Christ's hand is raised in blessing at the multiplication of the loaves |
18th Sunday in
Ordinary Time, Matthew 14:13-21
Taking the five loaves and
the two fish, and looking up to heaven, he said the blessing, broke the loaves,
and gave them to the disciples.
What
the priest used to say at Mass: “The day before he suffered, he took bread in
his sacred hands, and looking up to heaven, to you, his almighty Father, he gave you thanks and praise. He broke the bread, gave it to
his disciples, and said; TAKE THIS …”
What
the priest will say at Mass: “On the day before he was to suffer, he took bread
into 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 …”
The
Institution Narrative of Eucharistic Prayer I (above) is quite clearly modeled on
the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves. As St. Thomas Aquinas notes
(together with many others), the Gospels do not relate that Christ looked up to
heaven at the Last Supper, but we may presume this action since it was
prefigured at the multiplication of loaves and has been maintained in the
earliest tradition of the Church.
What
is particularly encouraging about the new English translation of the Roman
Missal is the inclusion of the language of blessing in the Institution
Narrative. While before – in Eucharistic Prayers I and III – the Latin word benedixit was translated as “He gave you
[…] praise” [completely confusing the two distinct actions of giving thanks (tibi gratias agens) and blessing (benedixit) by supplying the word “praise”];
the new translation will happily include the notion of blessing – “he said the
blessing”.
What
is more, Eucharistic Prayer IV will be modified from “he took bread, said the blessing, broke the bread, and
gave it to his disciples” to “he took bread, blessed and broke it,
and gave it to his disciples” – which is much more faithful to the Latin benedixit and to the biblical
inspiration of the liturgical text. It will now be very clear that the blessing
is directed toward the bread itself, which is about to be consecrated.
This
is what we should like to point out in our current article: The liturgical language
of the Mass must be rooted in the biblical language of the Gospels (and, as
applicable, of the whole Bible). A consideration of Christ’s blessing of the
bread just before the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves and fish will
serve to explain why the new translation of the Institution Narrative is far
more biblical than that which has been used in the English-speaking world since
the 1970s.
How
sad it is that the old (i.e. the current) English translation hid this act of
blessing for so many years. Starting in Advent 2012, a wonderful thing will
occur: The priest will once again be permitted to bless the bread at Mass!
The biblical account of the
multiplication of the loaves
We
will place side-by-side the Latin Vulgate, together with the English of the Douay-Rheims
and that of the NRSV. [recall that the Douay-Rheims translates mostly from the
Latin of the Vulgate, while the NRSV is based directly on the original Greek;
the Vulgate itself is, of course, from the original Greek]
Matthew
14:19
Vulgata
|
Douay-Rheims
|
NRSV
|
acceptis quinque panibus
et duobus piscibus aspiciens in caelum benedixit et fregit et dedit
discipulis panes discipuli autem turbis
|
He took the five loaves and the two
fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves
to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitudes.
|
Taking the five loaves and the two
fish, he looked up to heaven, and blessed and broke the loaves, and gave them
to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds.
|
One
can see that, even in the NRSV translation, it is clear that the act of
blessing is more than simply “giving praise” to the Father, but is understood
as a blessing of the bread which was about to be multiplied.
Consider
the words of Fr. Cornelius a’ Lapide on this point: “Looking up, &c. S. John has, Jesus took the loaves, and when He had given thanks, He distributed to
those who were set down. Wherefore the heretics explain the word blessed, by He gave thanks: but wrongly. For Christ, according to His manner,
gave thanks to the Father first, then blessed the loaves. For Mark says, looking up to Heaven he blessed and brake
the loaves. And Luke, He looked up to
Heaven, and blessed them, viz., the loaves, and brake and distributed them. Christ therefore here blessed both
God by praising Him and giving Him thanks, and also the loaves themselves. This
He did in order that He might draw down Divine grace upon them, by means of
which they might be multiplied, and acquire strength and efficacy to nourish,
strengthen, and exhilarate so great a multitude, just as much as though they
had been fed upon a rich feast of flesh and wine. Christ by this benediction
endued these loaves with some, not physical, but moral virtue; that is to say,
He ordained and appointed them for miraculous multiplication, whereby He placed
His hand, as it were, i.e., His own Divine virtue upon the loaves, that they
should straightway be really multiplied.”
The
debate here is whether Christ actually blessed the loaves, or whether his “blessing”
was a solely a prayer of praise to God the Father. The protestants desired to
claim that Christ did not bless the loaves themselves, but only the Father –
for they despise the act of blessing in the Church, together with other
sacramentals given at the hands of the priests. But the obvious meaning of the
text, and the interpretation which has the greatest favor in the tradition of
the Church, is that Christ did bless the bread and (by this blessing) prepared
it for the miraculous work he was about to accomplish in it – this is
recognized even by the NRSV which is best current Protestant Bible in English (he blessed and broke the loaves).
The
great similarity between the multiplication of the loaves and the Last Supper is
such that, if one misinterprets Christ’s blessing of the bread at the
multiplication, so too will he misinterpret Christ’s blessing of the bread at
the Last Supper.
The Institution Narrative
in the Scriptures
We
will consider the Narrative as it is presented in Matthew and in Luke (I Corinthians
11 is similar to Luke, while Mark is very close to Matthew).
Matthew
26:26
Vulgata
|
Douay-Rheims
|
NRSV
|
cenantibus autem eis
accepit Iesus panem et benedixit ac fregit deditque discipulis suis et ait
accipite et comedite hoc est corpus meum
|
And whilst they were at supper, Jesus
took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his disciples and said: Take ye
and eat. This is my body.
|
While they were eating, Jesus took a
loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to the disciples,
and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."
|
Luke
22:18
Vulgata
|
Douay-Rheims
|
NRSV
|
et accepto pane gratias
egit et fregit et dedit eis dicens hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis datur
hoc facite in meam commemorationem
|
And taking bread, he gave thanks and
brake and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do
this for a commemoration of me.
|
Then he took a loaf of bread, and when
he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is
my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me."
|
One
can see that Luke does not include a specific reference to Christ blessing the
bread before he consecrates it. However, this blessing is quite explicit in
Matthew and was prefigured in the multiplication of loaves. Even the Protestant
NRSV translates Matthew’s account with a reference to the blessing of the
bread.
However,
we do admit that there is this slight difference between the various accounts:
In Matthew and Mark, there is explicit reference to Christ blessing the bread.
But, in Luke and Paul, there is no such reference. Still, this is no
contradiction, but only a case of silence on the point (in Luke and Paul).
The
Church has constructed the Institution Narrative of the Mass from a combination
of the diverse elements of the various biblical accounts of the Last Supper.
From Matthew and Mark, the Church has taken the action of the blessing of the
bread just before the consecration.
The
text of the Mass (from the Roman Canon) reads: Accepit panem […] tibi gratias agens benedixit, fregit, diditque
disciplulis suis – “He took bread […] and, giving you thanks, he blessed,
broke, and gave it to his disciples.” This would be the most literal
translation of the Latin of Eucharistic Prayer I. The blessing is clearly
directed toward the bread – hence, traditionally, the priest made the sign of
the Cross over host with the word bene +
dixit.
Sadly,
many persons in the Church have tried to dismiss the act of blessing the bread,
favoring instead the idea that the blessing is only an act of praise given to
the Father. While there is some room for linguistic debate about the word Hebrew
notion of blessing, it is quite significant that even the Protestant Bible
(NRSV) translates the text of Matthew in the sense of Christ blessing the
bread. The Catholic scholars who want to cover-over the act of blessing are
more protestant than even the modern-day Protestants!
An evaluation of the new
translation
The
Institution Narrative of the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I)
Latin
|
Old
English translation
|
New
English translation
|
Qui, pridie quam
pateretur, accepit panem in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas, et elevatis
oculis in caelum ad te Deum Patrem suum omnipotentem, tibi gratias agens benedixit, fregit, deditque
discipulis suis, dicens:
|
The day before he suffered, he took
bread in his sacred hands, and looking up to heaven, to you, his almighty
Father, he gave you thanks and praise, He broke the bread, gave it
to his disciples, and said:
|
On the day before he was to suffer, he
took bread into 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:
|
The
new translation of this passage is not perfect. It does not explicitly state
that Christ blessed the bread, but rather gives the more open-ended wording “said
the blessing”, which could be interpreted either as a blessing of the bread or
as a blessing of God.
Still,
we can at least be happy that the word benedixit
has been preserved in the English! While “said the blessing” does not explicitly
and clearly state that Christ blessed the bread, it is much better than the old
“gave you … praise” which explicitly denied the act of blessing!
Most
happily, Eucharistic Prayer IV has come along even further: Moving from “said
the blessing” (in the old translation) to “he took bread, blessed and broke it”
(in the new translation). Here, the blessing of the bread is explicit and the
unity of the liturgical language with the biblical text is preserved.
I'm afraid that I have to agree that this translation, while somewhat better, is not much better.
ReplyDeleteThe translation as "said the blessing" stands athwart the Holy Father's idea of "mutual enrichment." In the TLM, at the word "benedixit," the priest makes the Sign of the Cross. In my Baronius Missal, that action comes at the English words "blessed it."
In making the Sign of the Cross over the hitherto unconsecrated bread at that point, the priest makes explicit in himself (alter Christus) the act of Christ. In regard to the proposed purpose of reform found in Sancrosanctam Concilium, these words, combined with the restoration of that act, make evident in an explicit fashion the union with Christ at the Last Supper and the priest at the altar.
"He said the blessing," blurs this act somewhat, and makes the Sign of the Cross at that point, if the action is to be restored to the Novus Ordo, less explicit and perhaps problematic.
Thus endeth the rant.
Thanks for this, I may refer to it in Catechism class this year.
ReplyDelete