Alexander’s letter to his namesake in Byzantium is a long and repetitive statement of the Arian problem. His Catholic Epistle is a more succinct setup for Nicea.
He tries to stop certain readings of the Christian books but his opponents are slippery - by saying these things, and by unfolding the divine Scriptures, we have often refuted them. But they, chameleon-like …
. Their arguments still resonate with many. Alexander formally bans, anathematized such men
, but that fails to stop other powerful bishops supporting them including Eusebius of Nicomedia.
The stage is set for the novelties of the Council. A precise definition of the orthodox position and its banned alternative to take out the fence sitters. Anathema again but now enforced Rome-wide to remove or neuter powerful bishops like Eusebius.
You can argue that the creed is valuable - God is made clear even if his books are ambiguous - but state-intervention? Slippery, slippery … To enforce the position of its majority, the Church needed Constantine. They made him a protagonist in their drama and he assumed the role offered. In spite of the Constantine-bashers, there was no machiavellian at Nicea. Just a majority-pleaser, a God-pleaser.
Leave a Reply