A Critical Analysis and Evaluation of the Epicleses in the Eucharistic Prayers of the Roman Rite

Jos Moons, SJ

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven/Tilburg University

The significance of the Second Vatican Council consists, among other things, of an incipient and unfinished renewal of awareness of the Holy Spirit. The renewal continued after the closure of the council, as the introduction of Spirit-focused invocations or epicleses to the new eucharistic prayers demonstrates. Arguably one of the major examples of postconciliar pneumatological renewal, the introduction of these epicleses is all the more noteworthy as the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium had almost entirely failed to mention the Holy Spirit.

The epiclesis has been analyzed and discussed from various perspectives, such as its historical forms and traditions, its development, and its place in relation to the consecration. Less studied are the epicleses’ exact formulations, even though the remarkable diversity in articulating the Spirit’s involvement seems to call for such an analysis. This article explores and critically evaluates how exactly the Spirit is involved in the sanctification, unification, and other graces that are being prayed for in the epicleses. After some methodological considerations, I provide an in-depth analysis of how the ten eucharistic prayers officially in use in the Roman Rite conceive the involvement of Holy Spirit. I then evaluate my findings in the light of Trinitarian theology and the Western tradition of forgetting or marginalizing the Holy Spirit (that is sometimes called Geistvergessenheit) and draw some conclusions.

In my analysis I focus on both the epiclesis that is placed before the institution narrative, a unique feature of the Roman Rite that is related to the gifts, and on the epiclesis that follows the anamnesis and is related to the community. (Interestingly, only the first epiclesis is accompanied by the epicletic gesture of the celebrant stretching out his hands.) The second epiclesis in a way includes the first, for usually both the Spirit and the partaking of the Eucharist play a role in the unity that is prayed for, so that indeed the “split epiclesis” is to be preferred over the term “double epiclesis.” Finally, even though it is not the focus of the current investigation, it is good to note that the specific form and place of the epiclesis is a matter currently under discussion. Eucharistic prayers from the early church period usually contained a single epiclesis over both the gifts and the community that was placed after the institution narrative. Commentators regret, for example, that the split epiclesis weakens the connection between gifts and community that characterized the single epiclesis—a connection that made it clear that the transformation of the gifts is aimed at the transformation of the community—and that it disturbs the sequence of Father, Son, and Spirit.

I recognize that the focus on the textual details of the epiclesis comes with various weaknesses. One could include the Spirit references in other parts of the eucharistic prayer, such as the prefaces, or stretch the investigation by looking for where the Spirit is absent. Moreover, modern liturgical theology prefers a comprehensive approach that explores the eucharistic prayer as a whole, not single sentences, and that indeed should be broadened further to include the whole of the eucharistic liturgy in both its textual expression and its enacted form. Further, from a pneumatological perspective, my project risks being alarmingly reductive, as if the Spirit’s action depends on how we articulate our prayers. I shall discuss these points somewhat more extensively later in the article, where I will also argue for the merits of my approach.

You can read The Holy Spirit “Artisan of the Eucharist”? A Critical Analysis and Evaluation of the Epicleses in Eucharistic Prayers of the Roman Rite from the Horizons journal here. Currently free to access.