This Week in God
So, I must say, it is pretty sad when your theory about how Jesus may have had freak weather help him walk on water can be shot down by the DVE Morning Show. I mean, really. In between normal rock station bawdiness and Skynyrd tunes, Jim and Randy ripped this apart and it seemed they were even offended. Of course, right after that they made jokes about that woman who smuggled a gun into prison in her, uh.......but still. Has this FSU guy ever tried to walk on ice anyway? That was a big thing on DVE. They were like, okay, if Jesus and Peter were walking on ice, something that they never would have done before, why didn't they slip?
And of course you've heard about the oh-so-secret Gospel of Judas (and this link is one of my true favorites because Ann Rodgers is that good), yet another Gnostic text for people to get excited about. A few years ago, in my most recent stint as a theology grad student, I wrote a catechetical paper on the Apostle's and Nicene Creeds. It was titled, "For Us and Our Salvation: The Profession of Faith." The Apostle's Creed, while probably not written by the Apostles themselves, was composed as a direct defense against the heresies of the day (about 200 AD). At that time the greatest challenge to orthodoxy was the spread of Gnosticism. When you look at the text of the Apostle's Creed, or any of the Christian Creeds, what is important to keep in mind is that they are not just a laundry list of line items. These Creeds are truly "for us and our salvation." It isn't about power; it is about understanding the truth.
So for a special treat, and because I'm now listed in the Catholic Blogs Directory, I thought I might post a little from the paper, in case you need it to help you in an argument in a bar or a book club. The recent "re-discovery" of Gnostic writings, both in Fiction and in Scholarship has done a great job creating a lot of noise tha gets us no where. If you go through the Apostle's Creed point by point, as I did below, and ask yourself what would happen if one of the the Gnostic positions (because they were not as codified as orthodoxy was) were true, what would that mean. For instance, if Christ were not a man, and only had the appearance of a man, or if the Christ spoke through a man named Jesus, like a puppeteer, what does that say about our Creator? Was the crucifixion just for show? A mockery of real human suffering? What the heck kind of a god would do that? This isn't just about whether Jesus married Mary Magdalene, or whether Judas was in on the plan. This is really about understanding our salvation.
I must note, too, that LC helped me quite a bit with this, so credit is due to her for her help.
***
Since Early Christianity, a regular Profession of Faith within the context of the Mass has been performed by the recitation of various Creeds, depending on the regional rite. These Creeds were not just a summary of beliefs to be recited and agreed upon by the faithful. They were frequently developed and re-developed in the face of heresies and false doctrines. These Creeds were defenses of Christ and His legacy, the Church. While we frequently view the controversies from which the creeds arose as theological hair-splitting and word games, we really need to view them as protecting our understanding of Christ to assure that others can experience Him as we do. The Creeds are truly "for us and our salvation." As we examine the Profession of Faith, and specifically the development of the Creeds that are most frequently used, we need to see them not as doctrine that we memorize and robotically repeat, or even a laundry list of beliefs that we simply are in agreement with, but rather our way of continuing the defense of Christianity. These Creeds are the embodiment of our Faith.
The word Creed comes from the Latin Credo, meaning, "I believe." In the Latin Rite Mass, Credo was the generic as well for what we currently refer to as "Profession of Faith." Its use in modern worship toward the close of the Liturgy of the Word and prior to the Eucharist allows us the opportunity to confess the great mysteries of our faith after they are revealed to us in the Scripture readings and before they are more fully celebrated in the Eucharist (USCCB Par 67).
