A Creed? What is the Athanasian Creed Anyway?

In last week’s News and Views, I mentioned the Athanasian Creed, which, along with the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds, is one of the Creeds of the Christian Church.  I noted that it was my favourite Creed. A couple of people queried me about it as they were not familiar with it.  This is not surprizing as it has been more honoured in the neglect that the observance in the modern church―at least in the Anglican Church in this part of the world.

As I result, I was inspired to write something about it this week.  The Book of Alternative Services, which is the prayer book used almost exclusively in the Anglican Church today (we still officially recognize the Book of Common Prayer but it is dying of neglect but that too is another story), has only the Nicene Creed and the Apostles’ Creed in the worship liturgy.  The Book of Common Prayer, which is the traditional prayer book, includes the Athanasian Creed as an alternative.  I don’t know to what extent it was used in the past, not being raised an Anglican.  However, it is in the back of the prayer books and probably was not used to any great extent. 

With that background, let’s explore the Athanasian Creed a little.  Given its length, I have reproduced it at the end of this missive for reference.  I found this version of the website of the Anglican Church of Canada which notes, “It is included in the Book of Common Prayer, but is used very rarely in current Anglican Church of Canada liturgies”.

 I have been favourably disposed to this for a couple of reasons which are perhaps theoretical and theological rather than practical.  Indeed, I have never experienced the Creed in worship.  First, article 35 states,” One, however, not by conversion of Godhead into flesh, / but by taking of Manhood into God.”    This for me, is an affirmation and a redemption of matter and of the human body which overcomes the split between the divine and matter which developed out of Augustinian theology.  I am not equipped to get into the fine points of this but the church has had what can only be described as a less than positive view of human sexuality and the body in general focusing on its sinfulness.  It also has had a less than positive view of women which I believe, was due, in part, to the negative attitude to matter as fallen and sinful.  There were and are cultural influences as well cannot be denied.  The Athanasian Creed holds that the incarnation redeemed humanity in all its material form and being.

The second reason for my positive view of the Athanasian Creed (which was probably not written by St. Athanasius) was articulated by Madeleine L’Engle in her introduction to The Mind of the Maker by Dorothy Sayers.  This book is a wonderful exploration of creativity and the Creator.  L’Engle writes that the work of Sayer notes the incomprehensible nature of the three in One and One in Three of the Trinity.  However, she states that, “The Athanasian Creed is probably the most satisfactory of the creed, with its open admission that trying to define the undefinable is like writing on water, and no more translatable than the words Jesus wrote in the dust” (xxii). 

If you look at the Creed you will see that it goes back and forth and up and down in its affirmation that the Three are one and the One is Three and just what it is so get over your need to define this in a logical way.

For me this is an absolutely critical point in trying to explore God.  I spoke in my sermon yesterday about the necessity of using poetry and image to speak of God rather than trying to use logical, scientific, fact driven language to define the undefinable.  “In my Father’s house are many mansions.” Of the King James Version is so much more evocative than the pedestrian “In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places” of the New Revised Standard Version. 

I have attached a copy of yesterday’s sermon if you would like to explore my thinking on this.  Blessings. 

Athanasian Creed WHOSOEVER would be saved / needeth before all things to hold fast the Catholic Faith. 2 Which Faith except a man keep whole and undefiled, / without doubt he will perish eternally. 3 Now the Catholic Faith is this, / that we worship one God in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity; 4 Neither confusing the Persons, / nor dividing the Substance. 5 For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, / another of the Holy Ghost; 6 But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, / the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. 7 Such as the Father is, such is the Son, / and such is the Holy Ghost; 8 The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Ghost uncreated; 9 The Father infinite, the Son infinite, the Holy Ghost infinite; 10 The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal; 11 And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal; 12 As also there are not three uncreated, nor three infinites, / but one infinite, and one uncreated. 13 So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, / the Holy Ghost almighty; 14 And yet there are not three almighties, but one almighty. 15 So the Father is God, the Son God, the Holy Ghost God; 16 And yet there are not three Gods, / but one God. 17 So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, / the Holy Ghost Lord; 18 And yet there are not three Lords, / but one Lord. 19 For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity / to confess each Person by himself to be both God and Lord; 20 So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion / to speak of three Gods or three Lords. 21 The Father is made of none, / nor created, nor begotten. 22 The Son is of the Father alone; / not made, nor created, but begotten. 23 The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son; / not made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. 24 There is therefore one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; / one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. 25 And in this Trinity there is no before or after, / no greater or less; 26 But all three Persons are co-eternal together, / and co-equal. 27 So that in all ways, as is aforesaid, / both the Trinity is to be worshipped in Unity, and the Unity in Trinity. 28 He therefore that would be saved, / let him thus think of the Trinity. 29 FURTHERMORE, it is necessary to eternal salvation, / that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. 30 Now the right Faith is that we believe and confess / that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and Man. 31 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; 32 Perfect God; / perfect Man, of reasoning soul and human flesh subsisting; 33 Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead;/ less than the Father as touching his Manhood. 34 Who although he be God and Man, / yet he is not two, but is one Christ; 35 One, however, not by conversion of Godhead into flesh, / but by taking of Manhood into God; 36 One altogether; / not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person. 37 For as reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ; 38 Who suffered for our salvation, / descended into hell, rose again from the dead; 39 Ascended into heaven, sat down at the right hand of the Father, / from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. 40 At whose coming all men must rise again with their bodies, / and shall give account for their own deeds. 41 And they that have done good will go into life eternal; / they that have done evil into eternal fire. 42 THIS is the Catholic Faith, / which except a man do faithfully and stedfastly believe, he cannot be saved.

