Tag Archives: Nicene Creed

Clothed in Glory

Posted on by
Reply
The Annunciation. Oldest surviving icon of the Annunciation, Rome, Via Salaria, Catacomb of Priscilla, mid-2nd century.

The Annunciation. Oldest surviving icon of the Annunciation, Rome, Via Salaria, Catacomb of Priscilla, mid-2nd century.

Clothed with the Glory of God

When we discuss the communion of persons, which is a sign[1] and symbol of the communion the trinity has with itself, we can then understand what the scriptures mean when they speak of Adam and Eve being naked, and not ashamed (Ge 2:25).[2] By nature the man and the woman were in full communion with each other, and full communion with God (Ge 2:8). The fathers of the church believed Adam and Eve were thereby clothed with the glory of God.

The obvious question is whether the idea of the original and prototypical humanity being clothed with the glory of God has any scriptural foundation. In the introduction to Robert Alter’s translation of Psalms, he notes the way the language of Psalms presents the idea of light’s being a mythological property of deity, of God wearing light as a garment, and of God stretching out the heavens as a garment.

God, as we note in Psalm 27[3], is associated with light — in that instance, because light, archetypically, means safety and rescue to those plunged in fearful darkness, but also because radiance is a mythological property of deities and monarchs. Psalm 104 is a magnificent celebration of God as king of the vast panorama of creation. It begins by imagining God in the act of putting on royal raiment: “Grandeur and glory you don” (hod wehadar lavashta). The psalmist then goes on: “Wrapped in light like a cloak, / stretching out the heavens like a tentcloth” (verse 2). What makes the familiar figure of light for the divinity so effective is its fusion with the metaphor of clothing. The poet, having represented God donning regalia, envisages Him wrapping Himself in a garment of pure light (the Hebrew verb used here is actually in the active mode, “wrapping”). Then, associatively continuing the metaphor of fabrics, he has God “stretching out the heavens like a tent-cloth,” the bright sky above becoming an extension of the radiance that envelopes God.[4]

The association of God with light is the source for the phrase describing Jesus Christ as “light from light” in the Nicene Creed. Since Sacred Scripture speaks of God being clothed in light, and of spreading out the heavens like a tentcloth, it is only natural to extend that idea to original and prototypical humanity. St. Ephrem the Syrian writes: “God clothed Adam in glory”; and again: “It was because of the glory with which they were clothed that they were not ashamed. It was when this glory was stripped from them after they had transgressed the commandment that they were ashamed because they were naked”[5] In like manner, St John Chrysostom writes: “[W]hile sin and disobedience had not yet come on the scene, they were clad in that glory from above which caused them no shame. But after the breaking of the law, then entered the scene both shame and awareness of their nakedness.”[6]

The 17th century mystic Jacom Böhme remarks:

Man should have walked naked upon the earth, for the heavenly [part] penetrated the outward, and was his clothing. He stood in great beauty, glory, joy and delight, in a child­like mind; he should have eaten and drunk in a magical manner; not into the body, as now, but in the mouth there was the separation; for so likewise was the fruit of Paradise.[7]

Such was the state of humanity in Paradise. Yet once Adam had sinned and the glory of God had departed from him, it was immediately clear to him that he no longer belonged in Paradise. St. Ephrem the Syrian, explains this in the seventh verse of his second Hymn on Paradise:

At its boundary I saw
figs, growing in a sheltered place,
from which crowns were made that adorned
the brows of the guilty pair,
while there leaves blushed, as it were,
for him who was stripped naked:
there leaves were required for those two
who had lost their garments;
although they covered Adam,
still they made him blush with shame and repent,
because, in a place of such splendor,
a man who is naked is filled with shame.[8]

There are striking parallels between this hymn and the account of the Philistines capturing the Ark — how the pregnant wife of Phineas, upon hearing this, gave birth. “And she named the child Ichabod, saying, The glory is departed from Israel” (I Sam 4:21). It is only after the fall, after the glory has departed, and after full communion of persons has been lost, that the man and the woman objectified each other as individuals rather than persons partaking of the same nature; in their fallen state they saw themselves as naked before each other and before God.[9]

