While the results of the Nicaea Council were unsettling to many attendees, the next several years following the signing of its credal statement in 325 had a veneer of peaceful acceptance. During that time, Constantine (the reigning emperor), Alexander (the bishop of Alexandria), and Athanasius (his soon to be successor), labored in their own ways in pursuit of churchwide acceptance of the creed. This paper will examine two works written by Athanasius in this season, Contra Gentes and De incarnatione, assessing their contributions towards adoption of the language and theology of the Nicene Creed.
In this brief span of ecclesial calm, Athanasius’s objectives were straightforward and strategic. Presuming the Nicene definition of the Son’s divinity to be a triumph and beginning his transition as both bishop of Alexandria and primary herald of the creed’s theology, Athanasius turned his attention to developing an apologetic of the Christian faith to counter forms of idolatry. The elevation of Christianity over pagan idolatry in the eyes of Constantine and his endorsement of the creed offered Athanasius a platform to tactically exposit the divine nature of Christ as articulated in the Nicene confession. Setting this instruction on the divinity of the Word primarily in the context of apologetic discourse against pagan theology—with no direct mention of Arius, the Nicene Council, or its creed—provided a subtle and noncontroversial venue.
To accomplish this goal, Athanasius crafted two connected treatises, Contra Gentes and De incarnatione, the former focused on response to idolatry and the latter on theology of the incarnation. Both reflected the recently confirmed Nicene teaching and confession and contributed to its developing theological framework. In addition to supplying the church with apologetic depth to engage the pagan culture, the thesis, tone, and exposition of the treatises sought to reform and unite a theologically fragmented clergy around a common confession.
While the treatises may have impacted clergy in the Alexandrian see, they did not observably convert skeptics across the broader church. Moreover, despite the influence of Constantine, imperial backing did not produce consensual adoption of the Nicene Creed. By 335, opposing factions emerged in a flurry of councils and synods, armed with revised language, alternative theological constructs, replacement creeds, and for some, the leverage of support from the presiding emperor. Ultimately, the creed of Nicaea would be recognized as orthodox through decades of engagement with each competing proposal.
Though the peaceful period ended, the treatises left a productive legacy. Careful study of both—including attention to the treatises as a continuous and connected argument for Nicene theology—uncovers significant elements Athanasius employed in his theological method, framework, and argument. They are grounded in biblical exposition, evidence fidelity to the regula fidei and work of earlier fathers, express a maturing method of anticipation of and engagement with arguments by contrarians, and focus on specific language that asserted Nicene theology. Each of these elements appear in Athanasius’s ongoing defense of the Nicene confession and refutation with its opponents throughout the next and highly contentious stage of adoption.