A Very, Very Brief History of the Church: Part 10

  "Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me"Hebrews:10:5

 "In the Begining Was the Word and the Word was With God and was God" John: 1:1

 "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" Matthew: 16:13b

 Many modern Christians may not be aware as to how many of the Church's doctrine or theology came into being.

Understand, that there is a difference between doctrine and theology. Doctrines are what we believe to be true but theology tells us why we believe they are true. 

When Theology is expounded upon many Christians find themselves lost in the discussion and many may not really understand the conversation, but theology has, from the very inspection of the Church held an important role in what the Church understands especially about the person of Jesus Christ.

The Church's understanding of the Person of Jesus as the eternal Son of God and the Second Person of the Trinity and the Divinity of the Holy Spirit was resolved at the Councils of Nicea 325 AD and Constantinople 381 AD.

Christological Discussions 

The Conversation(s) about who and what Jesus is and what his entrance into the stream of human history meant and has accomplished and what changed in humanities relationship with God, due to Jesus' entrance into history, needed to be conducted. 

This ongoing conversation(s) focused the early Church upon the Person and work of Jesus and helped to explain why and how a Palestinian Jews from a small rural village in the Provence of Galilee who had been born around 4 BC under Roman occupation could bring to pass Salvation for the human race through his life, death and resurrection and changed all things forever.

This was an important subject for many Church leaders in the formative years of the post-Apostolic Church. The early Church knew and understood that Jesus was God, yet many things were not fully clear as to just how this was true.

 "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known"1Cor:13:12

The Nature of God

 As the Primitive Apostolic Church spread out across the Roman Empire and was preaching a message about Jesus and the One True God, they would encounter Polytheistic Pagans who worshiped multiple deities. These pagans, when they heard Christian ministers preaching about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit would charge Christians of preaching about three gods, rather than One God. 

This assertion by these Polytheistic Pagans, that Christians worshiped three gods not one, forced the Church to come to an understanding and solid explanation regarding the nature of God and to form a statement that supported this understanding based upon what Scriptures was then available to them and their own personal experience with the Resurrected Jesus and the Presence of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

As time passed and the conversations regarding this One true God were carried out over the years and that this, One true God has revealed himself to humanity in the person of Jesus Many divergent views emerged which often brought controversy into  the Church. One of these controversies was Arianism which began due to the teachings of an Elder named Dr. Arius and his views regarding Jesus Christ and the nature of God.

Arianism

Dr. Arius was an Elder of the Church who was born around 250 AD, in Libya, Dr. Arius served as Priest in Alexandria Egypt at the Church of the Baucalis. Dr. Arius took the position that there was a "point of time" in eternity-past when there was only God the Father, and that the Son of God was a created being and subordinate to the Father and not co-equal nor co-eternal and that the Holy Spirit did not have "personhood" but rather is a power which emulates from God as light does from a candle.

Arius' views which sparked the heated debate and controversy within Church had, as did many others issues, the effect of causality; that is, the controversy forced the Church to consider just what did it believed and understand, and thought about, regarding a whole host of issues primarily, what did the Church understand regarding the person of Jesus Christ?   

Council of Nicea

Arius' divide became so contentious that it caused the Church's Bishops to come together at Nicea in the Provence of Bithynia in 325 AD to attempt to resolve the issue.

The First Council of Nicea was of major importance for the Church, it was the first very major council aside from what we read in St. Luke's account in Acts:15.  The Church as a whole came together with representation from all quarters of the Church for the purpose of arriving at a consensus of understanding among them all regarding the issues which confronted them all.  

The following discussions led to the formation of the Nicean Creed which helped to define the Church's understanding of the nature of Jesus Christ and his relationship with and in the God-Head. The Nicean Creed became a barometer of Orthodox Christian Doctrine. 

Though the understanding of the Triune nature of God was found as early in the epistles of Bishops Polycrap and Ignatius, both of which had been taught by the Apostle of John, the full treatment of the Trinity would not come until the Council of Constantinople in 360 AD .  

Views of the Eastern Church at that Time

As the Church affirmed the truth that Jesus was and is God incarnate and even now sits in the Heavens and from which he continues to direct the Church and from whence he will return to the Earth and extend the rule of God over all things, there were some in attendance at Council of Nicea who took an opposite view.

The question of all questions that framed any and all Theological questions, now and then, is "how is Jesus fully God yet fully Humanity?" How is Jesus one with the Father and the Holy Spirit yet distinct, that Jesus' nature was that of the "hypostatical union".

