Since my own (1950) Missal doesn't have (July 21) S Lawrence of Brindisi, I went into the on-line version of the 1962 Missal (Sanctamissa) and found a collect beginning
Deus qui ad ardua quaeque pro nominis tui gloriam et animarum salute beato Laurentio ... spiritum sapientiae et fortitudinis contulisti ...
Perhaps there is something I'm missing, but I can't understand this unless gloriam is a misprint for gloria.
If this is so ... (1) does this mistake appear in other recent reprints of the 1962 Missal? (2) Is it in the Missals of the later 1950s? (3) Have readers found other howlers in the 1962 Missal ... any publication of it ... (4) How about the 1961 Breviary?
The PDF of the editio typica 1962 missal available at the website of the Church Music Association of America also has this error (accusative instead of ablative of gloria).
ReplyDeleteI know we can't comment, but here goes: the 1962 Missale romanum ex decreto Ss. Concilii tridentini restitutum summorum etc. says «Deus, qui ad ardua quaeque pro nominis tui gloriam et animarum salute beato Laurentio, Confessori
ReplyDeletetuo atque Doctori, spiritum sapientiae et fortitudinis contulisti».
Though I do not have a printed missal or breviary to hand (currently traveling), a cursory review of DivinumOfficium.com suggests that "gloriam" is indeed a typographical error. It should read, as you suggest, "pro nominis tui gloria..."
ReplyDeleteMy 1962 altar missals have, correctly, 'gloria', and my 1962 breviary (La Maison Mame): but my copy of the editio typica is the exception in having 'gloriam' !
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteMy Baronius Press 2014 reprint of 1962 has gloria.
ReplyDeletePS. In the 'editio typica' of the 1962 missal, a Mass is ALSO given for St. Laurence of Brindisi in the supplement 'Missae pro aliquibus locis'. There 'gloria' is correctly given. So the faulty 'gloriam' is to be found in the proper of saints of the editio typica.
The 1961 Liber Usualis has «glória». So does the 1965 Missale Romanum for the USA (Latin-English in parallel columns).
ReplyDeleteThe most recent Missal in my collection before the changes began, 1954, has "gloria".
ReplyDeleteIn my Baronius Press edition of the Roman Breviary in English and Latin, the Collect for St. Lawrence of Brindisi has "gloria." My very useful "travel size" Missale Romanum from the FSSP's Fraternity Publications also has "gloria" for the same Collect.
ReplyDeleteGood morning. My Angelus press 1962 reads "...tui gloria"
ReplyDeleteDivinumofficium.com has corrected it to 'gloria'.
ReplyDeleteFather,
ReplyDeleteI have studied Latin for many years and cannot think of a time even in classical poetry (which has a way with bending rules!) when pro could take the accusative. It would seem most likely to me that this is definitely a misprint. I'm afraid I can't compare the other sources, but I do agree that this isn't correct.
Gloriam is the accusative (adverb) of Gloria
ReplyDeleteMy battered and tattered 1963 printing of the 1962 Edition has ' .. tui gloria ..' as does my nice, and still silky new, Baronius Press 2008 Summorum Pontificum Edition, (so too the Baronius Press 2011 remodelled Latin-English Roman Breviary). An American cousin's Angelus Press print also has the 'gloria' not gloriam. So, other eye-searing howlers apart, this gloriam seems to be a misprint.
ReplyDeleteMy Nova et vetera breviary has gloriae! Online Divinum Officium (rubrics 1960) has gloria.
ReplyDeleteMy venerable Baronius Missal has "gloria" as one would expect. I posted links to the Proper of that Mass on my humble blog and one of those links used the Missal which you used with the mistake "gloriam" in the Collect.
ReplyDelete"Gloria", in my editor of the breviary!
ReplyDelete"Gloria" in my edition of the breviary.
ReplyDeleteMy Copy of the 1962 Missal - without the St Joseph in the Canon - has "gloria".
ReplyDeleteThe Baronius Press 1962 missal of 2009 has "gloria".
ReplyDeleteThe Baronius Press 1962 missal of 2009 has "gloria".
