What Does The Prayer Really Say?
W D T P R S

The Vox Clara Committee begins meetings in Rome on Monday.

A prayer for translators
Almighty and merciful God,
who hast poured forth the Holy Spirit abundantly
upon the Church of Thine Only-begotten Son,
vouchsafe, we beseech Thee, inspiration and constancy
to those now laboring with great zeal
in rendering the prayers of the same Holy Church
from Latin into the diverse languages of all nations,
so that we who were estranged by an ancient act of pride
may be able both to offer Thee prayers properly
and being one in heart and mind receive from Thee the means of salvation.

The Latin text of the Holy Father’s encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia (EdE) became a battlefield in the pro multis wars being waged in the halls of the Holy See.  You might remember what happened.

In that encyclical the late Pope referred to the words of "institution" (that’s "consecration" for me and you).  He used, in the English, “for all” rather than “for many.”   This also appeared in the unofficial Latin of the encyclical at the time of its release.  "ARRRGGH", quoth I.  Then I got down to work to figure out what had happened.

In my WDTPRS columns I went through all the Scripture and showed also that, probably in their haste, the people in charge of the release of the encyclical had made mistakes in the Biblical citations. “Mt 14:24” should have been either Matthew 26:28 or Mark 14:24.

Can you believe that?  That shot red flags up the pole for me, I can tell you.  Something was very very fishy about this whole thing. 

If that wasn’t bad enought, the Latin version of the Encyclical, at the time of its first release said: “qui pro vobis funditur et pro omnibus in remissionem peccatorum” which changed the words of Scripture and thus the Mass formula!

Mind you, the citation was clearly a paraphrase of the account and not a direct quote: it was cited with a confer (“cf.” or “cfr”) reference, so they have an out.  However, that was in fact, in black on white, the text at the time of the public release of Ecclesia de Eucharistia.

But wait, there’s more.  The certified text of any papal document is always promulgated in the official monthly publication of the Holy See called Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS).  Very often, after big documents come out with a great bang and splash, some months later the real text is issued, and it is different ­- and no one knows it because no one reads the Latin anymore. 

When you look now at the official AAS text of the EdE 2 wherein the Pope supposedly changed pro multis to pro omnibus we find that a correction has been made (cf. AAS 95 – 7 July 2003  – p. 434).  The pro multis is back in its proper place, the errant Scripture citations are cleaned up, and the bad pro omnibus is not to be found.

Someone, God bless him, put the smack down on pro omnibus in EdE 2.  

A Polish colleague of mine verifies that on the Vatican’s website, the Polish version of EdE says “za wielu…for many” in the controverted spot. 

Draw your conclusions as you will, someone, if not Pope John Paul himself (or a future Pope), had the clout to get this changed.  Since this was clearly a DOCTRINAL issue, I wonder who else could have been involved.    Hmmmmm…..

Here is the first entry for today in the Martyrologium Romanum:

Beatae Mariae Viriginis de Monte Carmelo, quo Elias propheta populum Israel quondam ad colendum Deum vivum reduxerat et postae eremitae quidam solitudinem quaerentes secesserunt ac denique Ordinem constituerunt ad vitam contemplativum ducendam sub patrocinio sanctae Dei Genetricis.

 

I know there are some clever readers who will try their hand at a translation. NB: there is a shift of subjects here so watch the "numbers" of the verbs.  Also, those verbal -nd constructions with ad will probably sound better as purpose clauses.

What Does the Prayer Really Say?  15th Sunday of Ordinary Time

ORIGINALLY PRINTED IN The Wanderer in 2003

More than one of you the faithful readers of WDTPRS have inquired about the Latin text of the Holy Father’s recent encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia which I said was on the Vatican’s internet website.  Apparently some folks are having difficulties locating it on the site.  Keeping in mind that webmasters rearrange sites and that web pages and their content are by definition not permanent, this is where you can find the document (this is case sensitive): http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/index.htm  At that address you can find multiple language choices, including the Church’s official tongue.  The webmasters of the Holy See’s site have been busy recently.  They have rearranged and made many texts available in Latin not previously to be found even though the other, modern languages were in evidence.  On the page I avert to above, the first two encyclicals, Ecclesia de Eucharistia (17 April 2003) and Fides et ratio 14 Sept 1998) are provided in both Latin and the seven major languages (English, French, German, Italian, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish) the Holy See normally provides.  Fides et ratio was considered important enough for a world-wide audience that it is also in Arabic!  They haven’t yet gotten around to getting the Latin versions of the previous encyclicals up and running.   I think the backend for these text pages is provided by the folks at Intratext Digital Library (http://www.intratext.com), the fascinating site in which I virtually live on some days.  

