The more I am on this site-I find some members quick to criticize the early church and the Catholic Church in particular. Indeed some criticism is merited-but what about the good that was done-little or nothing said-is this what the LDS Church teaches in it's teachings and doctrines? More importantly-is that what it's members believe?
Here are some "neutral" web sites on the Council of Nicaea and related councils-I think there was controversy and disagreement-but much good came out of them.
The world was much different in 300-400 A D than it is today-one must take into consideration the geopolitical climate of the day and the state of the Christian Church at the time of the councils.
First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Council of Nicea
Council of Nicaea - LoveToKnow 1911
--Carol
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander
Carol:
I suggest you read my posts slowly and carefully. Also, it may be a good idea to assess my statements from a historical standpoint rather than theological in order to understand what I am trying to say. I am not criticizing The Roman Catholic Church, I am making an observation about the nature of the proceedings, which in the words of the historians and theologians that attended the Councils, reported being a contentious gathering. We must be careful not to bring into the argument our own wishes, desires and bias as we examine history. It was what it was and sacrad or reverent those meetings were not. It is hard to imagine now, but there were riots on the streets, pamphlets thrown about and arguing all over the Turkish town even before the 318 bishops arrived.
It was (the council) one attempt to bring order and organization to the liturgy and practice of the Christian rites. It is evident, according to the historical accounts, that there were many sects and factions holding on to dissenting theologies and doctrines. Thru consensus and simple majority voting certain texts were accepted, other rejected and a general creed was adoted as a compromise as to define Christianity at that moment in time in history. It was an attempt, among many subsequent, to rid the incipient church of perceived heresy, to bring order and coherence to the faith.
Yes indeed, good came from those historical meetings, but we must look and study them in context. But without any romanticism or attributing to them a veil of sacredness since according to the eyewitness, there was none.
|