Apostles and Nicene Creeds Part 4

Hey everybody. Hope everyone in America reading this had a great 4th of July weekend. I get some views from others in other countries. Not sure if they actually read it. I'll never know and wont let it bother me either. Thanks for reading this, anyways.


Alright, back to the creeds:

I don't know how I made this mistake before, but the Apostles Creed according to my source, does not have "according to the scriptures." A very important part of the Nicene Creed nevertheless.

Apostles: "he ascended into heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead."

Nicene: "he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end."

       First, I want to touch on a piece from a previous part of the Nicene Creed, the part that says, "he descended into hell." We have mention of this, for what reason? Did Jesus go to hell? Did he make a visit to the devil and beat him up for his lunch money? No. He didn't. The term "hell" is used in our culture as the place that people go who do not have salvation, the people who choose a life other than with God. Historically, and in the particular meaning of this creed though, "hell" is meant to mean nothing more than the place that the dead go - which is in the ground. It simply means that we believe Jesus was buried. It is mentioned to give further edification that Jesus really died, not just passed out or something else. He really died, and was thus buried as such.

       I wanted to touch on that because we have in today's blog "he ascended into heaven." Now, when we read "he descended into hell... he ascended into heaven" we want to weigh these two places with equal measure simply because of our understanding, our lexicon, and its cultural inputs. Try not to do that, ever. Understand first what that writer was attempting to say, period. Doing otherwise gets us into the hermeneutical anarchy we have among the Body today.

       The rest of this part of the creed(s) places emphasis on the place and purpose that Jesus has in our salvation history. It is both historical and prophetic. "he ascended... he is seated... he will come again in glory to judge..." Here we have what Jesus did, what he is doing, and what he will do.

       The Nicene creed mentions that Jesus will come in "glory." You should understand this word to mean "power, might, etc,."

       Lastly you must agree as any sort of Christian that "his kingdom will have no end." This is one part of the Church that I didn't completely understand before I was Catholic. James Cardinal Gibbons relays in his famous book "The Faith of Our Fathers" that the Church has five distinctive (and extremely biblical) characteristics - one of which is perpetuity which essentially means "never ending." Hebrews 12:26 reads "since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken." In Matthew 16:18 Jesus indicates to Peter that "upon this rock" Jesus will build his church, not yours and mine, and that "the gates of hell will not prevail against it." "Prevail against" is actually one Greek word, katischyō, which means that this other "hell" or "hades" will not "over power" or "be superior in strength." Notice that Jesus as Jesus said to Peter about "my church" we believe the same about "his kingdom."

       This was actually a huge argumental win for Catholicism for me when I was investigating. The idea, biblical, that in order to be a real part of the body which is the church, that church has had to have existed forever - which only the Catholic Church can claim. Protestants, orthodox, and others cannot claim this as they chose to separate from the church in differing millenia. But as sadly mistaken by many protestants, the Catholic Church teaches that each of the true followers of Christ regardless of denomination are part of the Body of Christ - not just Catholics. Again, it was a huge win for me when I learned what Catholics actually believe and where they actually come from.

Jesus will be king of all, and will reign for all time.

The Largest Pillar to Fall

A devout protestant argues for months, becomes Catholic. Oh Lordie, there is so much to tell. and here is the first:

The Largest Pillar to Fall

Martin Luther said, “Justification is the article on which the Church stands or falls.”

                If the reader of this knows anything about the reformation, he/she should know that Luther was not the whole reformation, but got a serious ball rolling for others. So I will often refer back to Luther, and you might say “but I don’t like or agree with Luther.” That doesn’t matter. What matters first is why the reformation happened at all. Bear this in mind.               

                Before Luther, there were many reformers. Most of these reformers wanted a moral reformation – a challenge to a 700 year problem for corrupt positions in the Church, including the Pope.  Luther was a solid advocate of a reformation against the corruptions of the Holy Catholic Church. In his well heard of “95 Theses” there were several issues Luther addressed boldly.  Ever read them? They are available online these days. Have a look. You will see him pointing out three recurring problems: 1) the power of a Pope, 2) the corruption of the church, 3) the issue of indulgences.  Indulgences were the chief issue, but I see three common topics. Either way, these were the mainstream issues he spoke out against in the beginning of his ministry. Even during this time, Luther often was heard speaking that there was no single issue that should cause him to break free from Rome (the Roman Catholic Church). Bear in mind he was no layman, he was indeed a devout monk turned priest ordained and anointed. He wanted the unity of the Church to remain integral in whatever happened. But, his invocation as the Diet of Worms “here I stand,” and the “article on which the Church stands or falls” are central to the reformation.  Why the change of heart? He was probably angry as the years went by. Trying to have someone kidnapped, misleading them to a castle tower, and other things might do that…

                So what was the position on justification exactly? Luther’s view was Justification by “Faith Alone.” In the Latin it is “Sola Fide.” To fill the reader in, the Catholic view of Justification is and has always been ‘Faith + Works.’ To me, as a protestant at the time, this didn’t seem too foolish. Of course salvation was from Faith alone!  I recall to my mind what St. Paul says in Romans 3, about not boasting of works, because it has nothing to do with salvation. When Luther was challenged by scripture such as James 2:24, “you see that a man is justified by works and not faith alone.” Luther responded by calling the Book of James “an Epistle of Straw,” inciting it should be burned. Well there is a serious contention there between Paul and James, right? Does Paul not also say in Galatians 5:6, “what is important is faith expressing itself in love.” Does James not echo this saying, “faith without works is dead” (James 2:27). You can check out the Greek if you please about what I am saying but the best thing to do is take into context the scripture here. Paul, when he says works have nothing to do with salvation was speaking of works of the law, and later is referring to charitable works. Well, hey, so is James. James also is referring to obedience to God in the works.

