Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What’s the Point of Creeds?
CERC ^ | 1988 | Peter Kreeft

Posted on 05/01/2009 10:31:49 PM PDT by Salvation

What’s the Point of Creeds?

PETER KREEFT

I remember vividly how deeply moved I was as a young Protestant to hear how one of the Catholic martyrs died...


Peter Kreeft

I remember vividly how deeply moved I was as a young Protestant to hear how one of the Catholic martyrs died: scratching in the sand with his own blood the words of the creed, “Credo ....”( “I believe”).

My heart was moved, but my head did not yet understand. What do these Catholics see in their creeds anyway? How can a set of words be worth dying for? Why have wars been fought over a word? What's the point of creeds?

Then I read Dorothy Sayers' little masterpiece Creed or Chaos?, and I was answered.

The question can be answered by remembering another question, the one Pilate asked Christ in another life-or-death situation: “What is truth?”

And that is the point of the creeds: truth. In fact, Primal Truth, the truth about God. That is why the words of the Creed are sacred words. Just as God's material houses are sacred, so are his verbal houses. Of course God is no more confined to words, even the sacred words of creeds, than he is confined to the sacred buildings of tent or temple, church or cathedral. But both are holy, set apart, sacred. “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. “

Faith has two dimensions: the objective and the subjective. Creeds express these two dimensions: “I believe in God. “ There is an I, a believing subject, and there is God, the object of belief. There is the psychology of believing, which is something in us, and there is the theology of belief, which is the Truth believed. There is the eye, and there is the light. And woe to him who mistakes the one for the other.

When the Church formulated her creeds, humanity was more interested in the light than in the eye. God providentially arranged for the great creeds of the Church to be formulated in ages that cared passionately about objective truth. By modern standards, they ignored the subjective, psychological dimension of faith.

But we moderns fall into the opposite and far worse extreme: we are so interested in the subject that we often forget or even scorn the object. Psychology has become our new religion, as Paul Vitz and Kirk Kilpatrick have both so brilliantly shown.

Yet it's the object, not the subjective act, of faith that makes the creeds sacred. They are sacred because Truth is sacred, not because believing is sacred. Creeds do not say merely what we believe, but what is. Creeds wake us from our dreams and prejudices into objective reality. Creeds do not confine us in little cages, as the modern world thinks; creeds free us into the outdoors, into the real world where the winds of heaven whip around our heads.

What is the object, the Truth? Saint Thomas says that the primary object of faith is not words and statements but God himself. “We believe in God.” Further, as Christians we know God most fully in Christ, God incarnate, and as Catholics we know Christ through Holy Mother Church and her creeds.

When human reason raved, in the Arian heresy, that Christ could not possibly be both fully human and fully divine, Athanasius stood against the world; today we know Christ as he really is because of Athanasius and his creed.

When contemporary forms of the same heresy water down the strong meat” of Christ, the Church again braves the media, the mouth of the world, and calmly thunders the full truth about Christ. True, it is Christ rather than words that is the primary object of the Christian's faith, but what Christ? Here words are crucial.

Two extremes must be avoided: intellectualism and anti-intellectualism, worshipping the words and scorning the words. If the ancient mind tended to the former extreme, the modern mind certainly tends to the latter. Both errors are deadly.

Intellectualism misses the core of faith, both objectively and subjectively. Objectively, the core of faith is God, who is a Person, not a concept. Subjectively, the core of faith is the will, not the intellect. Though informed by the intellect, it is the will that freely chooses to believe.

Faith is not the relation between an intellect and an idea, but the relation between an I and a Thou. That is why faith makes the difference between heaven and hell. God does not send you to hell for flunking his theology exam but for willingly divorcing from him.

Anti-intellectualism also misses the core of faith, both objectively and subjectively. Objectively, because its faith has no object. It calls faith an experience (“the faith experience”) — a term never used by our Lord, Scripture, the creeds, or the popes. Modern people are constantly saying, “Have faith!” But faith in what or whom? They often mean “have faith in faith. “ But faith in faith in what?

Anti-intellectualism is a modern reaction against the modern narrowing of reason to scientific reason. When the ancients and medievals called man a “rational animal”, they did not mean a computerized camera mounted in an ape. They meant by “reason” understanding, wisdom, insight, and conscience as well as logical calculation.

Modern thinkers often forget this dimension of man and think only of reasoning (as in calculating) and feeling. And because they see that faith is not a matter of reasoning, they conclude that it must be a matter of feeling. Thus “I believe” comes to mean “I feel and creeds simply have no place. Faith becomes a “leap” in the dark instead of a leap in the light.

Many of the Church's greatest saints have been doctors of the Church, theologians, philosophers, intellectuals: Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Bonaventure. Anti-intellectuals like Tatian and Tertullian and Luther (who called reason “the devil's whore”) often die excommunicated, as heretics.

The Church — repeating what Saint Paul said in Romans 1: 19-20 — even teaches as a matter of faith that God's existence can be known by reason, independent of faith!

