Apart from God doing something in an unbeliever’s heart, don’t expect them to understand the message, applaud your efforts, agree with your logic or accept your Bible verses. It’s important to keep that in mind!
Randy Smith

Athanasi Creed

Athanasi Creed

QUICKUNQUE VULT

commonly called THE CREED OF SAINT ATHANASIUS

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty.And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be both God and Lord. So we are forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made, nor created nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.

And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater, or less than another; But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world; Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting; Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father, as touching his Manhood. Who although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ; One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God; One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.

For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.

This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.

Schaff: Creeds of Christendom, 66ff. renders Substance as Essence also; incomprehensible as either unlimited or infinite; faithfully as rightly; and, in the concluding sentence, faithfully and firmly as truly and firmly.

QUICUNQUE VULT

commonly called “The Creed of Saint Athanasius”

Whoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold

the Catholic Faith.

Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt

he shall perish everlastingly.

And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and

Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.

For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another

of the Holy Ghost.

But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all

one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal.

Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.

The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate.

The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensile, and the Holy Ghost

incomprehensible.

The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal.

Any yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal.

As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but

one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.

So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost

Almighty.

And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God.

And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.

And likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord.

And yet not three Lords, but one Lord.

For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge

every Person by himself to be both God and Lord,

So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, There be three

Gods, or three Lords.

The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten.

The Son is of the Father alone, not made, not created, but begotten.

The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made, nor

created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one

Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.

And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater, or

less than another.

But the whole three persons are co-eternal together and co-equal.

So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the

Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also

believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus

Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.

God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before all worlds; and

Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;

Perfect God and Perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh

subsisting.

Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the

Father, as touching his Manhood.

Who although he may be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ.

One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the

Manhood into God.

One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.

For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one

Christ.

Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the

third day from the dead.

He ascended into heaven, he sittith on the right hand of the Father, God

Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies and shall

give account for their own works.

And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they

that have done evil into everlasting fire.

This is the Catholic Faith, which except a believe faithfully, he cannot

be save.

(BCP, pp. 864-865)

This creed, called the “Quicunque Vult” or Athanasius’ Creed was formulated primarily in response to two prominent heresies known as “subordinationism” and “monarchianism.”

Any teaching which “subordinates” the Son to the Father, and the Spirit to both Father and Son, by treating them as three divine (or quasi-divine) beings which are separate from each other because they exist at different levels of reality is known as subordinationism. In other words, subordinationism is a direct and emphatic assertion that Son and Spirit are intermediaries between God and the world. They are divine; but they are not as divine as the Father. Consequently, they are capable–in a way in which he is not–of being directly related to the finite world. On a map of the structure of reality, they would be “closer” to the visible world than the Father.

But if this is what one wants to say, why not say it in the simplest and most economical way possible? Why not dispense with any real distinction among Father, Son and Spirit, and say that it is the one God, the indivisible ultimate, who alone is really divine? This, in essence, was the position of those who are known as “monarchians.” These teachers–and their tradition reached back into the second century–would, of course, have agreed with Athanasius in their opposition to any form of subordina- tionism. They saw no reason, however, to complicate matters by insisting on a real threefoldness in God. Once you have pulled up the rope ladder of subordinate or intermediary “divine ” beings, what is left, in effect, is simply the top rung–God, alone in himself. Moreover, it is only in this way that the unity of God can truly be safeguarded. For all its virtues, the position of people like Athanasius seemed to say that there are three coequal Gods; and Arius was assuredly correct in perceiving the absurdity of that position.

But then what did the monarchians make of the trinitarian formula? How did they explain or interpret expressions like ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?’ Needless to say, they did not want simply to be rid of this way of talking. They merely wished, as we have said, to make sure that it was not taken to refer to any ‘real’ distinctions in God. What they proposed, therefore, was a very simple–and in its way appealing– solution. In one way or another, they all suggested that Father, Son, and Spirit be taken as names for ‘different ways in which God is seen by us.’ This might mean, for example, that they are names for different attributes of God (and thus equivalent to abstract words like ‘creative’ or ‘self-expressive’); or it might mean that they are names for God’s ‘appearance,’ for what he ‘looks like.’

Now at first glance this position seems both plausible and helpful. It does, after all, give concrete meaning to the trinitarian formula; and at the same time, it asserts in a serious and explicit way the unity of God. A second glance, however, reveals a rather strange thing. Like the subordinationist, the monarchian erects a barrier between God and human beings. In this case, of course, the barrier is not made up of a descending hierarchy of intermediary divine beings. Rather, it is constituted by God’s appearance, which for the monarchian takes the place, functionally speaking, of intermediaries. In other words, the monarchian asserts that although God ‘is’ not Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, he nevertheless ‘looks like’ Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Between what God is in himself, on the one hand, and human beings on the other, there stands this appearance: and again we are confronted with a doctrine which questions the true and active presence of God himself with humanity. On the monarchian view, what we have of God directly is only his appearance, and not also his reality.

It was in order to forestall or correct this rather strange form of the idea of the “intermediary” that most Christian teachers insisted on saying that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are ‘hypostases.’ This Greek word (which was translated into Latin as ‘persona,’ whence the English ‘person’) meant simply “something objectively real.” When applied to Father, Son and Holy Spirit, therefore, it was calculated to assert that God does not just ‘appear’ to be threefold; he genuinely is threefold. Each of the three names refers to a real something in God. This assertion, moreover, constitutes yet another defense of the conviction that in creation, redemption and sanctification what is with us is ‘God’–as he truly is in himself.

