“Not
to spoil the party but we do have the ecumenical creeds. The Apostles' and
Nicene creeds exist as essentially definitions of what it means to be a
Christian. That's why many of us recite them every week-- to reaffirm our
identity and to reaffirm our unity
with all other Christians who confess this faith.”
Not
to spoil the party, but no, we don’t. The ecumenical creeds were given in a
context, and if we should say that we agree with them, we are saying we agree
with the context in which they were given, and on the terms with which the men
who composed them proposed them. The very fact that I am Catholic, and the
person who said this is not, is all the proof I need for what I have just said.
The meaning of the creeds is itself in dispute between us. If this is not
acknowledged, there is significant risk of false ecumenism, of which there is
far too much in these days. I suppose it is a forgivable conceit, depending on
when and why the person holds it, but this creedal minimalism is indeed a
conceit, and one in fact that doesn’t work.
Comments