Lost in Translation #171
After finishing the Perceptio Corporis tui, the priest prays:
Panem caelestem accipiam, et nomen Domini invocabo.
Which I translate as:
I will take the heavenly Bread, and I will call upon the name of the Lord.
This declaration is an adaptation of Psalm 115, 13 (see below), with “heavenly Bread” replacing “the Chalice of salvation.” And “heavenly bread” (panis caelestis) is an adaptation of two biblical expressions for manna, “bread from heaven” (panis de caelo) [1] and “bread of heaven” (panis caeli). [2] In John 6, 23, our Lord calls Himself Panis de caelo. There is an affirmation of the doctrine of the Real Presence implied here.
Each time he receives the Eucharist under a different species, the priest calls upon the name of the Lord, which is a powerful biblical practice. The first person who explicitly “began to call upon the name of the Lord” is Seth’s son Enos. (Gen. 4, 26) God, we know, is more pleased with Seth and his line than with Cain and his, for God chooses a descendent of Seth to live (Noah), while all of Cain’s descendants are destroyed by the Flood. Calling upon the name of the Lord is a mark of genuine devotion: “Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will call upon the name of the Lord our God.” (Psalm 19, 8) The prophet Joel predicts: “And it shall come to pass, that every one that shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (2, 32), a prophecy that Saint Peter cites in his first sermon. (Acts 2, 21) The priest (and so we do we the faithful) align ourselves, albeit with fear and trembling, with the good guys rather than the spawn of Cain.

As in other parts of the Mass, the priest’s words and actions reflect each other. The priest has just said that he will take the Heavenly Bread, and now he takes the Host in his left hand as he looks at it devoutly and says three times:
Domine, non sum dignus, ut intres sub tectum meum: sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea.
Which I translate as:
Lord, I am not worthy that Thou shouldst enter under my roof; but only say the word, and my soul shall be healed.
The prayer is almost verbatim that of the Roman centurion who asks Jesus to cure His servant. When Jesus offers to go and heal the servant, the centurion – knowing that according to the Mosaic Law entering a gentile’s house would render Jesus ritually unclean – declares his faith in Jesus’ authority over sickness and health even from a safe and clean distance. But before that, the centurion confesses his own unworthiness:
And the centurion making answer, said: “Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my roof: but only say the word, and my servant shall be healed.” (Matt. 8, 8)
The use of this prayer before Holy Communion is ingenious, for by placing the prayer here, the “roof” (
tectum) changes meaning from the top of one’s house to the top of one’s mouth. Such is an example of what we have been calling “
spiritual eructation.”
The prayer balances personal unworthiness and trust in God. No one, not even a priest, is worthy to put the living God beneath one’s palate, but we are also commanded to do this in memory of Him. The prayer thus continues the delicate and paradoxical dance in the Mass about our unworthiness to participate in it and yet our persistence in doing so.
The priest says each “Lord, I am not worthy” aloud, as if to emphasize the point with a public confession. He also strikes his breast with his right hand each time he says these words, the same gesture that the Publican makes in the Parable, at the words: “O God, be merciful to me a sinner.” (Lk. 18, 13). The Domine non sum dignus can therefore be characterized as a combination of two important Gospel passages.
And a sidenote: While the Roman Rite thinks of the Roman centurion before communing with the Eucharistic Lord, the Byzantine Rite thinks of the Good Thief crucified along with Our Lord. Its Prayer before Holy Communion is:
Remember me, O Lord, when You shall come into Your kingdom. Remember me, O Master, when You shall come into Your kingdom. Remember me, O Holy One, when You shall come into Your kingdom.
It is meet and just that the faithful approach the consumption of the living God with fear and trembling, and it is appropriate that they do so by following a particular model of spirituality. The Roman Rite chooses one model, the Byzantine Rite another. Glory be to God for both.
Returning to the Roman Rite, immediately before consuming the Host, the priest says:
Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam meam in vitam aeternam. Amen.
Which I translate as:
May the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ watch over my soul unto life everlasting. Amen.
The most common translation of custodiat in preconciliar hand Missals is “preserve,” which is also accurate. My only hesitation about this choice is that it may give the impression that the soul is being preserved in a static way, like jam in a hermetically sealed jar. Custodio means to guard or protect. Instead of wanting us to be like a preservative that has a “long life” because it does not develop or decay, the prayer asks for God to protect us from the bad so that we may grow in the good and live more fully. The 2011 ICEL translation, it seems to me, plays it safe and falls somewhere in between a static and a dynamic interpretation:
May the Body of Christ
keep me safe for eternal life.
The priest prepares to receive the Precious Blood by reciting Psalm 115, 12-13 and Psalm 17, 4:
Quid retribuam Domino pro omnibus quæ retribuit mihi? Calicem salutaris accipiam, et nomen Domini invocabo.
Laudans invocabo Dominum, et ab inimicis meis salvus ero.
Which the Douay Rheims translates as:
What shall I render to the Lord, for all the things he hath rendered unto me? I will take the Chalice of salvation; and I will call upon the name of the Lord.
Praising I will call upon the Lord: and I shall be saved from my enemies.