The Catholic ideal is the complete person, with a cool head and a warm heart, a hard head and a soft heart. The mere intellectual has a cool heart; the anti-intellectual has a hot head. The intellectual has a hard heart, the anti-intellectual has a soft head. The Church puts the severed parts in the right order because the Church has the blueprint: Christ (Eph 4:13). The Church has always had a conservative head and a liberal heart, and the world has never understood her, just as it never understood Christ.

Creeds are to the head what good works are to the heart: creeds express truth, the head's food, as good works express love, the heart's food. Both are sacred.

If there is any doubt about the need for creeds, it can be settled by fact: the fact that the Church established by Christ, the Church Christ promised to “guide into all truth”, has in fact formulated and taught creeds.

The first bishops, the apostles, formulated the Church's first, shortest, and most important creed, the Apostles' Creed. Whether the apostles literally wrote it, as tradition says, or whether it was written by their disciples to preserve the apostles' teaching, in either case it is the teaching of the apostles. When we recite this creed we speak in unison with them.

There is a strange notion abroad that creeds oppress, repress, or suppress people. That is like saying that light or food is repressive. The practical purpose of the creeds is truth, and truth is light and food for the soul.

Each of the Church's creeds was written in response to a heresy, to combat it not by force but by truth, as light combats darkness. Creeds are “truth in labeling”. Those who disbelieve in truth or scorn it, or who disbelieve in our ability to know it, see creeds as power plays.

The media's hysterical rhetoric about the pope's labeling Hans Kung's theology as non-Catholic theology is a good example of the world's utter confusion here. The media conjured up visions of the return of the Inquisition simply because the pope said, in effect, that Kung's teachings about Christ should not be confused with the Church's teachings about Christ. But this reaction should be expected if we remember the words of Christ himself (read Jn 3:17-21 prayerfully).

The most important creeds were those formulated by the Church's ecumenical (universal) councils in response to the most important heresies, the heresies about Christ; and of these the two most important were Chalcedon and Nicaea. (The Nicene Creed is the one we recite each Sunday at Mass.) The Church's most recent council, Vatican II, formulated no new creeds and no new doctrines but applied the old ones to new needs and situations.

The pope called an extraordinary synod of bishops in 1985 in part to clarify Catholic confusion concerning Vatican II. Anyone who would take the trouble to read the actual documents (which are much, much longer than creeds) would see how traditional they are. The “spirit of Vatican II” conjured by the media and some theologians is a phantom, a ghostlike half-person, with the fatal split between head and heart, creed and deed, theology and social action, love of God and love of man, eternal principles and updated applications.

But the pope is a bridge builder, a pontifex; he will patch what the world has torn. And the blueprint he will follow in doing this will be the historic, never-abandoned creeds of the Church of Christ.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Kreeft, Peter. “What's the Point of Creeds?” Chapter 17 in Fundamentals of the Faith. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988), 107-111.

Reprinted by permission of Ignatius Press. All rights reserved. Fundamentals of the Faith - ISBN 0-89870-202-X.



TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist; creeds
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-169 next last
"I believe."
1 posted on 05/01/2009 10:31:49 PM PDT by Salvation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway; Lady In Blue; NYer; ELS; Pyro7480; livius; Catholicguy; RobbyS; markomalley; ...
Two extremes must be avoided: intellectualism and anti-intellectualism, worshipping the words and scorning the words. If the ancient mind tended to the former extreme, the modern mind certainly tends to the latter. Both errors are deadly.

Comments?

2 posted on 05/01/2009 10:32:42 PM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Four Catholic Creeds

 THE FOUR CATHOLIC CREEDS

The Athanasian Creed
[QUICUNQUE VULT]
  • Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic [Apostolic/Universal] Faith, which except everyone shall have kept whole and undefiled, without doubt he will perish eternally.
  • Now the Catholic Faith is this: We worship One God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance.
  • For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is One, the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.
  • Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit; the Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated; the Father infinite, the Son infinite, and the Holy Spirit infinite; the Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet not three eternals but one eternal, as also not three infinites, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one infinite. So, likewise, the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty; and yet not three almighties but one almighty.
  • So the Father is God, the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God; and yet not three Gods but one God. So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord; and yet not three Lords but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by Christian truth to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be both God and Lord; so are we forbidden by the Catholic religion to say, there be three Gods or three Lords.
  • The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made nor created but begotten. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten but proceeding. So there is one Father not three Fathers, one Son not three Sons, and Holy Spirit not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity there is nothing before or after, nothing greater or less, but the whole three Persons are coeternal together and coequal.
  • So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity is to be worshipped. He therefore who wills to be in a state of salvation, let him think thus of the Trinity.
  • But it is necessary to eternal salvation that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. The right faith therefore is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.
  • He is God of the substance of the Father begotten before the worlds, and He is man of the substance of His mother born in the world; perfect God, perfect man subsisting of a reasoning soul and human flesh; equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood.
  • Who although He be God and Man yet He is not two but one Christ; one however not by conversion of the GodHead in the flesh, but by taking of the Manhood in God; one altogether not by confusion of substance but by unity of Person. For as the reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ.
  • Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, from whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life eternal, and they who indeed have done evil into eternal fire.
  • This is the Catholic faith, which except a man shall have believed faithfully and firmly he cannot be in a state of salvation.

The Apostle's Creed
I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of
Heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ,
His only Son, our Lord  Who was conceived by
the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered
under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into Hell;  the third day He
arose again from the dead;  He ascended into
Heaven and is seated at the right hand of God
the Father Almighty, from thence He shall come
to judge the living and the dead.  I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Holy Catholic Church, the Communion
of Saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection
of the body, and life everlasting.  Amen.
 

 
The Nicene Creed
 I believe in one God, the Father Almighty,
maker of Heaven and earth and of all things
visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus
Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten
of his Father before all ages, God of God,
Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not made, consubstantial with the
Father, by Whom all things were made; Who
for us men and for our salvation, came down
from Heaven, and was Incarnate by the Holy
Spirit of the Virgin Mary and was made Man;
He was crucified also for us under Pontius
Pilate, and was buried. And the
third day He rose again according to the
Scriptures, and ascended into Heaven. He
sitteth at the right hand of the Father: and He shall
come again with glory to judge the living
and the dead: and His kingdom shall have no end.
And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and
Giver of life, Who proceedeth from the Father and
the Son, Who, together with the Father and the Son,
is adored and glorified: Who spoke by the
prophets. And I believe in one holy Catholic and
apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism
for the remission of sins. And I expect the resurrection
of the dead, and the life of the world to come.
Amen.
 
 
 
The Trentine Creed or
The Creed of Pius IV. , A.D. 1564.
1. I most steadfastly admit and embrace Apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions,
and all other observances and constitutions of the Church.
2. I also admit the Holy Scripture according to that sense which our
holy mother the Church has held, and does hold, to which it belongs to judge of
the true sense and interpretations of the Scriptures. Neither will I ever take and
interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.
3. I also profess that there are truly and properly seven Sacraments of the
New Law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and necessary for the salvation
of mankind, though not all for every one; to wit, Baptism, Confirmation,
Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony; and that they
confer grace; and that of these, Baptism, Confirmation, and Order cannot be
reiterated without sacrilege. I also receive and admit the received and approved
ceremonies of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of the
aforesaid Sacraments.
4. I embrace and receive all and every one of the things which have been
defined and declared in the holy Council of Trent concerning Original Sin
and justification.
5. I profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper,
and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that in the most
holy sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially,
the Body and Blood, together with the Soul and Divinity, of our Lord
Jesus Christ; and that there is made a conversion of the whole substance of
the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the
 wine into the blood, which conversion the Catholic Church calls
Transubstantiation. I also confess that under either kind alone Christ is
received whole and entire, and a true Sacrament.
6. I constantly hold that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls therein
detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful.
7. Likewise, that the saints, reigning together with Christ, are to be honored
and invocated, and that they offer prayers to God for us, and that their relics
are to be respected.
8. I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, of the mother of God, ever
virgin, and also of the saints, ought to be had and retained, and that due
honor and veneration is to be given them.
9. I also affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the Church,
and that the use of them is most wholesome to Christian people.
10. I acknowledge the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church for the mother
and mistress of all churches; and I promise true obedience to the Bishop of Rome,
successor to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ.
11. I likewise undoubtedly receive and profess all other things delivered, defined,
and declared by the sacred Canons, and general Councils, and particularly
by the holy Council of Trent.
12. And I condemn, reject, and anathematize all things contrary thereto,
and all heresies whatsoever, condemned, rejected, and anathematized by
the Church. This true Catholic faith, without which no one can be saved,
I. N.N. do at this present freely confess and sincerely hold; and I promise most
constantly to retain, and confess the same entire and unviolated, with God's
assistance, to the end of my life.

3 posted on 05/01/2009 10:35:37 PM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
What’s the Point of Creeds?
Who Needs a Creed? (part 1 of 12)

Creed 7: Ascended Into Heaven
Beginning Catholic: Creeds: Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: Basic Tenets of Catholicism [Ecumenical]
The Catholic Nicene Creed
We Believe in One God...: The Nicene Creed at Mass [Catholic/Orthodox Caucus]
I Believe [Apostle's Creed]

Why the Creed Doesn't Mention the Eucharist
The Apostles' Creed in Public and Private Worship
More Than Our Father [The Creed]
The Nicene Creed in Greek and Latin
The Creed - latest revisions proposed by ICEL

4 posted on 05/01/2009 10:43:04 PM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Creeds are unifying statements of faith. They were developed by the Early Church as a test of Orthodoxy and as a response to heresies.

I find the creeds to be powerful statements. I wish more Protestant groups would use them or use them more often.

Stating your faith in common with other believers is a very powerful experience.


5 posted on 05/01/2009 11:16:17 PM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

We say the Nicene Creed every Sunday. What church to you attend? Do you say a creed each Sunday?

