What is the Nicene Creed?
The Nicene Creed is a foundational statement of Christian faith that emerged from the early church’s need to address theological controversies, particularly Arianism–a heresy that denied the full deity of Christ by claiming he was a created being. Also known as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, it holds a unique place in Christian history as the only creed universally accepted by Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant Churches. While earlier creeds like the Old Roman Symbol existed, the Nicene Creed provides the first detailed affirmation of Christ’s divinity and the Holy Spirit’s personhood that gained ecumenical acceptance. The creed systematically addresses key doctrinal issues, carefully articulating orthodox beliefs about the Trinity and the nature of Christ (Christology) in response to various heresies that threatened the church’s understanding of these essential doctrines.
When was the Nicene Creed written?
The Nicene Creed has a complex developmental history spanning several ecumenical councils. The original version was formulated at the First Council of Nicaea in AD 325, convened by Emperor Constantine I to address Christological disputes threatening church unity and imperial stability. Having recently unified the Roman Empire and legalized Christianity, Constantine sought to resolve theological controversies that were creating social and political tension throughout his realm. The Council of Nicaea produced its initial creed to counter Arian teaching (denying Christ’s eternal divine nature), bringing unity to the teachings of the Church.
This initial creed was later revised and significantly expanded at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 AD during the reign of Emperor Theodosius I. The Constantinople revision particularly expanded the section concerning the Holy Spirit’s divinity in response to the Pneumatomachian controversy, which questioned the deity and personhood of God the Holy Spirit. This revised version, formally called the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, is what most Christians know and recite today as the Nicene Creed. Historians and theologians make a technical distinction, referring to the 325 AD formulation as “the Creed of Nicaea” and the 381 AD revision as “the Nicene Creed.”
The creed underwent further historical development through subsequent councils. While its foundational elements were established at Nicaea (325 AD) and Constantinople (381 AD), the creed received its definitive sanction at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD, where it was confirmed as the standard of orthodox faith. A significant later development occurred at the Synod of Toledo in 589 AD when Western churches added the phrase “and the Son” (filioque) regarding the Holy Spirit’s procession. This addition became a significant point of theological and ecclesiastical division between Eastern and Western Christianity, contributing to the Great Schism of 1054 AD. The Eastern churches maintain the original wording, arguing that the Western addition compromises the monarchy of the Father within the Trinity, while Western churches defend it as a legitimate theological development expressing the Son’s role in the Spirit’s procession.
Who wrote the Nicene Creed?
The Nicene Creed was not written by a single individual but emerged from a collaborative effort of church bishops at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Emperor Constantine, who had unified the Roman Empire and ended Christian persecution through the Edict of Milan (313 AD), convened the council to address theological disputes, particularly the Arian controversy that threatened both church unity and imperial stability. The creed represented the beliefs of the early church's leadership and demonstrated their wisdom and doctrinal consensus in response to these challenges.
Approximately 318 bishops attended the Council of Nicaea, representing about one-sixth of all bishops in the Greco-Roman Empire. This number is traditionally significant as it corresponds to Abraham’s 318 servants in Genesis 14:14, a connection early Christians found meaningful. Among the notable attendees was Eusebius of Caesarea, the famous church historian who initially presented a creed based on the baptismal formula of his own church. This creed became the foundation for what would become the Nicene Creed, though it underwent significant revision to address the Arian controversy more directly. Also present was Hosius (or Ossius) of Cordova, who played a prominent role in formulating the creed and likely presided over the council following its formal opening by Constantine.
The final formulation of the creed expressly declared Jesus to be “true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance [homoousios] with the Father.” This precise language was chosen to combat the Arian teaching that Christ was a created being, albeit the first and highest of God’s creatures. Gregory of Nazianzus clarified, “The term ‘homoousios’ preserves the unity of the Godhead while affirming the distinctness of the persons” (Orations). The term homoousios (of one substance) became particularly crucial, though controversial, as it declared Christ’s full deity in unmistakable terms. Nearly all bishops present–all but two–signed the resulting statement, demonstrating remarkable consensus despite the intense theological debates of the era.
The version of the Nicene Creed commonly recited in churches today reflects further development at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 AD. This council, attended by the Cappadocian Fathers, including Gregory of Nazianzus, expanded the creed’s pneumatology (doctrine of the Holy Spirit) in response to new theological challenges. While the exact list of attendees at Constantinople is not fully documented, the council’s work proved crucial in developing what we now know as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. The Cappadocian Fathers were particularly influential in articulating the church’s understanding of the Trinity, helping to clarify how Father, Son, and Holy Spirit could be both three and one.
What is the difference between the Nicene and Apostles Creed?
While both articulate core Christian beliefs, the Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds differ significantly in their origins, purposes, and theological depth. The Apostles’ Creed emerged organically in the second century, likely developing from early baptismal confessions in Rome. Initially known as the Old Roman Symbol, it served as a simple expression of faith for new converts and reflected the basic theological understanding necessary for Christian initiation. Though ancient, the creed’s traditional attribution to the twelve apostles speaks to its antiquity and authority in the early church.
In contrast to the Apostles’ Creed, which seems to have developed organically, the Nicene Creed emerged from a specific set of historical circumstances that required precise theological language. Where the Apostles’ Creed simply states, “I believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord,” the Nicene Creed elaborates extensively on Christ’s nature and relationship to the Father. This expansion reflects the church’s need to address sophisticated philosophical arguments raised by Arian teachers who used Greek philosophical categories to challenge orthodox Christology.
The structure and content of the creeds also differ significantly. While both follow a Trinitarian pattern, the Apostles’ Creed maintains simple, narrative-like statements connected to redemptive history. Note Tertullian, “The rule of faith, indeed, is altogether one, alone immovable and irreformable—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit” (Prescription Against Heretics). The Nicene Creed employs philosophical terminology like homoousios (of one substance) to define the relationship between Father and Son precisely. Similarly, where the Apostles’ Creed simply affirms belief in the Holy Spirit, the Nicene Creed provides a robust pneumatology, describing the Spirit as “the Lord, the giver of life” and detailing his relationship within the Trinity.
The creeds also serve different liturgical functions. The Apostles’ Creed remains closely associated with baptism and personal profession of faith, while the Nicene Creed is more commonly used in eucharistic liturgies and formal ecclesiastical pronouncements in high church settings. Despite these differences, both creeds continue to play vital roles in Christian worship and Christian education, with the Nicene Creed being particularly significant for its universal acceptance across Christian traditions and its careful articulation of orthodox Trinitarian faith.
What is the difference between the nicene and Athanasian Creed?
While both the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed profess Trinitarian orthodoxy, they differ significantly in their origin, structure, and purpose. The Athanasian Creed (or Quicunque Vult, from its opening words, “Whosoever wishes”) emerged in Western Europe, likely in the 5th or 6th century, well after the Nicene Creed’s formulation. Though traditionally attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria, scholars now recognize it as the work of an unknown Western theologian who systematized Augustinian Trinitarian theology.
The Athanasian Creed is notably more detailed and precise in its Trinitarian formulations than the Nicene Creed. Where the Nicene Creed makes positive statements about what Christians believe, the Athanasian Creed employs a series of parallel statements explaining both what must be believed and what must not be believed about the Trinity. Cyril of Alexandria wrote, “For we confess that we do not divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two persons” (Letter to Nestorius). The creed includes specific warnings that salvation depends on holding the catholic faith whole and undefiled, especially regarding Christology and the doctrine of the Trinity, reflecting a more developed stage of theological reflection.
Unlike the Nicene Creed, widely accepted ecumenically, the Athanasian Creed primarily influenced Western Christianity. Eastern churches never adopted it, partly because it includes the filioque doctrine and partly because its detailed philosophical language reflects Western rather than Eastern theological methods. Its use in worship also differs significantly—while the Nicene Creed is regularly recited in most Christian liturgies, the Athanasian Creed is used less frequently, often reserved for special occasions like Trinity Sunday in those traditions that maintain its use.
The Athanasian Creed also provides a more extensive treatment of Christ’s incarnation, carefully delineating how divinity and humanity unite in the one person of Jesus Christ. This reflects later Christological developments following the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD), making it a more complete but also more complex doctrinal statement than the Nicene Creed. Despite these differences, both creeds remain authoritative expressions of the orthodox Christian faith, with the Nicene Creed serving as the universal standard and the Athanasian Creed providing deeper theological elaboration of Trinitarian and Christological doctrine in Western Churches.
What are the words of the Nicene Creed?
The Nicene Creed is a declaration of faith that unites Christians across orthodox theological traditions. It affirms the shared belief in the doctrine of the Trinity, one God expressed in three persons. Basil of Caesarea explained, “We are bound to confess one God, not in number but in nature, worshiping one essence in three persons” (On the Holy Spirit). This foundational statement encapsulates the unity and mystery of the Trinity while providing a precise articulation of Christian doctrine. The text is as follows:
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.
I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father [and the Son] (filioque), who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.
I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.
What is the filioque in the Nicene Creed?
The filioque, Latin for “and the Son,” represents one of Christian history’s most significant theological and ecclesiastical controversies. The term refers to an addition to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed’s statement about the Holy Spirit’s procession. The original creed, finalized at Constantinople in 381 AD, stated that the Holy Spirit “proceeds from the Father.” However, Western churches, beginning with the Synod of Toledo in 589 AD, added “and the Son,” making the Spirit’s procession from both Father and Son an article of faith.
The theological rationale behind the Western addition stemmed from Augustine’s teaching on the Trinity, which emphasized the unity of divine operations. As written by Augustine of Hippo, “The Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, demonstrating their unity” (On the Trinity). Western theologians argued that since the Father and Son share the same divine essence, the Spirit must proceed from both. They saw this as necessary to maintain the Son’s equality with the Father and to adequately express the Spirit’s relationship within the Trinity. This understanding developed particularly in response to Arianism in Spain, where the filioque was first introduced to emphasize Christ’s full deity.
Eastern churches strongly objected to this unilateral addition on several grounds. First, they viewed it as a violation of the ecumenical nature of the creed, which had been established by universal councils and could only be modified by similar universal authority. Second, they argued that it compromised the monarchy of the Father as the sole source of divinity within the Trinity. While Eastern theology acknowledged the Son’s role in the Spirit’s temporal mission, they maintained that the Spirit’s eternal procession was from the Father alone.
The filioque controversy contributed significantly to the Great Schism of 1054 AD between Eastern and Western Christianity. While not the only factor, it exemplified deeper theological and cultural differences between East and West. In modern times, some Western churches, particularly Anglicans, have shown flexibility regarding the clause, offering alternative texts that omit the filioque in ecumenical settings. However, the Roman Catholic Church maintains the filioque while acknowledging that the Eastern expression of the Trinity, without the clause, is also valid and orthodox.
Why was the Nicene Creed written?
Athanasius of Alexandria famously wrote, “The whole aim of the enemy is to separate us from the Savior, by asserting that He is not the Creator but a creature” (Discourses Against the Arians). The Nicene Creed emerged in the early church out of the need to address complex theological challenges threatening Christian unity and orthodoxy. While Arianism was the primary catalyst, other theological disputes concerning Christ’s nature and the Trinity also necessitated a clear doctrinal statement. However, the creed served several purposes beyond merely countering heresy.
First, it provided a framework for biblical interpretation. The scriptures, primarily narrative in form, required careful synthesis to develop coherent doctrine. The creed helped bridge the gap between biblical narrative and systematic theology, offering precise doctrinal formulations that remained faithful to scriptural teaching while addressing contemporary philosophical questions.
Second, the creed established a standard for orthodox teaching that could be used throughout the church. As Christianity spread geographically and culturally, maintaining doctrinal consistency became increasingly challenging. The creed provided a universal reference point for Christian teaching, helping local churches maintain a connection with the broader Christian community.
Finally, the creed served a catechetical purpose, clearly summarizing essential Christian beliefs that could be used in teaching and worship. Its careful articulation of complex theological concepts in relatively straightforward language makes it valuable for instructing both new converts and establishing believers in the fundamentals of the faith. This pedagogical function continues today, as churches use the creed to teach orthodox doctrine and maintain theological continuity with historical Christianity.
