SOME BASIC TEACHINGS FOUND IN THE CREED: THEIR SALVIFIC AND EXISTENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE (Part 2)

 

Part ΙΙ

 Dr Philip Kariatlis, Academic Director and Senior Lecturer in Theology, in Voice of Orthodoxy, 35:7-9 (2013), pp. 10-14.

 

The Structure and Basic Teachings of the Creed

The Creed is made up of twelve articles of faith, seven of which relate to God the Father, his only begotten Son, the ‘one Lord Jesus Christ’ and the Son’s relationship with the world. These articles were first promulgated at the First Ecumenical Counci (325AD) in Nicaea. The remaining five, relating to the Holy Spirit – more precisely, the Holy Spirit’s divinity and unique relationship to the Father – the Church and God’s future kingdom, were proclaimed at the Second Ecumenical Council (381AD) in the city of Constantinople.
God the Father Almighty
The Creed begins with a confession of faith in God the Father. From this it is clear that the Christian understanding of God is totally unrelated to any philosophical understanding which usually presents God as some abstract concept, the Uncaused Cause of the Greek philosophers. The Christian God, on the other hand, is Father! He is Father because He eternally begets a Son and timelessly issues forth the Holy Spirit. In referring to God as Father, the Eastern Orthodox tradition claims that He is the sole principle (μόνη ἄρχη) of the Son’s timeless generation and the Holy Spirit’s procession. More than this, the fact that God is Father also implies that we are his children. Reference to God as the ‘almighty’ Father highlights that evil will not prevail in the end; that, on the contrary God’s unimaginable love for the world will ultimately be victorious, thus giving us, the faithful, hope beyond the challenges, difficulties and evil that often seems to have the upper hand.
Furthermore, God is presented as Creator of both the visible and heavenly realms. This was added because there were many Christian sects in the early Church, such as the Gnostics for example, who believed that God could not have possibly been responsible for creating the world. In stating that God is Creator of ‘heaven and earth’, the Creed is declaring that God is responsible for brining the entire created realm – both earthly and heavenly – into existence and as such highlighting its inherent goodness. Precisel because God is the Creator of the entire world, the world is sacred insofar as it reveals the glory of God (cf. Psalm 19:1). As such, far from exploiting th world and depleting its resources, human persons are charged with the responsibility of being faithful stewards of the world, caring and looking after it.
The Only-Begotten Son of God
Next, the Creed turns its attention to the ‘onl begotten Son of God’. In light of the fact that the Christian God is the ‘Father almighty’, this necessarily implies that He has a Son because one cannot be called ‘Father’ without a Son. In this way, the logical sequence and relation between the articles of faith dealing with the Father and those following, namely the Creed’s presentation of the Son respectively become apparent. More specifically, those tenets of the faith relating to Jesus Christ, “the only-begotten Son of God” can be divided into two: whilst the first specifically relate to Christ’s unique relationship to his heavenly Father – what could possibly be called ‘ontological Christology’ (namely, the very being of the Son being precisely the same as the Father’s) – the second relate to Jesus’ relation to the world – what could be referred to as ‘functional Christology’. Notwithstanding the technical names ascribed to these two Christological sections of the Creed, it is important to appreciate what is being said.
The two most important phrases, which make explicit Jesus Christ’s unique relationship to the Father are the terms ‘of one essence [ὁμοούσιον]’ and ‘begotten [γεννηθέντα]’. In referring to Jesus Christ as being ‘of one essence with the Father’ the Creed is basically affirming the full and absolute deity of Jesus Christ and his co-eternity with the Father. In this way, the Creed is underscoring that all properties and activities proper to God the Father can equally
be attributed to the Son of God as well. Accordingly, if God the Father is to contemplated as ‘light’, then the same can be said of Jesus Christ; if God the Father is ‘true God’, so is Jesus Christ. This is the meaning of the phrase, “light from light, true God from true God” that we find in the Creed. To say this another way, the term homoousios underscores the fact that Jesus Christ cannot in any way be considered to be radically different form the Father. In other words, it highlights the fact that the Son of God possesses essentially the very same divinity as that of God the Father. In this way, the term affirms that the Son of God is unlike any created reality; namely, Jesus is not to be thought of as an offspring or a creature of God – as indeed some were asserting during that time when the Creed was first written and continue to do so today! The other important term, ‘begotten’ gives prominence to the fact that not only is the Son of God of the very same essence as God his Father, but that He is also a distinct divine ‘hypostasis’ or person – indeed, the second divine Person of the Holy Trinity, yet one in permanent communion/koinonia with his Father – and of course the Holy Spirit.
In referring to the Son of God as ‘begotten’ the Creed identifies that which is unique with regards to the Son of God. Indeed, the Father is the unbegotten One and the Holy Spirit is the One who proceeds eternally from the Father. In this way, both the indissoluble communion and the unity of the Father with the Son together with his distinctiveness is highlighted in the Creed.
After having specified the Son’s unique relationship to God the Father, the Creed continues in identifying his activity within the world. The Creed captures the entire activity of Christ on earth – namely, his incarnation, together with his crucifixion, resurrection, ascension and return in glory (often referred to in text books in terms of ‘Christ’s entire salvific economy) – and provides us with the hermeneutical key to unlocking the significance of these activities as a whole and appreciating their relationship. This section of the Creed begins with “for us and for our salvation” thereby clearly highlighting that all these events can only truly be understood when seen in Orthodox tradition teaches that Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father alone – that is, not from both the Father and the Son – whilst, He is sent into the world in time, by the Son. The teaching regarding the distinction between the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father alone, and his temporal mission from the Son, is clearly seen in the gospel according to St John, chapter 15, verse 26:
When the Advocate comes, whom I will send [ὃν ἐγὼ πέμψω] to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father [ὃ παρὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται], he will testify on my behalf.
The text clearly shows that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father – ὃ παρὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται – since the Father alone is the source and beginning of the Godhead. Indeed, the Eastern Orthodox tradition understands the verb ‘ἐκπορεύεται’ to have a special meaning signifying the Spirit’s eternal procession from the Father alone. And so, when referring to the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, which concerns the relations existing within the Trinity from all eternity [the immanent Trinity], the Church attributes the Spirit’s procession and existence to the Father alone. It is for this reason that the Eastern Orthodox Church refuses to say that the Spirit also proceeds also from the Son, since this is not the Scriptural use of the verb ‘ἐκπορεύεται’, nor was it understood like this at the Second Ecumenical Council (381AD) which formulated the Church’s teaching on the Holy Sprit. However, in referring to the Spirit’s temporal mission in the world, then it is clear that the Holy Spirit is in fact sent by Jesus Christ – ὃν ἐγὼ πέμψω.
Failure to distinguish between the two Scriptural verbs ‘ἐκπορεύεται’ and ‘πέμψω’, can consequently easily lead one to believe that the Holy Spirit ‘proceeds’ from the Father and the Son since the Scriptures mention the Son sending forth the Spirit – but this only concerns the Spirit’s temporal mission in the world.3 To do this, however, would not only introduce two separate principles or sources to the Godhead, which would amount to ditheism, but also distort the equality between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit;4 that is, an imbalance in the eternal relations is introduced in which the Holy Spirit would be subordinated to the Son. Consequently, in order to avoid introducing two principles into the doctrine of the Holy Trinity and destroying the equality between the three divine persons, the Eastern Orthodox Church rejects the filioque. It relation to the eternal relations between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the Eastern Orthodox tradition would claim that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and rests in the Son.5

The Salvific and Existential Significance of the Creed for Us Today

It is important to note that the truths depicted above are not some theoretical, speculative doctrines for the so-called ‘professional’ theologians devoid of any practical significance. On the contrary, these eternal truths are important both because they have to do with our salvation – namely, the means by which we too can enter into this fellowship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit by grace. Furthermore, they are significant because they can inform, indeed transform, the way we live our life on a daily basis.
The significance of the Creed lies in the fact that it does not simply present theoretical truths about God but saving truths. The Creed captures in writing an experience of the early Church’s communion with God and thus it also allows the faithful today into that very same saving experience of the mystery of God. Far from being rigid, inflexible and merely authoritative teachings, the Creed, on the contrary, contains teachings which contribute to a person’s redemption and salvation. It is important to realize, right from the outset, that the Creed has nothing to do with simply adding to our knowledge of God, but its ultimate purpose is to give insights into another way of life, a life without end. Understood as salvific teachings bestowing upon the faithful a kind of foretaste foretaste, here and now, of that ‘not-yet’ direct experience where God will be revealed ‘face to face’ (1Cor 13:12), the Creed ought to be seen as one’s commencement upon the path of true life, which is, in the end, a path to freedom. Indeed, the type of freedom that God offers is one which liberates the world even from the bonds of death bestowing upon us the fullness of life. In this way, the truths contained in the Creed offer us salvation: salvation from death and salvation into eternal life where we literally become everything that God is by nature, by grace.
More than beings ‘pointers to salvation’, the teachings contained in the Creed also offer invaluable guidelines for how to live our life as Christians today.
Far from being merely informative, the teachings contained in the Creed are ‘pointers to life’ which are able to make a formative, and in the end, transformative impact on our life. Far too often, the doctrines of the Church in general, but more specifically also the teachings found in the Creed, are thought to be speculative abstractions which have nothing to do with life. Moreover, it is often said, that becoming familiar with the doctrines of the Church is of secondary importance, best left to the so-called expert ‘theologians’ since leading a ‘good’ and ‘virtuous’ life is what matters in the long run. On the contrary, however, doctrines in general, but more specifically those foundational ones contained in the Creed, are highly instructive for life. For example, the fact that we believe in one God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, uniquely distinct yet at the same time equal and united gives human persons, who are created in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26) a paradigm for true living.
In the same way, for example, that the three divine Persons continually embrace one another in an interpenetrating communion of love, completely and continuously open to the other, where their uniqueness does not destroy their unity and communion but rather constitute it, so too are human beings called to embrace the ‘uniqueness of others without this in any way necessarily leading to any division within a community of people. Based on this Trinitarian
model, Orthodox theology would claim that difference, diversity and distinctiveness need not lead to separation; on the contrary diversity can be constitutive of unity within human societies. Trinitarian theology tells us that each of us was not created different from each other, but different for each other. In striving to live this truth alone, we would be able radically to transform the way we saw and interacted with others leading to a wonderfully diverse, yet peaceful and tolerant society.
Concluding Remarks
In attempting to explore some of the basic teachings found in the Creed, we were able to show that all these articles of faith are essentially related to the salvation of the world. In so doing, we were able to ascertain that the main tenets of faith as depicted in the Creed, far from being preoccupied with any speculative or presumptive abstractions, are best understood from within a soteriological and existential framework. Specifically, we were able to show that the mystery of diversity in unity as lived eternally by the three divine Persons of the Holy Trinity, is a pattern of life that we are called to emulate, of course in a creaturely way. As such, it is not enough to become familiar with these truths but also and more appropriately to sing praises to the Trinitarian Godhead, to bow in awe before the incomprehensible mystery of divine Love, to be bathed by its splendor, and to pray to be gifted with the grace so openly flowing out of this Love, so that we may be enabled to live lovingly in this life, namely, selflessly orientated always towards the ‘other’, who ultimately is our ‘nearest god’.6