A while back I opined that, because of the recent coverage in the press of positive developments in favor of celebration of Mass using the 1962 Missale Romanum, the opposition would start to rally, close ranks and resist the calamities that would result from “turning the clock back” yadda yadda.  Remember that?  I suggested that it might have been better to remain quiet about the whole thing lest loose lips sink our ships.  The torpedoes are in the water, friends. In an article on the Vidimus Dominum (VID) site (www.vidimusdominum.org) we read that Fr. Rinaldo Falsini, OFM, who was an “expert” at the Second Vatican Council wrote in an Italian weekly called Settimama that a Catholic rite of St. Pius V does not exist because that rite, valid before the Council, has been profoundly reformed by Pope Paul VI according to the indication of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium.  The VID article further says, “The Franciscan friar recently published and strong criticism of Cardinal Ratzinger’s theses regarding the liturgy. This time his criticism is directed to the statements made by Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos during a Mass celebrated in Rome at the Basilica of Saint Mary Major according to the Rite of St. Pius V….  Fr. Falsini sustains that the legitimate Roman rite “is only one, the traditional rite revised and renewed by the Second Vatican Council reform. If the preceding rite, called the rite of St. Pius V, has the same value as the present Roman rite we would be in an unheard of situation which no one could allow. We have the right and duty to forcefully object to these irresponsible statements”.”  (emphasis added)  Behold a battle of experts (periti)!  Whose side to take… hmmm… let me think…. Falsini?  Ratzinger?  Falsini?  Ratzinger?....  At any rate, the fight is now more closely engaged.  I suspect we will see more of this sort of thing in the future.

POST COMMUNIONEM
LATIN (2002 Missale Romanum):
Sumptis muneribus, quaesumus, Domine,
ut, cum frequentatione mysterii,
crescat nostrae salutis effectus.
 
It seems to me that the vocabulary for even the basic student of Latin is not too much of a reach today.  However, we can look more closely at a couple words, with the help of our great bulwark against ignorance and confusion the Lewis & Short Dictionary.   Frequentatio means, “frequency, frequent use, a crowding together.” As a figure of speech, in rhetoric, it is “a condensed recapitulation of the arguments already stated separately, a recapitulation, summing up.”  This noun comes from the verb frequento, meaning “to visit or resort to frequently, to frequent; to do or make use of frequently, to repeat” and “to celebrate or keep in great numbers, esp. a festival.”  Or, in somewhat post-Augustan usage, of a single person, “to celebrate, observe, keep”.  In grammar, a “frequentative verb” describes a repeated action.  In English (there is an English noun “frequentation”, by the way) we once said more commonly when we went to a place or someone’s house with some frequency that we would “frequent” a place, as in the well-known Irish pub song The Wild Rover: “I went into a ale house I used to frequent, and I told the landlady my money was spent.  I asked her for credit, she answered me "Nay, such a custom as yours I can have any day!"    We had the phrase frequentare mysteria in the Super oblata of the 2nd Sunday of Ordinary time and the lovely alliterative frequentata mysteria in the Post communion of the 1st Sunday of Advent.  So, a frequentatio is a complex idea.  In this liturgical context it means “to attend or participate in often” and it has the over tone of being crowded together with others doing the same.  Just as an aside, consider frequentatio from the point of view of its use as a term in rhetoric: the celebration of Holy Mass is the source and summit of our Christian lives.  Our reception of Holy Communion in the context of Mass is really the fullness of what the Church calls “full, conscious and active participation” in the sacred liturgy (which is the “source and summit”).  In a way, is not the moment of Holy Communion being described in this prayer is a summation of the whole of the Christian’s identity and life?  How could it not be?  This is the Eternal Word made flesh, who dwelled among us so as to save us from our sins and reveal us more fully to ourselves (cf. Gaudium et spes 22).  Of all the sacraments Christ gave us, this Most Blessed Sacrament is the only one which actually is what it signifies: Christ truly present.  Christ, who is the Word spoken from eternity by the Father, is the frequentatio who at the end will take all things to Himself and submit them to the Father so that God might be all in all (1 Cor 15:28).  Christ is our frequentatio.  

