Apostles' Creed (???)
The Apostles' Creed, or the baptismal symbol of the Old Roman Church, has received this title because of its great antiquity. It dates from very early times in the Church, a half century or so from the last writings of the New Testament. The Apostles' Creed and the Athanasian Creed, do not possess the same authority as the Nicene Creed, because they have not been proclaimed by an Ecumenical Council. It is simply a local western Baptismal Creed, never used in the services of the Eastern Patriarchates. Nonetheless, the "Orthodox honour the Apostles' Creed as an ancient statement of faith, and accept its teaching.
I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Creator of heaven and earth,
And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived of 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 sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,
whence 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.
* May say "universal" rather than "catholic" though it must be stressed that catholic in this sense has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church but should be understood as indicating that the "Church" is complete and lacking in nothing essential.
** The Roman Creed according to Rufinus (380) ends with "carnis resurrectionem" but the Greek version of the Roman Creed by Marcellus (341) with "zoe aonion."
Many of the early Church Fathers wrote what are called Rules of Faith. Their obvious resemblance to the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed indicate their importance as proto-creeds. Click here to see a chart featuring some of these Ante-Nicene Rules of Faith compared in parallel.
Nicene Creed (325-381)
The Nicene Creed, also called the Nicaene-Constantinopolitan Creed, is a statement of the Orthodox faith of the early Christian Church. It was first formulated in opposition to certain heresies that denied the deity of Christ, especially Arianism and Docetism. These heresies, which disturbed the Holy Church during the fourth century, concerned the doctrine of the Holy Trinity and of the person of Christ. In its present form this creed goes back partially to the Council of Nicaea (AD 325) with additions made by the Council of Constantinople (AD 381). It was accepted in its present form at the Council of Chalcedon (AD 451). The Fathers of the Eighth Ecumenical Council under St Photios (AD 879) condemned those who either added to or subtracted from the Creed. The creed is in substance an accurate and majestic formulation of Trinitarian faith.
In his response to the Lutheran theologians, Patriarch Jeremiah II of Constantinople, in 1576, gives this introduction to the Symbol of Faith. The most sacred symbol, the confession of the sound faith of Christians, "was first drawn up by the 318 God-bearing Holy Fathers at Nicaea, and completed by the 150 Fathers in Constantinople, and ratified by the other five Ecumenical Synods, without adding or omitting anything, in as much as they agreed with it, as the holy men who blazed forth during the years between those holy Synods distinctly confessed, and as we by the grace of God confess with them."
Patriarch Jeremiah, continues with this prologue: "This is the treasure of the true faith, which was sealed by the Holy Spirit, so that no one would omit anything nor introduce into it anything spurious. This divine, most sacred, and wholly perfect credo of our piety, the confession of all the Holy Fathers, the definition of Christianity, which we embrace and espouse, we boldly profess to preserve unscathed and unadulterated to the end of time as the holy deposit of faith of the divinely inspired Holy Fathers. Thus, through the intercessions of those who formulated this creed and preserved it, we may offer up our sound profession of faith as a pure gift to the Trinity, so that we may be delivered from ever-lasting punishment, and we may enjoy the divine kingdom, which is eternal in Christ, which we hope to receive through the grace of Christ."
* The phrase "and the Son," known as the "Filioque," was not original to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed and was never said in the Churches of the Roman Empire, East or West, nor in England and Scandinavia, who were all united in one common confession. The Church in Spain added the phrase in AD 589 to stress the equality of the Father and the Son in response to Arian heretics who taught that the Son of God was inferior to the Father. Later, the teaching was propagated by the Carloginian theologians and their barbarian armies who took Old Rome captive and established the medieval Frankish Papacy.
The traditional Churches never accepted the added phrase because it distorts our Trinitarian confession. The Filioque contradicts the words of our Lord when he said, "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me. And you also will bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning."
For more on the importance of the Filioque and its impact on history, read our explanation below.
Definition of Chalcedon (451)
In AD 449, between the third and fourth Councils, another council was held in which St Cyril's successor, Dioscorus of Alexandria, "insisted that there is in Christ only one nature (physis)." This is a position commonly called Monophysite, which teaches that the Incarnate Logos had a single nature forged "from two natures," a divine and a human nature united as a single nature. The Council of Chalcedon met on Oct 22, 451 to resolve the Monophysite controversy in which Eutyches had refused to confess the existence of two natures in Christ.
Concerning Christ's nature and personhood, the Council championed the Orthodox Christology of St Cyril of Alexandria and rejected Dioscorus' position, proclaiming that, "While Christ is a single, undivided person, He is not only from two natures but in two natures." In other words, Christ is one person, a single concrete personal reality, with two distinct natures. The distinction between the two natures is clearly stated, although the unity of Christ's person is also emphasized.
Following, then, the holy fathers, we unite in teaching all men to confess the one and only Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. This selfsame one is perfect both in deity and in humanness; this selfsame one is also actually God and actually man, with a rational soul* and a body. He is of the same reality as God as far as his deity is concerned and of the same reality as we ourselves as far as his humanness is concerned; thus like us in all respects, sin only excepted. Before time began he was begotten of the Father, in respect of his deity, and now in these "last days," for us and behalf of our salvation, this selfsame one was born of Mary the virgin, who is God-bearer [Theotokos] in respect of his humanness.
We also teach that we apprehend this one and only Christ-Son, Lord, only-begotten -- in two natures; and we do this without confusing the two natures, without transmuting one nature into the other, without dividing them into two separate categories, without contrasting them according to area or function. The distinctiveness of each nature is not nullified by the union. Instead, the "properties" of each nature are conserved and both natures concur in one "person" and in one reality [hypostasis]. They are not divided or cut into two persons, but are together the one and only and only-begotten Word [Logos] of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus have the prophets of old testified; thus the Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us; thus the Symbol of Fathers** was handed down to us.
* meaning human soul
** meaning the Nicene Creed
What does all this mean? Nestorius had taught that the humanity and divinity in Christ were separated as if Christ had a split personality. On the contrary, Holy Scriptures teach us that "Jesus did not act as God on some occasions and then as a human at other times. [W]e cannot divide events in His life into the category of human or divine [as if he were schizophrenic]. He lived and suffered as a human being, yet all the while He was God." The Divinity of the Word was resplendent with glory while his own flesh simultaneously suffered insults.
Dioscorus and Eutyches on the other hand over compensated by saying that the divinity and humanity in Christ were mixed or fused into a new third nature. That is, one new third nature distinct from the divine or human natures. That is why this heresy is called monophysitism, meaning "one nature." Orthodox Christians reject that Christ's two natures are either separated or blended into a hybrid nature, half-man and half-God. Orthodox Christians believe in Christ as a single undivided personality in whom these two natures are vitally and inseparably united, so that he is properly, not God and man, but the God-man. The two natures are bound together by a bond so unique and inscrutable that it consitutes one person. He will remain this way forever.
The Holy Monastery of Saint Gregory on Mount Athos stressed the importance of this for our salvation in their monograph: "The dogmatic differences between the two sides are so great that, if they were forgotten, salvation itself would be put at risk. If, that is, the eternal Hypostasis of God the Word is not also the Hypostasis of the assumed flesh, the deification of the compound make-up of man is not possible, in which case the salvation of men through partaking of the Deified and life-giving flesh of the Lord is also impossible."
This is a very complex statement, so it is alright to read it two or three more times. What is at stake here is what is always at stake, our union with God, our becomming like God, "theosis." The often repeated patristic saying demonstrates what the Early Church believed was on the line here, "What Christ has not assumed he has not healed." In other words, if Christ did not assume our full human nature he could not make us divine through becoming "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) Gregory Nazianzen tells his congregation, "For He passes from place to place, that He may not only gain many, but may consecrate many places. He sleeps and labors, that He may sanctify sleep and labor. He weeps, that He may give a value to tears. He preaches heavenly things, that He may exalt His hearers." So the Son of God became exactly like us so that we can become exactly like he is by grace. If Christ's divine nature and human nature remain separated as Nestorius proposed, then we have no hope for union with God. If Christ's divine and human nature are fused into a new third nature, neither divine nor human, then we have no hope for union with God.
For this reason, the Fourth Great Council confessed and defended the ancient Christian faith in Christ. Christians confess one hypostasis, that is one concrete personal reality in Christ. They acknowledge that it is the one hypostasis of the Logos incarnate who wills and acts. They do not teach two hypostases, that is two concrete realities or two persons.
They do confess that both the Divinity and the humanity of Christ are real and are hypostatic. They confess that the humanity and Divinity, though perfectly and hypostatically united, are not confused, divided, mixed or separated. Humanity remains humanity, Divinity remains Divinity, but in Christ these two are united in one hypostasis in order to heal our sin-sick souls and unite us to the Triune Life of God.
Thus as we have said, it is imperitive that Christ be "true God" and "true man." As Pelikan writes, "Salvation depended on the true and complete humanity of Christ in his life and death; that true and complete humanity depended in turn on his having been truly born; and his true birth in turn depended on his having had a mother who was truly and completely human." In order to safeguard the doctrine that it is God Himself, the Second Person of the Trinity, who is incarnate and not just a specter or ghost, Christians call the Virgin Mary, "Theotokos," because she was the birth giver of God. In other words, Christ was God from the very beginning, he was not a human being who acquire divinity at a latter point in time, he was not a spirit that only appeared to be human. The baby Mary gave birth to was God the Word enfleshed.
Thus the Incarnation is the radical affirmation that God has entered concretely into human history through the kenosis, or "self-emptying" of being born and dying. The Logos, Who is by nature God, became by nature Man, by His Incarnation in the fullness of time so that by becoming exactly like us we could become exactly like he is by grace. For more on the importance of the Incarnation read the last article in the Advent issue of Athelney.
Athanasian Creed (4th century)
The Quicunque vult, commonly called the Creed of Saint Athanasius in midieval Breviaries, is a beautiful and exact dogmatic Canticle found in all early Western Psalters that contain Canticles beside the Psalms of David such as the Utrecht Psalter. Athanasius (AD 293-373), the champion of Orthodoxy against Arian attacks on the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, did not write this creed. The name persists because until the seventeenth century it was commonly ascribed to him in honor of his defense of the Orthodox Trinitarian faith. Who wrote it will perhaps always be a mystery. Most of today's historians agree that it originated in Gaul around AD 500. Its theology is closely akin to that found in the writings of the Western Fathers, especially Ss. Ambrose of Milan, Augustine of Hippo, and Vincent of Lérins. Many authors have been proposed including St Hilary of Arles (+449), Victricius Bishop of Rouen, or St Vincent of Lerins (+450).
The Athanasian Creed does not possess the same authority as the Nicene Creed because it has not been proclaimed by an Ecumenical Council. It is not used in the Byzantine, Syraic (Antiochean), or Coptic (Alexandrian) liturgies but it is sometimes printed without the filioque in the Horologion (Book of Hours).
On the other hand, the Athanasian Creed was used in the Churches of the Western Orthodox Patriarchate. Before and after the Frankish Captivity, it was the ancient usage of the Church of England, since at least the sixth century, to sing the Quicunque vult every day after the Psalms at Prime. In the 1662 English Prayer Book the Quicunque vult was appointed to be read instead of the Apostles' Creed on certain days only at Matins. Apart from the opening and closing sentences, this creed consists of two parts, the first setting forth the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, and the second dealing chiefly with the Incarnation and the two-natures of Christ.
1. Whosoever will be saved: before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith:
2. Which Faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled: without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
4. Neither confounding the Persons: nor dividing the Substance [Essence].
5. For there is one Person of the Father: another of the Son: and another of the Holy Ghost.
6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.
7. Such as the Father is: such is the Son: and such is the Holy Ghost.
8. The Father uncreate [uncreated]: the Son uncreate [uncreated]: and the Holy Ghost uncreate [uncreated].
9. The Father incomprehensible [unlimited]: the Son incomprehensible [unlimited]: and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible [unlimited, or infinite].
10. The Father eternal: the Son eternal: and the Holy Ghost eternal.
11. And yet they are not three eternals: but one eternal.
12. As also there are not three uncreated: nor three incomprehensibles [infinites], but one uncreated: and one incomprehensible [infinite].
13. So likewise the Father is Almighty: the Son Almighty: and the Holy Ghost Almighty.
14. And yet they are not three Almighties: but one Almighty.
15. So the Father is God: the Son is God: and the Holy Ghost is God.
16. And yet they are not three Gods: but one God.
17. So likewise the Father is Lord: the Son Lord: and the Holy Ghost Lord.
18. And yet not three Lords: but one Lord.
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity: to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord:
20. So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion: to say, There be [are] three Gods, or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none: neither 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: neither made, nor created, nor begotten: but proceeding.
24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers: one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.
25. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after another: none is greater, or less than another [there is nothing before, or after: nothing greater or less].
26. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshiped.
28. He therefore that will be saved, must [let him] thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation: that he also believe rightly [faithfully] the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess: that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man;
31. God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds: and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God: and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead: and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood.
34. Who although he be [is] God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ.
35. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh: but by taking [assumption] of the Manhood into God.
36. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]: but by unity of Person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man: so God and Man is one Christ;
38. Who suffered for our salvation: descended into hell [Hades, spirit-world]: rose again the third day from the dead.
39. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of the Father God [God the Father] Almighty.
40. From whence [thence] he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
42. And shall give account for their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting: and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.
