Meaning: "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church"

[jimmyjimmy]

"I believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church"

It's a statement from the Nicene creed.

Is the meaning static as defined by those who wrote it or are we free to reinterpret it as we see fit?

Forgive me...

It's the message, not the messenger, which makes a church an "apostolic" Church.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

It's the message, not the messenger, which make a church an "apostolic" Church.

In reformed theology only.
From the EO side, it is both.

Forgive me...

 

[Apex]

That is the idea. All of it. As they teach it.

You know what makes up the catechism of The Orthodox Churches?

The Creed.

Yet, millions of Christians adhere to all the theological points of the Nicene Creed and are not members of Eastern Orthodox Church. How do you reconcile this fact?

 

[Ken Rank]

Handed down via the Holy Spirit though. That's the important bit!

Sometimes, I agree, but not always. There is much we are not aware of because we don't study our history. The idea that Jesus was Jewish who went to synagogues on Sabbath is a foreign idea to us. The idea that Christianity was very much a sect of Judaism in the first century is equally foreign. The idea that decrees were passed in the 2nd and 3rd centuries to make us look less Jewish is unknown... while decrees being passed by Jews to distance themselves from Christians is also unknown. So... some things have been preserved by the Spirit... but not every decree and decision made at some counsel was.

Blessings.
Ken

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Yet, millions of Christians adhere to all the theological points of the Nicene Creed and are not members of Eastern Orthodox Church. How do you reconcile this fact?

Many points yes, but not all. It is a whole statement, we recite it in services.

Let me put it to you in a question. Do the ancient Churches... 2000 years old, have the right to their definition of what was written by them and for them?

If thats not true then the truth about everything is subjective. And we know that is not so.

Would we have the right to bust in on their services in Damascus and demand to be served communion without any introduction?

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Sometimes, I agree, but not always. There is much we are not aware of because we don't study our history. The idea that Jesus was Jewish who went to synagogues on Sabbath is a foreign idea to us. The idea that Christianity was very much a sect of Judaism in the first century is equally foreign. The idea that decrees were passed in the 2nd and 3rd centuries to make us look less Jewish is unknown... while decrees being passed by Jews to distance themselves from Christians is also unknown. So... some things have been preserved by the Spirit... but not every decree and decision made at some counsel was.

Blessings.
Ken

So true! Christ used the hours of prayer and taught them to the Apostles for our benefit.

We are losing these things in the west.

Forgive me...

 

[Ken Rank]

So true! Christ used the hours of prayer and taught them to the Apostles for our benefit.

We are losing these things in the west.

Forgive me...

We are.... that is what I spend most of my time studying and teaching. Many don't see the point... but when we are "born into" a way of thinking and that way of thinking prevents us from getting all of what God has for us... then yes we can still be saved...but we leave food on the table God wants us to eat.

We are not at odds brother... we don't agree on every doctrine and we don't have to. Messiah will come and correct us all and we do ALL have error that will be corrected. Have a blessed weekend.

Shalom.
Ken

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

We are.... that is what I spend most of my time studying and teaching. Many don't see the point... but when we are "born into" a way of thinking and that way of thinking prevents us from getting all of what God has for us... then yes we can still be saved...but we leave food on the table God wants us to eat.

We are not at odds brother... we don't agree on every doctrine and we don't have to. Messiah will come and correct us all and we do ALL have error that will be corrected. Have a blessed weekend.

Shalom.
Ken

Im not against you either.
We dont have to agree on doctrine, just dogma.
The creed is our dogmatic statement.

Forgive me...

 

[Ken Rank]

Im not against you either.
We dont have to agree on doctrine, just dogma.
The creed is our dogmatic statement.

Forgive me...

Actually, we will agree less on dogma if you define dogma as Strong's does (a decree that is civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical). If the decree does not come from God Himself (and it will already have been recorded in the bible) then I am more often then not, not going to accept it. The exception to that is when decrees are passed for community reasons. We don't live in the Kingdom right now, Messiah isn't King and God's Law isn't the law of the land... and so we do the best we can under the conditions we are in until he returns and sets up that Kingdom.