We also start the Rosary with the Apostles’ Creed.


6 posted on 05/01/2009 11:22:18 PM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I attend a non-denominational (VERY CONSERVATIVE) Christian Church. We do say the Apostles creed regularly but not every Sunday. I have been to several Mainline protestant churches that do not say any creed at all.

In this day where false teachings abound, I firmly believe that Christians need to be held more strongly to the contents of the Creeds.


7 posted on 05/01/2009 11:31:49 PM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

The Episcopal church says the same creeds every week, yet the church is corrupt root and branch. I admire the beauty of the liturgy, but we are done for if we rest in it thinking that rote recitation will maintain true teaching.


8 posted on 05/02/2009 12:19:48 AM PDT by newguy357
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: newguy357

The Episcopal church says the same creeds every week, yet the church is corrupt root and branch. I admire the beauty of the liturgy, but we are done for if we rest in it thinking that rote recitation will maintain true teaching.

- - - — - - -
I agree rote recitation is not an answer. The Episcopal church (and many other churches) have erred in not holding its adherents to the beliefs found the CONTENT of the creeds. That is what needs to change. My church holds true to the content of the creeds regardless of how often they say them.

I also know several churches that never say any creeds yet hold true to their contents.

Liberal churches who recite the creeds, yet teach opposite doctrine are like the Pharisees whom Christ speaks about in Matthew 15:18:

“This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.”


9 posted on 05/02/2009 12:26:01 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: newguy357

Hi.

Former Pepsicolian here.

In terms of Salvation’s choice (a few posts above) of worshipping the words or scorning them, SOME Pepsicolians manage to do both! I heard the rector of a nearby parish call the creed a “poem”! My ample behind it’s a poem! But one could see that what he was doing was giving himself permission to say it without meaning it.

But, saying it beats not saying it (or them) for the reason that out there is some young kid who doesn’t yet realize that the man in a dress is lying. That kid is wrestling with the creeds, trying to understand them and why we say them and what they’re about. So the insincere liturgical blather of the priest is being used by God to touch the heart and mind of one of His elect.

I know whereof I speak here ...


10 posted on 05/02/2009 2:30:43 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

The Catholic creed!...

The Catholic creed is why “ The Catholics “ were not allowed to write our constitution...

It’s all about “ We The Catholics, “ not “We The People. “


11 posted on 05/02/2009 3:59:22 AM PDT by JEHUE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Mad Dawg

Not a bad article through about here:

“What is the object, the Truth? Saint Thomas says that the primary object of faith is not words and statements but God himself. “We believe in God.” Further, as Christians we know God most fully in Christ, God incarnate, and as Catholics we know Christ through Holy Mother Church and her creeds.”

This is pure, patristic Christian theology.

But he falls right off the cliff, displaying his Protestant roots after this:

“Objectively, the core of faith is God, who is a Person, not a concept.”

God is not a “Person” or a “Persona”. God is ineffable, the “Being which creates beingness” We believe in God but God does not “exist” in any sense we comprehend. Any other concept leads to anthropomorphism, as for example this:

“God does not send you to hell for flunking his theology exam but for willingly divorcing from him.”

Nonsense. God doesn’t send anyone to hell. God’s mercy and love fall on the good and the evil alike, like rain on the earth. To say that God’s grace doesn’t fall on the evil is like saying the sun doesn’t shine on the blind! We can grow to hate God so much that His love becomes a fire which torments us just as it burnishes and refines those who love Him.

I am always pleased when a Protestant returns to The Church; it is cause for rejoicing. But The Church has an obligation to properly catechise people before they begin to “preach”.


12 posted on 05/02/2009 4:07:50 AM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son...

What you posted is an adulterated Nicene Creed. The Nicene-Constantinopolean Creed never had "and the Son."

I am not sure why the Latin Church has so many Creeds. The Church agreed to one Creed, acclaimed at an Ecumenical Council, believed infallible and guided by the Holy Spirit. Is that not enough for some individuals in your Church? Or is making an imprint of one's own ego so important as to try to embellish something considered infallible?

13 posted on 05/02/2009 4:11:33 AM PDT by kosta50 (Don't look up, the truth is all around you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Intellectialism is hardly a problem. Faux intellectuals are. The Obama regime is filled with faux intellectuals. Otherwise they are all rather thuggish and dull witted.


14 posted on 05/02/2009 4:53:12 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

When I was a child we said the Apostles Creed and/or the Nicene Creed every Sunday...

I had to learn them by heart and recite them to be confirmed into the Anglican church at 14...


15 posted on 05/02/2009 5:11:45 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

In a search for some church in Toronto that contained people who would welcome me, I attended a United Church in my neighbourhood (that turned out to be the wealthiest church in the city). They required that you only believe 85% of the Creed in order to be a member. (They were actively hostile to new members, and anti-American sermons were preached routinely by their South African pastor). I think a Creed is either or — you do not get to pick which bits you will believe and which you will not.

I have always thought that in addition to a statement of facts, the Creed is food for meditation.


16 posted on 05/02/2009 5:35:59 AM PDT by Appleby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut; newguy357; Salvation
I admire the beauty of the liturgy, but we are done for if we rest in it thinking that rote recitation will maintain true teaching.

This is an excellent point. As Catholics, we profess our faith each Sunday by reciting the Nicene Creed, yet I wonder how many do so out of rote rather than truly reflecting on the truths expressed therein. To ensure we have a firm uderstanding of our faith (i.e. what we state each Sunday), the Church has given us the catechism. It breaks the Nicene Creed down into its elements and then links each statement to Scripture. For example:

PART ONE
THE PROFESSION OF FAITH

SECTION ONE
"I BELIEVE" - "WE BELIEVE"

26 We begin our profession of faith by saying: "I believe" or "We believe". Before expounding the Church's faith, as confessed in the Creed, celebrated in the liturgy and lived in observance of God's commandments and in prayer, we must first ask what "to believe" means. Faith is man's response to God, who reveals himself and gives himself to man, at the same time bringing man a superabundant light as he searches for the ultimate meaning of his life. Thus we shall consider first that search (Chapter One), then the divine Revelation by which God comes to meet man (Chapter Two), and finally the response of faith (Chapter Three).

CHAPTER ONE
MAN'S CAPACITY FOR GOD

I. THE DESIRE FOR GOD

27 The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for:

The dignity of man rests above all on the fact that he is called to communion with God. This invitation to converse with God is addressed to man as soon as he comes into being. For if man exists it is because God has created him through love, and through love continues to hold him in existence. He cannot live fully according to truth unless he freely acknowledges that love and entrusts himself to his creator.1

28  In many ways, throughout history down to the present day, men have given expression to their quest for God in their religious beliefs and behavior: in their prayers, sacrifices, rituals, meditations, and so forth. These forms of religious expression, despite the ambiguities they often bring with them, are so universal that one may well call man a religious being:

From one ancestor [God] made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him - though indeed he is not far from each one of us. For "in him we live and move and have our being."2

1 Vatican Council II, GS 19 § 1.
2 Acts 17:26-28.

You can see more of how this comes together at the following link.

Catechism of the Catholic Church.

17 posted on 05/02/2009 5:42:28 AM PDT by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; Salvation
God is not a “Person” or a “Persona”. God is ineffable, the “Being which creates beingness” We believe in God but God does not “exist” in any sense we comprehend. Any other concept leads to anthropomorphism, as for example this:

K ... you are being too scrupulous with the text. Catholics believe the same thing, even Protestant converts. Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant, words limit our ability to express the ineffable.

40 Since our knowledge of God is limited, our language about him is equally so. We can name God only by taking creatures as our starting point, and in accordance with our limited human ways of knowing and thinking.

41 All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. The manifold perfections of creatures - their truth, their goodness, their beauty all reflect the infinite perfection of God. Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures" perfections as our starting point, "for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator".15

42  God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, image-bound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God - "the inexpressible, the incomprehensible, the invisible, the ungraspable" - with our human representations.16 Our human words always fall short of the mystery of God.

43 Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression; nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that "between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude";17 and that "concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him."18

15 Wis 13:5.
16 Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Anaphora.
17 Lateran Council IV:DS 806.
18 St. Thomas Aquinas, SCG I,30.

CCC

Having previously been an altar server in the Roman Catholic Church, you already know this.

18 posted on 05/02/2009 5:54:38 AM PDT by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Mine is simpler and lots more effective.

Live each day with courage.

Take pride in your work.

Always finish what you start.

Do what has to be done.

Be tough, but fair.

When you make a promise, keep it.

Ride for the brand.

Talk less and say more.

Remember that some things aren't for sale.

Know where to draw the line.

Life is hard, it is harder if you are stupid.

Nemo me impune lacessit.

"Courage is when you are scared to death, saddle up and ride out anyway.

John Wayne

19 posted on 05/02/2009 6:02:35 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Nemo me impune lacessit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer; Kolokotronis

Perhaps dear Kolokotronis was making the (IMO correct) point that God isn’t a person, but God the Father is (like God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are too). IOW, to correctly convey the Triune concept of God, it’s best to not refer to “God” as a person, but only refer to a person of the Trinity when speaking of such. In the context of the text in dispute, it seems the author was speaking of God the Son, so in that sense he (the author) was right, but in a technical sense it can be said that the author should have been more clear. (i.e. saying “Objectively, the core of faith is God the Son, who is a Person, not a concept.”)

Maybe?


20 posted on 05/02/2009 6:14:05 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven; Kolokotronis
Perhaps dear Kolokotronis was making the (IMO correct) point that God isn’t a person

We ALL know that God is not a person. Hence, the clarification posted from the CCC.

They say that language is the worst form of communication because it fails to properly express what is in our hearts. This discussion is a good example.

