Posted on 05/19/2007 3:06:54 PM PDT by NYer
This council opened on 19 June in the presence of the emperor, but it is uncertain who presided over the sessions. In the extant lists of bishops present, Ossius of Cordova, and the presbyters Vitus and Vincentius are listed before the other names, but it is more likely that Eustathius of Antioch or Alexander of Alexandria presided. (see Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, ed. Norman P. Tanner S.J.)
The bold text in the profession of faith of the 318 fathers constitutes, according to Tanner "The additions made by the council to an underlying form of the creed", and that the underlying creed was most likely "derived from the baptismal formula of Caesarea put forward by the bishop of that city Eusebius" or that it "developed from an original form which existed in Jerusalem or at any rate Palestine". "A direct descent from the creed of Eusebius of Caesarea is manifestly out of the question." Vol 1, p2)
The figure of 318 given in the heading below is from Hilary of Poitier and is the traditional one. Other numbers are Eusebius 250, Eustathius of Antioch 270., Athanasius about 300, Gelasius of Cyzicus at more than 300.
We believe in one God the Father all powerful, maker of all things both seen and unseen. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten begotten from the Father, that is from the substance [Gr. ousias, Lat. substantia] of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten [Gr. gennethenta, Lat. natum] not made [Gr. poethenta, Lat. factum], CONSUBSTANTIAL [Gr. homoousion, Lat. unius substantiae (quod Graeci dicunt homousion)] with the Father, through whom all things came to be, both those in heaven and those in earth; for us humans and for our salvation he came down and became incarnate, became human, suffered and rose up on the third day, went up into the heavens, is coming to judge the living and the dead. And in the holy Spirit.
these the catholic and apostolic church anathematises.
The bishops assembled at Nicaea, who constitute the great and holy synod, greet the church of the Alexandrians, by the grace of God holy and great, and the beloved brethren in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis.
Since the grace of God and the most pious emperor Constantine have called us together from different provinces and cities to constitute the great and holy synod in Nicaea, it seemed absolutely necessary that the holy synod should send you a letter so that you may know what was proposed and discussed, and what was decided and enacted.
Against all this the holy synod pronounced anathemas, and did not allow this impious and abandoned opinion and these blasphemous words even to be heard.
Of that man and the fate which befell him, you have doubtless heard or will hear, lest we should seem to trample upon one who has already received a fitting reward because of his own sin. Such indeed was the power of his impiety that Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais shared in the consequences, for they too suffered the same fate.
But since, when the grace of God had freed Egypt from this evil and blasphemous opinion, and from the persons who had dared to create a schism and a separation in a people which up to now had lived in peace, there remained the question of the presumption of Meletius and the men whom he had ordained, we shall explain to you, beloved brethren, the synod's decisions on this subject too. The synod was moved to incline towards mildness in its treatment of Meletius for strictly speaking he deserved no mercy. It decreed that that he might remain in his own city without any authority to nominate or ordain, and that he was not to show himself for this purpose in the country or in another city, and that he was to retain the bare name of his office.
It was further decreed that those whom he had ordained, when they had been validated by a more spiritual ordination, were to be admitted to communion on condition that they would retain their rank and exercise their ministry, but in every respect were to be second to all the clergy in each diocese and church who had been nominated under our most honoured brother and fellow minister Alexander; they were to have no authority to appoint candidates of their choice or to put forward names or to do anything at all without the consent of the bishop of the catholic church, namely the bishop of those who are under Alexander. But those who by the grace of God and by our prayers have not been detected in any schism, and are spotless in the catholic and apostolic church, are to have authority to appoint and to put forward the names of men of the clergy who are worthy, and in general to do everything according to the law and rule of the church.
In the event of the death of any in the church, those who have recently been accepted are thereupon to succeed to the office of the deceased, provided that they appear worthy and are chosen by the people; the bishop of Alexandria is to take part in the vote and confirm the election. This privilege, which has been granted to all others, does not apply to the person of Meletius because of his inveterate seditiousness and his mercurial and rash disposition, lest any authority or responsibility should be given to one who is capable of returning to his seditious practices.