                Any plain reader can see that the Catholic view is clearly derived explicitly from scripture. This is rare. I will write about it another time, but the doctrines of Christianity are very rarely explicit from the Scriptures; rather they are very implicit. It was only with new heresies that the Church saw the need to define, dogmatize, or opinionate the Churches official position. A perfect example is the Trinity. For now, just know, or learn to see that the primary reason Luther gave us for the Schism is completely unbiblical itself. Heavens knows how this actually took off as an academic apology for Christendom, but I can see where people wanted away from the corruptions of the Church. What’s terrible is that the reason for this break, “faith alone” is found nowhere in the Bible. But, don’t rush into the judgment. Catholics do not count faith as important as works, or vice versa. Any Deacon, Priest, Bishop, or Pope will tell you that the faith-filled relationship is the utmost important! It is a huge misunderstanding that the Catholic Church weighs so heavily on works.

                So I have pretty simply laid it out for the reader. You can do as I did, and check out the debates on youtube, or the ones in text. They are all over the Internet. You will see that neither back down, but I think it is easily discernible that the Catholic tradition of “faith and works” for justification is a better argument, and is biblical as well. And that brings up a big point on the benefit of the Catholic view. They have +2000 years of this belief in faith and works. It is no modern opinion, or a response to Luther, or anything else; it was echoed throughout the ages from the very beginning. This is so important as you will hear many these days say, “well, the Catholic Church does not look like the New Testament Church we observe in scripture.” Point taken. But according to whom? This can drag out a whole separate issue, but really, if we look at scripture only, and ignore traditions, we wind up in a very harmful spot. I know, I will be blasted for that, but I will explain the scripture and tradition thing another day. Stick with me for now.

If you followed along, you saw where in scripture we observe faith and works and not just faith alone. Paul said, “do not get into vein arguments.” Some would call this a stupid argument, “they both teach the same thing.” Well, yes, Protestant pastors will teach that faith without works is dead faith, but will not include works in justification. Whatever the case, if it is such a silly topic then that should certainly create some doubt in your mind for Luther’s and the other reformers (who all agreed, by the way, with Luther) reason for starting the reformation and deciding that a schism with the Church was more important.

That is the greatest pillar to fall for my foundation for Protestantism. I was not the first or the last, but after I realized that Luther was not in sync with the historical church, all of Protestantism began to make much less sense, and was much less necessary, and much less truthful.  So don’t get me wrong, Protestant churches are great, and they preach, mostly, the Truth, but it is not the whole truth. In fact, there is only one Church that says it is infallible.

Please write me with questions: shaunmc04@gmail.com

"Put your boobs away."

Anyone heard of Rocco Grimaldi? Perhaps not, unless you're a huge College Hockey fan, or follow the NHL draft. The man of the discussion is the 33rd Draft pick to the NHL's Florida Panthers, and a current Fighting Sioux forward (woot woot). This guy can thread a needle in the dark if you know what I mean (hockey metaphor). The most remarkable thing about this extremely talented young man is not the fact that he is touted as the next Johnathan Toews (take your pick from the megamix of talent coming from the ND Locker room), nay, the most remarkable thing about him is his devotion to God, Jesus, and the advancement of the Kingdom.

He isn't just about pretty words either; as most athletes stop at "I would like to thank God," no, this man preaches the whole Gospel - conviction, celebration, and hope. He is also a man who knows how to carry that cross. Some -who have nothing better to write about- have referred to his very recent Twitter remarks as "sexist" which we can see is a common reaction from that of an unbeliever. His "rants" were largely pointed at modesty and purity. He points out that "women are not an object for playing with" and "Guys, when did sleeping with every girl you can make you a man?" or "[girls,] when did being a beautiful girl become dressing with the least amount of clothes?"  .... The one that got him in trouble was "Ladies you can help us out big time. Put your boobs away..."

Yep, that is SEXIST!!! (#psych!!) lol

Click: yardbarker for a 'thoughtful' exposition where Rocco "gets all weird and religious on us" or puckdaddy for some twisted criticism of Rocco's choice of words.

We can call it unfair treatment, but the "world" is not a place for a Christian or a devout, outspoken athlete. We weren't made for this world. The "world" would be heralding this man if he was in support of LGBT or removal of DADT or DOMA, or if he were to drive a Prius and gave speeches for the rights of the "small majority." What a contradiction. Instead, people act as if his Twitter comments are an attack on the very civil rights of others. 

As my wife would say, it's a "travishamockery." But I will digress. We all know how the world treat Christians so I will not spend any more time talking about it. Instead, I will celebrate that the Lord Jesus has done an amazing work in this young mans life. Glory be to God that He has empowered a public figure to be a great example of the message of the Messiah. His words are that exact message:

"I'm not a Christian because I'm strong and have it all together. I'm a Christian because I'm weak and admit I need a savior."  

Amen. Carry your cross, too. Preach the whole Gospel. People don't know they need a mediator until they know they understand the Law.

Now for fun: