Faith

Photo by Diocese of Spokane on Unsplash

Formed in Christ

Friday, February 27, 2026Faith

Submit a Letter to the Editor

The history of the composition of this prayer shows a good deal of dialogue, back-and-forth, and discussion among the various group members.

Father Robert M.
O'Grady

The task for implementing the liturgical reform decreed by the Second Vatican Council fell to Pope St. Paul VI. The same process had been followed by the Council of Trent, entrusting the reform to Pope St. Pius V. Each of the sainted popes, in turn, handed the work of the reform to various papally appointed groups of experts. After Vatican II, the general group was called the "Consilium ad Exsequendam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia" or the Council for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. Usually shorthanded as the "Consilium," it was composed of several subcommittees, each called a coetus, and they were numbered.
Coetus X had the job of studying and reforming the Order of Mass, including the Eucharistic Prayers. It was to this group that the task of fulfilling Pope St. Paul VI's request for additional Eucharistic Prayers ultimately fell.
The group, composed of priests from various nations and with various areas of expertise related to the sacred liturgy, was not, however, starting from ground zero. On the contrary, there were many Eucharistic Prayers in use in other Catholic Churches, especially in the Eastern Catholic Churches. Interestingly, the Eucharistic Prayers in use in the Eastern Catholic Churches are also ones prayed in the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

For the Second Eucharistic Prayer, the working group looked backwards. In fact, it went back to the third century, to a Eucharistic Prayer in use in both East and West. The prayer for many years had been attributed to a controversial priest in Rome named Hippolytus. Hippolytus -- or some other unknown individual -- gathered prayers in use and urged their use in Rome.
In that collection, they found an ancient Eucharistic Prayer. It was to that prayer that the group turned, using it as a model for what is now our Eucharistic Prayer II.
The original prayer would be in need of substantial editing.
First, the prayer would have to be structured so that it was like other Eucharistic Prayers. As we have seen, the classic format is a preface dialogue, a preface, the preface response (or the Holy, Holy, Holy), then the Eucharistic Prayer with its sections: introduction, words of institution, intercessions for the Church, the living and the deceased, and its conclusion or doxology.
Second, some phrases and words would have to be replaced because they were so antiquated that the references would be lost on the assemblies of today.
Third, they wanted to keep the "shorter" in mind, since this prayer was to be composed with an eye that it would be primarily prayed at weekday Masses.
The process seems to have been very successful, since, from most reports and experience, this is the most popular of the Eucharistic Prayers, and not only on weekdays as originally intended, but also on Sundays.
The history of the composition of this prayer shows a good deal of dialogue, back-and-forth, and discussion among the various group members.
The members, leaning toward history, wanted little editing done. Those who were theologians wanted to make sure that developments in sacramental theology would be evident in the editing. The liturgists were keen to make the prayer accessible to the assembly, especially in language and terminology, since the prayer would soon be translated into various vernacular languages.
Also, they would need to provide "directions" or rubrics for the prayer.
The original prayer was one long prayer proclaimed by the celebrant, usually the bishop. He was accompanied by his priests as concelebrants and the deacons. However, he said the prayer alone, and the assembly replied with the "Amen," as we do now, to the concluding doxology.
Remember that there were very few "printed" texts, more accurately manuscripts, available for the various churches, so the prayers needed to be memorized. So, compacting everything that should be included in the prayer was a challenge.
The translation of one version (the text is readily available in many places, here is one: liturgies.net/Liturgies/Historical/hippolytus.htm) is about 300 words. So frequent use, even daily, would make it easier to memorize.
One of the reasons for the composition of this prayer was that celebrants were "ad libbing" prayers -- they had no other choice. Sometimes, accidentally or maybe intentionally, an error about the faith could slip in. These could, for example, be about Jesus Christ, for example, overlooking his divinity, or forgetting his humanity.
Next week, we'll look at Eucharistic Prayer II as it is in our Roman Missal today. Keep some of this week's column in mind for next week.