A new Ultramontanist Creed: would you sign up to this?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Maximian

Guest
A Mexican Priest invited his parishioners to pray with him as he recited the following. It’s his own initiative and not official but Im interested to know how many people here would subscribe to it. I would not.

I believe in Pope Francis as the legitimate Successor of the Apostle Peter. I believe that the Holy Ghost speaks to the Church through him. I believe that he guides the Catholic Church as a true Pastor. I believe that he is diligently concerned with all of humanity, because we are all brothers and sons of God. I believe in his magisterium, which is in perfect harmony with the faith and morals of the Church. I believe that his personal opinions reflect the evangelical attitude of the believers in Christ. I reject all offenses, aspersions, and insults towards his person. As for those who reject his authority, I affirm that they are in ecclesiastical error as much as in error of communion.
We ask all of this of Thee, O Lord, through Jesus Christ Our Lord.
 
No, there is no way I would get behind that. It is a fine statement of support until the last two sentences:

“As for those who reject his authority…” — There is no need for me to judge and condemn Pope Francis’ doubters, and I believe it is wrong to do so.

“We ask all this of Thee, O Lord…” — None of this creed is a petition, so this ending is pious-sounding nonsense.

Don’t misunderstand me. I think Pope Francis is a great pope. It’s fine to speak in support of Pope Francis, as I often do. I just think that this creed is unnecessary, poorly composed, and in those two ways erroneous.
 
Last edited:
The teaching of the Church is that the baptized are brothers and sisters, adopted sons and daughters of God. I don’t know how anyone gets by with lumping in all the unbaptized as if they are equal to Christians.
 
Yes, though he could say that all humanity are created in the image and likeness of God, and loved by God.
 
Last edited:
In which setting did the priest use this? I’m intrigued by the use of the word “creed” – it can’t very well be interpreted as a profession of Christian faith when most of the fundamental dogmas are not even mentioned in it.

I wouldn’t get behind it, for the same reasons as @Beryllos. Also, I can’t see what possible place for this would be appropriate in a liturgical setting, although I could imagine the text being reworked and reworded as an intercession prayer for the Pope and the Church.
 
If this was recited during Mass, then there is an uncomfortable element of religious coercion to it. If the pastor wants to begin a Pope Francis fan club, then there still is the issue of dividing the parish (my goodness, I never thought I would say something like that)

Also, this oath of fealty* is Francis-specific and will need to be rewritten for every pontificate. That is not a good precedent.
  • this is neither a prayer, nor a creed.
 
I don’t have a problem with Pope Francis being Pope. Most stuff he says and does is fine with me. Sometimes he says or does stuff I find irksome, vague or unnecessary, but I don’t think that un-Popes him. I;'m also fully capable of figuring out when he’s speaking ex cathedra and when he’s giving a personal opinion that might further be twisted by whoever is publicly presenting it.

However, I’m not going to start reciting “I believe…” statements written by priests. It sounds too much like an extension of the Creed, which no priest or bishop has the right to just sit down and write and tell me to say. Nor am I going to make public statements judging others, as Beryllos said.

This priest’s bishop should have a word with him, especially regarding the last line of the prayer regarding “ecclesiastical error”. Stuff like this is why I would expect priests writing prayers to get a Nihil Obstat/ Imprimatur for them before promulgating them to the faithful.
 
Last edited:
He called it a creed and it was read from the pulpit during Mass. He did NOT substitute it for the Creed in the Mass, which was said as usual at the correct point in the Mass. There was no liturgical abuse, in case that’s what you were wondering.
 
Beryllos said:
“We ask all this of Thee, O Lord…” — None of this creed is a petition, so this ending is pious-sounding nonsense.
Click to expand...
Exactly. A careless mistake by the priest who thought he was being very clever.

As for the “creed” itself, it’s clearly not a good idea. I’d say it might just possibly be acceptable, to the extent that it could be said of every pope, without exception. In other words, of the papacy as an institution, not of this or that pope as an individual. But I don’t think that was the author’s intention. And even so, it’s still not a good creed.
 
Last edited:
First you say he “invited parishioners to pray along” and now you say he “read it from the pulpit during Mass”. If he read it as part of his homily then I do not see a problem. If he distributed copies to be recited by the assembly, then that’s another thing.
 
Maximian said:
He called it a creed and it was read from the pulpit during Mass. He did NOT substitute it for the Creed in the Mass, which was said as usual at the correct point in the Mass. There was no liturgical abuse, in case that’s what you were wondering.
Click to expand...
It seems to border on liturgical abuse. There already is a Creed for Mass. Adding a makeshift creed is a distraction or competition from the real one.

What if he does a makeshift for the other parts of the Mass? Is it ok to add a makeshift Eucharistic Prayer, as long as he also includes a prescribed one? Is it ok to take a “gospel” reading from the Gospel of Thomas, as long as he also does the assigned one from Luke?

Give them an inch…
 
Last edited:
Maximian said:
There was no liturgical abuse, in case that’s what you were wondering.
Click to expand...
Inviting the parish to pray along in a prayer that may very well be a falsehood?

The last couple of lines there are extremely problematic.

You sure it isn’t abuse?
 
(Sigh) from the pulpit, he invited his parishioners to pray along with him as he read it.
 
I share your concern which is why I hedged with “liturgical abuse”
 
Maximian said:
I believe in his magisterium, which is in perfect harmony with the faith and morals of the Church. I believe that his personal opinions reflect the evangelical attitude of the believers in Christ.
Click to expand...
As the OP, this is the passage I have a problem with. Although it is sometimes done to refer to a particular Pope’s magisterium it is unusual and in my view a bad habit, as there is only one magisterium. Until he clarifies those dubia, it’s not possible for anyone to say his pronouncements are in “perfect harmony”. Maybe they are, maybe not. He hasn’t told us.

And how am I supposed to know what his personal opinions on everything are? Or what indeed is the evangelical attitude of the bieves in Christ?
 
RhodesianSon said:
Yeah, I’d have no problem reciting that.
Click to expand...
It’s one thing to have no problem (for yourself) reciting it. But it’s another thing to insert something into the Mass.

Especially if it is advertised as a “Creed” when there already is a Creed there.

I happen to agree with my posts on CAF. Likely there are many folks from CAF who recite them at home, perhaps in a chant. As they should.

But even I would object if one of my better posts was dressed up something like one of the parts of the Mass, and used alongside that genuine Liturgical feature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top