Sign of the cross at the end of the creed

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

MockSock

Guest
Why does one sign oneself at the end of the creed?

I’ve found myself doing it in OF Mass (out of habit, not to make a point). But why is it done in the EF? Never thought about it before.

Also, why was it abolished? Did they think it was superstitious nonsense? - that’s usually the reason.
 
I shouldn’t have asked the second part of the question about why it was removed (thanks, a better word than abolished).

What I was really wondering was why it was done in the first place.
 
MockSock said:
I shouldn’t have asked the second part of the question about why it was removed (thanks, a better word than abolished).

What I was really wondering was why it was done in the first place.
Click to expand...
I have come across another thread on CAF asking your question .
40.png
Do you make the sign of the cross at the end of Gloria and Credo? Traditional Catholicism
That was my understanding of the OP question. Still, I don’t know why anyone would think the gesture is to be taken up by the congregation. Might as well stand there with orans hands or go up and kiss the altar if you’re going to imitate. Why the sarcasm from you, Mark? Weren’t you one of those who stressed the need for more participation in the EF Mass?
confused
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
As far as I know it was never done in the Baker or Portland dioceses. At least not by the people, the sisters, or the servers. I never saw it done by the priests or bishops either.

But I was only paying attention from 1960 on.
 
Rob2 said:
I have come across another thread on CAF asking your question .

45584d4d51f32b616d0918333bdd8a40a1bbd8fe.png
Do you make the sign of the cross at the end of Gloria and Credo? Traditional Catholicism
That was my understanding of the OP question.
Still, I don’t know why anyone would think the gesture is to be taken up by the congregation. Might as well stand there with orans hands or go up and kiss the altar if you’re going to imitate.
Click to expand...
Thanks for those. I really should remember to search things before asking questions 😀

The thread had conflicting responses (as you would expect) but the general consensus seemed to be that, although it isn’t strictly rubrical, it is not prohibited and it is an ancient and private devotion.

The link you shared, although very helpful, was (I thought) quite irrelevant to my question. I thought you must have misunderstood me or something. But I was amazed to see the instruction: ‘Make the sign of the Cross at the conclusion of the Creed at the words “I believe in the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen."’ in an OF manual.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
MockSock said:
But why is it done in the EF?
Click to expand...
These are all the beliefs we subscribed to, whether ourselves or our godparents at baptism. The Sign of the Cross should remind us of the promises we made, ergo, the Sign of the Cross is made during the Creed.
 
I’ve looked at the missal I got in 1957 and it says that the priest makes the sign of the cross at the concluding words of the Gloria , but says nothing about the creed . Very confusing .
 
Growing up, Father always had everyone doing the Sign of the Cross after the homily, so I reflect and pray silently and still do that. I’ve never heard of having it at the Gloria or Creed before.
 
The St Andrew Daily Missal indicates the Sign of the Cross at the end of the Gloria and Credo. IMG_20180814_110534|375x500 (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
What year was that published @Symphorian?

I still wonder why it is done. Perhaps we’ll never know. @Fauken’s answer may well have been correct, but it did sound like a bit of a guess. (No offense intended @Fauken.)
 
I can’t find an actual publication date but it has an Imprimatur date of July 1954.

(I’m Anglican and our first Book of Common Prayer (1549) says that the use of such pious gestures is down to individual choice…we may adopt them or omit them as we see fit. There are a number of places in the in the Mass and Daily Office where such pious gestures could be used.)

For me, the Sign of the Cross is a short Creed in action…it represents our belief in the Crucified Christ and our trust in His Passion and also declares our faith in the Holy Trinity.
 
MockSock said:
Did they think it was superstitious nonsense? - that’s usually the reason
Click to expand...
I am not sure exactly what you mean by this, or why that would be a reason. I think I can at least suggest an alternative explanation that points in the opposite direction, but it is conjecture.

The sign of the cross is a potent symbol. An early verbal expression is at the end of St Matthew’s gospel: “Baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

That expression became the base for the creed. Belief in the Father, and in the Son, and in he Holy Spirit is elaborated in successive parts of the creed. At the same time, the part about the Son incorporated the history of Jesus with a descent/ascent model: “came down… buried… rose… ascended…” This portrait of Jesus coming from the father is embedded in the vertical gesture of the sign of the cross, and culminates in an expansion through the Holy Spirit with the horizontal gesture.

The Creed is built on the sign of the Cross, or the sign of the Cross comes out of the creed. I do not which. But the teo are linked through their association with the words of Baptism.

The power of the symbol led to its adoption in many places as a sign of beginning or ending, as a sign of blessing, etc. In the ‘60s, the Council asked “The rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity; they should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions.” The many repetitions of the cross had diluted the meaning of the symbol and alienated it from its origin in baptism. Most of the repetitions were eliminated, other than the beginning and the end.

IMO, the connection between the Cross and the creed is different from the other uses. Perhaps it will find its way into the rubrics as a sign of our baptism into the faith in the creed. Setting aside a repititious use is a step toward restoring the power of the symbol.
 
The sign of the cross is indicated in Divine Worship: The Missal (Ordinariate Use) at the end of the Gloria and the Creed. The end of the Gloria contains a Trinitarian statement and so is very much like making the sign of the cross at ‘In the name of the Father…etc.’
At the end of the Creed I was told that we make the sign of the cross at ‘the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come’ as it is through the cross that we have been redeemed and so brought to eternal life.
 
I have heard it explained as AngelusDomini says above. It is not indicated in the OF mass, but neither is a cross at receiving holy communion either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top