There is some nagging confusion amidst recently-ordained (and even not-so-recently) priests about "epiclesis" in the Canon of the Mass. Somehow, they think that an "epiclesis" is necessary for a complete Sacrifice.
That's what they've been told by "experts," ya'know.
Fr. Hunwicke, no mean scholar, has a thought.
...The Roman process of consecration is, as I have explained before, perfectly simple. The Father is asked ... quite a number of times ... to accept the Offering. He asked to accept it so that it may be the Lord's Body and Blood because that is what he promised. Because he accepts it, it is the Body and Blood. We do not need, nor does the Father need this, for us to give him procedural advice: "Ah, Father, and by the way: we do not think it is adequate for you simply to accept; things won't, y'know, work unless you also send down your transmuting Spirit in order to effect the transformation."...
Remember that the "experts" also believed that the 'prayer of Hippolytus' was authentic, instead of that of an anti-Pope.
2 comments:
I don't get the point here....OF COURSE the Holy Spirit is involved in manifesting Christ us....He always us and was....by God's design.
"How shall this be since I know not man? The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God."
Gee, why didn't the Father just snap His 'fingers' and make it happen?
Of COURSE the Holy Spirit was and continues to be necessary....by His design.
Susan, here's what's going on.
The Old Rite Mass text did not have an "epiclesis", but the Novus Ordo does have one.
So many seminarians (and priests) were told that the Old Rite Mass was lacking an essential element. It's not, of course--but the purpose was no different than the purpose of Franny I's 'orders' on abolishing the Mass of the Ages.
Post a Comment