THE PAN-ORTHODOX CELEBRATION OF THE 1600TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE COUNCIL OF NICAEA IN 1925

Natallia Vasilevich, The Ecumenical Review 05 October 2025.

Abstract

This article explores the attempts to organize a Pan-Orthodox Council in the years following the First World War that could gather in 1925 on the occasion of the 1600th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. While some of these efforts were remarkably ambitious, and although they were not always feasible or fully realized, they nevertheless left a lasting impact, not least on the broader implications for Orthodox engagement in the ecumenical movement. In particular, the historical occasion gave rise to a number of Pan-Orthodox and ecumenical initiatives, especially the participation of Orthodox leaders in the events to commemorate Nicaea hosted by Anglican churches in Britain in 1925, and Orthodox participation in the Universal Christian Conference on Life and Work in Stockholm in the same year.

The Christian world is commemorating in 2025 the 1700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325 AD) with a rich array of conferences, symposia, festivals, and pilgrimages taking place around the world. Churches, academic institutions, and ecumenical organizations are actively participating in marking this milestone, including the World Council of Churches, which is organizing its Sixth World Conference on Faith and Order in October 2025 in Egypt to coincide with the anniversary.

Other events that have taken or will take place in different national and international contexts include the conference in June 2025 at the Angelicum in Rome, “Nicaea and the Church of the Third Millennium: Towards Catholic–Orthodox Unity,” organized under the auspices of the International Orthodox Theological Association. The newly elected Pope Leo XIV has reaffirmed the intention of Pope Francis to take part with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in a pilgrimage to Nicaea, the present-day Iznik in Türkiye. One of the notable undertakings in 2025 is the Germany-wide pilgrimage organized by the Orthodox Bishops’ Conference in Germany (OBKD), featuring a specially commissioned icon of the Council of Nicaea. Travelling through Orthodox parishes and ecumenical venues across the country from February to November 2025, the icon is accompanied by a series of liturgical, educational, and interconfessional events, serving as a visible sign of Orthodox presence and dialogue in the German ecumenical landscape.

In July, I had the honour of participating in a conference dedicated to the Nicaea commemoration in Craiova in Romania, hosted by the Metropolis of Oltenia of the Romanian Orthodox Church.1 The research I initially undertook for that event became the basis for this article, which looks back to the commemorations that took place a century ago, in 1925, when the Orthodox world marked the 1600th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea. This article explores how that historical occasion gave rise to a number of Pan-Orthodox and ecumenical initiatives, as well as the broader implications for Orthodox engagement in the ecumenical movement. While some of these efforts were remarkably ambitious, and although they were not always feasible or fully realized, they nevertheless left a lasting impact.

A Pan-Orthodox Council and a Modern Orthodox Confession of Faith

The Pan-Orthodox Celebration of the 1600th Anniversary of the Council of Nicaea in 1925. Representing the Romanian Orthodox Church, Archimandrite Iuliu Scriban put forward, on behalf of Metropolitan Nicolae (Bălan) of Transylvania, a proposal to mark the anniversary in 1925 by composing a new confession of faith, that is, a restatement of the ancient confession, “but in such a form that it would also reflect our present spiritual condition.” The proposal also included an appeal to all Christian bishops – particularly Roman Catholic ones – to “enter into Christian unity.”2

Scriban further elaborated the idea by suggesting a Pan-Orthodox competition among Orthodox theologians to draft this new confession, with submissions evaluated and selected by a jury.3 He envisioned a large-scale commemorative event involving all Orthodox countries, bishops, theological faculties, and other ecclesiastical institutions and associations. Invitations, he argued, should also be extended to the Anglican Church, the Old Catholic Church, the Roman Catholic Church, the Armenian, Nestorian, and Ethiopian churches, as well as to other Christian communities.4 The Romanian archimandrite considered Constantinople the most appropriate location for such an event, given its historical significance as the seat of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. However, “if this is not possible for political or other reasons, another suitable place should be selected.”5 Scriban also underlined the need to persuade the governments of Orthodox countries to allocate funding in their national budgets for the participation of official delegations in the anniversary celebrations.6