 In the Eastern Church of that day there were two predominate views, both agreed that Jesus was and is fully God, but the issue was how was the one who is eternally God a man who emerged at a given point in human history?

The two views which are historicity labeled Alexandrian and Antiochene. Each of these schools of thought were in agreement that Jesus was, and is fully God.

Alexandrians

The School of the Alexandrians stressed that the revelation of truth which Jesus brought had to emerge out of the divinity of Jesus and in order to maintain this stance was to diminish his humanity. They looked upon Jesus as a divine revelator, therefore the Alexandrians focused upon his divinity, for did not Jesus say that "before Abraham was "I AM"?.

Antiochene

 The Antiochene School viewed and stressed Jesus' humanity; their reasoning was, that for Jesus to be the Savior of the human race he had to be human. They understood that God dwelt within Jesus but they did not want his humanity to be in any way diminished, after all Jesus' most used title for himself was "the Son of Man"?

View of the Western Church

There was little controversy within the Western Church over this as was in the east regarding the nature of Jesus. The Western Church used Tertullian 's explanation of Jesus, that in the person of Jesus there was two undiminished natures united in one person making Jesus Fully God and Fully Human; meaning the "hypostatical union".

Controversy

The beginnings of the controversy regarding the nature of Jesus had its roots even before the discussion about the Trinune nature of God came to a conclusion. Apollinaris from Laodicea, was one of those who supported the Nicene position of the Trinity.

Apollinaris sought to explain how the Logos or the Word of God, the Second Person of the Trinity, was incarnate in the person of Jesus. Apollinaris' explanation was that Jesus was human in every respect, expect, that Jesus did not have a "human soul" but rather the divine Logos, the Word of God was the "soul" in the humanity of Jesus.

Though some followers of the Alexandrine school found this explanation to their liking, for this view would allow Jesus to speak fully as God and his humanity would merely be an accommodation to us. 

Many others, however, saw the weakness in Apollinaris' explanation, and they recognized that this would make Jesus something "other than fully human". A component of humanity would have been omitted from the person of Jesus; therefore, Jesus could not save humanity for he would be something "other than fully human".

Those adherents of the Antiochene School did not find it a satisfactory explanation. They insisted that Jesus' humanity should not be diminished in any way, which in their understanding Apollinaris' explanation did just that, if Jesus was not fully human, he could not save humanity.

Ultimately the explanation of Apollinaris was reject by the Church after discussions and conversations within local Church Councils and among the Bishops.

Continuing Controversy 

A Bishop named Nestorius had become the Patriarch of Constantinople in 428 AD. Nestorius embraced the Antiochene School of thought. The Council which had been held in Constantinople declared that the Patriarch of that city should have the same level of influence in the Eastern Church as did the Bishop of Rome held in Western Church. This view was in accordance with culture of that time, as Rome was the capital of the Empire, especially in the West and the Church at Rome status reflected those influences embodied in the Bishop of Rome, so was Constantinople the eastern Empires' capital therefore the Patriarch of that city should command the same level of influence.

The Bishops in Alexandria and Antioch did not like being relegated to subordinate positions and wanted to expand their influence in the eastern Church. This desire for  greater influence within the Church of the east caused great posturing and politicking as each of the Churches sought to insert their candidate in the office of Patriarch of Constantinople so as to perpetuate their own views and influence within the Church.  

Nestorius, being of the Antiochene School of thought, became the Patriarch of Constantinople. His enemies who were primarily of the Alexandrian School sought to undermine him and capitalize on any and all mistakes that Nestorius might make. They found opportunity to destabilize Nestorius when he said that Mary the mother of Jesus should not be referred to as the Theotokos which means the "bearer of God”. Nestorius said that Mary should rather be called Christotokos which means the "bearer of Christ".  

 The Real Issue

The true issue was really not about Mary or how she should be viewed, but was in truth about Jesus and his nature. Nestorius was bringing Jesus' humanity in to view by citing him as Christ, as the one who saves humanity. This was reflective of Nestorius' Antiochene view which focused upon the humanity of Jesus. The Antiochene view did not want Jesus' deity to overshadow his humanity, they wanted it understood that Jesus was a real human being along with the whole of humanity and that Jesus is one of us.

Nestorius attempted to expound upon his pronouncement regarding Christ in a statement that did more to cloud the issue than clarify it. Nestorius said that in Jesus were "two natures and two persons”, one being divine and the other being human. The human was born of Mary but the divine was not. This made many uncertain as to the soundness of Nestorius' teaching and leadership within the Church.

