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

This is from American Papist, which you should look at everyday! Hilarious doesn’t describe this!

Having proven his diplomatic skills in Turkey, it was time for
Pope Benedict to meet the emissary from planet Vorticon 6.

Next?

A tougher inter-galactic nut to crack.

P.S…. It’s a big espresso coffee machine. The one above, not the Dalek.

I haven’t yet reviewed the Holy Father’s words in last night’s 1st Vespers ceremony, but here is what he said today during his Angelus address about Advent. 

He first spoke about his visit to Turkey and then segued into Advent (my translation and emphasis):

In Advent the liturgy gives us assurance and repeats often, almost as if to overcome our nature mistrust, that God "comes": He comes in order to be with us in our every circumstance; He comes to dwell in our midst, to live with us and in us; He comes to fill up the distances which divide us; He comes to reconcile us with Himself and with each other.  He comes in the history of humanity, to knock upon the door of every man and woman of good will, to bring to every individual, family and people the gift of fraternity, of concord and of peace.  For this Advent is the preeminent time of hope, when believers in Christ are invited to remain in vigilant and industrious expectation, nourished by prayer and effective diligence of love.  May the approach of the Birth of Christ fill the heart of all Christians with joy, serenity and peace.

To live this period of Advent in a more genuine and fruitful way, the liturgy exorts us to look to Mary Most Holy, and ideally to journey with her toward the grotto of Bethlehem.  When God knocked upon the door of her young life, She welcomed Him with faith and love.  In a few days we will contemplate the luminous mystery of her Immaculate Conception.  Let us be always attracted by her beauty, the reflection of divine glory, so that "the God who comes" may find in each one of us a heart both good and open which He can fill it abundantly with His gifts.

What Does the Prayer Really Say?  The 1st Sunday of Advent

ORIGINALLY PRINTED IN The Wanderer in 2004

This is the first offering of the fifth year of WDTPRS.  We begin anew.  In this series we have been examining the original Latin prayers of Holy Mass in the typical edition of the Missale Romanum promulgated by Pope Paul VI, in force since the 1st Sunday of Advent (30 November 1969). This is the so-called “Novus Ordo” or 1970 Roman Missal (the 1970MR).  After the Second Vatican Council, the Holy See entrusted the work of translating liturgical texts to the conferences of bishops.  In the English speaking world the conferences founded the International Committee on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) to do the work, later to be revised by the conferences and then submitted back to Holy See for approval.   The translations used since 1973, have long been recognized as inadequate in too many ways to enumerate with ease.   Years ago, driven by frustration and longing many participants of the internet forum I moderate begged me for accurate translations of Sunday prayers.  They wanted to know what the prayers really said.   Eventually, I was invited by The Wanderer to write this weekly column. We wanted to promote better translations for the common good of the people of God.  

This series has a two-fold objective.  First, we must all promote greater interest in and understanding of the content of the prayers the Church gives us for Holy Mass.  I want you to know what the prayers really say because, through them, we come to know and love the content of the prayers.  The content of our Catholic Faith is not just words to recite or memorize, but rather a divine Person, Jesus Christ, with whom we can have a reciprocal relationship of love shaping every dimension of our lives.  Secondly, WDTPRS has been urging, prompting, cajoling, pleading with you readers to write respectful, prayerful letters of support to those in charge of preparing the new English translations.   I have given you addresses.  I have done everything but put the pen on your hand and lick the stamp.  In turn, many of you have sent me copies of responses you received in return.  Your letters have made a difference, friends, make no mistake.  Moreover, you often send me your feedback and comments which I happy read and include in these articles.  You are a vital part of this WDTPRS project.  

