I was reading this article on Titus One Nine about an Anglican bishop who does not believe in the miracle of the Virgin birth. Now, I am not sure whether he recites the Nicene Creed weekly, or if he bothers to recite the part that mentions Mary being a virgin, but it raised a question in mind, which is:
Why would you recite a creed that you do not believe in, and in some cases, openly teach against?
Remember, a creed is a statement of belief. Traditionally, it is a statement that all Christians within a particular denomination are expected to believe. Of course, modernism has muddied these waters, and there exist many reasons why a person can recite a statement of belief but not actually believe what he is reciting. Some of these reasons for saying one thing and believing another are rooted in faith and submission, while others seem to be disingenuous.
It is common knowledge that many pastors and leaders in the mainline Protestant denominations publicly deny major Christian creedal beliefs (including the virgin birth, resurrection, and Trinity), although I am sure some Catholic leaders do the same thing. Why would church leaders recite a creed that affirms the very ideas they deny? Note that I am not referring to casual doubters here, but church leaders who, by their position, are expected to teach and defend the creeds. Also, I am not referring to individuals who have moments of doubt, ignorance, or weakness, but folks who have given these issues enough thought to have theological and philosophical arguments against classic Christian doctrines. And yet, many of these individuals still recite the creeds, and still remain leaders in denominations that are supposed to be based on the creeds.
As I write this, I think there are two genuine options in the case of those who cannot honestly recite a creed: either face/work through personal doubts (perhaps even over time) and, through faith, submit to the teachings of the creed in question, or join a church/organization that does not adhere to the particular creed that you cannot affirm. Related to the latter, I think many folks say the creed while doubting, faithfully seeking the Church’s guidance through the doubt, seeking the gift of faith amidst unbelief. I think this is a genuine option, one that recognizes the importance of submission to Christ and His Church, while facing what comes naturally to man: doubt. This, in my opinion, is different than being a church leader and openly denying/teaching against the beliefs contained in the creeds. I think if a person reaches a point where he proudly, openly, and publicly denies creedal beliefs, the latter option (finding another church) is more genuine.
I remember being driven batty by this issue when I was in seminary. That a future minister could trash a classic Christian doctrine in class and then affirm the doctrine by reciting the creed during worship irked me. However, I did meet some students who recognized the disconnect between what they believed and were expected to affirm in the creeds. One lady became Episcopalian because, even though she quit believing in doctrines like Jesus’ deity or his birth from a virgin, she liked singing in the local Episcopal parish choir. Even though I think that this is a poor reason to join a church, I will give her credit on one point: she did not recite the creeds because she didn’t accept their content.
So, what do you think? Is it genuine to recite a statement of belief and not believe what you are saying?
David Bennett
Jennifer
asimplesinner
Fr. J.
Chad Toney
Jorge Flores
Jonathan B
carmelbennett
nicenehobbit
Jason S
jaybird68
papaz
June 9, 2007 at 3:53 pm
It is completely hypocritical to recite a creed and say “I believe” or “We believe”…and then not really believe it! (Or live it, for that matter.)
June 9, 2007 at 5:08 pm
As an Anglican I met two bishops who openly denied the Virgin Birth and Bodily Resurrection and personally knew three priests who denied those doctrines (as well as most other major tenets of the historic Faith). Yet, as you say, every Sunday, they not only recited the Creed but LED their congregations in the recitation. It caused no end of confusion to many in the pews and often rankled as well. One of the reasons I fled Anglicanism was its tolerance of such duplicity.
Having said that, I must, however, admit that while I recite the Creed not only at Mass but in my daily devotions, there are times when serious doubts and questionings “arise in the heart” (to put it biblically). Sometimes my past theological studies kick in and I can hear a certain old prof say, “Well, the emphasis in the Creed is on ‘born’, not on ‘virgin’”, or his pointing out that even one as great as St. Hilary of Poitiers intensely disliked creeds and explicit dogmas because they could never capture the true essence of the Faith. Then I sometimes just wonder: What DO we mean by ‘resurrection’, IS midrash and mythologizing sometimes mixed up with literal truth etc, et al. I am, after all, an intelligent, educated, theologically trained modern man.
Yet, even with all the questionings and doubts that do sometimes assail I still repeat, “Credo”…”I believe”. Why? Because my Mother the Church has taught me to do so, the Mother who, even in my doubt, feeds me with Truth and brings me to the Banquet Table of the Lord. I can say, even in doubt, “I believe”, because, whatever else, I am in love with Jesus Christ and “to whom besides can I go, Lord? YOU have the words of Eternal Life!”
There is a kind of doubt that really does come from faith, or at least, bows to faith, and to the One who gives Eternal Life. Lord, I believe; help my unbelief. Amen.
June 10, 2007 at 2:41 pm
nh, I loved your response. I have these moments of “doubt” too, but pray for help in my unbelief.
I even had a period of years of struggle with certain things in the creeds–having being thoroughly “edumactaed” by Catholic and Evangelical scholars, but I continued to recite the creeds and eventually, many of my questions and doubts were erased. Thanks be to God!