Nicene Creed According to the Scriptures

A year ago, I had shared a post from Paul McCain at CPH on the Apostles' Creed which included proof texts.  Recently, he shared another such list for the Nicene Creed.

I Believe

Rom. 10:9; Jas 2:19; John 14:1

In one God,

Deut. 6:4; Is. 44:6

The Father

Is. 63:16; 2 Pet 1:17; Matt. 6:9

Almighty,

Gen. 17:1; Ps. 91:1; Rev. 4:8

Maker

Job 4:17, 35:10; Is. 17:7, 54:5

of heaven

Gen 1:1, 8

and earth

Ps. 104:5; Jer. 51:15

and of all things

Gen 1:31

visible and invisible.

Ps. 89:11-12; Amos 4:13; Rev. 3:5; Col. 1:16

And in one Lord

Eph. 4:5

Jesus Christ,

Acts 10:36, 11:17; Rom. 1:7, 5:1; 1 Cor 1:2, 6:11; 2 Cor. 1:2, 8:9; Gal. 1:3, 6:14; Eph. 1:2, 3:11; Phil. 1:2, 3:20; Col. 1:3, 2:6; 1 Thes. 1:1, 5:9; 2 Thes. 1:1, 2:14; 1 Tim. 6:3, 14, 2 Tim. 1:2, Philemon 1:3, 25, Heb. 13:20, Jas. 1:1, 2:1; 1 Pet. 1:3, 3:15; 2 Pet. 1:8, 14; Jude 17, 21; Rev. 22:20-21

the only-begotten,

John 1:18

Son of God,

Matt 3:17; John 3:16

Begotten of His Father,

Heb. 1:5

Before all worlds,

John 1:1; Col. 1:17; 1 John 1:1

begotten,

John 1:1; Heb. 1:5

Not Made,

Mic. 5:2; John 1:18, 17:5

Being of one substance with the Father,

John 10:30, 14:9; Heb 1:3

By whom all things were made;

1 Cor. 8:6; Col 1:16

Who for us men

Matt 20:28; John 10:10

and for our salvation

Matt 1:21; Luke 19:10

came down from heaven

Rom. 10:6; Eph. 4:10

and was incarnate

Col. 2:9

by the Holy Spirit

Matt 1:18

of the Virgin Mary

Luke 1:34-35

and was made man;

John 1:14

and was crucified

Matt. 20:19; John 19:18; Rom. 5:6, 8; 2 Cor. 13:4

also for us

Rom. 5:8; 2 Cor. 5:15

under Pontius Pilate.

Matt. 27:2, 26; 1 Tim 6:13

He suffered

1 Pet. 2:21; Heb. 2:10

and was buried.

Mark 15:46; 1 Cor. 15:4

And the third day

Matt. 27:63, 28:1; 1 Cor. 15:4

He rose again

Mark 16:6; 2 Tim. 2:8

according to the Scriptures

Ps. 16:10; Luke 24:25-27; 1 Cor. 15:4

and ascended

Luke 24:51; Acts 1:9

Into heaven

Mark 16:19; Acts 1:11

and sits at the right hand of the Father.

Ps. 110:1; Matt. 26:64; Acts 7:56; Heb. 1:3

And He will come again

Jn. 14:3; 1 Thes. 4:16

with glory

Matt. 16:27, 24:30, 25:31, 26:64; Mark 8:38; Col. 3:4

to judge

Matt. 25:31-46; Acts 17:31

both the living and the dead,

Acts 10:42; 1 Pet. 4:5

whose kingdom

John 18:36; 2 Tim. 4:1, 18

will have no end.

Luke 1:33; Rev. 11:15; Ps. 145:13

And I believe in the Holy Spirit,

Matt. 28:19; Acts 13:2

The Lord

2 Cor. 3:17

And giver of life,

John 6:63; Rom. 7:6, 8:2; 2 Cor. 3:6

who proceeds from the father

John 14:16-17

and the Son,

John 15:26; Rom. 8:9; Gal. 4:6

Who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped

Luke 4:8; John 4:24

and glorified

John 4:24; 1 Tim. 1:17

Who spoke by the prophets.

1 Pet. 1:10-11; 2 Pet 1:21

And I believe in one

1 Cor. 10:16-17, 12:12-13

Holy

Eph. 3:16-17, 5:27; 1 Pet. 2:9

Catholic

1 Cor. 1:2

and Apostolic

Eph. 2:20; Rev. 21:14

Church,

Acts 20:28; Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:24; Heb. 12:23; 1 Pet. 2:9

I acknowledge one Baptism

John 3:5; Rom. 6:3; Eph. 4:5

For the remission of sins,

Acts 2:38; 1 Pet. 3:21; Tit. 3:5

And I look for the resurrection of the dead

1 Thes. 4:16; 1 Cor. 15:12-13, 16, 52

And the life of the world to come.

