Patriarch Bartholomew I marks 1,700th anniversary of Council of Nicaea
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I led a liturgy in Istanbul on Sunday, marking the 1,700th anniversary of Christianity's first ecumenical council.
The first Council of Nicaea (located in modern-day Turkey, in the ciy of İznik) took place in 325 AD and the date remains important to Orthodox-Catholic relations.
It saw Roman Emperor Constantine I bring together some 300 bishops, according to the Catholic Almanac.
Among the outcomes was the Nicene Creed, a profession of faith that is still recited by Christians today and required of those undertaking important functions within the Orthodox, as well as the Catholic and Lutheran Churches.
As Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I is "primus inter pares" (first among equals) among the patriarchs of the Eastern Orthodox Church and is its spiritual leader.
Bartholomew, who is known for his ecumenical as well as humanitarian and ecological efforts, had met with Pope Leo XIV earlier this week for the first time.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Local France
a day ago
- Local France
OPINION: 130 years on, the Dreyfus affair still matters to France and the world
In 1894 an obscure Jewish French army captain was falsely convicted of espionage and treason. Alfred Dreyfus spent five years alone in a cage on Devil's Island in the French Caribbean before he was pardoned and finally rehabilitated in 1906. For many decades 'the Dreyfus case' divided France. To the Catholic fundamentalist, antisemitic and ultra-patriotic Right, his guilt – no matter the lack of evidence - became an article of patriotic faith. To the Left, and not just the Left, the struggle to prove his innocence symbolised the importance and the fragility of the democratic and personal freedoms won by the French Revolution. On Monday, the National Assembly voted unanimously to promote Dreyfus to the rank of brigadier general 90 years after his death. Until relatively recently, any unanimous parliamentary decision on the Dreyfus case in France would have been unthinkable. Advertisement This week's vote managed to be both unanimous and controversial. Of the 577 deputies, only 197 voted. Thirty-eight were from the far-right Rassemblement National, direct descendants of the Vichy regime of 1940-44 which rehabilitated the senior officers who lied and cheated to frame Dreyfus. Forty-one of the pro-Dreyfus votes came from the hard-Left La France Insoumise, which has been accused in recent months of anti-semitism in its unconditional support for the Palestinian cause. The centrist Modem party, the party of the prime minister François Bayrou, refused to take part. They said that the vote, sponsored by their coalition partners, Renaissance, the party of President Emmanuel Macron, gave the far-right and the hard-left a cheap opportunity to white-wash their anti-semitism. There may be some truth in that but it misses a larger point. The Dreyfus case IS partly about anti-semitism. The persecution of Captain Alfred Dreyfus persuaded Theodor Herzl, the father of Zionism, that the future for the Jewish people was the creation of a Jewish state. But 'the case' is also about something broader - something which threatens democratic values in the 2020s as much as it did in the 1890s. The trampling of the rule of law in the name of patriotism? Politics in which facts do not shape political opinions but quasi-religious beliefs establish bogus facts? We are confronted in 2025 with the same issues which the novelist Emile Zola addressed in 1898 in his celebrated front-page article on the Dreyfus case under the banner headline: 'J'accuse'. Twenty-seven years ago, in a speech to mark the centenary of Zola's article, President Jacques Chirac said: 'The Dreyfus Affair…tore French society apart, divided families, split the country into two enemy camps, which attacked each other with exceptional violence ... It was a reminder, that the forces of darkness, intolerance and injustice can penetrate to the highest levels of the state.' The last sentence is prophetic and chilling. Chirac might have been speaking about Donald Trump. Advertisement In that centenary year of the Zola article, I interviewed Nelly Wilson, a British academic who was an expert on both Zola and Dreyfus. Ms Wilson, who died in 2017, came to Britain in 1945 at the age of 15 as one of 150 young concentration camp survivors invited to settle by the UK government. 'It is perhaps not so surprising that the (Dreyfus) affair remains so vivid in the French mind,' she told me in 1998. 'It describes a conflict at the heart of French political psychology which has not changed so very much to this day. On the one hand, a fierce nationalism and a temptation to justify almost anything for raisons d'etat ; on the other hand, a fierce attachment to justice for the individual, for the rights of the individual.' Nelly Wilson believed that the Dreyfus case changed the course of French history. It discredited the forces of extreme nationalism, anti-semitism, clericalism and nostalgic royalism which might otherwise have pushed France into a kind of proto-fascism or Francoism 30 years before Hitler, Mussolini or Franco. That conflict is still with us but is no longer at the centre of French politics alone. It can be seen in the lies and law-trampling of President Trump, in the brutal creed of Vladimir Putin and in the kleptocratic rule of Viktor Orban in Hungary. Advertisement And, yes, the 'temptation to justify almost anything for raisons d'etat ' also describes the murderous and cynical forever war for his own survival waged by Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel. The Dreyfus affair has never had quite the same resonance outside France (Jewish communities apart). In the early 20th century, British newspapers wrote puzzled or mocking articles, demanding to know what all the fuss was about. The parallels are not exact but you can see similar comments today minimising the Trump administration's wrongful arrest and imprisonment in El Salvador of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. We should no longer ask why France is obsessed with Alfred Dreyfus. History has told us, and continues to tell us, that 'the case' was about more than anti-semitism and far more than the persecution of one innocent man.