In the first year of the series, we examined the “Opening Prayers” (collects) of the Mass, in the second the “Prayers over the gifts” (Super oblata), in the third the Post-communion prayers and during the fourth year we went through the four major Eucharistic Prayers.   This year WDTPRS takes a step both forward and backward.  Your feedback revealed that many of you appreciated the meticulous examination of the Eucharistic Prayers (part of the unchanging “Common” of the Mass), but you enjoyed far more looking at the prayers that change each Sunday (part of the changing “Proper”).  In response to you, we are returning to an examination of the changing Sunday prayers.  Many of you are interested in the detailed look at Latin vocabulary, while many are baffled or bored by it and just skip over those paragraphs.  Therefore, we will still review Latin, but not quite so much.  And remember: WDTPRS has never claimed to offer versions that are suitable for use in the Church’s liturgical action of Holy Mass: this is not our goal.  At times I will try to smooth them out a little, but mostly I will stick closely, even slavishly, to the Latin structure and to the original vocabulary.   Latin doesn’t always go into English very easily.  The people preparing translations truly need our prayerful and positive support along with constant reminders of our hopes and confidence.  Write letters.  Also, get subscriptions for people, as gifts, and share the project with others.  Do you love them?  Do you want them to have better translations and know what the prayers say?

What is the status quaestionis, the “state of the question”, these days? Since WDTPRS began the Holy See blasted ICEL for its draft translation of the 2nd Latin edition of the Missale Romanum and then issued a 3rd edition of the same (the 2002MR). A new set of norms for translation were promulgated by the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments (CDWDS) in a document called Liturgiam authenticam.  ICEL was gutted by the CDWDS and rebuilt.  The Vox Clara Committee was formed by the CDWDS as a powerful liaison and watchdog for ICEL.  ICEL prepared a new draft of the common prayers of Mass under the ongoing scrutiny and revision of Vox Clara.  A document with legislative force concerning liturgical abuses, Redemptionis Sacramentum, came forth at the order of the Holy Father in his encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia.  A special Year of the Eucharistic is in course now.   These are good things.  Nevertheless, I have warned you that, while there good advances, there are many and powerful enemies who fight with might and main to turn progress back, return to the older, cliché way of understanding translations.  If they can, they will block the production of a translation according to the norms laid down in Liturgiam authenticam.  They are not asleep.

An example of this came during the latest fall meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).  His Eminence Francis Card. George of Chicago ended his term as the head of the Bishops’ Committee for Liturgy (BCL).  But a surprise nomination came from the floor when Bp. John Kinney of St. Cloud – the last bishop appointed during the less than inspiring term of Belgian Archbishop Jean Jadot as the Papal Delegate to the USA (1973-80) nominated Bp. Donald Trautman of Erie, who was then elected by a large margin.  Bp. Trautman had this post once during the 1990’s: his track record is not what we might prefer.  In the USCCB he is the foremost campaigner for inclusive language among other, less than felicitous oddities.  He made strong declarations against the Holy See’s Liturgiam authenticam.  Bp. Trautman’s BLC will soon review the ICEL’s draft translation and vetted last week in Rome by the Vox Clara Committee.  There are strong indications that the decisions taken by Vox Clara last week would be very pleasing to WDTPRS readers.  However, we are forced to the conclusion that the selection of Bp. Trautman for the BCL is a declaration of war on the Holy See in the matter of translations.  But let us move to happier things, indeed, something of great joy: the prayers of Holy Mass and what they really say.  This year we are going to make a fresh examination of the Collects or “Opening Prayers” of Sunday Masses.

COLLECT - LATIN TEXT (2002MR):
Da, quaesumus, omnipotens Deus,
hanc tuis fidelibus voluntatem,
ut, Christo tuo venienti iustis operibus occurrentes,
eius dextrae sociati, regnum mereantur possidere caeleste.  Per Dominum….

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
All-powerful God,
increase our strength of will for doing good
that Christ may find an eager welcome at his coming
and call us to his side in the kingdom of heaven.

Would these articles be complete without reference to the prestigious Lewis & Short Dictionary?   L&S says that voluntas is basically, “will, freewill, wish, choice, desire, inclination”, but in our collect it has also the nuance of a “disposition” toward a thing or person.  Occurro is, “to run up to, run to meet” and the deponent verb mereor, “to deserve, merit, to be entitled to, be worthy of a thing”.   The usually active socio, “to join or unite together, to associate; to do or hold in common, to share a thing with another”, has a “middle” impact in this passive construction with the dative.

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Almighty God, we beseech You, grant
to Your faithful this disposition of will,
that those rushing with just works to meet Your Christ, now coming,
united at His right hand may merit to possess the heavenly kingdom.

This is the first prayer of the liturgical year. We are readying ourselves for Christ who comes!  This Sunday is back to back with the Solemnity of Christ the King, honoring the future Second Coming at the end of the world, while it prepares us for celebrating His First Coming at Christmas. Advent is all about how the Lord comes… in every way.  He comes in actual graces.  He comes when the priest says, “Hoc est enim corpus meum....This is my Body.”  He comes in Holy Communion and in the person of the needy.  “Make straight the paths!”, the liturgy of Advent cries out with the words of Isaiah and John the Baptist.  We are rushing forward (occurrentes) and smoothing the path for the feet of our King.  This requires work, just works, just by their origin, Christ Himself. When even in this life we are united to the right hand of Christ (dextrae sociati) our works are truly ours but also truly His and we merit heaven.   The image of the “right hand”, the Biblical place of honor, points to the eternal glory of God and the inauguration of the Messianic kingdom… regnum…celeste to which we look forward even as we look back to His First Coming (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church 663-4).

This is a new prayer for the Novus Ordo but based on ancient prayer from the so-called “Gelasian Sacramentary”. Many “Traditional” Catholics will claim that the prayers of the Novus Ordo are not sufficiently “Catholic”.  No prayer you will ever hear is more Catholic than this collect!  A Protestant or fundamentalist Christian could not say this prayer with its “just works”, its “meriting”, its “disposition”.  What does “disposition of will” (voluntas) mean for us fallen humans?  Protestants think our nature is wholly corrupt and so our disposition must be entirely evil.  But we know man is wounded by the Fall, not wholly corrupted.  Protestants believe anything good in us must be imposed from outside through the “alien merits” of Christ.  Is the voluntas we are begging in the prayer going to be our will or someone else’s will covering us over?  The prayer doesn’t say if the voluntas is God’s or ours.  But this is a Catholic prayer.  Once we are baptized and live in the state of grace, we are New Creations and God the Holy Trinity is at work in us.  Our cooperation with God’s gift of faith through good works saves us, not “faith alone” or a mere “covering over”.  A proper interior “disposition of will” is made possible and given by God but after that it is really ours.  Our works do not by themselves merit anything, but once we are transformed and renewed by sanctifying grace, “united at His right hand” already in this life, our work on earth merits the increase of grace and the reward of heaven because they are His while they are ours.  Thomas de Vio Card. Caietanus (Cajetan +1534) explained to Martin Luther (+1546) that, when we say that we “merit”, we are saying that Christ merits in us (cf. De fide et operibus, 12).  St. Augustine of Hippo (+430) preached that, “When God crowns our merits (merita), He crowns nothing other than His own gifts (munera)” (ep. 194, 5, 19). We merit salvation on the foundation of habitual, sanctifying grace, through the virtuous works which we perform.  His will becomes our sole desire.

How rich is this prayer!  This is how we begin our year, suffused with the language of deep humility: “Grant, we beseech You….”  We beg God to bless this WDTPRS project and cause it, by His will and our cooperation, to bear fruits for His glory and merit for us the gifts He comes to give.

What Does the Prayer Really Say?  1st Sunday of Advent – Roman Station: St. Mary Major

ORIGINALLY PRINTED IN The Wanderer in 2005

These WDTPRS articles carefully explore week by week what the Latin prayers of Holy Mass really say.  The first year of this series examined the Collects (“Opening prayer”) of Mass, the second the Super oblata (“Prayer over the gifts”) and the third the Post Communion prayers.  In the fourth year we studied together the four main Eucharistic Prayers and in the fifth we returned once again to look at the Collects.  This permitted me to make many revisions and rethink what I had written before.  There is an adage in Latin: repetita iuvant – repeated things help.  This liturgical year let us revisit to the Super oblata, prayed after the offertory and immediately before the Preface.   

Some news: From 7-10 November there was a meeting in Rome of members of the Vox Clara Committee established by the Holy See to ride shotgun on ICEL’s stagecoach.  His Holiness Benedict XVI sent His Eminence Francis Card. Arinze, our favorite frank and forthright Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments (CDWDS), a special message to be conveyed to Vox Clara.  The Pope wrote, “I add the hope that the translation into English … may soon be completed, so that the faithful throughout the English-speaking world may benefit from the use of the liturgical texts accurately rendered in accordance with the norms of the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam.”  Furthermore, “I am confident that … the translation of the Missale Romanum into English will succeed in transmitting the treasures of the faith and the liturgical tradition in the specific context of a devout and reverent Eucharistic celebration.”   

So, the Holy Father is pretty clear about what he wants.  Don’t hold your breath but a press release from Vox Clara said that ICEL informed them about a projected schedule indicating completion of its translation over the next “23 months.”  It would be good for everyone involved to get aboard.  In fact, WDTPRS thinks there will soon be a significant change at the CDWDS to facilitate their harmonious collaboration with the Holy Father.  Stay tuned.

In the meantime across the pond, at the time of this writing the American bishops are once again meeting in plenary session.  The chairman of the USCCB’s Committee on Liturgy (BCL), His Excellency Donald W. Trautman, the Erie bishop of Pennsylvania, held a Q&A session on what is going on with the new English translation.  He presented a gloomy picture of how divided the bishops are about the draft prepared by ICEL.  According to a CNS story of 15 November, Bishop Trautman said the results of two surveys on the new draft show that “53 percent of the bishops who responded thought the new translation was excellent or good, while 47 percent rated it fair or poor.”  He said, moreover that “What one bishop regarded as elevated language that enhanced the liturgy another described as ‘turgid’ and another complained about as ‘not American English.’”  Let’s let go of the fact that this translation isn’t only about “America”.  Still, Bishop Trautman’s survey (to which so few bishops bothered to respond) said that 12 percent thought the draft was excellent, 40 percent good, 40 percent fair, and 7 percent poor.  Hmmmm…  Bishop Trautman reports that 53 percent of bishops say the draft is excellent or good while 47 said fair or poor.  However, arranging the stats another way we see that 7 percent say the draft is poor while 92 percent say it is at least fair to excellent!    Who are these 7 percent?  I want names.

But wait, there’s more.  His Excellency Blase Cupich of Rapid City (SD) says only 107 bishops responded to the survey!   Bishop Cupich asked all the bishops to respond.   So, who knows what the bishops really think?   A Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story of 15 November quotes His Eminence Francis Card. George as saying: “There are those who have been quite critical of the present translation, but who are now saying that we don’t want to disturb the people, especially in the situation of weakened episcopal authority we have now.”  He was referring to distrust people might now have of bishops in the wake of the scandals sadly ripping at the Church in the United States.  It will not surprise us much that Fr. Bruce Harbert, Executive Secretary of ICEL, defended the draft as being more faithful to biblical language.  Trautman said, “We are a divided body on this translation issue. At this time we do not have a two-thirds vote necessary for canonical approval”.  Apparently there was rather sharp debate on the floor.   In an AP story Cardinal George said: “I’m not sure where this whole this is going to go”.  

Folks, many who resist the reworking of the translation think we are too thick to grasp the more accurate language and that priests are too dense to explain what it means.  In past articles I gave you evidence of this attitude taken from speeches and articles available on the internet.   Also, WDTPRS thinks the second draft translation is not a great improvement over the first.  Since many bishops didn’t respond to the survey, and are now being asked to, now is the time to write to your bishops and give them your thoughts.  Do you want things to remain as they are or do you want improvements?  Changes are going to be made without a doubt.  What changes will they be?

Advent begins a new liturgical year.  Each year through the liturgy Holy Church presents the history of our salvation and the mysteries of the life, death, resurrection and the return of the Lord.  Each year we ourselves are a little different and so the unchanging mysteries of our faith touch us in a fresh way.  Christ through His Church shapes us by means of the content of the prayers of Mass and we in turn shape the world around us.  How important is it for us to know what the Church is really praying?  We need to pray with her and through her and thus be formed by her.  The Western Church’s liturgy is officially in the Latin language, though now the vernacular is nearly completely dominant wherever the post-Conciliar liturgy is in use.  Barring some unfathomable event, the vernacular is here to stay.  As a result, the translations we have been given bear the burden of what the Church, through divine inspiration and centuries of human wisdom, desires to convey to us.  The translations had better be good.  It is of critical importance that they reflect with both unswerving accuracy and memorable beauty what the Church’s Latin prayers really say.  Few rational people dispute that the translations now in use are not up to the task I described.  In recognition of this fact, the Holy See required that a new vernacular rendering of the 3rd edition of the Roman Missal be prepared and issued norms for the preparation of new translations.  The work has been going on for some years now and at least two drafts have been presented.   The newer draft of the Ordinary of Mass is, in my opinion, of uneven quality.  We will continue to look at pieces of the draft in weeks to come.

We must place our Super oblata prayers in their context in the Mass.  As each Mass begins we have an entrance procession followed by a prayer that is “proper” (that is, it changes with the day as opposed to “ordinary”, which is fixed). This is the pattern: procession – proper prayer.   After the procession to Communion the priest says a proper prayer.  So too there is a proper prayer after the procession that brings our sacrificial gifts to the priest at the altar.   In the older, traditional or “Tridentine” form of the Mass this prayer was called the Secret because it was recited silently.  In the ancient Church, and also today in more solemn liturgy, there was an elaborate procession whereby the subdeacons and deacons brought forward from the congregation many material sacrificial offerings such as bread, wine, money, other food and objects for the poor, etc.  Already by the time the ancient Sacramentaries (e.g., “Veronese”, “Gelasian”) were put together the prayers following this offertory procession contained vocabulary for gifts and sacrifices (e.g., dona, munera, oblationem) and such is the case even now.  The Super oblata follow the general structure of a prayer of petition: we offer things up so that God’s grace may come down on us.  You will see that these prayers are normally in the first person plural: we.  The whole congregation is speaking in the person of the mediator at the altar, the priest.

Today’s prayer is in the abovementioned ancient Veronese Sacramentary amidst prayers for the month of July.  Note in the Latin the wonderful scrambling of word order for rhetorical effect.  Words that go together are separated and concepts are embedded between them.  This elegant rhetorical interlocking delights both ear and mind.  It also reflects how the concepts are interconnected.  Latin challenges us to hold different ideas in our minds as we wait for the final word and the sentence’s resolution, almost as a juggler foils the fall of many objects of differing shapes.  This sometimes makes rendering Latin into smooth English very hard.  

SUPER OBLATA - (2002MR):
Suscipe, quaesumus, Domine, munera
quae de tuis offerimus collata beneficiis,
et, quod nostrae devotioni concedis effici temporali,
tuae nobis fiat praemium redemptionis aeternae.

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Take up, O Lord, we beg You, the gifts we are offering
which were gathered together from Your favors,
and let that which You grant to be accomplished by our temporal dedication
become for us the reward of Your eternal redemption.

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Father, from all you give us
we present this bread and wine.
As we serve you now,
accept our offering
and sustain us with your promise of eternal life.

The now lame-duck ICEL version emphasizes the “meal” aspect of Mass rather than the transforming “sacrificial” dimension.  The Latin says munera, “gifts”, but ICEL says “bread and wine”; panem et vinum are not in the Latin original.  Of course at this point in Mass munera on the surface indicates the bread and wine.  ICEL restricts us to the obvious elements of bread and wine, which are material.  The Latin is less restrictive.  It embraces all that we bring to the Lord at Mass, material and spiritual sacrifice.  Furthermore, the Latin word collata brings to my mind an image of laborers in fields and vineyards, quarries, orchards and forests, reaping, gathering, mining, collecting what their own labor and God’s blessings produce.  ICEL chose not to translate collata.  Collata (means “gathered together” – like English “collate” cf. confero in the useful Lewis & Short Dictionary: “to collect, gather together” and thence “to bring together for comparison” which is where we get the abbreviation “cf.” meaning “compare with”).  The Latin powerfully juxtaposes what we do and what God does.  In the ICEL version we want God to “sustain” us with a “promise”.  In the Latin we beg God to receive back from us what He already gave and subsequently cause those things to be entirely transformed (fiat) into the “reward of eternal salvation” – Himself.  The structure of the prayer, by the complex way it weaves concepts between words that go together grammatically, hints at what the prayer really says: by our work and dedication we must give back to Him good things which were already His in anticipation of His transforming them as only He can.  Christ makes Himself the reward of our efforts.

Keep in mind our context: this is the beginning of Advent, the season of preparation for the Coming of the Lord.  Advent is back to back with the observance of the Lord’s final coming at the end of the world.  Advent is a time of penance before the First Coming of the Infant King.  Advent is liminal season, like a threshold, blending the end of the world with its rebirth in the new Adam.  Advent is also about the how the Lord comes in actual graces, in the words of the priest…Hoc est enim corpus meum....This is my Body, in Holy Communion and in the person neighbor, especially the needy.  St. John the Baptist admonishes us during Advent to make straight Christ’s path, for He truly is coming.  Christ Himself will straighten our paths His own way if have not taken care to straighten them beforehand.   It is a new liturgical year.  Pray that this upcoming season of preparation for the coming of the Lord at Christmas will bring us and our loved one many material and spiritual blessings.

What Does the Prayer Really Say?  1st Sunday of Advent – Station: St. Mary Major

ORIGINALLY PRINTED IN The Wanderer in 2006

Advent marks the beginning of a new liturgical year.  We prepare for the coming of the Lord with a season of joyful penance.  Last Sunday, the Solemnity of Christ the King, we underscored the final coming of the Lord as King of Fearful Majesty, the Just Judge who will reign forever in glory.  That joyfully sobering reflection should lend a penitential spirit to our joyful preparation for the First Coming at Bethlehem, Christmas.  Advent weds the end of the world with the world’s rebirth in the new Adam, Emanuel, the Incarnate Word who is with us still.  Advent is about all the ways our Lord comes to us: His coming at Bethlehem and at the end of the world are echoed in other moments of our Christian life.  Jesus comes in actual graces.  He comes in the words of Scripture.  He comes to us in Holy Communion.  He comes to us in the person of the needy.  He comes at the words of the priest… “this is my Body… this is the chalice of my Blood … poured out for you and for many for the remission of sins.”

“For many”

The Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, His Eminence Francis Cardinal Arinze, at the direction of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, has sent a letter dated 17 October 2006 to the various conferences of bishops in the world informing them that the words “pro multis” in the consecration of the Precious Blood are to be translated more precisely as, for example, “for many” or a similar form and not as “for all”.  The Protocol Number is 467/05/L.  This directive applies to all vernacular versions.

In his letter, Cardinal Arinze provides some of the chief reasons for a more precise translation.  They will sound very familiar to readers of WDTPRS.

First, the Greek of the Gospel accounts in Matthew and Mark have the word “many” (pollôn).  The Gospels could have had some other form, but they didn’t.  The Greek account is faithfully translated in most modern versions of the Bible.  WDTPRS exposed how Lutheran biblical scholar Joachim Jeremias argued that Christ really said “for all” in Aramaic, which would consequently and impossibly make the divinely inspired Greek words of Scripture wrong. 

Second, the Roman Rite in Latin has always said “pro multis” and never “pro omnibus” in the consecration of the chalice.  WDTPRS showed you a paragraph in the Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent which clearly explained why “pro omnibus” was not an option.

Third, the anaphoras (Eucharistic Prayers) of the Oriental Rites in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, and the Slavic languages, all have an equivalent of Latin “pro multis”.  WDTPRS found Eastern Catholic priests who all said that their translations have “for many”, not “for all”.

Fourth, “for many” is a faithful translation of “pro multis”.  “For all”, as Cardinal Arinze wrote, is “an explanation of the sort that belongs properly to catechesis”.  WDTPRS has always argued that we must give people what the prayer really says, with translations faithful to the original. If those prayers and concepts are difficult, explain them in sermons and ongoing liturgical catechesis.  People aren’t stupid.  Help them understand the hard things, but this one isn’t so hard.

Fifth, “for many”, is open to the inclusion of every person, but it does not suggest that all people are actually saved.  WDTPRS has repeatedly presented how Christ died for every person who ever lived but, sadly, some reject the Lord’s saving gift.  I suggested a phrase like “for the many” or “for the multitude”, as it is in French, which could indicate an unimaginably vast number, so immense that it could be everyone who ever lived minus one.  If even one person refused His gift, many, not all, will be saved.

Sixth, the document establishing the translation norms, Liturgiam authenticam, mandates that texts must be more faithful to the Latin original.  WDTPRS has pounded this every week for six years.

My dear readers, translations of sacramental forms are reserved to the Pope himself.  Cardinal Arinze in his letter said that he was writing at the Pope’s direction.  This means that the Supreme Pontiff has made his determination.  His decision cannot be voted on by any conference of bishops or reviewed by any Vatican congregation.

It is done. 

Writing that phrase to you just now… well… Christmas came early for me this year.

In the past you have written hopeful letters to officials.  It is now time to write to express your thanks.

Reactions to the correction in the erroneous translation of “pro multis” are pouring in from the blogosphere and the “trad” press.  Contemplate this howler from The Remnant which someone alerted me to (emphasis mine): “Yet, over the past forty years, neo-Catholic defenders of the postconciliar novelties in the Church, such as The Wanderer … have consistently defended the error [of the translation], ….”  That’s just weird.  Maybe they ought to subscribe to The Wanderer?

Meanwhile, I recall to your minds the controversy surrounding the late Pope John Paul II’s 2003 encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia in which the incorrect words “pro omnibus” appeared in the first, unofficial Latin version.  The Vatican website initially would not provide a link to the Latin text.  Then the words were corrected in the official Latin version in the Acta Apostolica Sedis.  Presto chango, a link to the Latin text then appeared on the website.  Now Pope Benedict XVI has made his decision.  The link to the Latin version of Ecclesia de Eucharistia has once again vanished though the place for the link remains!  “Curiouser and curiouser!”, cried Alice.  Oddly, of the late Pope’s fourteen encyclicals the only one with a working link to the Latin text is Fides et ratio of 1998.  Fides et ratio is also the only encyclical with a link to a translation in Arabic.  Benedict XVI’s first and only encyclical, Deus caritas est, has a working Latin link.

The concrete verification about “pro multis” fittingly comes to us on the cusp of a new liturgical year when we launch into the seventh year of our ongoing WDTPRS project.  In the first and fifth years we read the Collects (“opening prayers”) of Sunday Masses.  In the second and sixth year we studies the Super Oblata (“prayers over the gifts”).  In the fourth we looked at the four Eucharistic Prayers and in the third the Post Communions.  For the sake of completeness, we must now turn to the Post Communions again.

Joseph A. Jungmann’s magisterial work The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development (1949, English trans. 1953-5, reprinted in 1986, vol. 2, pp. 419-25) helps understand what a Post Communion prayer is all about.  Jungmann writes: “Even the earliest expositions of the liturgy, after speaking about the Communion to which all the faithful are invited, do not forget to admonish them to make a thanksgiving.”  St. Augustine of Hippo (+430) distinguished four sections of the Mass, the last of which is called the gratiarum actio, the thanksgiving after Communion (cf. ep. 149,16).  The Latin Rite originally had a double closing for Mass consisting of a prayer of thanksgiving and a prayer of blessing.  The thanksgiving prayer was called the post communionem in the ancient Gelasian Sacramentary, a building block of the Roman Rite as it is today.  The post communionem prayers have virtually the same style as the Collect and the Secret (now called the Super Oblata), addressed to God the Father, through Christ….per Dominum nostrum….

The context of the Post Communion in the Mass is similar to those of the Collect and Super Oblata. In each case there is outward activity with movement (processions at the entrance procession, offertory and Communion).  In each case, and originally only at these three points, a choir sang a psalm with an antiphon.  In each case the priest has silent introductory prayers (his prayers before the altar, his preparation at the offertory, and his devotional prayers during the ablutions after Communion).  The theme of the prayer refers to the Holy Communion just consumed moments before and to its effects and benefits in us.  It focuses on the Communion of all the faithful who received, not just that of the priest.

Today’s “Prayer after Communion” is of new composition for the Novus Ordo (1970MR, 1975MR and now 2002MR), but it is rooted in two prayers in the ancient Veronese Sacramentary.

POST COMMUNIONEM (2002MR):
Prosint nobis, quaesumus, Domine, frequentata mysteria,
quibus nos, inter praetereuntia ambulantes,
iam nunc instituis amare caelestia et inhaerere mansuris.

This is a wonderful prayer to sing, which is as it should be.  The alliteration of frequentata mysteria gives it a powerful staccato balanced by the assonance of “ah” and “a” sounds.   The phrase ínter praétereúnti(a_á)mbulántes is glorious, as is the final cadence, inhaerére mansúris.   

Over thirty years ago, the bishops of various conferences in the English speaking world took the advice of the old incarnation of ICEL and caused the following to be printed and, sadly, used in our churches to the present day.

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Father,
may our communion
teach us to love heaven.
May its promise and hope guide our way on earth.

Is this what the prayer really says?  When the English is shorter than the Latin, friends, you know there’s trouble.  The lame-duck ICEL prayers of the sacral cycles of Advent/Christmas and Lent/Easter are generally more accurate than those of Ordinary Time.  Nevertheless, this is so bad I was tempted to triple check that I got the right prayer from the correct Sunday. 

The Dictionary, the mighty Lewis & Short, helps us to understand that prosint is the third person plural present active subjunctive form of prosum, profui, prodesse, “to be useful or of use, to do good, benefit, profit”.  There is a custom in Roman sacristies after Mass.  Servers and sacred ministers line up in two rows and wait for the celebrant to enter and bow to the Cross.  As he removes his biretta and bows to the Lord, they all say “Prosit!”, that is, “May what you have just done be of benefit for you!”  The celebrant responds “Vobis quoque!” (singular “Tibi quoque!”), “And to you!”.   This is about the only time Catholics accurately say something like, “And also with you!”

Frequento is “to visit or resort to frequently, to frequent; to do or make use of frequently, to repeat” and also “to celebrate or keep in great numbers” as in the observance of public festivals.  Praetereuntia, the present active participle of praeter-eo, “to go by or past, to pass by; “to be lost, disregarded, perish, pass away, pass without attention or fulfillment (late Lat.)”  Mansuris is a plural future participle of maneo, “to remain, last, endure, continue”, and thus means “things that are going to endure”. 

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
We beg You, O Lord, may they be profitable for us, these oft celebrated sacramental mysteries,
by which You established that we, walking amidst the things that are passing away,
would now in this very moment love heavenly things and cleave to the things that will endure.

A SMOOTHER VERSION:
May these mysteries we so often celebrate
redound to our benefit, O Lord, we entreat You,
since by them You instruct us to love
the things of heaven and cling to what endures
as we journey in the midst of this world which is passing away.

When the priest intones this Post Communion, the Eucharistic Christ is within you.  A church’s tabernacle is no more a dwelling of the Real Presence than you are at that moment.