In examining the gender dimensions of the Council of Nicaea and its outcomes, this article examines the lived experiences of the councils of churches in Africa - with particular reference to the All Africa Conference of Churches and its member churches in Southern Africa - as institutions created to embody the faith, unity, and mission of the church. The key question examined is the following: What has been the role of women in defining and leading the faith, unity, and mission of the church in the councils of churches in Southern Africa (Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Malawi) and the All Africa Conference of Churches in particular? This article is qualitative, using historical methods and gender analysis to examine how women leadership in the councils cited have embodied the faith, its unity, and mission to achieve gender equality as expressed in the imago Dei.
The canons of the Council of Nicaea appear to confirm what some might consider today to be stereotypical views of gender identity. However, according to Philostorgius, a Christian church historian of Late Antiquity, Constantine's stepsister Constantia played an influential role in the decisions of some sceptical key players to sign the creed. Some non-Christian sources on Constantine's religious policy at the time of Nicaea ascribe an even greater role to women. They explain the emperor's conversion as an effect of the influence of the imperial court, in which, according to them, women played a key role. These sources even see the conversion of the emperor resulting in what they consider to be a "feminization" of the Roman Empire. This article briefly presents Constantia as a key female actor of imperial religious politics according to Philostorgius and looks at the non-Christian polemical accusation of "feminization" against Christianity in the age of Constantine. The concluding section examines the Roman Empire's reception of feminization in two historical interpretations of Constantine which are still influential in Western European discourses.
The experience of Indigenous women in the church is marked by exclusion even though Indigenous women are often the most active participants in the faith. "Living the Apostolic Faith Today" with a commitment to the decolonization of Christian mission cannot be complete without dismantling exclusive theologies and practices rooted in historical circumstances. With an objective to call on the church to conscientiously and consciously include Indigenous women in the walk toward visible unity, this article will be guided by two questions. First, what lessons can be learned from the historical circumstances of the Council of Nicaea in addressing conflicts and consequences of conflicts that marginalize vulnerable people like Indigenous women? Second, how do the outcomes of the Council of Nicaea, such as "orthodoxy," simultaneously exclude and inform faith practices today?
The Council of Nicaea of 325 CE was a significant moment in the history of the church, as it not only protected the very foundation of Christian beliefs but also preserved the unity of the church. Although we are about to celebrate the 1700th anniversary of the council, women are still fighting to find their place at the table of critical church decision-making processes. Doctrines and sometimes exegetical theological error driven by patriarchy have been used as tools to silence the voice of women in the church. Although the Council of Nicaea was called to respond to a theological error, it is vital that the 1700th-anniversary celebration creates another platform to challenge the theological posture that has relegated women in the church to non-essential duties. This inspires the spirit of Nicaea, which allowed for theological arguments to be heard as a means of charting the way forward to make the church stronger, despite the threat posed by Arianism.
Persons with disabilities were present at the Council of Nicaea. Some bishops with disabilities were present: for example, Paphnutius of the Upper Thebaid, Potamon of Heraklea, and Paul of Neo-Caesarea. These bishops became persons with disabilities because of the persecution of Christians under the Roman Empire. However, we can debate whether their presence represented the presence of persons with disabilities because they had been bishops before they became disabled through persecution. They came to the Council of Nicaea mainly as bishops, not as persons with disabilities. They were respected as living martyrs who were faithful to Jesus Christ and imitated him in his suffering. They were unlike persons with disabilities in common life, who were not respected in society and became targets of charity in the early church. Today, while some persons with disabilities are present in the church leadership, most are not fully welcome and some are still marginalized. Working for the inclusion of and justice for persons with disabilities is still needed in the church today.
