One of the antipope blogs is bothered about the variety of Eucharistic Prayer translations. Pope Benedict XVI supposedly settled it:
The original words of consecration by Benedict XVI., the faithfully arranged transmission of the words of consecration in the vernacular languages, is based directly on the official Latin formula.
Wait, what? Pope Benedict’s words? Admittedly, I don’t have a high opinion of some of the previous pope’s liturgical tinkering. “For many” struck me as vaguely Calvinist. At the Last Supper, Jesus clearly came to save “all,” at least all those willing to follow.
Granted, we are not talking about historical reconstructions of the cenacle, but the exaggerated emphasis on “for many” seemed like a *wink-wink* Jesus-didn’t-save-all-of-you-pretenders moment.
I’ve also seen a few blogosphere comments the past few days about the Jesus-content of Pope Francis’s words–the encyclical and all that. Not a single mention of Jesus at the Eponymous Flower posting. Which is curious, given that the words were his, not a modern pope’s. And they most certainly weren’t a Latin formula.
(Pope Francis) doesn’t exactly reverse the efforts of his predecessor, Benedict XVI. for a liturgical renewal, but freezes halfway.
A reversal would give it too much attention. I’m in favor of ars celebrandi, putting the onus on local quality rather than a futile top-down attempt to impose a comfy uniformity.