The reception of the Nicene Creed provoked several doctrinal debates in late antiquity. However, beyond theological disputes, it also influenced the identity dynamics of various Christian communities. The acceptance or rejection of the Creed and the related theological controversies, according to some scholars, played a role in shaping social and cultural boundaries, contributing to the division between orthodoxy and heterodoxy in different contexts. Nevertheless, these boundaries were far more blurred than what can be inferred from the sources and literary production on the subject. An exemplary case study is the Ostrogothic Kingdom. In this context, traditional historiography has assigned ethnic and identity significance to adherence to a specific doctrinal current, establishing a Latin-Nicene versus Gothic-Arian dichotomy. This theory assumes that the Arian crisis, within the limes, had ended in both partes imperii with the Councils of Aquileia and Constantinople in the early 380s, as supported by some sources (Ambrose, Epist. extra coll., 5, 1; 6, 1 and 3; Epist. conc. Aquil., 2, 2). Further evidence for this idea is found in Theodosian legislation, particularly in three consecutive constitutiones that addressed the doctrinal issue (Cod. Theod., 16, 1, 2; 16, 1, 3; 16, 5, 6). These not only specified the contents of the only official Creed but also outlined the penalties for anti-Nicenes, which included the progressive loss of all rights and total exclusion from the community. However, as Viola Gheller demonstrates (“Eterodossia e costruzione dell’ ‘altro’ tra IV e V secolo,” in «Rivista di Cultura classica e medievale» 1, 2020, pp. 191-210), despite contemporary literary sources emphasizing the isolation of Arian communities, numerous indications point to their vitality. By the fifth century, these communities included prominent and socially prestigious figures, such as comes of Africa Boniface, honoratus Maximus, and Bishop Maximinus, a well-known opponent of Augustine in the Collatio cum Maximino. These individuals were fully integrated into the societas of their time and were certainly not marginalized.
Given the persistence and flourishing of Latin Arian communities during the fifth century, the dichotomy imposed by historiography regarding the regnum of Theoderic and his successors becomes less clear-cut. Furthermore, we have direct evidence of Nicene communities with Gothic members, as attested by various sources (e.g., Basil, Epist. 164; Paulinus of Nola, Carm. 12, 197-268; Jerome, Epist. 106, 1-2; Ibid. 107, 2; John Chrysostom, Epist. ad Olymp. 15, 5; Id. Epist. 207; Id. Hom. 2, 3; Ibidem, 8). Additionally, the numerical significance of the Germanic component in the Ostrogothic Kingdom must be considered. Some scholars have even hypothesized the complete disappearance of Germanic identity within a single generation, suggesting that Theoderic's followers were primarily a military elite who were quickly absorbed into the Latin population. Although this theory has been heavily criticized, historiography generally agrees that the number of Goths in Italy was relatively small. Yet, sources attest to flourishing Arian communities throughout the kingdom’s duration, evidenced both by literary sources and the presence of some Gothic manuscripts with Homoean characteristics. Thus, religious boundaries did not necessarily align with ethnic ones. The situation was complex. In this context, analysing the Goths’ reception of the Nicene Creed is crucial, as it implies a sophisticated theological construction rooted in both Germanic culture and the Gothic language in order to reject it. A body of Gothic literature emerged, focusing on religious and exegetical themes, demonstrating not only an in-depth understanding of doctrinal currents but also the rhetorical strategies employed to refute the Nicene Creed. Both Latin and Gothic sources suggest a doctrinal stance that varied from extreme to moderate. As with the broader Arian controversy, the primary theological issue revolved around the non-scriptural term ὁμοούσιον. This lexeme underwent modifications, rejections, and re-admissions, which are also reflected in Gothic-language literature, highlighting the theological sensitivity of the Germanic population and its engagement with the Nicene Creed’s rejection through terminology derived from the numerous conciliar debates of the fourth century. Some scholars have attempted to identify traces of subordinationism in certain passages of the Gothic New Testament, though with relatively weak evidence. Nevertheless, other testimonies provide valuable insights. In Latin, the famous profession of faith by Ulfila, preserved in Ms. Parisinus 8907, exhibits an apparently extreme Arian character. A later source, from the second half of the fifth century and in Gothic, is the Skeireins (Commentary on the Gospel of John), which contains clear indications of Homoean theology. Additional later sources also merit analysis, such as the Manoscritto Capitolare Veronese LI (49), a collection of Arian texts containing 15 doctrinally non-aligned sermons with accompanying notes in Gothic script, and the Gothica Bononiensia, a Gothic bifolium that also appears doctrinally neutral. These sources illustrate the fluid and porous nature of boundaries between Christian communities. The demarcation lines between Christian communities were highly flexible and difficult to define, as demonstrated by the theological neutrality of many surviving Christian texts, whether Nicene or subordinationalist in nature. This suggests that the intensity or polemical tone of a text cannot be strictly attributed to a specific period or context. The reception of the Nicene Creed among the Goths, therefore, involved theological rejection but was not necessarily socially divisive. The sources attest to interconnected Nicene and Arian communities, blurring ethnic and religious boundaries. When doctrinal differences surfaced in political debates and influenced society, the reasons for such developments were tied to particular historical circumstances rather than inherent to the doctrinal disputes themselves.
The reception of the Nicene Creed among the Goths reveals the complex interplay between doctrinal boundaries and fluid identities in late antiquity. While the Creed sparked theological debates, its acceptance or rejection also influenced social and cultural dynamics, particularly in the Ostrogothic Kingdom. Traditional historiography often presents a rigid Latin-Nicene versus Gothic-Arian dichotomy, but evidence suggests a more nuanced reality. Arian communities, far from being marginalized, included prominent figures and remained vibrant into the fifth century. Similarly, Nicene communities included Gothic members, indicating that religious and ethnic boundaries were not strictly aligned. Gothic literature, such as the Skeireins, reflects sophisticated theological engagement with the Nicene Creed, often rejecting it through nuanced terminology. The fluidity of these boundaries is further evidenced by doctrinally neutral texts, suggesting that doctrinal differences did not always lead to social division. Instead, political and historical contexts often influenced the prominence of these disputes.