Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by Leucius Charinus »

In relation to the "Eusebian model" of the Nicene Council, Arnaldo Momigliano wrote:
  • "If we had the Christian History which the priest Philip of Side wrote about 430, we would know more about the significance of the predominance of the Eusebian model. It is evident that Philip of Side tried to go his own way and to avoid imitating Eusebius..."
Here is one fragment thought to be from the history of Philip of Side:


(8) When these things were expressed by them—or rather, through them, by the Holy Spirit—those who endorsed Arius' impiety were wearing themselves out with murmuring (these were the circles of Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea, whom I have already pointed out earlier), and yet they were looking with favor on the "hirelings" of Arius, certain philosophers who were indeed very good with words; Arius had hired them as supporters of his own wickedness, and arrived with them at that holy and ecumenical council.

(9) For there were present very many philosophers; and having put their hopes in them, as I have said just now, the enemies of the truth were reasonably caught, along with the one who actually taught them their blasphemy. The Holy Scripture was fulfilled in him and in them, which says, "Cursed is everyone who has his hope in a mortal man, and whose heart has departed from the Lord."[161]

(10) For truly, the blasphemous heart of the fighter against God, Arius, and of those who shared in his impiety, departed from the Lord—they dared to say that the Son of God, the creator of the universe and the craftsman of both visible and invisible created natures, is something created and something made.


Fr. 5.6 [Supporters of Arius at the Council of Nicaea]
Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 2.12.8-10 [p. 47, lines 5-19 Hansen][
https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/phil ... gments.htm

lsayre
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by lsayre »

How much might Constantine have had his thumb pressing down upon the decisions forged at Nicaea?

As an aside, J. P. Morgan once proclaimed: "I have two reasons for everything. A good reason, and the real reason.". Might much of what is publicly disseminated lean to the "good reason" side of things? Even to this day...
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by andrewcriddle »

lsayre wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 7:31 am How much might Constantine have had his thumb pressing down upon the decisions forged at Nicaea?

As an aside, J. P. Morgan once proclaimed: "I have two reasons for everything. A good reason, and the real reason.". Might much of what is publicly disseminated lean to the "good reason" side of things? Even to this day...
Constantine wanted a decision at Nicea, this meant in practice a formula Arius could not accept but almost everyone else (maybe reluctantly) could.
The homoousion probably originates in that context.

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by Leucius Charinus »

Christ's Kingdom: "A dream rather than reality" ???

CHAPTER XV: How Constantine entertained the Bishops on the Occasion of his Vicennalia.


About this time he completed the twentieth year of his reign. (1) On this occasion public festivals were celebrated by the people of the provinces generally, but the emperor himself invited and feasted with those ministers of God whom he had reconciled, and thus offered as it were through them a suitable sacrifice to God. Not one of the bishops was wanting at the imperial banquet, (2) the circumstances of which were splendid beyond description.

Detachments of the body- guard and other troops surrounded the entrance of the palace with drawn swords, and through the midst of these the men of God proceeded without fear into the innermost of the imperial apartments, in which some were the emperor's own companions at table, while others reclined on couches arranged on either side. (3)

One might have thought that a picture of Christ's kingdom was thus shadowed forth, and
a dream rather than reality.



https://catholiclibrary.org/library/vie ... d=00000195

yakovzutolmai
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 6:03 am

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by yakovzutolmai »

Indeed.
Ambrose and Jerome are a certain kind of villain in my eyes, not sure which.

I also would substitute your word (pagan) for the Arians, with something that resembles "original Christian", where your Christian has more to do with "Greek Contemporary Philosophy Purist".
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by Leucius Charinus »

yakovzutolmai wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:25 pm Indeed.
Ambrose and Jerome are a certain kind of villain in my eyes, not sure which.
These two literary sources were officially recognised as "Doctors of the Latin Church" (along with Augustine) in the year 1298 CE. I wonder how that happened and why.
yakovzutolmai
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 6:03 am

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by yakovzutolmai »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 4:45 am
yakovzutolmai wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:25 pm Indeed.
Ambrose and Jerome are a certain kind of villain in my eyes, not sure which.
These two literary sources were officially recognised as "Doctors of the Latin Church" (along with Augustine) in the year 1298 CE. I wonder how that happened and why.
I think that might have more to do with the evolution of the concept of the Vicar of Christ. I strongly doubt the Bishop of Rome had the status in ancient times which the Catholic Church attributes to him today. One example of this comes from the coronation of Charlemagne.

The interpretation of that event is that the Pope is using a hiccup in the succession at Constantinople to more or less declare an end to the institution of the Roman Emperor, including his role as Pontifex Maximus, and then creating in Charlemagne a new Holy Roman Emperor institution where the Vicar of Christ is supreme as Pontifex Maximus. This was a rather important political turn of hand, and we could interpret its timing to say that this concept of Papal Supremacy might only really get its start by the eight century in any meaningful way. So, you would possible have to wait a couple centuries to shore up the concept and get to the point where it can be accepted as unimpeachable, eternal truth. The Pope was always Vicar of Christ.
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by Leucius Charinus »

lsayre wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 7:31 am How much might Constantine have had his thumb pressing down upon the decisions forged at Nicaea?
Constantine's thumb was his large army of barbarian tribes led by the barbarian chieftains of those tribes. Those barbarian chieftains surplanted the Praetorian guard and surrounded Constantine on most occasions.

The army was instructed to loot and destroy the major pagan temples and they did just that. The army was instructed to enforce the prohibition of customary pagan temple industry - aka "prohibition of pagan sacrifice". The army was instructed to conduct search and destroy missions related to "prohibited books". If these military agents found any of these "prohibited book" in your bookcase then you were a dead man. (Beheaded)

Constantine instructed the army to relocate from the frontiers of the empire and be stationed in the cities of the empire. The process of Christianisation of the empire started in the cities and spread out to the "pagans" in the countryside. I wonder why?

Constantine's thumb extended to the education sector. Christian education was smiled upon whereas many of the Greek intellectual traditions were suppressed and this suppression (via persecution and intolerance) became magnified throughout the 4th century and culminated in Theodosius' revised Nicene orthodoxy featuring anti-pagan legislation.

Constantine's thumb extended to the lawful running of the empire. He decreed that Christian bishops had the power to overturn the rulings of civil magistrates.

Constantine's thumb extended to the treasury. Christian clergy were to be tax exempt. He had to legislate against an enormous avalanche of rich and powerful pagan vying to become bishops. Such was the luxury of tax exemption in an era when tax was to be paid in gold. By 350 CE land tax had tripled in living memory.

Constantine's thumb extended to the rise of the Nicene Church Industry and the activity of imperial scriptoria. Eusebius started the Index Librorum Prohibitorum. I've probably left out dozens of other facts but if you are looking for fingerprints ...
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by Leucius Charinus »

yakovzutolmai wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 2:49 pm
Leucius Charinus wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2022 4:45 am
yakovzutolmai wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:25 pm Indeed.
Ambrose and Jerome are a certain kind of villain in my eyes, not sure which.
These two literary sources were officially recognised as "Doctors of the Latin Church" (along with Augustine) in the year 1298 CE. I wonder how that happened and why.
I think that might have more to do with the evolution of the concept of the Vicar of Christ. I strongly doubt the Bishop of Rome had the status in ancient times which the Catholic Church attributes to him today.
As far as I am concerned the first "Pontifex Maximus" and Pope of Rome was Damasus who's army defeated the armies of other prospective "Bishops of Rome" in the streets of Rome. It was a dogfight and the winner became bishop. Tax exempt Bishop. Very lucrative job.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Dama ... ion_crisis

Jerome, who with his Vulgate helped his boss kick-start the Latin Church of Rome, was the "pupil" of the thug pope Damasus. The church industry in Rome started with the PETER-WAS-HERE business and branched out into the cult of the saints and martyrs and the wonderfully successful holy relic trade. Damasus was working on the ground floor. The utterly corrupt church industry was into fraud, forgery and fabrication from the beginning.
yakovzutolmai
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 6:03 am

Re: Could Nicaea's Outcome Have Been The Reverse?

Post by yakovzutolmai »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:39 pm
Jerome, who with his Vulgate helped his boss kick-start the Latin Church of Rome, was the "pupil" of the thug pope Damasus. The church industry in Rome started with the PETER-WAS-HERE business and branched out into the cult of the saints and martyrs and the wonderfully successful holy relic trade. Damasus was working on the ground floor. The utterly corrupt church industry was into fraud, forgery and fabrication from the beginning.
Fascinating.

Peter-was-here-ism in context with later Papal supremacy doctrine could easily come very late, cementing not even fully by the HRE. However, literary Peter-was-here-ism is essential to reconstructing the fathers of the mid-second century church. We have enormous trouble locating ANY apostles other than Papias's testimony of John. Interesting concept.

In any event, whatever's behind the debate between catholicizers and Gnostics, Marcionites, Ebionites, etc., it's clear that Theodosius, Augustine and Jerome created a particularly novel thing. I wonder what it was like beforehand?
Post Reply