The article recounts a journey from wariness of the Nicene Creed and critique of its patriarchal origins to a rediscovery of the subversive potential of its original drafting at the Council of Nicaea. The Nicene Creed from 325 CE (later extended to become the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed in 381 CE) is deeply incarnational, with an understanding of salvation that is rooted in birth. The later creed dilutes this emphasis through its additions, and translations of both into English have obscured the radical message that in Christ God became human (not only man) for all humankind. This article takes the original Nicene statement seriously and interprets Christianity as a faith of natality and incarnation rather than, as in much Western Christianity, of the cross. It reinterprets Nicaea through feminist philosophy, uncovering a more original reading. It suggests that since the celebration of Christmas moves hearts in even secular Europe, such a reading provides an opening for mission today.
The First Council of Nicaea (325 CE) was convened primarily to address the Christological dispute concerning the nature of Jesus: his origin, divinity, and relationship to God the Father. The controversy, which arose within the Christian clergy of Alexandria, particularly between Arius and his opponents, formed the central agenda of the council. The resulting Nicene Creed affirmed Jesus as “begotten, not made, of one being with the Father” (homoousios), establishing a unified doctrinal position within the church. However, while women had held notable roles in the early church, they were not intentionally involved in the deliberations. The council's decisions not only established doctrinal norms but also dictated the parameters of influence, leadership, and historical recognition. Thus, the council represents a missed opportunity. By not recognizing the importance of women in its critical deliberations, the council laid the groundwork for systemic patterns of exclusion that would persist for centuries.
The canons of the Council of Nicaea appear to confirm what some might consider today to be stereotypical views of gender identity. However, according to Philostorgius, a Christian church historian of Late Antiquity, Constantine's stepsister Constantia played an influential role in the decisions of some sceptical key players to sign the creed. Some non‐Christian sources on Constantine's religious policy at the time of Nicaea ascribe an even greater role to women. They explain the emperor's conversion as an effect of the influence of the imperial court, in which, according to them, women played a key role. These sources even see the conversion of the emperor resulting in what they consider to be a “feminization” of the Roman Empire. This article briefly presents Constantia as a key female actor of imperial religious politics according to Philostorgius and looks at the non‐Christian polemical accusation of “feminization” against Christianity in the age of Constantine. The concluding section examines the Roman Empire's reception of feminization in two historical interpretations of Constantine which are still influential in Western European discourses.
Persons with disabilities were present at the Council of Nicaea. Some bishops with disabilities were present: for example, Paphnutius of the Upper Thebaid, Potamon of Heraklea, and Paul of Neo‐Caesarea. These bishops became persons with disabilities because of the persecution of Christians under the Roman Empire. However, we can debate whether their presence represented the presence of persons with disabilities because they had been bishops before they became disabled through persecution. They came to the Council of Nicaea mainly as bishops, not as persons with disabilities. They were respected as living martyrs who were faithful to Jesus Christ and imitated him in his suffering. They were unlike persons with disabilities in common life, who were not respected in society and became targets of charity in the early church. Today, while some persons with disabilities are present in the church leadership, most are not fully welcome and some are still marginalized. Working for the inclusion of and justice for persons with disabilities is still needed in the church today.
The Council of Nicaea of 325 CE was a significant moment in the history of the church, as it not only protected the very foundation of Christian beliefs but also preserved the unity of the church. Although we are about to celebrate the 1700th anniversary of the council, women are still fighting to find their place at the table of critical church decision‐making processes. Doctrines and sometimes exegetical theological error driven by patriarchy have been used as tools to silence the voice of women in the church. Although the Council of Nicaea was called to respond to a theological error, it is vital that the 1700th‐anniversary celebration creates another platform to challenge the theological posture that has relegated women in the church to non‐essential duties. This inspires the spirit of Nicaea, which allowed for theological arguments to be heard as a means of charting the way forward to make the church stronger, despite the threat posed by Arianism.
The Council of Nicaea was convened in 325 CE and brought with it the winds of growth of the church, the woundedness and suffering of Christian leadership of bishops and deacons, and the importance of diaconal mission and ministry at that time. Although references to women deacons or deaconesses are found in early church documents, especially in the Eastern Orthodox churches, they were not necessarily present at the Council of Nicaea in any significant capacity to serve these diaconal roles, despite some suggestions of women being present at the council. In this article, sacred imagination allows us to consider diaconal voices from two other periods whereby Pan-African women deacons in Zimbabwe and the United States are providing diaconal leadership in seasons of ecclesial trends similar to those that affected the Council of Nicaea. The article considers their leadership and context in their times and how these insights could have contributed to the possible involvement of women deacons at Nicaea and the shaping of the ecumenical movement.