I Bind Myself

I bind unto myself today
the strong Name of the Trinity,
by invocation of the same,
the Three in One, and One in Three.

I bind this day to me for ever,
by power of faith, Christ's Incarnation;
his baptism in Jordan river;
his death on cross for my salvation;
his bursting from the spicèd tomb;
his riding up the heavenly way;
his coming at the day of doom:
I bind unto myself today.

I bind unto myself today
the virtues of the starlit heaven
the glorious sun's life-giving ray,
the whiteness of the moon at even,
the flashing of the lightning free,
the whirling wind's tempestuous shocks,
the stable earth, the deep salt sea,
around the old eternal rocks.

I bind unto myself today
the power of God to hold and lead,
his eye to watch, his might to stay,
his ear to hearken, to my need;
the wisdom of my God to teach,
his hand to guide, his shield to ward;
the word of God to give me speech,
his heavenly host to be my guard.

Christ be with me,
Christ within me,
Christ behind me,
Christ before me,
Christ beside me,
Christ to win me,
Christ to comfort
and restore me.
Christ beneath me,
Christ above me,
Christ in quiet,
Christ in danger,
Christ in hearts of
all that love me,
Christ in mouth of
friend and stranger.

I bind unto myself today
the strong Name of the Trinity,
by invocation of the same,
the Three in One, and One in Three.
Of whom all nature hath creation,
eternal Father, Spirit, Word:
praise to the Lord of my salvation,
salvation is of Christ the Lord.

This great and wonderful hymn was the offertory hymn at the ordination service last Wednesday when the assistant curate in our parish, Stephen Green,was ordained a priest along with another candidate Lisa Poultney.  It was a great service (we Anglicans know how to do these services really well) with and an inspiring sermon by Rev’d. Dr. Lizette Larson Miller of Huron University College. 

I have known and loved this hymn for many years.  It is an ancient one with the text being attributed to St. Patrick (fourth century CE), the one who is credited with driving the snakes out of Ireland.  However, whether it was the circumstances or the wonderful singing and accompaniment, or that I hadn’t sung it for a long time, singing this hymn moved and resonated with me more than I remember it affecting me in the past.

The hymn is truly a wonderful expression of the faith and belief of a saintly man   It is also an expression of wonder and awe at the glories of God and of God’s creation.  On reflection, it struck me that it is much more meaningful to me as a creedal statement than the creeds that we recite in worship.  The two creeds in our prayer book, the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed, can lead to some dispute and dissension as some Christians today object to having to recite a statement of faith that they cannot agree with totally.  Some people may object the theological implications in these creedal statements e.g. the virgin birth or Jesus descending to the dead between his crucifixion and resurrection.  I have even heard of one person who refuses to recite the phrase “holy catholic church” because in their mind it refers to the Roman Catholic Church and, after all, we are Anglican and not Roman Catholic.  This despite, I presume, knowing that catholic refers to the universal church as opposed to the Roman branch of Christianity.  However, appropriateness of reciting the creeds in worship is another topic for another day. 

I will say that I am a true believer in the benefit of having Christians proclaim what it is that Christians believe in and have no trouble reciting either Creed.  I have a personal preference for the Athanasian Creed for a somewhat obscure reason which I also won’t elaborate on today.  However, my experience of the St. Patrick’s Hymn is, for me, a more meaningful statement of belief that any of those Creeds.   This is in part because it is beautiful poetry which resonates with me.  But more to the point, it is grounded in a sense of who and what God is to the world and for me in my life each and every day.

It beings with the wonderful idea and expression of “binding” to myself.  This speaks of relationship rather than a somewhat dry theology in the formal Creeds.  It proclaims that I am in relationship to all of God and all of creation.  This is true whether I am always aware of it (and I am not) and whether I live as if I am but it is a reality which need to be reminded of.  The song of St. Patrick proclaims the reality of the Trinity which I have come to know is true for me (despite not being truly able to proclaim that for many years).  However, it doesn’t go into the specifics of the what the Trinity is or is not.  Rather than speaking of the Son being begotten, not made and the substance of the Trinity, St. Patrick speaks of the fact of the Trinity and does not attempt to split hairs about the nature of the mystery which is the Trinity.  In a similar way, it speaks of the incarnation but does not dwell on the nature of that mystery but treats it as a mystery which is beyond our capacity as creatures of the Creator to truly understand as much as we have struggled to do so.

The poem then speaks of the personal relationship with Christ which is possible for all Christians; Christ with me, within me, beside me, behind me, before me, beneath me, above me, in quiet, in danger, in all that love me, in friend and stranger; above all, Christ to win me.  That is the best expression of what Christ means to and for me and what I strive for even though I do not always of even often experience. 

I have not spoken of the music setting by Cecil Frances Alexander (1818-1895).  This is wonderful setting which does the poetry justice.  This is particularly true of the verse noted above in which expounds of the relationship with Christ, the melody in this verse is completely different to the rest to the hymn, which for me wonderfully expresses that nature of teat relationship which is unique in all of God’s creation and central to us as Christian. It also makes it a bit of a challenge for congregational singing but well worth it.

 

If you are not familiar with the hymn and the music it is easy to find many different versions on line.  Here is a link to one which has the version we sang, https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=I+Bind+Myself+Today+Choral+Performances&&view=detail&mid=FB4B2D2067339BBD623AFB4B2D2067339BBD623A&rvsmid=F18EB6B58BC0BDC46FCAF18EB6B58BC0BDC46FCA&fsscr=0&FORM=VDFSRV

Blessings on your journey; may it be filled with beautiful music.

OF Things Liturgical

The following is part of a discussion on with a friend on Facebook concerning the Book of Common Prayer and the Book of Alternative Services in the Anglican Church of Canada

Desmond — thank you for your thoughtful and extensive comments.  There is some in what you write that I agree and some with which I disagree.  I believe language and symbols such as passing the peace are important.  They are integral to the Anglican worship and symbolic of much more.  There is a great deal more to what the two services — if we take just the Communion or the Eucharist in both prayer books.  The things that are emphasized in each service are quite different but there are similarities.

The BAS does differ from the traditional Anglican service in both form and content.   However, in part it is a matter of emphasis rather than stark differences.  The BAS does emphasize the communal nature of worship opening with the gathering of the community — when two or three are gathered together in Christ’s name he is there — and the emphasis on community continues.  The BAS does have an emphasis on US but there is that element in the BCP.  The confession is communal, ‘We acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness’.  The creed in the BCP is ‘I believe’ however, the BAS uses most frequently the Apostles creed with ’I believe’.  There is also the Nicene Creed in the BAS which is communal.  However, you can hardly call that a modernization as the Council of Nicea was rather a long time ago.

 Certainly agree with you that there is a downplaying of repentance in the BAS which is unfortunate in my mind and theology.  We all have the need for repentance and come to the communion rail as sinners and in need of God’s grace.   Perhaps this is another case of emphasis as we are all created in God’s image and God declared it very good.  We have been expelled from the Garden which I take as a myth in the best sense.  However, that is not because of original sin in the Augustine sense.  We needed to rebel against God if we were develop as fully human beings but this did, of necessity, leads to a separation from God.  What would humanity be like if it has remained in the Garden?   This is non-traditional theology which I readily admit.  We do need to repent our separation from God which is inevitable because of our human nature and mostly because our egos see us as the center of our being rather than God.

This brings us to the crucial issue of scripture and how you understand it and what you/we believe.  I believe that contrary to what you declare we must look at the direction of scripture and of Jesus’ message rather than the specifics of different passages.  What you say is logical but I don’t believe that logic has priority for Jesus or for God’s interaction with people.  To perhaps be illogical and take one passage to support this I turn to Paul.  As Paul says to the Church in Corinth, ‘And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity” (KJV).  If we are to live in true charity with our neighbours and ourselves we will be following Jesus commandment to love one another.   I turn to Jesus and the woman caught in sin about to be stoned.  None of us is without sin.  However, he does say go and sin no more which is often held up as the last word against same-sex-blessing.  We are to turn back and repent.  However, there is another approach of Jesus which is presented in the parable of the Prodigal Son.  The father does not wait for the son to give his well-rehearsed speech of repentance.   The father accepts the son as he celebrates the reunion.  He does not say you may come back home but sin no more.  He accepts him unconditionally.  The question for me is how are we to live in love and charity with our neighbours? 