21 posted on 05/02/2009 6:30:55 AM PDT by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
The Catholic ideal is the complete person, with a cool head and a warm heart, a hard head and a soft heart. The mere intellectual has a cool heart; the anti-intellectual has a hot head. The intellectual has a hard heart, the anti-intellectual has a soft head. The Church puts the severed parts in the right order because the Church has the blueprint: Christ (Eph 4:13).

I think the passage above sums up the whole issue very nicely. Thanks for posting.

22 posted on 05/02/2009 7:38:07 AM PDT by SamuraiScot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

**In this day where false teachings abound, I firmly believe that Christians need to be held more strongly to the contents of the Creeds.**

Agree.


23 posted on 05/02/2009 8:52:29 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

The Nicene Creed is a poem? Outlandish!


24 posted on 05/02/2009 8:54:18 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis
“Objectively, the core of faith is God, who is a Person, not a concept.”

Yaaaggghhhh!

Nice catch.

25 posted on 05/02/2009 8:54:49 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

the creed is stated daily in every Catholic church.


26 posted on 05/02/2009 8:55:44 AM PDT by tioga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

So, how to you explain the Trinity without saying “Three persons in one God?”

Three ‘beings’ in one God?

Hmmm. Wondering.


27 posted on 05/02/2009 8:56:11 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kosta50; annalex; AnAmericanMother

Does someone have a Latin.Vulgate of the Creeds?


28 posted on 05/02/2009 8:57:59 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Appleby

**(They were actively hostile to new members, and anti-American sermons were preached routinely by their South African pastor).**

Wow! Sounds like you ran into another Rev. Wright! Was Obama there? LOL! <sarc off


29 posted on 05/02/2009 8:59:40 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Thanks, NYer!


30 posted on 05/02/2009 9:00:21 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

cute, but I do not worship ANY movies stars....only God.


31 posted on 05/02/2009 9:01:20 AM PDT by tioga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut
Creeds are unifying statements of faith. They were developed by the Early Church as a test of Orthodoxy and as a response to heresies. I find the creeds to be powerful statements. I wish more Protestant groups would use them or use them more often.

To your point, the various creeds and confessions of the historic church have been a useful means of codifying and focusing key Biblical doctrines, and by extension are very useful in matters of church membership (covenants) or forming definitions of heresy for Protestants. An interesting problem arises, as many "Protestant" churches, especially evangelical and non-denominational ones, reject the creeds as binding on themselves re matters of discipline or doctrine. How does St Simeon the Patient Reformed Church know that First Fundamental Independent Baptist Church of Christ Unified down the street is trinitarian and orthodox, if FFIBCoCU refuses to publish (or even write down on paper) their "what we believe" document, and also refuses to deny or affirm SStPRC's own "what we believe" document?

There is no simple way of determining whether some churches are "in the fold" of authentic Christianity or are apostate/heretical. We (the pro-creedal Christians) have to "take it on faith" that they (the anti-creedal Christians) are really our brothers in Christ. Now to some extent I'm exaggerating here in order to prove a point, but I think the question is a valid one.

I would never suggest that a creed is a substitute for Scripture itself, nor would I suffer accusations that creeds are fabrications of doctrine. I would say that creeds are excellent summaries of where Scripture speaks to certain subjects, and exist as historic documents as to who took what side in ecclesiastical/doctrinal disputes. IMO creeds were wisely formed to "redeem the time" (Eph. 5:16) when testing or investigating the confessions of a professing believer, and continue to be smart tools for the churches' use today.

Only those believers that individually and institutionally submit themselves to the historic creeds of the church can be said to be "in agreement" doctrinally. By their very nature, creeds define what two or more groups' shared beliefs are, and they provide a useful way for both insiders and outsiders to test themselves on whether they really are doctrinally and congregationally unified.

32 posted on 05/02/2009 9:14:21 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (Presbyterians often forget that John Knox had been a Sunday bowler.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JEHUE
What nonsense! Tell that to Charles Carroll, a Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence. He'd be shocked to find out that his cousin, Daniel Carroll, didn't really sign the Constitution!

There was no prohibition, real or implied, on Catholic representatives at the Constitutional convention of 1787. Daniel Carroll's presence there alone squashes the notion. I believe that there was one other Catholic there as well, though I don't recall his name. The only reason there were so few Catholic signers is that, at the time, there were proportionately few Catholics here. That's the only reason. Stop sounding like a Know Nothing Party member.

And there is another implication in your statement. Do you aver that it is more important to follow your country or to follow God first? God or country. You choose. Your statement seems to imply that sincere believers (in this case, Catholics) must bow to amorphous concepts of egalitarian politics ("the people") every time. I submit to you that that is a strange notion from the Christian POV. Indeed, it's that very mindset that has led to the collapse of our Christian heritage, insofar as people cave to the notion that we must subsume our convictions in the face of raw poll numbers on a host of moral issues these days. No. God comes first, then our fellow men! If you are any kind of Christian at all, how can you really take issue with this?

33 posted on 05/02/2009 9:16:17 AM PDT by magisterium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: tioga

Are you saying John Wayne is not god?