The experience of Indigenous women in the church is marked by exclusion even though Indigenous women are often the most active participants in the faith. “Living the Apostolic Faith Today” with a commitment to the decolonization of Christian mission cannot be complete without dismantling exclusive theologies and practices rooted in historical circumstances. With an objective to call on the church to conscientiously and consciously include Indigenous women in the walk toward visible unity, this article will be guided by two questions. First, what lessons can be learned from the historical circumstances of the Council of Nicaea in addressing conflicts and consequences of conflicts that marginalize vulnerable people like Indigenous women? Second, how do the outcomes of the Council of Nicaea, such as “orthodoxy,” simultaneously exclude and inform faith practices today?
In examining the gender dimensions of the Council of Nicaea and its outcomes, this article examines the lived experiences of the councils of churches in Africa – with particular reference to the All Africa Conference of Churches and its member churches in Southern Africa – as institutions created to embody the faith, unity, and mission of the church. The key question examined is the following: What has been the role of women in defining and leading the faith, unity, and mission of the church in the councils of churches in Southern Africa (Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Malawi) and the All Africa Conference of Churches in particular? This article is qualitative, using historical methods and gender analysis to examine how women leadership in the councils cited have embodied the faith, its unity, and mission to achieve gender equality as expressed in the imago Dei.
The article recounts a journey from wariness of the Nicene Creed and critique of its patriarchal origins to a rediscovery of the subversive potential of its original drafting at the Council of Nicaea. The Nicene Creed from 325 CE (later extended to become the Nicene‐Constantinopolitan Creed in 381 CE) is deeply incarnational, with an understanding of salvation that is rooted in birth. The later creed dilutes this emphasis through its additions, and translations of both into English have obscured the radical message that in Christ God became human (not only man) for all humankind. This article takes the original Nicene statement seriously and interprets Christianity as a faith of natality and incarnation rather than, as in much Western Christianity, of the cross. It reinterprets Nicaea through feminist philosophy, uncovering a more original reading. It suggests that since the celebration of Christmas moves hearts in even secular Europe, such a reading provides an opening for mission today.
Colonization and Christian mission had a symbiotic relationship. This has raised the question of the relationship between missionaries and colonizers. Most would agree that they influenced each other: colonialism facilitated the growth of Christianity, and missionary work provided fertile ground for colonialism in some parts of Africa. However, it is important to also highlight that some missionary work in Africa was purely for the spread of the gospel and not colonialism. With the partition of Africa after the Berlin Conference of 1884-85, many colonial powers restricted mission work in their colonies to missionaries from their own countries. This resulted in a denominational division and distribution that is still reflected in African churches today. However, in nations that are predominantly Muslim, the mission was not successful by either persuasion or coercion. Although the gospel was brought to Africa by the Europeans and linked to colonialism, it is not European. African Christians do not see the gospel as colonial or needing to be decolonized but are willing to share with others, including their former colonizers.
The Council of Nicaea took place at Constantine's initiative to harmonize religious belief and law into a state-subscribed orthodoxy. From a socio-political viewpoint, the council appeared to use a standardized version of Christianity as an instrument of the empire. The focus in this paper is not on Constantine's initiative or its impact on the non-conforming minorities; rather, it uses this impact as a lens for reviewing an emerging Hindu empire in India. For much of its independent history, India was largely successful in keeping Hindutva's 19th-century undercurrents at bay from polity. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), however, exposed the shallowness of the Indian experiment with secularism. As Hindutva embraces politics, it also exercises social control. In this sense, Hindutva is no different from Christendom, especially when viewed from the perspective of the impact it has on the minorities: a new act on citizenship, dissent-violence, and reconversions. What this shows is that colonial despotism continues even today.