The BAS does present things in what could be called a logical fashion.  There is little mystery in what has been presented which is part of the problem with the liturgy.  As my wife Lorna noted it tries to pin down God as good and gracious and loving and only that.  But there is little of the mystery of God which is essential as we try to understand God.  This is beyond our abilities as finite human creatures.  I want to conclude with a quote from Richard Rohr:

For me, it really comes down to this: the individuals I know who are most genuinely happy and also fruitful for the world invariably relate to God in a way that is deeply personal, intimate, and almost conversational. Yet these same persons would be the first to admit and recognize that their personal God is also transpersonal and sometimes impersonal, and “the one in whom we all live, and move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28), and, finally, beyond all names for God. God is humbly recognized as beyond any of our attempts to domesticate, understand, or control the Mystery. All names for God are “in vain.”

That is I believe not logical and it cannot be as God is beyond our logic.  For me that is the mystery of God. 

 

Sermon Easter Sunday 2014

Christ is risen – Christ is risen indeed – Hallelujah

Today we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  This is the most important day of the Christian year.  The resurrection is the most important – the central tenet of our faith as Christians.  In this service as with other worship services we will join in saying together our statement of faith – today we will join in the Nicene Creed – “on the third day he rose again according to the scripture”.

Recently a Roman Catholic priest – Father Michael - said to me in a conversation that he was continually surprised at how many Christians misunderstood the resurrection.  There is truth in that but I also sometimes it seems   that there are almost as many ways of looking at the resurrection as there are Christians. That of course is an overstatement but I believe there is truth in both statements.

What is it then that we believe when we say he is risen – Jesus has been resurrected?  Father Michael believes that most Christians believe that Jesus was magically resuscitated.  I believe there is confusion between resurrection and resuscitation.  To be resuscitated means to be brought back to life – our old life.  This is what happened to Lazarus.  Jesus brought him back to life.  Jesus called him and he came out of his tomb wrapped in his burial cloths.  John’s Gospel calls this one of the signs that Jesus performs – one of the signs of what the kingdom of God will be like when it is established.  In fact it is the seventh and final sign in John’s Gospel.  By implication the resurrection of Jesus is the ultimate sign – sign of new creation as one source calls it.  But what happened after this miraculous event? 

As I noted the raising of Lazarus is resuscitation and not a resurrection.  From the Gospel account Lazarus was the same person that was buried in the tomb that held his body.  He came out wrapped in the burial cloths.  They had to be unwrapped from his body to set it free.  Scripture does not tell us what happened to Lazarus after the act of Jesus.  We are told that some of the Jews who had seen this miraculous act of Jesus believed in him because of it.  Others did not.  The Gospel also tells us that the authorities were plotting to kill him along with Jesus but we are not told if they carried through with the plan.   However, we do not know anything specifically about Lazarus’ life after this miracle.  We know from the description of him coming out of the tomb he appeared the same as when his body was buried.  This is a critical point.  To be resuscitated mean to come back the same as when you were clinically dead – worse for wear but the same.

We know from scripture that Jesus was not the same after the resurrection.  The accounts are rather confusing.  Some people recognized him while others did not – such as the women at the tomb who mistook him for the gardener or the believers on the road to Emmaus.  Jesus had a physical body – the disciples could touch the holes in his hands and his feet.  Jesus act with the disciples.  However, he could seemingly pass through a closed door into the room where the disciples where cowering in fear.  He appeared to many people in many places.  He had what could only be called a spiritual body which scripture tells us ascended into heaven. 

So what are we to make of these accounts according to scripture as the creed states?  What do we believe?  Do you believe that Jesus was resurrected?  Or perhaps you believe it was resuscitation.  Some Christians I know do not believe in a physical resurrection.  My father who was an ordained minister did not believe in the bodily resurrection.  He believed it was symbolic for the resurrection that occurred to the disciples.  After the crucifixion they were cowering in the upper room and they found the courage to become apostles and spread the Good News of Jesus Christ.   He also believed it was symbolic of the transformation that is possible for each of us.  I have struggled with what I believe in many areas including the resurrection.  I can say at this point that I do believe in the resurrection. 

What are we as Christians to believe?  I think we should cry with the father in the Gospel of Mark who asked Jesus to heal his son of unclean spirits.  Jesus told him all things can be done for the one who believes.  He responded, “I believe, help my unbelief.”  I believe that what Jesus wants of us is not absolute certain unwavering belief in the resurrection or anything else.  He wants us to be faithful in our struggles to follow him. 

“I believe, help my unbelief.” 

He desires us to acknowledge that at times we may not believe but we still ask ourselves what we believe and what kinds of lives we should live.  If we are honest with ourselves and with God Jesus will be with us and we will find the new creation which John points to in his Gospel. 

The Lord is Risen – he is risen indeed.  Hallelujah.