Can a priest alter the ecce agnus dei?

[JKsoren]

Dear friends,

My wife and I have a liturgical question regarding the Mass for all those in the know. During the “ecce agnus dei” prayer, just before everyone receives communion, our priest seems to alter the wording by inserting the parenthetical comment “veiled under bread and wine”. In context it sounds like “this is the Lamb of God, veiled under bread and wine…”

Is this a valid alternate rendering of the “ecce agnus dei”? That is, is he permitted to say this version of the prayer? I suspect that he is not because it sure sounds a lot like a consubstantial view of the Eucharist to me (which is technically heretical). To be clear, he does not qualify this version of the prayer with something like “under the appearance of bread and wine” but rather, simply, “…veiled under bread and wine”.

If Christ were to be “under the appearance of bread and wine” then what he is saying might be read as orthodox since this is pretty much what transubstantiation formulates: the accidents, or mere appearances remain as bread and wine but in-spite of the appearances it is no longer bread and wine but truly and fully the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ.

Without this qualification, however, what he says is much closer to Martin Luther’s view that Jesus is simultaneously present with the bread and wine in a spiritual manner insofar as the bread and wine remain bread and wine even after consecration. Thus bread and wine are a “veil” for the Lamb of God who is there, somewhere, hidden in the bread and wine. I can see why he’d want to say this and why he’d change the words as such, just as much as I can understand why all those people left Jesus after he told them that they had to eat him. But that doesn’t make it right.

Anyway, he does this version of the prayer most Sunday’s and it never sat right with me and I am just trying to get to bottom of whether or not he is justified by the authority of the Catholic Church in doing so.

Thank you for any help in the matter.

Me

 

[Little_One0307]

Hi,

GIRM - General Instruction of the Roman Missal

GIRM #366 - It is not permitted to substitue other chants for those found in the Order of Mass, such as at the AGNUS DEI. [actually named this one.]

I know that somewhere there may be a part where it says that one cannot change the words to the Mass but I could not find it on such short notice. I will try to see if I cannot locate it today.

I did not see anything in Canon Law. Perhaps someone else can find it.

So no he does not have authorization to change this.

God Bless.

 

[JM3]

GENERAL INSTRUCTION OF THE ROMAN MISSAL

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html#C._The_Liturgy_of_the_Eucharist

The Fraction

1. The priest breaks the Eucharistic Bread, assisted, if the case calls for it, by the deacon or a concelebrant. Christ’s gesture of breaking bread at the Last Supper, which gave the entire Eucharistic Action its name in apostolic times, signifies that the many faithful are made one body (1 Cor 10:17) by receiving Communion from the one Bread of Life which is Christ, who died and rose for the salvation of the world. The fraction or breaking of bread is begun after the sign of peace and is carried out with proper reverence, though it should not be unnecessarily prolonged, nor should it be accorded undue importance. This rite is reserved to the priest and the deacon.

The priest breaks the Bread and puts a piece of the host into the chalice to signify the unity of the Body and Blood of the Lord in the work of salvation, namely, of the living and glorious Body of Jesus Christ. The supplication Agnus Dei, is, as a rule, sung by the choir or cantor with the congregation responding; or it is, at least, recited aloud. This invocation accompanies the fraction and, for this reason, may be repeated as many times as necessary until the rite has reached its conclusion, the last time ending with the words dona nobis pacem (grant us peace).

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm

1404 The Church knows that the Lord comes even now in his Eucharist and that he is there in our midst. However, his presence is veiled. Therefore we celebrate the Eucharist "awaiting the blessed hope and the coming of our Savior, Jesus Christ,"246 asking "to share in your glory when every tear will be wiped away. On that day we shall see you, our God, as you are. We shall become like you and praise you for ever through Christ our Lord."247

PONTIFICAL COMMITTEE
FOR INTERNATIONAL EUCHARISTIC CONGRESSES

vatican.va/roman_curia/pont_committees/eucharist-congr/documents/rc_committ_euchar_doc_20070913_49a-testo-base_en.html

The institution of the Eucharist conceals a profound mystery that transcends our ability to understand and our categories. It is the mystery of faith par excellence. The Eucharist constantly nourishes the Church, for from the Eucharist the Church draws her life and her reason for existence. At the Last Supper, Jesus gave the gift of his sacramental presence, a “real and substantial presence”[6], even though it is veiled in the humble signs of bread and wine. He enjoined the Church to welcome in perpetuity his declaration of love and the gift of his body and his blood as an event, always new and renewed, that constantly wells up from his Eucharistic heart. Here we find the deep meaning of “memorial”, which, already in the Jewish tradition, has the sense of an objective event, not only a subjective act of remembering the past. Celebrating this memorial plunges the participants once more into the mystery of the Passover of the Lord.

