The Roman Missal was originally published following Vatican II according to the precepts of Sacrosanctum Concilium (hence forward, SC) to encourage greater participation in the liturgy by the congregation of believers. By and large, the first three editions of the Roman Missal were produced by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) according to the principles of dynamic equivalency. According to anthropologist and Catholic scholar, Michael Angrosino, this form of translation: “involves the replacement of an element of the Roman [Latin] form with something in the local culture that has equal meaning or value.” The principle of dynamic equivalence, which is rooted in SC and Paul VI’s “Evangelization in the Modern World,” takes a Latin text that if translated literally into English would not make sense to English speakers or would not flow with the eloquence and richness of the original Latin prose. Formal equivalence is the literal translation of the original Latin into the vernacular.
The Nicene Creed, while formally composed at Nicaea, was a product of building heresies and the proto-orthodox reaction to them. As early as the third century (some 100 years prior to the Council at Nicaea), the Christian author Tertullian defended the orthodox notion of a Triune God against an individual named Praxeas: “Now what Divine Person was born in [the flesh]? The Word, and the Spirit which became incarnate with the Word by the will of the Father. The Word, therefore, is incarnate….” In the early fourth century, Arius, a priest from Alexandria, proselytized a theology, which denied the divinity of Christ: “It is not that he was unbegotten (for the Father alone is unbegotten) but that the subsistence of the ineffable, only begotten God is beyond the ability of the evangelists [John].” God, who is Creator, is unique and unbegotten. Christ, the only begotten Son of God, cannot share the uniqueness of God, so the Son cannot be God. It is quite possible that Arius was the proverbial “straw that broke the camel’s back,” as within several years of his writing the Council of Nicaea convened to tackle the issue. In the Nicene Creed, “one in Being with the Father” is now changed to “consubstantial with the Father.” In the original Greek, the word homoousios was used to describe the relationship between the Father and the Son. Many English speakers are familiar with the root “homo,” loosely meaning “the same” or “with.” As far as I can tell, few if any English speakers are familiar with the term “consubstantial.” The root “con” may be familiar to some as meaning “with,” but the word “consubstantial” is likely to confuse many as to its true meaning. Any multi-syllable word, such as consubstantial, that is difficult for the average English speaker to pronounce and which flows (in English) like molasses in the winter time (or moves like Fred Flintstones’ car) seems to be both confusing and unnatural.
One change to the Nicene Creed that may seem minute is the change from “We” to “I” as the first word. In the original Greek of Nicaea, the first word is “Πιστεύομεν,” the plural form of the verb “to believe.” This word, pistevo, is more accurately translated as “to have faith” or to place trust in. The verb derives from the noun pistis, which is a persuasion or assurance of belief. Hence, the Nicene Creed was originally formulated as a statement of faith by a collection of believers. I, however, is the first word in the Apostles’ Creed and those familiar with the Tridentine Rite will remember the first word of the Nicene Creed, credo, is I. The switch, however, changes the entire perspective from which the Creed is delivered. The Nicene Creed was formulated at the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325, and edited and reaffirmed at the Ecumenical Council of Constantinople in 381. The Nicene Creed is a form of dogma, defined solemnly by the bishops at an ecumenical council, which with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and is infallible. Hence, the Nicene Creed was originally formulated as a statement of faith by a collection of believers. The Creed was altered when translated into Latin as the Credo. The Creed now became singular like the interrogatory form of the baptismal promises. To people of the Tridentine Mass, the Creed was now a personal profession of faith confessed by everyone. Not a representation of the collective faith of the Church. The Greek word for symbol (the Creed is commonly referred to as a symbol of faith) is symbolon. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the word can be defined as half of a broke object. Just as the broken parts of a seal were placed together (on a letter) and presented as a token of recognition and the “bearer’s identity,” the symbol of faith is a sign of recognition and communion between believers.
Thomas Aquinas, in Summa Theologiae, writes that “a new edition of the symbol [act of faith, creed] becomes necessary in order to set aside the errors that may arise.” There were a number of heresies, scandals, and errors of faith in the history of the Church. To Aquinas, the Creeds might need to be updated in order to correct any of these errors. In response to the three objections, Aquinas writes that since the pope has the authority to convene an ecumenical council and the symbols of faith were drawn up at such councils, the pope has the authority to update the symbols of faith. These recent changes to the Nicene Creed may seem minor enough that the territorial authority convened by the pope and allowed under SC can do so and still be in accord with the spirit of SC in that they are changing a word only to clarify its meaning to the faithful. In the case of the Nicene Creed, a symbol of faith formulated over a century in the context of that century and altered at least once when translated into Latin in the form of the Credo, one must ask as which stage of meaning of formulation can be taken as authentic. Even Thomas Aquinas references the need for growth and correction of errors with regard to symbols of the faith. Do the teachings of Vatican II and SC affirm the context of the original Greek or do they and the current circumstances affirm that of the Credo? Another question arises then, as to whether or not the changes to the Nicene Creed overstep the authority of a territorial authority and would require an ecumenical council to revise. If one believes the changes to the Creed are merely superficial and are only going to illuminate the true meaning of the Creed (in accord with SC) then no ecumenical council seems necessary. But, if the change to the Creed changes the meaning and the perspective from which one proclaims the Creed, it seems as though an ecumenical council is necessary.
The change, however, is more than just the replacement of one word for another. The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes the differences between the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed starting from the perspective of the person professing the: “ ‘I believe’ (Apostles’ Creed) is the faith of the Church professed personally by each believer.” The profession acts as literally a personal commitment to a relationship with God. Furthermore, “’we believe’ is the faith of the Church confessed by the bishops assembled…[and] by the liturgical assembly of believers.” In 1 Corinthians, Paul affirms the body of Christ to be made of not a single part, but many, “there are many parts, yet one body.” The change from “We” to “I” completely ignores the joined prayer of the community of believers gathered in the Eucharistic celebration. The Nicene Creed is a prayer professed, not confessed, in public by the faithful. To use Paul’s symbolism, if they were all one Body, but composed of only one part, then it follows that “I” should be used. According to Lumen Gentium (LG), everyone bears witness to this unity Paul discusses in the Body of Christ. The very gifts, varied and splendid, that the faithful bring to the Church, bring everyone into God because “all these things are the work of the same spirit.” The liturgy brings the faithful into “communion” with other believers all around the globe who are gathered at the “Eucharistic assembly.” The Catechism continues: “Faith is not an isolated act. No one can believe alone, just as no one can live alone. The believer has received faith from others and should hand it on to others.” SC reiterates that “liturgical services are not private functions.” The Mass is the public celebration of the Church, the “sacrament of unity” between believers. If the Nicene Creed and the other prayers of the Mass were meant to be said in first person, the Mass could and should be said in private. How can one prayer arise if everyone is praying individually? The meaning of the Nicene Creed will be skewed to that of a personal prayer (such as the Confiteor) and the communion with other believers will be lost.
Works Cited
1. 1 Corinthians 12:14, 20 New American Bible, USCCB, www.usccb.org/nab/bible/1corinthians/1corinthians12.html
2. Agnoli, Deacon Frank. “In the New Missal, Nicene Creed would go from plural to singular.” The Catholic Messenger. Wednesday January 20, 2010, http://www.catholicmessenger.org/articles/2010/01/26/diocesan_news/doc4b57275dc3525594872994.txt
3. Angrosino, Michael V. “The Culture Concept and the Mission of the Roman Catholic Church.” American Anthropologist, 96 (1994).
4. Aquinas, St. Thomas. “The Object of Faith.” Summa Theologiae. From New Advent. http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3001.htm#article10
5. Arius. “Thalia.” in Christianity in Late Antiquity, ed. Bart D. Ehrman and Andrew S. Jacobs. New York, New York: Oxford Press, 2004.
6. Catechism of the Catholic Church, Vatican Archives. http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s1c3a2.htm.
7. Complete Greek-English Dictionary, ed. Arnold Mandeson, 1960.
8. Gaillardetz, Richard. By What Authority? Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2003.
9. Lumen Gentium, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
10. "Nicene Creed," Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. (Encyclopædia Britannica: 2011), Web. 08 Feb. 2011.
11. “Nicene Creed,” Liturgical Texts, (Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America: 2011), Web 09 Feb. 2011
12. Sacrosanctum Concilium Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
13. Tertullian. “Tertullian: Against Praxeas.” in After the New Testament: A Reader in Early Christianity. ed. Bart D. Ehrman. New York, New York: Oxford Press, 1999.
14. Turner, Rev. Paul. Understanding the Revised Mass Texts, 2nd Ed. Chicago, IL: Archdiocese of Chicago, Liturgy Training Publications, 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment