Did Pope Benedict commit litugrical abuse with the Eastern Orthodox?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic4Jesus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic4Jesus

Guest
I saw a video created by a Sedevacantist that supposedly shows of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI (this took place about 3 years ago I think) celebrating Mass according to the Eastern Orthodox rite with an Orthodox Metropolitan in Greek and they were supposedly saying the Nicene Creed without the Filioque clause (because the Orthodox do not believe in the filioque). Now I don’t know if that’s what really went on for sure because I don’t know Greek, but the title of the video was “Benedict XVI Chants Nicece Creed in Greek with Metrolpolitan without the Flioque Clause.” Does anybody know about this, and if he truly did that, was it sinful or against the Church in any way, shape or form?
 
Catholic4Jesus said:
I saw a video created by a Sedevacantist that supposedly shows of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI (this took place about 3 years ago I think) celebrating Mass according to the Eastern Orthodox rite with an Orthodox Metropolitan in Greek and they were supposedly saying the Nicene Creed without the Filioque clause (because the Orthodox do not believe in the filioque). Now I don’t know if that’s what really went on for sure because I don’t know Greek, but the title of the video was “Benedict XVI Chants Nicece Creed in Greek with Metrolpolitan without the Flioque Clause.” Does anybody know about this, and if he truly did that, was it sinful or against the Church in any way, shape or form?
Click to expand...
it’s a heresy to say the Filioque clause in Greek, which is why it was said without it. It has to do with the way the verb means in either Greek or Latin.

I seriously doubt that any Pope has ever concelebrated a Divine Liturgy with an Orthodox Patriarch or Metropolitan. The fact that this is coming from a sede is cause for concern.
 
I believe that the Filioque is always left out when the Creed is said in Greek. Correct me if I’m wrong.
 
First of all, the pope would not have concelebrated Divine Liturgy with the Orthodox because that would imply communion. I believe they have prayed hours together, although I am open to correction on that one.

Second of all, the filioque was not even adopted by Rome until the 11th century, and earlier popes fought against the addition of the filioque, so no by not including the filioque in any language would not constitute sin. Remember, it was not in the original version of the Creed, so obviously it is not ‘unorthodox’ to not include it.

Third of all, like others have noted, the filioque is never included in Greek because it would be heresy in Greek, which is one of the reasons that the Orthodox rejected it in the first place (not the only reason)

Fourth of all, the Eastern Catholics do not include the filioque no matter what language they are praying in (English, Arabic, Ukrainian, ect), so again, it is not heresy to not include it.

Fifth, I don’t really recommend watching sede videos for accurate information about anything really, but especially this sort of stuff.
 
Both Popes Benedict XVI and John Paul II celebrated mass with the PATRIARCH of Constantinople present at the altar during the Liturgy of the Word…the creed was said in Greek WITHOUT the filioque. All popes have ALWAYS used the creed WITHOUT the filioque when reciting it in Greek. It is my understanding that the creed is recited in Greek at least once a year by the pope.

After the Liturgy of the Word the Patriarch left the altar and followed mass from a throne set off to the side. The Pope and Patriarch also exchanged the kiss of peace during these masses.
 
Angel_Gabriel said:
it’s a heresy to say the Filioque clause in Greek, which is why it was said without it. It has to do with the way the verb means in either Greek or Latin.

I seriously doubt that any Pope has ever concelebrated a Divine Liturgy with an Orthodox Patriarch or Metropolitan. The fact that this is coming from a sede is cause for concern.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it could’ve just been a simply Nicene Creed prayer done outside of mass.
 
PietroPaolo said:
I believe that the Filioque is always left out when the Creed is said in Greek. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Click to expand...
This is correct. From what I understand, there is no concise way to say “and from the son” in Greek that doesn’t cause doctrinal issues, so it was omitted even in Greek Catholic liturgies.

I’m not sure, but it may have been initially included, but removed after ecumenical discussions with the orthodox revealed the issue.
 
UncleBill said:
Both Popes Benedict XVI and John Paul II celebrated mass with the PATRIARCH of Constantinople present at the altar during the Liturgy of the Word…the creed was said in Greek WITHOUT the filioque. All popes have ALWAYS used the creed WITHOUT the filioque when reciting it in Greek. It is my understanding that the creed is recited in Greek at least once a year by the pope.

