The Symbol of Faith – The Nicene Creed

Emperor St. Constantine and the Church Fathers

            The Nicene Creed is one of the most recognized and widely used Creeds in Christendom. It arose from the First Ecumenical Council held by the Church in the town of Nicaea in the year 325 AD, as most councils do, as a response to Heresy forming against the teachings of the church. When the church saw how the teachings of the Apostles could possibly be twisted into something not of God, the Church got together to publicly decreed the teaching of the Apostles in a definite manor. It can not be emphasized enough that this was not when these teachings were formed, but rather a proclamation of what was already believed and taught by the Apostles from the very beginning. Until this time there was no reason for the church to formally create a creed because the Bishops of the Church faithfully taught and handed down the correct teachings and doctrines. It must also be pointed out that at the time of this council the New Testament scriptures were not canonized yet. The church was still deciding which books should be revered as Holy Scripture and which should be used only for edification (see my other Blog “Early Christian Reader” for more details on that). 

So the teachings of the Apostles, and the Creed, were formed and solid even before the church had a solid grip on what the New Testament would look like. This is important for the discussion on the Reformer’s doctrine of Sola Scriptura that we will have later on in this series. The only “sure” thing we had by 325 AD was the faithful teaching of the Bishops and the most popular letters known to be authentically from the Apostles at that time. The Nicene Creed became a very foundational block of what it meant to call oneself a Christian. This Creed built off of earlier – less formal – creeds such as the Apostles Creed and the Athanasian Creed that holds very similar, if not identical, language that the Council used to create the Nicene Creed. 

The creed is divided into 4 sections: (1) The Father, (2) The Son (the longest), (3) The Holy Spirit, (4) The Holy Church. These are the most important elements of Christian Doctrine. Within the creed we find all theological affirmations that one needs within the Christian faith. God, Trinity, the Scriptures, Baptism, Resurrection, the Church, etc. The first 3 sections tell us what we should believe about God, and the last tells us what we should believe about the church and how we, as God's people, should interact with Him; the basic building blocks of the Christian faith. Lets dig in and discover the Early Christian faith together bit by bit:

 

Icon of the First Ecumenical Council

******

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 Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of Light; true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man. And He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; whose Kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father; who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets. 

And I believe in one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

          ******

            The very first words uttered in the Creed are “I Believe.” This is important to remember as our faith is a faith of belief in the truth of God and not relativistic in nature. This teaches us that even before we know what it is the Christian believes, the Christian must in fact BELIEVE these following tenants. In a modern secular world where radical individualism is king, this is important to remember. Too often today a Christian may flip flop between certain stances on topics of social importance – or even Theological importance for that matter. To be Christian is to believe in One thing, the truth of God handed down to us by the Apostles of Christ. One can not be a Christian and NOT believe that God made the heavens and the earth, that Christ was crucified, or that He rose from the dead. Closer to home, this means the Church and the Christian must have a stance on truth regarding civic topics such as abortion, same sex marriage, drug use, and assisted suicide. To be Christian is to stand up for what our Faith asks us to stand up for; indeed, what Christ commands us to bare, that is, to bare our cross – which may mean being ridiculed for being pro-life, i.e.

            The first two words in the Creed teaches us that what is about to be uttered in the creed is something that we should not stray away from, something we should hold onto deep in our hearts and minds, and if need be, suffer scorn or even die for our beliefs as Christians. A person can not attempt the Christian life in Christ without confronting their thoughts and personal beliefs with that of the Church, the Creed, or the teachings of the Apostles past down to us. In essence, it is what we believe as a Christian that makes us Christian.

 Icon of the 318 Bishops of Nicaea

History - Part II

            

                   In the summer of 1054 visitors from Rome came to the Sunday service in Constantinople at the Church of the Holy Wisdom;[1] but this was no regular visitor. His name was Cardinal Humbert, and was sent on behalf of the Bishop of Rome. The Cardinal walked right up to the Alter at the beginning of service and slapped upon it a Papal Bull[2] of Excommunication upon the East and her Bishops. The Cardinal and his two legates with him then walked out of the church. A deacon ran after them with the bull asking them to take it back. The Cardinal famously shook the dust from his feet and exclaimed “Let God look and judge.” The bull was dropped in the street and lost.[3] In turn, the Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Cerularius excommunicated the Bishop of Rome; these excommunications would not be “officially” lifted until 1965. 

            What was it that brought the Unified church to this point of division? There are a few factors that we will briefly discuss that were, both indirect and direct, causes of what has been deemed throughout history as The Great Schism; great because the church had been officially unified for over 1,000 years at this point – an amazing feat. Before we look at these factors though, I would like to point out that the effects of these excommunications were not immediate. The two churches continued to work together, though reluctantly at times, for quite some time. It was in fact the Eastern Church that requested the Western Church to send some noble knights to help defend the Byzantine Empire against the Turks in 1095. The opposite is also true. East and West were not always in close speaking terms with each other as early as the 6^th century moving forward – though this never quite manifested itself like it did in 1054, which is why this is the common date pointed to for the Schism.

