Much to my surprise, some time ago the Nicene Creed was
trending online among the Southern Baptists, America’s largest Baptist organization. They were, apparently, debating whether or not that Creed should be added to their official statement of faith. This was a bit controversial since the Southern Baptists are well-known for their position that they have “no Creed but the Bible”. Though it is hard for me to work up any enthusiasm or interest in what our Southern Baptist friends do with their official statement of faith, the news does provoke the question, “What’s so important about the Nicene Creed?” Or, in blunter terms, why should anyone today care about what a bunch of guys decided about 1700 years ago? Permit me to attempt an answer.
The Church has always cared a lot about unity—or, in more modern terms, inclusivity. Inclusivity is one of those magic modern words, words with which secular people seek to weave a spell. It is always good to be inclusive, to welcome everyone in, regardless of who they are, what they believe, or how they live. There are limits, of course, to modern secular inclusivity—they don’t welcome absolutely everyone, but secularism is so dominant that secularists can give the erroneous impression of welcoming absolutely everyone. People like White Supremacists are not welcome (to the secularists’ credit), but White Supremacists are sufficiently marginal enough so as to not disturb the impression of total inclusiveness. It is good to be inclusive, and bad not to be inclusive.
To an extent, the Church agrees, and therefore values its unity. That is why the Church speaks of “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church”—there are not two or more churches, but only one. There is not a church for Jews and another church for Gentiles. There is not (or should not) be a church for Greeks and another church for Russians. There is not a church for white people and another church for blacks. Nope; there is one single church, arranged on a territorial basis, and including within it Jews, Gentiles, Greeks, Russians, whites, and blacks. The Church is one and inclusive.
But although the Church values unity, it values truth even more. That is because the Lord did not inform us that inclusivity would set us free, but that the truth would set us free (John 8:32). Truth is therefore more important than unity. Or, put better, our unity is based upon our common acceptance of the truth.
Considerations of truth and error matter supremely to the Church because the Church is not just a collection of people (like the electorate, that long-suffering group). The Church is a body. That is, it is a group of people animated by the same spirit and having a life of its own. And bodies are, by definition, subject to disease, decay, and death. Human bodies can be killed by diseases, such as cancer. The Body of Christ can be killed by error, even as it is kept alive and free by truth. In other words, what cancer is to the human body, fundamental error is to the Church. Heresy and error are not simply wrong opinions; they are lethal disease. If not checked, healed, or excised, they will kill spiritual life.
That is why the Church became so excited when the heretical opinions of 
The Arian Heresy: How It Arose, and Who Then Used It For Political PurposesSince the time of the First Ecumenical Council, the Church has been struggling with this disease, but it keeps coming up again and again.
Admittedly the question was complicated. The Church had always taught that God was one—i.e. it had always confessed monotheism, a belief that there was only one God. And it also always taught that Jesus was the Son of God. Indeed, as far back as 
Hieromartyr Ignatius the God-Bearer the Bishop of AntiochTradition suggests that when St Ignatius was a little boy, the Savior hugged him and said: “Unless you turn and become as little children, you shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven”. The saint was called “God-Bearer” (Theophoros), because he bore God in his heart and prayed unceasingly to Him.
The challenge was how to reconcile the belief in the full divinity of Jesus while maintaining monotheism. Arius proposed a solution by claiming that Jesus was not fully God, arguing that Jesus was the first-created being. This led to a division in the Church, prompting Emperor Constantine to convene a council in Nicea in 325. The majority of bishops declared Arius a heretic and affirmed Jesus’ full divinity in a revised creed.
The debate continued for a generation until it became clear that the only options were to follow Nicea or Arius. The Nicene Creed became the standard for those who believed in Jesus’ full divinity, emphasizing the importance of worshiping Jesus as one would God. The question remains relevant today because salvation hinges on acknowledging Jesus as fully divine, rather than just a spiritual figure.
To worship Jesus as fully divine is crucial, as giving complete allegiance to anyone less than God would be considered idolatry. Just as one wouldn’t devote their entire life to a celebrity like Taylor Swift, a Christian’s devotion to Jesus must be unwavering, as St. Paul expressed in saying, “For me to live is Christ.” This level of commitment is reserved only for God, as idolizing anything or anyone else is condemned.
Source link