After the Liturgy of the Word the Patriarch left the altar and followed mass from a throne set off to the side. The Pope and Patriarch also exchanged the kiss of peace during these masses.
Click to expand...
Well that wasn’t explained in the video. That makes a lot more sense to me now. It’s interesting how misinformed Sedevacantists can be, sadly I was misinformed too but I am definately not a Sede. 😉
 
Catholic4Jesus said:
Perhaps it could’ve just been a simply Nicene Creed prayer done outside of mass.
Click to expand...
Whether it’s done in the context of a Mass or Divine Liturgy or otherwise isn’t the point…
to say the Creed in Greek with the filoque clause in it is heresy. It goes back to the what the verb proceed means in Greek and in Latin.
 
Angel_Gabriel said:
Whether it’s done in the context of a Mass or Divine Liturgy or otherwise isn’t the point…
to say the Creed in Greek with the filoque clause in it is heresy. It goes back to the what the verb proceed means in Greek and in Latin.
Click to expand...
People keep saying that. Can someone explain why it becomes heretical? I know a little bit of latin but no Greek.
 
runningdude said:
This is correct. From what I understand, -]there is no concise way to say “and from the son” in Greek that doesn’t cause doctrinal issues, so it was omitted even in Greek Catholic liturgies/-].

I’m not sure, but it may have been initially included, but removed after ecumenical discussions with the orthodox revealed the issue.
Click to expand...
Based on the link provided by Angel Gabriel, I revise my statement. It seems to be more of an issue that the Greek and Latin creeds say different things about the same faith. The Creed in Greek says that the Holy Spirit originates and is consubstantial with the father.

The Creed in Latin says merely that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are conconsubstatial, without explicitly defining the Father the as the ultimate origin of both.

It seems to be a divergent translation. The Filoque was added to address the denial of the divinity of Christ (Arianism) in the west. The Greek version was not revised accordingly, because Arianism was either not an issue in the East, or because the churches were not in communion at the time and thus no jurisdiction to change it.
 
runningdude said:
Based on the link provided by Angel Gabriel, I revise my statement. It seems to be more of an issue that the Greek and Latin creeds say different things about the same faith. The Creed in Greek says that the Holy Spirit originates and is consubstantial with the father.

The Creed in Latin says merely that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are conconsubstatial, without explicitly defining the Father the as the ultimate origin of both.

It seems to be a divergent translation. The Filoque was added to address the denial of the divinity of Christ (Arianism) in the west. The Greek version was not revised accordingly, because Arianism was either not an issue in the East, or because the churches were not in communion at the time and thus no jurisdiction to change it.
Click to expand...
The East dealt with Arianism, early on, the reason for the First Council of Nicea, where St. Nicholas promptly dealt with Arius himself, as did St. Anthanasius. The filioque wasn’t a problem, until Charlemagne started forcing its use in the Roman liturgies. In one of the cathedrals in Rome, the creed is on a plaque with Greek and Latin translations side by side, without the filioque.
 
Sedevacantists don’t seem to know much about the other 22 rites of the Church. :rolleyes:
 
Lester_S said:
In one of the cathedrals in Rome, the creed is on a plaque with Greek and Latin translations side by side, without the filioque.
Click to expand...
True, though this had as much to do with Pope St. Leo III’s power with Charlemagne as it did with the creed. Leo believed fully in the theology represented by the filioque, as had virtually all Latins for several centuries before him.
 
theistgal said:
Sedevacantists don’t seem to know much about the other 22 rites of the Church. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
And they don`t even seem to know as much as they think they do about the Latin Church, I will echo the sentiments about them that has been said by other posters; stay away from them.
 
Both Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI have sat in choir during Orthodox Divine Liturgies, and the Patriarch of Byzantium has sat in Choir during Roman Masses.

It’s a non-issue, except to the ignorant or prejudiced.

Sedevaticanists are usually one or the other, and often both; at the very least, they are predisposed to overreacting.

Properly, if allowed to do so, ALL Catholic clergy are supposed to vest in choir for Orthodox services when they are present. Likewise, Orthodox clergy are always supposed to be welcomed to vest in choir for Catholic services, as they choose. You’ll see it in videos of the Ruthenian bishop’s funerals… There are Orthodox bishops present.

As to saying the Creed without the filioque - it’s not permitted even in the latin rite in greek, because the greek uses ekporousis, which means flowing from its origin. It would be heretical in Greek.

Likewise, not all Catholic Churches use it in English - The Ukrainian and Ruthenian don’t. I don’t think the Melkites do. I know the Russians don’t.
 
Tomdstone said:
Is it a heresy to say the filioque in English, if the Mass is said in Greece for the English speaking living there?
Click to expand...
Not if the Mass is of the Roman Rite, as the translation is technically based upon the Latin, which does not admit the heresy. However, I would expect that they might omit it in practice. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top