On the Internet I came across the following strange communication, concerning the Eucharistic Prayer (III) used at the Funeral of Papa Ratzinger.
Simon Reynolds@Wintonfellow Replying to @liturgicalben
I am tempted to say that it's been the EP used at the majority of Catholic funerals (I've personally been at three for priests and one for a bishop where it's been used). Modelled on Hypollytus's anaphora, it has a pedigree of historic usage in Rome pre (what's become) the Roman Canon.
(1) The Greek name is Hippolytus. "Only a typo", you cry? Well, this one word ingeniously manages to weld together three typos. Surely that must be indicative of something. The name is not little-known. Euripides wrote two plays with this title. Some time ago, a film adaptation was made of it called Phaedra and featuring Melina Mercouri. It uses a Greek grammatical constuction which subverts the claim that Pauline Rome knew about 'Female Apostles'.
If some callow youff or youffess referred in her essay to a play by Shakespeare about "Cliopettra", ma'am's correcting pencil would probably shatter at the dismal profundity of the illiteracy thus demonstrated.
(2) There is a liturgical formula which once rejoiced in the title The Egyptian Church Order (Reynolds would probably have spelt it Ejjiption). It was then discovered, so we all thought, that it was really the long-lost Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus; Hooray! Frabjous Day!! And so it was a very influential text around 1930-1970. Dom Gregory Dix produced an edition, arguing for the importance of this text in establishing how the Roman Church worshipped around 210-ish. Dom Botte was dotty about it and established his academic reputation by working on it.
After Vatican II, Botty used this dodgy document to replace the historic Roman formula for the Consecration of a Bishop, thus handing the sedevacantists a powerful weapon.
Opps-a-daisy. The identity of the Egyptian Church Order with Hippolytus, or any idea of its having any connection with Rome, is now discarded academically. Wotta Bigga Mistaka to maka! (If anybody wants to go into this, they will probably find themselves reading the Anglican liturgical historian Paul Bradshaw.)
(3) During its period of popularity, a Eucharistic Prayer based upon this so-called ""Hippolytus"" text was authorised for the post-Conciliar "Roman" Rite. It is sometimes called EPII, although it has now become common to call it the Trastevere or Trattoria EP, since Louis Bouyer revealed in his memoires that he helped to draft it overnight in the Trastevere.
It is this EP II which for long was commonly but erroneously associated with the name of Hippolytus.
The EP III which was used at Papa Ratzinger's Funeral has never been commonly linked with 'Hippolytus' or 'Hypollytus'.
(4) But I have discovered a Tradition which, although far from Apostolic, might help to account for a fraction of poor Rennald's confusions.
In a book (2007) called A Challenging Reform, Archbishop Piero Marini, an admirer of Archbishop Hannibal Bugnini, wrote (concering the events of 1968) that "The fact that four Eucharistic Prayers were approved was consistent with the early Roman liturgy, which actually had used several anaphoras."
How liberally these jolly hypotolly chappies do invent their fantasy untruths!! How attached they are to spreading gibberish!!!
13 comments:
All the new Eucharistic prayers are religious hacks, shortcuts to make the service of the presider easier.
The Roman Canon - prior to its abuse by John 23rd - was considered inviolate.
Now, anything goes and everything grows.
One could say that the current Pope took a cheap shot at a defenseless former Pope but the exPope never said the Real Mass publicly after he was elected Pope so it really is much to do about n nothing because the ex Pope said both the Real Mass The LIl' Licit Liturgy are essentially the same thing.
Eucharistic Prayer 3 seems to be the "default" prayer used by Papa Francis.
Even at days when there are proper parts in Eucharistic Prayer 1 (THE Roman Canon).
Such a shame.
DK Pintar
Appeals to the practice of the early church all have this wonderful characteristic that no one actually knows anything about the early church. There is virtually zero evidence relevant to any matter of modern controversy. The result is that you can say of any proposal you like that it reflects the practice of the early church, and no one can prove you wrong.
The whole myth surrounding the "Second Eucharistic Prayer" as being Hyppolytus' canon ( which any comparison of the two quickly dispels) was deliberately propagated in order to justify its creation and its de facto replacing of tbe venerable, ancient Canon Romanus. I have even heard a well - known conservative Dutch priest claim that the "2nd EP of Hyppolytus" be a great treasure gifted the Church by the post- cociliar liturgical reform! As for the "3rd Eucharistic Prayer", it was conocted ex nihilo as a rival to the Canon Romanus, which Paul VI did not allow to be officiallly scrapped, but never ever has anyone claimed Hyppolitan origin for it. Now i hear that there are dozens of approved Novus Ordo "eucharistic prayers": cheaper by the dozen! One more excellent reason to stick to Tradition and the traditional liturgical rites.
In the periphery (Peru) there are over 4000 varieties of potato.
Dare we hope that some day we will have an equal number of eucharistic prayers?
P.S. I am old enough to remember when we had an offertory and described it as an offertory instead of ditching it for what we call an Institution narrative.
Of course, now that Vatican Two stressed how all share in the priesthood, a narrative could be said by anyone gathered in the worship space to have a memorial meal; that is, there may come a time (it is arriving faster than most are aware) when any Tom, Dick or Shari could become presider at the memorial meal and say the narrative and the vast majority of Catholics (having become inured to women in the sanctuary) would think that is jake; Well, it is about time for there is no reason a woman can't be a presider.
Back in the day (as the kids say) everyone knew only an ordained priest could confect the Eucharist and only he could make the offertory but things change and, as we have been told, continuity includes rupture, so there is no objection to us having blowed-up the Offertory and replaced it with a Jewish meal prayer because it makes no difference who influences/ controls/composes the prayers for Jesus' most sacred action on earth - Popes, Saints, Tradition, or Messias-Deniers..
Nothing says continuity like have destroyeing the offertory
In the periphery (Peru) there are over 4000 varieties of potato.
Dare we hope that some day we will have an equal number of eucharistic prayers?
P.S. I am old enough to remember when we had an offertory and described it as an offertory instead of ditching it for what we call an Institution narrative.
Of course, now that Vatican Two stressed how all share in the priesthood, a narrative could be said by anyone gathered in the worship space to have a memorial meal; that is, there may come a time (it is arriving faster than most are aware) when any Tom, Dick or Shari could become presider at the memorial meal and say the narrative and the vast majority of Catholics (having become inured to women in the sanctuary) would think that is jake; Well, it is about time for there is no reason a woman can't be a presider.
Back in the day (as the kids say) everyone knew only an ordained priest could confect the Eucharist and only he could make the offertory but things change and, as we have been told, continuity includes rupture, so there is no objection to us having blowed-up the Offertory and replaced it with a Jewish meal prayer because it makes no difference who influences/ controls/composes the prayers for Jesus' most sacred action on earth - Popes, Saints, Tradition, or Messias-Deniers..
Nothing says continuity like have destroyeing the offertory
If you have to hear EP2 and EP10 Sunday after Sunday, then the occasional use of EP3 can feel like water in the desert.
Does this mean, Father, that you are now on Twitter? I hope so.
@Albertus: Who is or was “Hyppolytus”? Or did you perhaps not read Father’s first few paragraphs?
Anyway, isn’t the whole point that there is no such (extant) thing as “H[i]ppolytus’ canon”? And that therefore it is meaningless to talk about a “comparison” of H’s canon with EP2?
"It is sometimes called EPII, although it has now become common to call it the Trastevere or Trattoria EP, since Louis Bouyer revealed in his memoires that he helped to draft it in a drinkery in a red-light district."
Isn't this a smidgin unfair? Fr. Bouyer and Dom Bernard Botte were presented with the draft text of an appalling EP which they were invited to "patch up," and instructed to have it ready by the following morning, so they retired to "la terasse du bistrot de Trastevere" to undertake their assignment. (Bouyer, Memoires, p. 199; Angelico Press Englisah trans., pp. 221-22) Whether Trastevere as a whole merits the characterization of a "red-light district" is a matter for discussion; when I was strolling about in it just twelve days ago it was rather packed with tribes of the Touristenwanderung, but it didn't seem particularly seedy, nor had it on my previous visits in 1974, 1979, 1981, 1983, or 1985.
Has anybody noticed the glaring contradiction in the assertion in Traditionis Custodes and the diktats of its enforcers such as Cupich that it seeks a return to a 'unitary' Roman rite: a 'unitary' rite with nine official Eucharistic Prayers and options everywhere else as far as the eye can see. Add to that the innumerable do-it-yourself versions of the Father McTrendies of the world (e.g. the antics of Pflegler and Kellen openly tolerated by Cupich in Chicago), the constant flow of sermonettes, standup comedy acts, Dad jokes etc etc.
The joke is that the new rite is infinitely more 'clericalist' than the old. Whereas in the Usus Antiquior the priest does exactly what the missal tells him, no more and no less, in the new almost everything comes down to Father's preferences, rubrics or no rubrics.
On Pope Benedict;s funeral, by the way, even Robert Mickens, of all people, has remarked on how perfunctory they were, to the point of being disdainful.
PS. Bouyer commented that EP II (on which he and Botte did their emergency rescue job in the trattoria) was not really about retrieving Hyppolitan tradition; Bugnini's purpose, he thought, was to satisfy those who wanted a slapdash Mass.
Dr Tighe is quite right. I have modified my text.
Post a Comment