 

[JM3]

Sorry, posted the wrong section of the GIRM.

Communion

1. The priest prepares himself by a prayer, said quietly, that he may fruitfully receive Christ’s Body and Blood. The faithful do the same, praying silently.

The priest next shows the faithful the Eucharistic Bread, holding it above the paten or above the chalice, and invites them to the banquet of Christ. Along with the faithful, he then makes an act of humility using the prescribed words taken from the Gospels.

Perhaps, you could ask him to explain it. While it does not follow the missal exactly, he is not exactly wrong.

 

[laszlo]

In one hand it is not licit for the priest to adlibit the mass, and to change the words of the missal, except where explicitly recommended (at the beginning of the mass and at the homily)

In other hand it is seriously forbidden for the laity to openly discuss the transgressions of the priest. Laity can complain to the pastor, to the diocese, to the Apostolic see, but under no circumstances can judge the priest on their own.

The Eucharist, Jesus body and blood under the species of bread and vine exactly means what the priest said: The Lamb of God under the veil of bread and vine. We see the bread and vine, it is our Lord.

In the good old times there were the interpreted Masses, a lector read loudly parts of the Mass and gave his comments. The lector was on his own, used his own words, and people interpreted it benevolently. All was to help to understand the Mass. People were not eager how to criticize the lector, they wanted to worship God, not their own judgment

The tragedy of our times is, that some traditionalist are seriously tempted by the Satan, and believe that they are like God, know good and evil, and appoint themselves to judges.

In the good old times to change the words of the Canon (from the Sanctus to the Our father both exclusive) was considered grave sin, the rest was so so. This second Agnus Dei was part of the communion of the people, it wasn’t even considered part of the Mass, it became organized onto the Holy Mass only in 1967.

 

[japhy]

Simply put: no, priests are not authorized to make changes to the wording of the Ecce Agnus Dei, any more than the laity are authorized to make changes to their response to it.

 

[TheMc]

Sorry, posted the wrong section of the GIRM.

Communion

1. The priest prepares himself by a prayer, said quietly, that he may fruitfully receive Christ’s Body and Blood. The faithful do the same, praying silently.

The priest next shows the faithful the Eucharistic Bread, holding it above the paten or above the chalice, and invites them to the banquet of Christ. Along with the faithful, he then makes an act of humility using the prescribed words taken from the Gospels.

Perhaps, you could ask him to explain it. While it does not follow the missal exactly, he is not exactly wrong.

Yes, he is wrong. Frankly, I could care less if it is theologically sound or not, because even if it is, it is still not to be used.

This section of the GIRM does not explain how he “invites” them, but others do, and the missal says too. The beginning of the GIRM is more of a commentary on the Mass than anything.

This is what the current missal says:
This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper.

And this is why he can’t change it:

•Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 22.3 (1963)
o Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

•Canon 846.1 (1983)
o The liturgical books approved by the competent authority are to be faithfully observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore no one on personal authority may add, remove or change anything in them.

•Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1125 (1992)
o For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the minister or the community. Even the supreme authority of the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy.

•General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 24 (2003)
o Nevertheless, the priest must remember that he is the servant of the Sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the celebration of Mass.

•Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 31, 59 (2004)
o They ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through arbitrary additions.
o 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

 

[Little_One0307]

Yes, he is wrong. Frankly, I could care less if it is theologically sound or not, because even if it is, it is still not to be used.

This section of the GIRM does not explain how he “invites” them, but others do, and the missal says too. The beginning of the GIRM is more of a commentary on the Mass than anything.

This is what the current missal says:
This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper.

And this is why he can’t change it:

•Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 22.3 (1963)
o Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

•Canon 846.1 (1983)
o The liturgical books approved by the competent authority are to be faithfully observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore no one on personal authority may add, remove or change anything in them.

•Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1125 (1992)
o For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the minister or the community. Even the supreme authority of the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy.

•General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 24 (2003)
o Nevertheless, the priest must remember that he is the servant of the Sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the celebration of Mass.

•Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 31, 59 (2004)
o They ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through arbitrary additions.
o 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

Thanks for posting those sources. They will serve to help me greatly. I was looking for them but could not find them.

God Bless.

 

[JM3]

Yes, he is wrong. Frankly, I could care less if it is theologically sound or not, because even if it is, it is still not to be used.

How do you know that the priest does not have the permission of the Bishop (who does have the authority to change it)?

Thus, I suggested that he speak with the priest

 

[TheMc]

How do you know that the priest does not have the permission of the Bishop (who does have the authority to change it)?

Thus, I suggested that he speak with the priest

How do we know he does? I don’t believe a bishop can do that, and even if he could, you would have to assume it isn’t, because I’ve never heard of that happening. Priests need to say the black, and do the red.

 

[JM3]

How do we know he does? I don’t believe a bishop can do that, and even if he could, you would have to assume it isn’t, because I’ve never heard of that happening. Priests need to say the black, and do the red.

SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

III. The Reform of the Sacred Liturgy

A) General norms

1. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.
2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.
3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

The Apostolic See, the Bishop and the ‘competent territorial bodies of bishops’ have authority to regulate the Sacred Liturgy. Then, ‘no other person’. This is what it says.

 

[JM3]

Redemptionis Sacramentum

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#Chapter I

Chapter I

THE REGULATION OF THE SACRED LITURGY

1. The Diocesan Bishop, High Priest of his Flock

[21.] It pertains to the diocesan Bishop, then, “within the limits of his competence, to set forth liturgical norms in his Diocese, by which all are bound”.[45] Still, the Bishop must take care not to allow the removal of that liberty foreseen by the norms of the liturgical books so that the celebration may be adapted in an intelligent manner to the Church building, or to the group of the faithful who are present, or to particular pastoral circumstances in such a way that the universal sacred rite is truly accommodated to human understanding.[46]

 

[japhy]

The question, then, is whether it is “within the limits of [the] competence” of the bishop to provide alternate texts to certain fixed parts of the Mass, such as the Ecce Agnus Dei.

I do not think it is.

 

[UbiCaritas]

*Can *he? Yes. He can also engage in liturgical dance while doing so, wear a fuzzy rainbow-colored stole, and think that Marty Haugen is the very last word in liturgical music.

Should he? No.

Grrrrrr muttermuttermutter

 

[laszlo]

The question, then, is whether it is “within the limits of [the] competence” of the bishop to provide alternate texts to certain fixed parts of the Mass, such as the Ecce Agnus Dei.

I do not think it is.

The Agnus Dei here is the one from the communion rite, which until recently was entirely separated from the mass, not even part of the Missal.

The bishop certainly is competent to permit interpretative masses, where the priest for catechetical reasons explains certain parts of the mass, and the mysteries associated with it.

Laity, any lay person, regardless of his education certainly is not competent to criticize their ecclesiastical superiors among each other. They have the right to complain to the authorities, but not to judge.

 

[JM3]

The question, then, is whether it is “within the limits of [the] competence” of the bishop to provide alternate texts to certain fixed parts of the Mass, such as the Ecce Agnus Dei.

I do not think it is.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html

GIRM

1. When the prayer is concluded, the priest genuflects, takes the host consecrated in the same Mass, and, holding it slightly raised above the paten or above the chalice, while facing the people, says, Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God). With the people he adds, Domine, non sum dignus (Lord, I am not worthy).

Which parts of the ‘Ecce Agnus Dei’ are fixed and which are not? The GIRM is not clear on this. Which parts of the Mass does the Bishop have authority? I don’t know, but the Bishop knows and I trust his judgement.

 

[ProVobis]

The question, then, is whether it is “within the limits of [the] competence” of the bishop to provide alternate texts to certain fixed parts of the Mass, such as the Ecce Agnus Dei.

I do not think it is.

I don’t think it is either, but I think it would be possible for the bishop to allow the Ecce Agnus Dei (or another part of the Mass) in an approved Polish or approved Hungarian if there are some of those speaking those languages there.

 

[japhy]

The Agnus Dei here is the one from the communion rite, which until recently was entirely separated from the mass, not even part of the Missal.

I’m not sure that’s relevant to the discussion. In the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, the Ecce Agnus Dei is very much part of the Mass and found in the Missal.

The bishop certainly is competent to permit interpretative masses, where the priest for catechetical reasons explains certain parts of the mass, and the mysteries associated with it.