Council of Ephesus

The Alexandrian opposition lead by Bishop Cyril with support from the Western Church and with the help from the Emperors Valentinian III and Theodosius II wanted to address the issue. A Council was called for and the leadership of the Church gathered at Ephesus in 431 AD.

Nestorius' main supporter John of Antioch was delayed for two weeks. The Council decided to move forwarded with the discussion in spite of protest from some of the Bishops. Nestorius was not given the opportunity to even to defend himself nor was his position given full and unbiased treatment. The Council then declarer that Nestorius was a heretic and he was to be removed from his office.

After the events of the Council Nestorius' supporters arrived, they held a Council of their own and declared that Bishop Cyril was a heretic. Bishop Cyril and his supporters reissued their proclamation that Nestorius and his supporters were the heretics.

Unhappy, with the results and the accusations found among each of the councils Emperor Theodosius had both John and Cyril arrested and declared that each council and their decisions were invalid. At first, Nestorius would not be removed and would be given his full status.

The two parties then "negotiated" a statement called the "Formula of union” to address the nature of Jesus which each of the parties agreed to in 433 AD. Nestorius, however would be removed from his office, he then spent the remainder of his life in exile going to the ancient city of Petra in Jordan.

Benediction: May each and all look ever mindful to the Holy Word of God which speaks always to us regarding God' Son Jesus Christ, today tomorrow and forevermore. Amen.

Rev. Todd Crouch, Norman, Oklahoma

"If It Is Not About Jesus, It Is Not About Anything"

A Very, Very Brief History of the Church: Part 9

               "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without                   wavering;" Hebrews: 10:23

 Roman, as an Empire had gone though many changes. Many of the peoples under its rule were turning away from the ancient practices and traditions that many Romans believed had made Rome the power that it had become.

The Roman Empire was facing many challenges, confrontations with barbarians on the borders and even economic problems and internal political debate.

 In 249 AD Gaius Messius Quintus Trainus Decius, sometime called Trajan Decius or Decius, became the Emperor, it was his objective to restore the Empire to its former glory and to reinvigorate the traditions which he believed would accomplish his purpose.

 The challenges which Rome faced, Decius believed, were the direct result of the displeasure of the Roman gods. Decius wish to restore the traditions and thus gaining the favor of the gods and that they then would restore the former glory of the Empire.

 Turning Hearts to the gods

Decius polices called for the worship of the gods of Rome, he wanted to restore the ancient practices to the Empire so that the gods would bless Rome. Decius believed that by truing the people’s hearts back to the gods he would be assuring the continuation of the Empire. Those who would not conform to this reordering of the Empire were often charged with treason against Rome.

In 250 AD Decius issued his edict to enforce his polices of returning the Empire back to it's former glory and a inauguration of what he hoped would be a Pax Romana and what he hoped would restore the favor of the Roman gods.

 Predictably, Christians within the Empire resisted and insisted in the worship of Jesus. Decius did not want to create a new group of martyrs; he knew of the faith inspired bravery by which Christians fifty years earlier faced death which inspired many people to become Christians. The Emperor did not want to repeat the same "mistake" again, he did not want the blood of Christians to spring forth in an all new harvest of believers.

The Edict of Worship

 Decius' purpose was, rather to induce Christians to renounce their faithfulness to Jesus and embrace the worship of the traditional gods instead of sending Christians to their deaths. Decius wanted Christians to submit to his edict which called for the gods of Rome to exulted.

 The edict, which had been issued called for all peoples in the Empire to give a sacrifice to the gods of Rome and then to offer incense to a likeness of Emperor Decius himself.

 When anyone complied with the mandatory act of worship of the gods and the Emperor, an imperial certificate was given to certify that they had obeyed the edict.

 When Decius' edict was issued in 250 AD , many Christians found themselves unprepared for situation. Christian had been given a period of little or no persecution for a time and now they found themselves presented with an edict which called for compliance.

 The Lapsed

 Some Christians were able to obtain counterfeit certificates which passed for those issued by the Imperil government, and others managed to escape or elude the  

authorities. Some who were unprepared gave in to the pressure and offered the mandated scarifies.

Other Christians resisted for a time but when arrested and brought before the Roman authorities gave into the pressure and complied. Those who conformed to the edicts' demands and gave in were called the Lapsed by Christians who stayed faithful.

 However, there was a large number of Christians who steadfastly remained faithful and refused the edict, some even unto death. They would not deny their Lord Jesus Christ.

 There was, during this period, actually only a few Christians killed. Decius wanted to avoid making new martyrs. Rome wanted these Christians to forsake their faith in Jesus and turn to the gods of Rome. Those Christians who renounced their faith in Jesus were of more use to Decius then those who shed their blood or gave their lives for Jesus.

 Oregin, one of the leaders of the Church during this persecution was arrested and subjected to torture. This persecution was not as others in the past which occurred sporadically but this was coordinated and orchestrated by the government.  

 The Confessors

 Those who held firm to their faith in Jesus and confessed him even under great stress became known in the Church of that time, as the Confessors. These confessors held firm under great and cruel torture, yet they did not suffer martyrdom but rather lived through the persecution.

  The Confessors became an honored group who inspired the Church to hold fast to the faith those who did not were viewed Lapsed and apostates.

 Comes to an End

 This time of testing of the Church came to an end when Decius died. Then in 251 AD Gallus who was an associate of Decius came to the throne and began the persecution again until he was taken prisoner of the Persian Empire bringing about a period of relative peace in the Church for time.

With the end of the persecution, which in the scope of time was relatively short, yet severe, created a condition and situation within the Church which needed to be addressed.

The Lapsed, those who followed the edict of Decius and offered the prescribed sacrifice to the Roman gods and burned incenses to the Emperor's likeness , now wanted readmission back into the fellowship of the Church.

 This question demanded a resolution. There were many factors which had to be considered, not all who were Lapsed had weakened to the same degree. Some of the Lapsed had given into some demands of the edict while refusing other portions of it. Others weakened momentarily and regained their strength and suffered.

 Also, questions arose concerning those Christians who had obtained forged certificates of compliance and who avoided all pressure from the state; should they be allowed to continue in fellowship?

 These challenging questions and others caused the debate which seemed beyond the means of the Church leadership to resolve adequately. Some felt that the Lapsed should be refused readmission to the Church fellowship again. Others believed that readmission should be conditional. Some felt that forgiveness should be extended to the Lapsed and they be given admission to the Church.

Unable to find a course of action that answered the questions it was then suggested that the Confessors be brought into the discussion. It was believed and hoped that the strength manifested by the Confessors and the honored place which they held within the fellowship of the Church would qualify them to speak to this situation.

 Many of the Confessors from Northern Africa began to restore many of the Lapsed into fellowship. This readmission of some of the Lapsed caused anger and resentment on the part of some Bishops citing that only the Church leadership held position and the authority to readmit those who had not held faithful.

 Others within the Church believed that the Confessors and the Bishops needed to be more ridged toward the Lapsed.

 Cyprian and Novation

 The issue caused two Bishops to have central roles in the controversy, Cyprian and Novation.

Bishop Cyprian had been converted to Christianity at age forty. Cyprian was a trained orator and debater and had been ordained a Bishop in the city of Carthage shortly before the persecution began.

When the persecution arose Cyprian attempted to find a safe place from which to lead the Church under his care. Some believed that his actions were designed to save himself rather than to be able to lead the congregation in spite of the fact that he had offered his own life up for martyrdom.

 Some in the Church were now asserting that the Confessors at Carthage had more authority to speak on behalf of the matter regarding the Lapsed, than Cyprian did.

 Many of the Confessors had a very gracious policy toward the Lapsed, they believed that the Lapsed should be readmitted to fellowship with nothing more than a public declaration of repentance.

 Some of the Elders in Carthage who wanted more control over the Bishops in the congregations sided with the Confessors which created division within the Church in Carthage.

 Council of Carthage

 The divide became so tense that Bishop Cyprian called a council to resolve the question and restore unity. The Bishops gathered together and discussed the Lapsed questions and the resulting schism.

The result of the council was, that those who were able to obtain certificates without having offered sacrifices to the Roman gods would be readmitted to the fellowship of the Church. Those who did offer sacrifices to the gods would only be readmitted upon their "death beds" or if another persecution came and they could then demonstrate their faithfulness by remaining faithful through any forthcoming persecution. Those however, who did not repent of sacrificing to the Roman gods would never be readmitted to the fellowship of the Church.

 The council's resolution affirmed that it was the Bishops who held the authority with in the Church to make decisions not the Confessors regardless of their place of esteem which they held among the Church. The decision put an end to the controversy but the divide lingered for some time to come. 

 Novation

 Bishop Novation held a more unbending view of the Lapsed which intensified the controversy. Novation had disagreed with Bishop Cornelius at Rome and with the leadership of the Church. Novation's view was that the Lapsed were being allowed back into the Church far too easy. 

The disagreement between Bishop Novation and Bishop Cornelius created a rift similar to one from an earlier time in the Church when Hippolytus had a disagreement with Bishop Calixtus.

Hippolytus felt that those persons caught in fornication were being brought back into fellowship far too easily and that they should have been more earnestly proven to be faithful. This disagreement caused a divide in the Church, now once again a difference of opinion brought a clash and division within the Church.

 The issue revolving around the Lapsed was one of the main causes of concern for the Western Church which had the effect of causality and produced a system of Church governance that centuries latter would be challenged and sparked the reformation.

 To Be Continued......

Benediction: May we each and all ever thank our Lord for those, in all and any ages who hold fast in their faith in our Lord Jesus, today, tomorrow and forevermore. Amen.

Rev. Todd Crouch, Norman, Oklahoma

"If It Is Not About Jesus, It Is Not About Anything"

A Very, Very Brief History of the Church: Part 8(b)

"But we beseech you, brethren, to know them that labor among you,

 and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you":1Thess:5:12

There arose in southern Asia Minor influential Christian thinkers generally called the Cappadocians. They were, Basil (called the Elder) of Caesare born around, Macrina (called the Younger), Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzus. They were all born around the early 300's AD.

These, like other early Christian thinkers and writers, do not belong to any one "ecclesiastical organization" but to all Christians in whatever age they lived. These early leaders of the Christian Church helped to frame what we understand to be accepted Orthodox Christian doctrine and theology throughout the greater body of Christ.

Basil of Caesarea

Basil was from a Christian family; his grandparents had lived in exile for their faith in Jesus. Basil had traveled to Egypt and other lands to study the life of a monastic monk. Basil came to live in a place called Annesi. In Annesi he and his friend Gregory of Nazianzus created a community for men to teach service to others, which he believed was the true basis for the monastic life.

Basil is generally considered the father of the monastic movement in the east. After six years Basil was ordained an elder, which he accepted with some hesitation. Basil found himself having a conflict with the Bishop of the Church in Caesarea. This conflict resulted in Basil returning to the monastery. Here he remained living in quiet until the Arian controversy arose again, and the Bishop of Caesarea called upon Basil to help in the conflict against Arianism.

When Basil arrived at the town of Caesarea, he found that bad weather had been hard on the crops, little food was being sold in the public markets. Some of the wealthy people of the town had bought up what had been available making shortage even worse and sending prices beyond that of the poorer people's ability to pay.

Basil preached against the selfish practices of some of the people in the city, what little property that he had Basil sold to help provided for those who had little or nothing.

When the Bishop of Caesarea died Basil was chosen to replace him. Basil's election to the office of Bishop was in part due to his ability to address Arianism. Those who embraced Arianism saw Basil's health as a week point which they hoped to exploit.

The Emperor at that time was Valens who favored the Arian view. Valens announced that he would visit Caesarea, those who held to the orthodox view knew that Valens did this to lend his support to the Arian cause and position.

Before the Emperor arrived in Caesarea, he sent his agents ahead of him to induce Basil to agree with Arianism. Emperor Valens offered promises of promotions and his favor in exchange for Basil's support for the Arian view and to threats if Basil would not agree with his views. Basil, however, would not relent and even threats of torture did not move him.

When the Emperor arrived in the city he made an generous offering upon the alter in the Church but none accepted it until Basil himself came forwarded making it clear to all present that he was in authority and not the Emperor.

From that time forward Basil wrote expounding on the Trinitarian orthodox view within the Church. Basil would die just before the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD.

Gregory of Nyssa

Gregory was the younger brother of Basil. Gregory was reserved and liked quite contemplation, yet unlike his brother Basil, Gregory did not at, first enter the monastic life, rather he was married, until his wife died. It was only after her death that Gregory entered the monastic life.

 Gregory sought peace and emotional security within the confines of the monastic life. Here, Gregory had hoped to spend his days in prayer and meditation but his brother Basil called upon Gregory to assume the office of Bishop of the small village of Nyssa. 

Accepting the role of Bishop proved difficult for Gregory. Being a Bishop placed him in the midst of the Arian controversy. So great was the contention with the Arians that Gregory withdrew and went into hiding for a time.

