The paper examines the Council of Nicaea as a decisive moment in the formation of Christian thought, interpreting it through both Aristotelian–Porphyrian and Hegelian dialectics. It argues that Nicene theology inaugurated a distinct Christian scholasticism rooted in the categories of commonality and particularity, which shaped Trinitarian and Christological formulations. It further shows how the reception of Nicaea followed a dialectical pattern: an initial thesis of enthusiastic acceptance, an antithesis involving attempts – political and ecclesiastical – to erase its memory, and finally a synthesis achieved by the neoNicene theologians, especially the Cappadocians, who clarified the relation between ousia and hypostasis. The essay highlights the paradox that Nicaea became more globally influential in the secular age than in Late Antiquity, functioning as a “mustard seed” that grew into a universal Christian reference point. It also critiques the reduction of Nicene faith to mere identity, noting how both supporters and opponents historically turned doctrine into ethnic or confessional markers. The study also addresses the tension between conciliarity and ecclesiastical structures: bishops, though essential to councils, often undermined conciliarity through selfinterest. Ultimately, the paper emphasises Nicaea’s core theological legacy – the nonhierarchical equality of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – as the foundation of Christian unity, metaphysics, and ecclesial life.
Cyril Hovorun (Wed,) studied this question.