The creed on God as creator, maker, and fashioner

[Andreas Moran]

I would like to invite opinions from those more knowledgeable than I on the meaning of certain words in articles 1 and 2 of the Creed. (Since, for those on the new calendar, today is the commemoration of the Holy Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council, this seems an appropriate day to ask!)

Article 1 of the Creed says that the Father Almighty is the Maker of heaven and earth and all things visible and invisible. The word for Maker in the Greek is 'ποιτην'. Article 2 says that the Lord Jesus Christ was begotten, not made. The Greek word for 'made' is 'ποιηθεντα', obviously the same root (from which, of course, the English word 'poem' comes). Article 2 says of the Lord Jesus Christ, in most English translations, 'by Whom all things were made'. There are two points here. First, 'by' ought to be 'through' since the Greek word is 'δια' and not 'υπο' and that does have, it seems, implications in terms of Trinitarian theology (the roles of the Persons - the Father wills, the Son executes). The Holy Fathers, of course, were using the words from John 1:1 - παντα δι' αυτου εγενετο. Secondly, the Greek word for 'made' - εγενετο - here is a different word. So, we have both 'ποιεω' and 'γιγνομαι' which are translated by using 'to make'. But in Greek (so far as I can tell from Liddell & Scott), 'ποιεω' means '1. to make, produce, execute 2. bring to pass, bring about, cause, effect 3. to make, shape, create: to beget'. However, 'γιγνομαι' means, 'to become, to happen: to be born: to be'. Thus, there can be shades of meaning here though it is not easy to see what they are. The question is: why does the Greek use these two different words, do they have distinct meanings and are these meanings (if distinct) of theological signficance? (Alright - three questions!) I notice that the two words are also used in the first verses of the first chapter of Genesis (Greek LXX) and presumably the Holy Fathers had those in mind also.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Andreas wrote:


for those on the new calendar, today is the commemoration of the Holy Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council, this seems an appropriate day to ask!

Sorry!- the Sunday commemorations (except for the saints of the day) are tied to the Paschal calendar which we all share regardless of whether we are on the new or old calendar.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Andreas Moran]

Sorry!- the Sunday commemorations (except for the saints of the day) are tied to the Paschal calendar which we all share regardless of whether we are on the new or old calendar.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

When I saw that you had replied, Father, I was getting all excited, thinking that you had some answers to my question(s)! Oh, well. As to today, I didn't realise that - thank you. So we all celebrate these Holy Fathers today. Good.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

When I saw that you had replied, Father, I was getting all excited, thinking that you had some answers to my question(s)! Oh, well. As to today, I didn't realise that - thank you. So we all celebrate these Holy Fathers today. Good.

We serve in Slavonic, not Greek.

Sorry! :)

[Andreas Moran]

Greek scholars, then, please! (How does Slavonic translate these two Greek words?)

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Greek scholars, then, please! (How does Slavonic translate these two Greek words?)

I don't have the knowledge of Greek to be able to directly answer your question.

However the Slavonic may clear up the matter somewhat since it has: творца небу и земли; maker of heaven and earth

then:

имже вся быша; by Whom everything came into existence.

Again I don't have the understanding needed to compare this last phrase with egeneto.

But at times the Slavonic makes more clear the Greek original.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Dimitris]

Article 2 says of the Lord Jesus Christ, in most English translations, 'by Whom all things were made'.
Uh, I have an imortant question here: does "by whom all things were made" really refer to Jesus Christ? The Creed says "being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made". From the syntax I refered this "by Whom all things were made" to the Father. Could you help me to clarify the things?

Kind regards,
Dimitris

[Andreas Moran]

Uh, I have an imortant question here: does "by whom all things were made" really refer to Jesus Christ? The Creed says "being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made". From the syntax I refered this "by Whom all things were made" to the Father. Could you help me to clarify the things?

Kind regards,
Dimitris

It is clear that 'by whom all things were made' does refer to Jesus Christ. The Creed mirrors what is said in John 1:1.
Icons of Creation depict Christ as the Word creating.

[Herman Blaydoe]

In the US, you will find more than one translation of the Creed. I have seen both "by whom all things were made" as well as "through whom all things were made." I simply chalked it up to a "very God of very God" vs. "true God of true God" or "quick and the dead" vs. "living and the dead" sort of thing.

But yes, it absolutely is referring to the Son rather than to the Father although I can unfortunately understand the confusion. I thought the very same thing at one point (the syntax is somewhat ambiguous), but further reading on the Creed taught me otherwise. The Church has preserved the proper understanding, even if we don't always get it individually right away.

Herman the Pooh

[Michael Stickles]

Odd. The Greek version of the creed I looked at has "di ou ta panta egeneto." Now, "ta panta" - all things - is plural, but "egeneto" is third person singular (he/she/it). That doesn't seem to match if the translation is supposed to be "through Him all things came into being".

I looked in Liddell & Scott, and they show "panta gignesthai" (the infinitive form) as meaning "to take all shapes; turn every way" (under gignomai) or "to become all things; to try every expedient" (under pas/panta). So "through Him it took all shapes" would work, but "it" doesn't have an antecedent in the text that makes sense to me.

So, now I'm also looking forward to an opinion from someone more knowledgable about this!

In Christ,
Mike

[Andreas Moran]

Indeed, Mike, we need assistance here. Calling all Greek scholars!

[Anthony]

That particular one I can help with, though not a Greek scholar; in ancient Greek, a neuter plural subject takes a singular verb.

On Andreas's original question, the English translation of the creed I have memorized has "through whom"; I can't remember where I got it from. I agree that "by whom" sounds misleading, though I think there is also an older English use where this meant virtually the same as "through whom" - "by way of", as it were.

