Also See The Church Then and Now
ON THIS PAGE The Council of Nicaea... The First Ecumenical Council (AD 325) The Council of Jerusalem Vs. The Ecumenical Councils
How differently they arrived at their decisions The Decisions Made By The Councils were Based Not On Scripture
But On The Traditional Teachings of The Church The Canons of The First Ecumenical Council
The Council of Nicaea The Canons of The Second Ecumenical Council
The Second Council of Constantinople... The Canons of The Third Ecumenical Council
The Council of Ephesus... The City of Ephesus... From Diana To Mary
An Important Step In Mariology
The Council of Nicaea... The First Ecumenical Council (AD 325)
The word canon can be used is several different ways. For example, it can mean 1. A list of writings (particularly sacred writings) officially recognized as genuine. 2. An established principle: the canons of polite society. 3. One of the members of certain Roman Catholic religious orders.
However, in the context of this article canon refers to 'An ecclesiastical law or code of laws established by a church council." It should be first noted that the council of Nicea (now Iznik, a town in northwest Turkey) had nothing to do with the canon of Scripture. Neither the Council records nor the writings of any of the attendees (Eusebius, Athanasius etc.) mention any discussion regarding which books belonged in the Bible. See The Canon of Scripture and The Apocrypha This council was called solely to establish the exact relationship of Christ to the Father which was not as simple as first appears. The question was whether Jesus was created and was therefore in some way subordinate to, or less Divine than the Father. Although the Bible literally abounds with evidence of the deity of Jesus Christ, "The controversy began when Arius, an Alexandrian priest, questioned the full divinity of Christ because, unlike God, Christ was born and had a beginning. What began as an academic theological debate spread to Christian congregations throughout the empire, threatening a schism in the early Christian church." [01]
Emperor Constantine, who was aware that serious divisions in the church would go a long way towards destabilizing his empire, was determined to ensure this did not happen. He decided that the best way to resolve the conflict was to convene an ecclesiastical council that he probably hoped would come to a consensus. It did - based on the very ambiguous word homoousios. Footnote I See The Deity of Jesus Christ. Was He Lord, Liar Or Lunatic? Although it is more than likely that each of the disagreeing parties thought the other guilty of heresy, one has to wonder at the political maneuvering and other machinations behind the councils. In referring to the Council of Nicaea, John Mcguckin (a priest of the Orthodox Church, professor of early church history at Union Theological Seminary and Professor of Byzantine Christianity at Columbia University in New York) made the following rather telling statement . After the council, many of the same bishops who had signed its creed appeared at other councils, often reversing their previous decisions according to the way the winds of preferment were blowing. They found themselves less in a domain of monumental clarity and more in a swamp of confusing arguments and controversies that at times seemed to threaten the very continuity of the Christian church. [02]
Changing one's mind according "according to the way the winds of preferment were blowing" is not exactly how one goes about determining God's truth and His will and was certainly not how the first council held by contemporaries of Jesus in Jerusalem around 50 A.D. arrived at their decision.
