This year is the 1,700th anniversary of a great church controversy
From time to time, great controversies of doctrine and practice arise in the church.
The first such one concerned the need for Gentile converts to Christianity to observe the rules of the law of Moses.
It was resolved by the Council of Jerusalem, recorded at Acts 15, which decided in favour of not burdening them with the regulations, except for abstaining 'from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood'.
There was an element of compromise in this decision, but the main thrust of it was definitely on the liberal side.
READ MORE
Another major controversy was resolved 1,700 years ago this year by the first Council of Nicaea, which was held in the year 325. This striking anniversary is being observed in church circles around the world.
The controversy dealt with at Nicaea concerned the views of Arius, a priest in North Africa, as developed in Arianism. Arianism taught that
Jesus
was not coeternal with God, having been created by God, but nonetheless having been created before time began.
Arianism's understanding that Jesus had been created, as opposed to begotten, involved subordinationism within the Trinity and was a matter of widespread and passionate dispute within the early church.
The Emperor Constantine – who ruled from 306 to 337, had converted to Christianity and legalised its practice by the Edict of Milan in 313 – was deeply concerned about the depth of this division of opinion and convened the council which was held in Nicaea, which is now Iznik in
Turkey
, in summer 325 to establish a definitive position.
The council adopted the first version of the Nicene creed, referring to 'one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father, only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father'.
While some may think there was an element of compromise in the wording 'begotten, not made', nonetheless the creed is a clear repudiation of Arianism, categorically anathematising any view of Jesus as of 'a different hypostasis or substance' from God, or as 'created'.
Christian teaching distinguishes between begetting and creating. This difference was helpfully explained in a nutshell by CS Lewis in his book, Mere Christianity, thus: 'When you beget, you beget something of the same kind as yourself ... But when you make, you make something of a different kind from yourself.'
Although there understandably are differing views of the precise course of ancient history, it is widely viewed that the first form of the Nicene creed was amended in 381 by the Council of Constantinople (now Istanbul) into the present-day form, except for the
Filioque clause (that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father 'and the Son'), which was added in 1014 and was an important factor in the 1054 schism between the western and eastern church.
The 381 version of the Nicene creed is also known as the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed. What is crucially important about the Nicene creed from its original 325 form is that it firmly establishes the trinitarian understanding of God.
Perhaps all of this may seem rather esoteric in today's church, but the importance of Trinitarianism is seen in that when one tampers with it then all sorts of theological trouble is inclined to ensue.
In terms of the today's church, Trinitarianism can be seen as underscoring certain particularly contemporary concerns. These include respect for human diversity and the value of unity-in-diversity in church relationships, given that the trinitarian God is both one and diverse in nature; the importance of human equality, the three divine people being coequal; and the fundamentally relational nature of human life – embracing personal, societal and political life – given that harmonious relationship is at the heart of the life of the triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
No doubt there are many other ways in which the trinitarian understanding of God can be seen as a standard and goal for the church and for human society in general.
Given the priority of the scriptural witness, some question the authority of creeds such as the Nicene creed in establishing orthodox doctrine.
Nonetheless, the church does have to organise itself – and ecumenical councils, such as were those of Nicaea and Constantinople, can rightly assert what is the common and received understanding of the mysteries of God.
