Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Early Christian Schism - III: The Council of Nicaea - Extra History (Patreon)

Published:
2016-05-13 16:50:22
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

The leading bishops gather at the Council of Nicaea to discuss the theological schisms in the Church. Surely that will resolve everything!

Files

Previews only

Early Christian Schisms - III: The Council of Nicaea - Extra History

The Council of Nicaea convened to decide the guiding rules of the church - and to resolve the questions posed by Arian theology. A deacon named Athanasius set himself against Arius and succeeded in getting his teachings declared heresy. Support us on Patreon! http://bit.ly/EHPatreon --- (Episode details below) Grab your Extra Credits gear at the store! http://bit.ly/ExtraStore Subscribe for new episodes every Saturday! http://bit.ly/SubToEC Watch the beginning of the Early Christian Schisms! http://bit.ly/1TvNot1 Play games with us on Extra Play! http://bit.ly/WatchEXP Talk to us on Twitter (@ExtraCreditz): http://bit.ly/ECTweet Follow us on Facebook: http://bit.ly/ECFBPage Get our list of recommended games on Steam: http://bit.ly/ECCurator ____________ Disclaimer: This series is intended for students, to give them a broad overview of a complicated subject that has driven world history for centuries. Our story begins and focuses on Rome. Constantine called the Council of Nicaea not only to address the teachings of Arius, but also to decide basic matters for how the church would go forward. Yet it was the debate over Arian theology which quickly came to dominate the council's time. The bishops effectively split into two factions, one backing Arius and the other led by a deacon named Athanasius. Athanasius vehemently opposed the Arian teachings and would not allow any compromise to be formed with the other group. Yet he played the politics very carefully, adopting in his own arguments the phrase "homoousian" (or "of the same substance") to describe the relationship between the Father and the Son, knowing full well that Arius would never accept an agreement which included this idea. Even when others tried to compromise with the phrase "homoiousian" (or "of similar substance"), Arius would not agree. Athanasius used the extra time to make private deals and assemble a majority coalition, with which he successfully caused Arianism to be declared heresy and forced Arius himself into exile. Emperor Constantine was just happy a decision had been reached, but a bishop in his own court would not let matters rest so easily. This bishop, Eusebius, campaigned tirelessly for the restoration of Arius and managed to get Athanasius exiled instead. Constantine himself wound up being baptized by Eusebius, and his son Emperor Constantius II would be a die-hard Arian in his turn. Eusebius even ordained a Goth named Ulfilas to preach to the Gothic tribes, and his sucess meant that the tribes became Arian Christians who would never completely assimilate into the Roman Empire. Thus, despite the firm decree at the First Council of Nicaea, Arian Christianity continued to grow and thrive alongside orthodox teachings. ____________ ♫ Get the intro music here! http://bit.ly/1EQA5N7 *Music by Demetori: http://bit.ly/1AaJG4H ♫ Get the outro music here! http://bit.ly/23isQfx *Music by Sean and Dean Kiner: http://bit.ly/1WdBhnm

Comments

Hasan Mahmood

I love how history ties itself back around other events. "Remember this thing? Yeah this is relevant now."

ExtraCredits
>>1798206

This has been one of the most fun things about Extra History as we go further into the series. Seeing places where the narratives tie together is just... so much fun!

Hasan Mahmood

What will be great is that when you do the History of Paper Money, you'll be able to tie back into the Chicanery of the South Sea Bubble again. It was Walpole BTW.

ExtraCredits
>>1798310

I've been thinking about just asking the artist to put Walpole's face on all the paper money we draw. But first I'll have to check if the earliest paper money actually had faces on it or if they were printed with something else.

Robbie the Gnome

I love how "we're having a council to heal this rift once and for all" enevitably turns into "and they solidified the rift and made it even more of a canyon. Every single time...

Aaron hutchinson

For all the smarts that Constantine had he could be surprisingly naive. It seems to be that way with a lot of historical figures. Well done on the episode.

RMS Oceanic

Since we're hopping directly to the Justinian Era, I think this will be a fun story: So from Constantine on every (fully recognised) Emperor was a Christian, except one: Julian, Half-Nephew to Constantine, embraced Olympian Paganism (earning him the nickname Julian the Apostate) and embarked on a "death by a thousand cuts" strategy to do away with Christianity, one that was cut short by his death in Battle two years into his reign, but the interesting thing was his initial approach. He knew all about the Great Persecution of Diocletian and to repeat that would just stiffen Christian resolve. So his opening move was in fact an edict of universal religious toleration: Every religion - polytheistic, monotheistic, Christian - was not to be suppressed or favoured by the authorities. And this had the effect of removing any secular authority one sect of Christianity might have over the others, allowing the Arians and Niceans to tear into each other and undermine themselves without Julian lifting a finger, allowing him free reign to begin re-establishing the old cults. However a questionable choice to go to war against Persia cost Julian his life, and his successor undid most of his reforms. It's fascinating that the intra-Christian schism would not be resolved within the Imperial Court (but not elsewhere) until the dealings of Theodosius and Ambrose of Milan. One of Constantine's sons (Constantius II) was Arian, but the other two (Constantine II and Constans) were Nicean and they almost came to blows over it. Valentinian was Nicean, but his brother Valens was Arian, though both were able to put this aside in that last decade before the Gothic War, but then Valentinian's son Valentinian II - I'd use their first name, but everybody was Flavius - was Arian. It's only after Theodosius takes the whole empire that the imperial faith is unified, and Ambrose of Milan has a lot to do with that, possibly everything.

RMS Oceanic
>>1798717

Constantine was raised an Olympian Pagan, and I think anyone raised in a polytheist environment will have a bias to looking at a monotheist sect like Christianity as a much more unified colossal thing than it really is. The, for want of a better word, stereotype would be "wow, all these people worship a single god?", and as an outsider looking in, I suspect he never grasped the subtleties that came with that monotheism. Hence why he's the one who is able to see the big picture of "hey we all love Jesus right?", and probably why he softened against Arianism later in life. Lifelong Christians may perhaps have missed the forest for the trees in focusing on what to an outsider seems pathetically trivial.

ExtraCredits
>>1799234

I love that strategy. The original "Turn 'em all loose and let God sort them out" approach.

ExtraCredits
>>1798626

It's like every superhero movie in the Marvel universe. "Gotta stop this evil guy from destroying the planet! Okay, phew, got that taken care of. Oh no, turns out that our actions have awakened a new evil force that's ALSO out to destroy the whole planet! Oh, when will this cycle of planet destroyers and evil awakenings end?!"

ExtraCredits
>>1798717

Seems he didn't quite anticipate how contentious these theological debates were going to get... Poor little emperor.

Jim McGeehin

It seems like a literary quibble, but the specific uses of words show up time and again in these Ecumenical Councils focusing on Christology, and specifically the monophysite and miaphysite heresies. Some of the ideas almost seem like compromises that themselves would be declared heretical, such as Apollinarism, which states that Jesus had a human body, but a divine mind seems almost like a reach to find a middle ground between pure monophysite and the dysophysite positions, or the Eutychian belief that one nature subsumed the other. It's a vast oversimplification, but it is amusing to say that sometimes, a preposition can mean the difference between heresy and orthodoxy. I can't wait until next week. Will you be discussing the deposition of Pope Silverius? I'm also happy to write a mini-thing on it. It even ties in to our good friends Belisarius and Theodora.

Joo-Hwan Jun

I wonder how different the Roman Empires would have been if Constantine left the Church and State separate? Would Arianism eventually die out OR would it have been the most prominent view in the Christian circle?

Daniel Lowery

Is there a reason why the Nicean creed would eventually beat out arianism, or is that reason going to be covered in a lies/ future episode?

Connor Raikes

Ahahaha Bishops with eyepatches!! Let's call them "Pirates of the Catechism"!

Mask
>>1799234

Ironically, that's the same strategy Constantine used to *establish* the Christians. He set a law of tolerance that prevented killing and persecuting them on basis of religion. Christianity spread like wildfire, the cities becoming almost entirely Christian within Constantine's lifetime. Then, unfortunately, he made it so everyone had to be Christian, so no one was happy. A lot of Pagans brought their practices into the church, mixing the theologies. I think that might've played a part in this new atmosphere of serious schisms.

Mask

I looked at this carefully, but there was no inaccuracy or misleading note to comment on. You've been doing a marvelous job making these interesting and accurate. And now we're trekking back into Justinian's reign! Bravo! __________________________________It's a pity there wasn't a chance to mention two of Constantine's most prominent laws, which were a major part of Christianity's development in Rome. One was the law of tolerance I mentioned earlier, forbidding persecution on grounds of religion, which caused Christianity to go from about 10% to almost 100% of the cities' populations (all in a generation!). The other, when Christianity became massively popular in the cities, was that Constantine declared it the official religion of the empire, and everyone had to convert more or less. This wasn't good for anyone, Pagan or Christian. ________________________________Thank you for covering this so well. I'm glad to see this part of history be covered.

RMS Oceanic
>>1799234

Did Constantine mandate Christianity? I know he championed it and stopped funding pagan temples, but I thought it wasn't until Theodosius that Christianity was the religion of the empire.

Mask
>>1799234

Mandate is too strong a word. There was rarely any strong effort to force the Jews to be Christian, for example. Simply, enough laws were passed that Christianity, the official religion, was the only practical option for most people. I should probably have worded my earlier posts more carefully, on that note....

Mask
>>1801657

Note that they didn't HAVE to convert. They weren't forcing conversion. But it being the official religion, with a bunch of other laws and government support, meant that Christianity was the only practical option for most people.

Tommy Laukkanen

So I see a lot of interesting comments here so allow me to add to the discussion with my own views: "This show is awesome." There.

Dmitry

"These wonderful presentations should be shown in schools!" - I am sure this has been said before on numerous occasions and I can't think of a higher praise for any history show.

Anonymous

This series is utterly brilliant. The only place you'd ever learn about this stuff is in advanced Theological studies or in training to become a Priest (can't see myself fitting either of those in some how!). You are quite literally doing "God's work" in bringing all this stuff to light - thank you!

Dani McKenzie
>>1805335

Not even in Theology studies. Too many of the facts would be brushed aside in order to pursue religious orthodoxy.

ExtraCredits
>>1800039

No Silverius, but we're going to cover Nestorianism! (Earlier I'd said we were only going up to the Council of Nicaea, but it turns out I'd swapped the numbers on the scripts, so I was looking at Episode 3 and thinking it was episode 4... ah well.)

ExtraCredits
>>1800436

Well, it "beat out" Arianism by being declared orthodox while Arianism was declared heresy, and even with certain emperors (HI Constantius II!) deviating from orthodox teachings to embrace Arianism, orthodoxy is always going to have some extra sway because that's what the church officially teaches. That being said, Arianism didn't entirely lose, since the ideology continued to exist and thrive for centuries. If you ever want to look into what happened with the Gothic kingdoms that Ulfilas converted, it's pretty fascinating, and in some ways it boils down to "Arian kings lost wars to Nicene kings." I haven't done a deep dive on that myself, but I'd guess it's not entirely luck that things shook out that way - usually there's a great deal of influence from more powerful neighbors lending aid to Nicene kings because they share the same beliefs.

ExtraCredits
>>1800646

I love it! There is a reason those bishops had eyepatches though, which James will discuss during Lies...

ExtraCredits
>>1801657

Mask, do you happen to know if Constantine's approach to conversion was the first time that tactic was used? The whole "you don't have to be [state religion] but it will be a lot easier for you if you are" is not something I remember seeing prior to the rise of Christianity, but it's not like I've specifically researched the subject.

ExtraCredits
>>1803827

There is no higher praise, although that one is tied with "I never liked history until I watched your show." Makes me all melty.

ExtraCredits

I can't speak for James and so perhaps my opinion isn't the one you're looking for, but in my opinion the churches have too much independent history to ever become one entity again. Even if the heads of the church agreed to try (which I don't believe they want to do), you can almost guarantee that followers on both sides would oppose that decision strongly enough to branch off into new "traditional" churches, effectively creating three more branches instead of merging two into one. -Soraya

ExtraCredits
>>1805962

Oh man, I remember when the Da Vinci Code came out and people were super convinced that it had in fact revealed some mysterious conspiracy. Sometimes I wonder how much influence it had over the backstory of the Assassin's Creed games because it feels like there are so many similarities there.

Mask
>>1801657

Pretty much every state religion in history has done this, to varying extents. Even atheistic states like the USSR do this. Constantine wasn't really doing anything unusual, it just became convenient for a lot of people to become Christian. Someone mentioned he might've cracked down on a couple of Pagan cults, but they might've been involved with criminal activities. In most cases, it's just conformism that is the key to this - simply having a popular god of your city is likely to make it convenient to follow them - but many have used harsher and more overt methods. _______________________________Now, for intentional systems, I'm more familiar with later ones. Christians and Muslims have a habit of taxing each other extra, so converting will get you a tax break. Communist Germany offered free, large wedding services to people who got married by the state instead of the church, and a bunch of other perks instead of persecuting them as in other communist nations. Having the wrong religion could, in various places, disqualify you from holding certain positions, or having any say in political matters, as the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. And sometimes there was just no protection from civilian violence if you didn't conform to the government faith (which could escalate into outright genocide). _________________________________One of the earliest cases I can think of of extreme conversion focused violence, would be around Antiochus IV Epiphanes. He persecuted both the Jews and the Persian Zoroastrians terribly (interestingly, the later likely got their roots from Judaism, being the only other monotheists in the region). That was what started the Maccabean Revolt. I'd love to see that covered, and I intend to vote for it until it is. _________Those are the basics. If you have any more specific questions, feel free to ask. I might've missed what you were really feeling curious about.

Dani McKenzie
>>1805962

I'm sure it did, because, well what's better than Church heresies and conspiracy plots. What was awful about the debunking video was the absolute lack of facts (e.g., claiming all of the new testament had been written right after Christ died, and not 400 years later, ignoring the content of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Gnostic Gospels, etc.

Jim McGeehin
>>1800039

Well, I'll write up a short thing on it and post it next Friday. It's a fascinating political story.

ExtraCredits
>>1801657

Nope, Antiochus IV Epiphanes is the perfect example of a pre-Constantine use of this method. Thanks!

Judas Martel

Hi Extra Credits, how do I get to vote for the next Extra History topic? I would like to recommend the story of the World's First Circumnavigation, the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Inquisition, and the Chinese Warring States Period. Thanks!

Mask
>>1829301

To vote in the poll as to which of the presented options is covered, you have to donate $5+. To submit a suggestion to the raffle, you have to donate $10+. You can also attend livestream Q&As for $8+.

ExtraCredits
>>1829301

Mask with the succinct and timely answers! Thanks, Mask. <3 Judas, the next vote will be in about 3 weeks and the topic suggestion period will be in about 2 weeks. Feel free to message me here if you have any questions!