After the death of his brother Basil in January of 379 AD and the death of the Emperor Valens in August of 378 AD, Gregory then emerged as one of the prime supporters of the Trinitarian orthodox view within the Church which had come down over the years from the Apostolic era.

Gregory attended the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD where he carefully articulated the Trinitarian stance on the nature of God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit before those assembled.

Gregory would go on to become a theological adviser to the Emperor Theodosius, this role demanded much travel from Gregory who longed to be back living a quiet life in the monastic community.

Finally, after many travels and after the Church's historic understanding of the nature of God as the Holy Trinity was firmly in place Gregory then was able to to return to a life of quiet. The time and place of his death are unrecorded.

Gregory of Nazianzus

Gregory had been a heretic until his wife Nona was able to bring him into the orthodox view of the Church. Gregory had met Basil while they were students.

As a youth Gregory was studious, he was for a time in Caesarea then traveled to Athens Greece here he would stay there fourteen years. There he met Basil and even the Prince Julian.

At age thirty Gregory returned to home and entered the monastic community along with his friend Basil. Gregory would be ordained as an elder against his wishes. He would for a time go to Basil's community at the monastery to avoid the responsibilities of an elder but eventually accepted the office and began his pastoral duties.

The Arian controversy continued in which Gregory became involved. His friend Basil placed Gregory as Bishop over a small community. Gregory felt that Basil imposed on him and their friendship became strained.

Gregory entered into a very difficult time both personally and spiritually. He suffered the death of several family members including his wife, Nona. In his grief, Gregory left the congregation over which he had been placed and went in to seclusion. 

While Gregory sought for answers in his retirement, news was sent to him that Basil had died as well. The news was devastating to Gregory compounding the grief from which he sought escape.

Eventually Gregory found the strength to return to active service within the Church. He found himself facing the Arian controversy and speaking in support of the Trinity which was the historic understanding of the Church. In 379 AD he spoke in Constantinople. 

At this point even the Imperial government had found itself in support of the Arian view and in the city of Constantinople there was not one congregation which held to the historic understanding of the Church. While walking in to the streets Gregory was assaulted by a mob and was struck by stones which were thrown by the Arian adherence.

The contention was great but Gregory held to the understanding of the established Church. He would compose hymns which he used to strengthen his small congregation, some of those hymns are still sung by eastern Orthodox Christians.

It was not until Emperor Theodosius came to Constantinople in 380 AD and brought a settlement. All those who held to Arianism were removed from public office which they had used to advance their cause in which they believed.

The Emperor asked Gregory to attended a service at the Cathedral of St. Sophia. As they approached the Cathedral sun light came through the clouds and fell upon Gregory. Many believed that it was sign from God and called for Gregory to be elevated to the office of Bishop.

At first, Gregory sought to avoid the ordination, but in the end, he accepted it. Gregory, however was not just named Bishop of Constantinople but given the office of Patriarch.

Gregory presided over a council where some opponents pointed out that Gregory could not be the Patriarch of the city due to, he being a Bishop in another city. Gregory quickly resigned the office and another man named Nectarius would serve in his place.

The Council of reaffirmed the Church understanding of the deity of Jesus and that of the Holy Spirit and defined the historic view of the Trinity.

Gregory returned to his home and spent the rest of his life serving as a pastor and composing hymns until he died at age sixty years of age.

Macrina

Macrina was the sister of of Basil and Gregory their family had been Christians for two generations and had suffered persecution during the Decian persecutions around 250 AD.

At twelve years of age Macrina parents arranged for her to marry to a relative of the family. At the start, Macrina wished not to be engaged but then agreed to the arrangement. After all the plans had been finalized Macrina's fiancée died unexpectedly. Macrina decided never to marry and chose for herself a life of celibacy and contemplation.

Macrina developed an strong personality even confronting her brother Basil whom she confronted about his arrogance. She also forcefully suggested that Basil focus more on Christian writers and thinkers rather than pagan ones.

Macrina became a stabilizing presence in their family after the death of some close relatives and their father as well. She always focused her family's thought on promises of God that they might rise above the grief and sadness which they had experienced in life.

Macrina moved to her family’s land holdings in the village of Annesi and established a community that was in her view designed to foster greater communion with God and other believers. 

Macrina and several other women gathered at Annesi and lived together in a simple life of fellowship and serving God until she died trusting in the eternal life through Jesus Christ.

To Be Continued....

Benediction: May we each and all praise our Lord's faithfulness toward each and all of his people, today, tomorrow and forevermore. Amen.

Rev. Todd Crouch, Norman, Oklahoma