Favourite Traditional Prayers?

[Dempsey1919]

This is one of my favourate prayers from the Tridentine Mass. It is called the Suscipe sancte Pater:

Suscipe, sancte Pater, omnipotens aeterne Deus, hanc immaculatam hostiam, quam ego indignus famulus tuus offero tibi Deo meo vivo et vero, pro innumerabilibus peccatis, et offensionibus, et negligentiis meis, et pro omnibus circumstantibus, sed et pro omnibus fidelibus christianis vivis atque defunctis: ut mihi et illis proficiat ad salutem in vivam aeternam. Amen

Accept, O holy Father, almighty and eternal God, this unspotted host, which I, thine unworthy servant, offer to Thee, my living and true God, for mine inumerable sins, offences, and negligences, and for all here present: as also for all faithful Christians, both living and dead; that it may be of avail for salvation both to me and to them unto life everlasting. Amen

The reason I like this prayer is because I think that it perfectly explains the offering we make during the Mass. I also think that it is beautiful. This prayer is full of theological richness.

Please share your favourite prayer and explain why you like them.

 

[JuanCarlos]

I enjoy the Confiteor, the Salve Regina, Regina Caeli, and prayer to St. Michael the Archangel.

St. Alphonsus’ prayer before the Blessed Sacrament is beautiful too.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I enjoy the Confiteor, the Salve Regina, Regina Caeli, and prayer to St. Michael the Archangel.

What is it about those prayers that you like?

 

[bpbasilphx]

I’ll give two Byzantine prayers:

Hail, Virgin Theotokos, Mary full of grace, the Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, for you have borne Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of our souls.

The angel cried to the Lady full of grace: “Rejoice, O pure Virgin! Again, I say, Rejoice! Your Son has risen from his three days in the tomb. With Himself He has raised all the dead. Rejoice, O all people!” Shine, shine, O new Jerusalem; the glory of the Lord has shone on you. Rejoice, and be glad, O Zion. Be radiant, O pure Theotokos, in the Resurrection of your Son!

 

[Dempsey1919]

Hail, Virgin Theotokos, Mary full of grace, the Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, for you have borne Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of our souls.

Is this the Byzantine version of the Hail Mary? The only difference is that it contains no intercession request and the title “Mother of God” is referred to at the beginning instead of at the end.

Is this an ancient prayer? I would think the latin version of the Hail Mary and the Byzantine version were the same in the beginning, and then eventually changed over time to the versions we have today.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

This is one of my favourate prayers from the Tridentine Mass. It is called the Suscipe sancte Pater:

The reason I like this prayer is because I think that it perfectly explains the offering we make during the Mass. I also think that it is beautiful. This prayer is full of theological richness.

Please share your favourite prayer and explain why you like them.

I like the prayer itself but is this the prayer said over the bread before consecration or over the host after? I think, but am not sure, it was said before consecration. ‘Host’ means ‘victim’ and the prayer is properly prayed after the consecration. Before the consecration, the priest can ask blessing on the bread. It is only after the consecration that our sacrifice can be of avail for our salvation. I may be wrong about where this prayer is in the mass, if so please let me know.

I prefer the prayers said over the gifts in the NO as being appropriate in that they are at that point still bread and wine.

One of my favorite prayers is the Memorare because of its directness and the confidence it expresses. I also like to meditate on the beginning of John’s gospel, which was read as the ‘last gospel’ at the TLM. It expresses very clearly that Jesus existed as eternal Son of the Father before He became man.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I like the prayer itself but is this the prayer said over the bread before consecration or over the host after?

This is the Offertory verse. It is said before the Consecration. An interesting note to make is that this prayer also dates from the 8th or 9th Century. It is very ancient.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

This is the Offertory verse. It is said before the Consecration. An interesting note to make is that this prayer also dates from the 8th or 9th Century. It is very ancient.

I thought I remembered it there and as a teen I thought it seemed odd to pray it at that place in the mass. I also thought it odd that the Offertory came before the Consecration. But I suppose it was at this time that the faithful brought up their gifts to the deacon or priest?? In protestant services the offertory is when the collection is taken up. They have it even when they don’t have communion.

Do you know a rationale for having this prayer where it is?

 

[Timothysis]

I like the prayer itself but is this the prayer said over the bread before consecration or over the host after? I think, but am not sure, it was said before consecration. ‘Host’ means ‘victim’ and the prayer is properly prayed after the consecration. Before the consecration, the priest can ask blessing on the bread. It is only after the consecration that our sacrifice can be of avail for our salvation. I may be wrong about where this prayer is in the mass, if so please let me know.

I know I’m opening the Mother-of-all-Can-of-Worms, but this is one of the problems with the TLM. The host only becomes unspotted AFTER the consecration, and the remaining offerings seem to be of little avail unless the host is consecrated, which, at this point, it is not. The “Mystery of Faith” is also a problem in the TLM liturgy, because no one exactly knows what the mystery of faith means in that particular situation. If one reads the text of the TLM you’ll see that it is a hodge-podge of prayers and petitions, with no real sequence of thought. These were some of the issues that caused a call for liturgical reform for 100 years before the second Vatican council.

 

[bpbasilphx]

**Is this the Byzantine version of the Hail Mary? The only difference is that it contains no intercession request and the title “Mother of God” is referred to at the beginning instead of at the end.

Is this an ancient prayer? I would think the latin version of the Hail Mary and the Byzantine version were the same in the beginning, and then eventually changed over time to the versions we have today.
______________**

**Everything in the Byzantine Church is ancient–except for the Offices of newly glorified saints, and even these follow ancient models.

I understand that at the time of the split, the Western form of the Ave ended with the words “fruit of your womb, Jesus.” I also understand the Dominicans still say it thus among themselves.**

 

[japhy]

this is one of the problems with the TLM. The host only becomes unspotted AFTER the consecration, and the remaining offerings seem to be of little avail unless the host is consecrated, which, at this point, it is not.

Certainly, the Host is only really perfect when it has been consecrated, but at the same time, we are offering God the very best raw materials we have for this sacrifice. Furthermore, the sacrificial language before the consecration makes it clear just what will be happening, and after what model: just as Melchizadek offered bread and wine, so do we, first for them to be transubstantiated into the Body and Blood, then offered again as the pleasing sacrifice acceptable to the Father. This is an offering to God of the best we have, and then of the best He has.

The prayers are constantly directed to the end: the manifestation and offering of the Most Holy Sacrifice. To treat what will become the Body and Blood as simple bread and wine beforehand, and not as something holy (that is, set apart) would be dishonest.

The “Mystery of Faith” is also a problem in the TLM liturgy, because no one exactly knows what the mystery of faith means in that particular situation.

Someone knew what it meant in its context:
Q. What are the words of consecration?
A. “This is my body; This is the cup of my blood, of the New and eternal Testament; a mystery of faith, which shall be shed for you, and for the many, to the remission of sins.”

Q. What meaneth these words?
A. They signify according to the letter, what they effect and cause, viz. a change of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ; and in a mystery also they signify, unto us the incarnation, passion, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

If one reads the text of the TLM you’ll see that it is a hodge-podge of prayers and petitions, with no real sequence of thought.

That was Vaggagini’s argument. See this article (scroll to 2/3 of the way down for the relevant portion) by Fr. Cassian Folsom, O.S.B., about the complaints raised against the apparent haphazardness of the Roman Canon.

I don’t think the ancient liturgy is “all over the place” or a “hodge-podge”; at least, not in a detrimental way. It seems humbly human, attempting to near the divine.

 

[Conservative]

I know I’m opening the Mother-of-all-Can-of-Worms, but this is one of the problems with the TLM. The host only becomes unspotted AFTER the consecration, and the remaining offerings seem to be of little avail unless the host is consecrated, which, at this point, it is not. The “Mystery of Faith” is also a problem in the TLM liturgy, because no one exactly knows what the mystery of faith means in that particular situation. If one reads the text of the TLM you’ll see that it is a hodge-podge of prayers and petitions, with no real sequence of thought. These were some of the issues that caused a call for liturgical reform for 100 years before the second Vatican council.

Well, I’m not a priest - and I’m very tired - and I’m not checking my Missal right now. But couldn’t something be holy and unspotted before it is consecrated into the Body and Blood of Our Lord? As to the “Mystery of Faith” (“Mysterium Fidei”) sp? - I’m not sure if those words come before the Host is consecrated or the wine. But wouldn’t the Mystery of Faith be that - despite its appearances - the Mystery is it becoming Our Lord’s Body and Blood - in the form / appearance of bread and wine? It’s a mystery…Yet, we have the faith to believe it is so.

I’m sure the wine still tastes like wine to the priest once he conserates it and later sips it - yet, it is now the Blood of Our Lord shed on the Cross - if ever there was a Mystery of how that can be repeated over and over through the centuries - I don’t know what is!

 

[Dempsey1919]

Do you know a rationale for having this prayer where it is?

This is what Dom Prosper Gueranger said about this prayer in his little book “The Holy Mass:”

The Priest, on having received the Paten, and whilst offering the Host, says the Prayer: Suscipe, sancte Pater.

In order to better understand all these prayers which now follow, we must keep steadily before us the Sacrifice itself, although it is not as yet offered in all it’s august reality. As a first instance, we have in this prayer, the Host spoken of as being presented to the Eternal Father, athough our host at the moment is not yet the Divine Host Itself. And it is said that this host is without spot: immaculatam hostiam; in these words allusion is made to the victims of the Old Testament, which were obliged to be without blemish, because they were a type of Our Lord, Who was one day to appear before us as Immaculatus.

