by I will discuss the impact that the Christological and Trinitarian debates from Nicaea I (325) to Chalcedon (451) still have on churches today.
Many of the outcomes from the different council’s ecumenical meetings (Nicaea I to Chalcedon) are still considered valid doctrine today regarding Christological and Trinitarian debates that caused the original meetings. In 325 AD, 230 bishops gathered in Nicaea, a key goal was to define Jesus’s special status as, ‘the Son of God,’ the ‘Word’ or ‘Logos’ of God, and the Savior who was ‘one with the Father.’”[1] This doctrinal issue was critical because in focused on who Jesus was in his person and who He was in His work as Savior.[2] Arius concluded that only the Father has not been created and the Son must have been created like other forms of existence. Athanasius viewed this perception as assaults on the Christian message and stated that if Christ were not God, then He could not provide salvation. Noll explains, “What Athanasius saw clearly was that, unless Christ was truly God, humanity would lose the hope that Paul expressed in 2 Corinthians 5:21, ‘that in [Christ] we might become the righteousness of God.’”[3] There were four key assertions where the first one was that Christ was true God from true God. The second was that Christ was of one substance with the Father. The third was Christ was begotten, not made. The fourth was that Christ became human for us humans and for our salvation.
In 381 AD, an assembly of bishops reaffirmed the key assertions and created the Nicene Creed (slightly modified) with a fuller statement on the Holy Spirit.[4] Noll states, “The Nicene Creed has remained for nearly seventeen centuries a secure foundation for the church’s theology, worship, and prayer.”[5] The Nicen Christology established that prayer, worship, preaching, the use of Scripture, and the sacraments all deserved independence from the ruling of government.[6]
In 451 AD, approximately 520 bishops attended the Council of Chalcedon to debate how Jesus was fully divine and human at the same time or if there were other alternative explanations. There is a division today on Christology between “Word-Flesh Christology” on one end of a spectrum, and “Word-Man Christology” on the other. This comes from the interpretation of John 1 relating to the humanity of Christ’s earthly existence. The division is whether the “Word” took on a human body or if the “Word” was joined to a man. The result today is three different perspectives that include: 1) Oriental Orthodox where Christ has only one nature: divine, 2) Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant where Christ is one person existing in two natures (fully God and fully man), and 3) Church of the East where Christ has two separate and distinct natures that are only loosely conjoined. While there is still division between the East and West, Chalcedon’s answer to these questions—and in response to that instinct—has stood the test of time: Jesus was ‘one person’ consisting of ‘two natures.’”[7]
Before reading this week’s text, I was unsure what the differences were between the council in 321 AD and 381 AD. The modification and clarification of the Holy Spirit is important and I now understand the importance of that second council and appreciate the Nicene Creed. Noll states, “The expanded formula of 381 clarified that, even as Jesus was a fully divine person, so also was the Spirit.”[8] This provides the clarity of the Trinity that was and is so much needed.
It is interesting how people want to logically reason answers to some of those items that were not meant to be figured out through logic. One example is where there was the need for the meeting at Chalcedon in 451 AD to discuss how much Jesus was of man and of God. There was much controversy between the West and the East. Noll states, “The key affirmations of the definition reflected the main themes of the New Testament—that Christ was a united and integrated person, that he was both God and man, that his human and divine natures were not confused, and that these natures were harmoniously joined in a single individual.”[9]
After reading this week’s reading assignments, I now have a better understanding of the arguments between the Western school of thought, Roman, that was concrete, practical, and legal, versus the Eastern, was more on abstraction, passion, and speculation.[10] Even the languages were not generally the same as the Roman world used Latin and the Eastern used Greek. Overcoming these differences and coming to somewhat of a conclusion is impressive because it involved 520 bishops over the course of 15 sessions that lasted over a month.
Musings from the Professor on the Topic
Early Christian councils were important in establishing what Christians ought to believe. The council of Nicaea set the precedent for how the Church was going to deal with doctrinal issues, for better or worse. I would venture to guess that many Christians do not give these councils much thought.
Bibliography
Noll, Mark A. Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012.
[1] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 40.
[2] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 44.
[3] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 47.
[4] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 51.
[5] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 51.
[6] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 54.
[7] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 60.
[8] Ibid., 51.
[9] Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 72.
[10] Ibid., 68.