Posted on 05/01/2009 10:31:49 PM PDT by Salvation
Comments?
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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 ...
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. “
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”.
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?
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.
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...
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.
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 FAITHSECTION 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 GOD27 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.
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.
Having previously been an altar server in the Roman Catholic Church, you already know this.
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
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?
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.