Zdeněk Petráček

482 077

The dispute over the divinity of Jesus against the background of the Council
of Nicaea

Introduction

The goal of this thesis is to explore the theological stances of the early Christian communities
in the 3rd and 4th centuries, focusing on the Christological dispute on the Council of Nicaea. By
looking at the letters pre- and post-council we’ll try to unravel not just doctrinal differences but
also the socio-political and theological impacts on Christianity. For this work, we will be using
the term “Arian controversy” solely for the dispute between the presbyter Arius from
Alexandria and bishop Alexander of Alexandria about the divinity of Jesus and his relationship
with God the Father. Arius advocated for a view where the Son was a created being, differing
from Alexander’s belief in the co-eternality of Christ with the Father and emphasizing their
shared essence.

This study will not only spotlight Arius and Alexander but also shed light on the roles of other
important figures, such as Eusebius of Nicomedia who supported Arius to varying degrees. On
the side of Alexander of Alexandria, an important figure of Athanasius of Alexandria emerged,
playing a prominent role primarily after the council of Nicaea when he became one of the
greatest advocates of Alexander’s beliefs after his death1.

1
Pavel Dudzik, “Spor o nauku Areia z Alexandrie“, in: Petr Kitzler (ed.), Počátky ariánského sporu: Řecké
teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha: OIKOYMENH 2019, 11-30:
13-14.

1/6
 Historical context of the council

In the early 4th century, after a shift in Roman leadership, Constantine and Licinius agreed to
end not only Christian persecution but all religious persecution in the Roman Empire 2. The
growing complexity of theological questions led to the necessity of synods, where bishops
could address these issues, later they were held yearly in Cartago with as many as 87 bishops
present3.

Emperor Constantine, after becoming the sole emperor of the empire, sought church unity,
leading to the Council of Arles, mainly dealing with the aftermath of Christian persecution 4.
However, the bigger issue arose soon enough regarding Jesus’ divinity, initiated by Arius in
Egypt5, leading to his first excommunication where he eventually got support, to a varying
degree, from Eusebios of Nicomedia. Initially dismissing the matter, Constantine eventually
called the first general council, the Council of Nicaea, near Constantinople, to address these
theological debates which would influence the whole church for the first time6.

Arius’ beliefs

For Arius’ beliefs, we’ll be looking at a letter to Alexander of Alexandria, where Arius
summarizes his views on the relationship of the Son and the God 7. The letter to Alexander of
Alexandria begins with the characteristics of God the Father – unbegotten, eternal and without
beginning: “We know one God, the only unborn, the only eternal, the only beginningless, …,
the only immortal”8. He gave birth to the Son not just apparently but actually and he created
him by his will: “(the God) gave birth to him not seemingly, but really, by his will he
established the immutable and unchangeable”9. For Arians the Father sovereignly determines
2
Dana Carleton Munro - Edith Bramhall (eds.), “The Early Christian Persecutions.”, in: Dana Carleton Munro -
Edith Bramhall - Edwin Knox Mitchell (eds.) et al., Translations and reprints from the original sources of
European history: series for 1897 (Vol. IV), Philadelphia: Department of History of the University of
Pennsylvania 1898, 2-31: 29-30.
3
Klaus Schatz, Všeobecné koncily: Ohniska církevních dějin (Vol. I), Brno: Centrum pro studium demokracie a
kultury 2014, 14-15.
4
James Alexander, “Církevní koncily a synody”, in: Ian Hazlett (ed.), Rané křesťanství: Počátky a vývoj církve
do roku 600, Brno: Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury 2008, 116-125: 119.
5
Vratislav Šmelhaus, Řecká patrologie (Vol. I), Praha: Ústřední církevní nakladatelství 1972, 114
6
K. Schatz, Všeobecné koncily…, 23.
7
Pavel Dudzik, “Nauka Areia z Alexandrie“, in: Petr Kitzler (ed.), Počátky ariánského sporu: Řecké teologické
prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha: OIKOYMENH 2019, 77-140: 77.
8
“Známe jednoho Boha, jediného nezrozeného, jediného věčného, jediného bez počátku, …, jediného
nesmrtelného”, Pavel Dudzik, “Dopis Alexandrovi z Alexandrie (řecký text a český překlad)”, in: Petr Kitzler
(ed.), Počátky ariánského sporu: Řecké teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325),
Praha: OIKOYMENH 2019, 98-101: 99, my translation.
9
“zrodil ho nikoli zdánlivě, ale opravdu, svou vůlí ustavil neměnné a nezměnitelné”, P. Dudzik, “Dopis
Alexandrovi z Alexandrie…”, 99, my translation.