1 Cor 15:54-57; Rev. 22:5

Amen.

Ps. 41:13; 2 Cor. 1:20

 

Prepared by Richard Gilbert, Hacienda Heights, CA.

Nicene Creed Profitable for Summing Up the Faith

From Thomas C. Oden's essay, "The Faith Once Delivered" –

Teachers as varied as Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and Luther have held that the Nicene Creed is the best of the condensed statements of Christian faith and the most reliable way to learn the heart of faith.  In professing the form of the creed received in Jerusalem, Cyril explains that the believer is helped to keep close to the center of the faith once delivered by the apostles,

which has been built up strongly out of the Scriptures.  For since all cannot read the Scriptures, some being hindered from the knowledge of them by lack of learning, and others because they lack leisure to study, in order that the soul should not be starved in ignorance, the church has condensed the whole teaching of the Faith in a few lines.  This summary I wish you both to commit to memory when I recite it, and to rehearse it with all diligence among yourselves, not writing it out on paper, but engraving it by the memory upon your heart, taking care while you rehearse it that no catechumen may happen to overhear the things which have been delivered to you.  I wish you also to keep this as a provision through the whole course of your life, and beside this to receive no alternative teaching, even if we ourselves should change and contradict our present teaching.  (Catechetical Letters 5.12)

Evangelicals and Nicene Faith: Reclaiming the Apostolic Witness, p. 8-9

Council of Nicaea: A Final Observation

Going into this study I knew that the Nicene council had one governing mission guiding their progress:

What do we believe?

What makes this so profound is its blatant simplicity.  Their singular objective was to come together and codify what was received from faithful witnesses (i.e. the gospels, epistles, and later apologists/teachers) concerning the triune God and his revelation in the already acknowledged and accepted Law, Prophets, and Writings (i.e., Old Testament).  In our present theologically diverse culture, an attempt at such dogmatism would most likely be met with disdain and derision.  Within the church is post-modernism with emphasis on what is best for the individual within his or her current circumstance and cultural.  Partially fueling this are the publishers of theological and biblical works who relish the production of whatever new perspective can be brought to a subject.  So much effort goes into the production of original thought that the church has lost the desire, nay, the ability to understand what it knows.

Lest the guilt be placed solely on these purveyors of paper, both academia and church leadership at-large have accepted the quest for the holy grail of "entering into the conversation" without attempting to address a topic in such a way that a legitimate, true answer can be presented or confirmed.  The search has become an end in itself.  Imagine playing "Capture the Flag" with players wandering helter-skelter in the sheer revelry of activity questioning the very existence of flags and the need to possess one if they do.

To these and the reader I beseech, To the law and to the testimony! (Is 8:20 NASB) When the people of Israel were on the far side of the Jordan ready to enter the land, Moses delivered the sum of God's covenant with them.  It demanded a response due to such a great and good sovereign.  They knew both their place and duty.

This day the LORD your God commands you to do these statutes and rules.  You shall therefore be careful to do them with all your heart and with all your soul.  You have declared today that the LORD is your God, and that you will walk in his ways, and keep his statutes and his commandments and his rules, and will obey his voice.  And the LORD has declared today that you are a people for his treasured possession, as he has promised you, and that you are to keep all his commandments, and that he will set you in praise and in fame and in honor high above all nations that he has made, and that you shall be a people holy to the LORD your God, as he promised.  (Deuteronomy 26:16-19)

The new covenant given in Christ's blood is the final, supreme, enduring act of that same God.  Our response can be no less.

Nicaea - Canon 20

Forasmuch as there are certain persons who kneel on the Lord’s Day and in the days of Pentecost, therefore, to the intent that all things may be uniformly observed everywhere (in every parish), it seems good to the holy Synod that prayer be made to God standing.

The actual position of prayer became an issue in relation the Lord's Day and Pentecost because the act was viewed in relation to the resurrection.  The standing position while gathered on those days signified rest and joy according to Augustine.  This practice was elongated during the church year as Hammond states.

Although kneeling was the common posture for prayer in the primitive Church, yet the custom had prevailed, even from the earliest times, of standing at prayer on the Lord’s day, and during the fifty days between Easter and Pentecost.¹

Not all churches accepted this later practice.  Even the apostle Paul plainly kneeled to pray between Easter and Pentecost (Acts 20:36; 21:5).

