Much attention was given in the third and fourth centuries to the core doctrinal issues of Trinitarianism and Christology, and rightly so. Such theological issues are at the heart of the Christian faith, paving the way for our understanding of orthodoxy. This is evident as one considers the early creeds of the church and the amount of attention and space that is granted to articulating the persons of the Godhead. We take great joy and receive great aid in attending to such exacting definitions and descriptions.
1. Gregg R. Allison, Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 566–67.
But the Nicene Creed deals with much more than the Trinity and Christology. Other key issues addressed in the early creeds include the forgiveness of sins, the second coming of Christ, the resurrection, and, for our purposes in this article, the church. While we may be surprised to see the church given such a prominent place in the early creeds, we should remember that those gathered were all part of the church, and thus extremely invested in defining it. Gregg Allison maintains, “As the church of Jesus Christ expanded rapidly and matured, questions concerning the nature, characteristics, and purposes of the church became one of its greatest concerns. This was especially the case as the church faced another opponent: not persecution from the outside, but heresy from the inside.”[1] The Apostle’s Creed refers to the people of God as “the holy catholic church, the communion of saints.” The Nicene Creed expands upon this description and refers to believing in “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.”
2. See, for example, Gregg R. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers: The Doctrine of the Church (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 103–57.
3. For further discussion on these four attributes, see Edmund P. Clowney, The Church: Sacraments, Worship, Ministry, Mission (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1995), 71–98.
While Protestants may not be comfortable with such language due to Roman Catholic appropriations of it, these four terms serve us well in describing what the universal church is in its essence according to Scripture. Other metaphors, terms, and approaches can be taken to describe the church,[2] but there is much to commend the way the Nicene Creed describes the church. This article will define each term as originally intended and then suggest how such terms can serve our vision for the church today.[3]
One
4. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 7.17, in ANF, 2:100. Cited from Allison, Historical Theology, 567.
5. Richard D. Phillips, Philip G. Ryken, and Mark E. Dever, The Church: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2004), 33.
Oneness refers to the unity of the church as we are united to Christ. This unity is not sentimental or arbitrary; it is rooted in doctrinal truth as taught in Scripture. Clement of Alexandria (died c. 215) claims, “The preeminence of the church, as the principle of unity, is its oneness. In this, it surpasses all other things and has nothing like it or equal to itself.”[4] Indeed, unity is the call of the church. We are one body under one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father, attaining to the unity of the faith and maturity (Eph. 4:1–6, 13). Phillips agrees with this assessment and astutely states, “Following the example of our Lord and his apostle, out of love for the church, and as the duty of those appointed as shepherds over the flock, we must discern and safeguard the gospel boundary of true Christian unity.”[5]
6. For thoughts on “theological triage,” see Albert Mohler, “A Call for Theological Triage and Christian Maturity”; Gavin Ortlund, Finding the Right Hills to Die On: The Case for Theological Triage (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020). See also The MacArthur Center’s podcast episode on theological triage.
7. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 4.1.2.
This is an essential point to consider, as many view doctrine to be a barrier between churches. One must recognize, however, that no true unity can be upheld within the church apart from holding to doctrinal convictions. Yes, churches can and should be aware of how there can be differences on doctrinal issues that are not core to orthodoxy, the gospel, and salvation, but there must be efforts made toward doctrinal precision.[6] Such conviction makes unity all the more clear and joy-filled as we embrace truth together. As Calvin claims, “All the elect of God are so joined together in Christ, that as they depend on one head, so they are as it were compacted into one body, being knit together like its different members; made truly one by living together under the same Spirit of God in one faith, hope, and charity, called not only to the same inheritance of eternal life, but to participation in one God and Christ.”[7] The church is one, unity is at the essence of what the church is, and that unity is grounded in right biblical belief.
Holy
To say that the church is holy means we, as God’s people, are set apart for his purposes, indwelt by the Spirit, and called to live in obedience and righteousness (1 Pet. 1:15–16). This is our identity, and yet there is progress to be made in truly living this out as the church. As such, there is a tension here, as Scripture refers to God’s people as having a holy calling (2 Tim. 1:9), set apart as holy (2 Tim. 2:21), God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved (Col. 3:12), a holy priesthood (1 Pet. 2:5), nation (1 Pet. 2:9), and temple (1 Cor. 3:17; Eph. 2:21). Like the Corinthians, we are saints (1 Cor. 1:1–2), and so too like the Corinthians, we have many issues to address. This imperfection is evidenced in the rest of Paul’s letter and the life of the church historically and today.
8. Phillips, Ryken, and Dever, The Church, 53.
By Christ’s imputed righteousness, the church is considered to be holy (2 Cor. 5:21; Phil. 3:9). As Ryken maintains where he addresses the state of the Corinthian church, “What these verses do mean is that the Corinthians had made a definitive break with the dominating power of sin over their lives. A radical work of holiness had taken place. . . . Now they had a new identity in Christ and they had begun to live for God.”[8] Thus, the church, in recognizing its identity in Christ as holy, should strive urgently for holiness in practice.
Catholic
The church is one, holy, and is catholic (i.e., universal), encompassing all true believers throughout history, throughout the world. For Cyril of Jerusalem (313–386), the church is “catholic,” because
9. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 18.23, in NPNF, 7:139–40. Cited from Allison, Historical Theology, 568.
it extends over all the world . . . and because it teaches universally and completely one and all the doctrines which ought to come to men’s knowledge . . . and because it brings into subjection to godliness the whole race of mankind . . . and because it universally treats and heals the whole class of sins . . . and possesses in itself every form of virtue which is named, both in deeds and words . . . and in every kind of spiritual gift.[9]
Followers of Jesus Christ were to become part of the church; there was no understanding of living as a Christian apart from the life of the church.
10. Zacharias Ursinus, The Commentary of Dr. Zacharias Ursinus on the Heidelberg Catechism, trans. G. W. Williard (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 1985), 289–90.
Some may not prefer such a term, believing this is a way one would speak of the Roman Catholic Church as the “one true church”. This, however, is not the true intent of such a doctrine. The point is to say, as Ursinus (1534–1583) put it, that the church is called “catholic” in respect to place, as it is spread throughout the whole world, to humanity, as it embraces people from all tribes, tongues, and nations, and in respect to time, because it endures every historical period of the world.[10] Thus, Mark Dever rightly reminds us,
11. Phillips, Ryken, and Dever, The Church, 92.
By God’s grace, we can savingly trust in Christ anywhere, anytime, regardless of who our parents were. The church’s catholicity is rooted in bounded by the gospel’s catholicity. Anytime, anywhere, anyone can be forgiven his or her sins by faith alone in the one and only Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ. That is the true catholic doctrine of the true catholic church. [11]
Apostolic
Finally, the church is apostolic, meaning it is founded on the teaching of the apostles and continues in their doctrine and mission to make disciples. Tertullian offers a helpful synopsis of this attribute. While he does focus on the importance of the apostles themselves and those who come after them (i.e., apostolic succession), the accent of his point lies with the doctrine of the apostles as authoritative for the church.
12. Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, 21, in ANF, 3:252. Cited from Allison, Historical Theology, 568–69.
Since the Lord Jesus has sent the apostles to preach, our rule is that no others ought to be received as preachers than those whom Christ appointed. . . . Now, what they preached—in other words, what Christ revealed to them—can . . . properly be proved in no other way than by those very churches which the apostles founded in person. They declared the gospel to them directly themselves, both viva voce [by live voice] . . . and subsequently by their writings. If, then, these things are so, it is equally clear that all doctrine which agrees with the apostolic churches—those matrixes and original sources of the faith—must be considered as truth, as undoubtedly containing that which the churches received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, and Christ from God.[12]
Apostolicity, then, refers not to some kind of apostolic succession but rather to the doctrine passed down from the apostles to the church.
True churches are those that adhere to the teachings of the apostles (and the prophets). In other words, apostolic churches adhere to the doctrine of the apostles as expressed in Scripture. Those churches that do not adhere to such teaching are heretical in nature. As such, it is essential that churches preach, teach, disciple, counsel, and converse with the Bible at the center. We are not called to simply follow men, but Spirit-inspired authors who taught and wrote words of life by which we are saved, sanctified, and kept for God’s purposes.
The Beauty of the Church
One can see the interconnections between these attributes of the church. As God’s people, the church is identified as unified, set apart for God’s purposes, universal in time and geography, and rooted and grounded in apostolic truth as contained in Scripture. Thus, it is biblical doctrine that saves and unites a people to the glory of God. While we recognize that we see these attributes as not yet fully realized in our sinful world, they have been inaugurated, are genuinely real, and shape the way we live as the people of God.
Such attributes grant us a beautiful vision for the church. We should engage deeply in doctrine, knowing this is the source not only of our spiritual lives, but of our unity. As we see the unity we have in the orthodoxy represented in early creeds and confessions, local churches can work together in various ways, while also discussing doctrinal differences and striving for biblical faithfulness. We can acknowledge and contribute to the work of missions, knowing that the church is universal, since God calls people to himself from every tribe, tongue, nation and language (Rev. 7:9). And, as a holy church, we embrace the call to be consecrated, different, other-worldly, sojourners and strangers advancing toward the city that is to come (Heb. 13:14–16; 1 Pet. 2:11). This section of the Nicene Creed rightly reminds us of our corporate identity in Christ and compels us to live in line with such an identity in our everyday activity as the church of the living God.
