OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 21, 2014, 08:30:04 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Have you ever encountered the "Tridentine Creed"??  (Read 3735 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« on: September 09, 2011, 12:59:19 AM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2011, 01:31:04 AM »

Seems a bit fishy to me. I don't think that it could have been around since Trent since the second to last paragraph references the First Vatican Council. I am curious though, is there anything within this Creed that an Eastern Catholic would consider outright wrong?
Logged
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2011, 01:44:44 AM »

According to Wikipedia it was revised at First Vatican. What's described on the page sounds a lot like is in the link you gave.

There is precedent for revising creeds, so it isn't that far out.
Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,971


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2011, 03:15:10 AM »

According to Wikipedia it was revised at First Vatican. What's described on the page sounds a lot like is in the link you gave.

There is precedent for revising creeds, so it isn't that far out.
Cool
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2011, 03:54:11 AM »

The "Try Dentyne" creed? What kind of zany marketing partnerships will Catholics come up with next!?



Kidding aside (hey, it's 4am, cut me some slack), as for the text, some of the wording sounds a bit strong to me, but then I'm a crazy liberal. I didn't really see much to fret over (do eastern Catholics accept the validity of indulgences?), though perhaps I missed something. One question, when it speaks of "images" does it mean icons, or does that also include statues?
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,022


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2011, 06:24:23 AM »

I like cinnamon Dentyne.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Adela
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 746



« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2011, 08:20:28 AM »

I don't like it. It seems like McCarthyism where they are trying to flush out people who aren't theologically pure in their eyes.   Unfortunately, Byzantine Catholics are in a tough spot.  They are put on display whenever there is a need to show the Orthodox how great reunification will be, but then are told they can't practice their faith in the way that was passed down to them because it will "scandalize" the Latin rite Catholics   
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2011, 09:54:40 AM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?

LOL...that's a cobbled together mess.

Tell the folks when they hear it recited during a liturgy then they can make their case.

Good grief!...Where do these people come from?
Logged

Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,179



WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2011, 10:07:00 AM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?

LOL...that's a cobbled together mess.

Tell the folks when they hear it recited during a liturgy then they can make their case.

Good grief!...Where do these people come from?

From Trent, an authoritative council (for Romans and all those under the Pope).
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2011, 10:10:51 AM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?

LOL...that's a cobbled together mess.

Tell the folks when they hear it recited during a liturgy then they can make their case.

Good grief!...Where do these people come from?

From Trent, an authoritative council (for Romans and all those under the Pope).

 laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh

Listen buddy...I got this ocean front propery in North Dakota that is just FABULOUS!!...price is right...easy access off a major interstate!!....

 Sad
Logged

Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,179



WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2011, 10:32:39 AM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?

LOL...that's a cobbled together mess.

Tell the folks when they hear it recited during a liturgy then they can make their case.

Good grief!...Where do these people come from?

From Trent, an authoritative council (for Romans and all those under the Pope).

 laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh

Listen buddy...I got this ocean front propery in North Dakota that is just FABULOUS!!...price is right...easy access off a major interstate!!....

 Sad

Wonderful, I'll exchange it for this big Christ statue in my backyard, you've probably seen it in pics from Rio. Since my family has allowed visitations to the statue, it's worth a bit more than the property, for sure. But because I like you - my father would kill me if he heard this, I must be mad - I'll give the statue to you for the property and just 20,000 dollars cash. Perfect business for you...

Quote
The "Professio fidei Tridentina", also known as the "Creed of Pope Pius IV", is one of the four authoritative Creeds of the Catholic Church. It was issued on November 13, 1565 by Pope Pius IV in his bull "Iniunctum nobis" under the auspices of the Council of Trent (1545 - 1563). It was subsequently modified slightly after the First Vatican Council (1869 - 1870) to bring it inline with the dogmatic definitions of the Council. The major intent of the Creed was to clearly define the Catholic faith against Protestantism. At one time it was used by Theologians as an oath of loyalty to the Church and to reconcile converts to the Church, but it is rarely used these days.
http://www.preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Symbola/Tridentinae.html
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2011, 10:35:31 AM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?

LOL...that's a cobbled together mess.

Tell the folks when they hear it recited during a liturgy then they can make their case.

Good grief!...Where do these people come from?

From Trent, an authoritative council (for Romans and all those under the Pope).

 laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh

Listen buddy...I got this ocean front propery in North Dakota that is just FABULOUS!!...price is right...easy access off a major interstate!!....

 Sad

Wonderful, I'll exchange it for this big Christ statue in my backyard, you've probably seen it in pics from Rio. Since my family has allowed visitations to the statue, it's worth a bit more than the property, for sure. But because I like you - my father would kill me if he heard this, I must be mad - I'll give the statue to you for the property and just 20,000 dollars cash. Perfect business for you...

Quote
The "Professio fidei Tridentina", also known as the "Creed of Pope Pius IV", is one of the four authoritative Creeds of the Catholic Church. It was issued on November 13, 1565 by Pope Pius IV in his bull "Iniunctum nobis" under the auspices of the Council of Trent (1545 - 1563). It was subsequently modified slightly after the First Vatican Council (1869 - 1870) to bring it inline with the dogmatic definitions of the Council. The major intent of the Creed was to clearly define the Catholic faith against Protestantism. At one time it was used by Theologians as an oath of loyalty to the Church and to reconcile converts to the Church, but it is rarely used these days.
http://www.preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Symbola/Tridentinae.html

Yes.  A loyalty oath.

When you hear it recited in a liturgy...as I noted earlier...then you can be concerned.

It is not even used as an oath of loyalty any longer, for good reason.

M.
Logged

Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,179



WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2011, 10:41:38 AM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?

LOL...that's a cobbled together mess.

Tell the folks when they hear it recited during a liturgy then they can make their case.

Good grief!...Where do these people come from?

From Trent, an authoritative council (for Romans and all those under the Pope).

 laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh

Listen buddy...I got this ocean front propery in North Dakota that is just FABULOUS!!...price is right...easy access off a major interstate!!....

 Sad

Wonderful, I'll exchange it for this big Christ statue in my backyard, you've probably seen it in pics from Rio. Since my family has allowed visitations to the statue, it's worth a bit more than the property, for sure. But because I like you - my father would kill me if he heard this, I must be mad - I'll give the statue to you for the property and just 20,000 dollars cash. Perfect business for you...

Quote
The "Professio fidei Tridentina", also known as the "Creed of Pope Pius IV", is one of the four authoritative Creeds of the Catholic Church. It was issued on November 13, 1565 by Pope Pius IV in his bull "Iniunctum nobis" under the auspices of the Council of Trent (1545 - 1563). It was subsequently modified slightly after the First Vatican Council (1869 - 1870) to bring it inline with the dogmatic definitions of the Council. The major intent of the Creed was to clearly define the Catholic faith against Protestantism. At one time it was used by Theologians as an oath of loyalty to the Church and to reconcile converts to the Church, but it is rarely used these days.
http://www.preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Symbola/Tridentinae.html

Yes.  A loyalty oath.

When you hear it recited in a liturgy...as I noted earlier...then you can be concerned.

It is not even used as an oath of loyalty any longer, for good reason.

M.

Quote
This formula was made binding, in a double bull of Nov. 13, 1564 ('Injunctum noblis'), and Dec. 9, 1564 ('In sacrosancta beati Petri, principis apostolorum, cathedra,' etc.), upon the whole ecclesia docens, i.e., upon all Roman Catholic priests and public teachers in Catholic seminaries, colleges, and universities.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds1.vi.iv.html

You're a catechist right?
Ah, and just noticed the name of the second bull "In sacrosancta beati Petri, principis apostolorum, cathedra"..."In Petri cathedra" should be an "ex cathedra" teaching, right?
« Last Edit: September 09, 2011, 10:43:10 AM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #13 on: September 09, 2011, 11:24:01 AM »

According to Wikipedia it was revised at First Vatican. What's described on the page sounds a lot like is in the link you gave.

There is precedent for revising creeds, so it isn't that far out.

It's just the definitions of Trent (Vatican I added later) put into credal form. I don't think the concept of putting a statement of faith like that into a personal "I believe" is entirely heretical, especially after hearing my priest mention the interesting form of the creed recited at Bishop Mathias's consecration and then listening to it on AFR.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,179



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 09, 2011, 11:36:06 AM »

According to Wikipedia it was revised at First Vatican. What's described on the page sounds a lot like is in the link you gave.

There is precedent for revising creeds, so it isn't that far out.

It's just the definitions of Trent (Vatican I added later) put into credal form. I don't think the concept of putting a statement of faith like that into a personal "I believe" is entirely heretical, especially after hearing my priest mention the interesting form of the creed recited at Bishop Mathias's consecration and then listening to it on AFR.

It's not heretical to formulate new creeds, as long as they are not meant to substitute the Nicene-Constantinopolitan one. They are synthetic formulations of faith. Changing the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, though, is uncanonical to say the least.
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2011, 01:04:41 PM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?

LOL...that's a cobbled together mess.

Tell the folks when they hear it recited during a liturgy then they can make their case.

Good grief!...Where do these people come from?

From Trent, an authoritative council (for Romans and all those under the Pope).

 laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh

Listen buddy...I got this ocean front propery in North Dakota that is just FABULOUS!!...price is right...easy access off a major interstate!!....

 Sad

Wonderful, I'll exchange it for this big Christ statue in my backyard, you've probably seen it in pics from Rio. Since my family has allowed visitations to the statue, it's worth a bit more than the property, for sure. But because I like you - my father would kill me if he heard this, I must be mad - I'll give the statue to you for the property and just 20,000 dollars cash. Perfect business for you...

Quote
The "Professio fidei Tridentina", also known as the "Creed of Pope Pius IV", is one of the four authoritative Creeds of the Catholic Church. It was issued on November 13, 1565 by Pope Pius IV in his bull "Iniunctum nobis" under the auspices of the Council of Trent (1545 - 1563). It was subsequently modified slightly after the First Vatican Council (1869 - 1870) to bring it inline with the dogmatic definitions of the Council. The major intent of the Creed was to clearly define the Catholic faith against Protestantism. At one time it was used by Theologians as an oath of loyalty to the Church and to reconcile converts to the Church, but it is rarely used these days.
http://www.preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Symbola/Tridentinae.html

Yes.  A loyalty oath.

When you hear it recited in a liturgy...as I noted earlier...then you can be concerned.

It is not even used as an oath of loyalty any longer, for good reason.

M.

Quote
This formula was made binding, in a double bull of Nov. 13, 1564 ('Injunctum noblis'), and Dec. 9, 1564 ('In sacrosancta beati Petri, principis apostolorum, cathedra,' etc.), upon the whole ecclesia docens, i.e., upon all Roman Catholic priests and public teachers in Catholic seminaries, colleges, and universities.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds1.vi.iv.html

You're a catechist right?
Ah, and just noticed the name of the second bull "In sacrosancta beati Petri, principis apostolorum, cathedra"..."In Petri cathedra" should be an "ex cathedra" teaching, right?
but it has no "+Sic Maria dixit": that's apparently the little known but all dispositive enacting clause of Pastor Aeternus.

Their supreme pontiff says Trent was an ecumenical council. That would make it binding on anyone who buys that he speaks infallibly on faith and morals about such things.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2011, 01:06:27 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #16 on: September 09, 2011, 02:02:33 PM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?
I am not quite sure what is wrong with this creed from a Catholic point of view. It seems entirely orthodox to me.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Adela
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 746



« Reply #17 on: September 09, 2011, 04:54:51 PM »

I agree with ElijahMaria, it's not used in any mass or liturgy. I believe everything in the Apostles Creed and Nicene Creed ( but not necessarily the fileoque- still researching that one.).  I'm a bit troubled by indulgences and not sure about purgatory. And original sin as defined by the Augustinian model is not the view of the Byzantine Catholics.   So I don't think I could say this Tridentine Creed with a clear conscience.

After spending some time with rigid traditional Catholics I learned to read between the lines.  The ones i knew really believe you have to be a formal member  of the Roman rite church to avoid burning in hell.  For confession, if you forgot to confess one thing it meant you still aren't forgiven, you have to be scrupulous and be sure to confess every detail.  I wasn't accepted once I questioned why the salvation of the poor souls in purgatory was dependent on me praying for them - it seemed unfair that someone who didn't get prayers would suffer longer than someone who was more popular.  It really seems that a group requiring recitation of a creed not recited by the greater church is trying to be more catholic than the pope. 

TheistGiril, I'm curious why they are so disturbed by the Byzantine Catholics and are using this creed to make some point?
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2011, 09:12:53 PM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?
I am not quite sure what is wrong with this creed from a Catholic point of view. It seems entirely orthodox to me.
I thought the same thing when I read it.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #19 on: September 09, 2011, 10:38:49 PM »

Someone on another message board flung this at some Eastern Catholics in an attempt to find out once and for all if we were really Catholics:

http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Tridentine_Creed.html

I'm a lifelong Catholic and was really taken aback by this - I've never heard of it, read it, heard it used in Church, etc. - yet apparently (at least according to Wiki) it's been around since the Council of Trent.

Info? Comments?
I am not quite sure what is wrong with this creed from a Catholic point of view. It seems entirely orthodox to me.
I thought the same thing when I read it.
since it predates all the sui juris unions except perhaps the Italo-Albanians (not entirely clear) it would seem that one would have to look at the particular terms of the particular "union" as to what they had to give up what they had known as the Orthodox Tradition of the Catholic Church in order to submit to the Vatican's magiterium, as there are specific things they said they would not give up, which conflict with the general terms of submission in the oath.

They say that is was required of converts:were any signers of the "Unions" required to say it?  Otherwise, they can argue where this oath and what it stands for conflicts with what they had held as the Orthodox Faith of the Catholic Church, the terms of the "Union" are determinative.
Quote
Ego N. firma fide credo et profiteor omnia et singula, quae continentur in Symbolo, quo Sancta Romana ecclesia utitur, videlicet: Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium. Et in unum Dominum Iesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, et ex Patre natum ante omnia saecula. Deum de Deo, Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, genitum non factum, consubstantialem Patri; per quem omnia facta sunt. Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de caelis. Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est. Crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato, passus et sepultus est, et resurrexit tertia die, secundum Scripturas, et ascendit in caelum, sedet ad dexteram Patris. Et iterum venturus est cum gloria, iudicare vivos et mortuos, cuius regni non erit finis. Et in Spiritum Sanctum, Dominum et vivificantem, qui ex Patre Filioque procedit. Qui cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et conglorificatur: qui locutus est per prophetas. Et unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam. Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. Et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum, et vitam venturi saeculi. Amen.

Apostolicas et ecclesiasticas traditiones reliquasque eiusdem ecclesiae observationes et consitutiones firmissime admitto et amplector.

Item sacram Scripturam iuxta sensum eum, quem tenuit et tenet sancta mater Ecclesia, cuius et iudicare de vero sensu et interpretatione sacrarum Scripturarum, admitto, nec eam umquam nisi iuxta unanimem consensum Patrum accipiam et interpretabor.

Profiteor quoque septem esse vere et proprie Sacramenta novae legis, a Iesu Christo Domino nostro instituta, atque ad salutem humani generis, licet non omnia singulis, necessaria: scilicet Baptismum, Confirmationem, Eucharistiam, Poenitentiam, Extremam Unctionem, Ordinem et Matrimonium, illaque gratiam conferre, et ex his Baptismum, Confirmationem et Ordinem sine sacrilegio reiterari non posse.

Receptos quoque et approbatos ecclesiae catholicae ritus in supradictorum omnium Sacramentorum solemni administratione recipio et admitto.

Omnia et singula, quae de peccato originali et de iustificatione in sacrosancta Tridentina Synodo definita et declarata fuerunt, amplector et recipio.

Profiteor pariter, in Missa oferri Deo verum, proprium et propitiatorium sacrificium pro vivis et defunctis, atque in sanctissimo Eucharistiae Sacramento esse vere, realiter et substantialiter Corpus et Sanguinem, una cum anima et divinitate Domini nostri Iesu Christi, fierique conversionem totius substantiae panis in Corpus at totius substantiae vini in Sanguinem, quam conversionem Ecclesia catholica transsubstantiationem appellat. Fateor etiam sub altera tantum specie totum atque integrum Christum verumque Sacramentum sumi.

Constanter teneo, purgatorium esse, animasque ibi detentas fidelium suffragiis iuvari. Similiter et Sanctos, una cum Christo regnantes, venerandos atque invocandos esse, eosque orationes Deo pro nobis offerre, atque eorum reliquias esse venerandas.

Firmissime assero, imagines Christi ac Deiparae semper Virginis, necnon aliorum Sanctorum habendas et retiendas esse, atque eis debitum honorem et venerationem impertiendum.

Indulgentiarum etiam potestatem a Christo in Ecclesia relictam fuisse, illarumque usu christiano populo maxime salutarem esse affirmo.

Sanctam catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam romanam omnium ecclesiarum matrem et magistram agnosco, Romanoque Pontifici, beati Petri, Apostolorum principis, successori, ac Iesu Christi Vicario, veram obedientiam spondeo ac iuro.

Cetera item omnia a sacris canonibus et oecumenicis Conciliis, ac praecipue a sacrosancta Tridentina Synodo, et ab oecumenico Concilio Vaticano tradita, definita et declarata; simulaque contraria omnia, atque haereses quascumque ab Ecclesia damnatas et reiectas et anathematizatas ego pariter damno, reicio, et anathematizo.

Veram catholicam fidem, extra quam nemo salvus esse potest, quam in praesenti sponte profiteor et veraciter teneo, eamdem integram, et inviolatam usque ad extremum vitae spiritum, constantissime, Deo adiuvante, retinere et confiteri, atque a meis subditis, vel illis, quorum cura ad me in munere meo spectabit, teneri, doceri et praedicari, quantum in me erit, curaturum, ego idem N. spondeo, voveo ac iuro. Sic me Deus adiuvet et haec sancta Dei Evangelia. Amen.
Quote
I, N, with a firm faith believe and profess each and everything which is contained in the Creed which the Holy Roman Church makes use of. That is: I believe in one God, The Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God. Born of the Father before all ages. God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God. Begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father. By Whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And became incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary: and was made man. He was also crucified for us, suffered under Pontius Pilate, and was buried. And on the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and His kingdom will have no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, Who proceeds from the Father and the Son. Who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, and Who spoke through the prophets. And one holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I expect the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

I most steadfastly admit and embrace Apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions, and all other observances and constitutions of the Church.

I also admit the Holy Scripture according to that sense which our holy mother the Church has held, and does hold, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretations of the Scriptures. Neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.

I also profess that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the New Law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and necessary for the salvation of mankind, though not all for every one; that is: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrimony; and that they confer grace; and that of these, Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders cannot be reiterated without sacrilege. I also receive and admit the received and approved ceremonies of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of the aforesaid sacraments. I embrace and receive all and every one of the things which have been defined and declared in the holy Council of Trent concerning original sin and justification. I profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially, the Body and Blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ; and that there is made a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood, which conversion the Catholic Church calls Transubstantiation. I also confess that under either kind alone Christ is received whole and entire, and a true sacrament.

I constantly hold that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls therein detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful. Likewise, that the saints, reigning together with Christ, are to be honored and invoked, and that they offer prayers to God for us, and that their relics are to be venerated.

I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, of the Mother of God, ever virgin, and also of other Saints, ought to be had and retained, and that due honor and veneration is to be given them.

I also affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the Church, and that the use of them is most wholesome to Christian people.

I acknowledge the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church as the mother and mistress of all churches; and I promise true obedience to the Bishop of Rome, successor to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ.

I likewise undoubtedly receive and profess all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred Canons, and general Councils, and particularly by the holy Council of Trent. I condemn, reject, and anathematize all things contrary thereto, and all heresies which the Church has condemned, rejected, and anathematized.

This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved, which I now freely profess and to which I truly adhere, inviolate and with firm constancy until the last breath of life, I do so profess and swear to maintain with the help of God. And I shall strive, as far as possible, that this same faith shall be held, taught, and professed by all those over whom I have charge. I N. do so pledge, promise, and swear, so help me God and these Holy Gospels.
http://www.mrtrid.com/profession.html

For a published text predating Vatican I:A  text-book of popery: comprising a brief history of the Council of Trent and a complete view of Roman-Catholic theology By John Mockett Cramp
http://books.google.com/books?id=uPAQAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA464&dq=firma+fide+credo+et+profiteor+omnia+et+singula,+quae+continentur+in+Symbolo,+quo+Sancta+Romana&hl=en#v=onepage&q=firma%20fide%20credo%20et%20profiteor%20omnia%20et%20singula%2C%20quae%20continentur%20in%20Symbolo%2C%20quo%20Sancta%20Romana&f=false
and the English Chambers's encyclopædia: a dictionary of universal knowledge, Volume 8
http://books.google.com/books?id=1WkMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA299&dq=with+a+firm+faith+believe+and+profess+each+and+everything+which+is+contained+in+the+Creed+which+the+Holy+Roman+Church+makes+use+of.+That+is:+I+believe+in+one+God,&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

While there are obvious heterodox departures from the Catholic Tradition as the Fathers delievered them, such as the filioque and purgatory. For example, let us take Brest:
Quote
Since there is a quarrel between the Romans and Greeks about the procession of the Holy Spirit, which greatly impede unity really for no other reason than that we do not wish to understand one another—we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son.
http://ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TREATBR.HTM
since this oath violates this by having to say "from the Father and the Son" instead of "through the Son," I can see how those who signed on to Brest might refuse this creed.

A large part would be the problem with confessing adherence to the Council of Trent.  Since Trent condemned utraquism (the insistence of communion under both, not one "species) this
Quote
That the Mysteries of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ should be retained entirely as we have been accustomed until now, under the species of bread and wine; that this should remain among us eternally the same and unchangeable.
might cause some problems. As perhaps would this
Quote
That we should not be compelled to take part in processions on the day of Corpus Christi—that we should not have to make such processions with our Mysteries inasmuch as our use of the Mysteries is different.
as Trent described Corpus Christi as "A Triumph over heresy" another clause
Quote
That the marriages of priests remain intact, except for bigamists.
would cause problems, as Trent banned anew married clergy, indeed basically restricting ordination to the never married.

So you have a start of the objections.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2011, 10:48:46 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #20 on: September 09, 2011, 11:51:11 PM »

As to more detail, skipping the obvious filioque problem, going on:
Quote
I most steadfastly admit and embrace Apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions, and all other observances and constitutions of the Church.

I also admit the Holy Scripture according to that sense which our holy mother the Church has held, and does hold, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretations of the Scriptures. Neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.
In the case of those submitting to the Vatican, they would have said this previously.  In some instances, e.g. married priests, such tradition was the tradition of the whole Catholic Church until changes in the West introduced differences. Trent reaffirmed those differences.  The union treaties specifically called for exemption from adopting them.

Quote
I also profess that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the New Law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and necessary for the salvation of mankind, though not all for every one; that is: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrimony; and that they confer grace; and that of these, Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders cannot be reiterated without sacrilege. I also receive and admit the received and approved ceremonies of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of the aforesaid sacraments. I embrace and receive all and every one of the things which have been defined and declared in the holy Council of Trent concerning original sin and justification. I profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially, the Body and Blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ; and that there is made a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood, which conversion the Catholic Church calls Transubstantiation. I also confess that under either kind alone Christ is received whole and entire, and a true sacrament.
this would contradict, as what Trent defined and declared contradicted the Catholic Tradition upheld by the Orthodox from whom the signers of Brest came, the terms of Brest:
Quote
That the divine worship and all prayers and services of Orthros, Vespers, and the night services shall remain intact (without any change at all) for us according to the ancient custom of the Eastern Church, namely: the Holy Liturgies of which there are three, that of Saint Basil, that of Saint Chrysostom, and that of Epiphanius which is served during the Great Lent with Presanctified Gifts, and all other ceremonies and services of our Church, as we have had them until now, for in Rome these same services are kept within the obedience of the Supreme Pontiff, and that these services should be in our own language.

That the Mysteries of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ should be retained entirely as we have been accustomed until now, under the species of bread and wine; that this should remain among us eternally the same and unchangeable.

That the Mystery of Holy Baptism and its form should remain among us unchanged as we have served it until now, without any addition.

That we should not be compelled to take part in processions on the day of Corpus Christi—that we should not have to make such processions with our Mysteries inasmuch as our use of the Mysteries is different.

That the marriages of priests remain intact, except for bigamists.

That our Bishops should not send to Rome for the sacrae (permission to consecrate), but, if the King's Grace names someone to a bishopric, that according to the old custom the Archbishop—Metropolitain should have the duty and the right to ordain him. The Metropolitain himself, before entering upon the office of metropolitain, should send the sacrae to the Pope. Then, after he has received the sacrae from Rome, let the bishops ordain him, at least two of them, according to their custom. If a bishop is elected Metropolitain, let him not send for the sacrae, because he already has the episcopal cheirotonia; he may take an oath of obedience to the Supreme Pontiff in the presence of the Archbishop of Gniezno (who on that occasion will not be functioning as Archbishop, but as Primate of Poland).

That we should not be forbidden to visit the sick with the Most Holy Mysteries, publicly, with lights and vestments, according to our rubrics.
this would include chrismation after baptism, communion of the laity of both the Body and Blood, married clergy, local control of the episcopate rather than central control from Rome, etc. all of which conflict with the administration of sacraments according to Trent.  But here again, the practices that Trent upholds are recent innovations in the West.  The practices the signers wanted to preserve even after submission to the Vatican were the universal Orthodox Tradition of the Catholic Church of the earliest centuries, if not the whole first millenium.

How this
Quote
I constantly hold that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls therein detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful.
is harmonized with this article of Brest
Quote
We shall not debate about purgatory, but we entrust ourselves to the teaching of the Holy Church.
I cannot determine.  If they were required to subscribe to Florence, it would be clearer. As for
Quote
I also affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the Church, and that the use of them is most wholesome to Christian people.
since indulgences were a later Western development, only found in the East after Trent, they are not part of the universal Orthodox Tradition of the Catholic Church, and but Brest is silent on them.  So it would seem to be a question of whether they had to affirmatively adopt them, or if their silence in the terms of Brest precludes them from rejecting what Trent taught on them.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2011, 12:24:09 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #21 on: September 10, 2011, 01:57:45 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #22 on: September 10, 2011, 02:14:32 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?
Yes...I believe even the EO and OO would agree that Ecumenical Councils are the most authoritative.
Logged
Adela
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 746



« Reply #23 on: September 10, 2011, 05:58:41 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?
Possibly..... For me it just seems odd to have a subset requiring a stricter creed recitation than what the greater church requires. It seems to lend itself to a caste system, if you will, within the Catholic church.

The original post was about this Tridentine Creed being used against Greek Catholics to show they weren't kosher enough.   These threads seem to turn into a Mensa Meeting where things are discussed from every angle and everyone jumps on what resonates personally.  For me it seemed to be a purity test used against Greek Catholics as described by the original poster.

I'm not a fan of a small group deciding whose Catholic enough.

I'm sure the persecution of the Greek Catholics when they came to America was justified by the same mindset - they weren't Catholic enough because they had married priests, used leavened bread in their liturgies , etc.
Logged
Adela
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 746



« Reply #24 on: September 10, 2011, 09:00:46 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?
Yes...I believe even the EO and OO would agree that Ecumenical Councils are the most authoritative.

And, Wyatt, I'm not denying everything in this creed is official Roman Catholic doctrine.  If there was something about having to believe in limbo then there would be something to debate. I understand really conservative or traditional Catholics are fed up with all the craziness That has happened since the 60's, such as communion rails being torn out,  the tabernacle being moved so you  have no idea where to find it,  and so on.  I just feel that with the majority of Roman Catholics not believing in the Real Presence in the Eucharist, why should a small group attack the Greek Catholics as not being Catholic enough?

Maybe the Orthodox have it right, they kept things simpler and stuck with the basics of the ancient faith. They don't  have to get their people to submit to believing in Purgatory and indulgences and can focus more on the essentials.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2011, 09:01:37 AM by Adela » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #25 on: September 10, 2011, 09:51:53 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #26 on: September 10, 2011, 09:57:22 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?
Possibly..... For me it just seems odd to have a subset requiring a stricter creed recitation than what the greater church requires. It seems to lend itself to a caste system, if you will, within the Catholic church.

The original post was about this Tridentine Creed being used against Greek Catholics to show they weren't kosher enough.   These threads seem to turn into a Mensa Meeting where things are discussed from every angle and everyone jumps on what resonates personally.  For me it seemed to be a purity test used against Greek Catholics as described by the original poster.

I'm not a fan of a small group deciding whose Catholic enough.

I'm sure the persecution of the Greek Catholics when they came to America was justified by the same mindset - they weren't Catholic enough because they had married priests, used leavened bread in their liturgies , etc.

That did not and does not make correct the practice of asserting the Latin Church as the only bearer of the truth.  And it did not take long to figure that out once the eastern Catholic faithful began to worship outside of their natal countries.  In fact it did not take long for the pressure to "correct" that misconception to begin, and it continues apace as we speak.

Again I protest the idea that simply because things go wrong in the Church that the entire Church must be wrong.  Use that yard stick in Orthodoxy and what do you get?....Vagante bishops...

 
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #27 on: September 10, 2011, 10:49:51 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
the facts of the "unions" and the formation of the WRO belie your assertions here: the WRO are required to change their orandi to conform with the Orthodox credendi that is held universally by the Catholic Church (although the orandi is not), whereas the Vatican's "sui juris" rites originally (and now, again) were not changed-which would alert the faithful that they had entered into another ecclesial community.  It is for that reason that practically every Orthodox parish I have been in has service books published by the Vatican.  "Byzantine Worshop" and others do follow the lex credendi, lex orandi rule, which is why they are unsuitable for Orthodox worship:they have been changed to conform with Vatican teaching, including that of Trent.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #28 on: September 10, 2011, 11:02:56 AM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
the facts of the "unions" and the formation of the WRO belie your assertions here: the WRO are required to change their orandi to conform with the Orthodox credendi that is held universally by the Catholic Church (although the orandi is not), whereas the Vatican's "sui juris" rites originally (and now, again) were not changed-which would alert the faithful that they had entered into another ecclesial community.  It is for that reason that practically every Orthodox parish I have been in has service books published by the Vatican.  "Byzantine Worshop" and others do follow the lex credendi, lex orandi rule, which is why they are unsuitable for Orthodox worship:they have been changed to conform with Vatican teaching, including that of Trent.

I believe this strays from the original question asked of me. 

I do believe you have the same difficulty that Father Ambrose does in distinguishing between doctrine, ecclesial and theological anthropology, piety, and liturgy.  So whatever you say here is marked by that deficiency.

So there may be some truth in what you have said above but it is misleading in the main.
Logged

Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #29 on: September 10, 2011, 05:13:53 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #30 on: September 10, 2011, 06:00:49 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
Logged

Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #31 on: September 10, 2011, 06:10:17 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
So you're saying that I was correct in the first place.

Why bother asking where I got the idea then?
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 10, 2011, 06:23:48 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
So you're saying that I was correct in the first place.

Why bother asking where I got the idea then?

No.  You are not correct in your comparison at all. 

There are many credal statements over the centuries.  Do you pay attention to those from the east that are not in the divine liturgy?  If not, does that make you like the Protestants and sola scriptura?
Logged

theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #33 on: September 10, 2011, 08:01:34 PM »

TheistGirl, I'm curious why they are so disturbed by the Byzantine Catholics and are using this creed to make some point?

Hi everyone, sorry, I didn't mean to do a thread "hit and run"! Just started a new job this week and it's taken up a lot more time than I thought it would (and they don't like us to surf the Net during business hours - imagine!  Grin ).

Anyway, yes, on the forum I was referring to, there does seem to be this constant effort to prove that Byzantine Catholics are not "real" Catholics, by posting things like this Tridentine Creed and then demanding to know why B.C.'s won't agree to it.

I must say, though, that I enjoy the irony:  at this particular RC forum, EC's are sometimes accused of not being (Roman) Catholic enough, while here at OC.net, we're sometimes accused of being too (Roman) Catholic!   Roll Eyes

Makes me think we must be doing something right!  Cool  
« Last Edit: September 10, 2011, 08:02:47 PM by theistgal » Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #34 on: September 10, 2011, 08:06:47 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
So you're saying that I was correct in the first place.

Why bother asking where I got the idea then?

No.  You are not correct in your comparison at all. 

