Changing Words in Liturgy of Eucharist

[SouthernSister]

Please help me understand something?

About two months ago, my priest started changing the words during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. It happens now always at the time right before He consumes the Consecrated Body of Jesus. Instead of saying “This is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, happy are those who are called to His Supper,” he says: “This is God’s Lamb, crushed for our sins, poured out for our salvation; happy are we who are called to the Banquet Feast of Heaven.”

He’s also tried this variation: “This is God’s Lamb, broken and wounded for us; happy are we who are called to the Banquet Feast of Heaven.” Unfortunately, our Bishop does something similar, as do several other priests in our Diocese.

Today, though, he combined two Eucharistic prayers (I think, it was very hard to come home and try to reconstruct what he did, as I am not a Liturgy scholar) – he said two sentences from Eucharistic Prayer #1, skipped the whole next section, then picked up in the middle of Eucharistic Prayer #2. Is this allowed? I have become very distracted during Mass because I never know what he’s going to say and he changes it from week to week.

I would appreciate your advice. I honestly am not sure if he called down the Holy Spirit today…

SouthernSister

 

[kleary]

Absolutely none of that is allowed. The priest MUST read from a single Eucharistic prayer with no variations of any kind.

Prior to 1969 there was only ONE prayer the priest used and in the prayer in the Missal there were things that directed him on every action at the altar.

That is one reason why I now attend an Indult Mass in my Diocese. No more priests adding their own personal touches to the Mass that create confusion among us.
Ken

 

[SouthernSister]

kleary:

Absolutely none of that is allowed. The priest MUST read from a single Eucharistic prayer with no variations of any kind.

Prior to 1969 there was only ONE prayer the priest used and in the prayer in the Missal there were things that directed him on every action at the altar.

That is one reason why I now attend an Indult Mass in my Diocese. No more priests adding their own personal touches to the Mass that create confusion among us.
Ken

Okay – giving him the benefit of the doubt, it’s possible that he started with one Eucharistic Prayer, lost his place, and picked up with his most comfortable one! (ok, I may be stretching it here but am trying to extend grace and charity)

But during the Communion Rite, is he allowed to change this part?

Communion:

Priest: This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper.
All: Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.

Today was the first time he’s ever changed the Eucharistic prayer but he’s been changing these words during the Communion Rite for about six months.

SouthernSister

 

[Fidei_Defensor]

SouthernSister:

Okay – giving him the benefit of the doubt, it’s possible that he started with one Eucharistic Prayer, lost his place, and picked up with his most comfortable one! (ok, I may be stretching it here but am trying to extend grace and charity)

But during the Communion Rite, is he allowed to change this part?

Communion:

Priest: This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper.
All: Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.

Today was the first time he’s ever changed the Eucharistic prayer but he’s been changing these words during the Communion Rite for about six months.

SouthernSister

Those words are in the Official Order of Mass as written in the Sacramentary and approved by the Holy See. Nobody can change, modify, or alter it.

 

[John_Lilburne]

The priest should use the approved translation, which is
“This is the Lamb of God
who takes away the sins of the world.
Happy are those who are called to his supper.”

I have seen many priests change this wording. I think their incorrect belief that they may change the words could be from the 1975 General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM), n. 11:

“It is also up to the priest in the exercise of his office of presiding over the assembly to pronounce the instructions and words of introduction and conclusion that are provided in the rites themselves. By their very nature these introductions do not need to be expressed verbatim in the form in which they are given in the Missal; at least in certain cases it will be advisable to adapt them somewhat to the concrete situation of the community.”

This has a footnote 20: “See Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship (SCDW), Circular letter on the eucharistic prayers, 27 April 1973, no. 14.”

This letter expands on what is meant by an “introduction”.

“14. Among elements favoring a fuller adaptation that are within the power of individual celebrants may be mentioned the introductions, the homily, and the general intercessions.
First, the introductions. They are ways of leading the faithful to a more thorough grasp of the meaning of the sacred rites or certain of their parts and to an inner participation in them. Particularly important are the introductions that the General Instruction assigns to be prepared and spoken by the priest: the comments introducing the faithful to the day’s Mass before the celebration, to the liturgy of the word before the readings, and to the eucharistic prayer before the preface; the comments concluding the whole rite before the dismissal. Prominence should be given to those introductions that the Order of Mass provides for certain rites, for example, the introductions to the penitential rite and the Lord’s Prayer. By their very nature such introductions do not require that they be given verbatim in the form they have in the Missal; consequently it may well be helpful, at least in certain cases, to adapt them to the actual situation of the community. But the way any of these introductions is presented must respect the character proper to each and not turn into a sermon or homily. There must be a concern for brevity and the avoidance of a wordiness that would bore the participants.”

(From Documents on the Liturgy, Liturgical Press, 1982, ISBN 0-8146-1281-4, pages 627-628).

Basically the Vatican said to priests: “Feel free to make up the way you get people to begin the Our Father.” Priests felt if they could change that, they could also change the way they got people to say other prayers.

In the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal this has been changed.

The 1975 GIRM n. 11 has been replaced with 2002 GIRM n. 31. Now there is no footnote to the letter above. It has:

“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.”

So the permission to change the “introduction and conclusion” has been removed. Only where the rubrics indicate does the priest have permission to change the texts. The rubrics in the 2002 Roman Missal’s Order of Mass do not give the option to change this wording.

Of course, changing the Eucharistic Prayer is also wrong.

 

[peary]

Please help me understand something?

About two months ago, my priest started changing the words during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. It happens now always at the time right before He consumes the Consecrated Body of Jesus. Instead of saying “This is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, happy are those who are called to His Supper,” he says: “This is God’s Lamb, crushed for our sins, poured out for our salvation; happy are we who are called to the Banquet Feast of Heaven.”

He’s also tried this variation: “This is God’s Lamb, broken and wounded for us; happy are we who are called to the Banquet Feast of Heaven.” Unfortunately, our Bishop does something similar, as do several other priests in our Diocese.

Today, though, he combined two Eucharistic prayers (I think, it was very hard to come home and try to reconstruct what he did, as I am not a Liturgy scholar) – he said two sentences from Eucharistic Prayer #1, skipped the whole next section, then picked up in the middle of Eucharistic Prayer #2. Is this allowed? I have become very distracted during Mass because I never know what he’s going to say and he changes it from week to week.

I would appreciate your advice. I honestly am not sure if he called down the Holy Spirit today…

SouthernSister

Does he know what he is doing? LOL The poor soul sounds confused! As long as he didn’t change the exact words during the Consecration, it is a valid Eucharist. Of course, he shouldn’t be changing any of the rubrics or language. He sounds bored.

 

[BobP123]

Question: How much deviation from approved texts would you allow before you consider it invalid? A lot have problems with the existing approved vernaculars.