The import of this canon is in carrying forth Paul's praise to Corinth in commending them for maintaining "the traditions even as I delivered them to you" (1 Cor 11:2).   Since Paul had established a common practice among the churches, it seemed natural to maintain commonality of activity in everything done.  Of course, the apostle would not have been so detailed in what he asked of each local body.  There was no reason to regulate all the activities and actions pertaining to those, only to establish the basis by which the church conducted itself in Christ.


¹ Wm. A. Hammond, note to Canon 20, The Seven Ecumenical Councils, (NPNF² 14:42).

Nicaea - Canon 19

Concerning the Paulianists who have flown for refuge to the Catholic Church, it has been decreed that they must by all means be rebaptized; and if any of them who in past time have been numbered among their clergy should be found blameless and without reproach, let them be rebaptized and ordained by the Bishop of the Catholic Church; but if the examination should discover them to be unfit, they ought to be deposed.  Likewise in the case of their deaconesses, and generally in the case of those who have been enrolled among their clergy, let the same form be observed.  And we mean by deaconesses such as have assumed the habit, but who, since they have no imposition of hands, are to be numbered only among the laity.

Paulianists were those who followed Paul of Samosata.¹  Upon their entrance or return to orthodoxy, they were to be rebaptized.  The reason for this stems from Paul's heterodox view of the Trinity.  Any baptism performed purportedly according to the formula in Matt 28:19 would be invalid, since his doctrine of the godhead was invalid.

One may ask, "Why be baptized again?  What is the point?"  Baptism identifies the person as a full adherent to another.  In this case the one to whom the heterodox believer had been identified was in essence a false god.  Baptism was considered necessary to correct the outward sign of allegiance previously given.

The deaconesses mentioned were not new to Antioch or Paul in particular.  According to the excursus for this canon:

The principal work of the deaconess was to assist the female candidates for holy baptism.  At that time the sacrament of baptism was always administered by immersion (except to those in extreme illness) and hence there was much that such an order of women could be useful in.  Moreover they sometimes gave to the female catechumens preliminary instruction, but their work was wholly limited to women, and for a deaconess of the Early Church to teach a man or to nurse him in sickness would have been an impossibility.²

¹ Bishop of Antioch from A.D. 260 until being deposed in 268 for teaching a form of monarchianism with leanings toward adoptionism.
² "Excursus on the Deaconess of the Early Church," The Seven Ecumenical Councils, Canon 19 (NPNF² 14:41).

Nicaea - Canon 18

It has come to the knowledge of the holy and great Synod that, in some districts and cities, the deacons administer the Eucharist to the presbyters, whereas neither canon nor custom permits that they who have no right to offer should give the Body of Christ to them that do offer.  And this also has been made known, that certain deacons now touch the Eucharist even before the bishops.  Let all such practices be utterly done away, and let the deacons remain within their own bounds, knowing that they are the ministers of the bishop and the inferiors of the presbyters.  Let them receive the Eucharist according to their order, after the presbyters, and let either the bishop or the presbyter administer to them.  Furthermore, let not the deacons sit among the presbyters, for that is contrary to canon and order.  And if, after this decree, any one shall refuse to obey, let him be deposed from the diaconate.

The ecclesiastic hierarchy found shortly before the council was most evidenced within the formal procedure surrounding the administration of the Lord's Supper.  Remembering the early church's view of the elements (see Canon 13), the strictures are understandable.  Overseers, elders, and deacons each had their place and responsibility concerning who was served and when.  This canon was directed at misuses and misappropriation amongst the deacons that the council believed required censure.

Nicaea - Canon 17

Forasmuch as many enrolled among the Clergy, following covetousness and lust of gain, have forgotten the divine Scripture, which says, “He hath not given his money upon usury,”¹ and in lending money ask the hundredth of the sum,² the holy and great Synod thinks it just that if after this decree any one be found to receive usury, whether he accomplish it by secret transaction or otherwise, as by demanding the whole and one half, or by using any other contrivance whatever for filthy lucre’s sake, he shall be deposed from the clergy and his name stricken from the list.

The underlying point of this canon lies within God's view of concern for his people.  Only those who are without would need a load to "get over the hump," and these occurrences come upon Christians.  Loaning money at interest adds a burden on the needy and demonstrates greed latent within the heart.  If any church leader should be found to be doing so, his position was forfeit.