Canon Ian Ellis is former editor of The Church of Ireland Gazette
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
3 days ago
- Irish Times
Britain's Simon Yates seals Giro d'Italia in Rome for second Grand Tour title
Simon Yates arrived in Rome, was blessed by Pope Leo XIV and then completed a miraculous overall victory in the 2025 Giro d'Italia , seven years after his race lead had traumatically dissolved with victory in his grasp. The English rider's remarkable turnaround in Saturday's final mountain stage, in which Yates leapfrogged 21-year-old Giro debutant and race leader Isaac del Toro and podium rival Richard Carapaz to take a near four-minute overall lead, was one of the most stunning in Grand Tour racing. This was Yates's Rory McIlroy moment, a career catharsis that banished the pain and humiliation he had endured on the Colle delle Finestre in 2018. Seven summers after the monstrous climb cracked his career apart, the mountain that had broken him became the setting of his redemption. As Yates, of the Visma-Lease a bike team, savoured the closing moments of the 2025 Giro, the final stage was won by his team-mate Olav Kooij, who outsprinted the Australian Kaden Groves to take their team's third stage win of the race. READ MORE Yates is now the third British rider to win the Giro, after Chris Froome in 2018 and Tao Geoghegan Hart in 2020. By coincidence, the successes of all three were founded in the mountains of Piedmont. Yates's reversal of fortune was thanks to his own aggressive racing and the canny tactics of his team, but also to the bizarre tactical feud between Del Toro, of UAE Team Emirates, and the EF Education Easy Post leader, Carapaz, that played perfectly into his game plan. It wasn't quite X marks the spot, but when Yates, rose out of the saddle on the Finestre's narrow bends, a few turns of the pedal from where Froome had dismembered his race leadership in 2018, he was evidently a man on a mission. That year, a dominant Yates had appeared destined to win the Giro, yet endured one of the worst humiliations in the race's history, suffering a complete collapse on the gravel hairpins of the Finestre, and finishing almost 40 minutes behind the flying Froome. That humiliation derailed Yates, although he recovered in time to take that year's Vuelta, his first Grand Tour success. Yet there was no real thought of settling scores with the mountain until the route of this year's corsa rosa, climaxing with a return to the Finestre, was announced. It was, Yates said, 'in the back of my mind,' to come back to the climb that left him broken, to 'close a chapter' and to show what his real capabilities were. Aided by the hard work of his team-mate Wout van Aert, his redemption was writ large as he reversed his overnight deficit into a winning margin of just under four minutes. In contrast to 2018, Yates rode discreetly throughout this year's Giro, progressing from 21st place after the opening stage, to a holding position in the top three as he entered the Giro's final week. When he did finally show himself on the Finestre, it was decisive. In the end, Carapaz and Del Toro, both of whom looked capable of chasing Yates on the steep gravel slopes, found themselves caught between a rock and a hard place. Whether through hubris or tactical misjudgement, they chose to let the British rider win the Giro, rather than join forces to try to stop him. Yet that view is also something of a disservice to Yates, because without him seizing the initiative with his relentless attacking, they would not have been forced to make that decision at all. Third overall before the stage to Sestriere, Yates was also risking it all, gambling that his stamina would take him to the finish line, and that he would not be caught. 'Are they still together?' he asked anxiously on his race radio of Carapaz and Del Toro, as he climbed further ahead, through the Finestre's final hairpins. And they were, tightly locked in a game of poker that had no winner. Del Toro will hope that, like Yates, he one day gets another chance to claim the maglia rosa of Giro leadership. Carapaz, meanwhile, winner of the race in 2019, adds yet another top-three placing to past podium finishes in the Tour de France and Vuelta a España. But tactical nuances are only a small part of the story and the deep, primal sobbing that poured out of the usually stoic Yates, as he collapsed into tears beyond the finish line, revealed just how personal this was for him. Even an hour later, as he fulfilled his media duties, his eyes were still brimming. Professional cycling's most romantic race had the most romantic conclusion. The rest was just la polemica. – Guardian
Irish Times
22-05-2025
- Irish Times
Flight carrying ‘barbaric' deportees from US to Africa stopped at Shannon Airport
A US aircraft carrying deportees described by a US Homeland Security official as 'barbaric' and 'violent' to North Africa against the directions of a US federal court judge stopped at Shannon Airport on route to its destination. Flight-tracking date obtained by the New York Times traced a Gulfstream jet owned by a private company that stopped off at Shannon after leaving an airport in Harlingen, Texas, on Tuesday. From Shannon, the aircraft travelled on to an airport in Djibouti, arriving there on Wednesday. It is reported the final destination of the eight deportees is South Sudan. At a hastily called press conference on Wednesday, Tricia McLaughlin, the assistant secretary for public affairs at the department of Homeland Security, stressed the gravity of the crimes committed by the deportees. READ MORE 'We conducted a deportation flight from Texas to remove some of the most barbaric violent individuals illegally in the United States. No country on Earth wanted to accept them because their crimes are so monstrous and barbaric. Every single one of them was convicted of a heinous crime – murder, rape, child rape.' The deportations are believed to include men from Vietnam, Cuba, Myanmar, Laos and Mexico and took place in conflict with the instructions of US district judge Brian E Murphy. Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs Simon Harris has said he is seeking 'legal clarity' about the situation. 'Complying with US law is obviously a matter for the US administration. Complying with our own laws is obviously for the Irish state and the Irish government,' Mr Harris told RTÉ radio's Morning Ireland. 'There are very clear rules in relation to flights that can and can't stop over in Shannon and what they must do and not do. We need to see whether this was in compliance with that.' Judge Murphy, a district judge in Massachusetts, had ordered the immigration authorities to carry out screenings interviews of the men to establish whether they qualified for humanitarian aid, with their lawyers and interpreters present. His decision came after an emergency motion was filed by lawyers representing the men, stating that their clients were informed that they were being sent to South Sudan, rather than their home countries. Ms McLaughlin went on to say that department of Homeland Security eventually found a country willing to accept the deportees before criticising Judge Murphy for 'trying to bring them back'. 'It is absolutely absurd for a district judge to try and dictate the foreign policy and national security of the United States of America.' She declined to state where the final destination of the flight will be. 'We are following due process under the US constitution,' Ms McLaughlin said. 'These individuals and their lawyers have been given plenty of prior notice,' she said before 'imploring' the media present to write about the victims of the crimes which the deportees had committed. The episode represents the latest clash between federal judges and the department over deportation flights taking place in defiance of court orders. Judge Murphy ruled the US government's attempt to deport migrants to South Sudan 'unquestionably' violated an earlier court order. He made the remark at an emergency hearing he had ordered in Boston following the deportations. On Tuesday, Judge Murphy ruled that US president Donald Trump could not let a group of migrants being transported to countries that were not their own leave the custody of US immigration authorities. Lawyers for seven of the men were told that their clients were given little more than 24 hours notice that they were being expelled from the US. Judge Murphy said that little amount of time was 'plainly insufficient'. An eighth man in the group was a citizen of South Sudan, according to the Department of Homeland Security. South Sudan, the world's youngest country, has widely been described as being on the verge of descending into another episode of civil war. A South Sudan police spokesman said no migrants had arrived in the country from the US. He said that if they did, they would be investigated and those found not to be from the country would be 're-deported to their correct country'. – Additional reporting: AP
Irish Examiner
19-05-2025
- Irish Examiner
Project 2025 co-author Russ Vought is the power behind Trump presidency
While Elon Musk has clearly been a major influence on the Trump administration, the less well known, but arguably more influential, power behind the presidency is Russell (usually Russ) Vought. Vought is the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) — the nerve centre of the administration's sweeping changes. Vought is also rumoured to be about to take over running the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) from Musk. He is fully committed to a radical overhaul of the way the US presidency works — and his deep religious convictions have led him to believe there should be more Christianity embedded in government and public life. He has vowed to 'be the person that crushes the deep state', and was part of the first Trump administration, where he held the position of OMB deputy director — and, briefly, director. Vought worked with Trump in his first term on executive order 13957, which aimed to reclassify thousands of policy jobs within the federal government. This was designed to allow the White House to quickly change who was employed in these roles. This was revoked by the Biden administration. But Trump issued a similar executive order 14171 in January, which will implement quicker hiring and firing procedures; this could affect up to 50,000 federal roles. White House 'retaining control' of agencies under its command In an interview with conservative commentator and podcaster Tucker Carlson, Vought said this was necessary for the White House to 'retain control' of the agencies under its command. Without it, he claimed, ideological 'opponents' within the