Given from the Catholic Broadcasting Station 2SM Sydney Australia
Choose a topic from Vol 3:
It is difficult to follow your line of thought. Do you imagine that the moment a man makes a statement of his Christian Faith he must abandon a Christian way of life? Or that, if one attempts a Christian way of life, he is at once forbidden to make any statement of his Christian Faith? Christianity is a religion revealed by God to teach us the full truth about our eternal and supernatural destiny, and to give us the means of attaining that destiny through Christ who is the heart and soul of that religion. The effect of that religion, if we accept it, try to put its precepts into practice, and use its means of grace is a spiritual and Christian way of life midst our present circumstances and duties. And part of that way of life is our obligation to believe all that God has revealed because He has revealed it.
The Catholic Church agrees. We must not accept from fallible men what we are to believe; nor can the mere acceptance of any creed be essential Christianity. Yet, whilst essential Christianity is not the mere acceptance of a creed, the acceptance of a creed is essential to Christianity. For we must accept teachings essential to Christianity, and that means the acceptance of a creed. The creed to be accepted, of course, must not be one drawn up by fallible men. It must be presented to us by an infallible Church, acting in virtue of the power and protection of the Holy Ghost, as were the Apostles when they said of their decision, "It has seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us."
That is true. But the acceptance of a creed will not do that provided one lives up to the teachings of Christianity, fulfills its duties of worship, and obeys its laws. One who does this will find his religion full of vitality and dynamic. It is a mistake, however, to think that, because the mere acceptance of a creed is not enough, therefore, the acceptance of a creed is not necessary.
That is true; but it must remain Christianity. There are those who want to change its teachings who really want Christianity to be for a past age, and who desire to provide a new religion for this age. It is rather a mystery why they wish to retain the name of Christianity for their new set of teachings. Meantime, their very modernism robs Christianity of its vitality and dynamic. William Force Stead, a Protestant, has recently written in his book, "In the Shadow of Mt. Carmel," as follows: "While other Christian Communions have been sedulously bowing to the spirit of the age, with the studied politeness of a courtier, and with something of a courtier's eye to obtaining favors, the Roman Church stands erect and bows to no man." At its beginning Christianity was to the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Greeks foolishness. So it has remained. This modern world is full of Jews and Greeks. The modernist theologian turns to the Jew and says, "Look, we have removed the stumbling block"; and to the Greek, "Behold, we have removed the foolishness." But, somehow or other, in response to all this tampering with creeds and dogmas, Mr. Stead remarks that "the Jews and the Greeks are not very interested."
No one can object to any man thinking clearly, honestly, and comprehensively. But the one point you overlook is the propensity of men to think wrongly, either because they do not advert to all the relevant facts when they commence thinking, or because they wrongly imagine certain things to be facts which are not facts, or because they fail in logic during their process of thought. The real value of the creeds lies in their power to preserve men from falling into error through one or all of these causes.
They hinder one's progressing along wrong lines; and they exist precisely for that. But no sensible person wants to progress along wrong lines.
If one is free to believe the creeds mistaken, and does so, how could he be of any help in the approach to truth and reality? One does not help others towards the truth by giving them wrong explanations. And certainly Christ did not establish His Church for that perverse purpose. If the Catholic Creeds merely give what fallible men thought to be the truth about Jesus in other days, then they may not have represented the truth about Jesus at all. Such a statement is a denial of the infallible teaching authority of the Catholic Church; and no one who believes in the Church in the Catholic sense of the word could possibly accept such views.
Do you mean that we are to believe in a Christ about whom no definite statements can be made with any certainty at all? And why should we do even that much? Truly, modernism ends in a morass.
The Apostles' Creed is a summary statement of the main teachings of the Apostles. The Apostles themselves did not compose it. It was drawn up after their death, in order to embody in a brief rule of faith the substance of their teaching. The first and earliest forms of this Creed appear in the second century. But it went through various arrangements and reconstructions in order to exclude new errors and heresies, until it finally assumed the present form in the fifth century. There is no doubt as to its value and authority, nor as to the fact that its contents are derived from the preaching of the Apostles themselves.