A Study on the Apostolic Creed - Essay Example

A Study on the Apostolic Creed What way of speaking about God is most challenging, interesting, revealing, fruitful, or natural to you Human beings, though very intelligent and gifted with understanding are extremely limited in their capacity to comprehend the divine. The ability to understand the infinite is only possible if it is made in context of what we know. We know God created the Universe, with Billions of Stars each of them millions of times bigger than the earth and each of them follow a precise path which has been set for them by Him. But what is difficult for us to understand is this Powerful Being; whose powers we can barely even begin to comprehend actually personally cares about us. Even David asks Him, "what is man that You care about him so much". We know that God cares about us and protects us. Our Parents take care of us and protect us. Our Mother nurtures us. Our Father protects us and guides us. For me that is the most natural way to look at God, as a Father. And the reason for that is not to assign him male attributes, because he is beyond that 1but because I see in Him somebody who cares and protects me, but also gives order and meaning to my life. And this in no way means that I consider a Mother's role secondary in a family , because it is not but because the Father is the Head of the household and you can trust Him to take care of it. Many religions and many individuals have a very private approach to religion. In these readings you will find that there is an underlying communal approach found in the Catholic Church. From what you have read, why do you think Catholics emphasize communal religion and/or which reason do you find most satisfying for this approach even if it is not your personal style. The Catholic Church stresses the communal dimension of all the sacraments, seeing them as "community events," not private rituals.2 The reason for that I think is that for many years and even perhaps centuries , the church seemed a distant organization which the Church Parish had to observe as spectators. That is actually quite ironic considering that crucification of Jesus Christ the Curtain separating the Tabernacle from the people was torn in half since now there was nothing separating man and God. The communal nature of the Catholic Church involves everybody in the Church Parish and in many ways takes the Church to them and so it is something personal to them. Experience and response is the focal point of these readings. What was the most unique experience Christians had of Christ (according to The Creed) and what are some of the ways they responded The unique experience which Christians had of Christ was that By his Revelation, the invisible God, from the fullness of his love, addressed men as his friends, and moved among them, in order to invite and receive them into His company. When the Lord of the Universe comes down among us and extends an Invitation to us, the only thing we can do is accept it. And that is what the Christians did by faith and belief.3 The Faith was to God , but the belief was twofold , it was to the Truth and to the Person who was witness to the truth. Teilhard de Chardin has a very mystical view of creation and our participation in it. What are two or three of the most interesting things he has to say about this relationship and what do you think they mean. Teilhard de Chardin thinks that creation was not one act at one moment but is a continuous event. And indeed that is way it makes most sense theologically. We know on a personal level that God deeply cares about us and knows the smallest thing which effects us. But at the same time we want to say the He created this Universe long ago in one instant and then left it alone. Creation is not an event but is something which is continuous and indeed continues even now. Our limited understanding perhaps required this to be a linear event. But God is beyond time and space. And that is why this apparent argument between Religion and evolution is such a futile exercise. Evolution is part of God's creation. The present world with its supernatural order is not something that God can just do without. It is not an utterly contingent world and its creation is not an arbitrary act. The world is not superfluous to God. God is not indifferent to the world that he has created; He is personally involved in it.4 Thomas Merton reflected deeply on his own human limitations which he presents as very typical human limitations. Which of these limitations or challenges to being fully human do you think are most likely to be universal limitations or challenges Some of you might also like to consider whether his experience as a male drove him to any of these conclusions. Thomas Merton wrote "Man is divided against himself and against God by his own selfishness, which divides him against his brother"5. Thomas Merton felt that the biggest limitation which man had was the numerous self created divisions that man imposed on himself. These were never mandated by God. Indeed God asks to even love our enemies. But the structure of the world is such that this divisions are a part of it. Indeed Thomas Merton communicated with people of diverse faith such as the Tibetan Buddhist Ripoche. The goal over there was not to change or be changed , but to understand. It was not necessary to negate other people's faith to affirm one's own. But Thomas Merton changed from a World hating monk to Life affirming ascetic mainly because he realized that these limitations could be overcome, because God provides us with the means to do so. According to this document from the Second Vatican Council of the Catholic Church, what do you think are the two or three most essential elements or factors which constitute the human being as the Catholic Church sees the human being How do these views affect the way you consider humanity The Catholic Church sees the Human being as created in Unity with6 God and perfect in all ways , but because of his corruption was separated from God. But God in His infinite love for man reached out to him to get him back to the stage of uncorrupted perfection. And though man does not have any role in him being saved as it is by Grace, he does have talents which God has given him so man can serve God and humanity in fulfillment of those talents. Which theory of revelation is closest to your own understanding of revelation Why If you do not have a personal connection with revelation, which