Creeping Creed

By Dr. John Weaver

---

This creed was first compiled from earlier statements of faith under the oversight of some 318 bishops and Emperor Constantine at Nicaea in 325 AD and edited in subsequent “ecumenical church councils.” The “Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed” combats the heresy of Arianism (that the Son of God is not coeternal with God the Father) and articulates a religious faith that is regularly recited down to the present day by adherents to Christianity. You can read it here.

Though the creed expresses Biblical truths about God (the Father and Son are the same and separate) and salvation (baptism is for remission of sins), its content is corrupted by its form. In other words, it expresses Biblical truths in an unbiblical way – the ecumenical creed – expressing good things about God but not according to the pattern of leadership (a bishop should lead only a local church, e.g., Heb 13:17) and the exclusively congregational service of the church as revealed in the Scriptures. [On this latter point in historical perspective, I find helpful Everett Ferguson, “The ‘Congregationalism’ of the Early Church,” in D.H. Williams, ed., The Free Church and the Early Church: Bridging the Historical and Theological Divide (Eerdmans, 2002)].

The Nicene Creed appears at a time in the history of Christianity during the 4^th and 5^th centuries AD when religious and political power is increasing consolidated by leaders in large cities – e.g., Alexandria, Constantinople, Rome – and the unity of the church is distorted towards the material organization of human religious and political institutions and away from the spiritual unity of individual believers in faithfulness to Christ and their local church congregation.

The venerable language of the creed cloaks an unbiblical alliance of church and state (often called Constantinianism, which is powerfully critiqued by a Mennonite writer whom I often find insightful, John Howard Yoder). Between the lines of the ancient Nicene creed is a demonic powerplay by religious leaders (some of whose writings, like Athanasius of Alexandria, I read profitably and admire). It is a powerplay that utilizes ignoble means to accomplish noble ends (viz., to combat heresies, to spread the gospel, and maintain peace).

To be sure, the creed is in some ways beautiful and expresses an admirable desire for unity. In one of its forms, it begins, “we believe . . .”.

But “even the demons believe” (James 2:20). And no confession of faith is fully true that does not pair 1) the expression of faith with 2) the work of Christians and the Church that is authorized by Jesus and the Apostles in the Bible. The faith of Nicene creedalism is a faith that is “useless,” as James terms faith without works, because in practice it creeps away from the truth it confesses.

But perhaps I’m being too one-sided and overly harsh about the Nicene Creed. The Wikipedia entry on the Nicene Creed observes that “non-denominational groups, such as some independent Churches of Christ . . . view the Nicene Creed as a helpful summary of faith but not authoritative . . .”. This is fine so far as it goes, but caveat lector. The same Abraham who in Genesis 14:14 led 318 men (the legendary number of bishops at Nicaea) in glorious battle with kings to rescue his kinsmen and achieve a worldly victory -- this is the same Abraham who offered his son Issac on the altar, contrary to all human expectations regarding what would actually grow his family, his influence, and God’s promises. And yet it was his counterintuitive, steadfast obedience to the revealed will of God on Mount Moriah that saved him and truly served God. “You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works” (James 2:22). My own prayer is that I confess and teach truth with adherence to God’s revelation of the Body of Christ, the Church as described in the Scriptures. May we, in confessing Christ, be friends of God.

You can read more from Dr. John Weaver at his blog - https://johnbweaver.substack.com/