The Creed and NOT a filioque question (well, not exactly)

[RKO]

simple: can the Creed be traced back to the ACTUAL apostles? If not how far back can it be traced?

 

[WisdomTree]

simple: can the Creed be traced back to the ACTUAL apostles? If not how far back can it be traced?

Which one?

 

[Kristos]

simple: can the Creed be traced back to the ACTUAL apostles? If not how far back can it be traced?

depends on how you define traced. i think those at nicea & constantinople who wrote it felt it is articulation of scripture and tradition. they were not changing anything, they were clarifying.

 

[RKO]

depends on how you define traced. i think those at nicea & constantinople who wrote it felt it is articulation of scripture and tradition. they were not changing anything, they were clarifying.

That's what I thought. It was "codified" from tradition at Nicea. Is that what you are saying?

 

[WisdomTree]

That's what I thought. It was "codified" from tradition at Nicea. Is that what you are saying?

The Nicene Creed was formulated during the Council of Nicaea in 325AD and then revised during the Council of Constantinople in 381AD, few centuries after the Apostles died. They had nothing to do with it directly, but their teachings preserved by the Church Fathers allowed the Creed to exist.

If you're talking about the Apostles' Creed on the other hand...

 

[Soderquj]

[FONT=&quot]Orthodox confess the Nicene Creed (the Symbol of Faith or simply the Creed). The Nicene-Constantinopolitan is that creed formulated at the First and Second Ecumenical Councils. It was defined by the Holy Fathers of those first two councils (held in Nicea and Constantinople, respectively) to combat various heresies. Some scholars believe that the Creed promulgated by the First Ecumenical Council was based on an earlier baptismal creed used in Palestine (the Apostles' Creed), while others regard its more likely origin as being a creed issued early in 325 A.D. in Antioch, a so-called "Syrian Creed." (Orthodoxwiki)[/FONT]

 

[RKO]

The Nicene Creed was formulated during the Council of Nicaea in 325AD and then revised during the Council of Constantinople in 381AD, few centuries after the Apostles died. They had nothing to do with it directly, but their teachings preserved by the Church Fathers allowed the Creed to exist.

If you're talking about the Apostles' Creed on the other hand...

I am talking about the Apostle's Creed if it is what the Nicene was based on. I'm wondering where the true genesis of it all was, if that can be determined. Did it come from the Apostle's Mouths, according to tradition? I'm assuming there is no writing other than the NT, from which it was all taken. MAybe that's it, Perhaps it was gathered from the words of the NT, and called the Apostle's Creed. I read about some tradition about each of the 12 Apostles coming up with a line each or something, but that seems sentimental and farfetched.

 

[WisdomTree]

I am talking about the Apostle's Creed if it is what the Nicene was based on. I'm wondering where the true genesis of it all was, if that can be determined. Did it come from the Apostle's Mouths, according to tradition? I'm assuming there is no writing other than the NT, from which it was all taken. MAybe that's it, Perhaps it was gathered from the words of the NT, and called the Apostle's Creed. I read about some tradition about each of the 12 Apostles coming up with a line each or something, but that seems sentimental and farfetched.

The Apostles' Creed was originally called the Old Roman Creed or "Symbolum Romanum". The date ranges from 200AD to 900AD. The history surrounding it is quite obscured and according to a legend, each of the twelve Apostles wrote a line for the Roman Creed, which was later modified to become the Apostles' Creed. Whether this is true, we'll have no idea. This creed is accepted exclusively by the West (being the most commonly used Creed) while the East generally reject its legitimacy as well as the fact that they never used it.

 

[Nephi]

I am talking about the Apostle's Creed if it is what the Nicene was based on. I'm wondering where the true genesis of it all was, if that can be determined. Did it come from the Apostle's Mouths, according to tradition? I'm assuming there is no writing other than the NT, from which it was all taken. MAybe that's it, Perhaps it was gathered from the words of the NT, and called the Apostle's Creed. I read about some tradition about each of the 12 Apostles coming up with a line each or something, but that seems sentimental and farfetched.

Honestly the Eastern traditions don't really use the Apostle's Creed. I think it's primarily a Western creed, "most visibly by liturgical Churches of Western tradition."

I don't think it ever gained real usage or recognition (not to say it's wrong) in the East.

EDIT: Looks like WisdomTree beat me to it.

 

[Lukaris]

Sometimes I wonder if the Apostles' creed was originally intended to be caled something like the apostolic creed just as a statement of orthodox/catholic faith but somehow became peceived as a creed that was recited by the apostles. It is used in western rite Orthodoxy; see: Saint John the Baptist Orthodox Church » Apostles’ Creed

 

[MKJ]

Isn't there a difference between not using something and not accepting its legitimacy.

The apostles creed was used well before the East and the West became separated, so from an Orthodox perspective it was used in the Orthodox Church for many years, and it also does not say anything at odds with the Nicene Creed. I cannot really see how its legitimacy could be disputed.

 

[Nephi]

Isn't there a difference between not using something and not accepting its legitimacy.

The apostles creed was used well before the East and the West became separated, so from an Orthodox perspective it was used in the Orthodox Church for many years, and it also does not say anything at odds with the Nicene Creed. I cannot really see how its legitimacy could be disputed.

You are right. It was used in the West, is perfectly Orthodox, and nothing is wrong with its use. EO just don't find it authoritative, unlike the Nicene Creed.

 

[Cappadocious]

The Athanasian Creed is another story.

 

[WisdomTree]

The Athanasian Creed is another story.

An interesting one as well.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Isn't there a difference between not using something and not accepting its legitimacy.

The apostles creed was used well before the East and the West became separated, so from an Orthodox perspective it was used in the Orthodox Church for many years, and it also does not say anything at odds with the Nicene Creed. I cannot really see how its legitimacy could be disputed.

this. my priest once told me that there is nothing theologically wrong with the Apostle's Creed, it just did not get the stamp as the Symbol of the Faith like the Nicaean Creed did.

I think in the OSB it points out that the Epistles quote many early Creeds as well, and the original Christian Creed (according to my priest) was Jesus is Lord, which itself comes from the Creed of ancient Israel, Hear Oh Israel the Lord your God, the Lord your God is One!

 

[Lukaris]

As I linked in my post the Apostles' Creed is used in WRO & I personally think a layperson should read both the apostles & then the Nicene creeds as a faith development exercise. Both I think can help us communicate with other Christians on a layperson level alongside a basic use of our prayer books with the Bible. A good basic prayer book (like the red Antiochian pocket one) have what a layperson should know for daily prayer & Orthodox Christian life. I think we shortchange our potential to communicate faith on a basic layperson level when we often have the basics at our fingertips.

I think we sometimes try to resort to monastics too often for things that we can express otherwise perhaps not as deeply but just as validly. It is probably many monastics who gave us the prayers & tools in the prayer books anyway. Interestingly, it is a couple of monastics I read from that mentioned a layperson should have a basic faith & basic level of reading. For ex. St John Climacus mentions that the layperson should love God & neighbor & keep the basics of the 10 commandments before his writings on the ladder of divine ascent (which echoes what St. Paul says in Romans 13:8-10) & the 20th c. elder Porphyrios in Wounded by Love says he was told by his elders not to read the Philokalia but to read the Bible, the lives of the saints, & some of the divine services.

I guess in some ways I am rambling & not trying to infringe upon anyone's path but i think there are some options that we often overlook & are not just expressed commonly. There seems to be an astounding amount of lay ignorance; I mean I just got out of a council meeting in which we found a cradle layperson was upset because they did not understand that a 40 day Trisagion would be given for a deceased family member instead of a mass(!!!!), I mean c'mon already.(No ill intent towards the grieving intended).