1700 years of Nicene Creed

According to tradition, the Nicene Creed turns 1,700 years old tomorrow.

I was born into a Unitarian family, and as old-school New England Unitarians, we didn’t think much about the Nicene Creed. I mean that literally, and not in a snide sense: obviously the Nicene Creed was never recited in our Unitarian church, but beyond that no one even talked about it; it just wasn’t something we ever thought about.

If we ever thought of the Nicene Creed, we thought about it in negative terms, much the same way Professor Francis Christie of Meadville Theological School wrote about it in 1910:

Today, I’d be less doctrinaire about the Nicene Creed. Even though the Nicene Creed’s trinitarian theology has never made much sense to me personally, I have friends for whom it remains a profoundly moving statement of theology (including some good Universalist friends). Part of being staunchly non-creedal is remaining open to the possibility of truth in creeds you don’t feel much emotional sympathy with. Yet Transcendentalist that I am, I continue to feel that Thoreau got it right when he wrote:

To use Theodore Parker’s terms, when it comes to religiou, there is that which is transient, and that which is permanent. Using these terms, Thoreau is talking about that which is permanent: “no time has elapsed since that divinity was revealed.” A creed, on the other hand, is a fallible human invention, and while it is useful for a time, it is nonetheless transient. The Nicene Creed has been useful to many Christians for 1,700 years, which is a very long time indeed; but it only points toward the divine, it is not itself divine. — At least, so sayeth my Unitarian forebears, with whom I entirely agree.

With those caveats, happy birthday to the Nicene Creed.

3 thoughts on “1700 years of Nicene Creed”

  1. My email to the UU History group on Oct 13th.

    To: ?Discussion and Archives of UU History and Historical Research?

    It’s the 1700th year anniversary of the Council of Nicaea. You may have overlooked it. I sure did until YouTube recommended to me a video from Father Barron explaining its history. Barron started recalling a question from a parishioner asking Barron to explain the creed and especially what “begotten” meant. It’s baffling even to those who recite it every Sunday.

    I’ve been stumped myself by questions from more Orthodox Christians asking me to explain what the Trinity means since they assume a Unitarian could explain what they’re not. I usually just said it was an old debate not relevant to today. I think that’s wrong of me, buy I’ve always disliked linking Unitarianism to past Christian Orthodoxies and Heresies.

    UU faith has seemed uniquely North American to me; and maybe just uniquely New Englandish since we never became Jefferson’s national faith. It’s never fit easily into Christian History in my mind but rather part of specific American History which disdains Theology. I know some on this list will disagree and would like to link us back at least to Sozzini. Listening to Father Barron suggested I might be wrong and that there may be a line, and an enduring one, we should be recognizing from a debate in Nicaea to Unitarianism (at least the Unitarian half of UU) and today.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *