The Twelve Articles of the Catholic Faith

Below are the Twelve Articles of the Catholic Church listed and explained:

Article One: I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth: This declares our faith, trust and dependance on the one true God, the creator of the whole Universe. The three in one God (the Trinity).

Article Two: And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord: The word Jesus meaning “Jeshua” in Hebrew means “God saves”. And Lord in Hebrew and Greek mean “Adonai which implies “divine”. Therefore, the Catholic Church believes Jesus to be divine and above all the Savior of all mankind.

Article Three: Who was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary: This affirms that Jesus is both human and divine. Jesus had a human mother but no earthly Father, rather was by the power of the Holy Spirit conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary. So the Catholic Church believes Jesus to be fully Human and fully Divine.

Article Four: He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried: This verse of the article is so that all may see that just like every other human that Christ in his earthly nature suffered pain, was condemned to suffering and death; in his quest to save all mankind. The mention of Pontius Pilate is not to vilify or attract condemnation, but to validate and clarify the history details of Christ’s suffering and death. It also reminds the faithful that one can’t blame all Jews for the death of Jesus, as some have erroneously done over the ages. Certain Jewish leaders conspired against Jesus, but the actual death sentence was given by a Roman and carried out by Roman soldiers. So both Jew and Gentile alike shared in the spilling of innocent blood. Anti-Semitism based on the Crucifixion of Jesus is inaccurate, unjust, and erroneous.

Article Five: He descended into hell: The third day he arose again from the dead. The hell referred to in this article is not the hell for the damned, where the devil and his demons resides; no! The hell referred to here is the place for the dead as the Jews and Early Christians then called it. So Jesus after the third day of his death rose again out of the abundance of his own divine powers. He rose not as a ghost or spirit but with a body. These he did to as usual prove his divinity and the great power of God.

Article Six: He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty: Christ ascended back to Heaven to meet with His Heavenly Father (God) to seat at his right hand-side of authority in Heaven. This he did before the eyes of the faithful to prove and assure them that all who follow His path will someday dwell with him and the Father.

Article Seven: He will come again to judge the living and the dead: “Judgement Day”, “Doomsday”, “Day of Reckoning”, etc are the names most people call it now but it all refers to the second coming of Christ, when he will come with the task of not salvaging the whole world again but to Judge it all.

Article Eight: I believe in the Holy Spirit: This affirms that there are three persons of God, which are God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Article Nine: The holy Catholic Church, the Communion of Saints: The Catholic Church is not just a mere institution or infrastructural community with facilities but a necessary spiritual growing family where all are equal before God, Jews and Gentiles alike. Where the faithfuls commune with Christ constantly.

Article Ten: The forgiveness of sins: The Catholic Church in  this verse of the Article affirms an everlasting believe that Christ came to the world to die that our sins might be forgiven us. So the Church teach her faithfuls to constantly rely on Christ’s afforded grace for forgiveness of sin. The Catholic Church believe that Original Sin is forgiven in Baptism and other sins by the sacrament of Penance mainly through confession.

Article Eleven: The resurrection of the body: The Catholic Church believe that human is made up of body and soul, dying now will entail a temporary separation of the body from the soul which will be reunited again on the judgement day when Christ will come again. So the Just will go to heaven just as Christ with body and soul and the guilty will be damned to hell body and soul as well.

Article Twelve: The resurrection of the body: Before one could pass on from this life to next life he/she would die just like our Savior Jesus did. At the moment of private death before the Judgement day, Catholics believe that souls will be judged privately.

The Catholic Church believes that anyone who dies with unconfessed and unforgiven mortal sin and sins of wicked and evil deeds will be damned to hell. And those whose sins ain’t that worse to deserve hell nor good enough to go to heaven will be put in Purgatory; a middle ground between heaven and hell; a state where departed souls would go to be cleansed of any attachments to sin before going through the pearly gates to Heaven.



  1. Patrick Gannon Reply

    IIs one “saved” if one does not accept “all” of these articles of faith? For example, I find the idea of a virgin birth to be absurd. It came about because of a mistranslation from Isaiah that referred to a “young woman” or “maiden” rather than explicitly to a “virgin.” This is well-known now. I suspect that the authors of Mark and John would agree that there was no requirement for a virgin birth and that Jesus was not the result of a virgin birth.

    Regardless – would not believing this reserve a seat in Gehenna, Hades or Tartarus for me?

  2. Lea Leger Reply

    T. That’s your own interpretation not the apostles interpretation. It is written in the bible or in Isaiah ,a virgin is conceived and born a child,and name him “Emmanuel”. The same in NT. a virgin is conceived
    If u say she is not a virgin, u are the seed of Satan not seed of Woman (Mary) Woman is a prophetic name of Mary. Gen.3:15 the Woman who will crushed the serpent head
    Rev. 12 the woman who gave birth to male child and will rule all nations..The Woman that Jesus referred to at the wedding of Cana.