There are many credal statements over the centuries.  Do you pay attention to those from the east that are not in the divine liturgy?  If not, does that make you like the Protestants and sola scriptura?
Any creed declared by a council is certainly something to pay attention to. A liturgical service is not the method by which we judge a creed.

I absolutely maintain that it is exactly like Protestants and Sola Scriptura to say "If it isn't in the service it isn't important."
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #35 on: September 10, 2011, 08:44:52 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
So you're saying that I was correct in the first place.

Why bother asking where I got the idea then?

No.  You are not correct in your comparison at all. 

There are many credal statements over the centuries.  Do you pay attention to those from the east that are not in the divine liturgy?  If not, does that make you like the Protestants and sola scriptura?
Can you name one required of converts and theologians-like the Vatican required subscription to the Tridentine-that we are free to ignore?  I know we have some elaboration on the Nicene Creed in the office of reception of converts, and in the consecration of bishops, but we are not free to ignore them, as we accept the one to be among us and the other to be above us by such Creeds.

And we are not free to ignore the ones we do not use verbatim in the DL.  We don't usually recite the entire definition of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, but we read the exclamations on the Triumph of Orthodoxy.  We do not recite the Twelve Chapters, upon which the sentence against Nestorius was based at Ephesus, but we call her Theotokos in conformity, and anyone who cannot subscribe to the Twelve Chapters does not subscribe to the Orthodox Faith and thus cannot commune in the Catholic Church.

The Confession of Dositheos, limited in authority as it is, cannot be ignored, nor can the Orthodox Confession of the Catholic Church of the East of Met. St. Peter Movila, because they are lex credendi what the lex orandi is teaching.  They bear the authority of the Councils (Jerusalem in the former, Iasi (and Jerusalem) in the latter) which produced/approved them.  Hence why they are of a lesser authority than any definition produced by an Ecumenical Council.

Which brings up to the problem of your stand on this creed of the church of your baptism, EM.  It was produced by a council that your magisterium pronounces as ecumenical/general.  It was important enough three centuries later that it was updated by the next council your magisterium pronounced as ecumenical/general-Vatican I.  Given the importance of the council which produced this creed in stamping its name-Tridentine-on the very mass which was being imposed on everyone at the time in communion with the Vatican
Quote
Finally came uniformity in the old Roman Rite and the abolition of nearly all the medieval variants. The Council of Trent considered the question and formed a commission to prepare a uniform Missal. Eventually the Missal was published by Pius V by the Bull "Quo primum" (still printed in it) of 14 July 1570. That is really the last stage of the history of the Roman Mass. It is Pius V's Missal that is used throughout the Latin Church, except in a few cases where he allowed a modified use that had a prescription of at least two centuries. This exception saved the variants used by some religious orders and a few local rites as well as the Milanese and Mozarabic liturgies. Clement VIII (1604), Urban VIII (1634), and Leo XIII (1884) revised the book slightly in the rubrics and the texts of Scripture (see LITURGICAL BOOKS). Pius X has revised the chant (1908.) But these revisions leave it still the Missal of Pius V. Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09790b.htm
it would seem that the creed came as a matched set with the missal of Trent.

Which leaves the question of the OP about the Byzantines.  They all post-date Trent, and exemption from the Liturgy of Trent was one of the main, if not the main, demands of those who submitted to the Vatican in the "unions."  Such exemption would be immediately in conflict, as we have seen, to the Tridentine Creed.  Agreeing to the exemption, did your supreme pontiff absolve them of subscription to the Tridentine Creed as well?  In which case your Latins should take it up with your supreme pontiff, and stop pestering your Byzantines.  But if not, then the Byzantines didn't look at the fine print before they signed.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #36 on: September 10, 2011, 09:14:44 PM »

But if not, then the Byzantines didn't look at the fine print before they signed.

That's an interesting statement.  What would you say to the Byzantines who were baptized into the Byzantine Rite, and never had the option of "signing" anything, but just continue to follow the teachings of their parents and grandparents? 

(We had one today - a baptism that is! Welcome to the world, Baby Emilie!  Grin )
« Last Edit: September 10, 2011, 09:15:12 PM by theistgal » Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #37 on: September 10, 2011, 09:26:53 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
So you're saying that I was correct in the first place.

Why bother asking where I got the idea then?

No.  You are not correct in your comparison at all. 

There are many credal statements over the centuries.  Do you pay attention to those from the east that are not in the divine liturgy?  If not, does that make you like the Protestants and sola scriptura?
Any creed declared by a council is certainly something to pay attention to. A liturgical service is not the method by which we judge a creed.

I absolutely maintain that it is exactly like Protestants and Sola Scriptura to say "If it isn't in the service it isn't important."

 laugh  Careful.

I did not say that it was not important.

I said that I could safely ignore it.  That is a quite different statement. 

That text was never used in liturgy but was used as a loyalty oath during the time of the re-formation and periods of counter-reformation.  Since then it has fallen into disuse. 

That is all that I indicated, and because it is no longer used in ANY capacity then it is of historical interest but not at all vital to my salvation: not my salvation as an eastern Catholic, nor is it necessary to the salvation of Roman rite Catholics.

M.
Logged

theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #38 on: September 10, 2011, 09:55:22 PM »

That text was never used in liturgy but was used as a loyalty oath during the time of the re-formation and periods of counter-reformation.  Since then it has fallen into disuse.  

That is all that I indicated, and because it is no longer used in ANY capacity then it is of historical interest but not at all vital to my salvation: not my salvation as an eastern Catholic, nor is it necessary to the salvation of Roman rite Catholics.

M.

Actually, it is apparently being used in the capacity of ardent traditionalist Roman Catholics trying to trap and/or discredit Eastern Rite Catholics on Internet fora.  Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: September 10, 2011, 09:56:00 PM by theistgal » Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #39 on: September 10, 2011, 10:01:10 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
Is there anything in this Creed that you specifically disagreed with?
Logged
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #40 on: September 10, 2011, 10:11:06 PM »

Is there anything in this Creed that you specifically disagreed with?

Hi Wyatt - I know you addressed this to elijahmaria but since I'm the OP I hope you won't mind if I respond also.  Smiley

My objection to this Creed is less the content than the belligerent attitude.  I agree with others who said it sounds more like a loyalty oath.

I also object to RC's who are using it as a "test" to see if EC's are really C.  Wink
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #41 on: September 10, 2011, 10:12:55 PM »

But if not, then the Byzantines didn't look at the fine print before they signed.

That's an interesting statement.  What would you say to the Byzantines who were baptized into the Byzantine Rite, and never had the option of "signing" anything, but just continue to follow the teachings of their parents and grandparents? 

(We had one today - a baptism that is! Welcome to the world, Baby Emilie!  Grin )
Many years!

It doesn't make a difference, as the "union agreements" that I have seen all speak of "in perpetuity." IOW, they (or actually, you) all are "grandfathered" in by their parents and grandparents.  So the Ruthenians and Ukrainians were fully within their rights when the Vatican banned their married clergy, for instance, to withdraw their signatures as it were from the "union agreement."  That they returned to the bosom of the Catholic Church of their forefathers and were received into Orthodoxy is icing on that cake: they could have signed onto the Union of Utrecht.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #42 on: September 10, 2011, 10:17:53 PM »

it's not used in any mass or liturgy.
I'm just curious, but what difference does that make? This sounds a bit like the Protestant thing of "it's not in the bible". Certainly Trent and Vat I are far more important when it comes to defining the beliefs of the Catholic Church than the liturgy is, aren't they?

What gives you that idea?  It is not a contest to see which elements are more important.  The Catholic Church teaches lex oradi lex credendi as well as Orthodoxy.
Where did I get what idea?

The idea that you're writing off this creed because it isn't in the Liturgy? Well I got that from the part where you and another said it isn't in the Liturgy so you feel you can ignore it.

There are many Creedal statements that I am perfectly able to ignore.  The one I cannot ignore is the one contained in the divine liturgy.
So you're saying that I was correct in the first place.

Why bother asking where I got the idea then?

No.  You are not correct in your comparison at all. 

There are many credal statements over the centuries.  Do you pay attention to those from the east that are not in the divine liturgy?  If not, does that make you like the Protestants and sola scriptura?
Any creed declared by a council is certainly something to pay attention to. A liturgical service is not the method by which we judge a creed.

I absolutely maintain that it is exactly like Protestants and Sola Scriptura to say "If it isn't in the service it isn't important."

 laugh  Careful.

I did not say that it was not important.

I said that I could safely ignore it.  That is a quite different statement. 

That text was never used in liturgy but was used as a loyalty oath during the time of the re-formation and periods of counter-reformation.  Since then it has fallen into disuse. 

That is all that I indicated, and because it is no longer used in ANY capacity then it is of historical interest but not at all vital to my salvation: not my salvation as an eastern Catholic, nor is it necessary to the salvation of Roman rite Catholics.

M.
I must admit to an academic interest in semiotics, so I enjoy seeing how far symantics can be stretched.

I was not quoting you, rather I was making a summation of your position. No, you did not use the word "unimportant", however if something can be "safely ignore[d]" (which you do say), then it stands to reason that it is unimportant. Something that is important is something that we must direct a certain level of attention to.

You seem willing to admit that it was of historical importance, and thereby get out of the claim that you believe it is unimportant, but that is something completely different. Your position is that it is not important in the here and now in spite of the fact that it was updated at the second most recent Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church.

On top of all that there is nothing in the creed that is not established Catholic doctrine. I have to ask the same question as Wyatt, what particular issue in the creed do you disagree with? I disagree with a fair amount, but I'm not Catholic. Wink
Logged
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #43 on: September 10, 2011, 10:19:53 PM »

Is there anything in this Creed that you specifically disagreed with?

Hi Wyatt - I know you addressed this to elijahmaria but since I'm the OP I hope you won't mind if I respond also.  Smiley

My objection to this Creed is less the content than the belligerent attitude.  I agree with others who said it sounds more like a loyalty oath.

I also object to RC's who are using it as a "test" to see if EC's are really C.  Wink

But can't any creed be used in the same way? Isn't that why we state the various creeds in our various liturgies? To affirm before God that we do in fact believe these things? Is a person not a liar if they recite the Nicene Creed in the Divine Liturgy without holding to its truth?
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #44 on: September 10, 2011, 10:39:06 PM »

Is there anything in this Creed that you specifically disagreed with?

Hi Wyatt - I know you addressed this to elijahmaria but since I'm the OP I hope you won't mind if I respond also.  Smiley

My objection to this Creed is less the content than the belligerent attitude.  I agree with others who said it sounds more like a loyalty oath.

I also object to RC's who are using it as a "test" to see if EC's are really C.  Wink
That makes sense. The only part of that creed that I didn't particularly care for was the part at the beginning that referred to the Church as the "Holy Roman Church." I mean, I get what it's saying by that since the headquarters of our Church is in Rome, but the Catholic Church as a whole is certainly not just Roman. That part seems to be kind of a slap in the face to the Eastern Catholic Churches. The rest of it though seemed doctrinally orthodox.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.24 seconds with 72 queries.