44. This is the Catholic Faith: which except a man believe faithfully [truly and firmly], he can not be saved.
The Eighth Ecumenical Council (879-880)
The Fourth Council of Constantinople of 879-880 is the Eighth Ecumenical Council for Eastern Orthodox Christians. In 858, Emperor Michael III had deposed the previous patriarch, Ignatius, and appointed Photius, a noble layman from a local family, as the new Patriarch of Constantinople. Ignatius refused to abdicate, setting up a power struggle between the Emperor and the Pope. In 867, a council in Constantinople deposed the pope, declared him anathema, and excommunicated him. In addition Roman claims of Papal primacy and the Filioque clause were condemned.
Another council in Constantinople, called in 869 by Emperor Basil I the Macedonian and Pope Adrian II, deposed Photius. After the death of Ignatius in 877, Photius once again become the Patriarch. A Council was called in 879 and affirmed the restoration of Photius the Great. Attended by 383 bishops, comprising the representatives of all the five patriarchates, including that of Rome whose legates were present at the behest of Pope John VIII, this reunion council was originally accepted and fully endorsed by the papacy in Rome. It was repudiated by Rome in the 11th century, retroactively regarding the robber council of 869-870 to be ecumenical.
Additionaly, the council condemned any alteration whatsoever to the original Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, thereby condemning the addition of the Filioque clause to the creed as heretical. I present two translations of the Horos or Rule of the Council that appears in both the minutes of the sixth and the seventh acts.
|
Jointly sanctifying and preserving intact the venerable and divine teaching of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, which has been established in the bosom of our mind, with unhesitating resolve and purity of faith, as well as the sacred ordinances and canonical stipulations of his holy disciples and Apostles with an unwavering judgement, and indeed, those Seven holy and ecumenical Synods which were directed by the inspiration of the one and the same Holy Spirit and effected the [Christian] preaching, and jointly guarding with a most honest and unshakeable resolve the canonical institutions invulnerable and unfalsified, we expel those who removed themselves from the Church, and embrace and regard worthy of receiving those of the same faith or teachers of orthodoxy to whom honor and sacred respect is due as they themselves ordered. Thus, having in mind and declaring all these things, we embrace with mind and tongue (τῇ διανοίᾳ καὶ γλώσσῃ) and declare to all people with a loud voice the Horos (Rule) of the most pure faith of the Christians which has come down to us from above through the Fathers, subtracting nothing, adding nothing, falsifying nothing; for subtraction and addition, when no heresy is stirred up by the ingenious fabrications of the evil one, introduces disapprobation of those who are exempt from blame and inexcusable assault on the Fathers. As for the act of changing with falsified words the Horoi (Rules, Boundaries) of the Fathers is much worse that the previous one. Therefore, this Holy and Ecumenical Synod embracing whole-heartedly and declaring with divine desire and straightness of mind, and establishing and erecting on it the firm edifice of salvation, thus we think and loudly proclaim this message to all: |
Firmly grounded in the venerable and divine doctrine of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, with unquestioned determination and with full purity of faith in deep reverence and loyal preservation of the Holy precepts of his disciples and apostles, and in complete fidelity to the errorless canonical laws and the immutable faith of the doctrine and canons of the Seven Holy and Ecumenical Councils, which were inspired and guided by one and the same Holy Spirit, we reject those who separate themselves from the Church and we embrace and receive those who are worthy of reception, those who are of the same mind. . . This we think and teach- that we accept with both heart and mouth (τῇ διανοίᾳ καὶ γλώσσῃ) the Creed of Faith that was transmitted from of old by the Fathers up to this very time, And we all proclaim with a loud voice that this Creed cannot be subtracted from, added to, altered or distorted in any way. . . This Holy and Ecumenical Council accepts with complete divine zeal and total purity of intention the ancient Creed of Faith. . . And this Council glorifies it and establishes the confidence of salvation upon it and declares it aloud so that all can therefore learn it: |
|
"I believe in One God, Father Almighty, ... and in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God... and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord ... who proceeds from the Father..." [the Creed, in its entirety, is cited here] |
|
|
Thus we think, in this confession of faith we were we baptized, through this one the word of truth proved that every heresy is broken to pieces and canceled out. We enroll as brothers and fathers and coheirs of the heavenly city those who think thus. If anyone, however, dares to rewrite and call Rule of Faith some other exposition besides that of the sacred Symbol which has been spread abroad from above by our blessed and holy Fathers even as far as ourselves, and to snatch the authority of the confession of those divine men and impose on it his own invented phrases (ἰδίαις εὑρεσιολογίαις) and put this forth as a common lesson to the faithful or to those who return from some kind of heresy, and display the audacity to falsify completely (κατακιβδηλεῦσαι ἀποθρασυνθείη) the antiquity of this sacred and venerable Horos (Rule) with illegitimate words, or additions, or subtractions, such a person should, according to the vote of the holy and Ecumenical Synods, which has been already acclaimed before us, be subjected to complete defrocking if he happens to be one of the clergymen, or be sent away with an anathema if he happens to be one of the lay people." |
|
|
George Dragas: The text used for this translation is that of Dositheos, as reedited with corrections by Siamakis. Mansi's edition was also consulted. |
Richard Haugh: The above text was translated into English from Hergenrother's German translation because Hergenrother maintains that the text in Mansi is not complete. |
The solemnity and severity of this statement is quite striking. The reference to the Lord, the Apostles and the Fathers as guardians of the true faith clearly imply that what is at stake here is a theological issue. The issue is not just words or language but thought and mind as well. The whole construction clearly implies that there is some serious problem in the air which, however, is not explicitly named. The focus is the Creed, which is said to be irreplaceable. It is totally unacceptable to replace it with anything else. It is worse, however, to tamper with it, to add or to subtract from it. The addition or subtraction is not merely a formal matter, but has to do with the substance of the faith into which one is baptized and on which salvation in the Church is established. To commit such a mistake can only mean rejection of the faith once delivered to the saints and therefore can only incur expulsion from the Church. What else could St. Photios have in mind but the Filioque? Was there any other threat to the Creed at that time?
For more on the importance of the Filioque and its impact on history, read our explanation below.
This council is not regarded as ecumenical by all Orthodox Christians, but some major voices in the Orthodox world do so, including 20th century theologians Fr. John S. Romanides and Fr. George Metallinos (both of whom refer repeatedly to the "Eighth and Ninth Ecumenical Councils"), as well as Fr. George Dragas and Metropolitan Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos.
Further, the Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs refers explicitly to the "Eighth Ecumenical Council" regarding the Synod of 879-880 and was signed by the patriarchs of Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria as well as the Holy Synods of the first three.
Those who regard these councils as ecumenical often characterize the limitation of Ecumenical Councils to only seven to be the result of Jesuit influence in Russia, part of the so-called "Western Captivity of Orthodoxy."