snip
The Apostle's Creed is the oldest Roman catechism. (Catechism Par 196). While our Tradition says that the Apostles themselves composed it, the actual evidence we have of its composition or use still gives it an early date of record. We may not be able to attribute its authorship, but we do know that it is a true summary of essential beliefs of the Apostles. Writings that date to 200 AD show it in use in a baptismal dialogue ("Do you believe?" "I do"). The Apostle's Creed is written to cover the whole Trinity, the three persons in one God. We should note how succinctly this Creed defines the most important aspects of our faith. Not only does brevity show antiquity, it also illustrates the understanding of the intended audience, Christians from Jewish roots or people aware of Jewish teachings. So much was understood by saying these few lines that further clarification, like we will see in the Nicene Creed, would have been superfluous. What is there is mostly to defend the Christian faith from the heresies influenced by Gnosticism. Gnosticism was a widespread religious movement that reflected the pessimism of the times of the early Christians (Young 17). While Gnosticism did not have a singular direction, there were general tendencies to see the physical body as a tomb and to escape it we needed to achieve higher knowledge (Young 18). Gnosticism was particularly critical of the concept of the humanity of Christ. They had no problem with Christ being divine on earth, but that the Savior would take on a human form was anathema. Of special note will be the lines regarding Jesus being both God and man. Gnostics were able to function within the Church, so a defense against them was critical.
The Apostle's Creed first focuses on God the Father:
We, of course, refer to God as the Father, as Christ did. What is not indicated here is that there is ONE God. For the early Christians, who would be largely Jewish, the exclusive loyalty to one true God was never a question (Young 16). It was only later, as Christianity spread to regions away from its cradle throughout Europe, Africa, and Asia that we would need to qualify God with the word "One." To say that God was the Creator of Heaven and Earth was a direct defense against Gnosticism; they saw the world as too banal to be of God the FatherÂ’s creation (Armstrong 96). This is in direct opposition to creation in Genesis, when "God looked at everything he had made, and he found it very good." (The Catholic Study Bible, Gen 1:31)
Next we profess our belief in Jesus:
We refer to Jesus as the only Son, as was revealed by God at Christ's baptism and at the Transfiguration (beloved Son) and by Christ's own assertion. Our belief in the "only Son" also signifies our belief in Christ's eternal pre-existence, but this will require more detail once the Nicene Creed is developed. At the time, it sufficed to say that Jesus being his only Son meant the Father-Son relationship existed for always. The Gnostics were not in agreement in their opposition to orthodoxy; some believed that God would not have taken a human body, or that the Christ spoke through a man named Jesus (Kiefer).
The Gnostics contended that the Holy Spirit had nothing to do with Christ until his baptism; this is countered with the Christian belief that he was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Kiefer). That he was born shows our belief in the human nature of Christ. The reference to Pontius Pilate gave Jesus a definite historical context that his death occurred under the jurisdiction of the Procurator of Judea. This was to distinguish Christ from mythical gods that died and resurrected and whose stories were allegorical, for instance dying in winter and resurrecting at spring. Jesus as a man was an historical being associated with a particular time and place.
At the time of the original composition of the Apostle's Creed, the early Christians needed to defend the belief that Jesus Christ was man as well as God. Without this very concept, there is no salvation for us. The next few lines show our belief in Jesus' very humanity. In the face of Gnosticism, which as mentioned earlier had no belief in the possible humanity of the Savior, it was critical for Christians to affirm that Jesus did become man. Then as now we cannot trivialize that Jesus' human suffering, crucifixion, and dying. By denying Christ's humanity, we are denying that he truly offered himself up for us, that he was sacrificed to save us. Christ truly suffered as a man, and then truly died, rather than fainted or fell into a coma, and lay dead in a tomb while his spirit went to the place of the dead. It does not get any more human than that. Christ's resurrection was in accordance with the scriptures, but the Apostle's Creed does not contain that line as will be later inserted in the Nicene Creed. The Jews that are joining our early Church do not need to explain or have explained to them that Christ's death and resurrection are in accordance with the Scriptures; they already know this.
As for the Holy Spirit:
The belief that the promises of Christ and the fullness of the Gospel was for the entire world flew in the face of the Gnostic concept of the select. For the Gnostics, the holy Church could not be universal. Also to counter Gnosticism and its view of the foulness of the physical body, the Creed lists both the forgiveness of sins and the resurrection of the body. In Gnosticism, sin was a matter of our earthly bodies; the soul was separate from the body, so forgiveness of sins was unnecessary. The resurrection of our bodies and the end of the world, when our souls are joined to our bodies was also likely a disturbing concept to them (Kiefer).
