Since our Church embraces the idea of Sacred Tradition, I have been sharing various thoughts and ideas about our Sacred Tradition. There are modern Christian Churches that reject the idea of Sacred Tradition. Tradition gives us insight into the practical application of Christian Truth, both in the recent past and within our own time. For instance, from the time of the Reformation to the present, the Spirit has made it clear that salvation is not confined to any one particular denomination, that every Christian has a common heritage with the Christian peoples of the first 10 centuries (not only with post-Reformation believers), and that the Holy Spirit’s ministry can neither be regulated by an era of history (i.e., New Testament times) nor buy any specific Christian’s doctrinal statement. Some may interject that all of these things were always clear in the Scripture, but this is certainly not the case. “Bible-believing” Christians have not always agreed on these insights, and even a number today still do not agree with all of these perspectives.

Words and other symbols can change (i.e., doctrinal development), but Divine Meanings will never change.

Let us take, for example, the Greek word homoousios (same nature). Few Christians in main stream Churches today would have a theological problem with using that word when explaining that Christ is homoousios both with God and humanity. However, some Christians in the Fourth Century did have trouble with it. Why? Because that very same word had been popularized just a century earlier by another heretic, Paul of Samosata. Certain Christians did not feel comfortable using a word which had formerly been associated with the heretical doctrine in order to now defend orthodox dogma. Nevertheless, the Church decided to use the word anyway, believing that its application and meaning in an orthodox Christian context made its use justifiable.

I suspect, however, that if you were to ask many modern mega-church goers about this word, they would probably not accept its use. Why? Because it sounds too academic and it is not found in the New Testament.

A word with a tarnished history was brushed off and used by Tradition to brilliantly testify to the miracle of the Incarnation. It’s adoption in a stanza of the Nicene Creed is something which every Christian today acknowledges, even if they don’t know that it is the original word that expresses the English idea of “of one substance with the Father.” Of course many don’t known even what the English means.