The Council of Jerusalem Vs. The Ecumenical Councils
The first thing we need to recognize is that God's truth including His laws and commandments cannot originate with ANY human agency - They come from God alone. As Jesus said,
Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. (John 14:6 NASB) Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice." (John 18:37 NASB)
These truths were conveyed to man through the prophets and other authors of the books of the Bible - all of whom God Himself chose, and all of whom spoke and wrote under the influence of the Holy Spirit. And The Council of Jerusalem was fully aware of this. How The Council of Jerusalem Arrived At Its Decision
Acts 15 tells us about a crisis in the first century church that came about when some men from Judea began to teach that no one could be saved unless they were circumcised. However, because they were willing that the matter be decided by the church leaders Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem to meet with the elders. This meeting is counted by many historians as the first church council. In Jerusalem, Peter testified that it was God who had decided that the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel from his (Peter's) mouth and that the Father had given the Holy Spirit to Jews and Gentiles alike with no distinction between them. Paul then related the miracles God had done among the Gentiles just as Jesus had authenticated His message to the Jews. Finally James, who was head of the Jerusalem church, cited Amos 9:11-12 which confirmed that the Gospel would be taken to the non Jew. James' decision that the Gentiles need not be circumcised (but did have to observe three commands V.20) was unanimous. Without exception, the whole church including all the apostles and elders was of "one mind" (Acts 15:22-23, 25). Is it any wonder that they could say "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us...." (Acts 15:28). In summary, the Jerusalem council was guided by the unassailable evidence of God's workings.They made note of the signs and wonders they saw God doing among the Gentiles, then compared what they saw with the miracles performed by Jesus Himself. Finally they ensured that this evidence conformed to the Scriptures. Although the words "it seems good" was used many, many times, it is indeed unfortunate that this pattern was not followed by any of the succeeding councils How The Ecumenical Councils Arrived At Their Decisions
The decisions the various councils came to were based on the aye's and the nay's. Ramsay MacMullen, emeritus professor of history at Yale University, has a book out entitled "Voting About God" that shows how Christian doctrine came to be decided by the democratic votes of bishops. In his words... (Emphasis Added) How did Christians agree on their definition of the Supreme Being, Triune? It was the work of the bishops assembled at Nicaea in AD 325, made formal and given weight by majority vote and supported after much struggle by later assemblies, notably at Chalcedon (451) likewise by majority vote. Such was the determining process. Thus agreement was arrived at, and became dogma widely accepted down to our own day." [03] The site gotquestions.org, says (Emphasis Added) Constantine prodded the 300 bishops in the council to make a decision by majority vote defining who Jesus Christ is. The statement of doctrine they produced was one that all of Christianity would follow and obey, called the "Nicene Creed." This creed was upheld by the church and enforced by the Emperor. The bishops at Nicea voted to make the full deity of Christ the accepted position of the church. [04]
Note: A "creed" goes beyond stating a belief. It is essentially an authoritative statement of a particular position (or positions) to which others are expected to assent. (Incidentally, the Apostles' creed was not formulated by the apostles but 500 years or so after the New Testament was completed. See The Apostles' Creed However, the real problem is the fact that the arguments made at the various councils were...
Based Not On Scripture But On The Traditional Teachings of The Church,
Philip Schaff (Who?) opens a very disturbing window calling the attention of the reader to the fact that in the Nicaean council (All Emphasis Added)
"... as in every other of the Seven Ecumenical Councils, the question the Fathers considered was not what they supposed Holy Scripture might mean, nor what they, from à priori arguments, thought would be consistent with the mind of God, but something entirely different, to wit, what they had received. They understood their position to be that of witnesses, not that of exegetes. They recognized but one duty resting upon them in this respect-to hand down to other faithful men that good thing the Church had received according to the command of God. The first requirement was not learning, but honesty. The question they were called upon to answer was not, what do I think probable, or even certain, from Holy Scripture but, what have I been taught, what has been intrusted to me to hand down to others? [05]
This is supported by the writings of some of the earliest church leaders. Tertullian (c. 155/160 - 220 A.D.) in describing various practices in the church, said (All Emphasis Added) If no passage of Scripture has prescribed it, assuredly custom, which without doubt flowed from tradition, has confirmed it. For how can anything come into use, if it has not first been handed down?.... If, for these and other such rules, you insist upon having positive Scripture injunction, you will find none. Tradition will be held forth to you as the originator of them, custom as their strengthener, and faith as their observer. [06]
Gregory bishop of Nyssa (c. 335 – c. 395). In a letter entitled Not Three Gods written to Ablabius (a Christian convert and possibly a high official of the Roman Empire) Gregory spoke of the problem of the trinity not being three separate Gods. (Emphasis Added) ".... even if our reasoning be found unequal to the problem, we must keep for ever, firm and unmoved, the tradition which we received by succession from the fathers, and seek from the Lord the reason which is the advocate of our faith: and if this be found by any of those endowed with grace, we must give thanks to Him who bestowed the grace; but if not, we shall none the less, on those points which have been determined, hold our faith unchangeably. [07]
In other words, doctrine was now determined by tradition with barely a nod given to what the Scriptures clearly tell us. In less than three hundred years the church had turned aside from the pattern established by the council of Jerusalem and by the "noble-minded" Bereans who examined the Scriptures daily to see whether the things they were being told were true (Acts 17:11). And this pattern continued through the centuries in the Catholic church. In an an encyclical or papal letter addressed to the bishops of the Church, Pope Pius IX asked them for their opinion on the definition of a dogma on the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary. That the vast majority of the 604 Bishops gave a positive response to the question led directly to the 1854 Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, which officially defined the dogma. (See Footnote III) Meet The Cappodocian Fathers
Gregory of Nyssa was one of three Catholic mystics and trained Greek philosophers called the Cappodocian Fathers who largely responsible for the doctrine of the trinity. A scholar, he wrote many theological, mystical, and monastic works in which he balanced Platonic and Christian traditions. What is truly abhorrent is that Gregory found the key to the trinity in the triple nature of our soul stating that you learn "the secret of God" from the things within yourself... a "testimony above and more sure than that of the Law and the Gospel". He added we would have no content for our thoughts about Father, Son, and Spirit, if we did not find an outline of their nature within ourselves.