ReplyDeleteThe Sheed & Ward Missal in Latin and English of 1949 has "gloria", too.
ReplyDeleteThe correct version may be indeed "gloria" (ablative). Missale romanun (ed. 1862): "Deus, qui ad ardua quaeque tui gloria, et animarum salute, beato Laurentio ..." (7. Julii, pro aliqu. locis). The same "gloria" in the Breviarium romanum (ed. 1888, pars aestiva, p. [325]).
ReplyDeleteThe 'Rubrics 1960' version at divinumofficium.com reads gloria.
ReplyDelete"tui gloria" in my 1962 St Andrew's Missal and in my 1963 Collegeville edition of the Roman Breviary. (I know: "deleted unread". But you did ask.)
ReplyDeleteDear Father Hunwicke, My 1961 Breviary gives gloria not gloriam, ditto my 1962 Altar Missal.
ReplyDeleteI trust that good order is being kept in Pantasaph.
Regards,
Kevin Jones
Dear Father,
ReplyDeleteAlthough this is a bit late, I can confirm the text should say:
"Deus, qui ad ardua quaeque pro nominis tui gloria et animarum salute, beato Laurentio...."
I checked my own 1962 Missal.
God bless,
Mark
It's a typo as we say here in North America. My 1962 St.Andrew's Daily Missal, which I've had since 1967, has 'gloria' and the SSPX daily missal published in 2004 has the correct spelling. My Liber Usualis versions also have correct spellings. No one seems to proof read their Latin any more as you have pointed out on other occasions.
ReplyDeleteIt's not to be found in the recently published Missel Quotidien.
ReplyDeleteIn the OF it's "Deus, qui pro nominis tui gloria et animarum salute beato Laurentio presbytero..." Probably a misprint in the older missals.
ReplyDeleteYes, some missals and a breviary I checked had gloria for St. Laurence.
ReplyDeleteSomething strange happened yesterday for the commemoration of St. Christopher. His collect is:
Præsta, quaesumus, omnípotens Deus: ut, qui beáti Christóphori Mártyris tui natalítia cólimus, intercessióne eius in tui nóminis amóre roborémur.
In various 1962 missals I've looked at, there is a variation between natalitia, natalicia, and natalita. Why would that be?
My 1959 Daily Missal, unfortunately, contains only an English translation for the propers--and that suggests the original source was, or should have been, an ablative with 'pro'. My 1957 Daily Missal, my 1939 Missale Romanum (Latin only) and my 1901 Liber Usualis only have St Praxedes for 21 July.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Internet, which is right about most things, his feast day had been 6 July and he was declared a doctor of the church by John XXIII in 1959--perhaps that was when they gave him the 21st? But acc to my Liber Usualis, 6 July was the Octave of SS Peter & Paul, and Lawrence is nowhere to be found.
Divinumofficium.com gives gloria, which as you surmise, must be correct. Strangely, the Nova et Vetera edition of the Breviarium Romanum gives gloriae, which is at least as impenetrable as gloriam!
ReplyDeleteMost of my Missals are in storage, but the misprint does not appear in my 1963 Pustet Missale Romanum "Editio Secunda iuxta typicam," nor does it appear in the Baronius Press English/Latin hand missal published in 2004 (although I know the priest who edited the latter: he's quite a good Latinist, so he may have caught/corrected it).
ReplyDeleteMy Latin-English hand missal edition of the 1962 Missal published by Angelus Press (2004) has gloria.
ReplyDeleteMy Roman Catholic Daily Missal from Angelus Press (1962) has, "Deus, qui ad ardua quaeque pro nominis tui GLORIA et animarum salute..."
ReplyDeleteI believe my missal is Baronius Press's edition of the 1962 missal. It correctly reads "gloria."
ReplyDeleteIn answer Father: yes, 'gloriam' is a typo; the printed 1962 missal (at least, the one I'm looking at, published by Angelus Press) has the correct text, 'gloria'.
ReplyDeleteOnline liturgical websites such as divinumofficium.com do have occasional typos of that kind. I have not yet discovered any typos in my printed copy.