Which Eucharistic Prayer is my Priest Using?

[Charlie_Ham]

There are many, many resources to help me prepare for the Liturgy of the Word but I haven’t found any that help me to participate as fully as I want in the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

I would like to be able to recognize which Eucharistic Prayer my Parish Priest is using as soon as possible. The ideal way for me would be for it to be listed on the display for the hymns or for him to announce it. He declines because he says sometimes he doesn’t know which Eucharistic Prayer he will use until he is at the Altar. I have made some “cheat sheets” with key words listed and, for example, I can recognize Eucharistic Prayer II from “font” and “dew fall”. I know when he is using Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children I-III because he uses the little red book from USCCB instead of the Sacramentary. Other than that I can’t identify which Eucharistic Prayer of the 13 he is praying.
Is there a resource you can direct me to?
Just knowing which Prayer we are praying is only part of my need. Once I know which Prayer we are praying I want to be able to relate to it. I would like a resource that compares and contrasts all 13 Eucharistic Prayers in great detail. After studying that I could relate to each Prayer in a deeper way. I could know and appreciate the differences.
Is there a resource you can direct me to?
This is my 1st Post.

Thanks, Charlie Ham

 

[bobballen_18]

Pretty much just commenting to be subscribed to the thread. As far as I know, there are only currently four Eucharistic Prayers allowed in the Roman Missal in the Ordinary Form, so I’m interested in other answers.

 

[midori]

Our priest recently used a Eucharistic prayer that wasn’t in the missal— I can’t remember which one it was, or what the occasion was, but he explained a little bit about how there were special Eucharistic prayers for certain occasions.

This page has some links to at least 13 different valid Eucharistic prayers-- the four normal ones, two for Masses of Reconciliation, three for Masses with Children, and a set of four marked “for various needs and intentions”.

 

[bobballen_18]

Our priest recently used a Eucharistic prayer that wasn’t in the missal— I can’t remember which one it was, or what the occasion was, but he explained a little bit about how there were special Eucharistic prayers for certain occasions.

This page has some links to at least 13 different valid Eucharistic prayers-- the four normal ones, two for Masses of Reconciliation, three for Masses with Children, and a set of four marked “for various needs and intentions”.

OK, that’s helpful for comparing the different Eucharistic Prayers. My question is, were these various versions of the Eucharistic prayer just made up post-Vatican II? Or did they have their origin in another Rite? Or did they appear in the Roman Rite in its earlier days?

I wonder what the value is of having so many different Eucharistic Prayers. To me the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I) seems to be the appropriate one for the Roman Rite. But I suppose that is not a common thought these days.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

There are many, many resources to help me prepare for the Liturgy of the Word but I haven’t found any that help me to participate as fully as I want in the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

I would like to be able to recognize which Eucharistic Prayer my Parish Priest is using as soon as possible. The ideal way for me would be for it to be listed on the display for the hymns or for him to announce it. He declines because he says sometimes he doesn’t know which Eucharistic Prayer he will use until he is at the Altar. I have made some “cheat sheets” with key words listed and, for example, I can recognize Eucharistic Prayer II from “font” and “dew fall”. I know when he is using Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children I-III because he uses the little red book from USCCB instead of the Sacramentary. Other than that I can’t identify which Eucharistic Prayer of the 13 he is praying.
Is there a resource you can direct me to?
Just knowing which Prayer we are praying is only part of my need. Once I know which Prayer we are praying I want to be able to relate to it. I would like a resource that compares and contrasts all 13 Eucharistic Prayers in great detail. After studying that I could relate to each Prayer in a deeper way. I could know and appreciate the differences.
Is there a resource you can direct me to?
This is my 1st Post.

Thanks, Charlie Ham

I assume you are wanting a resource that you can have at hand as opposed to looking at on a webpage. The best, honestly, is probably the booklet that we priests use when we concelebrate. There is one booklet that has the standard four Eucharistic Prayers plus the two Eucharistic Prayers for Masses of Reconciliation (which were authored for the Holy Year 1975) and then the four versions of the Eucharistic Prayer for Various Needs and Occasions (which in Europe we just called the Swiss Canon).

Unfortunately, the three Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children are in a separate booklet. (These prayers are, if I may say, off my beaten path in that I rarely encounter them and have had recourse to them while celebrating the liturgy only a handful of times in their existence. I mainly dealt with them when I was a professor and discussed them in my lectures.)