As the GIRM and the Missal indicate, there are places where priests can give explanations, and where commentators can give catechetical guidance to the congregation.
31. It is also up to the priest, in the exercise of his office of presiding over the gathered assembly, to offer certain explanations that are foreseen in the rite itself. Where it is indicated in the rubrics, the celebrant is permitted to adapt them somewhat in order that they respond to the understanding of those participating. However, he should always take care to keep to the sense of the text given in the Missal and to express them succinctly. The presiding priest is also to direct the word of God and to impart the final blessing. In addition, he may give the faithful a very brief introduction to the Mass of the day (after the initial Greeting and before the Act of Penitence), to the Liturgy of the Word (before the readings), and to the Eucharistic Prayer (before the Preface), though never during the Eucharistic Prayer itself; he may also make concluding comments to the entire sacred action before the dismissal.
It is not indicated in the rubrics that the priest may alter the “Ecce Agnus Dei” exhortation. Nor does GIRM 31 state that the priest is permitted to make catechetical remarks during the Liturgy of the Eucharist (only “before the Preface”).

As for the commentator:
105b. The commentator, who provides the faithful, when appropriate, with brief explanations and commentaries with the purpose of introducing them to the celebration and preparing them to understand it better. The commentator’s remarks must be meticulously prepared and clear though brief. In performing this function the commentator stands in an appropriate place facing the faithful, but not at the ambo.
Remarks from a commentator are not a means of changing texts of the Mass (like the exhortation to behold the Lamb of God), but of explaining parts of the Mass so that the faithful may better understand celebrate them.

Laity, any lay person, regardless of his education certainly is not competent to criticize their ecclesiastical superiors among each other. They have the right to complain to the authorities, but not to judge.

Am I judging?

 

[japhy]

Which parts of the ‘Ecce Agnus Dei’ are fixed and which are not? The GIRM is not clear on this.

The GIRM does not say which parts of the Our Father are fixed and which are not. This is because the whole prayer of the Our Father is fixed. The Ecce Agnus Dei does not have interchangeable parts like the Eucharistic Prayers do. It does not change with the liturgical season or the feast day. It is not optional. It is the same exhortation, day after day: Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi. Beati qui ad cenam agni vocati sunt.

Which parts of the Mass does the Bishop have authority? I don’t know, but the Bishop knows and I trust his judgement.

It is still possible for bishops to exceed the bounds of their authority; after all, they are human. No matter how much we trust a bishop and his judgment, our trust does not prevent him from overstepping his competence.

The GIRM has a whole chapter (IX) titled “ADAPTATIONS WITHIN THE COMPETENCE OF BISHOPS AND BISHOPS’ CONFERENCES.”

What does the GIRM have to say about adaptations?

1. Moreover, in order that such a celebration may correspond more fully to the prescriptions and spirit of the Sacred Liturgy, and also in order to increase its pastoral effectiveness, certain accommodations and adaptations are specified in this General Instruction and in the Order of Mass.
2. These adaptations consist for the most part in the choice of certain rites or texts, that is, of the chants, readings, prayers, explanations, and gestures that may respond better to the needs, preparation, and culture of the participants and that are entrusted to the priest celebrant. Nevertheless, the priest must remember that he is the servant of the Sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the celebration of Mass.

[Note: adaptations to the *Ecce Agnus Dei are not specified in the GIRM nor the Missal, as described in GIRM 23-24.]

1. In addition, certain adaptations are indicated in the proper place in the Missal and pertain respectively to the diocesan Bishop or to the Conference of Bishops, in accord with the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (cf. below, nos. 387, 388-393).
2. As for variations and the more substantial adaptations in view of the traditions and culture of peoples and regions, to be introduced in accordance with article 40 of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy because of benefit or need, the norms set forth in the Instruction On the Roman Liturgy and Inculturation and below (nos. 395-399) are to be observed.
   Here is a specific adapation/variation that falls within the competence of the Bishop, mentioned in the GIRM: “The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.” (GIRM 43)

Here is another area:
283. …] The Diocesan Bishop may establish norms for Communion under both kinds for his own diocese, which are also to be observed in churches of religious and at celebrations with small groups. The Diocesan Bishop is also given the faculty to permit Communion under both kinds whenever it may seem appropriate to the priest to whom, as its own shepherd, a community has been entrusted, provided that the faithful have been well instructed and there is no danger of profanation of the Sacrament or of the rite’s becoming difficult because of the large number of participants or some other reason.
The Bishop may also decide where tabernacles should be located. (cf. GIRM 315)

I’ll post the contents of chapter IX of the GIRM in my next post.

