Commentary 25/05/19 Nicaea, Ecclesial rules, and 21st-century Asia

[성기화 요셉]

The Council of Nicaea promotes a dynamic relationship with law, fostering ecclesial unity without entangling in rigid web of regulations

A file picture of the Tenth Congress of Asian Theologians (CATS-X) and the commemoration of the 1700th Anniversary of the Council of Nicaea that took place in October 2024, at the Zion Cathedral of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Nicaea could offer much to contemporary Christians in Asia, where the need for foundational Christian laws remains a real challenge. (Photo: cca.org.hk)

By Michel Chambon

Published: May 19, 2025 04:32 AM GMT

Updated: May 19, 2025 05:25 AM GMT

In this final reflection on the Council of Nicaea, I would like to revisit a series of decisions made by the assembly to highlight both the importance and the vulnerability of these foundational rules — these first Christian laws.

While some laws are necessary to follow Jesus together, nothing is truly imposed by the force of law — not even the splendor of the truth.

By the end of June 325, the Council of Nicaea took a number of important decisions. In addition to issuing a creed that condemned Arianism, the council also defined a new way of calculating the date of Easter, one that no longer followed the Jewish calendar.

While this decision served to unite Christians, it also marked a clear distinction between Christians and Jews. Christianity was no longer a branch of Judaism. It originated from it, but now stood apart.

Yet, this necessary distinction between Judaism and Christianity remains a challenge for Christians — even today, and even in Asia. To follow Jesus faithfully requires understanding his culture and religious roots. But to follow the Triune God he reveals means going beyond the first covenant. Christians thus live in a tension with the Jewish world — a tension that calls for maintaining a delicate balance.

In Asia, some Christian groups are quite content to know nothing about Judaism. They see it as distant, outdated — a religion of the past. But this is problematic in two ways.

First, such ignorance of the Jewish faith reflects a lack of curiosity and love for Jesus himself, the Jew we worship. This is a real handicap for the maturity of our own faith.

Second, it does injustice to the Father of Jesus Christ — the God who remains eternally faithful to his first covenant, who has not abandoned the children of Israel, and who continues to honor his promises to them, even today.

When we reflect on the faith journey of the Jewish people today, we contemplate the ongoing work of God.

Another problematic relationship with Judaism is found in those Christians who ignore the difference between Jews and Christians. Some believe Christians are simply a continuation of the Jewish people — the one and only chosen people of God.

Some even idealize Israel as a perfect, holy, chosen people. But this failure to recognize what sets us apart is dangerous, as it overlooks what Jesus accomplished: he offered a new and eternal covenant in his own blood. If we claim to be the Jewish people, we deny both their uniqueness and the radical newness of the Gospel.

Beyond this complex and dynamic relationship with Judaism — symbolized by the council’s decision to set a distinct date for Easter — the Council of Nicaea also enacted a series of other decisions. Most notably, the bishops issued 20 new canons, which formed the first expression‎ of what would later become canon law: the legal framework governing the new people of God.

Proclaiming 20 laws was a significant innovation, but also a modest beginning given the many challenges and transformations facing fourth-century Christianity. While the Church needed to be organized, the conciliar fathers were not aiming to become nitpicking legislators. They agreed on just 20 points, leaving the rest to the discretion of local bishops and churches. In the Christian world, there is a need for regulation — but not for overregulation.

Of these 20 canons, eight dealt with the structure and regulation of the clergy (covering matters such as sexuality, formation, usury, transfers, rank, discipline, etc.). This was clearly the area requiring the most explicit guidance. Six more canons addressed the general life of Christians (such as the catechumenate and the reintegration of those who had renounced their faith during persecution), three related to the hierarchy among churches, and two dealt with managing Christian sects.

The Council of Nicaea reminds us that, in a growing Church, rules are necessary — especially for those in leadership. Clergy must be held accountable. There must be clarity on how to welcome back those who denied their faith. Sexuality must be addressed. The military profession, still practiced by some Christians, must be confronted. These rules were essential for fostering the unity of the Church.

Yet, these laws were often applied inconsistently. Even the condemnation of Arianism struggled to take hold. This paradox reminds us that Christian faith cannot be confined within a rigid framework of codes, prescriptions, prohibitions, and laws. There is a certain vanity in legalism.

This simultaneous necessity and fragility of law may frustrate some. But it’s precisely on this point that Jesus clashed with the more legalistic Jewish movements of his time. There is a creative tension between law and faith. Law remains necessary, but in Christianity, it can never replace the empowering joy of the Gospel.

This lesson from Nicaea could offer much to contemporary Christians in Asia. On our continent, the need for foundational Christian laws remains a real challenge. Due to the linguistic, theological, and cultural diversity of our communities, it is not easy to agree on the core principles that unite us. Sometimes, we’re tempted to give up trying.

For example, in some countries, churches recognize the validity of baptisms administered by other Christian denominations — as long as they are performed in the name of the Trinity.

However, this recognition is far from consistent. In some cases, pastors prefer to rebaptize individuals rather than engage with other denominations. In practice, affirming the reality of “one baptism in Christ” remains a significant challenge.

But baptism is only one aspect. What other core principles must Asian Christians articulate to truly embody unity in diversity? What foundational practices and principles can serve as bridges across theological, linguistic, and cultural divides?

Conversely, while regional and interdenominational frameworks are difficult to establish, community-level rules tend to proliferate. Some Christian communities have become excessively rigid, burdening their members with detailed rules, moral codes, and constant oversight — modern-day Pharisees in spirit. For these communities, regulating everyone and disciplining everything becomes the central mission. Sadly, this leads some to quietly walk away from what feels like totalitarian Christianity.

Instead, the Council of Nicaea promotes a dynamic relationship with the law — one that fosters ecclesial unity without entangling us in a rigid web of regulations. As Christians, we must neither abandon the need for shared norms nor absolutize them. Nicaea reminds us that while collective rules are necessary, they should not be idealized or overproduced — for when law becomes an end in itself, it quickly kills the spirit of faith.

This is the third part of a three-part series of articles marking the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea. You can read the first and second parts here.

*The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official editorial position of UCA News.