The Canons of The Council of Nicaea
Although it was the focal point, the resolution reached regarding the Person of Christ was not all that was achieved at the council. Twenty canons dealing with various disciplinary issues were established that set an unfortunate precedent. As historian John Mcguckin points out... (Emphasis Added)
These 20 canons have never attracted as much attention as the doctrines of Nicaea but actually had immense importance, as they were the reference point around which all future collections of church law were modeled and collated. [08]
Thereafter it fell to various councils to decide not only matters of doctrine that became accepted creeds, but they also made decisions regarding other more practical matters in the church. These decisions became canon law (laws and regulations made or adopted by ecclesiastical authority, for the government of the Christian organization and its members). To put it another way, the body of Christ was well on its way to becoming something it was never intended to be... an enormous organization, governed by men who put dozens of man-made rules and regulations into place. (What is tremendously sad is that we abide by man made rules and regulations, yet cheerfully and consistently pretend certain instructions in the New Testament do not exist. For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11, Paul warned the faithful not to have anything to do with (not even eat with) so called believers who were immoral, covetous, idolaters, revilers, drunks, or swindlers. Even a cursory reading of the canons of the Council of Nicaea (the so called disciplinary issues) shows many of the tenets of the Catholic church coming through, loud and clear. For example... Canon 3 said any and all members of the clergy were forbidden to dwell with any woman, except a mother, sister, or aunt. The New Testament church was looked after by only two groups of people - the elders and the deacons both of which Paul stated were to be the "husband of one wife". Titus 3:2 and 12. See Church Leaders... Then and Now Canon 4 speaks of the "ordination" of bishops. It says a bishop should be appointed by all the bishops in the province; but should this be difficult, at least three should meet together, and the assent of the absent bishops communicated in writing. After which the ordination could take place. Canons 11 and 12 speak of penances imposed for certain sins. For example, Canon 11 says if those who denied Christ during the persecution "heartily repent", they shall pass three years among the hearers; shall be prostrators (penitents, who could not receive communion in penance for something they did) for seven years, and shall communicate with the people in prayers, but without oblation for two years. In other words, the church determined that the penalty was 12 years long if the person repented. (This in spite of the fact that verses like Acts 2:38 say you can repent, be baptized and receive the Holy Spirit with no mention of any time delay).
As said in the notes on Canon 12 in The Seven Ecumenical Councils... "This discretionary power of the bishop to dispense with part of a penance-time is recognized in the fifth canon of Ancyra and the sixteenth of Chalcedon, and mentioned by Basil, Epist. 217, c. 74. It was the basis of "indulgences" in their original form" [09] Canon 13 speaks of last rites. "Concerning the departing, the ancient canonical law is still to be maintained, to wit, that, if any man be at the point of death, he must not be deprived of the last and most indispensable Viaticum (the Eucharist )". Canon 18 explicitly states that the Eucharist is the Body of Christ and, not only reminds deacons that they are "inferiors of the presbyters" and cannot even sit among them, but also warns them that they have no right to touch the Eucharist nor administer it to the presbyters. In other words, only bishops and priests can consecrate the Eucharist. The first part of the canon 18 says It has come to the knowledge of the holy and great Synod that, in some districts and cities, the deacons administer the Eucharist to the presbyters, whereas neither canon nor custom permits that they who have no right to offer should give the Body of Christ to them that do offer.
In his notes made on Canon 18, Zeger Bernhard van Espen who specialized in canon law, said (Emphasis Added) From this canon we see that the Nicene fathers entertained no doubt that the faithful in the holy Communion truly received "the body of Christ." Secondly, that was "offered" in the church, which is the word by which sacrifice is designated in the New Testament, and therefore it was at that time a fixed tradition that there was a sacrifice in which the body of Christ was offered. Thirdly that not to all, nor even to deacons, but only to bishops and presbyters was given the power of offering. And lastly, that there was recognized a fixed hierarchy in the Church, made up of bishops and presbyters and deacons in subordination to these. [10]
The First Council of Constantinople... The Second Ecumenical Council (AD 381)
This was a local gathering of only about one hundred and fifty bishops, none of whom represented the see of Rome. This council is considered the Second Ecumenical Synod because it's creed was universally accepted.
The council of Nicaea, held some 50 plus years earlier, was focused on the person and nature of Christ giving scant attention to the Holy Spirit. Reformed Theologian Loraine Boettner (1901-1990), an ardent Calvinist outlined the situation ... so absorbed had the Council been in working out the doctrine concerning the Person of Christ that it omitted to make any definite statement concerning the Holy Spirit...The defect of the Nicene Creed was remedied, however, by the Second Ecumenical Council, which met at Constantinople in 381, and included in its creed the statement: "We believe in the Holy Ghost, who is the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who, with the Father and Son, together is worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets." [11]
As said by Melinder Penner, co-founder of Stand to Reason "Once they demonstrated the Biblical and philosophical possibility of two persons of the divine substance, it was a small step to demonstrate the third person". [12]
And this "small step" was taken at The Second Ecumenical Council, that put the official stamp on the 'third person of the trinity', a doctrine that is considered to be so sacred and so foundational a part of the Christian faith, that many use it as a litmus test for defining who is or isn't a true Christian. In other words, although the Bible says no such thing, they consider a person cannot be saved if they don't believe in one God, who exists as three distinct, but equal, Persons. The problem being that although the Bible definitively points to a plurality in the Godhead and Acts 5:3-4 is more than enough to clinch the issue of the Holy Spirit being God, there is absolutely no evidence that the Holy Spirit is the 'third person of the trinity'. In fact there is much that contradicts it. Since this topic is way too long and involved to go into here, it has been dealt with in a separate article. See Is God A Trinity? The Canons of The Second Council of Constantinople
There were not many canons or rules of law passed by this council, other than the fact that they declared anathemas on various heresies defined as anyone that didn't agree with the decisions on doctrine the council arrived at. Note: An anathema is a formal ecclesiastical ban, curse, or excommunication. Canon 2 defined the jurisdictions of the various bishops of five "dioceses"... Alexandria, Antioch, Pontus (Cappadocia), Ephesus and Thrace and forbid them to operate in any diocese but their own, unless invited to do so. Canon 3 declared the primary position of the Bishop of Rome, followed by the Bishop of Constantinople.
Canon 7 said certain heretics who submitted "a written renunciation [of their errors] and anathematize every heresy which is not in accordance with the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of God" would be first sealed or anointed with the holy oil upon the forehead, eyes, nostrils, mouth, and ears. Others, including the Eunomians, Montanists and Sabellians were received as heathen and the following procedure was followed "On the first day we make them Christians; on the second, catechumens; on the third, we exorcise them by breathing thrice in their face and ears; and thus we instruct them and oblige them to spend some time in the Church, and to hear the Scriptures; and then we baptize them." [13] Yet again, this was a tremendous deviation from Scripture, which states that a person has to repent of their sins, not their disagreement with the doctrines of the church. And when someone in the first century church repented and believed in the Lord Jesus Christ they could immediately be baptized. I have no idea where the "breathing thrice" in people's face and ears idea came from, but it certainly wasn't the New Testament. But, all this is hardly surprising since, by this time, the laws of the "church" had superseded the basic Gospel message, and complex doctrines and practices had complicated the simplicity of New Testament beliefs and practices. See Sin, Repentance and Salvation on THIS page and Baptism HERE
The Council of Ephesus... The Third Ecumenical Council
was held in 431 AD. in Ephesus (near present-day Selçuk in Turkey). It was called by the Roman Emperor Theodosius II after
"Patriarch Cyril of Alexandria appealed to Pope Celestine I (bishop of Rome) to condemn Patriarch Nestorius of Constantinople for heresy due to Nestorius' refusal to use the term theotokos (Mother of God) in relation to the Virgin Mary".
