The Mass is ended, go in peace

[Holland]

At the closing of Mass when I hear that sentence it is not hard to figure out what the priest is saying. It is a very simple sentence. We have a priest in our Diocese who, on occasion, will close the Mass with “The Eucharist is ended, go in peace.” I really have no idea what he is trying to say. Anyone out there have any ideas on this?

 

[Ferds_Guiang]

I think the priest is substituting the word “Eucharist” for “Mass”. Well pastorally I do not see any problem since we can interchange both terms- so when we say “the celebration of the Eucharist”, it is the same as “celebration of the Holy Mass”. But if you want to be very liturgical about it then maybe the liturgist would say that the priest stick to the usual term-“the Mass is ended”- because that is what’s prescribed in the liturgy, and besides, there is a clear distinction liturgically between Eucharist and Mass because the Eucharist refers to the Sacrament, while the Mass refers to the liturgical ceremony in which the bread and wine are consecrated and become the Eucharist.

 

[Aramis]

At the closing of Mass when I hear that sentence it is not hard to figure out what the priest is saying. It is a very simple sentence. We have a priest in our Diocese who, on occasion, will close the Mass with “The Eucharist is ended, go in peace.” I really have no idea what he is trying to say. Anyone out there have any ideas on this?

There are actually several options in the Sacramentary for the ending.

And, if present, the deacon is supposed to be the one saying it.

In latin, the option is “Ite, missa est.”

In English for the US, the three options:

1. “Go in the peace of Christ.”
2. “The Mass is ended, go in peace.”
3. “Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.”

Certain other countries with English have slightly different wordings.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

It has been my experience that some priests can’t believe that the mass is right unless they leave some fingerprints on it.

 

[benedictgal]

The celebrant needs to stick to what is in the Roman Missal and not substitute words on his own authority. Please note what Redemptionis Sacramentum states:

[7.] Not infrequently, abuses are rooted in a false understanding of liberty. Yet God has not granted us in Christ an illusory liberty by which we may do what we wish, but a liberty by which we may do that which is fitting and right.18 This is true not only of precepts coming directly from God, but also of laws promulgated by the Church, with appropriate regard for the nature of each norm. For this reason, all should conform to the ordinances set forth by legitimate ecclesiastical authority.

…[11.] The Mystery of the Eucharist “is too great for anyone to permit himself to treat it according to his own whim, so that its sacredness and its universal ordering would be obscured”.27 On the contrary, anyone who acts thus by giving free rein to his own inclinations, even if he is a Priest, injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved,28 and becomes responsible for actions that are in no way consistent with the hunger and thirst for the living God that is experienced by the people today. Nor do such actions serve authentic pastoral care or proper liturgical renewal; instead, they deprive Christ’s faithful of their patrimony and their heritage. For arbitrary actions are not conducive to true renewal,29 but are detrimental to the right of Christ’s faithful to a liturgical celebration that is an expression of the Church’s life in accordance with her tradition and discipline. In the end, they introduce elements of distortion and disharmony into the very celebration of the Eucharist, which is oriented in its own lofty way and by its very nature to signifying and wondrously bringing about the communion of divine life and the unity of the People of God.30 The result is uncertainty in matters of doctrine, perplexity and scandal on the part of the People of God, and, almost as a necessary consequence, vigorous opposition, all of which greatly confuse and sadden many of Christ’s faithful in this age of ours when Christian life is often particularly difficult on account of the inroads of “secularization” as well.31

…[59.] 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.

Even a change as perceptibly minor as “Eucharist” is not good. The celebrant does not have the authority to make this change. He needs to do the red and say the black.

 

[EasterJoy]

But if you want to be very liturgical about it then maybe the liturgist would say…

You know the joke: the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist is that you can negotiate with a terrorist.

Seriously, though, it is the Church and not the liturgists that has given the dictum which Benedictgal stated so succinctly: do the red and say the black. Period. The liturgists just try to make certain that the variations used are the variations allowed.

 

[Holland]

Well, I agree with what everyone has said here but I still don’t understand the sentence. It just doesn’t make any sense to me. How in the world and in what sense could the Eucharist be over. I find the whole thing rather confusing.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Well, I agree with what everyone has said here but I still don’t understand the sentence. It just doesn’t make any sense to me. How in the world and in what sense could the Eucharist be over. I find the whole thing rather confusing.

I have another post here somewhere about the use of the word “Eucharist”. The term is used with several different intended meanings, that is what is causing confusion. In this case the priest is using the word “Eucharist” to describe the liturgical celebration, not the Sacrament specifically.

 

[benedictgal]

I have another post here somewhere about the use of the word “Eucharist”. The term is used with several different intended meanings, that is what is causing confusion. In this case the priest is using the word “Eucharist” to describe the liturgical celebration, not the Sacrament specifically.

Even at that point, the celebrant is not authorized to deviate from what is written in the Roman Missal. It’s simply not his call to make.

 

[Aramis]

Even at that point, the celebrant is not authorized to deviate from what is written in the Roman Missal. It’s simply not his call to make.

It might be used in a different English missal; the US translation in’t the only English one.

 

[Holland]

Thanks everyone! I think I get it now.

 

[benedictgal]

It might be used in a different English missal; the US translation in’t the only English one.

However, if you look at the Latin version:

Ite, missa est

.

Now, in the new version of the Roman Missal, there are more options that were suggested by the Holy Father in Sacramentum Caritatis. These are:

Go forth, the Mass is ended.
Go and announce the Gospel of the Lord.
Go in peace, glorifying the Lord by your life.
Go in peace.

None of these new translations have the word “Eucharist” in them.

 

[Theophorus]

It might be used in a different English missal; the US translation in’t the only English one.

In the UK the endings are the same, as those mentioned above by benedictgal.

I find this action problematic theologically as well as liturgically as from what has been said above there is no distinction made between the Eucharistic Celebration and the Eucharistic.

The Eucharistic Celebration, that is to say Holy Mass, has a definitive ending. The Eucharist itself exists outside of Mass, The Blessed Sacrament can be reserved in the Tabernacle, can be adored in the Monstrance. To say that the Eucharist is ended, doesn’t seem to fit with a catholic understanding of things.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Well, I agree with what everyone has said here but I still don’t understand the sentence. It just doesn’t make any sense to me. How in the world and in what sense could the Eucharist be over. I find the whole thing rather confusing.

The best way to find out what he means or what his intention is would be to ask him. Simply say “Father, I don’t really understand what you mean when you say ‘the Eucharist is ended’. Could you please explain it to me?” Then, you’ll know what he is intending.

If that also makes him realize that he is not making things easier for his parishioners, than good.

 

[malphono]

I have to inject a note of levity here. Some time ago, there was a priest in Detroit who was notorious for malapropisms. (He was often known as “Fither” and was so notorious that the malapropisms were often called “Fitherisms” but I digress.) Anyway, back when the OF first appeared, at the conclusion of one particular Mass, he bellowed out (and very dramatically), “Go, the (a)ss is mended” at which point there was dead silence. Then came a titter of laughter followed by a chorus of gusty guffaws followed by a very red-faced priest!

 

[lizaanne]

There are actually several options in the Sacramentary for the ending.

And, if present, the deacon is supposed to be the one saying it.

In latin, the option is “Ite, missa est.”

In English for the US, the three options:

1. “Go in the peace of Christ.”
2. “The Mass is ended, go in peace.”
3. “Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.”

Certain other countries with English have slightly different wordings.

I used to attend a parish where the priest would say:

“Go in peace to love and serve the Lord — and one another.”

I heard it so many times I still expect to hear it sometimes. Thankfully our priests don’t feel the need to “put their fingerprints” on the Mass as one post above puts it.

~Liza

 

[Aramis]

I used to attend a parish where the priest would say:

“Go in peace to love and serve the Lord — and one another.”

I heard it so many times I still expect to hear it sometimes. Thankfully our priests don’t feel the need to “put their fingerprints” on the Mass as one post above puts it.

~Liza

I know a few priests who say, “The Mass has ended; Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.”

Doesn’t make it right. Pick one, reverend father…

 

[lizaanne]

I know a few priests who say, “The Mass has ended; Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.”

Doesn’t make it right. Pick one, reverend father…

Oh yes!!! That’s exactly what he would do, I forgot!!

“The Mass has ended; Go in peace to love and serve the Lord — and one another.”

Sheesh

~Liza

 

[miniquedoes]

I just recently met a priest who said every time “The Mass is never ended…it must be lived.”

 

[benedictgal]

I just recently met a priest who said every time “The Mass is never ended…it must be lived.”

That is reprobated. The CDWDS had told LifeTeen to cease using this ilicit dismissal.