That said... even agreeing less on dogma doesn't prevent us from being brothers. We are bound by our faith IN HIM... the rest is details unless we are in rebellion or leading others from Him.
Shalom.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Hi, I don't think we've met.

Let me ask you. Does the bride of Christ have the authority to make changes in her own house?

Economia?

And if that is true, are all these different Churches and individual ideas the bride?

Forgive me...

It is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ who determines truth.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

It is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ who determines truth.

And surely the Holy Spirit is not telling different things to different people.

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

The creed is the dogmatic statement of The Orthodox Church.

dog·ma
ˈdôɡmə/
noun

1. a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
   "the Christian dogma of the Trinity"
   synonyms: teaching, belief, tenet, principle, precept, maxim, article of faith, canon;
   
   
   Forgive me...

 

[GUANO]

"I believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church"

It's a statement from the Nicene creed.

Is the meaning static as defined by those who wrote it or are we free to reinterpret it as we see fit?

It is static as defined by those who wrote it until it is changed by the appropriate parties in the official organization. The individual is still free to interpret it however they like as that is their nature—whether it is correct to do so it up to debate.

In regards to the esoteric meaning, you have the capitalization wrong so that's incorrect because the 'church' itself wasn't 'deified' by the Romans at that time (but it was later on). Neither Christ Himself nor any other writer of the New Testament laid out a structure of succession for the church and even the 'pro tips' that were given were pretty much ignored by the 'apostolic succession' over time because they were 'prohibitive' to them. Christ is the head of His body and knows who is His and those that are His know Him. All of our organizations, denominations, creeds, and statements of faith are vanity at the least and sorcery, idolatry and spiritual domination at the most.

 

[GUANO]

Sometimes, I agree, but not always. There is much we are not aware of because we don't study our history. The idea that Jesus was Jewish who went to synagogues on Sabbath is a foreign idea to us. The idea that Christianity was very much a sect of Judaism in the first century is equally foreign. The idea that decrees were passed in the 2nd and 3rd centuries to make us look less Jewish is unknown... while decrees being passed by Jews to distance themselves from Christians is also unknown. So... some things have been preserved by the Spirit... but not every decree and decision made at some counsel was.

Blessings.
Ken

The Jew's who converted to Christianity practiced a version of Christianity that looked 'Jewish', while the Greeks, Turks, Syrians, and Persians were more Gnostic, the Romans more ritualistic, the Africans fell in between gnostic, ritualistic and even shamanic, and there isn't much of a trace of the Indian church, as far as I remember they were killed quickly after they went out to evangelize that area. later, the romans eventually evolved into something that appears to be an image of the chaldean religion of assyria and babylon (astrolatry) mixed with a form of the Roman Imperial Cult with iconography based on Christian figures—they mostly assimilated their competitors until the reformation over 1,200 years later.

 

[anna ~ grace]

And surely the Holy Spirit is not telling different things to different people.

Forgive me...

That is an excellent point.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Guano,

Someone has been hitting the history book. Great stuff.

Have you read "The shape of the liturgy" yet.

Forgive me...

 

[GUANO]

Guano,

Someone has been hitting the history book. Great stuff.

Have you read "The shape of the liturgy" yet.

No—but looks interesting. I'm not necessarily a 'believer' in the Catholic rites and rituals but I'm certainly interested in the principles behind the evolution and/or development of such rites and rituals themselves.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

No—but looks interesting. I'm not necessarily a 'believer' in the Catholic rites and rituals but I'm certainly interested in the principles behind the evolution of such rites and rituals themselves.

Right. Dom Gregory Dix. Angelican, his work come highly recommended by EO clergy.

Lots of detail. I have it in pdf if want a copy.

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

...
Forgive me...[/QUOTE]

 

[GUANO]

Right. Dom Gregory Dix. Angelican, his work come highly recommended by EO clergy.

Lots of detail.

Forgive me...

I grabbed the pdf