In the Creed... "holy" missing?

Discussion in 'Theology and Doctrine' started by Robert Lyon, Aug 20, 2017.

  1. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    953
    Likes Received:
    593
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    Another filter, do you see a difference between capital c in Catholic and a small c?
     
  2. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I have had a response.

    Yes this is a great puzzle. As far as I know it was the belief of Cranmer and others at the time of putting the first prayer books together that the word ‘holy’ had been added at a later time and so in the interests of purity they omitted it.​

    Here is the link to the site that he has been involved with, which many of you may find interesting. http://anglicaneucharistictheology.com/Anglican_Eucharistic_Theology/Welcome.html

    The difficulty of the proposition that Cranmer thought it was not part of the original, as I see it, is that we have no evidence of this, and the practice of the Church universal, beyond our tradition seems to suggest that the word holy in reference to the Church is indeed part of the original text of the Nicene Creed. I am not entirely sure that the argument stands up particularly well in light of the inclusion of the filioque clause which is clearly not part of the original text of the Nicene Creed, though it would have been in use in English liturgy post the Norman conquest.
     
    Liturgyworks likes this.
  3. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    OHCA.jpg
     
    Aidan likes this.
  4. Robert Lyon

    Robert Lyon New Member

    Posts:
    8
    Likes Received:
    4
    Country:
    Canada
    Religion:
    ANiC

    Thanks for that, Philip.
    I really appreciate your interest in exploring this curio.
    Robert
     
  5. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I am interested in this topic and hope that some people will have more to offer. I am off on vacation for 3 weeks - Edinburgh Oxford Dublin and not likely to get any free time to pursue it.
     
  6. Robert Lyon

    Robert Lyon New Member

    Posts:
    8
    Likes Received:
    4
    Country:
    Canada
    Religion:
    ANiC
    Enjoy over 'ome!
     
  7. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    953
    Likes Received:
    593
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    This may be as far fetched as a wheelbarrow of manure fro China, but bare with me. What if Cranmer did not truly support Henry
    philip enjoy your tour of the British Isles
     
    Liturgyworks likes this.
  8. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I think that we are all aware than Cranmer had more of a mind to reform than Henry VIII. They were both clearly strong willed, and so far as they could accommodate each other, they did, but they were not a doveset couple. Cranmer was the ArchBishop of Canterbury that facilitated the Kings passage through a number of marriages. The touch and go moment was following the death of Catherine of Aragon, the Pope could easily have opened the door, and history may well have been different.
     
  9. Canon Principal

    Canon Principal New Member

    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    Christian
    Interesting thread. I just emailed Colin Buchanan who @Botolph quotes. Colin says:
    I wouldn't advise treating this question as of any interest! See F.E.Brightman, The English Rite, Vol. 1, p.civ, and his reference to John Dowden, The Workmanship of the Prayer Book pp.104-105. These references show that some sources in Cranmer's time omitted 'holy' There can be absolutely no doctrinal implication whatsoever - for Cranmer had no problem in using 'holy' in the Apostles' Creed, used twice daily in Morning and Evening Prayer!

    I'll sleep easy now.
     
    Stalwart likes this.
  10. Liturgyworks

    Liturgyworks Active Member

    Posts:
    365
    Likes Received:
    188
    Country:
    US
    Religion:
    Orthodox Christian
    You have a print copy of the Deposited Book?
     
  11. Tiffy

    Tiffy Active Member

    Posts:
    568
    Likes Received:
    228
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    Big difference.

    'c' means universal, world wide, all denominational, instituted by Christ.

    'C' means exclusive, limited to Rome and wherever Rome feels its influence should be felt, one denominational, instituted by Peter (presumably) and with a Pope temporarily in charge of it, as 'vicar of Christ', until Christ returns.

    Puzzling thing is though, the BCP (1958) uses a 'C' instead of a 'c' for Catholic & Apostolic Church in Nicene Creed and the Apostles Creed. Must have either been a printer's error or a closet Roman Catholic mole in the printers shop. Glad to see they corrected that in Common Worship though. 'c' for catholic in both Nicene and Apostles Creeds.

    I was surprised to discover the 'Holy' missing from the Nicene Creed we used to say at Communion from the old BCP, hadn't noticed that, no empty space left where it went either. It appears in the Apostles Creed in the BCP though, (along with one that omits 'and the Son', for ecumenical occasions, along with other shorter affirmations of faith), so it didn't go completely AWOL. I'm pleased to see it's back on board now in Common Worship, though probably on stoppage of leave (No 14's), for being adrift since 1662.
    :worship::cross::sadangel:
    .
     
  12. Liturgyworks

    Liturgyworks Active Member

    Posts:
    365
    Likes Received:
    188
    Country:
    US
    Religion:
    Orthodox Christian
    We should not allow the Roman church to monopolize the word Catholic. I, as an Orthodox, am not even prepared to let them monopolize Roman; I will call them Roman Catholic as a courtesy, but the Catholic Church is the visible Body of Christ including all local churches adhering to the Apostolic faith. The Eastern Orthodox Christians have a claim on the word Roman, because ethnically they historically have identified as Romans (Romiioi) and are known as Rum by the Arabs.

    Letting them call themselves Catholics also discriminates against the Assyrians, the Old Catholics and the Anglo Catholics, all of which use the word Catholic in the primary name of their church.

    So do not let the Church in Rome monopolize either the word Catholic with a capital C or Roman, because strictly speaking they are entitled to neither.
     

Share This Page