            Language: The first important factor in the schism between East and West is language. the East used Greek while the West employed Latin as the official language; There were few exceptions. The West continued the tradition of Latin as the language of the region primarity for administrative purposes. This was the Language of Rome and the Western Empire. The East had used Greek for language while under the united Empire but the region’s administrative infrastructure was Latin. When the Empire was split into two and the eastern capitol set as Constantinople, this changed. The east viewed Greek as a superior language and was the language used by the Christians in the west when Constantine became the first Christian Roman Emperor. Latin in the West and Greek in the East made communication difficult and trading of goods and ideas nearly impossible. 

Culture: It is because of this that from the 4^th century forward there began to develop very different cultures in East and West. The East – influenced by Levantine and Greek philosophical thought – became more mysterious and thought heavily upon metaphysical themes, always trying to explain and experience the supernatural acts of God. The West was more influenced by Rome’s legacy of legality and sophisticated structure of government, society, and judicial life; this extended into the life of the church as well. This influence would only be expanded upon when scholasticism enters the scene.

Secular Government: During the 3^rd and 4^th centuries the Roman Empire suffered much internal strife and civil wars. The government was carved up multiple times amongst its leaders; first as a Tetrarchy, then as two separate Empires, the Western Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire. The western Empire fell to many invasions from different groups leaving the Western Empire leaderless. Over a short span of time, the Bishop of Rome began to take on both Civil and Religious leadership roles, and the line between the two roles quickly became skewed. Over the preceding centuries the Bishop of Rome, the Pope (or Papa), became the central figurehead of Government in the region. The Byzantine Empire on the other hand dealt with a different set of issues. While the West was bring brought low by outsiders, the civil leadership in the west remained relatively strong. Because of this, the civil and the religious sectors were allowed to grow independently from each other, unlike the West. Though they played very different roles, the civil and religious realms became very tightly knit. The Bishops were very proud of their Christian Emperor, and the Emperors were eager for Christian council from the Bishops in times of need. 

The Rise of Islam: The rise of Islam came as an utter surprise to North Africa, the Levant, and Europe. Within 100 years of the founding of Islam, their armies had swept the earth and taken control of 3 very important Christian centers: Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch. While the Islamic Law allowed Christians to practice their faith, it permitted no conversion from any faith to Christianity; this limited these three cities global impact in the region. This left the two major centers of Christianity – Rome and Constantinople, also the respective Capitals – to vie for the Prime Leadership role within Christendom. Neither would win.

Primacy of Rome: Though early councils do indeed recognize Rome as the first and most respected of the Bishops and Christian centers, it was in no way an admonition that the Bishop of Rome was the universal head of all Christendom. The Patriarchs were given a status of ‘first among Equals,’ while the Bishop of Rome was given that same status as First Among Equals’ among the patriarchs. The Christian world often looked to Rome as a spiritual father for advice. This began to change when it was clear that the Bishop of Rome began to see himself as supreme head of the Church. The Church has always places Christ himself as the head of the church, in a very real sense, while ALL bishops were subject to Him and each other. The Pope began to place himself above the reprove of his fellow bishops. This is one of the most important and painful aspects of the Schism.

The Filioque Clause: No. This has nothing to do with St. Nick. Ok, well, maybe a little. St. Nicolas did in-fact attend the First Council in Nicaea. At this council the Creed of the church was finalized and gave the Christian the language of the faith. This was not the beginning or the creation of the faith, but rather a formalization of the language of what the Church had always professed. The most important part, for our purposes, is the churches teaching on the Holy Spirit. The Nicean Creed reads thus:

“And [I believe] in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the prophets.”

According to the Gospels, we are told by Christ that holy Spirit comes from the father, sent by the sun. The church agreed on this point in 325. But later on, on the council from the Spanish, the Western church began to change the language – without the council of the whole church together in agreement. The wording ‘and from the Son’ (Filioque in Latin) was inserted after ‘who proceeds from the Father,’ so that it would read that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This caused an uproar for the eastern church. This may not seem like a big deal, but it actually effects the pace of the Holy Spirit within the Trinity. Anything that changes how we think about God is very important. We will discuss the Filioque controversy and its importance in more detail when discussing the Creed in future posts.

            There are many reasons why the church split in two: some legitimist, most not so much. But after the Bishop of Rome left the communion of the rest of the bishops (there were not that many bishops in the west at the time other than in Rome), the western church began to make additions to the faith, including Purgatory, Immaculate Conception of Mary, Papal Supremacy, and indulgences, etc. These were the issues that many of the Reformers had with Rome. They are the same issues that the East take up with Rome as well, since Orthodoxy kept the same faith and the West added to it. In our next discussion, we will begin to go through the Creed. I believe this is the best way to discover Christian Doctrine and the Orthodox teaching on those doctrines.

---

[1] Also known as Hagia Sophia, and now stands as a mosque/museum in the modern city of Istanbul.

[2] A Papal Bull is a statement given by the Pope that is set as an official decree; named after the wax seal attached to the bottom called a Bulla.

[3] Ware, Timothy, The Orthodox Church. Penguin, 1997 ed. pp. 43.