34 posted on 05/02/2009 9:28:47 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Nemo me impune lacessit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Keep up the good work is my only comment. It’s just like the two extremes C.S. Lewis once pointed out with regard to Satan when he said the two biggest mistakes we make are to (1) give him all the credit (i.e. blame) and attribute all of our sins to him(ala Flip Wilson - “The Devil made me do it”) and (2) the deny he exists or think that he does not have a hand in many things. I was taught there are three things we struggle against, “the world, the flesh, and the devil” and I would say that intellectualism is certainly the flesh as our pride and our own sense of ego is often at the heart of our trying to assert our intellect over scripture. Meanwhile, we are to worship God with our “mind” so to be a silly-minded person that does not consider the scripture carefully in its context is, likewise, foolish.


35 posted on 05/02/2009 9:36:32 AM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Hey - you are doing a good job on here!


36 posted on 05/02/2009 9:37:02 AM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

You do have some interesting points here.


37 posted on 05/02/2009 9:43:49 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“Catholics believe the same thing, even Protestant converts.”

I know, NYer, I know. I am not saying the Latin Church doesn’t have an orthodox belief in this regard. I am saying that the formerly Protestant preacher is either just plain wrong, or reverting to a Protestant mindset and vocabulary, neither of which are appropriate if one purports to be speaking the Truth as The Church knows it.


38 posted on 05/02/2009 10:12:02 AM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

“So, how to you explain the Trinity without saying “Three persons in one God?”

Three ‘beings’ in one God?

Hmmm. Wondering.”

Easy, learn to understand the Creed in Greek, or Syriac/Arabic, or Church Slavonic, or Latin (without the filioque as is normative for catechesis). The whole “person” idea comes from the Latin “persona” which means more a “mask” than “person”. The word to use is “hypostasis”, which is used even in English, thus three hypostasia in one ousia. Theologically, these words are used when discussing the Trinity in most languages because they avoid the problem of anthropomorphism.

St. Patrick’s shamrock is pretty good, too!


39 posted on 05/02/2009 10:29:48 AM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

You got me there. Need to look up this word!

anthropomorphism


40 posted on 05/02/2009 10:37:27 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Kolokotronis
So, how to you explain the Trinity without saying “Three persons in one God?" Three ‘beings’ in one God?

Orthodox don't. Last time I checked, it's "Trinity one in essence and undivided." Very carefully chosen words.

If each "person" of the Holy Trinity is mentioned, the term used is hypostasis, which does not mean "persona" (as in Vulgate tranlastion, a "mask"), nor does it mean a human person. Hypostasis is substantial reality, an essence, not a person.

41 posted on 05/02/2009 10:38:39 AM PDT by kosta50 (Don't look up, the truth is all around you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis
You got me there. Had to look it up.

anthropomorphism

Main Entry:
an·thro·po·mor·phism 
          Listen to the pronunciation of anthropomorphism
Pronunciation:
\-ˌfi-zəm\
Function:
noun
Date:
1753
: an interpretation of what is not human or personal in terms of human or personal characteristics : humanization
an·thro·po·mor·phist 
          Listen to the pronunciation of anthropomorphist \-fist\ noun

42 posted on 05/02/2009 10:42:17 AM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Faith and reason, the good blend.


43 posted on 05/02/2009 11:45:05 AM PDT by bboop (obama, little o, not a Real God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

You know what’s sad? You hang around Pepsicolians long enough and you’re no longer surprised. Just depressed.


44 posted on 05/02/2009 11:52:47 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: JEHUE; magisterium
"The Catholic creed is why “ The Catholics “ were not allowed to write our constitution... "


Daniel Carroll a Signer of the Articles of the Confederation/ U.S.
Constitution and U.S. Representative in the First Federal
Congress (1789-179)


Charles Carroll a Signer of the Declaration of Independence and a
Senator in the First U.S. Federal Congress (1789-1791)


Thomas Fitzsimons a Signer of the U.S. Constitution and U.S.
Representative in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)

45 posted on 05/02/2009 11:53:18 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Comments?

Well thanks for asking...

10. I acknowledge the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church for the mother and mistress of all churches; and I promise true obedience to the Bishop of Rome,

1Co 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
1Co 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
1Co 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

As you can see, we are warned against following Peter, or any of his supposed apostolic heirs...

And of course everyone knows Peter would never let a man bow down to him, to pay him reverence...

That should throw up very large 'danger' signs to you guys that follow and are obedient to a pope...Especially one who claims to be a descendant of one of the apostles...

3. I also profess that there are truly and properly seven Sacraments of the New Law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and necessary for the salvation of mankind, though not all for every one;

Sorry...Jesus became the ONE sacrifice FOR US so we don't need sacraments...We can do nothing...Jesus did it all...

5. I profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead;

God never asked you for a sacrifice...In fact, a sacrifice by Catholics or anyone would be an abomination to God...The only sacrifice God wants is a sacrifice of thanksgiving...Be thankful for what He has done...

God already provided the 'Sacrifice', His only Son...What can you do to top that??? You going to offer His Son again??? Or continually offer His Son???

