Different Words in the Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter sandthipe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sandthipe

Guest
we attended mass at a church while on vacation and the priest used a few subtly different phrases during the mass. He said, “so that from East to West and from North to South” - I’ve only ever heard “East to West”. Also, at the end he said, “This Celebration has ended” instead of “The Mass has ended”.

Are these differences significant? Also, how much flexibility does the celebrant have in the text of the Mass? Thanks! -Chris
 
sandthipe said:
we attended mass at a church while on vacation and the priest used a few subtly different phrases during the mass. He said, “so that from East to West and from North to South” - I’ve only ever heard “East to West”. Also, at the end he said, “This Celebration has ended” instead of “The Mass has ended”.

Are these differences significant? Also, how much flexibility does the celebrant have in the text of the Mass? Thanks! -Chris
Click to expand...
The differences you’ve described don’t seem to be particularly “significant”; the fact is, though, those words aren’t the approved text of the Mass, but some priests like to make stuff up to “personalize” the Mass. As the recent instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum from the Vatican made clear:
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.
There are some legitimate options in choosing the words of the Mass – e.g., a couple of forms for the Kyrie, four choices for the memorial acclamation (“Christ has died, Christ is risen” / “When we eat this bread and drink this cup,” etc.). Other than that, there’s not supposed to be any flexibility.
 
sandthipe said:
we attended mass at a church while on vacation and the priest used a few subtly different phrases during the mass. He said, “so that from East to West and from North to South” - I’ve only ever heard “East to West”. Also, at the end he said, “This Celebration has ended” instead of “The Mass has ended”.

Are these differences significant? Also, how much flexibility does the celebrant have in the text of the Mass? Thanks! -Chris
Click to expand...
This is always frustrating. Catholics have a right to the mass celebrated faithfully. We recently went on vacation, and the priest was changing words about every other sentence. I sure got some looks when I knelt for communion!😃
 
Catholicben said:
This is always frustrating. Catholics have a right to the mass celebrated faithfully. We recently went on vacation, and the priest was changing words about every other sentence. I sure got some looks when I knelt for communion!😃
Click to expand...
Last summer when I was on holidays I attended Mass and at Consecration when the priest spoke the words “he took the bread, broke it…” I heard ‘crack’. That’s when I realized that for the very first time I’d experienced what RS was referring to in article 55.
In some placesthere has existed an abuse by which the Priest breaks the host at the time of the consecration in the Holy Mass. This abuse is contrary to the tradition of the Church. It is reprobated and is to be corrected with haste.
Click to expand...
Guess we’re not the only diocese where RS has been totally ignored.
 
The priest has no flexibility at all with regard to changing the words of the Mass. However, if these are the only things that were changed, count your blessings.

Betsy
 
I was at Mass at another place where the Priest, instead of saying “Do this in memory of me” said “Whenever you get together like this, remember me”. This made me even more sad because the Mass was being offered for my father.
How licit was this priest’s improvisation?
 
Even though Mark Thompson quoted RS, there is a section in the document that specifically treats the EP:
[51.] Only those Eucharistic Prayers are to be used which are found in the Roman Missal or are legitimately approved by the Apostolic See, and according to the manner and the terms set forth by it. "It is not to be tolerated that some Priests take upon themselves the right to compose their own Eucharistic Prayers"129 or to change the same texts approved by the Church, or to introduce others composed by private individuals.130
Click to expand...
This is where the big danger lies. The priest needs to say the text that the Church gives him, not make edits along the way.
 
sometimes it could just be an honest mistake

because of familiarity of the words, a priest may try to recall the words from memory instead of reading off the book or at least glancing to remind him of the exact words. the problem here is their memory is not so good, they may recall a different word unintentionally and go with it

perhaps a charitable reminder to glance at their guides is in order
 
The military has specifications for everything. They are identified MIL- STD- xxx-yyy-etc

When I worked in a lab we occasionally wrote in the spec MIL-TDP-41 [Make it like the d****** print for once.} It always endeared us to the shop people.

I am occasionally tempted to put a post-it on the Sacramentary reading: DIL-TBG-41 [Do it like the blessed GRIM for once.] 😃
 
sandthipe said:
we attended mass at a church while on vacation and the priest used a few subtly different phrases during the mass. He said, “so that from East to West and from North to South” - I’ve only ever heard “East to West”.
Click to expand...
“From East to West” is, well, “correct”. It is currently at least. The confusion probably comes from the fact that the words should be “from the rising of the sun to it’s setting”, which it is in the new translation. The priest probably felt that north and south were left out or something, but the actual problem is that it was not translated very well (no, he’s not allowed to do that as pointed out above).
 
curlycool89 said:
“From East to West” is, well, “correct”. It is currently at least. The confusion probably comes from the fact that the words should be “from the rising of the sun to it’s setting”, which it is in the new translation. The priest probably felt that north and south were left out or something, but the actual problem is that it was not translated very well (no, he’s not allowed to do that as pointed out above).
Click to expand...
It’s funny, I actually think that “from age to age you gather a people to yourself so that from east to west a perfect offering may be made to your name” is one of the (very) few great lines in the present translation. It’s not even a particularly faithless, since “from the rising of the sun to it’s setting” (the forthcoming translation) carries a very strong “dawn to dusk” connotation that ab ortu solis usque ad occasum doesn’t in Latin.
 
From the rising of the sun to it’s setting carries a connotation of all times which is missing in *from East to West. *This is fulfilled in that the mass is being celebrated someplace in the world at every moment.

The trend to translate for meaning rather than literally has the fault that it gives only the meaning for the translator, and may well lose subtler meanings. If the Old Testament translators had worked that way we would have lost many of the Messianic prophecies. Fortunately they preserved the original as well as possible, even when they didn’t understand it.
 
Joe_Kelley said:
From the rising of the sun to it’s setting carries a connotation of all times which is missing in *from East to West. *This is fulfilled in that the mass is being celebrated someplace in the world at every moment.
Click to expand...
You know what, that was my exact thinking. From East to West is sort of a physical area idea (remember, engineering student ;)), whereas From the rising of the sun… is more of all time/all space. It’s like we went from 2D into 4D.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top