¹ Lev 25:37
² As monthly interest

Nicaea - Canon 16

Neither presbyters, nor deacons, nor any others enrolled among the clergy, who, not having the fear of God before their eyes, nor regarding the ecclesiastical Canon, shall recklessly remove from their own church, ought by any means to be received by another church; but every constraint should be applied to restore them to their own parishes;¹ and, if they will not go, they must be excommunicated.²  And if anyone shall dare surreptitiously to carry off and in his own Church ordain a man belonging to another, without the consent of his own proper bishop, from whom although he was enrolled in the clergy list he has seceded, let the ordination be void.

This canon serves as counterpoint to the previous with emphasis being placed on the responsible conduct of the church being visited by a rogue leader.  Any spiritual leader in the church who removes himself from one church in order to serve in another is not to be accepted into fellowship but sent back from whence he came.  And any attempt to appoint the newcomer in a leadership position will be voided.

I wonder how many churches would be spared if they did due diligence toward those purporting to know the scriptures and desiring a place to speak and teach?


¹ In this context parish is equivalent to diocese.
² The idea is "not joining in sacrifice with" or "not being allowed to celebrate together with" rather than complete banishment.

Nicaea - Canon 15

  On account of the great disturbance and discords that occur, it is decreed that the custom prevailing in certain places contrary to the Canon, must wholly be done away; so that neither bishop, presbyter, nor deacon shall pass from city to city.  And if any one, after this decree of the holy and great Synod, shall attempt any such thing, or continue in any such course, his proceedings shall be utterly void, and he shall be restored to the Church for which he was ordained bishop or presbyter.

Leading up to this council, some church leaders had begun moving from one locale to another without sanction for various reasons—some altruistic, some not.  The council recognized that such movements were counter-productive and attempted to stem the practice.  Citing that the bond between a church and its leader was akin to marriage, they viewed it as an act of spiritual adultery.  There were legitimate cases that seemed to require a move.  In such both the sending and receiving churches would agree with the blessing of fellow overseers.  However, over time this canon was entirely disregarded.

Though having fallen into neglect, the intent of this canon has direct application for today in relation to the modern pastorate.  A typical scenario has the following elements:

1.	A man filled with desire to do something for God
2.	He attends seminary full-time (or as near to possible) in order to finish quickly
		a. Neglecting his wife and possibly children
		b. Ruining his health
3.	He graduates with little practical experience.
4.	He travels about candidating at various churches looking for the proper fit
5.	A church issues a formal call
6.	If accepted, the man actively pastors at that church for an average of 4-5 years, gaining much-needed experience
7.	Either the church or the pastor determines the fit is not correct
8.	Start over at step 4 and repeat until retirement or death

The differences between the early and modern church are quite stark.

Local Emphasis – When Paul and Barnabas ministered returned from the outer reach of their missionary trip, they stopped to see the new disciples and "appointed elders for them in every town" (Acts 14:23).  From the beginning oversight was from within the local church and not an act of superimposing another spiritual authority on top of the local church.  After the first apostles died, this pattern continued as churches aged and new ones were begun.  All believers were expected to be actively discipling with a natural outcome of growth both in the giving and receiving of sound doctrine.  As younger men aged, those who exhibited Christ-like character, wisely used the scriptures, and cared for the local church were recognized and acknowledged as new overseers.  Bringing in an outsider was the exception rather than the norm.

Today the opposite is expected.  Out of an initial church plant, few if any are properly discipled, and those who have an acumen for the Lord's things are encouraged to attend Bible school and seminary, but rare is the case that such a person will return to the commending church.  More commonly, the seminarian forges into other territories seeking to make his own way leaving the home church with unfulfilled hopes.  Even more likely than this is the church which has nobody with a penchant for the ministry.  In both cases there will eventually need to be someone to shepherd the church.  The job posting is placed, applicants are interviewed, and someone is hired to do the work of the ministry.  Even if the hired preacher is not forced out by internal strife, people will not consider themselves accountable to God for the work he gave them to do (Eph 2:10) or the call to grow in grace (2 Pet 3:18), rather wallowing in a sanctimonious or self-pitying mire.

Permanency – In the early church, those in oversight generally stayed in one place unless forced to do otherwise.  There is scant evidence of any elder in the apostolic church moving from one city to another, though a case might be made for Aquila, the believer from Rome (Romans 16:3-5) who with his wife Priscilla found themselves in Corinth because of persecution against the Jews (Acts 18:2).  The names of Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, and Ignatius come readily to mind as those who stayed to mind the flock without thought of moving away.  Though the latter two  were forced because of persecution to leave their posts, neither had a desire to leave the flock unattended.  As the Nicene canon intended, the overseer was to be a permanent fixture of his church.  The bond was between spiritual shepherd and sheep was meant to be as fixed as the Lord Jesus' own (John 10:12).

