Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been an insuiin dependent diabetic for 51 years. When my older daughter was about 7, she started to ask me a question in this manner..."Mommy, when I grow up and be a mommy and take shots...." My heart just sank. She just assumed she would have to take shot when whe was a mommy. She knew about my medical condition but never asked me why I took shots.
Many Catholics and others are like that. Instead of researching and questioning their religion to find the truth, they just assume it's not right for them and go church "shopping."
Even though they will change a couple of phrases during the Mass, it is still the same Mass with the focal point being the Consecration of the Body and Blood of Christ.
I wasn't too happy about the sign of peace hand shake, but I did it anyway and accepted it. No big deal!
If you have questions about your faith, go ask your priest or pastor and get the explaination of the whys. Check it out on the internet. The answers are here. You have to ask the questions to get your answers. "Knock and it will be opened to you. Seek and you shall find."
Our life is a process of learning, one day at a time.
Peace be with you............And with your Spirit.
The only thing I would question about this...and I'm sure it would strike a note with the Orthodox...is why the church is once again altering the words of the Nicene Creed. Is it part of the magisterium's authority to bind and loose?
The creed in question was not something the bishops made up for the occasion. A creed, or profession of faith, had been present in the Church from the beginning. It had to be professed by each convert to Christianity when accepting baptism; it had to be professed for the children of Christian families brought into the Church through infant baptism. In fashioning the original version of what came to be known as the Nicene Creed, the Council took one of the baptismal creeds in common use—probably the one used by the Church of Jerusalem—and added language that would express without ambiguity the true faith of the Church regarding Christ’s nature, as against what Arius and his followers were trying to say it was. The result was the essence of the Nicene Creed still professed on Sundays and holy days in the Catholic Church...........
The creed in question was not something the bishops made up for the occasion. A creed, or profession of faith, had been present in the Church from the beginning. It had to be professed by each convert to Christianity when accepting baptism; it had to be professed for the children of Christian families brought into the Church through infant baptism. In fashioning the original version of what came to be known as the Nicene Creed, the Council took one of the baptismal creeds in common use—probably the one used by the Church of Jerusalem—and added language that would express without ambiguity the true faith of the Church regarding Christ’s nature, as against what Arius and his followers were trying to say it was. The result was the essence of the Nicene Creed still professed on Sundays and holy days in the Catholic Church...........
Thanks for the link. I actually resort to the use of Catholic.com for insight and strength when I don't understand something about the RCC. I don't recall if I read that particular article from This Rock, so I appreciate that you posted a link to it.
Now as for my comment about the creed, I'm referencing how one of the reasons for the schism between the RCC and EO was due to the addition of the filioque' to the Nicene Creed. The EO were/are opposed to it, and do not use that form of the creed. When I looked at the article John1960 referenced, I clicked on the link which stated "Revised order of the Mass", and viewed a .pdf file documenting the proposed changes. In the left column where it states "Present text for People", I noticed under "Nicene Creed" that it currently does not follow the same wording as the original creed. It's close, yes - but there are notable differences. Most particularly I noticed how the people presently say "On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures." However, the new text proposed has the people going back to the wording of the original creed, in which it stated "in accordance with the Scriptures". So my question is this: Does part of the magisterium's authority to bind and loose include the power to alter the creed?
At some point in the past, apparently the church changed the wording of the creed (did that happen after Vatican II), and is now once again changing it - even though it is reverting back to the original words. So why did they change it to start with? For the Orthodox, the creed remains the same as the original, and the wording never changed. Why would the RCC change it, and now decide to once again change it back?
In essence, it is saying the same thing. It does not "change" the creed.
That is the version I have always known and I'm old.
"On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
