17 The Council of Nice, and the rise of Antichrist
Constantine, the Council of Nice, and the rise of Antichrist
John tells us of the antichrist. “Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us,” (1 John 2:18-19).
Antichristis not an individual we should expect at some distant time in the future. John tells us there weremany antichristsin his day. Anti- simply means in opposition to. Whatever, or whoever, openly opposes Christ is antichrist. The Alexandrian reformers were anti-Christ. They were opposed to Christ, as they were opposed to the church, and to the gospel. Those in John’s day went out. In trying to remake the church, the antichrists at Alexandria went out from the Lord’s church, and set up their own anti-church.
Paul tells us about the rise of the man of sin. “Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God shewing himself that he is God” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4). The three major events in the development of antichrist, and the manifestation ofthe man of sin, were (1) the establishment of the Academy at Alexandria (2) the triumph of Constantine and the Council of Nice, and (3) the rise of Augustine of Hippo. The Academy laid the groundwork for the rise of Catho-licism, and provided a huge supply of trained and polished young orators to advance the cause.
Constantine came to the throne in 306 A.D., and received full imperial power in 314. He made the Catholic party the state church, and at the Council of Nice in 325, he provided them with anorganization, ahierarchy, and acreed. He “deprived the Donatists of their churches. This persecution was the first which realized the support of a Christian emperor, and he ‘went so far as to put some of the Donatists to death’” (Orchard pg 88). The second major development in the rise of antichrist was the council of Nice in Bithynia in Asia Minor in 325 A.D. The conflict that gave rise to the synod was a dispute between Alexander and Athanasius on one side, and Arius and Eusebius on the other side, over the doctrine of the Trinity.
Arius insisted that Jesus was not fully God, that he was originally created from nothing, that he was subject to change, that he did not fully know the Father, nor himself, and so on. No Christian can accept the teachings of Arius. If Jesus is not fully God, then all who worship him are idolaters. The Council decided in favor of Alexander and Athanasius, and the doctrine of the Trinity, and banished Arius. They issued what has come to be known as the Nicene Creed.
Virtually all the literature dealing with the Nicene Council focuses on the question of the Trinity. Great amounts of writing has been devoted to their handling of that question, and you would get the idea that is all that was involved. But any time the adversary makes a loud noise in the East, you should take a moment time to see what is happening in the West-and out of sight. The council was summoned by Constantine, and held under his authority. He was in attendance, at least, part of the time. Eusebius’s editor records, “At the signal which announced the entrance of the emperor, all arose, and he appeared in the midst of them, his purple robe, resplendent with gold, and precious stones, dazzling the eyes of the beholders” (Preface to Eusebius’ History pg 15). That does not seem to describe an assembly of humble followers of Christ. The editor goes on to say that at the imperial banquet “the guards and soldiers, disposed in a circle, were stationed at the entrance of the palace with drawn swords. The men of God passed through the midst of them without fear, and went into the most private apartments of the royal edifice” (pg 27). It is easy to imagine the emperor was accompanied by an armed guard with drawn swords, but I have some difficulty in thinking the guests were not somewhat intimidated by those drawn swords. At any rate, it was against that background the council did its work. That council was the organizational meeting of the Catholic Church, and its resolutions serve as their fundamental documents. Until then, they had been the Catholic party, and they claimed the Catholic name; now they began to be a truly separate organization. They were not yet Roman Catholic; but they were as Catholic as they would ever be.
We cannot point to any one date, and say this is where the Roman Catholic Church began. Romanism has been a constantly unfolding and developing force that continues even today. The elements that developed into Romanism were already present in Paul’s day. He tells us, “The mystery of iniquity doth already work, only he who now letteth will let until he be taken until he be taken out of the way”2 Thessalonians 2:7. That mystery of iniquity is still unfolding. Infant baptism began in Augustine’s day. The doctrine of purgatory began with Origen and Augustine; but Gregory (595-604 A.D.) was the first to make practical use of it. Boniface III was the first called Universal Bishop in 606 A.D. In 648 A.D., Theodore I assumed the title of Sovereign Pontiff. The temporal power of the pope began with Stephen III in 748. The doctrine of transubstantiation began with Paschasius Radbert in 831 A.D. At the Council of Constance (1414-1418 A.D.) Martin V declared himself to be infallible. In 1854, Pius IX declared the doctrine of Immaculate Conception. So even though the Roman Catholic Church is still developing, the Council of Nice was Catholicism’s first truly organizational meeting. It gave Catholicism its organization, its hierarchy, and its creed. Since that council is so fundamental to the rise of the man of sin, it seems advisable that we take time to notice what the meeting did accomplish. The deliberations of that synod were some of the most significant in the history of religion, or of the world. The Creed itself was modified several times over the next sixty years, and in addition to the Creed, there were added the Synodical Letter, and more than eighty Canons. Those Canons spelled out many of the fundamental principles that have guided the Catholic Church ever since that day. The Nicene Creed reads, “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 of his Father, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousion) with the Father. By whom all things were made, both which be in heaven and in earth. Who for us men and for our salvation came down and was incarnate and was made man. He suffered and the third day he rose again, and ascended into heaven. And he shall come again to judge both the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost, etc....” Up to that point, so far, so good. It would be hard to find any evangelical Christian who would disagree. But it goes on, “And whosoever shall say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, or that before he was begotten he was not, or that he was made of things that were not, or that he is of a different substance or essence, or that he is a creature, or subject to change or conversion-all that so say, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes them.”
Again, no one can properly dispute that the doctrines the creed denies are false and should be rejected; but it is also clear thatthe council begins to show its teeth in the way itanathematizesthose who disagree.
Also, no one can deny that this council usurps the authority of the local church. The New Testament recognizes no higher ecclesiastical authority than the local church. This usurping of authority will become even more apparent as we go along.
Notice also that they identify themselves as the Catholic and Apostolic Church. They had been claiming the catholic name long before the Nicene Council convened. They claimed they were the one catholic (universal) church, and all outside their number were heretics.
Later versions of the Creed also presumed to set the date for observing Easter. The Lord never gave any command to observe Easter, much less a command as to when it should be observed. But the observance was an important consideration to the Catholics. Almost 300 years later, Pope Gregory sent Augustine of Canterbury to England to insist the Britons observe Easter at the authorized time. They refused and the Saxons slaughtered them by the thousands. The variouscanonsof the Council of Nice are even more telling than the creed they issued.
Canon IV had to do withpriestly celibacy. Every effort was made to adopt a rule requiring strict celibacy of all priests, but Paphnutius insisted that it was too much to require men to leave their wives, if they were married before they were ordained. It was finally decided they could continue to live with their wives, but if a priest was not already married at the time he was ordained, he must remain celibate. After the older priests died, it was possible for them to enforce celibacy on the priesthood in general.
Paul prophesied of this action by the Nicene Council in his letter to Timothy. “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter time some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;forbidding to marry....”(1 Timothy 4:1-3).
It is hard to imagine how Paul could have condemned these Nicene Catholics any more sharply than he did. He said they would (1) depart from the faith, (2) give heed to seducing spirits, and (3) doctrines of devils, that they would (4) speak lies in hypocrisy, and (5) their conscience would be seared with a hot iron. He leaves us no room to doubt what he thought of the Nicene Council, and that almost 300 years before the fact.
Canon VI gave the bishops of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch, jurisdiction over the churches in their respective areas. The supreme authority had not yet been settled on Rome, but it later would be. They were as Catholic as they would ever be, but, at this time, they were not yet Roman Catholic.
Canon XIII has to do withextreme unction, prayers offered over the dying.
Under threat of excommunication, Canons XV and XVI forbade bishops to move from one area to another. The early minsters were sent forth by the Spirit (Acts 13:1). But, following those seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, which Paul warned against, the council usurped the office of the Holy Spirit, and presumed to tell preachers where they could go.
Canon XIV has to do with licensing ofmonks.
Canon XVIII has to do with theirhierarchy. It established levels in the ministry; the deacon was the lowest level in the ministry, the presbyter was above the deacon, and the bishop was above the presbyter.
Canon XIX required any Paulianist who joined their number to be rebaptized. Over the centuries they burned untold numbers of Dissenters who placed the same requirement on those joining them.
Canon XX required that prayers be made standing, not kneeling.
Canon LXXIII had to do withmonasteriesandabbots.
Canon LXXIV had to do with sisters, widows, and deaconess [nuns] residing in monasteries.
Canon LXXVI had to do with the proper attire of monks and nuns.
We are determined to limit the size of the book. So we are only able to list a very few of the regulations adopted by the Nicene Council. But this should be sufficient to show it was a Catholic body, and they had fully departed from the simplicity of the New Testament. At the Council of Chacedon in 451 A.D. the charge was made that the Canons were forged. It has never been denied that those involved with the Council and its documents continued to tinker with them, at least, until the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. There are, today, several different versions of the Nicene Creed itself, but since the Council of Nice, the Council of Chalcedon, and the people who tinkered with the Creed for the next 60 years, were all part of the Catholic party, it is difficult to say who should determine what was their own tinkering, and what was forgery. At any rate, forgery or not, the Nicene Creed and its various canons have continued to guide the Roman Catholic Church until this very day.