Question about Mass...

[benedictgal]

This parish is in the US.
We are going to approach our priest with this, I have a couple of friends who are just as concerned about this as I am. I am praying that he doesn’t become too upset and make things hard for those of us who are concerned.

“My Lord and my God”, while a pious exercise, should be stated inaudibly. As others have posted, there should be silence during the EP. The only time the faithful recite/sing is at the Memorial Acclamation and at the Amen after the Final Doxology. While there are some pious and holy customs, we should not confuse them with what is spelled out specifically in both the GIRM and RS.

 

[ConstantineTG]

“My Lord and my God”, while a pious exercise, should be stated inaudibly. As others have posted, there should be silence during the EP. The only time the faithful recite/sing is at the Memorial Acclamation and at the Amen after the Final Doxology. While there are some pious and holy customs, we should not confuse them with what is spelled out specifically in both the GIRM and RS.

It can be audible. Its an exception, and it must be approved by the Bishop’s conference of the territory as well as the Vatican

is this in the Philippines?
because i know there was a direction to respond “My Lord and My God” during Consecration when the priest raises the Precious Body, and then the Cup

there is a provision in RS which states the following:

[53.] While the Priest proclaims the Eucharistic Prayer “there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent”,[132] except for the people’s acclamations that have been duly approved, as described below.

so acclaiming “My Lord and My God” is entirely valid and allowed if…

[54]…and in other acclamations approved by the Conference of Bishops with the recognitio of the Holy See”.

but the singing is not allowed

 

[benedictgal]

It can be audible. Its an exception, and it must be approved by the Bishop’s conference of the territory as well as the Vatican

Please show me your reference because this appears nowhere in the GIRM. I have gone to Mass in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico and even the faithful there do not do it. In fact, the priests in my area have asked the faithful to not say this audibly.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Please show me your reference because this appears nowhere in the GIRM. I have gone to Mass in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico and even the faithful there do not do it. In fact, the priests in my area have asked the faithful to not say this audibly.

I’ve made the quote from the RS in my post, please refer to it especially where highlighted. And as previously mentioned, it was done in the Philippines all throughout the country, as directed by the local Bishop’s Conference. I’m guessing if there’s a fair amount of people from another country who’s moved into this parish, they may have brought this practice along even if locally it was not approved by the US Bishop’s Conference.

 

[benedictgal]

I’ve made the quote from the RS in my post, please refer to it especially where highlighted. And as previously mentioned, it was done in the Philippines all throughout the country, as directed by the local Bishop’s Conference. I’m guessing if there’s a fair amount of people from another country who’s moved into this parish, they may have brought this practice along even if locally it was not approved by the US Bishop’s Conference.

But, this refers to the Memorial Acclamation, not to any other part of the Eucharistic prayer. “My Lord and my God” is an ejaculation, not an acclamation. Thus, its audible use is not licit.

 

[JRKH]

Well, I am not surprised by what Father had to say.
He tried to explain to us how the GIRM is not really a law as we know laws, but a guideline for priests to follow.
He also said that without what he does that Mass would be too boring and bland. (huh???)
And if we didn’t want to take his word for this, we needed to go and talk to the Bishop.

Soooo, that’s what we are going to do.
I’ve never spoken to a Bishop before. Do we call and make an appointment? It’s a very long drive and will take an entire day to do this.
I’m guessing it will be a while before we get to talk to him.

And on a side note, several of us got together this past Sunday and went visiting another church and it sure was refreshing to have a Mass that didn’t have the issues that our Mass has. We’ve decided to do this once or twice a month, it was a great experience.

It will be most interesting to see what the Bishop says.

I agree with the others that a well written letter might be better than trying to get a face to face meeting with the Bishop. Just make sure that the letter is written clearly and concisely (since the Bishop is undoubtedly a busy man) and also charitably.

I’m glad to hear that your pastor did not get upset about your questioning. Sounds like it went OK. Of course I, like the others, am sorry that he feels that without his “innovations” mass would be too boring.

Keep us informed.

