What is the purpose of the additional Eucharistic Prayers in the Novus Ordo?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jas84173

Guest
I am just curious why the traditional Eucharistic Prayer 1 which is the only one present in the EF isn’t the standard? By what authority or reason are there Prayers 2,3, and 4?
 
Last edited:
pianistclare said:
From One Eucharistic Prayer to Many: How it Happened and Why
Click to expand...
Thanks for that link. What an amazing story. Even though I lived through those times, most of those events occurred beneath the radar of the laity. A circuitous, byzantine narrative of how we got frm then to now.

Even at a young age, I was always enamored of the Roman Canon (now Eucharistic Prayer I), and had practically memorized it in English from reading the English side of the missal. For a long time it fell out of favor, but now I notice that our new young priests are using it a lot more often.
 
A lot of younger priests are more traditional than many older ones. A priest in my parish is learning how to do the EF. And even in the Norvus Ordo he uses Latin and other Eucharistic Prayers besides just number 2 which sadly has become the most used more than likely because it’s the shortest. Sad.
 
Last edited:
I feel like it should be the most used with others used on occasion. Prayer 2 is just I mean it’s legit of course but I definitely do not feel much reverence under it.
 
piansitclare’s article gave the reasoning and process. Honestly, the reasons don’t seem that compelling to me (variety for its own sake apparently, the canon is supposedly cumbersome to say aloud, and priests were experimenting with unauthorized prayers).

With regard to authority, liturgical change comes from the supreme authority of the Church:

Council of Trent, Session 21:
It furthermore declares, that this power has ever been in the Church, that, in the dispensation of the sacraments, their substance being untouched, it may ordain,–or change, what things soever it may judge most expedient, for the profit of those who receive, or for the veneration of the said sacraments, according to the difference of circumstances, times, and places.
Click to expand...
Pius XII, Mediator Dei
  1. It follows from this that the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Of course. I think I used the wrong word. I didn’t mean authority like the Church couldn’t. It was more of a what purpose did it have for it. Which that article above does a great job discussing.
 
It’s a long article even though it’s just a summary of events. But I would urge anyone to read through it who wants to get a feel for what those times of turbulent liturgical experimentation were like.
 
jas84173 said:
I feel like it should be the most used with others used on occasion. Prayer 2 is just I mean it’s legit of course but I definitely do not feel much reverence under it.
Click to expand...
I’ll agree up to the end. I won’t argue feelings though.

EP 2 has it’s purpose. It was originally intended to be used for weekday Masses.

It fits that niche quite well. It serves its purpose.

I use it for almost every weekday Mass unless there’s some reason to add more solemnity. I’ll probably use the Roman Canon tomorrow for the Presentation (just as example).
 
GIRM CH Vll norms: a) " Eucharistic Prayer I, or the Roman Canon, which may always be used, is especially suited for use on days to which a proper text for the Communicantes (In communion with those whose memory we venerate) is assigned or in Masses endowed with a proper form of the Hanc igitur (Therefore, Lord, we pray) and also in the celebrations of the Apostles and of the Saints mentioned in the Prayer itself; likewise it is especially suited for use on Sundays, unless for pastoral reasons Eucharistic Prayer III is preferred."

Yet I hear prayer 2 more than anything.
 
Last edited:
me too. I only hear Eucharistic Prayer I by very traditional, young priests or at Easter.

Personally, I wish they would mandate Eucharistic Prayer I for at least all Holy Days, Easter, Holy Thursday, plus some other feasts, etc.
 
In my parish it is normally #2 for weekdays, #3 for Sundays, Roman canon #1 for solemnities and major celebrations. When our priest is tired he prays #4 (said he needed to concentrate more on what he is actually doing and why). Sometimes the extra EPs if there is a mass with families or children’s activities in church afterwards. A lot more variation now with the new priest, which makes at least me, having to concentrate more on the prayers as I sometime ring the bells and adjust sound.

My favourite is #4 as I love the eastern way of expression. It also works very well with my protestant background.
 
phil19034 said:
me too. I only hear Eucharistic Prayer I by very traditional, young priests or at Easter.

Personally, I wish they would mandate Eucharistic Prayer I for at least all Holy Days, Easter, Holy Thursday, plus some other feasts, etc.
Click to expand...
It’s really not that simple.

It was easy when there was only one option.

But now that the options do exist, there are reasons why EP 2 might be preferred for any particular Mass.

For example, I don’t speak Spanish, but I can get through a Mass in Spanish. I use EP2 (and I admit, because it’s shortest). Prohibiting its use on Easter (or requiring EP1) would put a burden on me that’s not necessary. Yes, I “could” learn to do it in Spanish, but the value of insisting on EP1 does not outweigh the burden in a situation like this.

I also use EP2 when I’m not feeling well or if I’m in some situation where I have to use the shorter of the available options (heat or A/C is broken or the weather is bad), or if the Mass started late.

The point is that there are all kinds of reasons why a priest might choose EP2. And it just doesn’t make sense to take that option away from him by mandating a certain EP on certain days; at least not when the EP itself is suitable for any Sunday (and not all of them are).
 
FrDavid96 said:
40.png
phil19034:
me too. I only hear Eucharistic Prayer I by very traditional, young priests or at Easter.

Personally, I wish they would mandate Eucharistic Prayer I for at least all Holy Days, Easter, Holy Thursday, plus some other feasts, etc.
Click to expand...
It’s really not that simple.

It was easy when there was only one option.

But now that the options do exist, there are reasons why EP 2 might be preferred for any particular Mass.

For example, I don’t speak Spanish, but I can get through a Mass in Spanish. I use EP2 (and I admit, because it’s shortest). Prohibiting its use on Easter (or requiring EP1) would put a burden on me that’s not necessary. Yes, I “could” learn to do it in Spanish, but the value of insisting on EP1 does not outweigh the burden in a situation like this.

I also use EP2 when I’m not feeling well or if I’m in some situation where I have to use the shorter of the available options (heat or A/C is broken or the weather is bad), or if the Mass started late.

The point is that there are all kinds of reasons why a priest might choose EP2. And it just doesn’t make sense to take that option away from him by mandating a certain EP on certain days; at least not when the EP itself is suitable for any Sunday (and not all of them are).
Click to expand...
gotcha. thanks Father!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top