Theology enthusiasts from around Sydney braved inclement weather to attend a conference on the Council of Nicaea held at the University of Notre Dame Australia in honour of the council’s 1700th anniversary.
The day conference hosted on 15 May by UNDA’s School of Philosophy and Theology with the Catholic Institute of Sydney (CIS) brought together scholars from a range of ecclesiastical and academic backgrounds to address the world’s first ecumenical or universal church council: both within its immediate context and its historical and theological legacy.
As Senior Lecturer and Post-Graduate Theology Co-ordinator, UNDA, I (Dr Mario Baghos) spoke first, on ‘The Historical Context of the Council of Nicaea.’
Tracing the scriptural roots of councils as authoritative instruments of the church to articulate matters of faith and doctrine, I then spoke about the unprecedented intervention of a Roman emperor – in this case, the first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine I the Great – in church affairs.
His convocation of the council of Nicaea, which was in any case (providentially) presided by a bishop, helped the church to formally explain its belief in Christ as fully God against the Arians who believed that Christ was not God, and were thus subordinationist.
The second paper by Professor Carole Cusack (USyd) was entitled On the Wrong Side of History: Homoian Christians in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries.
While emphasising the positive role of doctrinal formulation in maintaining the identity of Catholics, nevertheless the attribution of the term “Arian” to groups like the imperially displaced “homoian” Goths was problematic because, apart from the bishop Wulfila, they probably did not know what it meant, and it had terrible consequences for them in the long run.
A very interesting sociological comparison with the fate of Assyrian Christians in China made for thought-provoking discussion thereafter.
We then moved to theology with Dr Peter John McGregor’s (CIS) talk on “Arius and Apollinarius: False Cataphatic Responses to the Humanity and Divinity in Christ.”
Dr McGregor navigated the complex thought-world of fourth century heresies such as Arianism and Apollinarianism which he affirmed were rationalistic in their approach to the identity of Jesus, but in the wrong way.
Instead, he argued, the great orthodox theologians of the period utilised reason in a way that was sensitive to the paradox that Christ is both God and man; as such, they used positive words to describe this mystery (what is known in theology as “cataphaticism”) but also appreciated the transcendent mystery at play here (“apophaticism”).
Fr Antonios Kaldas (St Cyril’s) took us on a journey into fourth century asceticism by addressing ‘“A Flesh-Bearing Man”: The importance of embodiment in the Nicene Christology of Athanasius and Antony.’
St Athanasius is best known for his championing of the Nicene doctrine that Christ is “one essence” (homoousios) with God the Father, and Fr Kaldas encouraged us to see the connection between this important doctrine and embodiment in Christian life, with the figure of St Antony – a monastic exemplar in the Nicene period – taming the bodily passions with God’s grace to present it to the latter purified.
This, he concluded, had ramifications for Christian worship which should include the senses, and the body, in way that glorifies God.
Dr Mariusz Biliniewicz (UNDA) entitled “Filioque 1700 years after Nicaea – some contemporary perspectives” importantly brought the early theological articulation of the procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father “and the Son” (filioque) into contemporary ecumenical discussions in Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox milieus.
For while the former inserted the filioque into the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed that is recited at every Mass as part of a history of doctrinal development, the latter did not.
And while this has been a theological point of contention between the two churches in the past, with contemporary ecumenical moves on behalf of both to enter into full communion, further exploration is necessary, and so Dr Biliniewicz brought us up to speed on the status quaestionis in Catholic and Orthodox scholarship.
Dr Vassilis Adrahtas (Western Sydney) broadened our horizons to appreciate the Nicene Creed as a possible medium for integrating people from other religious traditions.
By delimiting the beliefs that belong exclusively to Christians in the Creed, Dr Adrahtas demonstrated that the general vocabulary in other parts of the text – familiar as this vocabulary would have been to persons in late antiquity – would have made it possible for people from other faiths to embrace Christianity, thereby acting as a bridge for a holistic vision and experience of the world where Jesus Christ takes pre-eminence.
Dr Robert Andrews’ (CIS) presentation ‘In a Higher World it is Otherwise: First Nicaea and the Development of Doctrine’ addressed the nuanced reception of Nicaea by St John Henry Newman over the course of his own life (from Anglicanism to Catholicism) but also as informing his approach towards the development of doctrine as a necessary element to the church’s mission on earth.
Associate Prof Bernard Doherty (Charles Sturt) ended the day with a talk entitled “Haunted by the Spectre of Arius: Archetypal Heresy, Subordinationist Christology and the Jehovah’s Witnesses.”
Dr Doherty spoke about the resurgence of subordinationism in the Reformation period, particularly the radical reformation which saw the persecution of theological and political dissenters from the official doctrines of Protestant Reformed Churches and States.
This marginalisation by way of comparison can also been seen in the case of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, whose subordinationist Christology Dr Doherty argued is clear but who have also suffered violent persecution by various groups for their existing on the margins.
The wide range of talks and approaches made it a thoughtful and engaging event, with lots of questions and confraternity.