First Council At Nicaea

Regarding the Byzantines and the rise and modernization of Christiandom, I've chosen to write about the First Council of Nicaea in 325AD. Emperor Constantine called together 1800 bishops from all over Christiandom (of which 318 attended - the number is disputed, but this one, in its specificity, as counted by the most sources) in response to a heretical cult in Nicaea. Essentially, Constantine disliked the cult in the area for reasons unexplained and wanted the Church to define its doctrine in order to exclude the heretics.

The attendees set their agenda and it is translated as this (the underlined sections are attempted hyperlinks to more information):

1. The Arian [a non-trinitarian sect, thought Jesus was 'unbegotten' and a divine 'creature' of God] question regarding the relationship between God the Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in purpose only or also one in being;

2. The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation [moving this away from the Jewish tradition]

3. The Meletian [a dude that was concerned with how easy 'bad' Christians get back into the Church] schism;

4. The validity of baptism by heretics [if theyre not Catholic, should we care about them or slaughter them?];

5. The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius [one of the emperors - he had lost a war in 324 to Constantine.]

The bishops largely accomplished all that they set out to accomplish on the political side of things (sorting out a 'church position' in the world - a rather foreign concept in the post-Reformation world of many denominations) yet did something much more profound in the course of human events.

Those with a history in Church (mine being very recent) will recognize the paragraph they produced in 325AD:

"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, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on 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, ascended into heaven; From thence he shall come to judge the quick 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.]"

There are hundreds of translations of this paragraph, the Nicene Creed, but this is considered to be a direct translation from the original without input from different denominational traditions. The brackets are words inserted by bishops who wanted more political specificity. That specificity, however, came in precedent of unity that lasted with the Catholic church until the Reformation (ironically, the Reformation began in Britain, the only area of Christiandom from which Constantine didnt invite bishops). The 20 decrees that are, today, either second nature to Christians or not recognized, were issued with a democratic element of bishops. Here, it may be fitting to propose a comparison.

It is incredibly loose, but the Council at Nicaea with its 318 bishops from a geographically widespread area seems like an early representative democracy. Granted, there is an element of theocracy here, but the grouping together to come to make collectively binding decrees is the definition of a representative form of government. Also, the discrepancy between those invited and those who actually showed up is a precursor to the number of MEPs or US members of Congress that show up on any given day. To those more interested, it may be worthy to look into early examples of post-Athenian democracy within Christiandom and especially within Greece (I am sure somebody has already) to draw conclusions for the development of the Magna Carta and the Glorious Revolution.

In this development, there might be trends disregarded by the secular academics which could explain why both tradition and the attempted destruction of tradition have sprung up so strongly in our own age. Perhaps it could help explain why the EU has failed to acknowledge that the Lisbon treaty did, indeed, get killed. After all, the Nicaean Creed is still active, what else from that meeting could be?

[[[The pictures from the top: explanation of the trinity as it is set up in the Nicene Creed, a fresco of the Council, and the main bishops (with Emp. Constantine in the center) with the original Creed.

Sources:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11044a.htm

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum01.htm

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/nicea1.txt

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I also found this totally unrelated similarity interesting...

There is an odd semblance between this and Obama's creepy stimulus logo. The top one is a T/O Map of the world...maybe the stimulus logo tells us where to find that recovery he promised (I'm not partisan...really ;) ).]]]

The Inferno, A Field Trip Through Hell

The picture probably got your attention didn't it?

The Inferno, by Dante Alighieri, is the first book in a three part series called the Divine Comedy. The Divine Comedy is about a poet named Dante, who travels through the realms of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven. The Inferno describes his journey through Hell with his guide Virgil and all that he encounters within the fiery realm.

The class discussions this week have been about Christianity in Western Europe, so The Inferno is relevant, as it is a very descriptive view of how Medieval Christians imagined Hell. Hell was an important concept in early Catholicism as it kept people in line and enforced order throughout society. Many Christians during the Medieval times were afraid of the eternal punishments that awaited the wicked and strove to act like good Samaritans.

The Inferno describes Hell through the eyes of Dante, as a realm without hope and full of pain. The book goes into much detail, going so far as describing the geography of Hell, portraying it as an upside down mountain, divided into 9 circles, or levels. Each level housed a different kind of Sinner, with the first few reserved for either pagans or sins of excess, such as greed, lust, or gluttony. The next three housed the violent, the slothful, and the heretics. The last two were reserved for frauds and traitors that betrayed the trust of others.

Each level had specific punishments for the sins committed by those inside. An example would be that the greedy in the fourth level were forced to push giant bags of gold uphill for eternity, similar to Sisyphus's punishment in Greek Mythology. Initially, Dante felt sorrow and pity for the tortured souls, but he begins to see that no matter how harsh the punishment, the soul being punished had done something to deserve it. At the very bottom, in the depths of the ninth circle of Hell, Lucifer himself is trapped in a lake of ice and chewing on the three most prominent sinners of history. Cassius and Brutus both planned and carried out the assassination of Julius Caesar, who Dante the Author viewed as the man who was chosen by God to unify Italy. The third traitor is Judas Iscariot, the apostle who betrayed Jesus to the Romans, which is the most evil thing Dante could envision.

Ultimately, The Inferno is an allegorical story of what awaits sinners in the afterlife. This tale shows the true horror of Hell as it was imagined by Medieval Christians and the influence of Christianity on Western Europe. Also, it shows a darker aspect of Christianity's Salvation promise. Sure, Heaven awaits the souls of the dead, but only if they have lead a virtous life. Otherwise, those impure souls are sent to a place of eternal punishment and pain, with no hope of redemption.

Emperor Justinian the Great or the Foolish

The most powerful and well known Byzantine Emperor was Justinian. His many accomplishments include building the Hagia Sophia, organizing the law code, and reconquering some parts of the old Western Roman Empire. However, Justinian was not only the greatest Byzantine Emperor he was also the worst, causing the beginning of the decline of the Byzantine Empire. This was done through poor decisions and his campaign to reconquer the west.

When Justinian ruled Byzantium (527-565 CE) he ruled the most powerful Empire in the Mediterranean, with vast amounts of mineral wealth and treasure. Justinian, believing he was the heir to the Roman Empire, wanted to reconquer the west. His opportunity came when, to protect the faith, set out to take over the Arian Christians who were considered to be heretics. The Arian Christians included the Vandals and the Ostrogoths. The Vandals were persecuting members of the Roman Church, therefore, as protector of the faith Justinian had cause for war.

Justinian first set out to retake North Africa from the Vandals. This was not difficult, due to the weakness of the Vandals in numbers and ability. The Conquest of the Vandals only took six months ending in 533 CE. Next Justinian set his eyes on Italy. Although he was able to wrestle Italy away from the Ostrogoths, the Byzantines were not able to hold it. Three years after his death in 565 CE a new group of barbarians, the Lombards, took over Italy. Why was Justinian not able to hold the reconquered territory? The most important reason was many of the Romans who lived in these areas did not support Byzantium, some even fought against them. Also in Italy the only reason why the Byzantium army survived was the strength of their navy. Their numbers were too few and many had to be recalled to protect the Empire against the Persians.

The most important reason why Justinian caused the beginning of the decline of the Byzantine Empire was before the reconquest Justinian paid the Persians for peace. With large sums of money going to the Persians and more money and manpower going to the reconquest, Byzantium declined in power. Due to the lack of money economy slowed down and the increased taxes caused the people of Empire to lose allegiance to Constantinople. All of these led to the slow decay and carving up of the once powerful Empire.