It is possible that author is making a morning drink-offering in the Temple (see Numbers 28, 7) and that the author is therefore offering thanks for having been delivered from something. Hence Jungmann writes:
In the Psalm the singer speaks out his resolve to make a thank-offering for his delivery from a great peril and in so doing (as was probably part of the ritual of a thank-offering) to raise the cup to praise God. [3]
But since the present circumstances are quite different, we see in this repurposing of these Psalm verses another act of spiritual eructation:
Here, the cup which we intend to pick up itself contains the Welfare and therefore the reason for thanksgiving, and next to the cup lies the Bread from Heaven. At this moment both of them are not so much gifts we offer up to God but instead that sacred repast to which we are now invited. And since we eat of this meal, it behooves us, as it behooved the psalmist, to praise the Lord because, as His guests at table, we are delivered from every earthly peril. [4]
The Vulgate (and the Missal) use the Latin retribuo for the Hebrew (shub: to return, turn back, restore, repent) over other Latin options such as reddo or redeo. Retribuo can mean to hand back money duly owed or to recompense someone. It is not without reason that our term “retributive justice” comes from it, and it is not in vain that we consider this term here. In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, retributive justice involves those who have committed wrongful acts who deserve a proportionate punishment. Retribution is especially necessary in the case of the Fall, for as St. Anselm argues, “nothing in the order of things is more intolerable than that a creature should take away honor owed to the Creator and not give back what he has taken away.” [5] And yet for postlapsarian man, retribution is impossible, since our crime outstrips our ability to offer recompense. Left in this impossible situation, it behooved the God-man to atone for our sins. The question that this prayer poses is thus: How can we ever pay back Our Lord Jesus Christ for all that He has done for us, He who bought us back (the literal meaning of re-deemed) from the auction block of death and damnation?
The Roman Rite subtly provides an answer to this question. Both in the Altar Missal and in preconciliar hand Missals, Psalm 115, 12-13 and Psalm 17, 4 are presented as a single uninterrupted block, as I have done here. But according to the rubrics, the priest pauses after he asks the question “What shall I render…?” and then spends several moments devotedly collecting the Particles of the Host from the paten and the corporal. Only after then does he say: “I will take…” The priest’s action is his answer. As Fr. Nicholas Gihr writes:
To the question, whether or how he might suitably thank the Lord for His boundless goodness, the priest remains for some moments in holy silence, whilst collecting the particles on the corporal, and then taking the chalice in his right hand, he breaks out into words which betoken his elevated sentiments of gratitude: “I will take the chalice of salvation and I will call upon the name of the Lord. Praising I will call upon the Lord and I shall be saved from my enemies.” Whilst considering what we may give to the Lord, we find nothing else than what He had previously given us. Thus, in the first place, the priest affirms his gratitude, in as much as he takes hold of the chalice with its infinitely precious and inestimable contents, to offer it for the glorification of the divine name and to drink it while gratefully magnifying the Lord. [6]
To Gihr’s insight we may add one more, namely, that the priest’s resolve to drink Christ’s Blood is an implicit promise to drink from whatever chalice God gives him, even if contains much that is bitter. What return can we ever make to Christ Jesus for all that He has done for us? We can start by being willing to suffer and die for Him as martyrs, or at the very least to accept gladly the dolors of daily life. “My Father,” cries Our Lord from the Garden of Gethsemane, “if it be possible, let this chalice pass from me. Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.” (Matt. 26, 39) It was Jesus Christ who took the first “chalice of salvation” (our salvation) by embracing the Cross, and as Christians we are called to do the same; for “If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” (Matt. 16, 24) What’s in your chalice? Whatever the answer, we will drink it, and gratefully.

And finally, immediately before consuming the Precious Blood, the priest says:
Sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam meam in vitam aeternam. Amen.
Which I translate as:
May the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ watch over my soul unto life everlasting. Amen.
By asking for protection of the soul, the priest also continues a theme from the Domine non sum dignus, where he asked for his soul to be healed. By asking now for his soul to be watched over, there is a hint that his soul has to some extent been healed enough to receive Holy Communion worthily.
The thematic continuity between the Domine non sum dignus, Corporis Domini nostri, and Sanguis Domini nostri was removed from the 1970 Missal. Annibale Bugnini explains why:
At his own communion the priest says: “May the body of Christ preserve me…” The Pope asked: “Would it not be better to retain the old formula, ‘May the body of Christ preserve my soul . . . ’?” In response, it was said that the suggested formula, which is already used in the Mass of ordination, seems more complete and accurate—not the soul alone but the entire human person is destined for eternal life. The new formula was kept.[7]
It is true that the entire human person receives eternal life (or eternal death), but in the Roman liturgical tradition, the way to draw attention to both body and soul is, wait for it, to mention both the body and the soul. By using “me” for the entire human person, the new prayer potentially feeds into the modern obsession with the self rather than corrects it. And as Chesterton quipped, “One can hardly think too little of one's self. One can hardly think too much of one's soul.” [8]
The new Missal, incidentally, also eliminates the prayers that call upon the name of the Lord and the Quid retribuam.
Notes
[1] Wis. 6, 20; 2 Esdras (Nehemiah) 9:15.
[2] Ps. 77, 24; 104, 40.
[3] Jungmann, vol. 2, 353.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Cur Deus Homo 1.13.
[6] Gihr, 740.
[7] Reform of the Liturgy, 380.
[8] GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Ignatius Press, 2005), 101.