We can also pause a moment to examine effectus, which dervies from efficio.  Efficio means, “to make out, work out; hence, to bring to pass, to effect, execute, complete, accomplish, make, form” and as a substantive, effectus, “worked out, i. e., effected, completed”.   Remember also that mysteria and sacramenta are frequently interchangeable.

Understanding what people are trying to say is difficult at times even in everyday life.  I am sure that, listening to or reading the words of others you, like I, have had to pause and consider, “Just what does he mean by that?”  If we have time, or the situation permits, we can at times interrogate the wordsmith or at least the text itself.  Certainly in these WDTPRS articles we try to do that in a brief way before translating.  We have to figure out what the texts means to say.  If that is hard in daily discourse and reading, it is far more difficult to accomplish when we are called upon to translate something.  This prayer today was and remains the Postcommunio of the Second Sunday after Pentecost in the 1962MR.   Since this prayer of ours today has been around for a while, it has undergone quite a few attempts at translation.  Let us examine a few, just to see what the similarities and differences are.

The New Roman Missal – 1945 (Sunday within the Octave of Corpus Christi)
Having received Thy sacred gifts, we pray, O Lord, that, as we now frequently assist at this mystery so may it cause to increase the grace of our salvation.

The New Marian Missal – 1950/1958
We who have received the sacred Gifts beseech Thee, O Lord, that by the frequenting of the Mystery, the fruit of our salvation may increase.

St. Joseph Daily Missal – 1959
Having received Your sacred gifts, we beseech You, O Lord, that our assistance at these mysteries may result in an increase of our salvation.

St. Andrew Missal – 1959
Having received Your sacred gifts, we implore You, Lord, that by our assiduous assistance at these holy mysteries, they may the more surely avail to our salvation.

Daily Missal of the Mystical Body/Maryknoll – 1960
O Lord, may we, who have received your gifts, be brought closer to our salvation by each performance of this sacred rite.

St. Andrew Bible Missal – 1960
O Lord, we who have received your gifts pray that the effect of your saving grace may increase in us in proportion to the frequency of our communion.

St. Joseph Daily Missal and Hymnal – 1966
O Lord, may we, who have received Your gifts, be brought closer to our salvation by each celebration of this sacred rite.

And now, ladies and gentlemen, the version you have been waiting for.  This is what you will more than likely hear in your parish church where the Novus Ordo is celebrated in English speaking lands:

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Lord,
by our sharing in the mystery of this eucharist,
let your saving love grow within us.

Ugh.  You can tell that we are back into Ordinary Time can’t you.  The translations during the festal cycles were not as bad as these tend to be.   Can we get at what the prayer really says?

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
The gifts having been consumed, we beg you, O Lord,
that the effect of our salvation may grow
with frequent participation in the sacramental mystery.

I find frequentatio mysterii quiet evocative.  The layers of meaning in frequentatio summon to mind simultaneous superimposed images of the visible and invisible dimensions of Holy Mass, the Eucharistic sacrifice (mysterium).  In the earthly building of the church where Holy Mass is being celebrated we have gathered around us many people.  Ideally, the church should be virtually thronging (frequentatio) with convinced and participating Catholics properly disposed to participate in the highest mode of active participation by receiving Holy Communion.  They are here often (frequentatio), each Sunday and often during the weekdays.  Imagine now a superimposed layer of the invisible participants at that Mass: myriads of holy angels and other members of the Church who have died and gone before us.  This is a fore glimpse of heaven.   Even if, in this imperfect world,  we approach this image more realistically and see in our mind’s eye that many at Mass are in fact not in the state of grace and may indeed be wicked, we also see in our two-fold visible invisible image the fallen angelic beings in all their intensely pain-filled fury.  Though they suffer the increased agonies of being within a structure which is itself a sacramental, and though they have unimaginable agony in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament, their malevolence against us and God is so great that they will endure this intense torture from holy things if, during Mass, they can spur just one person to weaken in his conscience and make a bad Holy Communion.  Their pain is great but their malice is greater yet.  By our frequent good Holy Communions we ask God to increase in us the effects of salvation which, in this world and our state of “already but not yet”, includes strengthening helps against the persistent and dire attacks of hell’s deadly minons.

What Does the Prayer Really Say?  15th Sunday of Ordinary Time

ORIGINALLY PRINTED IN The Wanderer in 2006

We have known ever since the close of the Synod of Bishops in October 2005, which discussed the Eucharist, that Pope Benedict would more than likely issue a post-synodal document on liturgy.  The committee which was assigned the task of preparing the Synods summary document completed its work and handed it in to the Pope.  So now the Holy Father is working his own document.  The Secretary of the Congregation for divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith, gave an interview to La Croix (25 June 2006) and provided a glimpse into the papal document (emphasis mine):

Today, the problems of the liturgy center around language (vernacular or Latin) and the position of the priest, whether he faces the assembly or faces God. I will surprise you here: nowhere in the conciliar decree does it say that the priest must face the assembly, nor that the use of Latin is forbidden! If the use of the common tongue is permitted, notably in the liturgy of the Word, the decree is very clear that the use of the Latin language should be maintained in the Latin rite. We are waiting for the pope to give us his guidelines on these subjects.

Can you imagine this sort of talk, open talk, from a highly place curial official even ten years ago?  Going on:

I have noticed how much the young priests here love to celebrate the Tridentine rite. It must be clarified that this ritual, following the missal of Pius V, has not been “outlawed.” Should its use be encouraged even more? That’s for the pope to decide. But it is certain that a new generation is seeking a greater orientation toward mystery. This is not a question of form, but of substance.

Long-time reader and now frequent participant on the WDTPRS internet blog, HE of TN, sent a note via e-mail relative to this interview.  Here is HE (edited):  “...the notorious pessimist Prof. L. Perrin has a … post today including this claim: ‘As Abp Ranjith is stressing, a Latin versus Deum Novus Ordo Mass is entirely faithful to the Vatican II Constitution, even more faithful. But what Abp Ranjith is ‘forgetting’ is to mention the 3rd edition of [the Missale Romanum] (2002) is pushing for versus populum … against the two previous Pauline editions and Vatican II.’”  Then HE asks me directly: “Do you know anything in the 3rd edition of the Missale Romanum that says this? Aside from the well-known mistranslation of GIRM #299 that you have discussed several times?  Anything in the MR 2002 rubrics themselves? For instance, does it still say several places that the priest is to turn and face the people?”

Indeed, HE of TN, Yes. Welcome to “What Do The Rubrics Really Say?”  There are still indications in the rubrics of the 2002MR which presuppose that the priest is celebrating ad orientem.  Here are two examples.  In #132 we find:

Sacerdos genuflectit, accipit hostiam, eamque aliquantulum elevatam super patenam vel super calicem tenens, versus ad populum, clara voce dicit: Ecce Agnus Dei,....  The priest genuflects, takes the Host and, holding it raised a little way over the paten or over the chalice, having turned toward the people, says in a clear voice: Behold the Lamb of God….

 

The people make their response and then in #133 we find:

Et sacerdos, versus ad altare, secreto dicit:  Corpus Christi….  And the priest, having turned toward the altar, says silently: May the Body of Christ…

In these two rubrics there is a specific order of actions.  First, the priest turns to the people.  Then, he turns to the altar.  This is only possible if the priest is celebrating Holy Mass facing the altar and the people are behind him facing the same direction as the priest.  The rubric is clear in this moment before Communion.  

Somewhat less immediately clear is the rubric at the Orate Fratres in #29, which says that the priest, while standing at the middle of the altar, turns to the people (versus ad populum) to say “Pray brethren, that my sacrifice and yours…”.  Then in #30 the priest is directed to speak the Super Oblata prayer, but there is no indication that he turns back to the altar: there is no second versus.  Why?  The priest, turning to the people to invite their response, simply continues to turn in the same direction back to the altar.  The single versus in this case indicates a completed turn in circle.  In #132 and #133 (above) the two different instances of versus indicate two turns, one toward the people by the priest’s right and one toward the altar by his left.  There is no complete circle.  In this way the Novus Ordo is consistent with the older “Tridentine” Rite at this same moment in Mass.  In the older, traditional way the priest turns by his right away from the altar and toward the people. He speaks the invitation.  He turns back to the altar, always by his right, in the same direction, thus completing the circle.  The rubric in the 2002MR has language very similar to the corresponding rubric in the 1962MR.  Thus, HE of TN, we have clear support in the 2002MR for ad orientem celebration.

However, in the so-called “Green Book” of the draft translation (recently emended and then approved by the bishops of the USCCB) those abovementioned instances of versus were incorrectly rendered as “facing the people”, thus introducing an ambiguity and eliminating the clarity about Mass being said ad orientem.  We shall have to see what Rome does with that.  
Let’s move on to this week’s “Prayer over the gifts” or

SUPER OBLATA (2002MR):
Respice, Domine, munera supplicantis Ecclesiae,
et pro credentium sanctificationis incremento
sumenda concede.

An ancestor of this prayer is in the ancient Gregorian Sacramentary.  This is also more or less the Secret of the Third Sunday after Pentecost in the 1962MR: Respice, Domine, munera supplicantis Ecclesiae: et saluti credentium perpetua sanctificatione sumenda concede which the 1959 St. Joseph Daily Missal renders as, “Regard with favor, O Lord, the gifts of Your suppliant Church, and grant that they may avail to the salvation of the faithful who partake of them.”  I like that “regard with favor” for respice.

The word sumenda is a little hard to put into smooth English.  This is neuter plural in form and it refers to the elements that are being offered, the munera to be transformed at the consecration, which will then be consumed.  The form here is what I call a “verbal –nd”.  It is used for gerunds and gerundives.  The gerundive (verbal adjective) is often used to express necessity, duty, purpose, etc. In later Latin it developed into a future passive participle. We have to stretch sumenda into a phrase in English.  We also need to consider the verb sumo itself, and not just its form.  Sumo means principally “to take, take up, lay hold of, assume” (synonym capio).  By extension it means, “choose, select”, “use, apply, employ, spend, consume”, and “undertake, begin, enter upon.”  Sumo can also be used for “consume” in the sense of eating.  Indeed Blaise/Dumas indicates that sumo can mean “receive the Eucharist”.  Think of the antiphon for Corpus Christi, used also for distributing Holy Communion outside of Mass: O sacrum convivium, in quo Christus sumitur... O Holy Banquet, in which Christ is received…”.

We must consider also the meaning of the preposition pro.  Your well-thumbed L&S reveals about fifteen different shades of meaning, such as “before, in front of”, “on behalf of, in favor of”, “in place of, instead of”, “for, just the same as”, “on account of, for the sake of”, and “in proportion to, in comparison with.”  With this in mind, we can attempt putting this into English.  Remember, in this WDTPRS series we are not trying to develop translations suitable for liturgical use.  We are trying to get at the raw meaning of the prayer.  

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Regard with favor, O Lord, the gifts of the supplicant Church,
and grant that they be undertaken
for an increase of the sanctification of believers.

SMOOTHED OUT ACCURATE VERSION:
Regard with favor, O Lord, the gifts of the Church now humbly in prayer,
and grant that they may be received
as an increase of the sanctification of those who believe.

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Lord,
accept the gifts of your Church.
May this eucharist
help us grow in holiness and faith.

The Latin says that, as a Church, we make this request of God in the posture of one kneeling or bent down in humility (“supplicant”).  We are begging.  The language reveals an understanding of our dependence on God’s graces, particularly the graces we have access to through the sacraments.  The entire process of our sanctification, which begins with our baptism and continues through our lives, is God’s own doing.  He makes it possible and begins it.  He makes us strong enough to do our part.  Then, when we have collaborated with Him in our own way and in our own degree of ability, He brings it to completion according to His will.  This is more than “help” from God.