To this Pope Celestine "replied on 11 August, 430, by charging St. Cyril to assume his authority and give notice in his name to Nestorius that, unless he recanted within ten days of receiving this ultimatum, he was to consider himself excommunicated and deposed" [14] Emphasis Added One cannot imagine that Celestine who was bishop of Rome September from 422 to August 432 A.D. would threaten to depose the Patriarch of Constantinople unless he had the power to do so. However, Nestorius, apparently paying scant attention to the pope's ultimatum, persuaded the emperor to summon a general council to decide between Cyril and himself. Again, it is interesting as to how much political maneuvering played a part. Nestorius was said to be studious and eloquent but apparently lacked the political skills that the emperor's sister seemed to have possessed in abundance "... the emperor's sister Pulcheria hated Nestorius and favored Cyril's theology. She managed to have the venue changed to the city of Ephesus, the greatest center of devotion to Mary the Mother of God in the whole Mediterranean world. Oral tradition claimed Ephesus as the place where Mary lived for many years with John the beloved disciple. Nestorius should have seen trouble coming. Nestorius expected a small meeting of bishops and theologians to resolve the issue, so he brought along sixteen bishops. But Cyril decided to take no chances. He was accompanied by fifty bishops, and his ally Archbishop Memnon of Jerusalem brought another forty. The Antiochenes, who leaned towards Nestorius, were about forty in number as well, but arrived late. [15]
The council eventually formalized the idea of the Virgin Mary as theotokos (Mother of God) and condemned Nestorius' teaching that Virgin Mary may be called the Christotokos, "Birth Giver of Christ" but not the Theotokos, "Birth Giver of God". In summary, the council was a battle over a single word, held in a city that venerated Mary, thus skewed from the beginning. With Cyril's 'victory' the Council of Ephesus issued several anathemas against Nestorius "If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (Theotokos), inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [as it is written, 'The Word was made flesh': let him be anathema." Council of Ephesus, Anathemas Against Nestorius, I. [16]
They also ordered that any Metropolitans, provincial bishops, or city or country clergy who, publicly or privately, maintained the doctrines of Nestorius or, in any way, attempted to join the apostasy, would be removed from office. Clergy who submitted to the bishops who had apostatized, or attempted to set aside the orders made by the holy Synod at Ephesus would be deposed, while laymen would be excommunicated. Nestorius initially retired to a monastery in Antioch but later, Augusta Pulcheria persuaded the emperor Theodosius to exile him to the monastery of the Great Oasis of Hibis in Thebaid, Egypt.
The City of Ephesus... From Diana To Mary
However, what I find truly interesting is why emperor's sister Pulcheria was keen on the council being held in the city of Ephesus. that, at the time, was very receptive to a the idea of a divine mother.