"Gi(g)nomai" is an interesting question. In modern Greek it often seems to be used as a virtual passive of "kano" (I do, make). I don't know whether this goes as far back as NT / Patristic Greek; but this would make sense in the light of the Latin version, which I believe reads per quem omnia facta sunt.

[Andreas Moran]

I agree that "by whom" sounds misleading, though I think there is also an older English use where this meant virtually the same as "through whom" - "by way of", as it were.

Yes, I think this is right. In the texts used at the monastery here, they say, 'by the prayers of . . . ' and not, 'through the prayers of . . . '

[Michael Stickles]

That particular one I can help with, though not a Greek scholar; in ancient Greek, a neuter plural subject takes a singular verb.

Thank you! This makes sense now. That's a rule I haven't run across yet in my studies.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Again, I am very, very far from being an expert on this.

But I am under the impression that in Slavonic things are made a bit more clear.

thus in the above reference


имже вся быша; by Whom everything came into existence.

имже is a singular masculine pronoun which means who/what in the instrumental case. Thus имже means 'he through/by whom'.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Andreas Moran]

Thanks to all. We seem to have nailed the 'by/through' issue. Can anyone throw light on the use of the words ποιεω and γιγνομαι?

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear Andreas and others,

Thank you for initiating an interesting discussion on the language of the creed. One thing worth noting is that the specific terminology of the creed as originally written at Nicaea, is in some senses deliberately amorphous, and in others deliberately specific -- sometimes as dual aspects to single terms. The famous homoousios, for example, was a term that is deliberately specific inasmuch as it argued against a hetero-substantiality; but it is deliberately amorphous in that it does not specify exactly how it is to be read (a fact commented upon by many of the fathers who signed the creedal document).

Andreas wrote:



Article 1 of the Creed says that the Father Almighty is the Maker of heaven and earth and all things visible and invisible. The word for Maker in the Greek is 'ποιτην'. Article 2 says that the Lord Jesus Christ was begotten, not made. The Greek word for 'made' is 'ποιηθεντα', obviously the same root (from which, of course, the English word 'poem' comes).

One of the key issues in the response to Arius was how to interpret the biblical 'begotten' of the Son, vis-a-vis the notion of the creation of the cosmos and the creatures within it. Prior to the debate, the term 'creature' (ktisma) was not ill thought-of as a reference to the Son (see the book of Wisdom, and Proverbs), given that it was generally taken to be equivalent to 'begotten'. But when Arius began to argue his specific interpretation of what 'creature' might mean with respect to the Son, the dilemma became how to speak of any difference or convergence of the ideas. This is a key point of background to the language of the council.

There are two essential verbs for the making of things in Greek: gignomai, which means begetting / bringing-into-being, and poieo, which means to fashion or form. In common parlance they can be used synonymously, and one might use either to refer to, for example, the creation of the heavens by God. This general synonymity was applied by Arius to the scripturally-proclaimed begottenness (genethenta) of the Son, which he took as essentially synonymous with the Son being a creature (kitsma), as something made (poiethenta) -- though it is interesting to note that Arius retains the scriptural ktisma for Christ, and not poima / poiethenta. Nonetheless, he clearly views genethenta and poiethenta as synonyms, as he states explicitly in his letter to Alexander, which we have preserved.

Thus the council of Nicaea needed to articulate the clarity of distinction of these terms, since as somewhat-different-yet-generally-synonymous was open to such interpretations as those of Arius. This was the brunt of its essential anti-Arian phrase: 'begotten not made' -- a direct contradiction to Arius' 'begotten or made'. The two are different. How? This is where homoousios is used as a gloss, with respect to the Son. To be begotten means to have one's source of being in the other ('of the ousia of the Father...'), uniquely, in the Son's case, being of one being with him ('that is, homoousios with the Father...').

This is why the distinction of the concepts was so important to Nicaea. Begottenness is defined by the council as indicating a type of origination that can be conceived as connected to the ousia of things, rather than simply a manipulation of external materials (which is how the creed tends to view poieo). Christologically, this is essential. But it also explains the unique relationship of the Creator to his creation. God is indeed the maker/fashioner (poitin) of creation, but he is equally that through whom creation has come into being (egeneto). In other words, God not only manipulates creation (as a sculptor moulds clay), but is also the source from which creation has its being. This is intimately connected to the doctrine of creation ex nihilo.

Clearly, the creation of the cosmos by the Son, 'through who all things have come into being' (panta di' autou egeneto), uses gignomai in a manner not identical to the Son's begotten relation to the Father; since the Father is eternal, so the one begotten of the Father is not comparable in that begottenness to things that have come into being by the will of these; but the creed maintains the distinction of terms (in fact, is partially responsible for defining how they are distinct) precisely so as to allow their wider use in Christologically helpful manners.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

[Andreas Moran]

Thank you, Fr Dcn Matthew. As I have often thought, there is nothing like going to the original Greek. But having it explained like this so deepens one's understanding of our faith. It also shows how early Greek texts key in with the Greek LXX. The two words for 'make' evidently play an important part in correctly expressing the theology of the Trinity. I suppose that all the Greek texts of our prayers and hymns are equally full of such theological riches.

[Andreas Moran]

I have just asked my wife to look at the Slavonic. It mirrors the Greek exactly. The word for 'Maker' in article 1 about the Father is ' Творца', root word, ' Творец'. The same word is used in the phrase, 'begotten not made'. This means, she says, to make as an artist creates; to fashion or form as Fr Dcn Matthew says of the Greek equivalent. The word for 'made' in the phrase, 'by whom all things were made' is 'быша', root word, 'быть'. This, my wife says, means 'to bring into existence'. The difference in meaning between the two words corresponds, then, she says, to the respective meanings of the two Greek words.