agencies had the power to diminish the efficiency of White House initiatives. And his role as head of the OMB was 'to tame the bureaucracy, the administrative state'. During the Biden presidency, Vought was one of the main authors — credited as the key architect — of the Heritage Foundation's influential Project 2025, widely seen as the blueprint for Trump's second term of office. The 900-page document, whose full title is Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, was a major talking point during the presidential election campaign. Throughout the campaign, Trump strenuously denied Democrat accusations of having any connection to Project 2025. But a large number of his appointees contributed to the Heritage Foundation's publication, and numerous Project 2025's recommendations have quickly been put into action. These include Trump's high trade tariffs and Doge's cost-cutting initiatives. US president Donald Trump strenuously denied Democrat accusations of having any connection to Project 2025 throughout the presidential election campaign File picture: Alex Brandon/ AP During his confirmation hearing in the US Senate, Vought reiterated his belief that the White House has authority over federal spending, not Congress. This contradicts article I, section 8, of the US Constitution, which grants Congress the power to tax and spend for the general welfare of the country. For the majority of constitutional experts, the executive (the president) may propose a budget, but it is Congress that authorises it. Concerned by this, Democrats on the Senate budget committee attempted a boycott of Vought's confirmation vote, which failed when all 11 Repubican members voted in favour. Democrat and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer has called Vought the 'most radical nominee' with 'the most extreme agenda' and said that Americans needed to understand the danger he poses to them in their daily lives. When asked to compare the Trump administration's policies to Project 2025, Paul Dans, who was the director of Project 2025 until he stepped down during the Trump campaign, said that the administration's policies were 'beyond my wildest dreams'. According to one website tracking the agenda, of the 313 suggested policy objectives in Project 2025, 101 have been implemented, while another 64 are in progress. A significant number of Project 2025's recommendations have been implemented by the Elon Musk-led Doge. And Vought has been described by one journalist as 'the glue between Musk and the Republicans'. Relationship between Vought and Musk Vought and Musk have forged a strange but effective relationship in executing Doge's cost-cutting initiatives. According to reports, Musk's Doge has used data to identify what he considers to be overspending while Vought's OMB has confirmed Doge's findings recommending how to deal with them. 'What's needed is a specific theory about the case and what can be done,' Vought said. It was part of an effort to help the government 'balance its books', he added. When asked what he thought of Doge, Vought replied: 'I think they're bringing an exhilarating rush … of creativity, outside the box thinking, comfortability with risk and leverage.' The process to crush the so-called 'deep state' conducted by Maga Republicans in Congress and Doge in the White House has been expertly coordinated by Vought. As one reporter wrote, he has experience of working on Capitol Hill and is on good terms with the Freedom Caucus who are the group of conservative Republicans that advocates for limited government, fiscal restraint, and strict adherence to a constitutional, right-wing agenda. After the caucus was instrumental in defining the terms of support for Mike McCarthy as Speaker of the House in 2023, Vought called the members of Freedom House 'the lions that have been through battle and won'. He knows the capabilities of the OMB, and is just as anti-establishment as Musk. According to independent researchers tracking Project 2025, a number of departments still have more than half of the project's objectives to be completed. The administration will need to work quickly, however. Historically, the party that occupies the White House fares badly in the midterms. The Republicans could lose control of the House or the Senate. Should this happen, the administration may find it more difficult to implement changes. But it is highly unlikely this will deter Vought and his drive for reforms of presidential powers. He, along with the majority of the Trump White House, believe in the unitary executive theory: that the president has control over all executive branch officials and operations, and that Congress cannot limit that control, even through legislation. If Vought does carry on and Congress challenges his decisions, the issue could end up in the Supreme Court — a court dominated by Trump appointees. Any judgment made by the court would be seismic in its importance of future interpretations of the constitution and where power really lies in the federal government. For Vought and other Project 2025 authors in the administration, a ruling in their favour would be vindication of their work. Dafydd Townley is a teaching fellow in US politics and international security, University of Portsmouth. The Conversation Read More Trump's Qatari 747 may need fighter escorts to serve as Air Force One