Ephesus was home to a Greek temple considered one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World and dedicated to the goddess Artemis, one of the most widely venerated of the ancient Greek deities. Acts 19:23-31 describes the riot that took place because Paul's preaching was threatening the livelihood of the silversmiths who made shrines and statues of Artemis to sell to the public. The account also tells us that she was worshipped in all of Asia and the world. (Emphasis Added) "Not only is there danger that this trade of ours fall into disrepute, but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis be regarded as worthless and that she whom all of Asia and the world worship will even be dethroned from her magnificence." (Acts 19:27 NASB)
Artemis is the Greek goddess of the hunt, wild animals, the Moon and chastity. Diana, the Roman equivalent of Artemis was also goddess of the hunt, the moon, and birthing, but was also one of the three maiden goddesses along with Minerva and Vesta who swore never to marry. In other words she was a virgin goddess, something that even Shakespeare wrote about more than once. See Footnote IV The original temple of Artemis/Diana in Ephesus was one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. It was built in the 8th century BC, but was destroyed more than once - by flood and arson etc. It's final destruction came in a raid by the Goths somewhere around the second half of the third century (some sources date the event to 401 AD). Apparently, one of two things happened. The conversion to Christianity left a felt void in people that had worshipped a female deity for centuries, which was probably enhanced when the city was also suddenly bereft of her temple. The Council of Ephesus was held in 431 AD, anywhere from 30-60 years after the destruction of the temple of Diana. So it is hardly surprising that, although many in Ephesus had converted to Christianity, the concept of a divine mother still held a strong attraction. However, the Bible is very patriarchal, describing the Creator as "Father", and Jesus as His "Son", which left little room for a mother image. Since other deities could not be assimilated into Christianity, the veneration of Mary provided an outlet for what, even now, seems to be a common desire for a divine mother. In fact, the Biblical account of the virgin birth of Christ tied in very nicely with the story of Diana as a maiden goddess. Mary was considered the new Eve who, in complete contrast to the first Eve who brought death into the world, was the instrument of hope for mankind. It is little wonder that the people demanded she be called "Mother of God" and that, from then on, countless statues, paintings and hymns would be devoted to her. Particularly interesting is one of the Spanish painter Diego Velázquez's earliest known works, The Immaculate Conception (1618-19) shows Mary standing on the moon or earth with a small image of a temple in the bottom left hand corner. the question of why there is a temple at all in the painting may be answered by the fact that it bears some resemblance to the temple of Diana. Ephesus simply transferred it's affection from the goddess Diana, to Mary. An Important Step In Mariology
Roman Catholic Mariology is the systematic study of Mary and of her place in God's plan for salvation. The Council of Ephesus was called in A.D. 431 just 50 years after the Council of Constantinople. Tom Perna, Director of Adult Evangelization and Catechesis at Saint Mary Magdalene Catholic Church in Gilbert, Arizona, lists three areas in which the council is said to have succeeded, his third point being... The council not only clearly defined Christology, but also defined an important step in Mariology. [17]
Technically, the church denied Mary as divine but, in effect, because it conveys a sense of holiness, the title 'Mother of God' implies that Mary had a role in creating divinity. It gives the impression of bestowing on Mary a position that she does not hold - mother of "God" Himself. Which is why so many in the Catholic church have elevated her to a position beyond that of mere mortals. It was but a short, and very easy, step from "Mother of God" to the many doctrines that have been since invented, none of which are even hinted at in the Scriptures. 1) The Immaculate Conception, which teaches Mary was born without original sin and remained sinless all her life.
2) Mary's perpetual virginity was proclaimed a doctrine at the fifth and sixth Ecumenical Councils in 553 and 680.
3) Her physical ascension into heaven, which means she never experienced physical death.
4) Her role as Co-redemptrix and Mediatrix.
5) Her right to receive prayer and veneration due to her role in redemption and as an intermediary.
6) Queenship of Mary, established in an encyclical of Pope Pius XII (The Ad Caeli Reginam), on the 11th of October, 1954, which said "Mary was chosen as Mother of Christ in order that she might become a partner in the redemption of the human race; As Christ, the new Adam must be called a King not merely because He is Son of God, but also because He is our Redeemer, so, analogously, the Most Blessed Virgin is queen not only because she is Mother of God, but also because, as the new Eve, she was associated with the new Adam."