The reader will no doubt be reminded of how the Ark of the covenant was shrouded in the “thick darkness” of the Holy of Holies (I Kings 8:12); and of how in Ezekiel chapters 8-10, the prophet is given a vision of the glory of God, the defilement of the temple, and how the glory of God departed from the temple as a consequence for Israel’s sin. In this manner we come to the understanding that the glory with which Adam and Eve were clothed, or overshadowed, is natural to mankind in the state of original righteousness, a state of communion with God. We also understand that the glory of God, with which they were clothed, would quite rightly depart as a consequence of Adam’s sin. In this context, we note that after the Babylonian captivity and the rebuilding of the temple, Ezra makes no mention of the glory of God returning, filling the temple, and overshadowing the Ark. Instead, the return of the Shekinah glory came at the Annunciation, when the angel Gabriel informed the blessed virgin that the Holy Ghost would come upon her and the power of the highest would overshadow her. What we see at the annunciation (and in Revelation 12), is the blessed virgin clothed with the glory of God, as was Eve in the garden — which points to the Incarnation as the inauguration of God’s plan for reconciliation and recreation, for the reestablishment of that perfect communion between God and man, and between each human person.

 

Endnotes

[1] On the nature of the sign and the thing signified, Karl Barth notes: “Sign and thing signified, the outward and the inward, are, as a rule, strictly distinguished in the Bible, and certainly in other connexions we cannot lay sufficient stress upon the distinction. But they are never separated in such a (“liberal”) way that according to preference the one may be easily retained without the other.” (Barth, Church Dogmatics The Doctrine of the Word of God, Volume 1, Part 2 1956, 179) In other words, the sign always points to the thing signified. However, if we believe in the thing signified, we have to accept the sign as well—as, for example, with the virgin birth being the sign of the Incarnation (Isa 7:14).

[2] (John Paul II 2006, 163)

[3] The Lord is my light and my rescue.

Whom should I fear?

The Lord is my life’s stronghold.

Of whom should I be afraid?

Ps 27:1, Robert Alter’s translation (Alter 2007, xxv-xxvi; 91)

[4] (Alter 2007, xxviii)

[5] (St Ephrem the Syrian n.d., 99, 106)

[6] (Louth, Conti and Oden, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Old Testament I, Genesis 1-11 2001, 72)

[7] (Böhme 2009)

[8] (St Ephrem the Syrian 1989, 87)

[9] (Lossky, The Creation 1989, 77)

 

Bibliography

Alter, Robert. 2007. The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Barth, Karl. 1956. Church Dogmatics The Doctrine of the Word of God, Volume 1, Part 2: The Revelation of God; Holy Scripture: The Proclamation of the Church. New York: T&T Clark Ltd.

Böhme, Jacom. 2009. “Mysterium Magnum (part one).” Gnosis research. October 9. Accessed November 15, 2010. http://meuser.awardspace.com/Boehme/Jacob-Boehme-Mysterium-Magnum-part-one-free-electronic-text.pdf.

John Paul II. 2006. Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body. Boston: Pauline Books & Media.

Lossky, Vladimir. 1989. “The Creation.” In Orthodox Theology: An Introduction, by Vladimir Lossky, edited by Ian Kesarcodi-Watson and Ihita Kesarcodi-Watson, 51-78. Crestwood: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press.

Louth, Andrew, Marco Conti, and Thomas C. Oden. 2001. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Old Testament I, Genesis 1-11. Vol. 1. 28 vols. Westmont: InterVarsity Press.

St Ephrem the Syrian. n.d. “Commentary on Genesis.” Scribd.com. Accessed June 9, 2013. http://www.scribd.com/doc/56174298/St-Ephraim-the-Syrian-Commentary-on-Genesis.

—. 1989. Hymns on Paradise. Translated by Sebastion Brock. Crestwood: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press.

