Jesus’ name in Greek (Ie ̄sous). Hence it was argued that the
number of bishops at Nicaea was a fulfilment of biblical prophecy.
This reveals how the champions of the Nicene creed accorded the
council a special status that was used to affirm the orthodoxy of
its statement of faith. In short, the council of Nicaea was not
simply a historical event in the way that we would define one;
rather, it was a symbol of orthodoxy and unity that had been
pre-ordained by God.
Yet this unity reflected as much an aspiration as a reality.
The debates at Nicaea revealed not only what united Christians
in 325, but also what divided them. For example, the council
issued a letter proclaiming that Easter should be celebrated at
the same date everywhere – a sure sign that it had not been.
In addition, the assembled bishops made decisions known as
‘canons’ (i.e. rules) that sought to clarify right practice on a wide
range of issues of ecclesiastical administration and Christian
conduct. Again, their very existence implies a diversity that the
council endeavoured to harmonize. It was noted at the outset of
this chapter that the aspiration towards unity in terms of Christian
faith and organization is one that is as old as Christianity itself.
As the debates at Nicaea demonstrated, however, this aspira-
tion was held in tension by the fact that in different parts of the
empire Christians organized their churches in different ways, and
professed beliefs about doctrine that were subtly (or sometimes
drastically) different. One of the challenges of studying early
Christianity is to allow room not only for the unity upon which
church tradition has laid such great emphasis, but also for the
diversity against which the advocates of that unity struggled so
vigorously.The ideal of unity in early Christianity
The Roman world into which Christianity expanded was charac-
terized by considerable diversity (Garnsey and Saller 1987). One
reflection of this can be seen in the empire’s languages. TheORTHODOXY AND ORGANIZATION IN EARLY CHRISTIANITY
146