See Mary... Queen of Heaven? A perfect example of men making it up as they went along is seen in Ambrose archbishop of Milan's writings on Mary. His elaborate, pretentious ideas and inane flights of fancy trumed Biblical truths. HERE
Footnote I - The First Council Of Nicaea
John Mcguckin, a priest of the Orthodox Church, is professor of early church history at Union Theological Seminary, and Professor of Byzantine Christianity at Columbia University in New York. In his article The Road to Nicaea, posted on Christianity Today in 2008, he says it was possibly Ossius, the theological adviser of the emperor, who suggested that the magic word to nail the Arian party would be homoousios. The term meant "of the same substance as," and when applied to the Logos it proclaimed that the Logos was divine in the same way as God the Father was divine (not in an inferior, different, or nominal sense). In short, if the Logos was homoousios with the Father, he was truly God alongside the Father. T
The word pleased Constantine, who seems to have seen it as an ideal way to bring all the bishops back on board for a common vote. It was broad enough to suggest a vote for the traditional Christian belief that Christ was divine, it was vague enough to mean that Christ was of the "same stuff" as God (no further debate necessary), and it was bland enough to be a reasonable basis for a majority vote. [18] In spite of the enthusiastic endorsement of the decree of this council by millions of modern Christians the word homoousios is fairly ambiguous - which seems to be exactly what the Arians thought. They disagreed with the vote because they felt , that is, how the Son of God related to the divine Father.... "they saw that it gave the Son equality with the Father without explaining how this relationship worked". [19] {PLACE IN TEXT}
Footnote II - Philip Schaff (1819 – 1893), well known for his History of the Christian Church, was a Swiss-born German-educated Protestant theologian and Church historian. He was professor at Union Theological Seminary, NY. and served as president of the committee that translated the American Standard Version of the Bible. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church is a set of books containing translations of early Christian writings into English. It was published in two series of fourteen volumes each between 1886 and 1900. The First Series was edited by Philip Schaff. The Second Series by him and Henry Wace, Principal of Kings College, London. Philip Schaff was also editor of the 10 volumes of the writings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers (to A.D. 325). {PLACE IN TEXT}
Footnote III - The Immaculate Conception
In the 1854 Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, which defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, Pope Pius IX wrote that (Emphasis Added)
"We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful."
Therefore, far above all the angels and all the saints so wondrously did God endow her with the abundance of all heavenly gifts poured from the treasury of his divinity that this mother, ever absolutely free of all stain of sin, all fair and perfect, would possess that fullness of holy innocence and sanctity than which, under God, one cannot even imagine anything greater, and which, outside of God, no mind can succeed in comprehending fully. [20] So how did this come about? Pope John Paul II wrote (Emphasis Added) Down the centuries, the conviction that Mary was preserved from every stain of sin from her conception, so that she is to be called all holy, gradually gained ground in the liturgy and theology. At the start of the 19th century, this development led to a petition drive for a dogmatic definition of the privilege of the Immaculate Conception.
Around the middle of the century with the intention of accepting this request, Pope Pius IX after consulting the theologians, questioned the Bishops about the opportuneness and the possibility of such a definition, convoking as it were a "council in writing". The result was significant: the vast majority of the 604 Bishops gave a positive response to the question.... In a papal letter (an encyclical) addressed to the bishops of the Church, Pope Pius IX asked them for their opinion on the definition of a dogma on the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary. Points three and the second half of point six of this encyclical say And Note the capitalization of the word "we" in bold (All Emphasis Added) 3. Moreover, Venerable Brethren, many of you have sent letters to Our Predecessor and to Us begging, with repeated insistence and redoubled enthusiasm, that We define as a dogma of the Catholic Church that the most blessed Virgin Mary was conceived immaculate and free in every way of all taint of original sin.
6. We eagerly desire, furthermore, that, as soon as possible, you apprise Us concerning the devotion which animates your clergy and your people regarding the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin and how ardently glows the desire that this doctrine be defined by the Apostolic See. And especially, Venerable Brethren, We wish to know what you yourselves, in your wise judgment, think and desire on this matter. [21] If you read this encyclical in it's entirety, there is not a single reference to what the Bible has to say on the matter. On reflection this is hardly surprising, because the silence is deafening when it comes to verses that even indicate Mary was born sinless. However, the positive response to Ubi Primum led to the 1854 bull Ineffabilis Deus, which defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception i.e. Mary was born without original sin. In other words, humans decided that Mary was born without original sin. {PLACE IN TEXT} Also See Ambrose, archbishop of Milan's elaborate, pretentious and completely make believe writings on Mary, the mother of Christ. HERE
Footnote IV - References to Diana's Virginity in Shakespeare
In Henry IV, Part 1, Falstaff styles himself and his highway-robbing friends as "Diana's foresters, gentlemen of the shade, minions of the moon" who are governed by their "noble and chase mistress the moon under whose countenance [they] steal".