This element is more rare today.  Either the pastor or church can terminate what is in essence an employment contract.  As long as the terms of employment are met, the contract remains in force.  If either fails to maintain the terms or wishes to renegotiate, either party is allowed to sever relations.  On the surface this seems quite clinical, and it is.  The correct bond never truly exists between the overseer and the people.

Perhaps now is the time for the church to correct this faux pas and reinstate the need for sound, godly leadership as the natural growth product of consistent discipleship.

Nicaea - Canon 14

Concerning catechumens who have lapsed, the holy and great Synod has decreed that, after they have passed three years only as hearers, they shall pray with the catechumens.

Catechumens were those who had more than an interest in the faith are were being taught the basics in preparation for baptism.  By this time people were being discipled before baptism rather than after, since the mark of baptism identified the individual as being fully committed.  More than hearers, these believers (for so they must have been) were being prepared for full fellowship with the saints.  If one of these should lapse, there was a required three-year period among those interested but not discipled before returning to the cycle of a catechumen.

Nicaea - Canon 13

Concerning the departing, the ancient canonical law is still to be maintained, to wit, that, if any man be at the point of death, he must not be deprived of the last and most indispensable Viaticum.  But, if any one should be restored to health again who has received the communion when his life was despaired of, let him remain among those who communicate in prayers only.  But in general, and in the case of any dying person whatsoever asking to receive the Eucharist, let the Bishop, after examination made, give it him.

Let's begin with a definition.  What is viaticum?  From the Catholic Encyclopedia we understand that

The substantive "viaticum" figuratively meant the provision for the journey of life and finally by metaphor the provision for the passage out of this world into the next.

Formerly it meant anything that gave spiritual strength and comfort to the dying and enabled them to make the journey into eternity with greater confidence and security.  For this reason anciently not only any sacrament administered to persons at the point of death, baptism (St. Basil, "Hom. in sac. Bapt."; St. Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. de bapt."), confirmation, penance, extreme unction (Moroni, "Diz. di erudizione stor.-eccl.), Eucharist (Fourth Counc. of Carthage, cap. 78, calls it "viaticum Eucharistiæ"), but even prayers offered up or good works performed by themselves or by others in their behalf, e.g. alms-deeds (St. Cyprian), and finally anything that tended to reconcile the dying with God and the Church came under this designation.¹

We can see that what was originally something to help the traveler was applied to the final great journey of death.  Up to the time of the Nicene council one of the deacons would leave the meeting to bring the bread and wine to a dying person as a way to ease the soul in the last hours.  A great premium was placed on actual, rather than spiritual, communion because of the connection the early church made between the elements and Christ's presence with his people as they gathered together.  About this Robert Webber reminds us that

the symbols of bread and wine are the material objects that in a mysterious manner are connected with the broken body and shed blood of Jesus Christ,through whom man worships the Father.  For this reason the early church had a high view of the symbols of the bread and wine and their place in Christian worship.…The early Christians refused to define exactly what happened to the bread and wine.  For them it was something actually present in a renewing and nourishing way.…The early Christians wished to maintain the mystery of the Eucharist as the culminating point of worship that pointed to the redemption of Christ and served as a means of receiving the benefits of the death of Christ.²

For the dying penitent the elements in this last act salved the conscience by speaking to him or her that the time of waiting mentioned in previous canons was now over.  The soul was clean before God and worthy to receive what God was giving in the elements.  For those not penitent this was a chance to confess any sin before God and have renewed confidence in their firm position by the communion act.  Should the dying person recover, that one should spend time away from the elements, probably as an act by the leaders to safeguard against either the person attempting to fool the church into shortening the time of penance or trying to eat and drink in an unworthy manner.

While writing this I am reminded of a godly person who was confined to the hospital for several weeks because of medical condition.  During that time she requested of the chaplain a chance to have the Lord's Supper.  Being of a group which practiced a closed communion, he was unwilling and asked why her church (my own church at the time) was not honoring her wishes.  She related the story to me after her release, and I was thoroughly ashamed both for my own thoughtlessness but also for those in that local body who could have performed this task.

Let us not lose sight of the importance of the body and blood of Christ to the infirm.  If they are able to partake of the elements, let them do so in joyous communion with the beloved saints and God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.



