Which Memorial Acclamation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter papaspicy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

papaspicy

Guest
This is a very simple question, but I don’t know where else to look for the answer. How should the Memorial Acclamation said at each mass get chosen? I feel that 95% of the time churches say, “Christ has died…” But I really like the others as well. Is there a method to the choice that should be followed? When I was a leader for the choir a number of years ago in college, we always sang, “Christ has died…” because we didn’t have music for the others. Of course we didn’t really look for it, and really we didn’t know any better or get instruction on what we were supposed to do. Is this the case at most churches? That the choir or priest just uses the one is most conveinent?

Pax
 
To the best of my knowledge there is no particular way to chose the Memorial Acclamation.

It’s usually a matter of the preference of the priest, music director, liturgy director, or whoever has been delegated the task of making the choice at a particular parish.
 
#1 is the only one that speaks of Christ in the 3rd person. The others speak of Christ in the 2nd person. Considering that Christ has just become present on the altar, #1 doesn’t seem to be theologically correct.

In fact in the Latin version of the Novus Ordo, Mysterium Fidei, although taken out of the Precious Blood consecration, still remains the same verbage. I’ve read that the intent was to refer to to the consecrations when the priest said it, as in “This has been the mystery of our faith” and the people respond to an acclimation to Christ on the altar. But it got translated “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith”. It doesn’t make sense to have 4 mysteries of faith, when the priest says the mystery of faith, as in one mystery of faith.

Hopefully this will become more clear when and if the new English translations come into use, and the “let us proclaim” is dropped.
 
Good point, Asperges and I believe I have read this is something that is going to be addressed.

Having said that, in my parish, if our priest says Eucharistic Prayer 1, we sing memorial acclamation 1; if he says Eucharistic Prayer 2, we sing memorial acclamation 2, if he says EP3, we sing MA3, and if he says EP4, we sing MA4.
 
In my parish, when the parochial vicar celebrates daily Mass, we sing, “When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory.”

Interestingly, during Masses celebrated by Pope Benedict XVI, this acclamation is used: “Salvator mundi, salvanos. Qui per crucem et resurrectionem, tuam liberasti nos.” This translates into: Savior of the world, save us. By your cross and resurrection, you have liberated us."

The ICEL should be nearly done with the new translation of the Roman Missal. From what I have read, Cardinal Arinze is holding their collective feet to the fire and is heavily suggesting (or, stronger) that they use Liturgicam Authenticam.

Now, while this is slighly off-topic, I share the opinion of Fr. Richard John Neuhaus that the current translations we are using for the Lectinary are, in a word, sorry. They are just plain bad and are not even beautiful language. They are also very confusing. I’ve had to check out the real meaning of one the Lectionary’s NAB gems, the Gospel reading for the Vigil of Pentecost. “There was, of course, no Spirit, for Jesus had not yet been glorified,” as taken from John’s Gospel. In the D-Rheims translation, it reads, “The Spirit had not yet been poured forth, as the Lord had not yet been glorified.” If you don’t believe me, grab a Lectionary or a dailyi Roman Missal and see for yourself.
 
The priest may choose, by his own devices (personal preference, rotation system, 4-sided die) which memorial acclamation to use, but he may ONLY choose from the four acclamations that are approved for Catholic worship:
  1. Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.
  2. Dying you restored our death, rising you restored our life, Lord Jesus come in glory.
  3. Lord, by your cross and ressurection, you have set us free. You are the savior of the world.
  4. When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death Lord Jesus, until you come in glory.
The priest may NOT, however, make up his own acclamation.

“Keep in mind that Jesus Christ has died for us and is risen from the dead. He is our saving Lord. He is joy for all ages” is one such acclamation that is commonly used. Beautiful and true though it may be, it is not proper, and should not be used.

MT
 
We use “When we eat this bread…” from the Mass of Rememberence.
 
Pax vobiscum!

At the Mass I normally attend, we do the “mysterium fidei” in Latin every week.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Pax vobiscum!

At the Mass I normally attend, we do the “mysterium fidei” in Latin every week.

In Christ,
Rand
I’m curious as to which one you use. Do you use the one that Pope Benedict uses at his Masses? Forgive my ignorance, but I think it is from the De Angelis setting. We used it for our diocese’s White Mass and everybody loved it. Unfortunately, no one’s used it since.
 