And of course you've heard about the oh-so-secret Gospel of Judas (and this link is one of my true favorites because Ann Rodgers is that good), yet another Gnostic text for people to get excited about. A few years ago, in my most recent stint as a theology grad student, I wrote a catechetical paper on the Apostle's and Nicene Creeds. It was titled, "For Us and Our Salvation: The Profession of Faith." The Apostle's Creed, while probably not written by the Apostles themselves, was composed as a direct defense against the heresies of the day (about 200 AD). At that time the greatest challenge to orthodoxy was the spread of Gnosticism. When you look at the text of the Apostle's Creed, or any of the Christian Creeds, what is important to keep in mind is that they are not just a laundry list of line items. These Creeds are truly "for us and our salvation." It isn't about power; it is about understanding the truth.
So for a special treat, and because I'm now listed in the Catholic Blogs Directory, I thought I might post a little from the paper, in case you need it to help you in an argument in a bar or a book club. The recent "re-discovery" of Gnostic writings, both in Fiction and in Scholarship has done a great job creating a lot of noise tha gets us no where. If you go through the Apostle's Creed point by point, as I did below, and ask yourself what would happen if one of the the Gnostic positions (because they were not as codified as orthodoxy was) were true, what would that mean. For instance, if Christ were not a man, and only had the appearance of a man, or if the Christ spoke through a man named Jesus, like a puppeteer, what does that say about our Creator? Was the crucifixion just for show? A mockery of real human suffering? What the heck kind of a god would do that? This isn't just about whether Jesus married Mary Magdalene, or whether Judas was in on the plan. This is really about understanding our salvation.
I must note, too, that LC helped me quite a bit with this, so credit is due to her for her help.
***
Since Early Christianity, a regular Profession of Faith within the context of the Mass has been performed by the recitation of various Creeds, depending on the regional rite. These Creeds were not just a summary of beliefs to be recited and agreed upon by the faithful. They were frequently developed and re-developed in the face of heresies and false doctrines. These Creeds were defenses of Christ and His legacy, the Church. While we frequently view the controversies from which the creeds arose as theological hair-splitting and word games, we really need to view them as protecting our understanding of Christ to assure that others can experience Him as we do. The Creeds are truly "for us and our salvation." As we examine the Profession of Faith, and specifically the development of the Creeds that are most frequently used, we need to see them not as doctrine that we memorize and robotically repeat, or even a laundry list of beliefs that we simply are in agreement with, but rather our way of continuing the defense of Christianity. These Creeds are the embodiment of our Faith.
The word Creed comes from the Latin Credo, meaning, "I believe." In the Latin Rite Mass, Credo was the generic as well for what we currently refer to as "Profession of Faith." Its use in modern worship toward the close of the Liturgy of the Word and prior to the Eucharist allows us the opportunity to confess the great mysteries of our faith after they are revealed to us in the Scripture readings and before they are more fully celebrated in the Eucharist (USCCB Par 67).
snip
The Apostle's Creed is the oldest Roman catechism. (Catechism Par 196). While our Tradition says that the Apostles themselves composed it, the actual evidence we have of its composition or use still gives it an early date of record. We may not be able to attribute its authorship, but we do know that it is a true summary of essential beliefs of the Apostles. Writings that date to 200 AD show it in use in a baptismal dialogue ("Do you believe?" "I do"). The Apostle's Creed is written to cover the whole Trinity, the three persons in one God. We should note how succinctly this Creed defines the most important aspects of our faith. Not only does brevity show antiquity, it also illustrates the understanding of the intended audience, Christians from Jewish roots or people aware of Jewish teachings. So much was understood by saying these few lines that further clarification, like we will see in the Nicene Creed, would have been superfluous. What is there is mostly to defend the Christian faith from the heresies influenced by Gnosticism. Gnosticism was a widespread religious movement that reflected the pessimism of the times of the early Christians (Young 17). While Gnosticism did not have a singular direction, there were general tendencies to see the physical body as a tomb and to escape it we needed to achieve higher knowledge (Young 18). Gnosticism was particularly critical of the concept of the humanity of Christ. They had no problem with Christ being divine on earth, but that the Savior would take on a human form was anathema. Of special note will be the lines regarding Jesus being both God and man. Gnostics were able to function within the Church, so a defense against them was critical.
