@PeterTurner Thanks for the good post on Mary in the councils. It's a reminder that I should really look at all the first seven ecumenical councils, especially the social/political not only the theological contexts. I also want to look closer into the arguments used: how much is it based on scriptures, how much on other factors.

@PeterTurner Not quite; after learning more about Constantine and the social realities of the Roman empire at that time (esp. what being an emperor means and their relationship with the military, the aristocracies, and pagan gods) I became persuaded that Constantine was largely innocent. I am much more concerned with the bishops's using political leverage to cause other bishops to prison / exile (example: St. Athanasius).

While I myself is persuaded to Jesus's nature according to Nicaea and Chalcedon, I was under the impression that most well meaning Christians in the 4th and 5th centuries were also persuaded similarly based on careful (and what I hope to be self-evident) exegesis of OT & NT which by that time had been informally "canonized". But it turns out the adherents of Arianism and Monophysitism were a LOT more and conducting good lives as Christians.

@PeterTurner It seems the 2 theories of the link between happiness, pleasure, and morality cannot be reconciled. It doesn't mean I cannot become Catholic, since I don't think Aquinas theory of happiness is a dogma. Both theories affirm resurrection of the body, the objective standard of the moral law, God as a source of happiness, the importance of beatific vision. But Lewis's model forces me to reconsider parts of Thomism that are important to me. I cannot logically have both.

BTW, I recommend courses taught by Prof. Kenneth Harl, esp. Fall of the Pagans & Origin of Medieval Christianity. I found them in local libraries and value them as a background of early Christianity. He's a great teacher as well as an archeologist of the late antique era. He was trained a classicist who had to learn Greek and Latin.