The Pan-Orthodox Congress took up the Romanian proposal and resolved to convene a Pan-Orthodox Council in 1925, linking it explicitly to the commemoration of the 1600th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. According to the Congress decision, the anniversary should be “celebrated worthily by the entire Orthodox Church, not only locally, but also through the convocation of a Pan-Orthodox Council, with an agenda of resolving all questions that concern the Orthodox Church at present” (§6.2).7

The idea of convening a Pan-Orthodox Council had been circulating since at least 1919, when then Archbishop Meletios III (Metaxakis) of Athens tasked a group of theologians with collecting issues in need of conciliar deliberation. But the very idea to address the range of issues faced by the Orthodox in the 20th century through a pan-Orthodox process goes back to the 1902 Encyclical of the Ecumenical Patriarch Joachim III (Devetzis).8 In the absence of such a council, the 1923 congress itself functioned as a provisional substitute. It issued several decisions intended to have temporary canonical validity until a future pan-Orthodox gathering could formally confirm or revise them. Among these were the permission for unmarried deacons and priests to enter into marriage, Decision No. 3.3)9 and for widowed priests to contract a second marriage (Decision No. 4.3).10

Following the congress, Meletios – since 1920 Ecumenical Patriarch – took steps to facilitate the preparatory work for the proposed council. However, his forced abdication in September 1923 due to pressure from the Turkish authorities prevented him from continuing in this role. Despite this setback, the Ecumenical Patriarchate maintained its ambitious plan to host the council in 1925. The Holy Synod transmitted official communications to various Orthodox churches, informing them of the congress’s decisions and formally proposing the convocation of an Ecumenical Council in that year.11 Although Constantinople had initially been considered the appropriate venue, the proposed location was later changed. In June 1924, Ecumenical Patriarch Gregorios VII invited all Orthodox churches to participate in a Pan-Orthodox or Ecumenical Council to be held in Jerusalem on the Feast of Pentecost in 1925.12 This involved the formulation of an agenda for the upcoming council, encompassing a wide range of general topics including the revision of canon law to take account of modern church circumstances, seeking unity with other Christian churches, and various specific issues, including dogmatic issues (such as general issues of dogma, theologumena, confessions of faith, Ecumenical Councils, and other authoritative Orthodox Councils of later ages), issues related to the administrative structures of the church, liturgical issues, issues concerning clergy, calendar and ethical-social issues.13

The plan to convene a Pan-Orthodox – or even Ecumenical – Council in 1925 was taken seriously not only by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which actively promoted it, but also by ecumenical leaders abroad. Swedish Archbishop Nathan Söderblom, who was preparing the Universal Christian Conference on Life and Work in Stockholm for August 1925, became seriously concerned that the Orthodox Nicaea commemoration might overlap with his own initiative. So credible did the prospect of the Council appear to him that he grew anxious about a potential scheduling conflict and its implications. Söderblom, who also dedicated the Stockholm conference to the Nicaea jubilee and regarded it as a kind of “Nicaea for ethics, for practical Christianity,”14 feared that simultaneous events would hinder Orthodox participation. In a letter to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, he respectfully pleaded that the planned Orthodox Council be scheduled in such a way that it would not coincide with the Universal Conference: “I take the liberty of asking the Holy Patriarchate whether it might be possible to convocate the panegyric festival in 1925 on such a date that it will not coincide with the Universal Conference in Stockholm 1925.”15

However, there were also voices which recognized the challenges of organizing such a council within the proposed timeframe and recommended a postponement. One of those of this opinion was Patriarch Miron (Cristea) of Romania; while the Romanian Orthodox Church accepted the invitation and agreed that Jerusalem would be a fitting location for the event, it ultimately concluded that 1925 was not a realistic target for adequate preparation.16

