Friday, 14 December 2007

Latinitas

Thanks to a comment by one Brother Pius on Fr Zs blog, I negotiated my way (eventually), here, to the complete text of the 2002 Missale Romanum, electronically rendered. Handy, especially since the paper version weighs in at several tons. Here you can find the Eucharistic Prayers for Children in Latin (very useful), the emergency rite for blessing an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion in Latin (must happen all the time!) and various other little gems.
I noted also that it reproduces the 2002 text exactly, even to the misprint in Eucharistic Prayer 4 which once caught me out when celebrating at the London Oratory. I found this unfamiliar word, but when you're sight reading (come on; how often do you celebrate EP4 in Latin?) you don't have time to think, and so it only sunk in a moment or two later that I had said something completely nonsensical.
An Alma Redemptoris for the first person to spot the error.

8 comments:

Flabellum said...

I think 'sed et fo´dera plúries' looks pretty odd!

Anonymous said...

The Apostles' Creed has been incorrectly rendered as "Credo in unum Deum". Our Eastern brethren will love that - yet another 'latin rite' change to the ancient Symbols. I suppose it will make a change from the filioque argument in the N-C Creed.

One assumes this is a typo, but has anyone seen any acknowldgement of that from Rome?

Anonymous said...

Do you mean "celebrindum" on p. 593? There are lots of errors in the 2002 Missal. Have you noticed the spoonerism on p. 8 where the decree prints "incipere autem vigebit" instead of "incipiet autem vigere"? I presume this is what it ought to say.

William said...

If I'm looking at the same page as you, there seems to be the interesting word "celebrindum".

Fr Justin said...

Anon and William; yes, 'celebrindum' (sounds like a character in Tolkien, doesn't it?) was what I had in mind. I think Anon wins by about 17 mins, so one Alma coming up……
But the Apostles' Creed blooper is an interesting one.
I can't admit fo´dera, though, Flabellum. That one's typographical, as o´ seems to stand for conjoined o and e systematically, and it only exists in the electronic text, not the printed.

William said...

Drat and double drat! I was convinced I would get the "Alma", but had forgotten that your blog is pre-emptively moderated, or whatever the term is, so others could have already replied without their replies being visible. Ho hum.

Re. "fo´dera": Just a few words on from "celebrindum" we have "in fodus aeternum", which I was going to co-nominate as the error until I saw that "oe" seemed to be uniformly rendered incorrectly. I can understand that oe-ligature-with-acute produces some bizarre renderings in the online version, since Unicode has no code-point for such a combination (it is in general an exceptionally rare character, though EP IV surprisingly has two in as many lines, with "obo´diens" [sic] shortly before "fo´dera"), but there's no reason why unaccented oe-ligature can't be rendered correctly. Or even just as two separate letters (as seems to happen with "ae"). Someone at the Congregation for the Clergy should sort that one out. (Alternatively, my consultancy rates are very reasonable …)

Anonymous said...

Father, I have noticed the following "errors" in the 2002 Missale Romanum.

1. The addition of the "unum" in the first line of the Apostles Creed.

2. The omitting of the first part of the introductory dialogue from the Preface of Pentecost on p. 445. (i.e. Dominus Vobiscum and Et cum spiritu tuo).

3. In the preface of EP IV on p. 591, the text "Aliae melodiae in Graduali romano inveniunter." is printed in black, when it is obviously a rubric.

ADV said...

A comment on the 'unum Deum' and the Eastern Rite.

Denzinger (1955) gives the 'Eastern Form of the Apostolic Creed' (at 8 and 9) with the text from that of St Cyril of Jerusalem which has the form 'unum Deum'. He states that the form was used before Nicea (325).