The Eucharistic prayer ends with the Great Amen after “Through Him, with Him, and in Him…” I have heard many priests say, 'This is Jesus, the Lamb of God." or “Behold! This is the Lord Jesus, the Lamb of God.”Often the priests in my city, instead of saying “this is the lamb of God” when they elevate the host, ad-lib, saying “this is Jesus your brother and friend,” or some other saying of the sort. I wonder if this is a violation of liturgical law or not. I am just curious.
Interesting thought, but how did you arrive at it? Was this thought formed on a reading of the GIRM and other church documents, or is it just an uniformed opinion? If it’s the former, can you give me a citation? If it’s the latter, I don’t see the value in posting it. The OP was looking for facts, not opinions.I don’t think that part of the liturgy is as restrictive as the Eucharistic prayer. Just my 2cents!
The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.
Did you get out of the wrong side of bed today? Why are you being so mean to DaughterSorrow?Interesting thought, but how did you arrive at it? Was this thought formed on a reading of the GIRM and other church documents, or is it just an uniformed opinion? If it’s the former, can you give me a citation? If it’s the latter, I don’t see the value in posting it. The OP was looking for facts, not opinions.
Forgive me, Timidity. I did indeed give my opinion and what I meant to post additionally, but didn’t, is that I wanted to research this myself to clear up my own understanding.Interesting thought, but how did you arrive at it? Was this thought formed on a reading of the GIRM and other church documents, or is it just an uniformed opinion? If it’s the former, can you give me a citation? If it’s the latter, I don’t see the value in posting it. The OP was looking for facts, not opinions.
The general principles involved are those announced in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, No. 24-26.
No. 24 reminds priests that while some adaptations of the liturgy are possible these “consist for the most part in the choice of certain rites or texts, that is, of the chants, readings, prayers, explanations, and gestures that may respond better to the needs, preparation, and culture of the participants and that are entrusted to the priest celebrant. Nevertheless, 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.”
Nos. 25 and 26 refer to other adaptations reserved to the diocesan bishop or to the episcopal conference which often require the definitive ratification of the Holy See.
The recent instruction “Redemptionis Sacramentum” has also weighed in on the topic of unauthorized alterations in No. 31:
“In keeping with the solemn promises that they have made in the rite of Sacred Ordination and renewed each year in the Mass of the Chrism, let Priests celebrate ‘devoutly and faithfully the mysteries of Christ for the praise of God and the sanctification of the Christian people, according to the tradition of the Church, especially in the Eucharistic Sacrifice and in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.’ They ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through arbitrary additions. For as St. Ambrose said, ‘It is not in herself … but in us that the Church is injured. Let us take care so that our own failure may not cause injury to the Church.’ Let the Church of God not be injured, then, by Priests who have so solemnly dedicated themselves to the ministry. Indeed, under the Bishop’s authority let them faithfully seek to prevent others as well from committing this type of distortion.”
Thanks for thinking of me! Perhaps “Timidity” should change his screen name to “Outspoken.”Did you get out of the wrong side of bed today? Why are you being so mean to DaughterSorrow?
There was no intent to to be “mean”. In fact, I even softened my words a bit, in hopes of sounding nice. I guess it didn’t work! :crying:Why are you being so mean to DaughterSorrow?
My priest does something similar.There is one departure that our priest uses in the Euch prayer that bugs me: “Happy are those who are called to His banquet.” (not supper)
Oh come on people - we’re supposed to have fun at Mass now, aren’t we? “Banquet” just makes the Mass that much more…fun, and interesting. Ugh.
I think that is one of the biggest problems that we have. Some Priests and some of the Laity feel they need to improve on the Mass, to see it clearer, with new eyes and hearts. To make the Mass more relevant and more in line with modern sensibilities, notions and ideas… I remember those words from back in the 60-'s when they started doing all this nonsense.I agree that the priest can feel that he has good reason for ad-libbing then. For example, the one in my city that likes saying “This is Jesus your brother” may wish to have the people there look at communion with new eyes. However, my question is whether this is a violation of liturgical law (though I myself feel that it would not be a major one if it is).
Technically “Blessed are those who are called to the banquet of the Lamb” is a slightly better translation. But that’s beside the point.My priest does something similar.
He hardly ever says the Ecce Agnus Dei, instead, he has something he prepared earlier, most of the time going along the lines of
“A holy food from god for the holy people of god, those who eat of it will never die, those who drink of it will never thirst. Blessed are those who are called to the banquet of the lamb.”
I find it very distracting.