These are the chief and most important decrees as far as concerns Egypt and the most holy church of the Alexandrians. Whatever other canons and decrees were enacted in the presence of our lord and most honoured fellow minister and brother Alexander, he will himself report them to you in greater detail when he comes, for he was himself a leader as well as a participant in the events.
The following is not found in the latin text, but is found in the greek text :
We also send you the good news of the settlement concerning the holy pasch, namely that in answer to your prayers this question also has been resolved. All the brethren in the East who have hitherto followed the Jewish practice will henceforth observe the custom of the Romans and of yourselves and of all of us who from ancient times have kept Easter together with you. Rejoicing then in these successes and in the common peace and harmony and in the cutting off of all heresy, welcome our fellow minister, your bishop Alexander, with all the greater honour and love. He has made us happy by his presence, and despite his advanced age has undertaken such great labour in order that you too may enjoy peace.
Pray for us all that our decisions may remain secure through almighty God and our lord Jesus Christ in the holy Spirit, to whom is the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
“Islam is a syncretist cult.”
Which is why for centuries The Church held (some of us still do) that it was in fact a Christian heresy, like Arianism or Docetism. Like most heresies, it can be recognized by its fruit.
That was why Dante placed Mohammed in Hell as the great heresiarch/schismatic.
However, Mohammed was a tribal Arab and was probably from a pagan background, so I’m not sure you could call him a heretic (pace Dante). Don’t you actually have to be an orthodox something-or-another first in order to develop a heretical form of it?
That said, I believer there has always been some dispute over whether one should consider it a Jewish heresy or a Christian heresy (or maybe a pagan heresy, too, if the pagans had any doctrine). And Mohammed was actually pretty crafty in the design of his cult and much less “idealistic,” shall we say, than most heretics, who actually thought they had a principle they were defending. He did it for conquest, pure and simple. And the benefit of his tribe.
He was taught Orthodox Christianity by a Monk, his concubine Mariam was a Coptic and he traveled in the lands of both the Orthodox and the Copts.
That, Narses, is quite a piece. Thank-you. (It could have been written by a Greek; much of it sounds almost exactly the way things were explained to me by my grandfather 50 years ago)
My pleasure. Belloc was a truly great man. A gift from God.
Belloc is wonderful - actually, when I was young and reading my way through people of that generation, I didn’t like him very much. But it’s amazing how the years bring wisdom...
Yes, Mohammed definitely knew about Christianity, including its orthodox form. Personally, I think he’s a lot more like Joseph Smith (or vice versa), because he wanted to create a form of vaguely Christian-based religion that reflected his time and place. Just as Joseph Smith placed the Garden of Eden in Missouri, so did Mohammed relocate and redefine the holy places, persons and concepts of his religious environment to serve his Arab supremacy cult.
Your inclusion, “under Constantine” was quite odd, since Constantine was not pope.
Christianity is the religion which holds that Christ is God.
Thank you for posting the link ... I’ve downloaded the entire twenty-two pages and I’m on page ten, he crusades, currently. I’m struck by the presience of Belloc in warning of Islam’s violent re-arising to come, written in 1936! His description of the violent, non-constructive nature of Islam is indeed being displayed today. He also makes an excellent case for calling Islam a heresy of Catholicism. The aspects are strongly apparent in Mormonism, also.
I am of the sort who believes the ‘First Church Council’ was held in Jerusalem, when Peter was still alive.
Show me where in Scripture Jesus tells His disciples to write down everything He says, compile them into a book, make copies and distribute these to the masses.
I was wondering where he was, this seems like a thread he would just have to crash. After all, we’ve already established that he is not a Trinitarian (courtesy of his first post in the religion forum), we’ve established that he doesn’t know what language Jesus spoke or the culture of 1st Century Palestine, and we’ve established that facts make no progress when facing what his pastor told him, so this thread is right up his alley. Just ignore him. Johnny One Note will move on then.
The testament which foretold the Messiah’s coming is scripture. The scriptures are read at Mass for a reason, and not always from the New Testament I presume. When Jesus taught His disciples or the masses, He quoted from scriptures. We are admonished to ‘study to show yourself approved’. Scriptures have a very important place in conversion and maintenance of the believers. Scriptures do not eliminate that which is vital in Apostolic Authority, but the authority does not eliminate the value of scripture.
