Icon of the Council of Nicaea
The Nicene Creed comes to us from the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. The Council convened to respond to the heretical teachings of Arius, a charismatic priest of Alexandria, who denied the divinity of Jesus Christ.
The Church had always professed that Christ is true God and true man. However, stifled by the tyranny of the Roman state for two-and-a-half centuries, she had been restricted from openly proclaiming her doctrine in the universal and authoritative voice of an ecumenical council. Surfacing less than a decade after the legalization of Christianity throughout the Roman Empire, the Arian heresy endangered the Church's doctrinal unity just as she was learning to breathe free of the threat of state oppression. It is ironic, moreover, that the body that outlasted the villainy of the pagan emperors would come to find herself cleaved down the middle by the hand of one of her own, the hand of a priest. It calls to mind Christ's lament to His disciples: “Amen, I say to you, one of you will betray me” (Matt. 26:21).
Arius' claim that the Son of God was not equal to the Father, but had been created by Him, had serious ramifications for Christianity. In reducing Christ to a creature, Arius called into question the Atonement. For to say that Jesus Christ is not God is in effect to say God did not come to dwell among us nor die for our sins. Nonetheless, Arius was successful in winning many Christians throughout the East over to his side, including even some members of the hierarchy.
As word of the heresy's spread reached the West, the Emperor Constantine consulted with his spiritual adviser, Ossius, the Bishop of Córdoba, who recommended the calling of the Council of Nicaea following the biblical example of the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15).
The challenge confronting the Nicene Fathers was how to clearly present the orthodox position on the Trinity in a way that would be difficult for the Arians to reinterpret. The bishops were hesitant to rely on Scripture alone since Arius was well-versed in Scripture and talented in twisting its teachings to support his position (cf. 2 Pet. 3:16). To solve the dilemma Ossius introduced the extra-biblical term homoousios or “consubstantial,” meaning of the same substance, to describe the relationship between Father and Son. Arius protested on grounds the term was not found in Scripture, but a strong precedent existed for the Church using such terms. As early as the 2nd century, for example, she had employed the extra-biblical term "Trinity" to describe the Godhead.
Unfortunately, the Council's action did not immediately end the lure of Arius' false teachings. If anything, Arianism seemed to grow in popularity in the decades that followed the Council's close. So much so that Saint Jerome, forty years removed, would with a heavy heart observe, “The world groaned and was astonished to find itself Arian” (Fr. John Laux, Church History, 1989, p. 118). In time, however, Christian orthodoxy would prevail and Arianism fell by the wayside.
THE ORIGINAL FORM OF THE CREED
The version of the Creed which we recite at Mass today, however, represents a slightly later rendition of the prayer dating to about 374 and often referred as the Nicene-Constantinople Creed. The Nicene Creed in its original form reads as follows:
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God; the only-begotten, begotten of the Father, that is, of the essence of the Father; God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God; begotten, not made; of the same substance [consubstantial] as the Father; through whom all things were made, both those in heaven and those on earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down, took flesh, and was made man, suffered, and rose up on the third day, ascended into heaven, and will come to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Spirit. But those who say there was a time when He was not, and that He was made out of what did not exist, or who say that He is of another hypostasis or substance, or that the Son of God is created or subject to change or alteration, the Catholic Church anathematizes.
CONSTANTINE'S ROLE
The Emperor Constantine's involvement with the Council of Nicaea would set the stage for future battles between church and state. It has also provided fodder for anti-Catholic claims that the Church of this period had become overly secularized and fallen into apostasy. The truth is, however, Constantine acted primarily as an observer at Nicaea, avoiding interference in theological debates. Also, as the historical record of Christian writings verifies, an the unbroken continuity of Catholic doctrine exists from the days of the Apostles forward, long before Constantine's time. Check out Catholic doctrine in early historical Christian writings.
PAPAL PRIMACY AT NICAEA
Opponents of the papacy are quick to point out that Pope Saint Sylvester was absent from the Council of Nicaea. The fact is, Sylvester was unable to attend due to infirmity. Yet he was represented at the Council by the priests Vitus and Vincent. They presided with Ossius over the proceedings, in fact, their names appearing directly beneath his and above all others in the official register. That these papal legates (and mere priests) were given such prominence in an assembly of 318 bishops, primarily from the East, affirms the primacy of the Bishop of Rome.