Reflection by Karlie Platz
Photo credit: Haniah Kring
Part of the mission of the Saint Benedict Institute is to foster an ecumenical community. Dr. Ortiz addressed this goal through his ecumenical talk “The Radical Doctrine of the One God,” which explored the familiar profession of the Nicene Creed: “I believe in one God.” Although we often take these words for granted, Ortiz demonstrated how they represent a radical doctrine that the early Church fought hard to establish.
First, Dr. Ortiz considered the threats Christian doctrine faced from the outside to demonstrate its countercultural nature. Early Christians found themselves surrounded by Roman pagan religions that worshiped a plethora of gods corresponding to different dimensions of life. Roman religion was civic in character, meaning that worship of the gods was believed to be directly connected to positive outcomes. To worship was a civic duty aimed towards the wellbeing of one’s self, family, and community. Through this lens, the new Christian religion was viewed as perverse, antisocial, and even atheistic. In the eyes of its pagan neighbors, Christianity was an existential threat to the gods that threatened to destroy social order, thereby turning the profession of one God into a “battle cry.”
While the Christian doctrine of one God certainly faced opposition from outside, Dr. Ortiz further highlighted the internal battle. Before the early Church established a definitive creed, several heretical ideas arose. For instance, gnostics such as Marcian advocated for a dualistic view of God: the “evil” craftsman god of the Old Testament and the “good” god of the New Testament who came to lead us to the spiritual world through secret knowledge or “gnosis.” On the other extreme, subordinationists and modalists tried to preserve God’s oneness at the expense of his threeness by claiming that God the Father is greater than the Son or that he is one God who interacts with the world in three different “roles.”
The fundamental flaw with these views was that they “ascribe those things which apply to men to the Father of all” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2.13.3). In contrast, scripture clearly reveals the mysterious oneness of God that defies earthly reasoning. Dr. Ortiz employed the story of the burning bush in Exodus to demonstrate this truth. By revealing himself in a bush that burned without being consumed, God showed that he does not depend on the world to exist, just as the fire does not depend on the bush for fuel. In addition, by identifying himself as “Abraham’s God,” he proved that because he is not part of the world, he is able to be present and intimate to particular people without consuming their free will. Finally, by revealing his name as “I AM,” God indicates that he is simple, uncompounded, unqualified being. This means that God must be one, for if there were other divine beings, God’s existence would be qualified by their divinity. In addition, it reveals that nothing can exist apart from God, since he is being itself and all other things receive their being from him.
This last point about God’s simplicity reveals a final radical element of the doctrine of one God. If God is one, then the creation of the world must be understood as creatio ex nihilo or “creation from nothing.” Although it may come as a surprise, early Christians and Jews actually agreed with their neighbors that God created from preexisting matter. However, this belief is incompatible with the doctrine of one God. If matter exists eternally and God created out of it, matter would be a second, higher deity upon which God depended. For this reason, the radical statement “we believe in one God” was necessarily followed by the equally radical statement “who created heaven and earth,” meaning that God created everything out of nothing.
Dr. Ortiz’s lecture encourages us to reflect more deeply on the words of the familiar creed. The next time we join our voices to profess “I believe in one God,” we would do well to appreciate the hard battle fought to establish these words. In addition, these words have significant consequences. We can find consolation in God’s simple, uncompounded being, because it means that his love is the one stable reality that is always there for us, even if we turn away from him like Saint Augustine, who wrote “You were with me, but I was not with you” (Confessions, 10.27.38). The doctrine of one God is certainly radical, but that’s fitting giving the radical love which it reflects.