Thus, the orthodox position in its basic outlines finally appeared. God is ‘one’ in being. But, at the same time, he is, objectively and in himself, three: “One God in three hypostases (persons).” But how can such a thing be said, and what does it mean?

It would be easy, of course, to evade these questions by saying that the doctrine of the Trinity is a mystery, and therefore something which must be accepted on faith. This policy, however, will not really work; and that is not merely because people have a hard time believing something whose point they cannot see. In Christian faith, a mystery is not something which fails to make sense. It is, rather, something whose sense can be discerned, and even stated, but never mastered or fully comprehended in its richness. The mysterious is such not because of its absurdity or its incoherence, but because of its depth: not because one cannot see or state truth about it, but because the truth as stated is only a bare intimation of the reality to which it points. There can, therefore, be no retreat from the task of asking what it is that the doctrine of the Trinity is saying or pointing to.

In this task, the first thing which must be firmly grasped is the deliberate seriousness with which the doctrine affirms that God is ‘one.’ When it is said that Son and Spirit are God, that they are “of one being” with the Father, this does not mean that they and the Father are three quite separate instances of “Godness.” It means, rather, that they are in very truth one and the same God. Each of them is all that God is; and none of them is separated from the others in being God. The persons are not independent individuals: They are, to use classical language, ‘ways in which God is God.’ This suggests, moreover, yet another dimension of God’s unity. Because the persons ‘are’ not separate things, they do not ‘do’ things separately, and they do not do ‘different’ things. All of the works of God are works of the Father done in the Son and perfected through the Spirit.

But how is this so? Do we not, in fact, associate creation with the Father, redemption with the Son, and sanctification with the Holy Spirit? The answer to this question is obviously Yes. It needs to be remembered, however, that these three works of God are in reality discovered as “moments” or dimensions of a single relationship. Redemption, I have said, is creation, historically objectified and enacted. Similarly, sanctification ‘is’ redemption, subjectively actualized. What God is and what he does in relation to humankind are ‘one thing.’ What the Word does is what the Father does; and what the Holy Spirit does is what the Word does. All carry out the one work of God, which is, as I have said, always the work ‘of’ the Father, ‘in’ the Son, and ‘through’ the Holy Spirit.

If this is so, however, in what way do the persons differ from one another? How are they distinct?

Here the key word is ‘relation.’ It is worth noticing that every account given of the meaning of the trinitarian formula explains the distinction of the persons in terms of some kind of ‘relatedness’ which is attributed to God. Subordinationism and monarchianism alike focused attention on the relationship of God to the created world as a whole, or to human beings in particular. In other words, the point, as they saw it, of making a distinction of persons was to explain the ‘how’ of God’s ‘relatedness to the finite universe.’ That is why the concept of the intermediary played so central a role in their thought. What each of these positions really emphasized, in short, was the distinction between God-in-himself and God-related-to-the-world. Subordinationism identified the Father with God-in-himself, removed and even isolated from the world. It then explained the Son and the Holy Spirit in their distinction from the Father as God-in-contact-with-the-world–a slightly inferior kind of God. The monarchian, as we has seen, took a somewhat different tack, but worked with essentially the same idea. For him, God-in-himself was the one true God; and God-in-relation-to-the-world was God as he “appeared” in threefold guise.

The orthodox position results from a refusal to make this sort of distinction in God. It wants to say, as we have seen, that God ‘in ‘himself’ is self-communicative and active in relation to the world: that at the very heart of the divine being is a movement of self-bestowal, of sharing, of affirmation of the “other.” In other words, the orthodox sought a way of asserting that God-in-himself is not distinct from, but exactly the same as, God-in-relation; and their way of doing this was to say that the distinction of persons is expressive of the fact that relat- edness is part of God’s own,proper way of being. It is, therefore, not, in the first instance, God’s relationship to the world which the doctrine of the Trinity focuses on. Rather, it is the fact that ‘God stands in relation to himself.’ On this understanding, the language of the trinitarian formula–‘Father, Word, Holy Spirit’–says in effect that God truly becomes “other’ for himself, that he communicates himself to himself. And this, in turn, means that relatedness to an “other” is not something eternal or foreign to God, but part of the very logic of his being. The doctrine of the Trinity says what God must be like in himself to be the sort of God who genuinely gives himself–communicates him- self–in love. For this reason, it states the presupposition of what we learn about God in considering him as the ultimate “other’ who is actively present in creating, redeeming, and sanctifying.

IN CONCLUSION the “mystery” of Trinity-in-unity, then, is the mystery of God’s self-communicative nature as that is expressed in his own being. He is his own Word to himself, and his own appropriation of that Word. He genuinely reproduces himself for himself; and yet all these “selves” are clearly ‘one’ in a final and unqualified sense.

Consequently, the doctrine of the Trinity, which is intimated in the very structure of the creeds, states what sort of God it is whose very nature is to affirm, and set himself in relation to, an “other.” The creeds, as we use them, enact jsut such a relation. When they are recited sincerely, they constitute a point at which a created person is seized up in the eternal self-communication of Father, Word, and Holy Spirit; for that is the meaning of creation, of redemption, and of sanctification.