Memorial Acclamation “C” Struggle

[jmjconder]

**“When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim you death, Lord Jesus Christ, until you come in glory.” ** (1 Cor. 11:26)

Every time we sing this version ~ I wince. I think of all the Catholics who do not fully understand that Jesus Christ is present Body, Blood Soul and Divinity – then we call the Eucharist ~ bread. I know this is straight from the Bible; however, I believe it is extremely confusing.

This verse read in context of the 1 Cor 11:23-29 makes sense and bread is seen in a completely new light. I highly suspect many people who sing this particular Memorial Acclamation are unaware of the surrounding verses.

I wish this confusing Memorial Acclamation were ignored for the more reflective versions. Any else feel as I do?

 

[bpbasilphx]

Maybe request your priest give some instruction about this, either from the pulpit or in the bulletin?

 

[SMHW]

I wish this confusing Memorial Acclamation were ignored for the more reflective versions. Any else feel as I do?

I have heard others express this same opinion so I’d say, “Yes,” there are others that feel as you do.

But I personally think that since read in context this is one of the clearest statements in the whole Bible that Christ is present in the Eucharist, that it should remain.

 

[PacoG]

Eucharistic Prayer I (The Roman Canon) states: "Father, we celebrate the memory of Christ, your Son. We, your people and your ministers, recall his passion, his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into glory; and from the many gifts you have given us we offer to you, God of glory and majesty, this holy and perfect sacrifice: the **bread **of life and the **cup **of eternal salvation.

Eucharistic Prayer II states: In memory of his death and resurrection, we offer you, Father, this life-giving bread, this saving cup.

Using your standard, that Acclamation C is confusing because it refers to the Body and Precious Blood as bread and cup, then the only acceptable Eucharistic Prayers are III and IV. EP III doesn’t make any reference to bread and cup and EP IV refers to “we offer you his body and blood, the aceptable sacrifice which brings salvation to the whole world.”

And one would think that the Roman Canon was our heritage since it was by itself as the only Eucharistic Prayer for 1000 years.

 

[Windmill]

Try it in the Latin as it is found in the official Sacramentary:

“Quotiescumque manducamus panem hunc et calicem bibimus, mortem tuam annuntiamus, Domine, donec venias.”

That’ll throw them off.

Seriously, I always thought this was an innovation foisted on us in place of what should be the normal prayer (“mortem tuam, annuntiamus…”). However, I was proven wrong when I took the time to look at the official documents. They’re both there, along with a couple of others. So, I guess your gripe is with Pope Paul VI. Also, as mentioned above, the Roman Canon does refer to the species of the Sacrifice after the consecration. It’s usually capitalized in the older missals, so it is clear that you are not talking about normal bread. I wonder if that is still the norm when printing vernacular missals today.

 

[DixitDominus]

Eucharistic Prayer I (The Roman Canon) states: "Father, we celebrate the memory of Christ, your Son. We, your people and your ministers, recall his passion, his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into glory; and from the many gifts you have given us we offer to you, God of glory and majesty, this holy and perfect sacrifice: the **bread **of life and the **cup **of eternal salvation.

Actually, the Canon of the Mass says

“Unde et mémores, Dómine, nos servi tui, sed et plebs tua sancta, eiúsdem Christi, Fílii tui, Dómini nostri, tam beátae passiónis, necnon et ab ínferis resurrectiónis, sed et in caelos gloriósae ascensiónis: offérimus praeclárae maiestáti tuae de tuis donis ac datis hóstiam puram, hóstiam sanctam, hóstiam immaculátam, Panem sanctum vitae aetérnae et Cálicem salútis perpétuae.”

which does not mention the words “Father” or “cup” at all, but actually runs something like

“Therefore also, O Lord, we Your servants, but also your holy people, mindful of so blessed a passion, indeed also of the resurrection from hell, but also the glorious ascension into heaven of the same Christ, Your Son, our Lord : offer to Your distinguished majesty from your gifts and presents a pure Victim, a holy Victim, and immaculate Victim, the holy Bread of eternal life and the Chalice of perpetual salvation.”

When the anamnesis of the Canon is translated correctly, one would have to interpret it the way an Arian interprets the New Testament to think that there was still bread upon the paten.

 

[PacoG]

Actually, the Canon of the Mass says

“Unde et mémores, Dómine, nos servi tui, sed et plebs tua sancta, eiúsdem Christi, Fílii tui, Dómini nostri, tam beátae passiónis, necnon et ab ínferis resurrectiónis, sed et in caelos gloriósae ascensiónis: offérimus praeclárae maiestáti tuae de tuis donis ac datis hóstiam puram, hóstiam sanctam, hóstiam immaculátam, Panem sanctum vitae aetérnae et Cálicem salútis perpétuae.”

which does not mention the words “Father” or “cup” at all, but actually runs something like

“Therefore also, O Lord, we Your servants, but also your holy people, mindful of so blessed a passion, indeed also of the resurrection from hell, but also the glorious ascension into heaven of the same Christ, Your Son, our Lord : offer to Your distinguished majesty from your gifts and presents a pure Victim, a holy Victim, and immaculate Victim, the holy Bread of eternal life and the Chalice of perpetual salvation.”

When the anamnesis of the Canon is translated correctly, one would have to interpret it the way an Arian interprets the New Testament to think that there was still bread upon the paten.

And the translation that was recently approved by the USCCB and is under the Vatican’s consideration reads:

Therefore, O Lord, as we celebrate the memorial of the blessed passion, the resurrection from the dead, and the glorious ascension into heaven of Christ, your Son, our Lord, we, your servants and your holy people, offer to your glorious majesty from your own generous gifts, the pure victim, the holy victim, the spotless victim, the holy Bread of eternal life and the Chalice of everlasting salvation.

I think it is obvious from any of the three translations that the Canon is referring to Jesus who called himself the “Bread of Life.”

A chalice is a cup. The words are synonyms.

And there is a huge difference between translation and transliteration.

 

[DixitDominus]

And the translation that was recently approved by the USCCB and is under the Vatican’s consideration reads:

Therefore, O Lord, as we celebrate the memorial of the blessed passion, the resurrection from the dead, and the glorious ascension into heaven of Christ, your Son, our Lord, we, your servants and your holy people, offer to your glorious majesty from your own generous gifts, the pure victim, the holy victim, the spotless victim, the holy Bread of eternal life and the Chalice of everlasting salvation.

I think it is obvious from any of the three translations that the Canon is referring to Jesus who called himself the “Bread of Life.”

A chalice is a cup. The words are synonyms.

And there is a huge difference between translation and transliteration.

You’re right, there is a difference between translation and transliteration.

This is translation:
λογος word

This is transliteration:
λογος logos

 

[kobefire]

what is that ?
just wander ? sorry i’m new here

 

[tee_eff_em]

I have heard others express this same opinion so I’d say, “Yes,” there are others that feel as you do.

But I personally think that since read in context this is one of the clearest statements in the whole Bible that Christ is present in the Eucharist, that it should remain.

I concur with [user]SMHW[/user]: Yes, it is evident that there are others who feel as you do, but: I try to defer to the Church in this matter.

[Weird: I seem to post this sentence to CAF every [post=2823522]11[/post] or [post=1597528]12[/post] months]

:twocents: Myself, as the Church in her scriptures, liturgy, and catechism does not seem to have a problem with references to “bread”, I try to not have one either (unless I have reason to believe my interlocutor may be confused; but if he assures me he is not I don’t press the matter). :twocents:

tee

 

[japhy]

A chalice is a cup. The words are synonyms.

A chalice is a cup, but a cup is not a chalice.

There’s a reason the chalice and paten are called “sacred vessels” and not “the dishes”.