¹ Augustin Joseph Schulte, "Viaticum," The Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 15 (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912).  Cited 28 Oct 2010.  Online: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15397c.htm.

² Robert Webber, Common Roots (2d ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 116-117.

Nicaea - Canon 12

As many as were called by grace, and displayed the first zeal, having cast aside their military girdles, but afterwards returned, like dogs, to their own vomit, (so that some spent money and by means of gifts regained their military stations); let these, after they have passed the space of three years as hearers, be for ten years prostrators.  But in all these cases it is necessary to examine well into their purpose and what their repentance appears to be like.  For as many as give evidence of their conversions by deeds, and not pretense, with fear, and tears, and perseverance, and good works, when they have fulfilled their appointed time as hearers, may properly communicate in prayers; and after that the bishop may determine yet more favorably concerning them.  But those who take with indifference, and who think the form of entering the Church is sufficient for their conversion, must fulfill the whole time.

This canon appears to be a continuation of the preceding¹ and is directed to those men who had formerly served in the military but now had enlisted in the army of Licinius who faced Constantine for control of the empire.  From the commentary with the canon, Licinius was known for his heathenism and requirement that all soldiers engage in idolatrous worship.  Any such soldiers desiring to return to the church were required a 13-year penance for full fellowship occurred.  As an aside, military service was not deemed sinful in itself though it had that potential except for mention by Tertullian as in On Idolatry, chapter 19.²

Concerning any person serving the time of penance, if the local elder determined after the completion of the "hearing" phase, that the repentance is both genuine and pronounced, the remaining stage(s) may be shortened as seems fitting.<sup>3


1</sup> "The Prisca and the Isidorian version stands as part of canon 11" in The Seven Ecumenical Councils, Canon 12 (NPNF2 14:28).
² ANF 3:73.
³ I.e. time off for good behavior.

Nicaea - Canon 11

Concerning those who have fallen without compulsion, without the spoiling of their property, without danger or the like, as happened during the tyranny of Licinius, the Synod declares that, though they have deserved no clemency, they shall be dealt with mercifully.  As many as were communicants, if they heartily repent, shall pass three years among the hearers; for seven years they shall be prostrators; and for two years they shall communicate with the people in prayers, but without oblation.

This canon seems quite stringent until reading the excursus which follows the canon.  That piece indicates that the penance described "was only of those convicted of what then were called by pre-eminence 'mortal sins' (crimena mortalia. [Cyprian. De Bono Patient., cap. xiv.]), viz: idolatry, murder, and adultery."  Even at that, the time required to restore to full communion was quite lengthy: three years of being able to enter and hear the Word of God, followed by seven years of being able to bow with the others, and lastly two years of being able to pray—yet all this time without sharing into the whole act of celebrating in the bread and wine.  The penitent were allowed to be a part of but not active in the worship.

While I commend these men for wanting to ensure the repentant hearts of those desiring to restore fellowship, the time period is excessive and establishes law in an effort to extend grace and mercy. True, the severity of the sin points to a like judgment, but better to take these on a case-by-case basis.

Nicaea - Canon 10

If any who have lapsed have been ordained through the ignorance, or even with the previous knowledge of the ordainers, this shall not prejudice the canon of the Church; for when they are discovered they shall be deposed.

It seems clear that this canon was written with 1 Timothy 5:21 in view:

In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality.

If someone was in a position of spiritual authority and was later determined to not be fit because of prior actions or teaching, he was to be deposed without regard for his current position.  This removed the temptation to allow someone to remain because he had already been publicly recognized.

Applying this to the modern church, if an acting pastor, elder, deacon, etc. has something brought forward¹ that should have prevented the initial appointment, the person should be removed.  That being so, what should be done if the leader confesses the wrongness and pleads the facts are from the past, not having any bearing on the current ministry?  According to this canon, the person remains disqualified and must be deposed.  This does not mean that the person could never be placed back into that position or another of leadership.  That depends entirely on the disqualification and both the ensuing restorative/instructive process and progress.



¹ I am assuming that the facts are being made known by two or three witnesses (1 Tim 5:19).

Nicaea - Canon 9

If any presbyters have been advanced without examination, or if upon examination they have made confession of crime, and men acting in violation of the canon have laid hands upon them, notwithstanding their confession, such the canon does not admit; for the Catholic Church requires that which is blameless.

The council recognize that some elders may be in position without having been previously properly examined or who has fallen into sin—either of which would cause disqualification from the position.  It also recognized that some held there position absolved them from the consequences of past sin.  In either case, the elder had to be removed.

