| French | German | Italian | Slovak | Spanish | Portuguese
Archives
More News
More Commentary
More Notables
Bishop Robert Barron with Cardinal Gerhard Müller: an hour-long discussion of our bodily Faith
Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré, Québec City, Canada
Rejoice, Blessed Virgin by Sergei Rachmaninoff
Michael Pakaluk
Thursday, June 19, 2025
Note: Our mid-year fundraiser moves along, and I’m grateful. But I’m also worried that it’s moving too slowly. If you can’t make a contribution right now, we understand. But there are many ways to configure donations: monthly, quarterly, and annually. I’m particularly grateful when someone gives $365 (dollar a day), $365.25 for those who want to be absolutely astronomically correct. Whatever works for you, we need your help. Now. So that we can get back to our main job of planning how to bring you the best commentaries, podcasts, courses, seminars that we can for the rest of the year. (Did I mention the Papal Posse?). I could go on, but enough said. Please. Support the work of The Catholic Thing. – Robert Royal
More than one important thing took place on June 19th. On that day in 325 in the city of Nicaea (present day Iznik, Turkey), the first world-wide (or “ecumenical”) council of the Catholic Church adopted a “symbol” that authoritatively expressed the ancient Christian faith. This was the first symbol formulated by the Church, after the Symbol of the Apostles. The Catechism excellently explains this perhaps unfamiliar terminology:
The Greek word symbolon meant half of a broken object, for example, a seal presented as a token of recognition. The broken parts were placed together to verify the bearer’s identity. The symbol of faith, then, is a sign of recognition and communion between believers. Symbolon also means a gathering, collection or summary. A symbol of faith is a summary of the principal truths of the faith and therefore serves as the first and fundamental point of reference for catechesis (n. 188).
Today, then, is the 1700th anniversary of the Nicene Creed. For the record, here is the original:
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, begotten of the Father, the only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father (ek tês ousias tou Patros), God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, one in substance (homoousion) with the Father; through whom all things came to be, both in heaven and on earth, who, for us men, and for our salvation, came down, and assumed flesh, and was made man; he suffered and arose on the third day, ascending into heaven, and is coming to judge the living and the dead.
And in the Holy Ghost.
But those who say: “There was a time when he was not;” and “He was not before he was made;” and “He was made out of nothing,” or “He is of another substance” or “essence,” or “The Son of God is created,” or “changeable,” or “alterable” – they are condemned by the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
The Council of Chalcedon in 451 preserved a fuller version of this creed as composed by the Fathers at the Council of Constantinople in 381, which affirmed additionally the divinity of the Holy Spirit. This fuller version is what we say in Church on Sunday and is sometimes called the “Nicene-Constantinopolitan” Creed.
The anathemas at the end of the original version, and also a clause that apparently was removed at Constantinople (“begotten. . .from the substance of the Father”), make it perfectly clear that this creed was intended to reject the teaching that Arius, in the event, was forced, finally, to evince clearly, namely, that Christ was simply the highest created being, but not God.
I’ve heard it said that Catholics are bad at celebrating anniversaries and that, therefore, we ought to make a big fuss at commemorating the 1700th anniversary of Nicaea. But what does this mean? Does it mean that, if we were “good at celebrating anniversaries,” in 2025 we would celebrate Nicaea, in 2031 Ephesus, in 2051 Constantinople, in 2063 Trent, in 2065 the Second Vatican Council, and in 2070 the First Vatican Council – for starters? This is silly.
Also, it seems frankly un-Catholic. In 1925, Pope Pius XI was occupied with encouraging devotion to St. John Vianney and St. Thérèse of Lisieux, both canonized that year. We are a living Church, after all. On the other hand, the Anglicans, or more precisely the Anglo-Catholic wing of the Church of England (against the preferences of the Evangelical Wing) organized a big gathering in Westminster Abbey of Anglican clerics with patriarchs from the Eastern Churches to commemorate the 1600th anniversary of the Nicene Creed.
For Anglo-Catholics, the gathering had two purposes: to nudge those patriarchs into recognizing the validity of Anglican orders, and to prepare, they hoped, for a reunion of the Anglican communion with the Eastern Churches, with a view to coalescing at last the Via Media that Newman had abandoned as a mere paper plan for a Christian Church. Both purposes met with spectacular failure. Not surprisingly, no similar 1700th year celebration has been planned while, in the interim, the Anglican communion, shorn of its prestige of association with a British Empire, has collapsed.
The Catholic Church does not need to return to the time of Nicaea to discover its own sources of unity, or to confect bases of unity that do not yet exist. The Nicaean Creed is serviceable to Catholics in ecumenical relations, true, as a basic statement of Christian belief. Even so, for common study and reflection, arguably St. Pope Paul VI’s Credo of the People of God would be a more fruitful instrument.
One might also recommend highly to Catholics a deep study of Arianism, and the responses of St. Athanasius and the Council. Such a study formed Newman and all his characteristic teachings.
For Newman, the Nicene Creed was already a development of doctrine and a hedge against private judgment. He observes in his history of the Council that Constantine and the Arians placed concord above truth – they were “liberals” – while St. Athanasius, who saw that the Church’s unity had to be based on truth, was derided, and excluded, as a rigid traditionalist.
Newman notes that Arianism actually grew in influence after the Council. Why? Because the Arians quickly subscribed to the Council’s Creed, so that Constantine became convinced that he was correct in his original estimation, that they were the peaceable party, whereas the orthodox Christians were inflexible in frivolous matters. In the end, the laity stepped forward to save the Church.
And here is a lesson for us all from Newman’s work on the Arians: “The disease, which had called for the Council, instead of being expelled from the system, was thrown back upon the Church, and for a time afflicted it; nor was it cast out, except by the persevering fasting and prayer, the labours and sufferings, of the oppressed believers.”
__________
You may also enjoy:
Fr. Benedict Kiely The Two Lungs of Pope Leo
Brad Miner Credo
Get the best Catholic commentary daily in your inbox. Subscribe, for free.
"*" indicates required fields
Michael Pakaluk, an Aristotle scholar and Ordinarius of the Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas, is Professor of Political Economy in the Busch School of Business at the Catholic University of America. He lives in Hyattsville, MD with his wife Catherine, also a professor at the Busch School, and their children. His collection of essays, The Shock of Holiness (Ignatius Press) is now available. His book on Christian friendship, The Company We Keep, is now available from Scepter Press. He was a contributor to Natural Law: Five Views, published by Zondervan last May, and his most recent Gospel book came out with Regnery Gateway in March, Be Good Bankers: The Economic Interpretation of Matthew’s Gospel.
Archives
More News
More Commentary
More Notables
Bishop Robert Barron with Cardinal Gerhard Müller: an hour-long discussion of our bodily Faith
Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré, Québec City, Canada
Rejoice, Blessed Virgin by Sergei Rachmaninoff
Copyright 2025 The Catholic Thing. All Rights Reserved.
"*" indicates required fields
Accidentally unsubscribe? Need to resubscribe? Use this form to get back on the list.
Join the 50k+ subscribers who receive The Catholic Thing’s daily email