Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: "Ustedes" vs. "Vosotros"
ROME, SEPT. 13, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.
As a response to our consideration of the use of "vosotros"/"ustedes" in Spanish-language Masses (see Aug. 30) a religious from Portland, Oregon, recommended that I insist more on the importance of retaining the less common "vosotros" form in the Institution narrative of the Consecration.
She is quite correct, as there is a real danger, especially for priests striving to learn Spanish, of changing the verb forms and thus using an illicit formula for the consecration that is unknown in any part of the Spanish-speaking world.
Such a consecration formula would be valid but certainly illicit and should never be used.
Regarding the possibility of changing the greetings formulas, a reader from Northcote, a suburb of Melbourne, Australia, pointed out an oversight on my part with respect to a change in the new Latin missal. He writes:
"Do the rubrics in the 2002 Roman Missal allow changes to be made to the greetings?
"The 1975 GIRM 11 (Documents on the Liturgy 1401) had: 'It is also up to the priest in the exercise of his office of presiding over the assembly to pronounce the instructions and words of introduction and conclusion that are provided in the rites themselves. By their very nature these introductions do not need to be expressed verbatim in the form in which they are given in the Missal; at least in certain cases it will be advisable to adapt them somewhat to the concrete situation of the community.'
"This has been replaced by 2002 GIRM 31: 'It is also up to the priest in the exercise of his office of presiding over the assembly to pronounce the instructions that are provided in the rites themselves. Where it is indicated in the rubrics, the celebrant is permitted to adapt to some extent these remarks ...'
"So the provision for the celebrant to change the words of introduction and conclusion has been removed.
"The Order of Mass in the 2002 Roman Missal gives no indication of permission to change the words of greeting, simply having '2. Deinde sacerdos, manus extendens, populam salutat, dicens: Gratia Domini nostri ... vel ...' (Missale Romanum, 2002, page 503). [The Latin text roughly translates "Following this, the priest, with hands extended, greets the people saying: The Grace of our Lord … or …]"
Actually the same rubric is also found in the former Latin missal, so there is really no change with respect to the rubrics.
My oversight chiefly consisted in confusing the rubrics of the greeting formula with those of the introduction to the penitential rite. In the latter case the present English rubric states that the celebrant may introduce the penitential rite "using these or similar words," an expression absent from both Latin and Spanish missals.
The present Spanish missal, however, does offer a wider choice of introductory formulas, some of them adapted to the liturgical seasons, than either the Latin or English missals.
All the same, I believe our attentive reader has caught a clear change in the norms manifesting the legislator's desire to limit the use of free adaptations to those areas where the rubrics specifically foresee them.
I would observe that, for all practical purposes, this change will not come into force until the eventual publication of the new translations of the entire missal in English and other languages.
As a response to our consideration of the use of "vosotros"/"ustedes" in Spanish-language Masses (see Aug. 30) a religious from Portland, Oregon, recommended that I insist more on the importance of retaining the less common "vosotros" form in the Institution narrative of the Consecration.
She is quite correct, as there is a real danger, especially for priests striving to learn Spanish, of changing the verb forms and thus using an illicit formula for the consecration that is unknown in any part of the Spanish-speaking world.
Such a consecration formula would be valid but certainly illicit and should never be used.
Regarding the possibility of changing the greetings formulas, a reader from Northcote, a suburb of Melbourne, Australia, pointed out an oversight on my part with respect to a change in the new Latin missal. He writes:
"Do the rubrics in the 2002 Roman Missal allow changes to be made to the greetings?
"The 1975 GIRM 11 (Documents on the Liturgy 1401) had: 'It is also up to the priest in the exercise of his office of presiding over the assembly to pronounce the instructions and words of introduction and conclusion that are provided in the rites themselves. By their very nature these introductions do not need to be expressed verbatim in the form in which they are given in the Missal; at least in certain cases it will be advisable to adapt them somewhat to the concrete situation of the community.'
"This has been replaced by 2002 GIRM 31: 'It is also up to the priest in the exercise of his office of presiding over the assembly to pronounce the instructions that are provided in the rites themselves. Where it is indicated in the rubrics, the celebrant is permitted to adapt to some extent these remarks ...'
"So the provision for the celebrant to change the words of introduction and conclusion has been removed.
"The Order of Mass in the 2002 Roman Missal gives no indication of permission to change the words of greeting, simply having '2. Deinde sacerdos, manus extendens, populam salutat, dicens: Gratia Domini nostri ... vel ...' (Missale Romanum, 2002, page 503). [The Latin text roughly translates "Following this, the priest, with hands extended, greets the people saying: The Grace of our Lord … or …]"
Actually the same rubric is also found in the former Latin missal, so there is really no change with respect to the rubrics.
My oversight chiefly consisted in confusing the rubrics of the greeting formula with those of the introduction to the penitential rite. In the latter case the present English rubric states that the celebrant may introduce the penitential rite "using these or similar words," an expression absent from both Latin and Spanish missals.
The present Spanish missal, however, does offer a wider choice of introductory formulas, some of them adapted to the liturgical seasons, than either the Latin or English missals.
All the same, I believe our attentive reader has caught a clear change in the norms manifesting the legislator's desire to limit the use of free adaptations to those areas where the rubrics specifically foresee them.
I would observe that, for all practical purposes, this change will not come into force until the eventual publication of the new translations of the entire missal in English and other languages.
posted by Chipi Buenafe at
8:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home