Our parish isn't live-streaming liturgies during this strange season, for the good and sufficient reason that our webmaster isn't completely sure how to do it. Instead, we're pre-recording liturgies, and making the videos available on the website at the appropriate times. With the Triduum quickly approaching, a few of us from the parish are scrambling to get services tweaked (because there is no congregation or choir) and recorded for that liturgically-intensive holy time. We're going to record the Good Friday service this evening.
(To digress for a moment: people are watching the videos, or at least checking them out: a recent Sunday mass had over one thousand "hits", although the average time spent watching the video fell well short of the full length of the recording. Oh well, a lot of our people leave mass early in real life, too.)
(To digress a second time: pre-recording a liturgy is just not as good as doing it at the designated time. Some of ours are getting recorded out of sequence, e.g. we are recording one or two of the Triduum services before we record the Palm Sunday mass, because of the availability of participants. I was once on a jury for a lengthy trial in which various witnesses also had to testify out of order, based on their availability to do court appearances, and that also was disjointed. And beyond the out-of-sequence problem, it's kind of strange to do a liturgy at a time which isn't the 'real' time. it really brings home that there is a certain "live" quality, an of-the-moment quality, which is important to liturgy. That is one of the reasons that some people - like me - prefer the live theater to films.)
You may recall that the Good Friday service has some special Solemn Intercessions which are used, more or less, as the Prayers of the Faithful are used at a regular Sunday or weekday mass. The Good Friday intercessions include petitions for the pope, for Christian unity, for the Jewish people, for those who do not believe in God, and various others. A couple of us remarked that, this year, it would be nice to have a special Solemn Intercession for this time of the pandemic.
... and right on cue, the Holy See released such a prayer. In an America article, Colleen Dulle reports that the Congregation for Divine Worship has released a prayer, approved by Pope Francis, to be used on Good Friday. (The same article reports that Francis also has approved a new mass to be used on occasions like ours, in the midst of a pandemic. The new mass can't substitute for one of the appointed Triduum liturgies, but it can be used in many other times of the year, including during Lenten weekdays like this week's).
,,, and also on cue, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops also released such a prayer. I'm presenting them side by side here.
You will note that there are elements of similarity to them. In fact some of the phrases are nearly identical. The Roman one is a translation of a prayer which was promulgated first in Latin and then translated into English and other languages. The textual source of the American one isn't explained at the site, but it seems likely that the American composers had the Roman one at hand when they put theirs together. Francis has loosened the translation rules significantly from the word-for-word requirements that prevailed before Benedict's retirement, so it's even possible that we're looking at two different translations of the same Latin text.
I wish I had known of these prayers earlier. I learned about the Roman one last night, and dashed off a hasty email to the person who puts together our service scripts, in case she hadn't already printed up the contents of the binders for tonight's recording session. I didn't learn about the existence of the American prayer until a few minutes ago.
Which do you like better? And what are your criteria for deciding that one is superior to the other?
You know the old editor in me is going to prefer the Congregation's version. If for no other reason than "this pandemic" beats "grave challenges that affect us" the same way "s**t" beats "dadnabbit."
ReplyDeleteBut I don't need a prayer against Covid-19. I have uttered a ton of my own in my own words. If this is for Good Friday use, great, but I'm not going to stick either on my refrigerator because I don't need any help in this matter.
Our priests have been saying daily Mass at 6:30 a.m. and releasing it on video at 8 a.m. Sunday is more complicated, and they do both English and Spanish Masses. Marilyn and I have been "attending" at noon because that's when I usher at the bilingual Mass, and we are trying to maintain some semblance of order in our lives. But the parish is using a Live! in red note on the upcoming Triduum, which means, I guess, the vigil, for example, starts at 7:30 p.m.in real time.
I could tell stories from vigils past, but I will spare you. Suffice to say, this year I expect my wife for the second time to attend, and myself for the first time without a crisis brought on by faithful idiots, to attend a vigil Mass. No fencing with lighted candles in the narthex this year.
I like the one by the US bishops better. I like the "dearly beloved" addressing the congregation, and the "Almighty and merciful God", addressing God. It more invokes God as our father, and I think the word "scourge" accurately describes what we are enduring. It just seems like the one by the bishops is more emotionally connecting.
ReplyDeleteWord is that our parish is also going to have pre-recorded Holy Week liturgies, consisting of Father (who hopefully gets out of self-quarantine on April 4th)and a deacon. My husband gets to be the deacon on Good Friday and Easter morning, and the other deacon gets Holy Thursday and Holy Saturday. We do have another deacon who is 90 years old and is pretty much retired. He used to sing the Exsultet and did a good job. I don't know if anyone is going to attempt it this year. Our catechumen is going to have to wait for the sacraments of initiation; maybe on Pentecost.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the first. The second one presumes it's all up to God and requires no effort but pleading on ours. It ignores the people on the front lines who are actually doing God's work for the suffering.
ReplyDeleteI have noticed that if and when your prayers are answered, the answers come in the form of human help most of the time, not direct divine intervention. The first prayer reflects reality as I see it.
Jim, which one do you like the best?
ReplyDeleteThe difference between the two that struck me the most is that the first one prays (twice) for those who have died, while the second doesn't even acknowledge the dead. That seems like a significant oversight. I am even wondering if the first, Roman one really was composed in Italy, where death from the virus has been more omnipresent than in the US.
DeleteI also note that the first is "for the afflicted" while the second is "for an end to the pandemic". I am not sure whether one intention is any better than the other, but it is a difference, and presumably guided the remainder of the respective prayers in different directions.
I like the first better, but the second is also a good prayer.
There are one or two other aspects of the Roman one that appeal to me over and above the American one. In the top half of the Roman prayer, we pray "that God the Father may grant health to the sick, [grant] strength to those who care for them, [grant] comfort to families and [grant] salvation to the all the victims who have died." That is a lot of beseeching on our part for granting on His part.
DeleteThe American prayer has what seems to be a roughly parallel passage: "that our God and Father will heal the sick, strengthen those who care for them, and help us all to persevere in faith."
Admittedly, the American version of this passage is cleaner, simpler, perhaps more forceful. What it lacks, or perhaps under-emphasizes, is the sense that those things we are requesting are *grants*, gratuitous gifts to which we're not entitled and possibly don't especially deserve. The Roman one makes it clearer that God doesn't owe us anything - it's not him who is in debt to us.
It's not clear to me whether these two passages are meant to be alternative translations of a single Latin source, but if they are, then I also don't care for the way the American passage glosses the Roman request for comfort for families and salvation for those who have died as a sort of more generalized "help to persevere in the faith". Let me iterate that this may not be a just observation, because the American version may not be a translation of the same source - it may simply be a different prayer.
From these observations, you may suspect that I harbor more sympathy for the current translations of the mass than many other people do. To some extent, I do. The original premise was that the current translations would give us richer imagery and better theology than its predecessor. To some extent, it did - but it also got screwed up along the way. The early years of the PrayTellBlog reported on that saga exhaustively.
Good point about the first one praying for the dead, I hadn't even noticed that it wasn't included in the second one. Definitely we want to do that. I think you are right that possibly they may not be exactly the same prayer rather than different translations. The prayer used by the priest who says the local daily Mass that we have been tuning in to seems to be a combination of the features of both these prayers.
DeleteAbout the controversies over the Mass translations, that all seems so long ago now. I didn't really have strong feelings about it in the first place. Now I just wish we could be physically present, though I am grateful for the electronic presence.
True enough that God doesn't owe us anything. But Jesus tells us to call him our Father. The hard part isn't believing that he exists, but believing that he cares sometimes.
Delete"bring a swift end to the corona virus pandemic" does not seem appropriate when our Ohio Health Director is telling us that we are isolating ourselves to avoid a quick surge of the virus that will overwhelm our health care system. We want to spread out the virus over time.
ReplyDeleteWe need to pray more to make all the changes that we should have made in anticipation of this virus.
The Evening Prayer from the National Cathedral seems to cover all the bases. It asks God to bring an end to the virus, and includes prayers for the sick, the dead, the caregivers, those deprived of income, the fearful, the anxious, and the grieving.
ReplyDeleteWords of public prayers are important, I think, as reminders of what we believe and how we are to face trials and temptations.
In private, I presume I do what everyone else does--say a Hail Mary or some other short prayer when I hear about people in dire straits. God already knows what is in my heart, so the words don't always matter.
Good prayer from the National Cathedral. I especially like their concluding collect from Gloucester Cathedral (if I am looking at the right place).
DeleteIt also includes elected officials and public health experts. Sounds Dr. Fauci could use extra prayers as Trumpistas agitate threats against him and his security detail is beefed up. How shameful.
Delete"Words of public prayers are important, I think, as reminders of what we believe and how we are to face trials and temptations."
DeleteYes, I agree. I also think the "we's" in your observation are important: these public prayers are a statement, not only of what I personally believe, but what the church, the body of Christ, corporately believes. The implication is that I as an individual am a member of that body, and what I am joining into in being a member of that body is, among other things, shared beliefs.
There are ecumenical implications and possibilities in those "we's". The immediate post-Conciliar period had some promising initiatives in that respect. That's another thing that sort of got screwed up (imho) during Benedict's watch. Perhaps some of that original post-Conciliar ecumenical prayer spirit is still retrievable, though.