Despite the initial momentum and the seriousness with which the proposal was received, both within the Orthodox world and by ecumenical partners abroad, the goal of convening the Council in 1925 ultimately proved unattainable. The scale of the undertaking required careful and coordinated preparation, which could not be achieved within the limited timeframe. While some churches expressed support in principle, they also acknowledged the practical difficulties involved. Others, particularly among the ancient patriarchates, called for the council to be convened in 1924, without reference to the Nicaean anniversary, but able to revisit and potentially revise controversial decisions made at the 1923 Pan-Orthodox Congress in Constantinople. The patriarchates (Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem) proposed “to summon another Universal or Great Council during the upcoming Pentecost or in September of this year [1924] in Jerusalem.”17

While the idea of Jerusalem as a symbolic and appropriate location for such an event was agreeable to the Ecumenical Patriarch Grigorios VII, he expressed reservations regarding the suggested dates in 1924.18 Taking into account both the obstacles for the Local Churches’ participation, posed by the complicated situation, and the desire to commemorate the 1600th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, as envisaged by the 1923 congress,19 it was decided to proceed with the original schedule for the council to be held in 1925.20 Despite the apparent unfeasibility of organizing a Pan-Orthodox Council in Jerusalem in 1925, the Ecumenical Patriarchate remained committed to the idea. Even after the death of Patriarch Grigorios VII in November 1924, the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate continued to pursue the plan and issued an decree on convening the Ecumenical Council.21

In the end, however, the proposed Pan-Orthodox or Ecumenical Council did not take place “due to insurmountable difficulties that occurred over time,”22 as it was formulated in an encyclical by newly elected Patriarch Vasilios III, and the vision of a unified Orthodox commemoration of Nicaea in conciliar form remained unrealized. For Serbian canonist Radovan Kazimirović, the inability to convene an Ecumenical Council was the best example of the crisis in Orthodoxy; he remarked ironically that “by celebrating the 1600th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea, the Orthodox Church inadvertently celebrated its stagnation.”23

In the absence of a Pan-Orthodox Council of their own, representatives of the Orthodox churches – including high-ranking hierarchs – took part in ecumenical events linked to the Nicaea commemoration, which were organized with the expectation of pan-Orthodox participation. Two such gatherings took place in 1925: one in June–July in Britain, organized by the Church of England, and the other – the Universal Christian Conference on Life and Work – in August in Stockholm, initiated by Swedish Archbishop Nathan Söderblom.

The Anglican Celebration of Nicaea in Britain in 1925

The first major ecumenical event related to the Nicaea anniversary took place in Britain in late June and early July 1925 and was organized by the Church of England.24 The highlight of the celebration was the solemn service held at Westminster Abbey on 29 June 1925, marking the central moment of the Nicaea commemoration.

This unprecedented gathering brought together a broad delegation of Orthodox hierarchs, including for the first time in history Orthodox patriarchs visiting England. Among them were Photios II, Patriarch of Alexandria, and Damianos I, Patriarch of Jerusalem. Other Orthodox participants included Metropolitan Germanos (Strenopoulos) of Thyateira (Ecumenical Patriarchate); Metropolitan Nikolaos (Evangelides) of Nubia (Patriarchate of Alexandria); Metropolitan Timotheos (Themelis) of Jordan (Patriarchate of Jerusalem); Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of Kyiv, president of the Acting Council of Russian Bishops Abroad and a leading conservative émigré theologian; Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky) of Western Europe; Bishop Veniamin (Fedchenkov) of Sevastopol; Evkustodion I. Makharoblidze; hieromonk Afanasy (Melnik); the secretary of the Western European Diocese, Tikhon (Ametistov); deacon Evgeny Vdovenko (from the Russian Church); Professor H. Alivizatos (Church of Greece); Archpriest Vasile Radu (Romanian Church); and Professor Nikolay Glubokovsky of Sofia University (Bulgarian Church).25 Local clergy, including Russian and Greek priests in Britain such as Fr Vladimir Theokritoff of London, also took part. The delegations remained in Britain for about a month, participating in liturgical services, public functions, and meetings with church and political leaders.

The highlight of the celebration on 29 June 1925 in Westminster Abbey featured the recitation of the Orthodox version of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed in Greek by Patriarch Photios, following the Anglican version of the creed. While the Anglican version included the filioque, the Orthodox confession was proclaimed without it. The event, attended by over 600 people, was marked by striking ceremonial symbolism. As Evkustodion Makharoblidze of the Russian Church in exile later recalled, after the Anglican Creed had been recited, the Orthodox Creed was read aloud in Greek. In a loud and clear voice, amid a reverent silence, the successor of St. Athanasius the Great – the majestic Patriarch Photios – pronounced each word with precision as he recited the Niceno-Constantinopolitan confession of faith. This moment was the most solemn of all.26

A similar celebration took place on 13–15 July 1925 at St David’s Cathedral in Wales and likewise featured a solemn liturgical affirmation of the Nicene Creed. The Creed was first spoken in Welsh, then sung in English – including the filioque – followed by a recitation in Greek by Patriarch Photios without filioque, and finally chanted in Church Slavonic by the Russian delegation.

It was during the course of the Nicaea celebrations in Britain that Archbishop Nathan Söderblom, who was also present, was deeply moved by the presence and liturgical witness of the Orthodox hierarchs, above all by Patriarch Photios. The solemn and dignified manner in which Photios recited the Nicene Creed in Greek made a lasting impression on Söderblom, becoming for him a powerful symbol of Orthodox continuity and the living tradition of the undivided church. As Metropolitan Macarie Drăgoi notes, this profound encounter gave rise to a personal friendship and mutual respect, which led to the participation of Patriarch Photios in the Universal Christian Conference in Stockholm.27 As soon as Söderblom returned to Uppsala after the celebrations in Britain in July, he immediately wrote a letter to Patriarch Photios inviting him, as “the most important leader of the venerable Orthodox Church today” and “the very successor of Athanasius,” to speak at the opening ceremony and to recite the Nicene Creed at the closing ceremony.28

The Universal Conference on Life and Work in Stockholm in August 1925

Patriarch Photios happily undertook this mission to bring the spirit of ancient Nicaea to the event dedicated to the Universal Conference on Life and Work in Stockholm, bridging the centuries of the history of the church from the First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea to the biggest conciliar event of the beginning of the 20th century, which took place in Stockholm. Here, Patriarch Photios again solemnly proclaimed the Nicene Creed: first at the opening ceremony in Stockholm, when he spoke on behalf of Orthodox delegates, referring to the First Ecumenical Council, and then recited the Nicene Creed in Greek at the high altar29; then in the closing service at Uppsala Cathedral on 30 August 1925, where he once again recited the Nicene Creed in Greek,30 making it a focal moment that set the tone for the entire ceremony.31

Patriarch Photios I himself so much appreciated his role during the celebrations in Sweden and the Stockholm conference that he compared the conference to the First Ecumenical Council in Nicaea, and King Gustaf of Sweden to Constantine the Great, who convened the Council of Nicaea. Replying to the king’s speech at the opening ceremony, the patriarch stated: “I saw as in a trance, the great Emperor Constantine opening with the speech inspired from above the first Ecumenical Synod.”32

The Stockholm Conference – envisioned by Söderblom as a kind of Ecumenical Council and later described as the “Nicaea of social ethics” – featured active pan-Orthodox participation.33 In addition to the solemn liturgical role of Patriarch Photios, the Orthodox presence included substantive contributions to the thematic content of the conference.

The Pan-Orthodox delegation included others who were also present at the celebrations of Nicaea in Britain: Metropolitan Germanos (Strenopoulos) of Thyateira (Ecumenical Patriarchate); Metropolitan Nikolaos (Evangelides) of Nubia (Patriarchate of Alexandria) and Professor Nikolay Glubokovsky, a Russian emigré scholar from Bulgaria, and Professor Hamilcar Alivisatos from the Church of Greece. In addition to Alivisatos, the Church of Greece was represented by another lay theologian, Dr Dimitrios Balanos.34