An interesting external attestation to the consideration of this synod to be the Eighth Ecumenical Council is the Roman Catholic Church's Catholic Encyclopedia (1907), which describes the council of 879-880 as the "Pseudosynodus Photiana," noting that the "Orthodox count [it] as the Eighth General Council."
The Filioque Controversy
The phrase "and the Son," known as the "Filioque," was not original to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed and was never said in the Churches of the Roman Empire, East or West, nor in England and Scandinavia, who were all united in one common confession. The Church in Spain added the phrase in AD 589 to stress the equality of the Father and the Son in response to Arian heretics who taught that the Son of God was inferior to the Father. Later, the teaching was propagated by the Carloginian theologians and their barbarian armies who took Old Rome captive and established the medieval Frankish Papacy.
The traditional Churches never accepted the added phrase because it distorts our Trinitarian confession. The Filioque contradicts the words of our Lord when he said, "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me. And you also will bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning." But, the Filioquist objects, the Father has given everything to the Son, citing John 16:15, "All things that the Father has are Mine." Although admitting this does not literally mean all, since the Father does not give His "Father-ness" to the Son, they insist that it does include the power to proceed the Holy Spirit. By insisting this, the Filioquists demonstrate their confusion between the Divine Essence (what God is) and the Person of the Father (who the Father is).
This confusion is made clear by posing the following question: Does the power to proceed the Holy Spirit come from the Divine Essence common to all, or from a specific Person? To answer "from the Divine Essence" is to face two equally distasteful choices: either the Holy Spirit proceeds Himself or the Holy Spirit is not God. The first is patently ridiculous; the second is clearly outside Christianity. The answer to the above question is clear: the power to proceed the Holy Spirit belongs to a specific Person: the Father. This has been and remains the consistent teaching of the Church.
The Fathers of the Second Ecumenical Council knew well that this question had been finally settled by the use in the Creed of the word "procession" as meaning the manner of existence of the Holy Spirit from the Father that constitutes His special individuality. Thus, the Father is unbegotten, meaning that He derives His existence from no one. The Son, being the "only begotten" of the Father, is eternally from the Father by generation. The Holy Spirit is eternally from the Father, not by generation, but by procession. The Father alone "speaks" his Son, the Word of God, into existence, and "breaths" forth his Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and rests in the Son.
This is exactly what we confess when we say, "I believe in one God, Father Almighty. . . And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages. . . And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father." This means that each person of the Holy Trinity is a unique person with distinct individuality, who together are worshipped and glorified as One God.
On the other hand, if the Son of God, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, also had the power to breath forth a person, this then would be an attribute of the divine essence and not an attribute of the Father''s person. Thus the Holy Spirit would also share this attribute and would necessarily breathe forth a fourth person of the Trinity. Either that or the Spirit is inferior to the Father and the Son. There are three Persons in One God, but out of those three the Father has the sole generative powers. The Son is eternally begotten of the Father, and the Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father. We do not deny that the Spirit may proceed through the Son, and we state explicitly that the Son often sends or directs the Spirit; however the Spirit eternally proceeds only from the Father.
In the 11th century, Frankish soldiers occupied Sicily and forced pastors there to add the Filioque to the Creed, use unleavened bread in the Eucharist, and other practices they found heretical. In response to this the Patriarch of Constantinople required all the Latin (Western Rite) pastors in Constantinople to stop using the Filioque and to use leavened bread. When they refused he shut down their churches prompting Rome to send a delegation in AD 1054. This delegation was anything but diplomatic and excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople.
Thus the Frankish Papacy broke away from the Orthodox Church, fully embracing the heretical doctrine of the double procession of the Holy Spirit.
The last Roman Orthodox Pope was Benedict X (1058-9) who had given the pallium to Stigand (1052-1070), the last Saxon Archbishop of Canterbury and defender of the true Faith. The Filioque was not said in England until after 1066 when William the Conqueror and his Norman army, with papal blessing, invaded England, deposed the faithful pastors and replaced them with Filioquist bishops loyal to the Frankish pope thus bringing England under papal control through fire and the sword.
Archbishop Stigand and his brother bishops, all natives of England, were condemned to prison by the foreign bishops as schismatics and heretics where they all died. It would seem highly unlikely that one would receive apostolic succession by murdering one's predecessors.
The English aristocracy fled to Ireland and the main centers of Orthodox Christianity in the East, Constantinople and Kiev. The Great Schism was finalized when the western barbarian Franks pillaged, disfigured, raped, and murdered the Eastern Christians in what would be remembered romantically as the Crusades. They set up competing Latin patriarchates in Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria. The Church in the West had finally become the apostate Frankish Catholic Church.
See: Philip Schaff on the Procession of the Holy Spirit, Fundamental Difference Between the East and West / The Filioque / Historical Background by Professor John Romanides , and The Filioque: An Orthodox Guide.
Council of Orange (521)
The Council of Orange was called to resolve the the controversy between Blessed Augustine (+430) and Pelagius. This controversy had to do the with degree to which a human being is responsible for his or her own salvation, and the role of the grace of God in bringing about salvation. The Pelagians held that human beings are born in a state of innocence and that there is no such thing as a sinful nature or original sin. As a result of this view, they held that a state of sinless perfection was achievable in this life apart from grace. The Semi-Pelagian view that emerged from this contravercy taught the doctrine that the human race, though fallen and possessed of a sinful nature, is still "good" enough to be able to lay hold of the grace of God through an act of unredeemed human will.
In an attempt to refute this heresy Blessed Augustine used philosophical catagories that subtly distorted the Biblical hebraic teachings of the Christian Faith and the early Fathers. These distortions spread among Augustine's later diciples, whose over reliance on his teaching in the absence of the wider patristic witness led to "opposite errors" and heresies. This local western council confessed the Orthodox faith as reflected in the teaching of St John Cassian (+435), a western Father and transmitter of the wisdom of the Desert Fathers. Thus the Council of Orange repudiated the teaching of Pelagius while simultaneously avoiding the pitfalls of Augustine's view.
In his 13th Conference, after demonstrating both the grace and power of God and the freedom and weakness of the will from Holy Scripture, St John Cassian writes:
So these are somehow mixed up and indiscriminately confused, so that among many persons, which depends on the other is involved in great questionings, i.e., does God have compassion upon us because we have shown the beginning of a good will, or does the beginning of a good will follow because God has had compassion upon us? For many believing each of these and asserting them more widely than is right are entangled in all kinds of opposite errors. For if we say that the beginning of free will is in our own power, what about Paul the persecutor, what about Matthew the publican, of whom the one was drawn to salvation while eager for bloodshed and the punishment of the innocent, the other for violence and rapine? But if we say that the beginning of our free will is always due to the inspiration of the grace of God, what about the faith of Zaccheus, or what are we to say of the goodness of the thief on the cross, who by their own desires brought violence to bear on the kingdom of heaven and so prevented the special leadings of their vocation? But if we attribute the performance of virtuous acts, and the execution of God's commands to our own will, how do we pray: "Strengthen, O God, what Thou hast wrought in us;" and "The work of our hands stablish Thou upon us"?
For we should not hold that God made man such that he can never will or be capable of what is good: or else He has not granted him a free will, if He has suffered him only to will or be capable of evil, but neither to will or be capable of what is good of himself. . . And so the grace of God always co-operates with our will for its advantage, and in all things assists, protects, and defends it.
Yet the Orthodox Church also teaches the inability of man to turn to God in faith without the prevenient grace of God. The sinful nature of man was expressed in the universally acceptance Larger Catechism of Metropolitan Philaret: '13 Q. Why are not all men capable of receiving a revelation non-mediated from God? A. Owing to their sinful nature, and weakness both in soul and body.' Metropolitan Philaret was drawing from a long line of theologians who have remained faithful to the words of St Paul 'Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the thoughts, and were by nature children of wrath even as the rest.' (Eph 2:3) The Pelagian heresy was also firmly condemned by the Synod of Carthage (419), the fathers of the Synod of Caerlion (569), chaired by St David the Waterman of Wales, the 1st canon of the Ecumenical Synod of Ephesus (431).
Conference 13 by St John Cassian is a very helpful text for obtaining an Orthodox perspective on this controvercy. The Place of Blessed Augustine by Fr Seraphim Rose (+1982) is also very illuminating. See also my excurses on the Life in Christ and uncreated grace below.
CANON 1. If anyone denies that it is the whole man, that is both body and soul, that was "changed for the worse" through the offense of Adam's sin, but believes that the freedom of the soul remains unimpaired and that only the body is subject to corruption, he is deceived by the error of Pelagius and contradicts the scripture which says, "The soul that sins shall die" (Ezek. 18:20); and, "Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are the slaves of the one whom you obey?" (Rom. 6:16); and, "For whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved" (2 Pet. 2:19).
CANON 2. If anyone asserts that Adam's sin affected him alone and not his descendants also, or at least if he declares that it is only the death of the body which is the punishment for sin, and not also that sin, which is the death of the soul, passed through one man to the whole human race, he does injustice to God and contradicts the Apostle, who says, "Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned" (Rom. 5:12).
CANON 3. If anyone says that the grace of God can be conferred as a result of human prayer, but that it is not grace itself which makes us pray to God, he contradicts the prophet Isaiah, or the Apostle who says the same thing, "I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me" (Rom 10:20, quoting Isa. 65:1).
CANON 4. If anyone maintains that God awaits our will to be cleansed from sin, but does not confess that even our will to be cleansed comes to us through the infusion and working of the Holy Spirit, he resists the Holy Spirit himself who says through Solomon, "The will is prepared by the Lord" (Prov. 8:35, LXX), and the salutary word of the Apostle, "For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).
CANON 5. If anyone says that not only the increase of faith but also its beginning and the very desire for faith, by which we believe in Him who justifies the ungodly and comes to the regeneration of holy baptism -- if anyone says that this belongs to us by nature and not by a gift of grace, that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amending our will and turning it from unbelief to faith and from godlessness to godliness, it is proof that he is opposed to the teaching of the Apostles, for blessed Paul says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). And again, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8). For those who state that the faith by which we believe in God is natural make all who are separated from the Church of Christ by definition in some measure believers.
CANON 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10).
CANON 7. If anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life, as is expedient for us, or that we can be saved, that is, assent to the preaching of the gospel through our natural powers without the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who makes all men gladly assent to and believe in the truth, he is led astray by a heretical spirit, and does not understand the voice of God who says in the Gospel, "For apart from me you can do nothing" (John 15:5), and the word of the Apostle, "Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God" (2 Cor. 3:5).
CANON 8. If anyone maintains that some are able to come to the grace of baptism by mercy but others through free will, which has manifestly been corrupted in all those who have been born after the transgression of the first man, it is proof that he has no place in the true faith. For he denies that the free will of all men has been weakened through the sin of the first man, or at least holds that it has been affected in such a way that they have still the ability to seek the mystery of eternal salvation by themselves without the revelation of God. The Lord himself shows how contradictory this is by declaring that no one is able to come to him "unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:44), as he also says to Peter, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 16:17), and as the Apostle says, "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:3).
CANON 9. Concerning the succor of God. It is a mark of divine favor when we are of a right purpose and keep our feet from hypocrisy and unrighteousness; for as often as we do good, God is at work in us and with us, in order that we may do so.
CANON 10. Concerning the succor of God. The succor of God is to be ever sought by the regenerate and converted also, so that they may be able to come to a successful end or persevere in good works.
CANON 11. Concerning the duty to pray. None would make any true prayer to the Lord had he not received from him the object of his prayer, as it is written, "Of thy own have we given thee" (1 Chron. 29:14).
CANON 12. Of what sort we are whom God loves. God loves us for what we shall be by his gift, and not by our own deserving.
CANON 13. Concerning the restoration of free will. The freedom of will that was destroyed in the first man can be restored only by the grace of baptism, for what is lost can be returned only by the one who was able to give it. Hence the Truth itself declares: "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed" (John 8:36).
CANON 14. No mean wretch is freed from his sorrowful state, however great it may be, save the one who is anticipated by the mercy of God, as the Psalmist says, "Let thy compassion come speedily to meet us" (Ps. 79:8), and again, "My God in his steadfast love will meet me" (Ps. 59:10).
CANON 15. Adam was changed, but for the worse, through his own iniquity from what God made him. Through the grace of God the believer is changed, but for the better, from what his iniquity has done for him. The one, therefore, was the change brought about by the first sinner; the other, according to the Psalmist, is the change of the right hand of the Most High (Ps. 77:10).
CANON 16. No man shall be honored by his seeming attainment, as though it were not a gift, or suppose that he has received it because a missive from without stated it in writing or in speech. For the Apostle speaks thus, "For if justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose" (Gal. 2:21); and "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men" (Eph. 4:8, quoting Ps. 68:18). It is from this source that any man has what he does; but whoever denies that he has it from this source either does not truly have it, or else "even what he has will be taken away" (Matt. 25:29).
CANON 17. Concerning Christian courage. The courage of the Gentiles is produced by simple greed, but the courage of Christians by the love of God which "has been poured into our hearts" not by freedom of will from our own side but "through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us" (Rom. 5:5).
CANON 18. That grace is not preceded by merit. Recompense is due to good works if they are performed; but grace, to which we have no claim, precedes them, to enable them to be done.
CANON 19. That a man can be saved only when God shows mercy. Human nature, even though it remained in that sound state in which it was created, could by no means save itself, without the assistance of the Creator; hence since man cannot safe-guard his salvation without the grace of God, which is a gift, how will he be able to restore what he has lost without the grace of God?
CANON 20. That a man can do no good without God. God does much that is good in a man that the man does not do; but a man does nothing good for which God is not responsible, so as to let him do it.
CANON 21. Concerning nature and grace. As the Apostle most truly says to those who would be justified by the law and have fallen from grace, "If justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose" (Gal. 2:21), so it is most truly declared to those who imagine that grace, which faith in Christ advocates and lays hold of, is nature: "If justification were through nature, then Christ died to no purpose." Now there was indeed the law, but it did not justify, and there was indeed nature, but it did not justify. Not in vain did Christ therefore die, so that the law might be fulfilled by him who said, "I have come not to abolish them, but to fulfil them" (Matt. 5:17), and that the nature which had been destroyed by Adam might be restored by him who said that he had come "to seek and to save the lost" (Luke 19:10).
CANON 22. Concerning those things that belong to man. No man has anything of his own but untruth and sin. But if a man has any truth or righteousness, it comes from that fountain for which we must thirst in this desert, so that we may be refreshed from it as by drops of water and not faint on the way.
CANON 23. Concerning the will of God and of man. Men do their own will and not the will of God when they do what displeases him; but when they follow their own will and comply with the will of God, however willingly they do so, yet it is his will by which what they will is both prepared and instructed.
CANON 24. Concerning the branches of the vine. The branches on the vine do not give life to the vine, but receive life from it; thus the vine is related to its branches in such a way that it supplies them with what they need to live, and does not take this from them. Thus it is to the advantage of the disciples, not Christ, both to have Christ abiding in them and to abide in Christ. For if the vine is cut down another can shoot up from the live root; but one who is cut off from the vine cannot live without the root (John 15:5ff).
CANON 25. Concerning the love with which we love God. It is wholly a gift of God to love God. He who loves, even though he is not loved, allowed himself to be loved. We are loved, even when we displease him, so that we might have means to please him. For the Spirit, whom we love with the Father and the Son, has poured into our hearts the love of the Father and the Son (Rom. 5:5).
CONCLUSION. And thus according to the passages of Holy Scripture quoted above or the interpretations of the ancient Fathers we must, under the blessing of God, preach and believe as follows. The sin of the first man has so impaired and weakened free will that no one thereafter can either love God as he ought or believe in God or do good for God's sake, unless the grace of divine mercy has preceded him. We therefore believe that the glorious faith which was given to Abel the righteous, and Noah, and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and to all the saints of old, and which the Apostle Paul commends in extolling them (Heb. 11), was not given through natural goodness as it was before to Adam, but was bestowed by the grace of God. And we know and also believe that even after the coming of our Lord this grace is not to be found in the free will of all who desire to be baptized, but is bestowed by the kindness of Christ, as has already been frequently stated and as the Apostle Paul declares, "For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake" (Phil. 1:29). And again, "He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). And again, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and it is not your own doing, it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8). And as the Apostle says of himself, "I have obtained mercy to be faithful" (1 Cor. 7:25, cf. 1 Tim. 1:13). He did not say, "because I was faithful," but "to be faithful." And again, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7). And again, "Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights" (Jas. 1:17). And again, "No one can receive anything except what is given him from heaven" (John 3:27). There are innumerable passages of Holy Scripture that can be quoted to prove the case for grace, but they have been omitted for the sake of brevity, because further examples will not really be of use where few are deemed sufficient.
According to the catholic faith we also believe that after grace has been received through baptism, all baptized persons have the ability and responsibility, if they desire to labor faithfully, to perform with the aid and cooperation of Christ what is of essential importance in regard to the salvation of their soul. We not only do not believe that any are foreordained to evil by the power of God, but even state with utter abhorrence that if there are those who want to believe so evil a thing, they are anathema. We also believe and confess to our benefit that in every good work it is not we who take the initiative and are then assisted through the mercy of God, but God himself first inspires in us both faith in him and love for him without any previous good works of our own that deserve reward, so that we may both faithfully seek the sacrament of baptism, and after baptism be able by his help to do what is pleasing to him. We must therefore most evidently believe that the praiseworthy faith of the thief whom the Lord called to his home in paradise, and of Cornelius the centurion, to whom the angel of the Lord was sent, and of Zacchaeus, who was worthy to receive the Lord himself, was not a natural endowment but a gift of God's kindness.
The Life in Christ
Is it God alone who saves us by bringing us into his Holy Triune Life? Yes. Does man's freewill cooperate in this process? Yes. Can man will this apart from God's grace? No, nothing is apart from God's grace. The Orthodox Faith is clear that our whole life is gift from God and that in our salvation there is nothing to boast in except the grace of God. Thus merit is a category utterly foreign to the mystical theology of the Orthodox Church. What human creature could merit anything so to bring demands to the throne of God? Our great saints are a testimony to us that there is no end to repentance and seeking God's forgiveness, absolution, and healing for our sin-sick souls. For repentance is a continual turning back toward God in faith and love that restores what was lost through the great turning away from Life that was our ancestral sin. This is the restoration of the image of God in fallen man. A healing that requires our cooperation with the saving activity of God. Yet, absent from the middle-eastern, hebraic, Biblical, and Apostolic mindset of our holy fathers, we will fail to grasp the fullness of our salvation. Therefore, the teachings of the Council of Orange cannot be understood outside of the context of the Patristic witness of the early Church.
The Life in Christ is not something mediated by anything but the person of Christ Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity, who united our human nature fully to the divine nature through the Incarnation. Consequently salvation is primarily an experience of the Life of Christ born within us by the Holy Spirit, a personal reality Christians experience in their entire lives and especially in the Holy Mysteries or Sacraments. In Baptism we are plunged into Christ by the Holy Spirit and united to his death, resurrection, and victory over death. In Chrismation, Christ our God presents us to the Holy Spirit to be anointed and filled with his life creating presence. In Holy Communion we receive the Body and Blood of Christ within our very selves. What more personal, intimate, and dynamic relationship could we have with Christ, to be inside him and to have him inside of us? Then we carry Christ into a hurting world to be ministers of reconciliation. The goal of the Christian life is to be united to Christ, to be healed by the Holy Spirit, to enter into the Trinitarian Life and be transfigured into Spirit-bearers, bringing Christ to the world and introducing them to the love of Christ.
Uncreated Grace
Explicit in this is the Orthodox understanding of grace. Orthodox Christians believe that, according to the Holy Scriptures, grace is uncreated, which is to say that grace is the personal presence of God himself. Even though God is completely unknowable and uncontainably beyond human thought in his inner life, he has made himself known through his "energy" or "activity" in the world. We see this activity as the mutually indwelling, selfless giving and receiving shared between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that overflows as creative love. Grace is uncreated because it is an experience of the "loving activity" that is undivided from God's very existence.