You can't offer the Son of God to God for a sacrifice...God already offered His Son for a sacrifice for YOU...

And they that have done good shall go into life eternal, and they who indeed have done evil into eternal fire.

Apparently that depends on what the definition of what evil is, eh, or what is, is...

You can claim you can sin every day, all day long but your sins aren't bad sins...

That IS a sin...It's the sin of willful delusion...

This true Catholic faith, without which no one can be saved,

And there's the biggest delusion of all...More than half of your church voted in a pro child killer as president...This is God's church??? Not the one I read about in the scripture...

46 posted on 05/02/2009 12:30:02 PM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; kosta50; AnAmericanMother

Latin version

Credo in unum Deum,
Patrem omnipoténtem,
Factórem cæli et terræ,
Visibílium ómnium et invisibílium.
Et in unum Dóminum Iesum Christum,
Fílium Dei Unigénitum,
Et ex Patre natum ante ómnia sæcula.
Deum de Deo, lumen de lúmine, Deum verum de Deo vero,
Génitum, non factum, consubstantiálem Patri:
Per quem ómnia facta sunt.
Qui propter nos hómines et propter nostram salútem
Descéndit de cælis.
Et incarnátus est de Spíritu Sancto
Ex María Vírgine, et homo factus est.
Crucifíxus étiam pro nobis sub Póntio Piláto;
Passus, et sepúltus est,
Et resurréxit tértia die, secúndum Scriptúras,
Et ascéndit in cælum, sedet ad déxteram Patris.
Et íterum ventúrus est cum glória,
Iudicáre vivos et mórtuos,
Cuius regni non erit finis.
Et in Spíritum Sanctum, Dóminum et vivificántem:
Qui ex Patre Filióque procédit.
Qui cum Patre et Fílio simul adorátur et conglorificátur:
Qui locútus est per prophétas.
Et unam, sanctam, cathólicam et apostólicam Ecclésiam.
Confíteor unum baptísma in remissiónem peccatorum.
Et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum,
Et vitam ventúri sæculi. Amen.[27]

The Latin text adds "Deum de Deo" and "Filioque" to the Greek.

[27]Missale Romanum

Wikipedia


47 posted on 05/02/2009 12:38:26 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Iscool; Salvation
"As you can see, we are warned against following Peter, or any of his supposed apostolic heirs..."

I guess I shouldn't read any of his epistles any more..

48 posted on 05/02/2009 1:11:43 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Salvation; kosta50; AnAmericanMother
And here it is in the original:

" Πιστεύω εἰς ἕνα Θεόν, Πατέρα, Παντοκράτορα, ποιητὴν οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς, ὁρατῶν τε πάντων καὶ ἀοράτων.

Καὶ εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ, τὸν ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς γεννηθέντα πρὸ πάντων τῶν αἰώνων· φῶς ἐκ φωτός, Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ Θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ, γεννηθέντα οὐ ποιηθέντα, ὁμοούσιον τῷ Πατρί, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο. Τὸν δι' ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν κατελθόντα ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν καὶ σαρκωθέντα ἐκ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς Παρθένου καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσαντα. Σταυρωθέντα τε ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου, καὶ παθόντα καὶ ταφέντα. Καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ τὰς Γραφάς. Καὶ ἀνελθόντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ καθεζόμενον ἐκ δεξιῶν τοῦ Πατρός. Καὶ πάλιν ἐρχόμενον μετὰ δόξης κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς, οὗ τῆς βασιλείας οὐκ ἔσται τέλος.

Καὶ εἰς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ Ἅγιον, τὸ κύριον, τὸ ζωοποιόν, τὸ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον, τὸ σὺν Πατρὶ καὶ Υἱῷ συμπροσκυνούμενον καὶ συνδοξαζόμενον, τὸ λαλῆσαν διὰ τῶν προφητῶν.

Εἰς μίαν, Ἁγίαν, Καθολικὴν καὶ Ἀποστολικὴν Ἐκκλησίαν.

Ὁμολογῶ ἓν βάπτισμα εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. Προσδοκῶ ἀνάστασιν νεκρῶν. Καὶ ζωὴν τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος.

Ἀμήν."

Its worth noting that even we don't recite it precisely as the Councils dogmatized it. In the proceedings of the Councils, it opens with "Πιστεύομεν", We believe, instead of "Πιστεύω", I believe. The dogmatic Trinitarian definition starts at the first word, "Πιστεύω", and extends through "τὸ λαλῆσαν διὰ τῶν προφητῶν", Who spoke by the prophets. Every time I look at these words, I am struck that these are precisely the words used by the Council Fathers almost 700 years ago, written in the very language they used.

49 posted on 05/02/2009 1:39:26 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; Salvation; kosta50; AnAmericanMother

You mean 1700 years.

The new English translation will restore “I believe...”; presently, in Novus Ordo we use the plural form.


50 posted on 05/02/2009 2:11:23 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-169 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson