I know the words of consecration in the Roman Rite are not strictly Scriptural, but I am curious why the verb tense is changed from present to future.
In the Ordinary Form, the words are:
ACCÍPITE ET MANDUCÁTE EX HOC OMNES: HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM, QUOD PRO VOBIS TRADÉTUR
ACCÍPITE ET BÍBITE EX EO OMNES: HIC EST ENIM CALIX SÁNGUINIS MEI NOVI ET AETÉRNI TESTAMÉNTI, QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDÉTUR IN REMISSIÓNEM PECCATÓRUM. HOC FÁCITE IN MEAM COMMEMORATIÓNEM
The bolded words are “will be given up” and “will be shed”.
In the Extraordinary Form, the words (for the chalice) are:
HIC EST ENIM CALIX SÁNGUINIS MEI, NOVI ET AETÉRNI TESTAMÉNTI: MYSTERIUM FIDEI: QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDÉTUR IN REMISSIÓNEM PECCATÓRUM
The bolded word is “will be shed”.
Concerning the bread, the Latin Vulgate reads:
“quod pro vobis datur” (Luke 22:19)
And concerning the chalice, the Latin Vulgate reads:
“qui pro multis effunditur” (Matthew 26:28)
“qui pro multis effunditur” (Mark 14:24)
“quod pro vobis funditur” (Luke 22:20)
All of these are in the present tense. (The Douay-Rheims translate all but one of them – Luke 22:19 – into the future tense.) The Greek agrees with the Latin (being in the present tense) in all four verses.
So why did the Church adopt the future tense for the words of Consecration?