Nicaea - Canon 8

Concerning those who call themselves Cathari, if they come over to the Catholic and Apostolic Church, the great and holy Synod decrees that they who are ordained shall continue as they are in the clergy.  But it is before all things necessary that they should profess in writing that they will observe and follow the dogmas of the Catholic and Apostolic Church; in particular that they will communicate with persons who have been twice married, and with those who having lapsed in persecution have had a period¹ laid upon them, and a time² fixed so that in all things they will follow the dogmas of the Catholic Church.  Wheresoever, then, whether in villages or in cities, all of the ordained are found to be of these only, let them remain in the clergy, and in the same rank in which they are found.  But if they come over where there is a bishop or presbyter of the Catholic Church, it is manifest that the Bishop of the Church must have the bishop’s dignity; and he who was named bishop by those who are called Cathari shall have the rank of presbyter, unless it shall seem fit to the Bishop to admit him to partake in the honor of the title.   Or, if this should not be satisfactory, then shall the bishop provide for him a place as Chorepiscopus, or presbyter, in order that he may be evidently seen to be of the clergy, and that there may not be two bishops in the city.

The Cathari were those who followed after Novatian, who took a rigorist position against those who lapsed because of persecution and those who may have had communion with someone twice-married.  If a Cathari overseer would disavow that life and cling to the catholic and orthodox church, he could maintain his position unless another overseer was in the vicinity.  If the latter be the case, then he could be an elder (πρεσβύτερος, presbyter) or having a quasi-episcopal position under the catholic overseer.

This brings up an interesting question for the modern church.  If a church leader has accepted and taught a rigorous or even ascetic position in personal application of the scriptures and then recants of it, how is he to be treated and allowed to minister?  For one who has fallen morally or spiritually through disregard of God's word, there is generally a time of counseling and a gradual increase in interaction and ministry within the local church as conditions allow.  Should the same approach be taken with one who has basically followed a legalistic course through the same spiritual disregard, only in an opposite direction?  I contend that the slow, measured course allows for the same type of instruction necessary to retrain the thinking and belief system on which it had been built.  There may be a tendency to allow the legalist more maneuverability because he has no apparent sins that a typical person would class as disqualifying.  And yet, both directions mentioned here are off-course and need correction back onto the true path of righteousness.


¹ Of penance
² Of restoration

Nicaea - Canon 7

Since custom and ancient tradition have prevailed that the Bishop of Ælia should be honored, let him, saving its due dignity to the Metropolis, have the next place of honor.

This canon is referring to what we know as Jerusalem.  The Ancient Epitome explains well what has happened and should be done.

There would seem to be a singular fitness in the Holy City Jerusalem holding a very exalted position among the sees of Christendom, and it may appear astonishing that in the earliest times it was only a suffragan see to the great Church of Caesarea.  It must be remembered, however, that only about seventy years after our Lord’s death the city of Jerusalem was entirely destroyed and ploughed as a field according to the prophet.  As a holy city Jerusalem was a thing of the past for long years, and it is only in the beginning of the second century that we find a strong Christian Church growing up in the rapidly increasing city, called no longer Jerusalem, but Aelia Capitolina.  Possibly by the end of the second century the idea of the holiness of the site began to lend dignity to the occupant of the see.¹

What had once been a prominent Christian church had been disrupted and set aside because of the temple destruction by Titus.  Now rebuilding, the church is restored to a place of equal prominence with the other major centers of the day.

¹ The Seven Ecumenical Councils, Canon 7 (NPNF² 14:17).

Nicaea - Canon 6

Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also.  Likewise in Antioch and the other provinces, let the Churches retain their privileges.  And this is to be universally understood, that if any one be made bishop without the consent of the Metropolitan, the great Synod has declared that such a man ought not to be a bishop.  If, however, two or three bishops shall from natural love of contradiction, oppose the common suffrage of the rest, it being reasonable and in accordance with the ecclesiastical law, then let the choice of the majority prevail.

This canon makes evident that no city, region, or province was to have neither prominence nor preëminence.  The autonomy of the city-church found in the New Testament was intended to be carried forward on a regional level.  Schaff underscores this fact when he states:

The Nicene fathers passed this canon not as introducing anything new, but merely as confirming an existing relation on the basis of church tradition; and that, with special reference to Alexandria, on account of the troubles existing there.  Rome was named only for illustration; and Antioch and all the other eparchies or provinces were secured their admitted rights.  The bishoprics of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch were placed substantially on equal footing, yet in such tone, that Antioch, as the third capital of the Roman empire, already stands as a stepping stone to the ordinary metropolitans.¹

I noted in a previous post that the NT church did not have nor was their an intention to establish even this hierarchy born of pragmatism. However, the Nicene fathers are to be commended for attempting to maintain a "level playing field" from one region to another.

Also, there is wisdom given that the commending bishops could overrule the metropolitan's disapproval, if they deemed it unjustified.  This is similar to the authority given in the U.S. government for the legislative body to override an executive veto.

¹ Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 3, pp. 275-276

Nicaea - Canon 5

Concerning those, whether of the clergy or of the laity, who have been excommunicated in the several provinces, let the provision of the canon be observed by the bishops which provides that persons cast out by some be not readmitted by others.  Nevertheless, inquiry should be made whether they have been excommunicated through captiousness, or contentiousness, or any such like ungracious disposition in the bishop.  And, that this matter may have due investigation, it is decreed that in every province synods shall be held twice a year, in order that when all the bishops of the province are assembled together, such questions may by them be thoroughly examined, that so those who have confessedly offended against their bishop, may be seen by all to be for just cause excommunicated, until it shall seem fit to a general meeting of the bishops to pronounce a milder sentence upon them.  And let these synods be held, the one before Lent, (that the pure Gift may be offered to God after all bitterness has been put away), and let the second be held about autumn.

If someone had been excommunicated, the other churches were to observe due diligence to ensure that one was not readily accepted elsewhere.  In addition, there were regular times when the overseers were to meet in order to review the case, if the discipline was correct or not.  The assumption is that full inquiry was made to bring about some measure of discipline in the first place.  That believer stood guilty before God until repentance happened.

Nicaea - Canon 4

It is by all means proper that a bishop should be appointed by all the bishops in the province; but should this be difficult, either on account of urgent necessity or because of distance, three at least should meet together, and the suffrages of the absent¹ also being given and communicated in writing, then the ordination should take place.  But in every province the ratification of what is done should be left to the Metropolitan.

In order to appoint an overseer,² a minimum of three existing overseers were required to assemble receiving input from those unable.  The selection then went to the overseer of the city (i.e., "archbishop" is the modern Western church term for Metropolitan) for final confirmation.  As written the canon recognized the method which had been built up as a safeguard against impropriety and rashness, as well as seeking a consensus amongst the spiritual men as to who was mature and able to lead.  As is evident from the terminology, a hierarchy had been established so that the Metropolitan oversaw the episcopate in his region, which were working in the individual churches and outlying communities.  From a biblical standpoint, this city position is untenable but was evidently allowed for cohesion of the church universal.

What of the congregations they served?  Did they not have input to the process?  Indeed they did as Hefele gives in the following commentary.

The Council of Nicea thought it necessary to define by precise rules the duties of the bishops who took part in these episcopal elections.  It decided (a) that a single bishop of the province was not sufficient for the appointment of another; (b) three at least should meet, and (c) they were not to proceed to election without the written permission of the absent bishops; it was necessary (d) to obtain afterward the approval of the metropolitan.…The Greek Commentators…only followed the example of the Seventh and [so-called] Eighth Ecumenical Councils in affirming that this fourth canon of Nicea takes away from the people the right previously possessed of voting in the choice of bishops and makes the election depend entirely on the decision of the bishops of the province.

The Latin Church acted otherwise.  It is true that with it also the people have been removed from episcopal elections, but this did not happen till later, about the eleventh century; and it was not the people only who were removed, but the bishops of the province as well, and the election was conducted entirely by the clergy of the Cathedral Church.  The Latins then interpreted the canon of Nicea as though it said nothing of the rights of the bishops of the province in the election of their future colleague (and it does not speak of it in a very explicit manner), and as though it determined these two points only; (a) that for the ordination of a bishop three bishops at least are necessary; (b) that the right of confirmation rests with the metropolitan.³

For a time both the Greek and Latin branches of the church had the members be active participants in the appointment of bishops.  This seems to reflect the apostolic pattern begun as Paul and Barnabas appointed those put forth by the local churches (Acts 14:21-23).  The process appeared to be men who appeared to be mature in the faith by the ministry being done.  These were put forth to the overseers who then appointed them with the the final confirmation coming from the metropolitan.


¹ The episcopate unable to attend
² The literal meaning of ἐπίσκοπος translated in the canon, signifying the work done by the individual.
³ Karl Josef von Hefele as noted in The Seven Ecumenical Councils, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, vol 14, Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, ed., (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1899), 12.