    1. Patrick Gannon Reply

      Lea, it appears to me that you don’t know your bible very well. Have you ever read the whole thing?
      In the Old Testament, the word used in Isaiah was “almah” which means “young girl,” or “maiden.” This word was translated to “virgin” when the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew to Greek. If the author of Isaiah had really meant to refer to a virgin, he would have used the word “betulah” which is much more specifically, a virgin. The authors of the New Testament were using the Greek translation of the Old Testament, including Isaiah and they grabbed that passage which refers to a virgin (but a passage that taken in context has nothing to do with messiahs) and invented the virgin birth story – probably because lots of pagan gods had virgin births so Jesus had to be at least as good as them.
      You can research all of this and prove it to yourself. This is very well known in academic circles, and clergy who studied at decent divinity schools know this, but of course the Church isn’t going to advertise that the virgin birth story is a myth that grew out of a translation error – any more than they are going to tell you that the word “Hell” also comes from intentional translation errors. (There are four different words, Sheol, Gehenna, Hades, Tartarus that were inaccurately translated to the pagan word “Hell”).
      Have you ever considered the rest of that passage – it says they will name him “Emmanuel” but they didn’t. They named him Jesus! The word “Emmanuel” shows up in one and only one place in the NT, and that’s the Matthew passage (1:23). Also in Isaiah, the word is spelled “Immanuel,” and this spelling of the word appears only once in the book of Isaiah and not in the NT. Obviously the Isaiah passage has nothing to do with Jesus as a Messiah, and if you read it in context, that’s very clear. The author of Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience and trying to convince them that Jesus had been prophesied. We call this “quote mining,” and they did it back in those days, just like they do today. It’s really bad scholarship and the Church knows it, but they’re stuck with it now, and defend it at all costs, because admitting that they’ve been lying for all these centuries would probably not help to keep the coffers full.
      You have to also understand that 1/2 of the gospel writers didn’t buy into the story either. Mark – the first author (even though his book is second in order) does not have a virgin birth. John, the last gospel clearly had the earlier gospels in front of him, and yet he specifically left out the virgin birth story. Paul, our very first writer doesn’t know anything about Jesus’ birth or that he was even a historical person. The author of Matthew came up with this silly notion – but one that the ignorant, pagan people of that time would be willing to accept, given other pagan gods had been born of virgins – but then Luke changed it all around. Matthew and Luke don’t agree with each other on many theological and “historical” points as they place Jesus’ birth about 12 years apart from each other; and Luke makes up the agonizingly stupid story that everyone had to return to the land of their ancestors to be counted in a census. That never happened. It’s ludicrous. The purpose of a census is to see where people live so you can tax them. The whole idea is ridiculous, and again, Church scholars know this, but are happy to let their sheeple believe fairy tales in order to keep the coffers full.
      If you are suggesting that I was born by Satan and not by a woman, wouldn’t that be just as miraculous as being born of a virgin? Isn’t Satan male? Actually today, being born of a virgin wouldn’t be difficult using modern technology. Also there have surely been incidents in which “petting” led to sperm entering a woman who had not yet had sexual relations, yet still impregnated her.
      One final note. You said, “That’s your own interpretation not the apostles interpretation.” The apostles weren’t even alive when these articles were written – centuries after the fact. The first basic version was presented in 325 AD and had subsequent modifications, but the apostles had nothing whatsoever to do with it. They were all long dead.
      I know it’s discomforting to learn that long held beliefs cannot be supported, and that this causes internal angst and anxiety; but in order to be true to yourself, you must question every one of your beliefs, because the source – the Catholic Church – has repeatedly shown that it cannot be trusted to be honest, open and forthright.

      1. Ray Reply

        The Canon of books in the bible were present around 325. The “books” themselves were all completed around the year 90 so your statement that the apostles did not know them is erroneous. As we can plainly read in the Pauline letters the faithful were instructed to share these letters. The fact that Peter mentions Paul’s writings shows the apostles were aware of each others writings.

        1. Patrick Gannon Reply

          Ray, that’s a fair point. I was actually thinking of the original disciples, rather than apostles, however the math is still a problem.
          I think we can assume that the disciples (if they ever really existed), and/or original apostles would have been about the same age of Jesus, who at about 30, was getting on in years when he was crucified. In those days, the average lifespan was about 35, so he and any followers were probably getting a bit long in the tooth, as the saying goes, when Paul was writing a couple decades later. Mark was written next, probably around 70 AD, which means our original disciples and most apostles surely would have been mostly dead. Few people made it to 70 in those days, and even fewer to 90. It’s highly unlikely that there were any surviving original apostles (if such existed to begin with), by then, and none of them claimed personal knowledge of the events described in the gospels, nor were the gospels authored by any of them. The disciples of course had long since disappeared. By the time, Matthew, Luke and John were written, both disciples and apostles were surely long gone. Of course none of the gospels attributes any personal witness to either disciples or apostles. We don’t know who the authors were and none claims to have witnessed any of it.

          As for Peter, almost every scholar considers the Peter’s and the TIm’s to be pseudepigraphical, i.e. works forged in another’s name. Peter was a poor fisherman, but the text is in high-end classical Greek.

          It’s also important to note that there were a great many other gospels, Acts, Revelations and Epistles circulating at the time that did not make their way into the Canon. (“The Other Bible” is a good source for many of these texts). It’s likely that Paul, in particular, was influenced by early texts that depicted a celestial, rather than historical Jesus. These texts, of course, were discarded by the Church when it came time to put the bible together, and the Church did its best to destroy them. As the primary source of scribes who copied texts, they made sure these other texts did not survive, by ensuring that they weren’t copied. We only see the winner. If you go back in time, there were competing sects of Christianity, including Ebionites, Marcionites, Gnostics and the proto-Orthodox, who later became the Church and then worked hard to stamp the others out.

  3. Joby P. Reply

    I think ARTICLE 12 is meant to be “life everlasting”.

Leave a Reply