 

Creation, Sola Scriptura, and the Church

Posted on by
Reply
Ex Nihilo by Frederick Hart

Ex Nihilo by Frederick Hart

Creatio ex Nihilo

The doctrine that everything that exists was created out of nothing cannot be proven from Scripture alone. It is a product of over 500 years of theological development beginning around 200 BCE, and prior to that time was of little to no concern to the Jewish people.

This might be hard for biblical literalists to take, but nothing in the Genesis creation accounts support the idea of creation ex nihilo, creation out of nothing. This is an interpretation passed on by tradition rather than a position derived from exegesis — the critical explanation of the text.

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” (Gen 1:1) This is a summary statement, one that sets the stage for everything that is to follow. And what follows does not support creation out of nothing. “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” (Gen 1:2) This verse is a description of the typical near-eastern concept of the primordial state which existed before creation. The Greeks called this chaos (χάος), a word that means formless, void, darkness. The Greek philosopher Pherecydes of Syros describes chaos as being like water — formless, yet capable of differentiation. John H. Walton says this was a feature of near-eastern cosmology, that the act of creation involved not the creation of matter, but the differentiation and ordering of matter. In this view, creation is functional rather than ontological; creation is an act of separation, of differentiation, of the initiation of an “operational system”.[1]

Jewish Development

Justin Taylor says Genesis 1:1 is not a summary statement, but rather a background statement describing the initial act of creation of matter out of nothing.[2] There are multiple problems with this interpretation. First, this interpretation is foreign to the ancient cosmologies. Paul Copan notes that “Jewish thought was preoccupied with the God of the cosmos rather than with the cosmos itself.”[3] Second, the creation accounts are about God and God’s relationship with the created order; and about humanity, about God’s relationship with humanity, and about humanity’s relationship with the created order. In other words, the creation accounts are theological and anthropological first, and only distantly related to the question of “how” God created. Third, Philip Jenkins notes that for early Jewish thought, “Adam’s story made little impact.”[4] It wasn’t until around the 2nd century B.C. that the creation accounts became an issue in theology. Prior to that time, the focus was Torah and Temple, on what Jacob Neusner refers to as “eternal Israel.”[5]

Beginning in the 2nd century BCE, there was a difference of opinion on the matter. Philo of Alexandria, the great Jewish theologian (c. 20 BCE – 40CE), appears to be of two minds on this issue. In his work On the Eternity of the World, he writes: “For it is impossible that anything should be generated of that which has no existence anywhere.”[6] Yet in his work On Dreams he writes: “And besides all this, as the sun, when he arises, discovers hidden things, so also does God, who created all things, not only bring them all to light, but he has even created what before had no existence, not being their only maker, but also their founder.”[7]

There are differences of opinion on this issue presented in the Apocrypha (a.k.a. the Deuterocanonical books), most of which were written in the 200 years before Christ. In 2 Maccabees we have the story of a woman encouraging her son to accept martyrdom rather than recant. She says: “I beseech thee, my son, look upon the heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, and consider that God made them of things that were not; and so was mankind made likewise.” (2 Macc 7:28) Contrast this with the Wisdom of Solomon, which states: “For Your all-powerful hand, Which created the world out of unformed matter…” (Wis 11:17a, OSB)[8]

New Testamental Support

Unlike what many people think, the New Testament does nothing to resolve this issue, as the passages used to support creation out of nothing do not say this explicitly. In many cases they could be interpreted as supporting either position; in other cases, their support for creation out of nothing is tenuous at best. Let us examine first the passage from the book of Romans.

(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. (Rom 4:17)

If we examine this passage out of context, the phrase “calleth those things which be not as though they were” seems to support creation out of nothing. But the context suggest otherwise. First, this refers to Abraham’s being the father of nations when as yet he not only had no children, but that his body and that of his wife were as good as dead (Rom 4:19; Heb 11:12). It is their bodies, which were as good as dead (incapable of childbearing) which were touched by God, “who quickeneth the dead.” The passage is not speaking of the creation accounts, but of God’s granting a child to Abraham and Sarah by quickening their dead bodies, by calling those things which be not (fertility) as though they were.

Another passage often used to support creation out of nothing is found in the book of Colossians.

