New sign of the cross

[BVM_1221]

[edited]

I have had slips with that prayer. Since I pray The Divine Office, I often drop the “be” in “Glory be”. In group Rosary sessions, such as Legion Of Mary, this causes me to be one word ahead of everyone else until I wake up to my gaff.

And I sometimes use the Eastern Catholic version of the “Glory (be)”, when everyone else is reciting the Western version. Oooops:blush:

 

[ProVobis]

I have had slips with that prayer. Since I pray The Divine Office, I often drop the “be” in “Glory be”.

You’ll be happy to know there is no “be” in the Latin (or Polish either, for that matter)

Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto…

just like there isn’t in the Gloria, "Gloria in excelsis Deo…"

“Glory to God in the highest…”

 

[OraLabora]

Another possibility is that he frequently prays the Rosary and unintentionally mixed up the Glory Be with the Sign of the Cross.

I don’t know how often he prays the Rosary but as a priest he is obligated to pray the Liturgy of the Hours every day and the Glory Be is said after the opening verse, and after each psalm, canticle and responsory.

 

[ProVobis]

About a quarter of the congregation, however, immediately noticing the error for what it was, without skipping a beat responded with a lively and pleasantly amused “Y con tu espíritu”! It was awesome. What an edifying illustration of our Catholicity.

At least they were paying attention, unlike those who responded to the priest’s “There’s something wrong with this mike” with “And also with you.”

 

[VicTorDominican]

I have had slips with that prayer. Since I pray The Divine Office, I often drop the “be” in “Glory be”. In group Rosary sessions, such as Legion Of Mary, this causes me to be one word ahead of everyone else until I wake up to my gaff.

And I sometimes use the Eastern Catholic version of the “Glory (be)”, when everyone else is reciting the Western version. Oooops:blush:

Ever hear a recent convert say “Our Father which art in heaven”, “thy will be done in earth” or “and forgive us our debt…passes”?

 

[japhy]

Perhaps whatever text he’s using to pray from has a typo, and he thinks the typo is genuine.

 

[JerrySeibert]

Perhaps whatever text he’s using to pray from has a typo, and he thinks the typo is genuine.

Typo thats awesome. If he get’s cranky when you ask HIM something. Then ask HIS Bishop. Easy to solve. Not attempting to be the Liturgical police but right is right and wrong is wrong. Easy as that.

 

[ProVobis]

Typo thats awesome. If he get’s cranky when you ask HIM something. Then ask HIS Bishop. Easy to solve. Not attempting to be the Liturgical police but right is right and wrong is wrong. Easy as that.

If you were writing a computer program, you’d probably get a compile error if you use the wrong preposition, but a wrong preposition doesn’t make the Mass invalid, especially if said outside the canon. You’ve done what you needed to do; I don’t see the sense out of correcting any more than that. The English grammar police died about the same time when nuns left the convent.

 

[Eire]

I am 83 years old and a “cradle” Catholic. I attended a Catholic elementary school and a Catholic High School. All taught by nuns.
In elementary school we always said Holy Ghost. I think it was in High School it was changed to Holy Spirit. I had no problem with that. It has been Holy Spirit for about 68 years now so there is nothing “new” about it.

 

[trekkie4christ]

You’ll be happy to know there is no “be” in the Latin (or Polish either, for that matter)

Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto…

just like there isn’t in the Gloria, "Gloria in excelsis Deo…"

“Glory to God in the highest…”

The “be” is implied in the Latin, otherwise you’d have a sentence fragment, lacking a verb. It is also implied in some English translations as well, but including it does not change the meaning of the prayer, in fact it may make it clearer for some.
You can clearly see that the standard rosary version of the Doxology uses “Glory be to…”, but the Liturgy of the Hours uses “Glory to…”. Must one be wrong? I don’t think such a minor difference is anything to argue about, especially when it doesn’t have any effect on the meaning.

 

[drforjc]

I don’t know how often he prays the Rosary but as a priest he is obligated to pray the Liturgy of the Hours every day and the Glory Be is said after the opening verse, and after each psalm, canticle and responsory.

Certainly. I was using the rosary as an example of a time when the Glory Be is prayed. The LOTH would be another example. Probably an unintentional error, confusing the wording. I myself sometimes slip up in the Nicene Creed, accidentally inserting phrasing from the Apostles’ Creed and vice versa.

 

[ProVobis]

The “be” is implied in the Latin, otherwise you’d have a sentence fragment, lacking a verb. It is also implied in some English translations as well, but including it does not change the meaning of the prayer, in fact it may make it clearer for some.

I don’t think there is an implied subjunctive in the Latin or Polish. You don’t say in the Hail Mary “Hail…full of grace, may the Lord be with you,” do you? (Ave Maria, gratia plena, dominus tecum.) Or “Glory be to the highest” (Gloria in excelsis Deo).

The Latin takes the subjunctive a lot more seriously than does the English, where it is almost transparent in the latter. If the “BE” is needed, then it would say so, like “Pax sit semper vobiscum” or “anathema sit.”

If it causes an English grammatical problem without an explicit verb, so be it. ← see the subjunctive?

 

[Cowra_Dude]

I am 83 years old and a “cradle” Catholic. I attended a Catholic elementary school and a Catholic High School. All taught by nuns.
In elementary school we always said Holy Ghost. I think it was in High School it was changed to Holy Spirit. I had no problem with that. It has been Holy Spirit for about 68 years now so there is nothing “new” about it.

The word “spirit” is not what I am querying.

 

[trekkie4christ]

If the “BE” is needed, then it would say so, like “Pax sit semper vobiscum” or “anathema sit.”

If it causes an English grammatical problem without an explicit verb, so be it. ← see the subjunctive?

True, the “be” is not needed in either the Latin or the English, but my argument is that including it is not wrong and does not change the meaning. Literal translations are not always the best.

 

[ProVobis]

True, the “be” is not needed in either the Latin or the English, but my argument is that including it is not wrong and does not change the meaning. Literal translations are not always the best.

I would agree with you in the sense that “Glory BE” isn’t wrong because we can give glory but I can’t agree with those who claim “The Lord BE with you” is okay theologically, because the Lord IS already with us. As I said, the subjunctive may seem minor, almost trivial, in the English but taken very seriously in the Greek and Latin, given all the codified conjugational endings (three persons, two numbers, four tenses, four conjugations, and two voices (total of 192) in the Latin alone) dealing with the subjunctive.

 

[zab]

our parish has the new translation, and the priest now says, “in the name of the father, and of the son, and to the holy spirit…”

why is it “to” the holy spirit now?

possible answers

probably just a slip of the tongue. Why didn’t you ask the priest?
newstheman;8447251:

slip of tongue? English not his first language?

It makes no sense to be in the name to something.

So it’s not like he’s saying anything wrong, he’s just not saying anything at all.

could it be you misheard him?

another possibility is that he frequently prays the rosary and unintentionally mixed up the glory be with the sign of the cross.

perhaps whatever text he’s using to pray from has a typo

, and he thinks the typo is genuine.

i am 83 years old and a “cradle” catholic. I attended a catholic elementary school and a catholic high school. All taught by nuns.
In elementary school we always said holy ghost. I think it was in high school it was changed to holy spirit. I had no problem with that. It has been holy spirit for about 68 years now so there is nothing “new” about it.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

Our Trinitarian understanding of prayer is that we pray TO the Father, THROUGH the Son, IN the Holy Spirit. The fact that the priest becomes irritated when questioned about his innovations suggests that he knows full well what he is doing.

As far as the “ghost” vs. “spirit” debate which the original poster did not start, the English language has the modern differentiation between a spirit (any invisible entity) and a ghost (a disembodied human soul). In most languages both of these concepts are covered by one word. “Ghost,” by the way, comes from the German “Geist,” meaning spirit.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Our Trinitarian understanding of prayer is that we pray TO the Father, THROUGH the Son, IN the Holy Spirit. The fact that the priest becomes irritated when questioned about his innovations suggests that he knows full well what he is doing.

I disagree. The texts of the mass are set in stone, and regardless of what he wants, the priest may not intentionally change it. Not saying he did, but he can’t, even if he wants to, for whatever reason.

 

[ANNE_2]

I disagree. The texts of the mass are set in stone, and regardless of what he wants, the priest may not intentionally change it. Not saying he did, but he can’t, even if he wants to, for whatever reason.

You are absolutely correct.
No Priest or Individual Bishop may make any changes to the Mass or the wording.

The GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) and the Roman Missal itself dictates what is said and done at Mass.

If anyone is aware of abuse, they should talk to the Priest. If that does not work, contact the Diocese Bishop.

Starting - Nov 27, 2011.
old.usccb.org/romanmissal/
and
usccbpublishing.org/productdetails.cfm?sku=7-176 (GIRM)

 

[ProVobis]

Our Trinitarian understanding of prayer is that we pray TO the Father, THROUGH the Son, IN the Holy Spirit.

That may be, but the codified prayer is “In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.”

The Three Persons are all in the genitive (possessive) case, genitive of the ablative nomine. So in the English it becomes “In the Father’s, the Son’s, and the Holy Spirit’s name” or as we most commonly say “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost/Spirit. Amen.”

The priest can always say it in Latin if he has a problem with the English.