The Apostle's Creed first focuses on God the Father:
I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth.
We, of course, refer to God as the Father, as Christ did. What is not indicated here is that there is ONE God. For the early Christians, who would be largely Jewish, the exclusive loyalty to one true God was never a question (Young 16). It was only later, as Christianity spread to regions away from its cradle throughout Europe, Africa, and Asia that we would need to qualify God with the word "One." To say that God was the Creator of Heaven and Earth was a direct defense against Gnosticism; they saw the world as too banal to be of God the FatherÂ’s creation (Armstrong 96). This is in direct opposition to creation in Genesis, when "God looked at everything he had made, and he found it very good." (The Catholic Study Bible, Gen 1:31)
Next we profess our belief in Jesus:
I believe in Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord.
We refer to Jesus as the only Son, as was revealed by God at Christ's baptism and at the Transfiguration (beloved Son) and by Christ's own assertion. Our belief in the "only Son" also signifies our belief in Christ's eternal pre-existence, but this will require more detail once the Nicene Creed is developed. At the time, it sufficed to say that Jesus being his only Son meant the Father-Son relationship existed for always. The Gnostics were not in agreement in their opposition to orthodoxy; some believed that God would not have taken a human body, or that the Christ spoke through a man named Jesus (Kiefer).
He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
and born of the Virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
The Gnostics contended that the Holy Spirit had nothing to do with Christ until his baptism; this is countered with the Christian belief that he was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Kiefer). That he was born shows our belief in the human nature of Christ. The reference to Pontius Pilate gave Jesus a definite historical context that his death occurred under the jurisdiction of the Procurator of Judea. This was to distinguish Christ from mythical gods that died and resurrected and whose stories were allegorical, for instance dying in winter and resurrecting at spring. Jesus as a man was an historical being associated with a particular time and place.
was crucified, died and was buried
He descended into hell.
On the third day he rose again.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
At the time of the original composition of the Apostle's Creed, the early Christians needed to defend the belief that Jesus Christ was man as well as God. Without this very concept, there is no salvation for us. The next few lines show our belief in Jesus' very humanity. In the face of Gnosticism, which as mentioned earlier had no belief in the possible humanity of the Savior, it was critical for Christians to affirm that Jesus did become man. Then as now we cannot trivialize that Jesus' human suffering, crucifixion, and dying. By denying Christ's humanity, we are denying that he truly offered himself up for us, that he was sacrificed to save us. Christ truly suffered as a man, and then truly died, rather than fainted or fell into a coma, and lay dead in a tomb while his spirit went to the place of the dead. It does not get any more human than that. Christ's resurrection was in accordance with the scriptures, but the Apostle's Creed does not contain that line as will be later inserted in the Nicene Creed. The Jews that are joining our early Church do not need to explain or have explained to them that Christ's death and resurrection are in accordance with the Scriptures; they already know this.
As for the Holy Spirit:
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
The belief that the promises of Christ and the fullness of the Gospel was for the entire world flew in the face of the Gnostic concept of the select. For the Gnostics, the holy Church could not be universal. Also to counter Gnosticism and its view of the foulness of the physical body, the Creed lists both the forgiveness of sins and the resurrection of the body. In Gnosticism, sin was a matter of our earthly bodies; the soul was separate from the body, so forgiveness of sins was unnecessary. The resurrection of our bodies and the end of the world, when our souls are joined to our bodies was also likely a disturbing concept to them (Kiefer).
Comments