In this Prayer the thought of the Priest runs far on, from the present moment; he is thinking of the Host which will be on the Altar after the Consecration, the Host which alone is the True Victim.

Hope this answers your question. The book I just quoted is available at Baronius Press.

 

[Timothysis]

Well, I’m not a priest - and I’m very tired - and I’m not checking my Missal right now. But couldn’t something be holy and unspotted before it is consecrated into the Body and Blood of Our Lord? As to the “Mystery of Faith” (“Mysterium Fidei”) sp? - I’m not sure if those words come before the Host is consecrated or the wine. But wouldn’t the Mystery of Faith be that - despite its appearances - the Mystery is it becoming Our Lord’s Body and Blood - in the form / appearance of bread and wine? It’s a mystery…Yet, we have the faith to believe it is so.

I’m sure the wine still tastes like wine to the priest once he conserates it and later sips it - yet, it is now the Blood of Our Lord shed on the Cross - if ever there was a Mystery of how that can be repeated over and over through the centuries - I don’t know what is!

The words “Mystery of Faith” are put into Jesus’ mouth, when, in fact, no gospel records him saying such words. This is the text:

"…and gave it to His disciples, saying; Take ye all, and drink of this;

For this is the Chalice of my Blood of the new and eternal covenant; the mystery of faith, which shall be shed for you and for many unto the forgiveness of sin."

I understand what we believe it to be, but you must admit that it is confusing where it is, especially by the fact that the gospels do not record our Lord as ever saying it.

 

[Timothysis]

The prayers are constantly directed to the end: the manifestation and offering of the Most Holy Sacrifice. To treat what will become the Body and Blood as simple bread and wine beforehand, and not as something holy (that is, set apart) would be dishonest.

Do you consider it dishonest (your word, not mine) to put words into Our Lord’s mouth which he isn’t recorded as uttering? That is why the Missal of Pope Paul VI put the “Mystery of Faith” AFTER the consecration; it makes sense in speaking of the whole consecration as a mystery than just the consecration of the Precious Blood.

I don’t think the ancient liturgy is “all over the place” or a “hodge-podge”; at least, not in a detrimental way. It seems humbly human, attempting to near the divine.

Interesting your use of the word “detrimental.” Are you saying that it is in some ways deficient? Anyway, I think things tend to get a little too “wordy,” if you understand what I’m saying…not that that’s necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Timothysis]

Someone knew what it meant in its context:

Yeah, some of this stuff is just clear as a bell, such as this one:

Q. What is Heresy?
A. Is it an obstinate error in things that are of faith.

or this:

Q. WHAT is the creed?
A. It is the sum of belief.
Q. Who made it?
A. The twelve apostles.

Now correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think that anyone truly believes that the Apostles Creed was the actual work the Apostles.

 

[josephdaniel29]

With Himself He has raised all the dead.

Gives me goosebumps every time I hear it.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[japhy]

Do you consider it dishonest (your word, not mine) to put words into Our Lord’s mouth which he isn’t recorded as uttering?

The Catechism of Trent attributed the words “mystery of faith” as well as “everlasting” to Apostolic Tradition, preserved by the Church. I don’t consider it dishonest.

Interesting your use of the word “detrimental.” Are you saying that it is in some ways deficient?

Not at all; I said “I don’t think the ancient liturgy is ‘all over the place’ or a ‘hodge-podge’; at least, not in a detrimental way.” In other words, something could be “all over the place” in a detrimental way. When driving down the road, being “all over the place” is not good at all. The Mass is not “all over the place” in a bad way.

 

[japhy]

Now correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think that anyone truly believes that the Apostles Creed was the actual work the Apostles.

That’s neither here nor there, in this thread. The belief that the Apostles were the originators of the Apostles’ Creed (which isn’t necessarily ridiculous) has nothing to do with the meaning behind the gestures made right before the Gospel.

 

[JuanCarlos]

Yeah, some of this stuff is just clear as a bell, such as this one:

Q. What is Heresy?
A. Is it an obstinate error in things that are of faith.

or this:

Q. WHAT is the creed?
A. It is the sum of belief.
Q. Who made it?
A. The twelve apostles.

Now correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think that anyone truly believes that the Apostles Creed was the actual work the Apostles.

Are you saying that heresy is not the obstinate error in things that are of faith? I couldn’t think of a more textbook definition if I tried!

And given how early the Creed appeared in the Christian world I have no doubt there was some form of the creed that had its origins with the apostles, probably very much like the modern creed. It is impossible to date the origins of the creed because in the early Church it was memorized, not written.