The Idea of Nicaea at Ephesus II (449)

At Ephesus II, the Nicene construal of 448 was overturned, Eutyches’ doctrine was declared to be faithful to Nicaea, and Flavian’s contrary to it. Ephesus II reoriented the reception of Ephesus I around the 22 July 431 acta (closing off the Antiochene strategy of reading Cyril’s council via the Formula of Reunion), whilst fashioning the hitherto little-known ‘Canon 7’ of 431 into a powerful weapon against any theological statements deemed to be an addition to the Nicene Creed. Ephesus II established its own conciliar status precisely by presenting its activity as the mere recapitulation and reapplication of the all-sufficient decrees of Nicaea and Ephesus. Moreover, the articulation of this ‘idea’ of Nicaea was primarily achieved through the careful layering of textual authorities in written conciliar acta. It was precisely though a self-consciously conservative re-presentation of the faith of Nicaea that Ephesus II dramatically remoulded the Nicene identity.

The Idea of Nicaea in the Aftermath of Ephesus

This chapter traces the reception of Ephesus after 431. It argues that there was a complex pluriformity of divergent receptions, each embodying a subtly different construal of the Nicene faith. First, the initial struggle over the reception of Ephesus is analysed, down to the Formula of Reunion (433). Then, several distinct trajectories of Ephesine reception are traced in the years following 433: a ‘minimal Cyrilline’ reception (which acknowledged the authority of Cyril’s council and the deposition of Nestorius); a ‘moderate Antiochene’ reception (which defined the council’s achievement via the Formula of Reunion, blunting the council’s attack on Antiochene doctrine); a ‘hard-line Cyrilline’ reception (which reoriented the documentary record of Ephesus around the 22nd July session of 431); and a ‘hard-line Antiochene’ reception (which continued to reject Cyril’s council). The diversity of receptions of Ephesus was further encouraged by the varied textual forms in which the decisions of the council came to circulate.

Introduction: Nicaea in Context

This introductory chapter sets out the core dilemma of the centrality of the idea of ‘Nicaea’ in fifth-century orthodox discourse, but also its inadequacy as a means to resolve the doctrinal questions raised by the Christological controversy. The idea of ‘Nicaea’ was both the ground of the church’s unity and the source of her strife. Nicaea’s capacity for flexible re-expression opened up ways for subsequent councils to associate (and even elide) their own work with its sacred authority, but also made possible the refutation of such construals on equally impeccable ‘Nicene’ grounds. The current state of scholarship on the issue is surveyed and critiqued. Wider implications for theories of doctrinal development are considered, and Rush’s account of ‘rejuvenating reception’ is commended.

The Idea of Nicaea at Chalcedon (451)

The emperor Marcian sought at Chalcedon to solve the problem of Nicaea’s reception once and for all, by presenting his oecumenical council as not only the repetition, but also the completion, of Nicaea’s work—seen especially in his desire for the council to promulgate a new statement of faith. The chapter begins with several case studies from the Chalcedonian acta, which demonstrate how problematic the flexibility of ‘Nicaea’ as a cypher of orthodoxy had become by 451. The chapter then explores Marcian’s attempt to make his case for a new ‘Definition’ of the faith to the bishops at Chalcedon. For instance, by re-narrating the Nicene past to include the contribution of Constantinople 381, Marcian provided a precedent for further credal statements, and so blunted the force of ‘Canon 7’ (according to its construal at Ephesus II). The Chalcedonian acta, however, suggest that Marcian met with substantial episcopal opposition in his endeavour, precisely because he was seen as violating Nicaea’s unique status. The chapter then considers the Definition itself, and its earliest reception.

The Idea of Nicaea at the Constantinopolitan Home Synod (448)

The ecclesial convulsions of 448–51 involved the collision of the conflicting textual receptions of Ephesus 431. The late 440s saw a revival of the controversy over the idea of Nicaea, and the meaning of its Ephesine reception. Domnus, Flavian and Eusebius sought to make the Formula of Reunion (433) the primary locus of Nicaea’s authoritative confirmation, exploiting the reception of Ephesus to grant impeccable Nicene credentials to a strongly dyophysite Christology. The Constantinopolitan ‘Home Synod’ of 448 represented an attempt to enshrine this interpretation of Nicaea as alone authoritative, through the subtle textual shaping of the synodical acta. Eutyches, however, effectively undermined this strategy through his own shrewd counter-presentation of the Nicene faith, and was able to depict Flavian and Eusebius as heretically seeking to add to it.

The Council of Nicaea and Its Early Reception

This chapter sets the scene for the various appeals to Nicaea during the Nestorian controversy, by analysing the nature of Nicaea’s earlier reception. It begins by examining the Council of Nicaea itself, and the terminology of the Creed. It then explains how attempts to replace Nicaea with superior councils and creeds during the 340s and 350s were gradually eclipsed by the widespread acceptance of the Athanasian polemic of Nicaea’s unique authority and sole sufficiency. Athanasius’ spirited ‘re-reception’ of Nicaea, however, itself necessitated an uneasy reshaping of the Nicene past, and served to raise more sharply the dilemma of how the Nicene Creed’s status could be preserved amidst the increasing inadequacy of its text to speak into new doctrinal controversies. This analysis is extended into the early fifth century, and identifies a growing tension between the rhetorical focus on Nicaea’s textual sufficiency and the more fluid use of Nicene credal statements ‘on the ground’.

Conclusion

This chapter begins by summarizing the key conclusions that have arisen in the course of the work, and then goes on to offer some wider theological reflections on the implications of the study for accounts of doctrinal development and ecclesial reception.

The Idea of Nicaea in the Two Councils of Ephesus (431)

This chapter begins by arguing that the debate between Nestorius and Cyril (428–31) was characterized by a deep concern for the authentic interpretation of the Nicene Creed. As the controversy grew, it dramatically brought to the surface profound tensions in the inherited assumptions concerning the Nicene faith. This central Nicene theme is then traced through the complex conciliar events of 431. The two rival councils of Ephesus each developed mirroring strategies for defending their particular construal of the Nicene faith, and for portraying their opponents as heretical violators of its tenets. Particular emphasis is put on the way that both sides sought to employ carefully shaped conciliar documentation to advance their respective positions. This opened up new and fruitful discursive possibilities, especially in the attempts to show continuity between the events of 325 and 431.