 

[japhy]

What follows are excerpts pertaining to the diocesan bishop (not to the conference of bishops, which can regulate additional matters).
Chapter IX
Adaptations Within the Competence of Bishops and Bishops’ Conferences

1. …] In order, however, to enable such a celebration to correspond all the more fully to the norms and the spirit of the Sacred Liturgy, certain further adaptations are set forth in this Instruction and in the Order of Mass and entrusted to the judgment either of the Diocesan Bishop or of the Bishops’ Conferences.
2. The Diocesan Bishop, who is to be regarded as the high priest of his flock, and from whom the life in Christ of the faithful under his care in a certain sense derives and upon whom it depends, must promote, regulate, and be vigilant over the liturgical life in his diocese. It is to him that in this Instruction is entrusted the regulating of the discipline of concelebration (cf. above, nos. 202, 374) and the establishing of norms regarding the function of serving the priest at the altar (cf. above, no. 107), the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds (cf. above, no. 283), and the construction and ordering of churches (cf. above, no. 291). With him lies responsibility above all for fostering the spirit of the Sacred Liturgy in the priests, deacons, and faithful.

…]

1. Each diocese should have its own Calendar and Proper of Masses. …]
   Here is the concluding section which deals with more variations and adaptations beyond the scope of the GIRM:
2. Finally, if the participation of the faithful and their spiritual welfare requires variations and more thoroughgoing adaptations in order that the sacred celebration respond to the culture and traditions of the different peoples, then Bishops’ Conferences may propose such to the Apostolic See in accordance with article 40 of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy for introduction with the latter’s consent, especially in the case of peoples to whom the Gospel has been more recently proclaimed. The special norms given in the Instruction On the Roman Liturgy and Inculturation should be carefully observed.

Regarding procedures to be followed in this matter, the following should be followed: In the first place, a detailed preliminary proposal should be set before the Apostolic See, so that, after the necessary faculty has been granted, the detailed working out of the individual points of adaptation may proceed.

Once these proposals have been duly approved by the Apostolic See, experiments should be carried out for specified periods and at specified places. If need be, once the period of experimentation is concluded, the Bishops’ Conference shall decide upon pursuing the adaptations and shall propose a mature formulation of the matter to the Apostolic See for its decision.

1. Before, however, proceeding to new adaptations, especially those more thoroughgoing, great care should be taken to promote the proper instruction of clergy and faithful in a wise and orderly fashion, so as to take advantage of the faculties already foreseen and to implement fully the pastoral norms concerning the spirit of a celebration.
2. Furthermore, the principle shall be respected according to which each particular Church must be in accord with the universal Church not only regarding the doctrine of the faith and sacramental signs, but also as to the usages universally handed down by apostolic and unbroken tradition. These are to be maintained not only so that errors may be avoided, but also so that the faith may be passed on in its integrity, since the Church’s rule of prayer (lex orandi) corresponds to her rule of belief (lex credendi).

The Roman Rite constitutes a notable and precious part of the liturgical treasure and patrimony of the Catholic Church. Its riches are of benefit to the universal Church, so that were they to be lost, the Church would be seriously harmed.

Throughout the ages, the Roman Rite has not only preserved the liturgical usages that arose in the city of Rome but has also in a deep, organic, and harmonious way incorporated into itself certain other usages derived from the customs and culture of different peoples and of various particular Churches of both West and East, so that in this way, the Roman Rite has acquired a certain supraregional character. In our own times, on the other hand, the identity and unitary expression of this Rite is found in the typical editions of the liturgical books promulgated by authority of the Supreme Pontiff, and in those liturgical books corresponding to them approved by the Bishops’ Conferences for their territories with the recognitio of the Apostolic See.

1. The norm established by the Second Vatican Council—that in the liturgical reform there should be no innovations unless required in order to bring a genuine and certain benefit to the Church, and taking care that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing —must also be applied to efforts at the inculturation of the same Roman Rite. Inculturation, moreover, requires a necessary length of time, lest the authentic liturgical tradition suffer contamination due to haste and a lack of caution.

Finally, the purpose of pursuing inculturation is not in any way the creation of new families of rites, but aims rather at meeting the needs of a particular culture in such a way that adaptations introduced either in the Missal or in combination with other liturgical books are not at variance with the distinctive character of the Roman Rite.

1. And so, the Roman Missal, even if in different languages and with some variety of customs, must be preserved in the future as an instrument and an outstanding sign of the integrity and unity of the Roman Rite.