"Keep in mind that Jesus Christ..."

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

surritter

Guest
Every once in a while our organist will use this for a Memorial Acclamation:

“Keep in mind that Jesus Christ has died for us, and is risen from the dead. He is our saving Lord; he is joy for all ages.”

You all know the tune – it’s by Lucien Deiss. But my question: Is that a legitimate Acclamation? I don’t have a copy of the GIRM handy, but I think it only allows four choices:
–Christ has died, Christ is risen…
–Lord, by your cross and resurrection…
–Dying you destroyed our death…
–When we eat this bread and drink this cup…

Has “Keep in Mind” been used at your parishes? The words seem OK, but if it’s been prohibited, I’ll mention it to the organist.
 
It’s not approved for use in the United States, as far as I know. It’s not in any liturgical book or document I have seen. There is no accommodation made in the GIRM or the Roman Missal for additional “memorial acclamations”.
 
surritter said:
Every once in a while our organist will use this for a Memorial Acclamation:

“Keep in mind that Jesus Christ has died for us, and is risen from the dead. He is our saving Lord; he is joy for all ages.”

You all know the tune – it’s by Lucien Deiss. But my question: Is that a legitimate Acclamation? I don’t have a copy of the GIRM handy, but I think it only allows four choices:
–Christ has died, Christ is risen…
–Lord, by your cross and resurrection…
–Dying you destroyed our death…
–When we eat this bread and drink this cup…

Has “Keep in Mind” been used at your parishes? The words seem OK, but if it’s been prohibited, I’ll mention it to the organist.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, this piece was written during the time of “experimentation”. As japhy noted, we are only to use what is in the Roman Missal. Thus, this composition is not licit. You could use it for the offertory or for Holy Communion, or even for Lent, but, not in the place of the approved texts of the Mass.

Incidentally, when the new translations come out, there will only be three Memorial Acclamations, since “Christ has died…” does not appear in the Latin text.
 
benedictgal said:
Unfortunately, this piece was written during the time of “experimentation”. As japhy noted, we are only to use what is in the Roman Missal. Thus, this composition is not licit. You could use it for the offertory or for Holy Communion, or even for Lent, but, not in the place of the approved texts of the Mass.

Incidentally, when the new translations come out, there will only be three Memorial Acclamations, since “Christ has died…” does not appear in the Latin text.
Click to expand...
I thought the US Bishop’s are requesting or have requested an indult to use the Christ has died acclamation.
 
Seatuck said:
I thought the US Bishop’s are requesting or have requested an indult to use the Christ has died acclamation.
Click to expand...
Evidently, that fell through. In the new translation, the one given the recognitio by Rome, this particular acclamation has been deleted.
 
benedictgal said:
Evidently, that fell through. In the new translation, the one given the recognitio by Rome, this particular acclamation has been deleted.
Click to expand...
interesting to me that my Franciscan parish only sings Chirst has died…

the more i learned about the Liturgy the more i see my parish being mor and more disobedient to Rome.
 
wisdomseeker said:
interesting to me that my Franciscan parish only sings Chirst has died…

the more i learned about the Liturgy the more i see my parish being mor and more disobedient to Rome.
Click to expand...
No – that’s OK! We were talking about the new translation that is not yet implemented in the US. Perhaps in the next couple of years. You’ll definitely hear about it. Only then would “Christ has died” be outside of the rules.

While “Christ has died” is the most common, it’s nice to hear the other three options occasionally. (Just not “Keep in mind!”).
 
It might be that your organist has old sheet music. I remember that the missellettes had it as an option when I was a kid (late 70s/early 80s). They don’t now.

At our parish we usually use “When we eat this bread and drink this cup” (Mass of Reconciliation version).
 
surritter said:
No – that’s OK! We were talking about the new translation that is not yet implemented in the US. Perhaps in the next couple of years. You’ll definitely hear about it. Only then would “Christ has died” be outside of the rules.

While “Christ has died” is the most common, it’s nice to hear the other three options occasionally. (Just not “Keep in mind!”).
Click to expand...
thanks.
 
Seatuck said:
According to the chart on the US Bishop’s website they are still hoping.

usccb.org/romanmissal/examples.shtml
Click to expand...
I am hopeful that it is deleted. Or, if they are bent on still using it, that it be the last resort. Notice, that the three original are in the second person. We are addressing the Lord in the “you”. Christ has died… is written in the third person. It’s one of those innovations that should just be deleted.
 
I’ve heard this used at a parish I used to visit…I really don’t care for it at all. It seems to impart an “oh, by the way” sort of attitude on the Liturgy of the Eucharist, suggesting that the warm and fuzzies are more significant than the real reason we gather to celebrate the mass.
 
jlyn1110 said:
I’ve heard this used at a parish I used to visit…I really don’t care for it at all. It seems to impart an “oh, by the way” sort of attitude on the Liturgy of the Eucharist, suggesting that the warm and fuzzies are more significant than the real reason we gather to celebrate the mass.
Click to expand...
That’s a good point – I couldn’t put my finger on it but I knew there was something weird about it. Theologically, it’s perfectly sound, but the “keep in mind” phrasing doesn’t do justice to the solemn Eucharistic Prayer that the Acclamation resides in.
 
benedictgal said:
I am hopeful that it is deleted. Or, if they are bent on still using it, that it be the last resort. Notice, that the three original are in the second person. We are addressing the Lord in the “you”. Christ has died… is written in the third person. It’s one of those innovations that should just be deleted.
Click to expand...
Incidentally, when the new translations come out, there will only be three Memorial Acclamations, since “Christ has died…” does not appear in the Latin text.
Click to expand...
But Christ did die, he has risen and he will come again. I don’t see anything wrong with this particular acclimation. Do any of the other acclimation’s appear in the Latin text? Which Latin text are you referring too? 🙂
 
Don9of11 said:
But Christ did die, he has risen and he will come again. I don’t see anything wrong with this particular acclimation. Do any of the other acclimation’s appear in the Latin text? Which Latin text are you referring too? 🙂
Click to expand...
No one is arguing whether or not the words of the acclamation are true. Of course they are.

The biggest issue is how closely the English text of the Roman Missal resembles the Latin text of the Roman Missal. “Christ has died…” was never in any of the Latin versions of the Roman Missal. (But the other three are.) It only appears in English translations . And as noted in earlier posts, it is third person rather than second person.

Those who would like to see the English translation of the text be as close as possible to the Latin text would like to see “Christ has died…” eliminated. Those who have developed some affection for what is arguably the most popular (but IMO somewhat boring) American Memorial Acclamation would like to see it stay
 
Don9of11 said:
But Christ did die, he has risen and he will come again. I don’t see anything wrong with this particular acclimation. Do any of the other acclimation’s appear in the Latin text? Which Latin text are you referring too? 🙂
Click to expand...
To add a bit to what SMWH has said, the issue with this acclamation is that it doesn’t address Christ directly as the others do. While the others speak to Him, this questionable one speaks about Him, the One Who Is present now on the altar, as if He wasn’t there. The proper acclamations attest to the reality of His Eucharistic Presence since we address Him directly.
 
FCEGM said:
To add a bit to what SMWH has said, the issue with this acclamation is that it doesn’t address Christ directly as the others do. While the others speak to Him, this questionable one speaks about Him, the One Who Is present now on the altar, as if He wasn’t there. The proper acclamations attest to the reality of His Eucharistic Presence since we address Him directly.
Click to expand...
That is what I said a few posts ago. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top