would make the most sense to you looking at Christianity as an outsider I do have a personal connection with the Revelation. However , let us check how the revelation is defined in the Catholic Church. Revelation may be defined as the communication of some truth by God to a rational creature through means which are beyond the ordinary course of nature. And I do think that was exactly what happened. The most sense to me and to perhaps even an outsider would be the theory of "Inspiration" in writing Revelation. It does not mean that this is a result of somebody's active imagination but indeed a direct communication from God which resulted in the Revelation . This could have been through Prayer , meditation or even a trance. God communicates with us all the time if we only open our channels. As the Apostle John was on that Island in his dying days , God was talking to him. These chapters present some of the various challenges faced by the early church in understanding how God reveals God's self to us. Some of these understandings were rejected leaving a fairly subtle approach. Today many denominations of Christianity have favored a less subtle approach that involves one degree or another of biblical fundamentalism (this term need not be taken as pejorative). What are some aspects of the more subtle approach touched on in Chapter 18 What do you appreciate or feel uncomfortable about in these aspects A Fundamental approach is a very flawed one in my opinion. Though it is good to have strong convictions and indeed strong convictions are what builds strong character, Fundamental approach implies and in fact conveys a certainty of truth. The early Church was constantly divided over many areas . An example was whether a Christian should be circumcised or not. A fundamentalist approach would take one or the other with total certainty without any basis for it apart from that it was decided previously or a few generations ago. Christianity is a relationship with God and that is why I feel a more subtle approach is warranted . Indeed we risk loosing the forest for the trees by missing the main message in trying to adhere to a rigid fundamentalist approach. Chapter Ten in Footings contains two differing reflections on sacrifice. Identify a few lines in each theologian's selection which indicate his overall view of the nature of Jesus' sacrifice. What are some of the things said in these various readings which offer a different view about the meaning and purpose of Jesus' sacrificial act than you held previously If you held no previous view, which are most striking and why The theories in the early Church did not differ on the fundamental that Christ died for our sins. The only thing which was not completely understood was the mechanism of that. The theory that a Ransom was paid on our behalf hence clearing our debt to God and removing us from that Liability of punishment . The second theory was of a moral exemplar. There was no question that man had fallen so Christ became incarnate, in order to set this example and thus provide a necessary condition for the moral reform that is, in turn, necessary for the restoration of the relationship between creature and Creator. I do think that there was a real transaction. Man was doomed for damnation. God loved man but because of His Holiness could not overlook sin , so Christ took our sins and died in our place so that we could be saved. Whether you agree or not with the Catholic Church's self-stated connection with revelation, what do you see as the Church's primary argument in favor of this connection The Revelation refers to the Churches in metaphor many times. The Church itself feels that it will play a big role in the days of the tribulation. The Church itself will be under siege in those days from the forces of the Antichrist so it does feel that it has a huge responsibility . Chapter 24 points out that the early creeds were a response to particular issues going on in the early Church. If you can ignore denominationalism for a moment and consider this question from a universal Church perspective, what two or three modern issues in the church would be most likely to shape a current effort at developing a creed . I think it is very important to understand that the early church was dealing with issues which were present at that time. They used the Apostolic knowledge and inspiration at that time to come up with appropriate solutions. There are multiple issues which are peculiar to today's Church which could benefit with a similar approach. I think celibacy among priests ( permitting Marriage in the clergy) , Contraception would be two modern issues which could be looked at. Somethings cannot be looked at without changing the fundamental nature of the Church ( like abortion for example) and cannot be considered and should not be. Use readings highlight the struggle for Truth. Considering these readings and any other discussions or module readings you have had regarding Truth, describe several approaches to the truth and compare or contrast these to your own approach. ***This question will have slightly more weight than any of the others. Please answer it in an essay of three or four well-written paragraphs . In the end there will be only one Truth, and we will all one day know it. But in the meanwhile we have to work with Knowledge , Inspiration , Prayers, Conjectures and doubt. So how do we go about it We cannot drift like a boat without a rudder, we have to have some fundamental convictions. We need to know who we are and what our value systems are. Having said that we also should understand that there may be some differing views . But it should be understood that differing views is not an attack on our theological position. All it is , somebody's opinion. It should be understood, perhaps even examined and if something valuable comes out of it , more the better. Thomas Merton himself met people from many religions. It never changed him to a point that he questioned his beliefs , but it gave him understanding that there were other approaches to the Truth. While reasoning and logic can only go so far, there is meditation and prayer. Is it really possible that two people meditating in two different religions are praying to two different beings. Perhaps , Perhaps not. But once you have a fundamental premise that God rules the Universe and has full control over it, you realize that in the end, whatever approach you take you will end up the only Truth. Read More