those who apostatised under Licinius, when there was no threat to their lives (canons 11 and 12).
Clergy of the Novatianist or 'puritan' sect,36 who refused to hold communion with lapsed ministers or with those who had contracted a second marriage, could be reconciled to the catholic church by the laying on of hands. Their orders would remain valid, though a bishop of the Novatianists would become a presbyter under a catholic bishop (canon 8). The followers of Paul of Samosata,37 on the other hand, were mere heretics who could not be readmitted until they received a new baptism in the threefold name (canon 18). Although this canon intimates by its silence that the baptisms of Novatianists were valid, this is not expressly stated. We owe to Socrates the information that the council licensed the marriage of lower clergy (Socr. HE 1.11); he also tells us that the Novatianists, having declined the summons of Constantine, were so far from being appeased by the decisions of the council that they subsequently took up the Asiatic date for Easter although they had hitherto observed the Roman calendar.38 There is nothing to corroborate the tradition that the bishops removed another source of discord by proclaiming a canon of scripture. But since there is no evidence, apart from Constantine's letter, of a regulation on the date of Easter, it seems probable that more work was transacted at Nicaea than our records now disclose.
As to the composition of the creed, we possess conflicting testimonies. Basil of Caesarea in Cappadocia (the Turkish hinterland) ascribes it to his own countryman Hermogenes (Ep. 81). Eusebius the historian, in a letter to the church of Palestinian Caesarea, asserts that, at the beginning of the council, he recited their local creed, which was then adopted by the council except that Constantine required the addition of the term homoousios.39 In the creed that he recited, there was in fact a great deal more that found no place in the Nicene version, and there is also more than one clause in the creed which was not anticipated in the Caesarean formula. Yet the story may be true in part, his own account of the episode in which, Theodoret tells us, the confession of one Eusebius was read out and condemned.40 Theodoret fails to say which
36 Including Donatists? See Epiph. Pan. 59.13.
37 See Euseb. HE 7.30.11 on his denial of Christ's divinity
38 Socr. HE 1.10 on the abstention of Acesius; 4.28 on the Phrygian calendar.
39 Appendix to Ath. Decr.
40 Thdt. HE 1.8.1; see Stead, "Eusebius".
Was this article helpful?