I assume you are in North America so the first link is for the American publisher and has both booklets. For reasons that mystify me, the Americans seem only to have a hardbound version for the concelebrant’s booklet, which makes no sense to me and also makes the booklet much more expensive. I give you a second link to the Catholic Truth Society in the United Kingdom that does have the paper version, which is less than half the price – it’s less than five pounds which should be less than eight American dollars.

ltp.org/s-37-revised-roman-missal.aspx

ctsbooks.org/eucharistic-prayers-for-concelebration/

 

[Don_Ruggero]

OK, that’s helpful for comparing the different Eucharistic Prayers. My question is, were these various versions of the Eucharistic prayer just made up post-Vatican II? Or did they have their origin in another Rite? Or did they appear in the Roman Rite in its earlier days?

I wonder what the value is of having so many different Eucharistic Prayers. To me the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I) seems to be the appropriate one for the Roman Rite. But I suppose that is not a common thought these days.

Eucharistic Prayer I is the canon codified by Gregory the Great, with some subsequent modifications in later eras.
Eucharistic Prayer II is essentially the canon of Hippolytus (with some debate among some scholars beyond our concern here), so its origin points toward the 3rd century.
Eucharistic Prayer III is a modern composition, largely of Father Cipriano Vagaggini, the renowned liturgical scholar.
Eucharistic Prayer IV is rather a Latin Church version that seeks to evoke the Eastern anaphoras.
The Eucharistic Prayers of Reconciliation (I-II) were gifts to the Church by Pope Paul VI on the occasion of the Holy Year 1975 and they remain in use for Masses that have a theme of “reconciliation”…I would posit their use is most popular in Lent.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Various Needs and Occasions (I-IV) originate in Switzerland (hence the name we use in Europe…the Swiss Canon), in 1974 or thereabout and have very specific themes and hence their use is regulated by the selection of Mass text.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children were an attempt to make the language and liturgical action more accessible to the very young.

Personally, I use Eucharistic Prayer I on the most solemn of occasions, the feasts of the saints commemorated in it and, most especially, when there is a Communicantes and Hanc Igitur associated with the solemnity being celebrated and then occasionally beyond that.

By and large, I find each text has its richness as well as its particular positive points that recommend it for certain occasions over another choice. I personally appreciate having the greater breadth of selection. The sentiment is not universally shared.

They were, in any event, not “just made up.” That characterization would be an injustice to the process of their coming into existence.

 

[Charlie_Ham]

Eucharistic Prayer I is the canon codified by Gregory the Great, with some subsequent modifications in later eras.
Eucharistic Prayer II is essentially the canon of Hippolytus (with some debate among some scholars beyond our concern here), so its origin points toward the 3rd century.
Eucharistic Prayer III is a modern composition, largely of Father Cipriano Vagaggini, the renowned liturgical scholar.
Eucharistic Prayer IV is rather a Latin Church version that seeks to evoke the Eastern anaphoras.
The Eucharistic Prayers of Reconciliation (I-II) were gifts to the Church by Pope Paul VI on the occasion of the Holy Year 1975 and they remain in use for Masses that have a theme of “reconciliation”…I would posit their use is most popular in Lent.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Various Needs and Occasions (I-IV) originate in Switzerland (hence the name we use in Europe…the Swiss Canon), in 1974 or thereabout and have very specific themes and hence their use is regulated by the selection of Mass text.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children were an attempt to make the language and liturgical action more accessible to the very young.

Personally, I use Eucharistic Prayer I on the most solemn of occasions, the feasts of the saints commemorated in it and, most especially, when there is a Communicantes and Hanc Igitur associated with the solemnity being celebrated and then occasionally beyond that.

By and large, I find each text has its richness as well as its particular positive points that recommend it for certain occasions over another choice. I personally appreciate having the greater breadth of selection. The sentiment is not universally shared.

They were, in any event, not “just made up.” That characterization would be an injustice to the process of their coming into existence.

Thank you, Fr. Ruggero,
Your 3rd and 2nd to last paragraphs are examples of what I am seeking. I want to recognize early in the Prayer what to expect, for example, the “solemnity”, the “particular positive points” that you mentioned.
BarryHudock’s “The Eucharistic Prayer - A Users Guide” is an excellent source of information like you listed in the 1st part of your 2nd post and the reference to Fr. Felix Just Midori cited is an excellent side-by-side listing of the words of the Prayers. Maybe what I want is only achieved by years of Seminary and subsequent daily Celebration of the Mass. Charlie Ham

 

[phil19034]

Eucharistic Prayer I is the canon codified by Gregory the Great, with some subsequent modifications in later eras.
Eucharistic Prayer II is essentially the canon of Hippolytus (with some debate among some scholars beyond our concern here), so its origin points toward the 3rd century.
Eucharistic Prayer III is a modern composition, largely of Father Cipriano Vagaggini, the renowned liturgical scholar.
Eucharistic Prayer IV is rather a Latin Church version that seeks to evoke the Eastern anaphoras.
The Eucharistic Prayers of Reconciliation (I-II) were gifts to the Church by Pope Paul VI on the occasion of the Holy Year 1975 and they remain in use for Masses that have a theme of “reconciliation”…I would posit their use is most popular in Lent.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Various Needs and Occasions (I-IV) originate in Switzerland (hence the name we use in Europe…the Swiss Canon), in 1974 or thereabout and have very specific themes and hence their use is regulated by the selection of Mass text.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children were an attempt to make the language and liturgical action more accessible to the very young.

Personally, I use Eucharistic Prayer I on the most solemn of occasions, the feasts of the saints commemorated in it and, most especially, when there is a Communicantes and Hanc Igitur associated with the solemnity being celebrated and then occasionally beyond that.

By and large, I find each text has its richness as well as its particular positive points that recommend it for certain occasions over another choice. I personally appreciate having the greater breadth of selection. The sentiment is not universally shared.

They were, in any event, not “just made up.” That characterization would be an injustice to the process of their coming into existence.

thank you Father! I know that part of the reason for the changes to the Mass was an attempt to return to a version of the liturgy which most closely matched that of the earliest Church. Is that why there are some priests (and Bishops) who prefer Eucharistic Prayer II and almost exclusively use it (or almost never use Prayer I)?

 

[bobballen_18]

Eucharistic Prayer I is the canon codified by Gregory the Great, with some subsequent modifications in later eras.
Eucharistic Prayer II is essentially the canon of Hippolytus (with some debate among some scholars beyond our concern here), so its origin points toward the 3rd century.
Eucharistic Prayer III is a modern composition, largely of Father Cipriano Vagaggini, the renowned liturgical scholar.
Eucharistic Prayer IV is rather a Latin Church version that seeks to evoke the Eastern anaphoras.
The Eucharistic Prayers of Reconciliation (I-II) were gifts to the Church by Pope Paul VI on the occasion of the Holy Year 1975 and they remain in use for Masses that have a theme of “reconciliation”…I would posit their use is most popular in Lent.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Various Needs and Occasions (I-IV) originate in Switzerland (hence the name we use in Europe…the Swiss Canon), in 1974 or thereabout and have very specific themes and hence their use is regulated by the selection of Mass text.
The Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children were an attempt to make the language and liturgical action more accessible to the very young.

Personally, I use Eucharistic Prayer I on the most solemn of occasions, the feasts of the saints commemorated in it and, most especially, when there is a Communicantes and Hanc Igitur associated with the solemnity being celebrated and then occasionally beyond that.

By and large, I find each text has its richness as well as its particular positive points that recommend it for certain occasions over another choice. I personally appreciate having the greater breadth of selection. The sentiment is not universally shared.

They were, in any event, not “just made up.” That characterization would be an injustice to the process of their coming into existence.

Thanks for that information, Father - I wasn’t meaning to insult the any of the Eucharistic prayers by wondering if they were made up. Well technically all of them were made up, right, but I was wondering more, who and when were they made up, and you answered my questions.

I guess as I touched on in my previous post, what is the point of having many different Eucharistic prayers? I hate to sound like some kind of skeptic, but I’m just curious about this. Wasn’t there only one Eucharistic prayer used in the Roman Rite - the Roman Canon - in whichever stage of its development? If this isn’t the case, well, then I guess my question becomes somewhat irrelevant - but if it is the case, why was the Roman Canon no longer the prescribed Eucharistic prayer? Why were options added in the 1970 Missal? What is it about the Roman Canon which caused the creators of the Ordinary Form, and other liturgical scholars, to think there needed to be other options?

 

[Phemie]

In the Novalis Sunday Missal, the page before the first EP has a list showing the first sentence and page number of each of EP I,II, III & IV, Reconciliation I & II and Various Occasions I, II, III, & IV.

You could make a list for yourself with the page numbers of the first 6. The ones for “Various Occasions” are less obvious since they are identical until after the Mysterium Fidei.

As for the EPs for Children they are not supposed to be used unless it’s a Mass with mainly children, although I must admit that I’ve experienced their use at Masses without so much as one child present.

 

[Charlie_Ham]

In the Novalis Sunday Missal, the page before the first EP has a list showing the first sentence and page number of each of EP I,II, III & IV, Reconciliation I & II and Various Occasions I, II, III, & IV.

You could make a list for yourself with the page numbers of the first 6. The ones for “Various Occasions” are less obvious since they are identical until after the Mysterium Fidei.

As for the EPs for Children they are not supposed to be used unless it’s a Mass with mainly children, although I must admit that I’ve experienced their use at Masses without so much as one child present.

Thanks Phemie, Yes, I’ve used your suggestion to make lists and am slowly making a little progress in recognizing which Prayer is being prayed.
The Preface for “Various Occasions” and EP IV are supposed to be “fixed” so that is a help.
If there is not a resource for this, is anyone up to writing one???

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

thank you Father! I know that part of the reason for the changes to the Mass was an attempt to return to a version of the liturgy which most closely matched that of the earliest Church. Is that why there are some priests (and Bishops) who prefer Eucharistic Prayer II and almost exclusively use it (or almost never use Prayer I)?

There is no polling for why priests use the EPs they do. The priests I know typically stick to EPs I, II, and III (though one is particularly enamored of various needs and occasions 3), with the most frequently-cited reason for using EP II being simple brevity. Those who are seeking the most ancient Roman worship, however, are unlikely to gravitate with any certitude toward EPII because by the turn of our century the scholarly consensus on its origin had fallen apart - the “Apostolic Tradition” upon which EPII is based is now widely considered to be neither attributable to Hippolytus, nor Roman (more likely Syrian or Egyptian), nor as early as once thought (parts of the document may date to the early 3rd century but it is likely a compilation with the prayer in question possibly stemming from the late 4th century).

 

[ProVobis]

I guess as I touched on in my previous post, what is the point of having many different Eucharistic prayers? I hate to sound like some kind of skeptic, but I’m just curious about this. Wasn’t there only one Eucharistic prayer used in the Roman Rite - the Roman Canon - in whichever stage of its development? If this isn’t the case, well, then I guess my question becomes somewhat irrelevant - but if it is the case, why was the Roman Canon no longer the prescribed Eucharistic prayer? Why were options added in the 1970 Missal? What is it about the Roman Canon which caused the creators of the Ordinary Form, and other liturgical scholars, to think there needed to be other options?

As I understand it, in the 60’s there were over 20 some Eucharistic Prayers being used. Pope Paul actually narrowed it down to four when he promulgated the new rite in 1969. Why he allowed even this many seems to be constantly debated, but unfortunately when you ask this question, you’re somehow questioning the validity of the Mass,.which is often not the case. But personally I would like to know as well just out of curiosity if nothing else.

 

[HaroldA]

Maybe I’m wrong but I thought that the EPs for Reconciliation were eliminated in the revised Missal that came out two years or so ago?

Edit to amend my post to say I thought it was the EPs for use with children that were eliminated?

 

[bobballen_18]

As I understand it, in the 60’s there were over 20 some Eucharistic Prayers being used. Pope Paul actually narrowed it down to four when he promulgated the new rite in 1969. Why he allowed even this many seems to be constantly debated, but unfortunately when you ask this question, you’re somehow questioning the validity of the Mass,.which is often not the case. But personally I would like to know as well just out of curiosity if nothing else.

By “in the 60’s there were over 20 some Eucharistic Prayers being used” do you mean that these 20 some were being used in what is now called the Extraordinary Form of the Mass? Or are you saying that in the interim between the Council and the 1970 Missal 20 some were used and Paul VI narrowed them down to the four in the 1970 Missal? As I mentioned in my previous post, I thought that in the 1962 Missal there was only one Eucharistic Prayer - the Roman Canon - used, and that it has always been that way in the Roman Rite (obviously this includes the various small changes over time which the Roman Canon has seen).

Right, I’m not questioning the validity of using any different Eucharistic Prayer, nor am I questioning the validity of the OF Mass - obviously they are all valid/allowed - but ever since I began actually learning about the EF I have been very curious about the reasoning and/or origin behind the things we see in the OF which I do not see in an EF Mass.

 

[phil19034]

By “in the 60’s there were over 20 some Eucharistic Prayers being used” do you mean that these 20 some were being used in what is now called the Extraordinary Form of the Mass? Or are you saying that in the interim between the Council and the 1970 Missal 20 some were used and Paul VI narrowed them down to the four in the 1970 Missal? As I mentioned in my previous post, I thought that in the 1962 Missal there was only one Eucharistic Prayer - the Roman Canon - used, and that it has always been that way in the Roman Rite (obviously this includes the various small changes over time which the Roman Canon has seen).

Right, I’m not questioning the validity of using any different Eucharistic Prayer, nor am I questioning the validity of the OF Mass - obviously they are all valid/allowed - but ever since I began actually learning about the EF I have been very curious about the reasoning and/or origin behind the things we see in the OF which I do not see in an EF Mass.

in Europe, there was a lot of liturgical abuses happening with the 1962 Mass. Also, some of the religious orders had their own variations. Perhaps that’s where the number 20 is coming from?

Or perhaps there was 20 different drafts of different Eucharistic Prayers written in preparation of the 1970 Mass?

 

[bobballen_18]

in Europe, there was a lot of liturgical abuses happening with the 1962 Mass. Also, some of the religious orders had their own variations. Perhaps that’s where the number 20 is coming from?

Or perhaps there was 20 different drafts of different Eucharistic Prayers written in preparation of the 1970 Mass?

Yeah, those seem like they are possibilities.

But regarding orders, I thought that if anything was different with an order, it would be literally a different rite - for example, the Dominicans actually continued using the Dominican Rite, where there might have been a Eucharistic Prayer (I have no idea if the Dominican Rite uses a different Eucharistic Prayer). But for everyone using the Roman Rite, at least up until 1962, I have never heard of anything besides the Roman Canon being used. Not that I know everything - far from it…lol - I just don’t know/haven’t heard of that.

Regarding after 1962 and in “preparation” for the current Ordinary Form, why would there have been the impression that a different Eucharistic Prayer than the Roman Canon needed to be used? Was there a perceived, I don’t know, deficiency or lacking in the Roman Canon which made “liturgical scholars” feel like there needed to at least be more options? I’m operating under the assumption that there must have been a reason for this, and I’m trying to find out what it is. Was there the thought that there are more “appropriate” Eucharistic prayers for different kinds of Masses - that the Roman Canon was “insufficient” in this manner for these different kinds of Masses? Too elaborate? Too long?

 

[Charlie_Ham]

Maybe I’m wrong but I thought that the EPs for Reconciliation were eliminated in the revised Missal that came out two years or so ago?

Edit to amend my post to say I thought it was the EPs for use with children that were eliminated?

Not eliminated but a different designation than the others - see here

During the past year or so since I’ve been trying to identify which Prayer my Priest is using, he has used two different Eucharistic Prayers from his Seminary days. They were yellowed sheets of type written text in sheet protectors. One was “Mass for Healing” and I forgot the other. I noticed because they definitely had a different “mood” about them. That’s what I want - to be able to really sense and appreciate the differences but so far it has been a struggle…

 

[JimG]

I don’t have them in front of me but it seems that if you memorize the first sentence of each of the main four Eucharistic Prayers, you will recognize them at the outset. However, I’m not aware of the other possibilities (up to 13?)

 

[HaroldA]

Not eliminated but a different designation than the others - see here

During the past year or so since I’ve been trying to identify which Prayer my Priest is using, he has used two different Eucharistic Prayers from his Seminary days. They were yellowed sheets of type written text in sheet protectors. One was “Mass for Healing” and I forgot the other. I noticed because they definitely had a different “mood” about them. That’s what I want - to be able to really sense and appreciate the differences but so far it has been a struggle…

Thanks.