The Church of Serbia was represented by the future bishop Archimandrite Valerijan (Pribićević) and Dr Irinej (Đorđević). The Romanian Orthodox Church had the largest and most representative delegation among the Orthodox participants. It included three hierarchs: Metropolitan Nicolae (Bălan) of Transylvania, Metropolitan Nectarie (Cotlarciuc) of Bukovina, and Bishop Bartolomeu (Stănescu) of Râmnicul Vâlcea, as well as Archimandrite Iuliu (Scriban); Rev. Dr Ioan Lupaş, a theologian, academic, and politician; Rev. Teodor Scorobeț; and two lay delegates: Prof. Dr Vasile Gheorghe Ispir, a theologian, missiologist, and politician, and his wife, Ana Ispir, who was the only female delegate in the Orthodox section. The Bulgarian Orthodox Church, which at the time had not yet been canonically recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, also sent a significant delegation. It was headed by its primate, Metropolitan Stefan I (Popgeorgiev Shokov) of Sofia, and included Bishop Paisius (Ankov) of Znepole and the canon lawyer and theologian Rev. Dr Stefan Zankov. In addition, Bishop Alexander (Inoziemcow) of Pinsk, from the newly established Autocephalous Orthodox Church of Poland, paid a brief visit to the conference but did not participate as an official delegate.

Conclusion

Although the Orthodox Church ultimately did not succeed in organizing its own Pan-Orthodox or Ecumenical Council in 1925, its participation in the international commemorations of Nicaea – especially in the ecumenical events organized by the Anglican and Protestant world – was significant both symbolically and strategically. The presence of high-ranking Orthodox hierarchs, their liturgical contributions, and their active engagement in theological and social discussions made a strong impression on their Western counterparts and lent historical and spiritual depth to the commemorations. While Orthodoxy may not have been in a position at the time to lead such events on its own, its contribution clearly resonated with those who had hosted them and attended the events at which they were present. More importantly, the experience of 1925 became a catalyst for deeper Orthodox involvement in the ecumenical movement. The friendships, theological exchanges, and symbolic gestures forged during these encounters laid important groundwork for future Orthodox participation in inter-Christian dialogue throughout the 20th century.

The impulse of 1925 did not disappear. Though the proposed pan-Orthodox Council in 1925 never materialized at the time, the vision and energy it generated continued to shape Orthodox ecclesial and theological life in the decades that followed. This momentum contributed to new pan-Orthodox initiatives aimed at preparing for the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church. These included the Pre-Conciliar Pan-Orthodox Conferences held in Rhodes and Chambésy, as well as pan-Orthodox theological seminars conducted from the 1960s to the 1990s. These processes eventually culminated in the convocation of the Holy and Great Council in Crete in 2016.35 In the post–Second World War era, the formation of the World Council of Churches and the convening of the Second Vatican Council also served as important models and sources of inspiration for the pan-Orthodox conciliar process, both in terms of structure and of theological scope. In these endeavours, the contacts forged in the 1920s and linked to the 1600th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea played an inestimable role.

A century later, the 1700th anniversary of Nicaea offers a renewed opportunity: not to repeat the council of 1925 but to carry its ecumenical and pan-Orthodox vision forward with commitment, courage, and conciliar imagination. Yet, while 2025 is rich with conferences, publications, and commemorative events, it is not difficult to foresee that the year that follows may already feel less festive, less symbolic, and perhaps marked by a certain sense of closure. The danger is that the momentum sparked by Nicaea will again fade, as it did a century ago.

Looking back at the Christian landscape of 1925, one is struck by the audacity of the vision: Orthodox hierarchs and theologians dared to dream of a new Ecumenical Council, a modern confession of faith, a re-engagement with the world. They were not afraid to imagine bold new beginnings. While many of those plans remained unrealized, they were grounded in a deep conviction that the church was not simply looking back at Nicaea as a fixed point of reference but forward, seeing itself as a living continuation of the Nicene legacy. The symbol of Nicaea was not about nostalgia but about progress, renewal, and a future rooted in shared faith.

Today, the impulse of Nicaea can still nourish the church’s journey ahead if it is not merely commemorated but actively filled with life. The anniversary is not only a moment to remember what was once achieved but to rediscover what might still be possible.

Acknowledgements

Natallia Vasilevich is an Orthodox theologian and political scientist from Belarus currently residing in Germany. She has a master’s in ecumenical studies and defended her PhD at the University of Bonn in 2025 on the pre-concilar process of the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church.