Even though this distinction was entirely Biblical and not Platonic, the medieval Frankish (9th century German) theologians disregarded it in favor of the pagan Neo-Platonic / Aristotilian idea that God is "simple." This means there are no distinctions within God. Where did they get that from the Bible? Consequently, grace was not uncreated for only God is uncreated. In time grace came to be understood in the west as a magical substance God causes to come into existence. Like gas put into the tank, we still had to drive the car up to heaven ourselves. The sacraments became like filling stations. The saints made it to heaven with some gas to spare and could share it with us to help us along. The Protestant reformers were right to reject this corrupt system of indulgences and priest craft but replaced it with the idea that grace was simply "undeserved merit." Consequently, salvation became a legal exchange of guilt for amnesty where God tolerates us by "declaring us right" rather than "making us right." In other words, in the Protestant system, we are not so much personally and dynamically united to God in Christ, rather God looks at Christ instead of us. In fact God cannot even look at us apart from Christ. In Protestantism, the sinner is always held at arms length from a distant and wrathful Father who must torture his Son in our place.
The Orthodox Christian understanding has always been that God does love sinful fallen humanity. The Bible says that God the Father was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.He does look upon them and has heard their cry for a savior. So much so, that God the Father sent his only begotten Son into the world to unite mankind to Himself through the power of the Holy Spirit, to set us free from the power of Satan, heal our self-sick souls, and make us holy and thus one with God. This is what Christ prays for in the hours before his crucifixion, "Father, make them one, as you and I are one." Our relationship with God is to be as close as the relationship Christ has with the Father!
For this reason, the Orthodox Christian experience of salvation is explicitly personal and Trinitarian and not legal. Grace is uncreated and thus an experience of the three-personal presence of God. The Persons of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are not remote and de-personalized. They are awesome present realities that are transfiguring the world. Salvation as healing, union, and glorification would be imposible without personal saving activity of the Triune God who begins, preserves, and completes our salvation through cooperation.
This experience of glorification is suprarational. It is light and darkness; it is a knowing and an unknowing. As St. Gregory Palamas tried to explain to the heretic Barlaam the Calabrian, the uncreated glory of God cannot be seen by the senses until man himself BECOMES the divine light, not that man is merged with God’s essence, but that man, since he is made in God’s image, was created to grow more and more like the Godman, and this is done not as one zapping us from the outside with created grace, but from the inside, since our nous is the site of divine/human synergy.
God wills that there be a real freedom in creation so that an equally real love can exist. This means that God is not dependent upon man or creation, as St. Gregory of Nyssa and many other Fathers have always agreed. St. Gregory of Nyssa, in Contra Eunomios I, describes the experience of noetic illumination as the realization in the heart that all created beings are dependent upon God, the truly real Being, Who is dependent upon nothing.
For this reason, it makes no sense to ask whether our salvation is of God's grace or human free will. We must work out our own salvation with fear and trembling for it is God himself that energizes us both to will and to do his good pleasure. God's pleasure is that all would be saved, healed, and become like him by entering freely into the Life of the Holy Three-Personed God. So we pray, "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner. Lord I believe, help me in my unbelief. Strengthen my faith that I may always turn to you as my only hope and save me whether I will it or not." This is called the Life in Christ.
At Vespers, the priest prays, "O Lord our God, who bowed the heavens and came down for the salvation of the human race, look down upon your servants and on your inheritance: for your servants have bowed down their heads and bent their necks to You, the Judge both awesome and loving. They do not await the help that is from man, but look for your mercy and are ready to receive your salvation."
If you want to read some of the primary sources concerning the Life in Christ, I highly recommend the following books: "Adversus Haereses" by Irenaeus of Lyons (especial the book "The Scandal of the Incarnation"), "On the Incarnation" by St Athanasius (a favorite of C.S. Lewis), the "Theological Orations" of St Gregory Nazianzen, and "The Life in Christ" by Nicholas Cabasilas. Another important book is "The First-Created Man" by St Symeon the New Theologian and translated by Fr Seraphim Rose.
Articles of Faith (1576)
from the First Answer of Patriarch Jeremiah II to the Lutherans
What follows after these introductory remarks are excerpts from the famous correspondence between Jeremiah II, Patriarch of Constantinople, and the Lutheran scholars in Tubingen, Germany regarding their "Augsburg Confession." The The Three Answers of Patriarch Jeremiah II to the Lutheran Scholars in Tubingen (1576-1581) enjoy the status of "symbolic books" in the Orthodox Church. That is, they are not of the same authority as the Symbols, esp. that of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. However, they are, with many other symbolic texts, of great value and importance to the Church. In his response to the Lutheran theologians, Patriarch Jeremiah II describes what he calls the twelve Articles of the Orthodox Faith.
The First Answer of Patriarch Jeremiah II of Constantinople
[p. 30] Jeremiah, by the grace of God, Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch to the wise and most learned men, the professors of Theology, Master Jacob the Chancellor and Master Martin Crucius. May you fare well.
[p. 31] We received the letters which your love sent us and the booklet which contains the articles of your faith. We accept your love, and in compliance with your request we shall endeavor to clear the issues in which we agree and those in which we disagree. The expression of love is the fulfillment of the Law and Prophets [cf. Rom 13:10]. Indeed, it is fulfilled, we may say, not only by mere words, but proven by the very facts themselves and by deeds. Even as the most precious stones that need no words of praise, yet they are looked upon with admiration because of their own intrinsic worth by those who know their value. You have displayed such a love, most wise German men, bereft of pride in those matters which you have communicated to us.
In responding, then, we shall say nothing originating of ourselves, but (what is pertinent) from the holy seven Ecumenical Synods with which, as you write, you acquiesce and you accept. We shall further speak in accordance with the opinion of the divine teachers and exegetes of the divinely inspired Scripture, whom the catholic Church of Christ has received in common accord, for their words and miracles illuminated the universe like another sun [cf. Mt 13:43]. Because the Holy Spirit breathed on them and spoke through them. Indeed, their statements shall remain unshaken forever because they are founded on the Word of the Lord.
The Church of Christ, according to Saint Paul, is the "pillar and bulwark of the truth" [I Tim 3:15]. And according to the divine promise of the Lord, the gates of Hades "shall not prevail against it" [Mt 16:18]. And although some are carried away by portentous thoughts nevertheless, this Church stands secure and steadfast, solidly supported on the rock and on those other teachings on which the truth has been established [cf. Eph 2:20]. For those who are of the Church of Christ, are wholly of the truth; but those who are not wholly of the truth, are also not of the Church of Christ. Therefore, we follow in the path of truth and offer the sound word for the upbuilding of the true faith. And with this we beseech the prayers of those who love the Lord, so that our mind may be guided by His divine grace in the path of peace [cf. Lk 1:79]. . . .
[3. Articles of Faith, pp. 33-36]
And now, coming to your third article concerning the articles of faith, we say the following: that the true and only divine faith of Christians, which is beyond mind and reason, the only existing true confession of the Triune God, which is contained in systematic form in these articles, is that which he who believes correctly must confess if he wishes to be saved.
These articles, which are also called articles of faith because they are principles and foundations of faith, are twelve in number, retaining the patter of the twelve Holy Apostles of Christ. Thus, three of them deal with the blessed Trinity, six deal with the Incarnation of the Son and Logos, and three deal with the consummation of the world.
The first of these articles states: that the Deity is by nature one, and not many, and also one in efficacy and rule and omnipotence and lordship.
Second, that this Deity is three, and not one person, even though it is one and undivided in the Godhead. The first person is unbegotten, the second person begotten, and the third person proceeds. They are called and said to be by the theologians: Father, Son, and Spirit.
Third, that this creator is the creator of all things, who brought them forth out of nothingness and placed them in time, the intelligible and sensible, the visible and the invisible.
Fourth, that through the providence of the Triune God, the good will of the Father and the synergism of the Spirit, the Logos, who remained unaltered and unchanged in divinity without suffering and not subject to corruption or change, became flesh for us by receiving the perfect human nature in one person.
Fifth, that he was born of a virgin, who had not known a man, and who was preserved as a virgin by Him before His birth, during His birth, and after His birth.
Sixth, that He suffered in the flesh (human nature) for us and was crucified and died voluntarily, but not with respect to His divine nature, which is immune to suffering.
Seventh, that He did rise on the third day, by His own power, and appeared many times to His disciples.
Eighth, that on the fortieth day after His resurrection He ascended into heaven while the disciples were looking on, and sat at the right hand of the Father proving that His inseparable and deified body is glorified and worshipped with the Father.
Ninth, that He will return again to earth from heaven in the glory of the Father, and He will grant His kingdom to His servants; and the impious He will condemn to suffering.
Tenth, He will resurrect our whole nature, uniting the souls with the pristine bodies in which they lived at one time for just retribution according to how they lived their lives, and they shall be immortal [cf. Eph 4:13].
Eleventh, that He will judge the living and the dead. He will punish the unfaithful ones, but he will glorify the pious and those who have lived according to the divine law.
Twelfth, that the life hereafter will be eternal because nature will become incorruptible.
Thus, in these articles the following are included: In the first, that the Father together with the Son and the Spirit are one God and one Lord, For this article calls the Father, God; the Son, God of God; and the Holy Spirit, Lord. It says that the Trinity is of the same essence [homousion]; that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are glorified together. At the same time the Prophets declared that God [the Father], together with the Logos and the Spirit, are eternal, omnipotent, and Creator; while the angels sing of the one God in three consecrations, [holy, holy, holy].
In the second article, that this, the only God, is a Trinity of persons and one in divinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That is, the Father is unbegotten and without cause, for He alone is the cause of those who are of Him. The Son, on the other hand, is begotten, God of God; while the Holy Spirit is Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father. And it further declares that this Trinity has, from time before all ages, one nature and glory and one power and worship. For the Holy Spirit is worshipped and glorified together with the Father and the Son.
In the third article it is taught that the Trinity is the Creator, making all things out of nothingness. For that reason it declares the Father as maker of heaven and earth and all things; the Son, through whom all things were made; and the Spirit as the giver of life.
In the fourth article the details concerning the Incarnation are proclaimed, that the Logos [Word of God] was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and Mary the Theotokos [Birthgiver of God].
In the fifth article, that Mary remained the Ever-Virgin from whom the Logos took a living body, having a soul that is rational and a capacity for will [theletike]. Being one, He became double for us, one consisting of two perfect natures.
In the sixth article, that the Logos was crucified in the flesh for us, He suffered and was buried; that He rose and ascended and will come again from heaven to judge the living and the dead. And in the other six articles are included: that there will be a resurrection and punishment, and an everlasting kingdom [for all the living and the dead].
The articles or chapters which are included in the sacred symbol [creed]. . .
[29. An Invitation To Follow the Holy Synods, pp. 102-3]
All these things which we have spoken, beloved, are founded, as you very well know, upon the inspired Scriptures, according to the interpretation and the sound teaching and explanation of our wise and holy theologians [the Fathers of the Church]. For we may not rely upon our own interpretation and understand and interpret any of the words of the inspired Scripture except in accord with the theologizing Fathers who have been approved by the Holy Synods, [inspired] by the Holy Spirit for a pious purpose, lest our thought, like that of Proteus move around here and there, deviating from the correct evangelical teaching, from true wisdom and from prudence. But someone will say, how can these things be corrected? In this way: with the help of God.
Let no one undertake or think anything contrary to the decisions of the Holy Apostles and the Holy Synods. He who uprightly keeps this principle will be a partner with us in our rejoicing, a member of our community and one who holds the same faith. But what communion would one have with us, who rejects the aforementioned canons and opposes the Apostles and shamelessly turns himself against the Holy Apostles? What part could he have with us? Somewhere one of the teachers [of the Church] says to those who strive to be pious: "One who speaks contrary to the things which have been decided—even though he is trustworthy [cf. l Cor 4:2; 9:1], lives as a virgin, does wonders, and prophesies—is a wolf in sheep's clothing, who causes the ruin of the sheep." Another teacher says: "It shakes loose something that seemed good to the God-bearing Fathers, that cannot be called administration, but violation and betrayal of the dogma." Still another teacher [Saint Basil] says:
One who has the judgment of Christ before his eyes, who has seen the great danger that threatens those who dare to subtract from or add to those things which have been handed down by the Spirit, must not be ambitious to innovate, but must content himself with those things which have been proclaimed by the saints. [Against Eunomius 2, PG 29.573-652]
Therefore, since so many and such important of our theologizing Fathers forbid thinking otherwise, there is only one correction: conform to the Holy Synod and follow the canons of the Apostles and, thus, follow Christ in all things.
[30. Closing Salutations]
O most wise German men and beloved children of our humble self, since, as sensible men, you wish with your whole heart to enter our most Holy Church, we, as affectionate fathers, willingly accept your love and friendliness, if you will follow the Apostolic and Synodal decrees in harmony with us and will submit to them. For then you will indeed be in communion with us, and having openly submitted to our holy and catholic church of Christ, you will be praised by all prudent men. ln this way the two churches will become one by the grace of God, we shall live together hereafter and we will exist together in a God-pleasing way until we attain the heavenly kingdom. May all of us attain it in Christ Jesus, to whom belongs glory unto the ages. Amen.
Written with the help of God, in Constantinople, in the year of the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ 1576, 15 May, at the venerable Patriarchal Monastery of the Pammakaristos [All-Blessed Ever-Virgin Mary].
Jeremiah, by the mercy of God, Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch