The USCCB website says that in this part of the Liturgy of the Eucharist, the celebrant and the assembly “acknowledge[s] their unworthiness to receive so great a gift.” That was easy enough to understand when the prior translation was “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but…”
But because the current formulation of the prayer calls to mind the Centurion’s servant who is healed…Am I supposed to think that there is more to this prayer than a profession of humility?
For example, the Centurion goes to meet Jesus and tells him to say the “word” instead of coming to the Centurion’s house. Besides saving Jesus the trip to his house, the Centurion seems to be aware that Jesus cannot enter his house without becoming ritually impure. Is this why the Centurion says “Lord, I am not worthy to have you enter under my roof…” The Centurion is showing great respect to Jesus and Jewish law. Given the Centurion’s position, this is also showing humility.
But in the context of Matthew, the “word” that this Centurion urges Jesus to give is the command that the servant be healed. And Jesus is struck by the Centurion’s faith. The faith of the Centurion is shown when he says that Jesus can give a command to heal and it will be done just as sure as if the Centurion told one of his soldiers to “Go”, and he goes. So in the scripture there is a heavy emphasis on faith.
If the meaning of “the word” is carried over to the prayer, then I would find myself asking whether “the word”, or command, is simply contingent upon my having faith in Jesus’ mercy to heal “my soul” without Him having to enter “under my roof”.
To make a long story short [too late], I cannot make sense of why a new formulation of this prayer was made. It seems to have just muddied the waters for me, especially today as I have reflected on it.