There is a reference to Diana in Much Ado About Nothing where Hero is said to seem like 'Dian in her orb', in terms of her chastity. In All's Well That Ends Well Diana appears as a figure in the play and Helena makes multiple allusions to her, such as, "Now, Dian, from thy altar do I fly..." and "...wish chastely and love dearly, that your Dian/was both herself and love..." The Steward also says, "...; Dian no queen of virgins,/ that would suffer her poor knight surprised, without/ rescue in the first assault or ransom afterward." It can be assumed that 'Dian' is simply a shortening of 'Diana' since later in the play when Parolles' letter to Diana is read aloud it reads 'Dian'. The goddess is also referenced indirectly in A Midsummer Night's Dream. The character Hippolyta states "And then the moon, like to a silver bow new bent in Heaven". She refers to Diana, goddess of the moon, who is often depicted with a silver hunting bow. In the same play the character Hermia is told by the Duke Theseus that she must either wed the character Demetrius "Or on Diana's alter to protest for aye austerity and single life". He refers to her becoming a nun, with the goddesse Diana having connotations of chastity. In The Merchant of Venice Portia states "I will die as chaste as Diana, unless I be obtained by the manner of my father's will". (I.ii) {PLACE IN TEXT} End Notes
[01] Council of Nicaea concludes. history.com. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/council-of-nicaea-concludes [02] John Anthony McGuckin. The Road to Nicaea.OrthodoxyToday.org. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/McGuckinNicea.php [03] Ramsay MacMullen. Voting About God in Early Church Councils. Yale University Press; 1 edition (October 10, 2006) Pg 7 [04] What occurred at the Council of Nicea? http://www.gotquestions.org/council-of-Nicea.html [05] Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series II, Volume 14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. Historical Introduction. Schaff, Philip (1819-1893) (Editor). Publisher: Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.vii.ii.html or http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.pdf [06] Tertullian. De Corona. Chapter III and IV. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.
<http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0304.htm [07] Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series II, Volume 5 (NPNF2-05). Gregory of Nyssa: Dogmatic Treatises On "Not Three Gods.” To Ablabius. Schaff, Philip (1819-1893) (Editor). Publisher: Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf205.viii.v.html [08] John Anthony Mcguckin. The Road to Nicaea. Christian History Institute
https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/road-to-nicaea/ [09] Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series II, Volume 14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. Schaff, Philip (1819-1893) (Editor). Publisher: Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.vii.vi.xviii.html [10] Nicene And Post-Nicene Fathers Of The Christian Church. NPNF2-14 (Volume XIV). The Seven Ecumenical Councils. Second Series Edited By Philip Schaff, D.D., Ll.D. And Henry Wace, D.D. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.vii.vi.xxvii.html [11] Loraine Boettner. The Trinity... Historical Aspects of the Doctrine. http://www.theoldtimegospel.org/message3/trin_09.html [12] Melinda Penner. The Doctrine of the Trinity at Nicaea and Chalcedon.
http://www.str.org/articles/the-doctrine-of-the-trinity-at-nicaea-and-chalcedon#.Un5oFtLTmCi [13] Documents Of The Second Ecumenical Councilv. (The First Council Of Constantinople) Translated by Henry R. Percival, 1899. http://www.orthodoxa.org/GB/orthodoxy/canonlaw/canons2econcileGB.htm [14] Chapman, J. (1909). Council of Ephesus. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved January 15, 2014 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05491a.htm. [15] Mary, Mother of God: The Origin of the Dogma Proclaimed at the Council of Ephesus in 431. Ancient Christian Writings Seminar. April 29, 2008 Fr. Bernhard Blankenhorn, OP. http://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blessed-sacrament.org%2Facw%2Fmarymotherofgodlect.doc. Document is no longer available [16] The XII. Anathematisms of St. Cyril Against Nestorius. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.x.ix.i.html [17] Tom Perna. The Declaration of the Theotokos at the Council of Ephesus
http://tomperna.org/2013/12/31/the-declaration-of-the-theotokos-at-the-council-of-ephesus/ [18] John Anthony Mcguckin. The Road to Nicaea. posted 7/01/2008 on Christianity Today.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/2005/issue85/theroadtonicaea.html?start=4 [19] John Anthony Mcguckin. The Road to Nicaea. http://www.oodegr.com/english/watchtower/road2nicaea.htm [20] The Immaculate Conception. Ineffabilis Deus. Apostolic Constitution issued by Pope Pius IX on December 8, 1854.
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ineff.htm [21] Ubi Primum On The Immaculate Conception. Encyclical Of Pope Pius Ix. February 2, 1849.
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ubipr2.htm
| 