Which just demonstrates the fallacy of Sola Scriptura. You believe one thing, someone else interprets it a different way and over the course of 500 years, 33,000 different Christian denominations are born. That is why Jesus, recognizing Peter's God-inspired statement of faith, was chosen to head the Church.
Peter's God-inspired statement of faith.
"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
"And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open."
Most Protestants believe that "church" refers to the mass of Christian believers throughout the world, loosely connected to each other by their faith in the Bible alone. But these verses demonstrate that the "Church" Jesus Christ founded is not an invisible body of loosely-connected believers, but a visible and hierarchical institution built upon the person of Peter, who was given supreme authority, an office for dynastic succession, and the gift of infallibility. This Church can only be the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
In these verses, we see the following. First, Jesus builds His Church (ecclesia) upon the person of Peter. Jesus changes Simon's name to "Kepha," and says that on this "Kepha" He will build the Church. Kepha, in Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke), means a massive rock formation, and Jesus' use of Kepha to rename Peter signifies Peter's foundational leadership in the Church. (See also Mark 3:16 and John 1:42 where Jesus renames Simon "Cephas" which is a transliteration of the Aramaic "Kepha."). Only the Catholic Church recognizes and proves through an unbroken lineage of successors that her foundation is Peter.
Secondly, Jesus says the powers of death will never prevail against the Church. So even though Jesus appoints sinful human beings such as Peter to lead the Church, Jesus promises that hell will not prevail against her. Because the powers of hell refer to the supernatural, this must mean that the Church, although lead by sinful people, is divinely protected. Because she is so protected, the Church cannot lead the faithful into supernatural error. That is, she is unable to teach error on matters of faith and morals. This inability to teach error on faith and morals is called "infallibility" (it has nothing to do with the sinfulness of the Church's leaders, which deals with "impeccability"). If the Church were not infallible, the powers of death would indeed prevail over her sinful members. The consistent, 2,000 years of the Churchs teaching on faith and morals proves that Jesus has kept His promise.
Third, Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven. While many Protestants think that the gift of the "keys" means that Jesus appointed Peter as the guardian of the gates of heaven, the "keys" actually refer to Peter's authority over the earthly Church (which Jesus often described as the "kingdom of heaven." Matthew 13:24-52; 25:1-2; Mark 4:26-32; Luke 9:27; 13:19-20, etc.) In the Old Davidic kingdom, the king had a prime minister on whose shoulder God placed the keys of the kingdom (Isaiah 22:22). Similarly, the new kingdom of Christ also has a prime minister (Peter and his successors) who is given the keys of the kingdom. The keys not only represent the authority the prime minister has to rule over God's people in the king's absence, but also the means of effecting dynastic succession to the prime minister's office (for example, in Isaiah 22:20-22, Eliakim replaces Shebna as prime minister in the Old Davidic kingdom). Only the Catholic Church claims and proves a succession of prime ministers (popes) all the way back to Peter, and this succession is facilitated by the passing of the keys of the kingdom.
Finally, Jesus declares to Peter that whatever he binds and looses on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. As in the Old Davidic kingdom, whenever Peter the prime minister opens, no one shall shut, and whenever he shuts, no one shall open. Jesus, therefore, gives Peter the authority to make decisions that will be ratified in eternity. In order for sinful Peter (and his successors through the passing on of the "keys") to make such decisions, he must be divinely protected. Once again, this evidences Jesus' gift of infallibility to the Church. Only the Catholic Church claims and has proven that her 2,000 year-old teachings on faith and morals, which have never changed, are infallibly proclaimed.
So am I. How does that have anything to do with Constantine?
Of course Jesus didn't tell his disciples to write every word he spoke...But it's clear that the written word of God is very important...'It is written' was referred to 63 times in the NT alone...The disciples, Jesus and listeners knew that the record of God was written and preserved...
Joh 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
Joh 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Like I said, without scripture, one religion is as good, or bad as another...And obviously John agrees...
1Jo 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
You may know, because it is written...
Thankyou for your contribution to the conversation...
Always there to serve. And btw, you won’t find any Catholic who feels that the Scripture isn’t important. So as usual, you are setting up a false straw-man.
MAJOR COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH - 1st Council of Constantinople - 381 A.D. (2nd in a series)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.