Nicene Creed omission at Mass

[EnglishTeacher]

I’ve noticed that, when leading the Nicene Creed, one of the priests at my parish always omits the word “men” in the line “For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven.” Is he supposed to be omitting that word? It seems to me like an unnecessary effort to be politically correct. “Men” as used there simply means “mankind” – i.e., human beings.

 

[Corki]

No, he should not be ommitting or changing any words in the prayers of Mass. The few exceptions to this rule are clearly indicated in the Missal (ie, sometimes “bretheren” can be replaced with “brothers and sisters”) but there is no such exception for the Creed.

 

[peresieh]

The Nicene-Constantinople Creed has various wording depending on the Catholic Church where it is prayed… For example, In the Byzantine Catholic Churches the filioque (and the son) is not said. In the Ruthenian Catholic Church the word “men” is also omitted. The Byzantine Churches also recite this Creed at daily liturgies; the Roman Catholics do not.

 

[Theophorus]

The Nicene-Constantinople Creed has various wording depending on the Catholic Church where it is prayed… For example, In the Byzantine Catholic Churches the filioque (and the son) is not said. In the Ruthenian Catholic Church the word “men” is also omitted. The Byzantine Churches also recite this Creed at daily liturgies; the Roman Catholics do not.

Fair enough, but in the Latin rite of the Catholic Church the English translation of the text reads:

“For us men and for our salvation He came down from heaven”

The priest should use the text the Church has provided and not go messing with the words.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

The Nicene-Constantinople Creed has various wording depending on the Catholic Church where it is prayed… For example, In the Byzantine Catholic Churches the filioque (and the son) is not said. In the Ruthenian Catholic Church the word “men” is also omitted. The Byzantine Churches also recite this Creed at daily liturgies; the Roman Catholics do not.

That could be, but at any rate, my parish isn’t Byzantine or Ruthenian or anything fancy like that. It’s just a regular Latin Rite church.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

No, he should not be ommitting or changing any words in the prayers of Mass. The few exceptions to this rule are clearly indicated in the Missal (ie, sometimes “bretheren” can be replaced with “brothers and sisters”) but there is no such exception for the Creed.

That is what I wondered about; thank you.

 

[Cristiano]

ἀνθρώπους (antropous), hómines, mankind, men it is always the same thing and it should not be skipped. I can see why the filioque is skipped in some liturgies but the elimination of “men” should not happen in any liturgy because it was part of the original version.

 

[John_Lilburne]

“[59.] The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.”
2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The omission of the Filioque is approved by the Pope. The omission of “men” is not. These are two different issues. The Filioque was determined not to be appropriate in Greek, so all Churches that derived from the Greek Tradition would omit the Filioque. The “men” is a modernist idea that says that line is sexist. It is not.

 

[PrayHarder]

That drives me crazy when people, especially the priest, leaves out “men.” While I would like to think they have some theological reason behind it, I think they are just trying to be politically correct.

What concerns me is if they take a little license with the Nicene Creed, what’s going to happen when the new missal comes into play? If priests start making little tweaks than it’s going to go against the whole purpose of trying to get back to the original text.

 

[laszlo]

I’ve noticed that, when leading the Nicene Creed, one of the priests at my parish always omits the word “men” in the line “For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven.” Is he supposed to be omitting that word? It seems to me like an unnecessary effort to be politically correct. “Men” as used there simply means “mankind” – i.e., human beings.

The Greek ‘anthropos’ or Latin ‘homo’ means the same thing as human being, always individual. The ‘mankind’ what some priests are using in the Creed means the human community, which is more than the sum of individuals.

Christ did not saved the mankind, he saved only the individuals. Virtually any individuals, but de facto there are ones who are not saved. The mankind is still subject to the original sin: mortal, inclining to toward the evil and so on.

To leave out the men and saying only ‘for us’ is theologically correct. However it is sin to make any intentional change in the public prayers, disobedience.

 

[ProVobis]

That drives me crazy when people, especially the priest, leaves out “men.” While I would like to think they have some theological reason behind it, I think they are just trying to be politically correct.

Exactly. Some call it a translation failure. The same thing happened when the word “men” was taken out of the very words of consecration, “for you and for all men.” However, some were still given the option to use the “men.”

 

[Cristiano]

The Greek ‘anthropos’ or Latin ‘homo’ means the same thing as human being, always individual. The ‘mankind’ what some priests are using in the Creed means the human community, which is more than the sum of individuals.

Christ did not saved the mankind, he saved only the individuals. Virtually any individuals, but de facto there are ones who are not saved. The mankind is still subject to the original sin: mortal, inclining to toward the evil and so on.

To leave out the men and saying only ‘for us’ is theologically correct. However it is sin to make any intentional change in the public prayers, disobedience.

How can you say that for “us” is theologically correct? Who is “us”?

Jesus died for mankind because mankind is the ensemble of all human beings. The economy of salvation is not simply at an individual level even if it encompasses individuals. However the fruit of his sacrifice will be limited to many.