2/6
 the nature of their relationship and is the only one without a cause, The Son is neither coeternal
with the Father nor he is without a cause: “For he is neither eternal, nor coeternal, nor
begotten with the father”10.

Alexander’s beliefs

We will aim to find Alexander’s beliefs in his Letter for Alexander of Byzantium, where
Alexander rejects the doctrine of Arius and clarifies his convictions. Alexander rejected the
questioning of the coeternity of the Son of God with God the Father: “as the Jews united
against Christ, denying the divinity of our Saviour, and teach that he is equal to all others.” 11.
He further stated that the Father and the Son must necessarily both exist eternally, for only if
the Father has a Son can he call himself the Father: “…, then it is necessarily true that the
Father is always the Father. He is Father if the Son, for whose sake he calls himself the
Father, is always with him. If the Son is always with him, the Father is always perfect” 12
therefore sonship, according to Alexander, is part of God’s perfection.

The Council of Nicaea and its resolution

The Council of Nicaea lasted from May to the end of June 325, and according to tradition, up
to 318 bishops attended the council. However, a direct participant estimated the number of
participants at about 27013. Among the participants, besides Arius, were some of his supporters,
while with Bishop Alexander at the council came the then-deacon Athanasius of Alexandria 14.

We have no surviving record of the exact proceedings of the Council. Still, we do know that
several texts corresponding in character to the Declaration of Faith were submitted to the
bishops. What we do know from the later letters from Athanasius, is that in the end, the

10
“Není totiž ani věčný ani souvěčný ani nezrozený spolu s Otcem”, P. Dudzik, “Dopis Alexandrovi z
Alexandrie…”, 99, my translation.
11
“jako Židé se spojili proti Kristu, popírají božství našeho Spasitele a učí, že je rovný všem ostatním.”, Pavel
Dudzik, “Dopis Alexandrovi z Byzantia (řecký text a český překlad)”, in: Petr Kitzler (ed.), Počátky ariánského
sporu: Řecké teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha: OIKOYMENH
2019, 176-214: 179, my translation.
12
“…, pak nutně platí, že Otec je vždy Otcem. Je Otcem, pokud Syn, kvůli kterému se nazývá Otcem, je vždy s
ním. Je-li Syn stále s ním, je Otec stále dokonalý”, P. Dudzik, “Dopis Alexandrovi z Byzantia …”, 191, my
translation.
13
Pavel Dudzik, “Počátky sporu o Areiovu nauku“, in: Petr Kitzler (ed.), Počátky ariánského sporu: Řecké
teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha: OIKOYMENH 2019, 31-74:
53-55.
14
P. Dudzik, “Počátky sporu …”, 56.

3/6
 Nicaean Fathers selected from the texts those whose content the proponents of Arius could not
agree with and incorporated them into a new creed (Nicaenum)15.

It can be seen from the Nicene Creed that the word essence and the phrases expressing that the
Father and the Son share one essence were deliberately used: “And in one Lord, JESUS
CHRIST, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of
the Father”16. The creed also focuses on the rejection of the term creation for the Son in
accepting the Son’s unequal status to God the Father and uses words such as begotten to
highlight the same essence of the Son to God the Father: God of God, Light of Light, very God
of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance [homoousion] with the Father”17.

The word homoousion, which was meant to represent the one essence of God the Father and
the Son appeared in the creed as we saw earlier and was advocated by Emperor Constantine
himself. He thus put pressure on the bishops to accept this creed as a unified position of the
church: “But those who say: ‘There was a time when he was not;’ and ‘He was not before he
was made;’ … or ‘He is another substance’ or ‘essence,’ … they are condemned by the holy
catholic and apostolic church.”18. Arius, who, with two of his allies, refused to sign the creed,
was exiled, and forbidden to return to the communities in which they were active before19.

Conclusion and importance for religious studies

For religious studies such events are important as they not only provide insights into the
beginnings and later development of the Christian doctrines but also the understanding of the
theological controversies and their resolutions can show the diversity of beliefs within the early
Christian communities and how these differences were addressed.

By examining events like the Council of Nicaea, we can explore the sociological and political
influences on religious beliefs in different eras. In this case particularly the influence of Roman
leadership on evolution of the Christian doctrines of the 3 rd and 4th centuries. It illustrates how
political power and religious authority interacted in a particular era.

15
P. Dudzik, Počátky sporu …”, 57.
16
Edwin Knox Mitchell (ed.), “Canons and Creeds of the First Four Councils.”, in: Dana Carleton Munro - Edith
Bramhall - Edwin Knox Mitchell (eds.) et al., Translations and reprints from the original sources of European
history: series for 1897 (Vol. IV), Philadelphia: Department of History of the University of Pennsylvania 1898,
3-31: 3.
17
Edwin Knox Mitchell (ed.), “Canons and Creeds …”, 3.
18
Edwin Knox Mitchell (ed.), “Canons and Creeds …”, 3.
19
P. Dudzik, “Počátky sporu …”, 60-61.

4/6
 Methodologies for further examination could include more textual analysis and study of the
primary texts like the letters, creeds formulated during these synods or theological treatises
from participants of the council. Another important role plays a historical contextualization as
broader historical or cultural context can help us to understand the motivations behind
theological positions. Incorporating fields like sociology or anthropology can also provide a
clearer understanding of how religious beliefs interacted with different societies in different
places.

Bibliography

Primary sources
Pavel Dudzik, “Spor o nauku Areia z Alexandrie“, in: Petr Kitzler (ed.), Počátky ariánského
sporu: Řecké teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha:
OIKOYMENH 2019, rozsah stran.
Pavel Dudzik, “Nauka Areia z Alexandrie“, in: Petr Kitzler (ed.), Počátky ariánského sporu:
Řecké teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha:
OIKOYMENH 2019.
Pavel Dudzik, “Počátky sporu o Areiovu nauku“, in: Petr Kitzler (ed.), Počátky ariánského
sporu: Řecké teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha:
OIKOYMENH 2019.
Pavel Dudzik, “Dopis Alexandrovi z Byzantia (řecký text a český překlad)”, in: Petr Kitzler
(ed.), Počátky ariánského sporu: Řecké teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před
koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha: OIKOYMENH 2019.
Pavel Dudzik, “Dopis Alexandrovi z Alexandrie (řecký text a český překlad)”, in: Petr Kitzler
(ed.), Počátky ariánského sporu: Řecké teologické prameny k ariánské kontroverzi před
koncilem v Nikaii (325), Praha: OIKOYMENH 2019.
Dana Carleton Munro - Edith Bramhall (eds.), “The Early Christian Persecutions.”, in: Dana
Carleton Munro - Edith Bramhall - Edwin Knox Mitchell (eds.) et al., Translations and reprints
from the original sources of European history: series for 1897 (Vol. IV), Philadelphia:
Department of History of the University of Pennsylvania 1898.
Edwin Knox Mitchell (ed.), “Canons and Creeds of the First Four Councils.”, in: Dana
Carleton Munro - Edith Bramhall - Edwin Knox Mitchell (eds.) et al., Translations and reprints
from the original sources of European history: series for 1897 (Vol. IV), Philadelphia:
Department of History of the University of Pennsylvania 1898.
Secondary literature
Klaus Schatz, Všeobecné koncily: Ohniska církevních dějin (Vol. I), Brno: Centrum pro
studium demokracie a kultury 2014
Vratislav Šmelhaus, Řecká patrologie (Vol. I), Praha: Ústřední církevní nakladatelství 1972

5/6
 James Alexander, “Církevní koncily a synody”, in: Ian Hazlett (ed.), Rané křesťanství: Počátky
a vývoj církve do roku 600, Brno: Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury 2008

6/6