1. St Gregory the Theologian described it in the following way: “No
sooner do I conceive the unity than the Trinity bathes me in its splendour. And when I think of the Trinity, again the unity seizes me and my eyes are filled, and the greater part of what I am thinking escapes me.” Oration, 40. 41, PG 36:417.
2. Στό Περιθώριο τοῦ Διαλόγου (Athens: Domos, 1991), 116.

3. St John of Damascus wrote: “Likewise, we believe also in one Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life: who proceeds from the Father, the Father being the only cause… proceeding from the Father and communicated through the Son. And participated in by all creation… And we speak likewise of the Holy Spirit as from the Father, and call him the Spirit of the Father. And we do not speak of the Spirit as from the Son… and we confess that He is manifested and imparted to us through the Son…But the Holy Spirit of the Father as proceeding from the Father, for there is no impulse without the Spirit. And we also speak of the Spirit of the Son, not as though proceeding from him, but proceeding through him from the Father. For the Father alone is the cause.” Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 1, 8,12. P.G. 94. 821-833 and 849.
4. The West responds to these objections by stating that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son “as from one principle [tanquam ab uno principio]”. According to the Eastern Orthodox tradition, such a re sponse reduces and confuses the persons of the Father and the Son, thus making the persons merely different aspects in which the one God appears; something which the East rejects, since it upholds that persons are concrete and unique modes of real existence. Furthermore, the filioque also ends up making the essence the principle of unity, and not the person of the Father, but the abstract essence of God. From this, there arises the danger of undermining the fact that God is personal, and believing instead that He is an abstract essence in which various relations can be distinguished. As we have shown, the East does not identify ‘person’
with mere relations as Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274AD) had done in the West by stating that personae sunt ipsaet relationes [persons are the relations themselves]. Relations are personal characteristics of persons, but not the persons themselves.
5. For example, the Doxastikon of the Sunday of Pentecost Vespers clearly brings to light this Trinitarian aspect of the feast day: “Come all you people, let us worship the Godhead of three hypostases: the Son in the Father, with the Holy Spirit; for the Father timelessly begat the Son, who is co-eternal and of one throne; and the Holy Spirit was in the Father, glorified with the Son; one might, one essence, one Godhead, which we all worship saying: Holy God who created all things through the Son, with the cooperation of the Holy Spirit; holy Mighty, through whom we have known the Father, and through whom the Holy Spirit came into the world; holy Immortal, the comforting Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and rests in the Son. O holy Trinity, glory be to you.” This hymn is attributed to Emperor Leo VI (886-912AD)

6. Archbishop Stylianos of Australia, in a poem entitled ‘The Other’ written in Perth, on 24-5-76. The entire poem reads: The Other/ The other is ineffable/ neither small nor large/ an anonymous yearning/ regardless/ of how familiar or distant/ he is my nearest god. / However different the other/ much more/ astonishing/ is my Lord and God/ only in touching him/ am I ecstatically redeemed/ in the fulfilment of the world.