Striking. . .

“The most striking phenomenon in the Roman text is the augmentation of the words of consecration said over the chalice.”  So wrote Josef Jungmann in volume 2 of the Mass of the Roman Rite.  Of course, Rome seems to consider the words of consecration to be more narrowly the words Jesus spoke and not quite the words which describe His speaking and what He did.  Perhaps this is considered nitpicking but it does occur to me that the additions are really somewhat dilutions; they do not enhance but detract from the words of Christ. 

On the day before he was to suffer, he took bread in his holy and venerable hands, and with eyes raised to heaven, to you, O God, his almighty Father, giving you thanks, he said the blessing,
broke the bread and gave it to his disciples saying: Take this, all of you, and eat of it, for this is my Body, which will be given up for you.

In a similar way, when supper was ended, he took this precious chalice in his holy and venerable hands, and once more giving you thanks, he said the blessing and gave the chalice to his disciples, saying: Take, all of you, and drink of this: Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my Blood, the Blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.  Do this in memory of me. As often as you shall do these things, you do them in memory of Me.

Perhaps it is understandable why there might be a desire to add to the words of Jesus in order to emphasize them or somehow make them more eloquent, it raises doubts about why there was this departure from the text of Scripture and, in particular, the words commended by St. Paul with such solemnity.  My point is not that this is the worst possible thing on earth but it does raise an issue.

Rome, along with Lutherans, insists that these are Jesus' words and that Jesus is still speaking them, albeit through the mouth of the priest/pastor.  So the question is why not let Jesus' words be simply Jesus' words without elaboration?  Bouyer has put it best.  The more we tinker with the words, the more they are our words and not the timeless words of Jesus, less they are words of God and more they are merely words and the creation of man.  Within the great and awesome mystery of Christ's presence in bread and wine, it would seem to me that precisely here the words of Jesus should be only Jesus' words -- without elaboration, paraphrase, or comment.  Let the words of Jesus remain His alone.

That is not to say that the words of the entire canon cannot be changed or should not be changed -- just the opposite.  From time to time they can and perhaps should be changed.  Goodness knows we have remembered that Jesus gave thanks but most Eucharistic prayers are heavy on everything but thanksgiving.  Yet the words of Christ should remain His own and without addition or edit.  First Corinthians 11:23-26:

²³ For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; ²⁴ and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” ²⁵ In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

²⁶ For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.

In another odd change, the Tridentine Canon had added the words Mystery of Faith right after the chalice or covenant statement of Jesus.  It was another striking deviation from the Words of Scripture in the Roman version, anyway.  The insertion of the words mysterium fidei into the Simili modo, though it does not interrupt Jesus' words (“This is the Chalice of My Blood”), it does interrupt the Scriptural narrative of those words. St. Thomas Aquinas was concerned enough to call it an inappropriate (inconvenienter) inserion.  Josef Jungmann echoes the concern: “And then, in the middle of the sacred text, stand the enigmatic words so frequently discussed: mysterium fidei.” Finally, Pius Parsch finds it disburing: “The insertion of ‘the mystery of faith’ is most unusual, since it even disturbs the construction of the sentence.” 

Curiously, until the changes to the liturgy in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council, the Latin rite was practically the only one that did not sing the words of the consecration.  Among the changes ushered in by the liturgical reform in the name of the Council was to allow for the possibility of singing the words of consecration, indeed the singing of the entire Eucharistic Prayer, in the Latin rite. As the General Instruction of the Roman Missal [GIRM] says:

"No. 30. Among the parts assigned to the priest, the foremost is the Eucharistic Prayer, which is the high point of the entire celebration. Next are the orations: that is to say, the collect, the prayer over the offerings, and the prayer after Communion. These prayers are addressed to God in the name of the entire holy people and all present, by the priest who presides over the assembly in the person of Christ. It is with good reason, therefore, that they are called the 'presidential prayers.'

"No. 32. The nature of the 'presidential' texts demands that they be spoken in a loud and clear voice and that everyone listen with attention. Thus, while the priest is speaking these texts, there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent."

"No. 38. In texts that are to be spoken in a loud and clear voice, whether by the priest or the deacon, or by the lector, or by all, the tone of voice should correspond to the genre of the text itself, that is, depending upon whether it is a reading, a prayer, a commentary, an acclamation, or a sung text; the tone should also be suited to the form of celebration and to the solemnity of the gathering. Consideration should also be given to the idiom of different languages and the culture of different peoples.

"In the rubrics and in the norms that follow, words such as 'say' and 'proclaim' are to be understood of both singing and reciting, according to the principles just stated above. 

At the 2006 Chrism Mass in St. Peter's Basilica, Benedict XVI sang the entire Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I) -- including the consecration.  In this he was joined by hundreds of concelebrating bishops and priests. 

Well, perhaps you learned something.  I did.