니케아 宗敎會議에 관한 歷史的 考察 -콘스탄티누스大帝와 유세비우스의 役割에 대한 批判을 中心으로-

Abstract

after the age of persecutions of christianity had passed in roman empire, clertmen were in internal trouble for problems of novatianists, montanists, donatists, meletians, and arians. partculary it was a serious problem that they were controvertinf of the trinity beween arius and athanasius. constantine the grat thought that this trouble would hinder the peaace and the unification of the roman emprie. therefore constantine the great opened the council of nicaea to solve the problem of the trouble in 325. nearly three hundred clergymen took part in the council, and most of members were bishops of the the oriental distirct. members of the council were divided into sects of the power of arius, athanasius, and eusebius. sects of arius denied a divine and human nature of christ, but sects of atahansius denied a divine and human natture of christ, but sects of athanasius admitted that two nature, and sects of eusebius were in the midway, and then eusebius pamphiilus himself had supported the position of arius. when constantine the great took part in the council, he emphasized concord and unity in an opening address. the creed of arius was suggested by eusebius of nicomedia, but it was rejected at the councils of nicaea, and the creed of caesarea was suggested by eusebius pamphilus. after the creed was amended partly, members of the council added 'homoousios' to the amended creed of caesarea. at last the insistence of ahanasius was passed throught the council unanimously except the sogn of theonas, arius, and eusebius of nicomedia. on the whole, this was a result of the role of constantine the great and eusebius pamphilus. but this brought about the banishment of many clergymen thought several times and the division beetween west and east church. therfore it was a failt that conantine the great controlled the council of nicaea, and accordingly clergtmen themselve must have secured their self-control. also the dual personality of eusebius pamphilus must be criticized, for acted without any belief and principle in the council of nicaea.