Euronews
4 days ago
- Euronews
Patriarch Bartholomew I marks 1,700th anniversary of Council of Nicaea
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I led a liturgy in Istanbul on Sunday, marking the 1,700th anniversary of Christianity's first ecumenical council. The first Council of Nicaea (located in modern-day Turkey, in the ciy of İznik) took place in 325 AD and the date remains important to Orthodox-Catholic relations. It saw Roman Emperor Constantine I bring together some 300 bishops, according to the Catholic Almanac. Among the outcomes was the Nicene Creed, a profession of faith that is still recited by Christians today and required of those undertaking important functions within the Orthodox, as well as the Catholic and Lutheran Churches. As Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I is "primus inter pares" (first among equals) among the patriarchs of the Eastern Orthodox Church and is its spiritual leader. Bartholomew, who is known for his ecumenical as well as humanitarian and ecological efforts, had met with Pope Leo XIV earlier this week for the first time.
Local France
22-05-2025
- Local France
Is the Napoleonic Code really still in force in France?
If you are looking to move to France - or you are seeking out the warnings and advice of foreigners already living here - you might be cautioned that "France still has the Napoleonic code in place". This warning may conjure up images of a person being sent to a remote island as punishment, but the Napoleonic code is not as antiquated as it might sound. In fact, much of the original code is still in use today, though of course there have been many amendments over the years. What is the Napoleonic code? The Napoleonic code is also known as the Code Civile des Français, and it was enacted in 1804, just a few years after Napoleon Bonaparte took power. It was not the world's first civil law system, but it was one of the most influential - and remains an influence on the laws of modern France and many other countries. Advertisement After taking power, Napoleon took it upon himself to deal with the patchy mess that was France's legal system. Prior to the Revolution, there was no secular, civil code covering the entire territory. Instead, there were feudal laws that differed from place to place, while the church enforced rules related to family, marriage and personal behaviour. During the Revolution, the feudal system and the Catholic church were stripped of much of their power in France, with many of their previous rules repealed. For example, homosexuality was decriminalised and slavery outlawed. Napoleon commissioned four jurists to draft the legal code, and he headed up the committee as chairman. The final version of 1804 was encompassed four 'books' ( livres ), covering 'people', 'property', 'different manners of acquiring property', and 'procedure' (the latter was eventually withdrawn). The Napoleonic code may be seen as modern and progressive in some ways - as it strengthened secularism and created a concept of equal rights enshrined by the law (for men). However, it was very patriarchal, walking back much of the progress women made during the Revolution and making them ' minors ' under the law. According to Vie-Publique , it "deprived women of legal rights, making them subject to the authority of their father and husband." These days, although the framework of the Napoleonic code remains in place, many parts have been either repealed or modified. Much if it has also been superceded by more recent domestic laws or international protocols such as the European Convention on Human Rights. During the 20th century, large segments of the civil law were reformed and rewritten to better reflect modern France. Advertisement For example, the loi 85-1372 of December 1985 reformed part of the 'Napoleonic code', granting spouses "joint management of the community life" and removing any references to 'husband or wife' to emphasise equality of spouses. You can actually read through the 'Code Civile' that is currently active on the LegiFrance website. So why do people still warn about the 'Napoleonic code'? If someone warns you about this it's likely that they're talking about French rules about inheritance that came in via the Napoleonic code, and which remain in effect today (with some modernising portions). While the Napoleonic code in its original form was kind of an attempt at marrying the traditional ideas of the Ancien Régime with the liberalism of the Revolution, Napoleon's approach to inheritance was a stark move away from the feudal system. Advertisement Previously, the estate would be passed down to the oldest male heir. This created the tradition of the second son joining the military, and then the third son joining the clergy (hence the term cadet for younger children). Napoleonic law made legitimate children equal in their right to the same portion of the parents' estate. There was a distinction for 'illegitimate' children, but this was amended in the 1970s. Today, the same idea is applied in French law - it is illegal to disinherit children, and they are all entitled to a portion of the estate. This applies to French people and also foreign residents or property owners - and it frequently causes consternation among foreigners as France is one of very few countries to have this system. READ MORE: Death and taxes: What you need to know about estate planning in France Napoleon's influence is still visible in many aspects of French life, from the invention of the lycée (secondary school) system to the Legion of Honor ( Légion d'honneur ). If you plan on applying for French citizenship (or if you're just interested) you can study up on his contributions to France in the Livret du Citoyen. READ MORE: What is France's 'Livret du Citoyen' and why might it be vital to you