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:  And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. (Col 1: 16-17)

The primary context of this passage is Christological. The Son of God is “the firstborn of every creature” (Col 1:15), just as He is “the firstborn from the dead” (Col 1:18) The creation of all things “visible and invisible” is a reference to the entirety of the created order, both spiritual and material. This creation is then recapitulated in the reconciliation of all things (Col 1:20). While creation out of nothing can be supported by this passage, it is an improper hermeneutic to derive a normative theology from a passage that is not explicitly addressing that subject.

The book of Hebrews is often used to support creation out of nothing, and at first glance this seems to be the case.

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. (Heb 11:3)

The verb “were framed” (καταρτιζω, katartizo, kat-ar-tid’-zo) has to do with an object’s function rather than its ontology. The idea is to mend, to complete, to arrange, to prepare. This is in line with the ancient cosmological ideas that the primordial stage was formless, void, and undifferentiated, and that the “things which are seen” were made of this primordial chaos, which we do not see. One can certainly read into this passage the idea of creation out of nothing, but the passage can readily be interpreted otherwise.

Ante-Nicene Development

The issue of whether the world was created out of nothing remained unsettled in the ante-Nicene era. Some early church fathers such as Justin Martyr held that creation has to do with God’s ordering or fashioning the world out of the preexisting chaos (Origen also supported this position.)

We have been taught that He in the beginning did of His goodness, for man’s sake, create all things out of unformed matter. (Justin Martyr, First Apology, X)[9]

Other church fathers such as Irenaeus of Lyon (c. 130 –c.  202 AD), Tatian the Assyrian (c. 120 – c. 180 AD), and Theophilus of Antioch (c. 181) argued against the both Greek philosophy and the Gnostics using the concept of creation out of nothing. Irenaeus of Lyon is quite explicit when he writes:

While men, indeed, cannot make anything out of nothing, but only out of matter already existing, yet God is in this point pre-eminently superior to men, that He Himself called into being the substance of His creation, when previously it had no existence. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies: Book II, X)[10]

In describing the content of the Christian faith, Irenaeus used some language from the Psalms, which itself is derived from Genesis:

Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the LORD his God:
Which made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that therein is: which keepeth truth for ever. (Ps 146:5-6)

The idea that God “made heaven and earth” was used in the proto-creedal formulations of Irenaeus, which inaugurated the language which was later folded into the Nicene Creed. In his Against Heresies, Irenaeus wrote:

The Church, though dispersed through out the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies: Book I, X)[11]

These have all declared to us that there is one God, Creator of heaven and earth. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies: Book III, I)[12]

Tatian the Assyrian makes the argument that even if the world was formed out of unformed, undifferentiated chaos, it was God that brought that chaos into existence.

The case stands thus: we can see that the whole structure of the world, and the whole creation, has been produced from matter, and the matter itself brought into existence by God; so that on the one hand it may be regarded as rude and unformed before it was separated into parts, and on the other as arranged in beauty and order after the separation was made. (Tatian, Address to the Greeks, XII)[13]

Theophilus  of Antioch ridicules the Greek philosophers and their concept of the eternity of matter. He writes:

God, because He is uncreated, is also unalterable; so if matter, too, were uncreated, it also would be unalterable, and equal to God; for that which is created is mutable and alterable, but that which is uncreated is immutable and unalterable. And what great thing is it if God made the world out of existent materials? For even a human artist, when he gets material from some one, makes of it what he pleases. But the power of God is manifested in this, that out of things that are not He makes whatever He pleases. (Theophilus, Theophilus to Autolycus, Book II, IV)[14]

The Nicene Creed

This issue was not settled until the First Ecumenical Council, which laid forth the idea of creation out of nothing as follows:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of his Father, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten (γεννηθέντα), not made, being of one substance (ὁμοούσιον, consubstantialem) with the Father.  By whom all things were made, both which be in heaven and in earth. (The First Ecumenical Council, The Creed)[15]

By claiming God to be the maker of all things visible and invisible, both in heaven and in earth, the council settled the issue, using the terminology found in Scripture as filtered through Irenaeus. By using the language of Irenaeus, they were implicitly endorsing the theology of Irenaeus over against those who believed that creation was a mere ordering of unformed, undifferentiated chaos.

Summary

The theological dogma of creation ex nihilo, of creation out of nothing, developed over time, in opposition to near-eastern cosmologies, to Greek philosophy, and to the Gnostics. The argument predates Christianity, and was not settled until the First Council of Nice in 325 A.D. The doctrine is nowhere explicit the Scriptures, and can barely be said to be implicit. It can be read into the Sacred Scriptures only insofar as one has this thought already in mind.

The fact that Christianity accepts the idea of creation out of nothing cannot be attributed to Scripture Alone, for those who through otherwise could also support their position from scripture. This position developed in opposition to heresy — specifically, the Gnostic heresy, which derived its cosmology from Greek philosophy and various near-eastern cosmologies. The idea of creation ex nihilo, of creation out of nothing, is therefore a product of the Church, and is part of Holy Tradition.

 

Bibliography

Copan, Paul. 1996. “Is Creatio Ex Nihilo A Post-Biblical Invention? An Examination Of Gerhard May’s Proposal.” EarlyChurch.org.uk. Accessed January 29, 2015. www.earlychurch.org.uk/article_exnihilo_copan.html.

Jenkins, Philip. 2015. “Enter Adam.” Patheos.com. January 23. Accessed January 29, 2015. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2015/01/enter-adam/.

Neusner, Jacob. 1993. A Rabbi talks with Jesus: an intermillennial, interfaith exchange. New York: Doubleday.

Philo of Alexandria. n.d. “On Dreams.” Early Jewish Writings. Accessed January 29, 2015. http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book21.html.

—. n.d. “On the Eternity of the World.” Early Jewish Writings. Accessed January 29, 2015. http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book35.html.

Schaff, Philip. 1884. ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Vol. 1. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

—. 2004. ANF02 Fathers of the Second Century: Hermas, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria (Entire). Edited by Phillip Schaff. Vol. 2. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Christian Classics Ethereal Library.

—. 2005. NPNF2-14 The Seven Ecumenical Councils. Vol. 14. 14 vols. Grand Rapids: Christian Classics Ethereal Library.

Taylor, Justin. 2015. “Biblical Reasons to Doubt the Creation Days Were 24-Hour Periods.” The Gospel Coalition. January 28. Accessed January 29, 2015. http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2015/01/28/biblical-reasons-to-doubt-the-creation-days-were-24-hour-periods/.

Walton, John H. 2009. The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate. Downers Grove: IVP Academic.

 

 

 Endnotes

[1] (Walton 2009, 29)

[2] (Taylor 2015)

[3] (Copan 1996)

[4] (Jenkins 2015)

[5] (Neusner 1993, passim)

[6] (Philo of Alexandria n.d., II.5)

[7] (Philo of Alexandria n.d., I.76)

[8] The King James Version translation of this verse is less clear, translating the phrase “out of formless matter” as “of matter without form”. “For thy Almighty hand, that made the world of matter without form …” (Wis 11:17)

[9] (Schaff 1884, 252)

[10] (Schaff 1884, 609)

[11] (Schaff, ANF01 1884, 541)

[12] (Schaff, ANF01 1884, 684)

[13] (Schaff, ANF02 2004, 108)

[14] (Schaff, ANF02 2004, 146)

[15] (Schaff, NPNF2-14 2005, 39)

Clothed with the Glory of God

Posted on by
Reply
Painting of a man, hands raised , all aflame.

Clothed with the Glory of God

Abba Lot went to see Abba Joseph and said to him, ‘Abba as far as I can I say my little office, I fast a little, I pray and meditate, I live in peace and as far as I can, I purify my thoughts. What else can I do?’ then the old man stood up and stretched his hands towards heaven. His fingers became like ten lamps of fire and he said to him, ‘If you will, you can become all flame.’

In the communion of persons, first evidenced in the persons of Adam and Eve, we are presented with a sign[i] and symbol of the communion the trinity has with itself. This helps us to understand what the scriptures mean when they speak of Adam and Even being naked, and not ashamed (Ge 2:25). (John Paul II 2006, 163) By nature the man and the woman were in full communion with each other, and full communion with God (Ge 2:8). The fathers of the church believed Adam and Eve were thereby clothed with the glory of God.

The obvious question is whether the idea of the original and prototypical humanity being clothed with the glory of God has any scriptural foundation. In the introduction to Robert Alter’s translation of Psalms, he notes the way the language of Psalms presents the idea of light’s being a mythological property of deity, of God wearing light as a garment, and of God stretching out the heavens as a garment.

God, as we noted in a verse quoted from Psalm 27[ii], is associated with light — in that instance, because light, archetypically, means safety and rescue to those plunged in fearful darkness, but also because radiance is a mythological property of deities and monarchs. Psalm 104 is a magnificent celebration of God as king of the vast panorama of creation. It begins by imagining God in the act of putting on royal raiment: “Grandeur and glory you don” (hod wehadar lavashta). The psalmist then goes on: “Wrapped in light like a cloak, / stretching out the heavens like a tentcloth” (verse 2). What makes the familiar figure of light for the divinity so effective is its fusion with the metaphor of clothing. The poet, having represented God donning regalia, envisages Him wrapping Himself in a garment of pure light (the Hebrew verb used here is actually in the active mode, “wrapping”). Then, associatively continuing the metaphor of fabrics, he has God “stretching out the heavens like a tent-cloth,” the bright sky above becoming an extension of the radiance that envelopes God. (Alter 2007, xxviii)

The association of God with light is the source for the phrase describing Jesus Christ as “light from light” in the Nicene Creed. Since Sacred Scripture speaks of God being clothed in light, and of spreading out the heavens like a tentcloth, it is only natural to extend that idea to original and prototypical humanity. Ephrem the Syrian writes: “God clothed Adam in glory”; and again: “It was because of the glory with which they were clothed that they were not ashamed. It was when this glory was stripped from them after they had transgressed the commandment that they were ashamed because they were naked” (St Ephrem the Syrian n.d., 99, 106) In like manner, Chrysostom writes: “[W]hile sin and disobedience had not yet come on the scene, they were clad in that glory from above which caused them no shame. But after the breaking of the law, then entered the scene both shame and awareness of their nakedness.” (Louth, Conti and Oden, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Old Testament I, Genesis 1-11 2001, 72)

The 17th century mystic Jacom Böhme remarks:

Man should have walked naked upon the earth, for the heavenly [part] penetrated the outward, and was his clothing. He stood in great beauty, glory, joy and delight, in a child­like mind; he should have eaten and drunk in a magical manner; not into the body, as now, but in the mouth there was the separation; for so likewise was the fruit of Paradise. (Böhme 2009)

Such was the state of humanity in Paradise. Yet once Adam had sinned and the glory of God had departed from him, it was immediately clear to him that he no longer belonged in Paradise. St. Ephrem the Syrian, explains this in the seventh verse of his second Hymn on Paradise,:

At its boundary I saw
figs, growing in a sheltered place,
from which crowns were made that adorned
the brows of the guilty pair,
while there leaves blushed, as it were,
for him who was stripped naked:
there leaves were required for those two
who had lost their garments;
although they covered Adam,
still they made him blush with shame and repent,
because, in a place of such splendor,
a man who is naked is filled with shame. (St Ephrem the Syrian 1989, 87)

There are striking parallels between this hymn and the account of the Philistines capturing the ark — how the pregnant wife of Phineas, upon hearing this, gave birth. “And she named the child Ichabod, saying, The glory is departed from Israel” (I Sam 4:21). It is only after the fall, after the glory has departed, and after full communion of persons has been lost, that the man and the woman objectified each other as individuals rather than persons partaking of the same nature; in their fallen state they saw themselves as naked before each other and before God. (Lossky, The Creation 1989, 77)

The reader will no doubt be reminded of how the ark of the covenant was shrouded in the “thick darkness” of the Holy of Holies (I Kings 8:12); and of how in Ezekiel chapters 8-10, the prophet is given a vision of the glory of God, the defilement of the temple, and how the glory of God departed from the temple as a consequence for Israel’s sin. In this manner we come to the understanding that the glory with which Adam and Eve were clothed, or overshadowed, is natural to mankind in the state of original righteousness, a state of communion with God. We also understand that the glory of God, with which they were clothed, would quite rightly depart as a consequence of Adam’s sin. In this context, we note that after the Babylonian captivity and the rebuilding of the temple, Ezra makes no mention of the glory of God returning, filling the temple, and overshadowing the ark. Instead, the return of the Shekinah glory came at the Annunciation, when the angel Gabriel informed the blessed virgin that the Holy Ghost would come upon her and the power of the highest would overshadow her. What we see at the annunciation (and in Revelation 12), is the blessed virgin clothed with the glory of God, as was Eve in the garden — which points to the incarnation as the inauguration of God’s plan for reconciliation and recreation, for the reestablishment of that perfect communion between God and man, and between each human person.

Bibliography

Alter, Robert. The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2007.

Böhme, Jacom. “Mysterium Magnum (part one).” Gnosis research. October 9, 2009. http://meuser.awardspace.com/Boehme/Jacob-Boehme-Mysterium-Magnum-part-one-free-electronic-text.pdf (accessed November 15, 2010).

John Paul II. Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body. Boston: Pauline Books & Media, 2006.

Lossky, Vladimir. “The Creation.” In Orthodox Theology: An Introduction, by Vladimir Lossky, edited by Ian Kesarcodi-Watson, & Ihita Kesarcodi-Watson, 51-78. Crestwood: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1989.

Louth, Andrew, Marco Conti, and Thomas C. Oden. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Old Testament I, Genesis 1-11. Vol. 1. 28 vols. Westmont: InterVarsity Press, 2001.

St Ephrem the Syrian. “Commentary on Genesis.” Scribd.com. n.d. http://www.scribd.com/doc/56174298/St-Ephraim-the-Syrian-Commentary-on-Genesis (accessed June 9, 2013).

—. Hymns on Paradise. Translated by Sebastion Brock. Crestwood: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1989.

 

[i] On the nature of the sign and the thing signified, Karl Barth notes: “Sign and thing signified, the outward and the inward, are, as a rule, strictly distinguished in the Bible, and certainly in other connexions we cannot lay sufficient stress upon the distinction. But they are never separated in such a (“liberal”) way that according to preference the one may be easily retained without the other.” (Barth 1956, 179) In other words, the sign always points to the thing signified. However, if we believe in the thing signified, we have to accept the sign as well—as, for example, with the virgin birth being the sign of the incarnation (Isa 7:14).

[ii] The Lord is my light and my rescue.

Whom should I fear?

The Lord is my life’s stronghold.

Of whom should I be afraid?

Ps 27:1, Robert Alter’s translation (Alter 2007, xxv-xxvi; 91)

The Virgin Mary and the Creeds

Posted on by
Reply

The three Ecumenical Christian Creeds are a witness to the universal faith of all Christians. The three Ecumenical Christian Creeds serve to define content and boundaries of the Christian faith. Therefore any teaching that is at variance with the three Ecumenical Creeds is by definition outside the boundaries of Orthodox Christianity.

The Nicene and the Apostles Creed

The Apostles Creed

The Apostles Creed

It is common liturgical practice to confess the Creeds in the Divine Service. It is both curious and little noticed that only two persons besides Jesus himself are mentioned in the Creed: the Virgin Mary and Pontius Pilate. Both the Nicene and the Apostles Creed place these two persons back to back, in opposition as it were:

Nicene Creed

I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God, …
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.

Apostles Creed

And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord:
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, dead, and buried.

 

The creeds clearly place the conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit and the birth of our Lord of the Virgin Mary over against the suffering and death of Jesus Christ, God’s only Son, our Lord, at the hands of the fifth Roman procurator, Pontius Pilate. The only woman mentioned is honored in her obedience; the only man mentioned is dishonored for rejecting the truth and putting to death the Son of God. Thus we see the fulfillment of the Protoevangelium: for of the seed of the woman our Lord was born for the purpose of being delivered for our offenses, but raised for our justification. Thus Pilate was Satan’s instrument by which Christ’s heel was bruised; the Virgin Mary’s was God’s instrument through whose obedience the serpent’s head was crushed beneath Christ’s heel.

The creedal title “Virgin Mary” is quite interesting. In Part II we discussed the prophecy of Isaiah that a virgin would conceive, and a virgin would bear a son. The Son of God was became incarnate of the Holy Spirit by the Virgin Mary, without impacting her virginity. In like fashion the incarnate Word was born of the virgin Mary without affecting her virginity. Thus in using the title of Virgin Mary, we confess Mary to be virgin still. Every time we use the title Virgin Mary we are making a statement about the perpetual virginity of Mary, for no one is called a virgin once they cease to be a virgin.

The Athanasian Creed

The Athanasian Creed expresses the seriousness with which the church fathers treated doctrinal matters. The Athanasian Creed begins by stating: “Whoever wishes to be saved must, above all else, hold the true catholic faith. Whoever does not keep it whole and undefiled will without doubt perish for eternity.” The Trinitarian half of the Athanasian Creed ends with this statement: “Whoever whishes to be saved must think thus about the Trinity.” Then the Christological half of the Athanasian Creed begins as follows: “It is also necessary for eternal salvation that one faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became man.” The Athanasian Creed ends as it began: “This is the true Christian [in the Latin, “catholic”] faith. Unless a man believe this firmly and faithfully, he cannot be saved.” With these words, known as the “damnatory clauses”, the error of those who believe doctrine does not matter is laid bare.

The Athanasian Creed stands firmly over and against those who would separate the Word from doctrine; those who make experience the arbiter of faith; and those for whom faith is a matter of good works instead of an orthodox doctrinal confession. The Athanasian Creed clearly states that one’s salvation depends upon holding to the Christian faith, whole and undefiled. Those who fail to hold firmly and faithfully to the Christian faith, as confessed in the Creed, cannot be saved and will without doubt perish for eternity. Therefore the stakes are high. Eternal destiny is at stake, and it is therefore imperative for us to understand what the Creeds have to say.

The Athanasian Creed stands firmly over and against those who would separate the Word from doctrine; those who make experience the arbiter of faith; and those for whom faith is a matter of good works instead of an orthodox doctrinal confession. The Athanasian Creed clearly states that one’s salvation depends upon holding to the Christian faith, whole and undefiled. Those who fail to hold firmly and faithfully to the Christian faith, as confessed in the Creed, cannot be saved and will without doubt perish for eternity. Therefore the stakes are high. Our eternal destiny is at stake, and it is imperative for us to understand what exactly is confessed in the Creeds.

The Athanasian Creed was not written by Athanasius, but was instead composed around 500 AD. It seems reasonable that the use of Athanasius’ name was to honor the man who saved Christianity from the Arian heresy and maintained the faith against Julian the Apostate. The Athanasian Creed is a confession of the orthodox faith over and against Arianism[ii], Nestorianism[iii], Monophysitism[iv], and Macedonianism[v]. As previously discussed, the opening and closing lines of the Athanasian Creed proclaim its purpose: to proclaim the true Christian faith, without which a man cannot be saved. As the Athanasian Creed is primarily concerned with the proper definition of the triune God, it’s description of Christian doctrine is not as well rounded as that of the Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds.

 

[i] The texts of the Three Ecumenical Christian Creeds are included at the end of this article.

[ii] Arianism: Jesus was a created being, and not God from God — a demigod, if you will.

[iii] Nestorianism: Jesus exists as two persons: the Son of God, and the Son of Man.

[iv] Monophysitism: The belief that Christ had only one nature, as opposed to the Chalcedonian position that Christ has both a divine and a human nature.

[v] Macedonianism: the denial of the full divinity and personhood of the Holy Spirit.