Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Another typo in the 2002 Missale Romanum

I think I have found another typo in the 2002 Missale Romanum. Apparently I have read that there are quite a few typos in the Vatican's printing.

Anyway, in Preface I for the Dead (which is the same preface as the only Preface of the Dead in the Extraordinary Form), the word in the 2002 Missale "condicio" should be "conditio."

I swear, some of these typos are as if someone was reading the prayers out loud to someone who was typing them.

EDIT - Fr. Z. has corrected me in the comments. I looked through my hand missals, and of the three the two newer ones (1962) have "conditio" and an older one (1930) had "condicio."

RS

2 comments:

Fr. John Zuhlsdorf o{]:¬) said...

Hmmm... In my 1962MR I have "certa moriendi condicio".

In Zeno of Verona (+c. 380) we read:

"Nunc primo omnium, optime christiane, scire cupio, quae sint tua, cum sint timentibus deum uniuersa communia, sicut scriptum est: turba autem eorum, qui crediderant, animo ac mente una agebant, nec fuit inter illos discrimen ullum nec quicquam suum ex bonis putabant, quae eis erant, sed erant illis omnia communia, sicut dies, sol, nox, pluuiae, nascendi atque moriendi condicio, quae humano generi sine personarum aliqua exceptione aequabiliter iustitia est diuina largita."

In Blaise/Dumas we find the voice "condicio".

The "tio" and "cio" were often interchanged, because indeed of the way they sound. Also, there were in manuscripts some confusion because the "c" and "t" were in some scripts formed similarly.

The Blaise's Dictionnaire Latin-Francais de auteurs chretiens we find separate voices for condicio and conditio with the explanation under the former that the words are often confused. Here condicio is "condition" in the sense of "state, nature, manner of being" while conditio is primarily "the action of creating".

So... all in all... I think we have to go with condicio as the accurate reading.

Roman Sacristan said...

Hmm, my "1962" Missale Romanum has "conditio" which is why I thought the 2002 Missale Romanum had an error (and I've encountered others in the 2002 too).
(I put 1962 in quotes because the Roman Canon in this one doesn't have Saint Joseph in it, even though the cover says "1962 Missale Romanum")

I guess that interchangability you mentioned maybe be at play ... or the "1962" I have has a typo.

Thanks for comment though. It's good to see the foundation of the texts.