“Salvator mundi, salvanos. Qui per crucem et resurrectionem, tuam liberasti nos.” This translates into: Savior of the world, save us. By your cross and resurrection, you have liberated us."
I could be remembering wrong, but I believe this is the response at every Latin NO Mass at Thomas Aquinas College. It’s been years, but that seems to be the one, although I haven’t heard it anywhere since.
In fact in the Latin version of the Novus Ordo, Mysterium Fidei, although taken out of the Precious Blood consecration, still remains the same verbage. I’ve read that the intent was to refer to to the consecrations when the priest said it, as in “This has been the mystery of our faith” and the people respond to an acclimation to Christ on the altar. But it got translated “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith”. It doesn’t make sense to have 4 mysteries of faith, when the priest says the mystery of faith, as in one mystery of faith.
I think the same thing. I don’t know if this is correct or not, but I usually abstain from this prayer on the grounds that, taking my cues from the TLM, the 'Mysterium Fidei" is the transubstantiation inself, not any of the other four options. I don’t think that the other four aren’t, individually, ‘a’ Mystery, but it seems that from the Latin, THE Mystery has already occurred.

Anyone out there know for sure what’s up with that? Also, if it’s clearly a misinterpretation of the Latin, which it seems to be, how come it’s so hard to just make the correction?
 
I’m curious as to which one you use. Do you use the one that Pope Benedict uses at his Masses? Forgive my ignorance, but I think it is from the De Angelis setting. We used it for our diocese’s White Mass and everybody loved it. Unfortunately, no one’s used it since.
I don’t think the De Angelis covers those responses- only the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei (and Ite Missa Est).
 
In Canada, unlike the US, we have a different introductions for each acclamation. While any of the acclamations can be used with “Let us proclaim the Mystery of Faith”, that introduction usually gets us 'Christ has died…"

But if the priest uses another intro we know we are supposed to use another response:

Priest: Praise to you, Lord Jesus, firstborn from the dead.
All: Dying you destroyed our death…

Priest: We are faithful, Lord, to your command.
All: When we eat this bread…

Priest: Christ is Lord of all ages.
All: Lord, by your cross and resurrection…
 
we use the one that begins "Mortem Tuam anunciamus Domine. . . " don’t know if I am spelling it right, I learned it by ear.
 
In Canada, unlike the US, we have a different introductions for each acclamation. While any of the acclamations can be used with “Let us proclaim the Mystery of Faith”, that introduction usually gets us 'Christ has died…"

But if the priest uses another intro we know we are supposed to use another response:

Priest: Praise to you, Lord Jesus, firstborn from the dead.
Priest: We are faithful, Lord, to your command.
Priest: Christ is Lord of all ages.
Wow. That might be what was permitted for the Canadian Missal, but I’m going to be honest: ick. Where is Mysterium fidei? It’s been removed 3/4 of the time!
 
Wow. That might be what was permitted for the Canadian Missal, but I’m going to be honest: ick. Where is Mysterium fidei? It’s been removed 3/4 of the time!
As I understand it the US bishops had looked at doing the same thing but didn’t follow though with it. It’s probable that the Canadian RM will not have these in the upcoming translation.
 
As I understand it the US bishops had looked at doing the same thing but didn’t follow though with it. It’s probable that the Canadian RM will not have these in the upcoming translation.
The problem is that the Roman Missal of the vernacular language is supposed to have the exact translation of the Latin one. It’s not supposed to be a paraphrase. I suspect that the Canadian version of the Roman Missal will soon disappear when ICEL gets the approval for the new (and, hopefully, more accurate) version.
 
The problem is that the Roman Missal of the vernacular language is supposed to have the exact translation of the Latin one. It’s not supposed to be a paraphrase. I suspect that the Canadian version of the Roman Missal will soon disappear when ICEL gets the approval for the new (and, hopefully, more accurate) version.
You have to wonder why it was approved by the CDW in the first place.
 
You have to wonder why it was approved by the CDW in the first place.
That’s the same question I keep asking about both our Sacramentary and our Lectionary. The Lectionary is just awful.

Incidentally, I am most curious about Dying you destroyed our death, Rising your restored our Life, Lord Jesus, Come in Glory. I think that what the original Latin meant was:

We announce your death, O Lord. We proclaim your resurrection. Come, Lord Jesus.

This is similar to the Spanish: Anunciamos tu muerte, Senor. Proclamamos tu recurreccion. Ven Senor Jesus.

Just a thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top