Apostles Creed

Yesterday I went to my first Mass in over a year. Whenever going back it is like I never quit going, I remember everything. I found it interesting and wonder why we did not pray the Apostles Creed during the Mass as I remember having done every time. Is this something new that is omitted from the Mass?

Did you pray the Nicean Creed or was there a Baptism or Confirmation or other use of the Baptismal vows stated by the people?

No, no Baptism, no Confirmation…it was simply omitted. This church, which is a Roman Catholic Church, also does not have any kneelers…I normally don’t go there when I do attend Mass but had to yesterday as they were the only Church near me with an evening Sunday Mass.

Well, if there was no reafirmation of vows and no Nicean creed, I am at a loss.

No kneelers is also strange to me.

That is why I don’t normally go to this churches Mass when I do go…it to me (and I am trying not to be judgemental) seems to lack the holiness that other Catholic Churches have…it lacks the solumnness you find in many Catholic churches. I was just wondering why that creed was omitted.

Again, I have no idea. the Nicean Creed is the standard for mass, although the Apostles is used for Childrens masses. The only time I know that it is omitted is when there is the re-profession of Batismal Vows.

Just remember that the important part is that Christ was present. Yes, the individual parts of the Mass are important, but if they are not there and it is out of your control, do not let it bother you. You did your part.


You’ve done you part if you’ve asked the priest why he was omitting it, and further informed the local bishop of this.

I don’t know what the GIRM has to say about this, but the answer has to be there, don’t you think? I suspect that Ralph has addressed all of the most logical possibilities, he seems to have a handle on it.

But frankly, the Latin church in Rome itself went for 1000 years without a Creed recited in the Mass, it was not considered necessary for all that time. That might be a clue to what’s behind the norms.

The practice of reciting the Creed (which is a baptismal formula, basically) during the Liturgy came from the east and in the west was first adopted in Spain in the sixth century, I think. The practice took several hundred more years to reach Rome.

I think the Apostles Creed is lovely, and should be recited if possible. I pray it at home sometimes. The Nicean-Constantinopolitan Creed is even better for liturgy, because it ranks as the premier statement of Faith. But I suspect the priest knows where he is allowed to cut and why, I believe he is well informed as to the norms and probably did nothing amiss. I think we need to put more trust in the priests of Holy Mother Church, wouldn’t you agree?

I wonder why this thread was started in this section? :confused:

First off, the Apostles’ creed was never part of the Mass until fairly recent times. The Nicene Creed was used.

Next, the Creed is omitted on ordinary weekdays, usually.

Perhaps because the so called “Apostle’s Creed” is not Biblical, and needs to be questioned. Parts of it are heretical, and fabricated theology. I would never profess this “Creed;” much less believe it

Say again?

My reading of the GIRM, and mind you I’m a layman, is that the creed is not required for daily Mass.

It is derived from an early western baptismal formula, it is what the early Christians believed, since they were taught these things as catechumans.

*I BELIEVE in God the Father Almighty,*Maker of heaven and earth:

  • And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,Born of the Virgin Mary, Suffered under Pontius Pilate, Was crucified, dead, and buried:
    He descended into hell; * The third day he rose again from the dead
    He ascended into heaven,
    And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty**
    From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.*

I believe in the Holy Ghost*
The holy Catholick Church**
The Communion of Saints**
The Forgiveness of sins**
The Resurrection of the body,** and the Life everlasting.


**CREDO in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem caeli et terrae,**et in Iesum Christum, Filium Eius unicum, Dominum nostrum,**qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine,**passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus,**descendit ad ínferos, tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,**ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris omnipotentis,**inde venturus est iudicare vivos et mortuos.**Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,**sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem,**remissionem peccatorum,**carnis resurrectionem,vitam aeternam.


WHat parts are heretical and/or fabricated?

depends what one wants to beleive.the part of asigning creation to the Father if one is an oneness this can’t be.Christ coming to judge the living and dead all are dead depending on who you ask.the forgiveness of sins now this could be tricky for those who believe the trail of blood theroy cause there were many who these people whom beleivers in tb didn’t beleive in the forgiveness of sins after a person was baptised.but the biggest fabrication is "the one Holy Catholic church"btw i beleive every word of the apostle’s creed as truth.

…Wait, the Creed as heresy? I thought this was merely a discussion of whether the priest was allowed to omit the Creed according to the doctrines of the Catholic Church. I’m also confused as to why this was posted in the Non-Catholic Religions…oh well. ANYway…

[quote=Hesychios]I don’t know what the GIRM has to say about this, but the answer has to be there, don’t you think?

Well, let’s see for ourselves. The following excerpt was taken from the copy of the GIRM found on the USCCB.

Chapter 2, III, B:

The Profession of Faith
67. The purpose of the Symbolum or Profession of Faith, or Creed, is that the whole gathered
people may respond to the word of God proclaimed in the readings taken from Sacred Scripture
and explained in the homily and that they may also call to mind and confess the great mysteries
of the faith by reciting the rule of faith in a formula approved for liturgical use, before these
mysteries are celebrated in the Eucharist.
68. The Creed is to be sung or said by the priest together with the people on Sundays and
Solemnities. It may be said also at particular celebrations of a more solemn character.
If it is sung, it is begun by the priest or, if this is appropriate, by a cantor or by the choir. It is
sung, however, either by all together or by the people alternating with the choir.
If not sung, it is to be recited by all together or by two parts of the assembly responding one to
the other.

So according to 68, “The Creed is to be sung or said by the priest together with the people on Sundays and Solemnities.” Not “should be”, or “can be”, but “is to be”. Last I checked, priests don’t have authority to omit parts of the GIRM.

Forgive me if it sounds like I’m obsessing over the point :eek: , as you’re right, we should be able to trust our priests. But the new priest at my Mother’s parish has done this as well, so I’d like to know for sure whether the priests are behaving as to be in good standing with the holy see.

For the record, the origional post was made on a monday, so it was about a sunday mass

FIBL9 brings up an interesting point I’ve always wondered about. The phrase " God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth". I thought the teaching was that the Holy Trinity was involved in the creation. If this is wrong, please someone correct me. If it is correct, then how can we square the phrase I quoted above. This has always bothered me. Long searches of the Catholic Encyclopedia do not answer this dilemma for me. What am I missing? Thanks,Roanoker

Two points to make here:

The official statement of Faith for all the church is the Nicean-Constantinopolitan Symbol of Faith, not this Creed. This Creed was a local Creed used in part of the west which was superseded by the Creed finished at Constantinople. All over the church (especially in the east, where most Christians were) there were local Creeds like this, all inadequate when compared to the N-C formula.

The second point is that it specifically addressed issues for the Christians of the time and place. BTW, we should not delve too deeply into “who does what” when it comes to the interior workings God, all of our expressions are inadequate. (There are not three Gods, but one God.) We can easily trip ourselves up for no useful purpose.

The link I provided above (from a Protestant site) has a breakdown lower on the page which seems to make a fair exposition of what theological challenges these Christians were apparently dealing with at the time of it’s composition, and that appears to be forms of Gnosticism floating about the community.

in some theology describing the trinity some time asignment is used to help in the distinguishing the “roles” of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.but whole of the trinity created all that was created.The Father through the Son by the power of the Holy Spirit.

I am still waiting for heresy or made up doctrine.:confused:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.