http://www.americancatholicpress.org/Father_Taft_Mass_Without_the_Consecration.htmlI came across this article by Fr. Taft about the Anaphora of Addai and Mari which is more in depth than another one which has been posted before. And yes, I read his article with faith seeking understanding. Here is what struck me.
It appears that the tendency in the West to reduce the consecration to the words of institution alone has allowed everything else to be tinkered with. Under Fr. Taft's understanding everything, and I mean everything, which has been handed down to us from the earlies of times, seems to be vitally important. The strongest point of his argument is that this is what has been done since time immemorial. (I always like to add to such claims, "But who could remember?"). But if we are dealing with what has been done since time immemorial, this means to tinker with anything seems to be rather grevious. Additions, I think, would be acceptable because they can bring clarity. Even Rome, in the relevant instruction makes an invitation for such an addition:
3. When Chaldean faithful are participating in an Assyrian celebration of the Holy Eucharist, the Assyrian minister is warmly invited to insert the words of the Institution in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, as allowed by the Holy Synod of the Assyrian Church of the East.
Deletions, however, would seem to be very rarely, if at all, tolerable.
