For many Christians the names ‘Constantine’ and Nicaea are not a familiar idea. In instances where they do recognize these names, they tend to be prejudiced towards the ‘pagan emperor’ and the ‘venerated council’ (Olson 1999:160). The importance of the First Nicene Council and the emperor’s role in the council may be seen as historical only. However, the events related to the development of the Nicene orthodoxy and the role the emperor played in the development of the relations between politics and religion are still influencing the lives of Christians today and therefore, these important events are in need of a review, this time from an African perspective. A probe into the imperial religious-political play may hold many significant answers in relation to contextualization, enculturation, dogmatic teaching, and the relationship between the church and state, amongst other things. In this dissertation document analysis is used in literature study to establish the significance of one of the interactive factors in the period leading to the first ecumenical council. Using a tri-categorical classification of the era, this study reviews the Jewish-Christian schism, Hellenism, and ultimately the role of imperial politics in the development of Christianity. The Jewish-Christian schism refers to the separation between Judaism and Christianity as the conceptive stage of the dynamics through which ecumenical orthodoxy was formed. Hellenism broadly refers to the integration of philosophy with Christianity. Finally, imperial politics was the political dynamic that contributed to the formation of ecumenical orthodoxy. This facilitated an investigation of the era between AD 70 and 325, enhancing a revisionist approach to Constantine, the Nicene Council and the orthodoxy that emerged post AD 325 – with an implied deduction of ecclesiastical polities which became an unconventional phenomenon. The study, engaging with primary sources and specialist scholarship on the era, derived and developed a revisionist approach on Constantinian influence upon Christianity. In the findings the ecclesiastical polity appeared as the significant influence in the shaping of ecumenical orthodoxy. The ecclesiastical polity itself being a factor of the very process of self-definition and contextualization. The significance of enculturation as established in the research implied cultural diversity as a major factor in the formation of religious orthodoxy, xix hence this implied the Jewish Christian schism as the departure point of enquiry. The research implied the development of social models as an interpretation and analysis of the hypothesis. The aforementioned social models had implications for Christian/religious eras even post the one at study. Therefore, making the hypothesis a tool of measuring the interaction of politics, socio-ethnic dynamics and religion in different eras. In principle the study enables a review of history as a factor of these three elements culture, religious syncretism and politics. / Christian Spirituality, Church History and Missiology / M. Th. (Church History)

While few would deny America is the most powerful nation on earth, there is considerable debate, and controversy, over how America uses its foreign policy power. This is even truer since the “unipolar moment,” when America gained sole superpower status with the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War. In the Cold War Reinhold Niebuhr was the main theological voice speaking to American power. In the Unipolar world, the Religious right emerged as the main theological voice, but instead of seeking to curb American power the Religious right embraced Neoconservatism in what I will call “Totemic Conservatism” to support use of America's power in the world and to triumph Manifest destiny in American foreign policy, which is the notion that America is a chosen nation, and this legitimizes its use of power and underpins its moral claims. I critique the Niebuhrian and Religious right legacies, and offer a classical realist strategy for theology to speak to America power and foreign policy, which avoids the neoconservative and religious conservative error of totemism, while avoiding the jettisoning of Niebuhr's theology by political liberals, and, the political ghettoizing of theology by his chief critics. This strategy is based on embracing the understanding of classical realism, but not taking the next step, which both Niebuhr and neoconservativism ultimately do, of moving from a prescriptive to a predictive strategy for American foreign policy. In this thesis, I argue that in the wake of the unipolar moment the embrace of the Religious right of Neoconservatism to triumph Manifest destiny in American foreign policy is a problematic commingling of faith and politics, and what is needed instead is a strategy of speaking to power rooted in classical realism but one which refines Niebuhrian realism to avoid the risk of progressing a Constantinian theology.