Peace
James

 

[ConstantineTG]

But, this refers to the Memorial Acclamation, not to any other part of the Eucharistic prayer. “My Lord and my God” is an ejaculation, not an acclamation. Thus, its audible use is not licit.

53.] While the Priest proclaims the Eucharistic Prayer “there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent”,[132] except for the people’s acclamations that have been duly approved, as described below.

So whats your example of an acclimation?

 

[MarkThompson]

53.] While the Priest proclaims the Eucharistic Prayer “there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent”,[132] except for the people’s acclamations that have been duly approved, as described below.

So whats your example of an acclimation?

You’re right, she’s wrong, believe it or not.

As the GIRM (no. 147 explains):
[During the Eucharistic Prayer, t]he people, for their part, should associate themselves with the priest in faith and in silence, as well as through their parts as prescribed in the course of the Eucharistic Prayer: namely the responses in the Preface dialogue, the Sanctus, the acclamation after the consecration, the acclamatory Amen after the final doxology, as well as other acclamations approved by the Conference of Bishops and recognized by the Holy See.
The attempt to deny that “My Lord and my God” could possibly be an approved acclamation by labeling it an “ejaculation” approaches the most debased level of absurdity I have yet seen on this board.

 

[Canto]

Well, I am not surprised by what Father had to say.
He tried to explain to us how the GIRM is not really a law as we know laws, but a guideline for priests to follow.
He also said that without what he does that Mass would be too boring and bland. (huh???)
And if we didn’t want to take his word for this, we needed to go and talk to the Bishop.

Soooo, that’s what we are going to do.
I’ve never spoken to a Bishop before. Do we call and make an appointment? It’s a very long drive and will take an entire day to do this.
I’m guessing it will be a while before we get to talk to him.

And on a side note, several of us got together this past Sunday and went visiting another church and it sure was refreshing to have a Mass that didn’t have the issues that our Mass has. We’ve decided to do this once or twice a month, it was a great experience.

The GIRM is the preface to the Roman Missal
The Roman Missal is an approved liturgical book
The Code of Canon Law says…

Canon 846 §1 The liturgical books, approved by the competent authority, are **to be faithfully followed **in the celebration of the sacraments. Accordingly, **no one may **on a personal initiative add to or omit or alter anything in those books.

General Instruction of the Roman Missal 24.The priest must remember that he is the servant of the sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or **to change anything **in the celebration of Mass. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 22.

A non boring Mass? How about incense, Gregorian Chant, bells at the Consecration, a good Homily, sacred silences and the focus on God not us.

 

[Aramis]

In the case of any response at that point, the obligation is to show that it has been permitted, Mark.

If “My Lord and My God” isn’t explicitly approved in the GIRM, nor the standard texts, nor by specific letter from the Conference of Bishops, then it is in fact forbidden.

RS requires a positive exemption to silence. That is, an explicit approval.

I’ve not seen anyone proffer one. Can you?

 

[JRKH]

While much of this may be useful to the OP,
Let us all be patient and wait to hear what the Bishop has to say…

Peace
James

 

[benedictgal]

53.] While the Priest proclaims the Eucharistic Prayer “there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent”,[132] except for the people’s acclamations that have been duly approved, as described below.

So whats your example of an acclimation?

Actually, Mark Thompson’s interpretation is wrong.

The Memorial Acclamations are:

When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory.
Dying, you destroyed our death. Rising you restored our life, Lord Jesus, come in glory.
Lord, by your cross and resurrection, you have set us free. You are the savior of the world.
Christ has died. Christ has risen. Christ will come again (which will probably be removed when the new translations come).

Now, if the bishops conference wants to add “My Lord and my God” as an acclamation in addition to those already approved, then, they could submit that change to Rome. However, these should not be audibly recited after the consecration of each species.

 

[MarkThompson]

Actually, Mark Thompson’s interpretation is wrong.

The Memorial Acclamations are:
…
Now, if the bishops conference wants to add “My Lord and my God” as an acclamation in addition to those already approved, then, they could submit that change to Rome. However, these should not be audibly recited after the consecration of each species.

Okay, let me post this again:

As the GIRM (no. 147 explains):
[During the Eucharistic Prayer, t]he people, for their part, should associate themselves with the priest in faith and in silence, as well as through their parts as prescribed in the course of the Eucharistic Prayer: namely the responses in the Preface dialogue, the Sanctus, the acclamation after the consecration, the acclamatory Amen after the final doxology, as well as other acclamations approved by the Conference of Bishops and recognized by the Holy See.
See? The “memorial acclamation” you’ve mentioned is the “acclamation after the consecration.” Now, what else is mentioned, eh? “Other acclamations”! What do we think, gang, is that just the memorial acclamation again? Or is does it, oh, I don’t know, refer to other acclamations that might be proposed and approved beyond the memorial acclamation?

So if proposed and approved they in fact would be recited audibly! Yay! Adding things to the Mass!

 

[benedictgal]

Okay, let me post this again:

As the GIRM (no. 147 explains):
[During the Eucharistic Prayer, t]he people, for their part, should associate themselves with the priest in faith and in silence, as well as through their parts as prescribed in the course of the Eucharistic Prayer: namely the responses in the Preface dialogue, the Sanctus, the acclamation after the consecration, the acclamatory Amen after the final doxology, as well as other acclamations approved by the Conference of Bishops and recognized by the Holy See.
See? The “memorial acclamation” you’ve mentioned is the “acclamation after the consecration.” Now, what else is mentioned, eh? “Other acclamations”! What do we think, gang, is that just the memorial acclamation again? Or is does it, oh, I don’t know, refer to other acclamations that might be proposed and approved beyond the memorial acclamation?

So if proposed and approved they in fact would be recited audibly! Yay! Adding things to the Mass!

Mark, in your zest to try to consistently disprove me, your interpretation again, is incorrect. The acclamations are in addition to the ones already prescribed, and these belong in their proper place, at the Mysterium Fidei. “My Lord and my God” is an ejaculation, not an acclamation.

Thus, after the consecration of the bread into the Body of Christ, there is silence. After the consecration of the wine into the Precious Blood , there is silence. The only time the faithful recite/sing audibly is at the Memorial Acclamation, which happens after the consecration of both species.

In any case, your point is moot anyway because this particular situation happened in the United States and is, thus, ilicit in the first place.

 

[Newbie2]

As far as I’m aware, there are only the 4 memorial acclimations that BG mentioned. I’d think that there are room for others, IF they were approved from Rome.

 

[MarkThompson]

Mark, in your zest to try to consistently disprove me, your interpretation again, is incorrect. The acclamations are in addition to the ones already prescribed, and these belong in their proper place, at the Mysterium Fidei.

There’s no call for the personal attack here, Benedictgal. And no, when an additional memorial acclamation is approved (e.g., “Christ has died, Christ is risen”) it is still a memorial acclamation, and it is still “the acclamation after the consecration.” An “other acclamation” is something besides the memorial acclamation.

“My Lord and my God” is an ejaculation, not an acclamation.

This is absurd.

In any case, your point is moot anyway because this particular situation happened in the United States and is, thus, ilicit in the first place.

It’s moot as regards the original poster, but not as concerning a general principle. As ConstantineTG mentioned above, “it was done in the Philippines all throughout the country, as directed by the local Bishop’s Conference. I’m guessing if there’s a fair amount of people from another country who’s moved into this parish, they may have brought this practice along even if locally it was not approved by the US Bishop’s Conference.” You then purported to know that “its audible use is not licit,” even though he had described having approval.

I’m guessing this is just another instance like the time you insisted until you were blue in the face that a Metropolitan Archbishop is not the ordinary of his own see. So if you’re just going to repeat the same unfounded opinion you’ve expressed before without additional attempts at explanation or justification (“it’s just not permitted”) along with not-so-subtly veiled personal attacks, there’ll be no need to expend the effort.

 

[benedictgal]

There’s no call for the personal attack here, Benedictgal. And no, when an additional memorial acclamation is approved (e.g., “Christ has died, Christ is risen”) it is still a memorial acclamation, and it is still “the acclamation after the consecration.” An “other acclamation” is something besides the memorial acclamation.

This is absurd.

It’s moot as regards the original poster, but not as concerning a general principle. As ConstantineTG mentioned above, “it was done in the Philippines all throughout the country, as directed by the local Bishop’s Conference. I’m guessing if there’s a fair amount of people from another country who’s moved into this parish, they may have brought this practice along even if locally it was not approved by the US Bishop’s Conference.” You then purported to know that “its audible use is not licit,” even though he had described having approval.

I’m guessing this is just another instance like the time you insisted until you were blue in the face that a Metropolitan Archbishop is not the ordinary of his own see. So if you’re just going to repeat the same unfounded opinion you’ve expressed before without additional attempts at explanation or justification (“it’s just not permitted”) along with not-so-subtly veiled personal attacks, there’ll be no need to expend the effort.

Mark, I stand by what I have written. The proper place for additional acclamation is after the priest recites/chants “Mysterio Fidei”, not beforehand during the actual consecration. Furthermore, “My Lord and my God” is a pious ejaculation, similar to “Jesus, Mary, Joseph, I love you. Save souls” or “My Jesus, mercy.” It is not an acclamation.

With all due respect, this is not the first time that you have insulted me during the the course of these threads. There is no need for you to attack me. Your interpretation, as I read it is wrong. Furthermore, if we were to follow your line of thought, this goes beyond a simple addition to the already approved Memorial Acclamations (three worldwide, four in the United States). It would involve amending the actual structure of the Eucharistic Prayer as there is silence after the consecration of the species of bread and, again, after the consecration of the species of wine.

The interesting part in all this is that, especially down here, priests with very different theologies (left and right) have admonished the faithful about remaining silent during the actual consecration to the pont that about two or three of the celebrants have asked the faithful not to say anything during the actual consecration until their appointed time, the Memorial Acclamation.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please keep the discussion civil, everyone. It’s all right to agree to disagree. Thank you.

 

[JRKH]

Mark and B’gal,

It appears that you both have pretty clearly stated your positions on this matter. Perhaps now would be a good time to back off and, like Mt 18:15-18 says, “Tell it to The Church” and let her decide which is what.

In other words, let’s wait to hear from the OP on wha the bishop has to say.

Peace
James

 

[MarkThompson]

Mark, I stand by what I have written. The proper place for additional acclamation is after the priest recites/chants “Mysterio Fidei”, not beforehand during the actual consecration. Furthermore, “My Lord and my God” is a pious ejaculation, similar to “Jesus, Mary, Joseph, I love you. Save souls” or “My Jesus, mercy.” It is not an acclamation.

With all due respect, this is not the first time that you have insulted me during the the course of these threads. There is no need for you to attack me. Your interpretation, as I read it is wrong. Furthermore, if we were to follow your line of thought, this goes beyond a simple addition to the already approved Memorial Acclamations (three worldwide, four in the United States). It would involve amending the actual structure of the Eucharistic Prayer as there is silence after the consecration of the species of bread and, again, after the consecration of the species of wine.

The interesting part in all this is that, especially down here, priests with very different theologies (left and right) have admonished the faithful about remaining silent during the actual consecration to the pont that about two or three of the celebrants have asked the faithful not to say anything during the actual consecration until their appointed time, the Memorial Acclamation.

With all due respect, I think you’re seeing personal attacks where none remotely existed. As many, many people have explained to you (particularly on the Amazing Grace thread, but in lots of other places too) your style of “argument” could use some improvement. Simply repeating your own opinions more emphatically does not make them more true. Maybe you’re misinterpreting calls to actually explain and argue for things as attacks?

Anyway, Constantine said that “My Lord and my God” was approved by the bishops’ conference in the Philippines. Is he not telling the truth? Or is the bishops’ conference guilty of an abuse of the Mass? Because, with all due respect, if I have to pick which is more likely to be accurate between your interpretation of the GIRM and a national bishops’ conference as they’ve implemented throughout their country, my faith isn’t going to lay with you.

Any explanation of what happens in the Philippines? I know that challenges your personally-formed opinions, but would you like to actually engage with it?