Exploring the Post Nicene Fathers:
Influences, Contexts, and Councils
Lesson 5.1: The Councils and Their Significance
The ecumenical councils represent pivotal moments in the history of Christianity. They
were gatherings of church leaders convened to address theological disputes, clarify
doctrine, and unify the Church’s teachings during times of division. In this lesson, we
will explore three key councils: Nicaea, Constantinople, and Chalcedon. Each played a
vital role in shaping Christian theology, establishing orthodoxy, and influencing the
Church’s development during and beyond the Post Nicene era.
Let us begin with the First Council of Nicaea, held in 325 AD. This council was
convened by Emperor Constantine, who had recently embraced Christianity and sought
to unify the Church amidst widespread theological controversy. At the heart of the
dispute was Arianism, a doctrine promoted by Arius, a priest from Alexandria. Arius
argued that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was not co-eternal with the Father but was
created by Him. This view directly challenged the Church’s understanding of the divine
nature of Christ and threatened to divide the Christian community.
The Council of Nicaea brought together bishops from across the empire to address this
critical matter. Their deliberations led to the rejection of Arianism and the formulation of
the Nicene Creed, a definitive statement of Christian faith that affirmed the full divinity
of Christ. The creed declared that Jesus Christ is “begotten, not made, consubstantial
with the Father,” emphasizing His eternal nature and equality with God the Father. This
declaration not only resolved the immediate theological dispute but also provided a
foundation for Trinitarian theology, which remains central to Christian doctrine.
The Nicene Creed established a clear standard for orthodoxy, but debates over Christ’s
divine and human nature persisted in the decades following the council. This brings us
to the Second Ecumenical Council, held in Constantinople in 381 AD. Convened by
Emperor Theodosius I, the Council of Constantinople sought to reaffirm the Nicene
Creed and address lingering controversies surrounding the Trinity and the Holy Spirit.
One of the primary issues at Constantinople was the question of the Holy Spirit’s
divinity. Some theological factions denied the full divinity of the Holy Spirit, relegating
Him to a subordinate status within the Godhead. The council affirmed that the Holy
Spirit is fully divine and equal to the Father and the Son, further solidifying the doctrine
of the Trinity. This affirmation was incorporated into an expanded version of the Nicene
Creed, which is often referred to as the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed.
Additionally, the Council of Constantinople condemned various heresies, including
Apollinarianism. This doctrine, promoted by Apollinaris of Laodicea, argued that Christ
had a divine mind but lacked a human one. The council rejected this view, affirming that
Christ possesses both a fully divine nature and a fully human nature. This decision
underscored the Church’s commitment to the mystery of the Incarnation—that Jesus is
fully God and fully man.
The theological developments of Nicaea and Constantinople laid the groundwork for the
Third Ecumenical Council, held in Chalcedon in 451 AD. This council was convened by
Emperor Marcian in response to ongoing debates over the nature of Christ. While
Nicaea and Constantinople had established key principles of Trinitarian theology and
Christology, questions remained about how the divine and human natures of Christ
coexisted.
The immediate cause of the Council of Chalcedon was the controversy surrounding
Monophysitism, a doctrine that emerged in the aftermath of the Second Council.
Monophysitism, deriving from the Greek word for “one nature,” argued that Christ’s
divine nature absorbed His human nature, leaving Him with a single, unified nature.
This view was promoted by Eutyches, a monk from Constantinople, and gained traction
in certain regions of the Church.
Chalcedon firmly rejected Monophysitism and articulated the doctrine of the hypostatic
union. This doctrine states that Christ exists in two distinct natures, divine and human,
which are united in one person. The council’s definition emphasized that these natures
coexist “without confusion, without change, without division, and without separation.”
This careful balance preserved the integrity of both Christ’s divinity and humanity,
ensuring a holistic understanding of His person and work.
The Chalcedonian Definition became a cornerstone of orthodox Christology and was
widely accepted throughout the Church. However, it also sparked divisions, particularly
among communities that adhered to Monophysitism or other interpretations of Christ’s
nature. These disagreements led to lasting schisms, including the separation of the
Oriental Orthodox Churches from the broader Christian community.
In examining these three councils, we can see their profound influence on Christian
theology and the Church’s unity. Nicaea established the foundation for Trinitarian
doctrine by affirming the full divinity of Christ. Constantinople expanded on this
foundation by clarifying the divinity of the Holy Spirit and affirming the full humanity of
Christ. Chalcedon addressed the complex relationship between Christ’s divine and
human natures, providing a definitive framework for understanding His person.
Beyond their theological contributions, these councils also reflect the dynamic interplay
between the Church and the Roman Empire during the Post Nicene era. The
involvement of emperors like Constantine, Theodosius, and Marcian underscores the
growing entanglement of political power and ecclesiastical authority. These rulers
recognized the importance of theological unity for the stability of the empire and actively
supported the councils in their efforts to resolve disputes.
The councils also highlight the role of the Post Nicene Fathers in shaping Christian
theology. Many of these influential figures participated in or contributed to the
discussions that took place during these gatherings. For example, Athanasius of
Alexandria was a staunch defender of the Nicene Creed and played a key role in
opposing Arianism. His writings and leadership helped ensure the victory of orthodoxy
at Nicaea and beyond. Similarly, the theological insights of figures like Gregory of
Nazianzus and Basil the Great were instrumental in the deliberations at Constantinople.
It is important to note that the councils did not exist in isolation. They were part of a
broader process of theological development that spanned centuries. The decisions
made at Nicaea, Constantinople, and Chalcedon were informed by earlier debates and
controversies, as well as the writings of the Apostolic Fathers and other early Christian
thinkers. These councils also set the stage for subsequent gatherings, including the
Councils of Ephesus and Constantinople II, which continued to address doctrinal issues
and refine the Church’s teachings.
In conclusion, the ecumenical councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, and Chalcedon
represent monumental achievements in the history of Christianity. They addressed
critical theological disputes, clarified key doctrines, and established standards of
orthodoxy that have endured for centuries. Through their deliberations and decisions,
these councils shaped the theological landscape of the Church and provided a
framework for understanding the mysteries of faith. Their legacy is a testament to the
Church’s commitment to preserving the truth of the gospel amidst the challenges of
division and controversy. As we continue our exploration of the Post Nicene Fathers, we
will examine how their contributions further influenced the debates and outcomes of
these councils, deepening their impact on Christian theology and history
Comments are closed.