[Article] Illicit omissions and additions in Eucharistic Prayers – Part II

In our ecclesiastical jurisdictions, unless those recognized by the Apostolic See after a vote by the Bishops Conference (cf. CIC Can. 838), or the nine other recent Eucharistic Prayers (three Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children, two Eucharistic Prayers for Masses of Reconciliation, and the four Eucharistic Prayers for Various Needs and Occasions) that are not commonly used, ‘the four (principal) Eucharistic Prayers contained in the revised Roman Missal remain in force, and it is not permitted to make use of any other, composed without the permission of the Apostolic See or without the approval of the same.

Episcopal Conferences and individual Bishops are earnestly begged to put pertinent arguments before their priests in order to bring them wisely to the observance of the same regulations as laid down by the Roman Church, to the benefit of the Church itself and in furtherance of the proper conducting of liturgical functions. The Apostolic See, moved by the pastoral desire for unity, reserves to itself the right of determining a matter of such great importance as the regulations for the Eucharistic Prayers.

Within the unity of the Roman Rite it will not refuse to consider legitimate requests; and petitions coming to it from Episcopal Conferences for the drawing up of some new Eucharistic Prayer in particular circumstances and introducing it into the liturgy will be given benevolent consideration; but in each case the Holy See will lay down the norms to be followed’ (1973 Circular Letter of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship Addressed to the Presidents of the Episcopal Conferences, 6).

Discussing the gravity of error in Eucharistic Prayers, Pope St. Pius V in De Defectibus (20) stated: ‘Defects on the part of the form may arise if anything is missing from the complete wording required for the act of consecrating. Now the words of the Consecration, which are the form of this Sacrament, are: HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM, and HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI, NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI: MYSTERIUM FIDEI: QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM.

If the priest were to shorten or change the form of the consecration of the Body and the Blood, so that in the change of wording the words did not mean the same thing, he would not be achieving a valid Sacrament. If, on the other hand, he were to add or take away anything which did not change the meaning, the Sacrament would be valid, but he would be committing a grave sin,’ and a disservice to the innocent People of God.

Proposing a vaccine to what others have described as an epidemic of liturgical aberration in our subregion, often propagated under the guise of Inculturation or an improper understanding of that necessary process, Pope Francis (Desiderio Desideravi, 19-20) calls for a deeper appreciation of the liturgy, saying: ‘If Gnosticism intoxicates us with the poison of subjectivism, the liturgical celebration frees us from the prison of a self-referencing nourished by one’s own reasoning and one’s own feeling.

The action of the celebration does not belong to the individual but to the Christ-Church, to the totality of the faithful united in Christ. The liturgy does not say “I” but “we,” and any limitation on the breadth of this “we” is always demonic.

The Liturgy does not leave us alone to search out an individual supposed knowledge of the mystery of God. Rather, it takes us by the hand, together, as an assembly, to lead us deep within the mystery that the Word and the sacramental signs reveal to us. And it does this, consistent with all action of God, following the way of the Incarnation, that is, by means of the symbolic language of the body, which extends to things in space and time.

ADVERTISEMENT

If neo-Pelagianism intoxicates us with the presumption of a salvation earned through our own efforts, the liturgical celebration purifies us, proclaiming the gratuity of the gift of salvation received in faith. Participating in the Eucharistic sacrifice is not our own achievement, as if because of it we could boast before God or before our brothers and sisters.

The beginning of every celebration reminds me who I am, asking me to confess my sin and inviting me to implore the Blessed Mary ever virgin, the angels and saints and all my brothers and sisters to pray for me to the Lord our God. Certainly, we are not worthy to enter his house; we need a word of his to be saved (cf. Ma 8:8). We have no other boast but the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Gal. 6:14).

The Liturgy has nothing to do with an ascetical moralism. It is the gift of the Paschal Mystery of the Lord which, received with docility, makes our life new. The cenacle is not entered except through the power of attraction of his desire to eat the Passover with us: Desiderio desideravi hoc Pascha manducare vobiscum, antequam patiar (Lk. 22:15).’

Properly so, ‘in reciting the prayers, and especially the Eucharistic Prayer, the priest must avoid on the one hand a dry style of reading without any variation of voice, and on the other hand a too subjective and emotional style of speech and action.

As the one presiding over the function, he must be very careful in reading or singing to help those taking part to form a true community celebrating and living the memorial of the Lord’ (1973 Circular Letter of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship Addressed to the Presidents of the Episcopal Conferences, 17).

In the words of St. Pope John Paul II, ‘I consider it my duty, therefore, to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning.

Liturgy is never anyone’s private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated. The Apostle Paul had to address fiery words to the community of Corinth because of grave shortcomings in their celebration of the Eucharist resulting in divisions (schismata) and the emergence of factions (haireseis) (cf. 1 Cor. 11:17-34).

Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church…

No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands: it is too great for anyone to feel free to treat it lightly and with disregard for its sacredness and its universality (Ecclesia de Eucharistia, 52).

Kyrie Eleison!