Wikipedia claims that “According to one source, in 1604 Pope Clement VIII, as well as modifying some of the rubrics, altered the text of the Canon by excluding a mention of the king.[20]” The cited source is Cavendish, Paul, “The Tridentine Mass”, Civitas Dei, FR: Orange.As I understand, the Roman Canon originally contained prayers for the secular authorities, didn’t it? If yes, when were they excluded?
Byzantine liturgy still has such prayers in the anaphora.
It appears, then, that the prayer for the King was not actually removed in 1604. But it did vanish sometime in the next century or so, because this Missale Romanum from 1719 lacks it.cum fámulo tuo Papa noſtro N. et Antíſtite noſtro N. & Rege noſtro N. & ómnibus Orthodóxis, atque Cathólicæ & Apoſtólicæ fídei cultóribus.
Thx. This seems especially nonsensical in English texts, considering Brittish king was not Catholic.Here is a Missale Romanum from 1628 that mentions the King in the Canon.
It appears, then, that the prayer for the King was not actually removed in 1604. But it did vanish sometime in the next century or so, because this Missale Romanum from 1719 lacks it.
Following this, A manual of devout prayers (1778), The Roman Missal for the Use of the Laity (1806), and The Family Prayer Book; containing all the Public and Private Devotions in Use amongst English Catholics (1839) all mention “rege nostro N.” in the Canon. None of these are official liturgical texts, of course, but it is interesting to see a kind of cultural memory of praying for the King in the Canon long after the Church had ceased to do so in fact.
Well, the question is, does the grammar imply that the king is included among “ómnibus Orthodóxis”? I don’t know enough Latin to tell.Thx. This seems especially nonsensical in English texts, considering Brittish king was not Catholic.
Yes. Moreover, there is no sense whatsoever to mention in anaphora someone who is not in full communion with the Church. This prayer is of utmost importance and it may be offered only for the full members of the Church, who may participate in the sacramentWell, the question is, does the grammar imply that the king is included among “ómnibus Orthodóxis”? I don’t know enough Latin to tell.
1970As I understand, the Roman Canon originally contained prayers for the secular authorities, didn’t it? If yes, when were they excluded?
Byzantine liturgy still has such prayers in the anaphora.
A man who is both a priest and a monk is called a hieromonk if Eastern and religious priest or regular priest if WesternMore on the Orthodox… I recall that before CAF banned the Eastern Christianity forum, one of the regulars who was a priestmonk in New Zealand mentioned that as he was preparing the lamb (bread) for consecration, he would separate small portions for specific prayers for his bishop, his superior, and the queen.
Interesting. I had heard that word, but didn’t realize the two terms were synonymous.A man who is both a priest and a monk is called a hieromonk if Eastern and religious priest or regular priest if Western
Thanks for the evidence. I just thought I would add that the phrase’s continued existence in a missal printed elsewhere (i.e., outside of Rome itself) doesn’t necessarily discount the pope having ordered its removal decades earlier. Ofttimes practice remained unchanged in a particular country until its government had “received” a papal or conciliar decree; law can only bind if promulgated, so if a state were to refuse to cooperate in that promulgation its population was argued to be exempt. France was a notable offender in this regard. As of 1615 it still hadn’t promulgated the disciplinary decrees of Trent, so a 1628 missal from Paris would be unremarkable in ignoring a papal decision that was only 24 years old.Here is a Missale Romanum from 1628 that mentions the King in the Canon.
It appears, then, that the prayer for the King was not actually removed in 1604. But it did vanish sometime in the next century or so, because this Missale Romanum from 1719 lacks it.
Following this, A manual of devout prayers (1778), The Roman Missal for the Use of the Laity (1806), and The Family Prayer Book; containing all the Public and Private Devotions in Use amongst English Catholics (1839) all mention “rege nostro N.” in the Canon. None of these are official liturgical texts, of course, but it is interesting to see a kind of cultural memory of praying for the King in the Canon long after the Church had ceased to do so in fact.