Can Children Leave During the Liturgy of the Word?

[dconklin]

At one of our Masses we offer CLotW. Before the first reading the priest calls the kids up (I cannot remember the ages), gives one of the catechists the Book of the Gospels for Children, offers a prayer and then a song is sung as the kids leave. They are brought back for the Prayers of the Faithful.

 

[lax16]

Thanks for the many helpful replies!

1. I can see this is more common than I thought.
2. This seems to serve a good purpose as long as it is not disruptive.
3. Be careful not to use improper materials or turn it into a craft.

And more!

 

[bcuster]

They do it at my parish, but it’s from ages 6-10 - well past First Communion age, I’d surmise.

We invite children ages 3 to 9 to come to Children’s Liturgy of the Word. The purpose is to present the scriptures in an understandable format for children. We leave after the Gloria and return after the Homily.

 

[jimkhong]

1. Is this okay?

Yes, the governing document in the church is the Directive for Masses with Children (‘DMC’). Para 17 makes direct reference to such a celebration

“Sometimes, moreover, if the place itself and the nature of the individuals permit, it possibly will be appropriate to celebrate the liturgy of the word, including a homily, with the children in a separate, but not too distant, location.”

1. It is led by a lay person, not a deacon or priest. Is this permitted?

Yes, para 24 of DMC provides for the pastor to delegate the responsibility to speaking to the children to another adult. It is however silent on whether the priest must be present throughout. I suppose that in 1973 when the DMC was issued, Children’s Liturgy of the Word was not yet commonly practiced. We are in great need of an update.

As with all things liturgical, more specific guidance may be avaialble from national bishops conferences and local bishops. I am only aware of two: from the Canadian and the English bishops and both gave rather divergent advice (the Canadian one is more restrictive while the English one provides detailed guidance as well as material). Many dioceses have set up diocesan offices or guidelines for Children Liturgy of the Word.

“With the consent of the pastor or rector of the church, nothing forbids one of the adults who is participating in a Mass with children from speaking to the children after the gospel reading, especially if the priest finds it difficult to adapt himself to the mentality of children.”

Questions on the liturgical regulations for CLOW are discussed here.

1. The children return at various times - sometimes in the middle of the homily. When should they return?

Yes, but while this is not regulated by any Church rules, simple liturgical common sense apply. You should re-enter the mass at the appropriate points, ideally when collection is taking place or a hymn is being sung. If possible, avoid re-entering when prayers are being said and never while the congregation is kneeling.

Best practices on setting up a Children’s Liturgy of the Word are discussed here.

Please feel free to PM me if you have any questions specific to your situation.

 

[jimkhong]

The biggest difference (and perhaps the most controversial one) was that in place of a homily we’d have a short reflection or directed discussion on the readings and how the first reading(s) was/were different from or the same as the Gospel. Lay people are not to give homilies so it was always a challenge to figure out what we could legitimately say or do.

Great to see so many responses with active and healthy Children Liturgies of the Word.

I can’t see why this practice would be so controversial. It is provided in DMC no 24 for an adult to speak to the children. I would presume that the adult concerned is properly formed spiritually and is not using it as a pulpit to ‘play priest’. We do get lay people (my experience is that they are always lay - never had problems with clergy) who quote rules etc on what CLOWs are doing wrong. As along you have the support fo your pastor, it really doesn’t matter.

In one parish I was in, the priest and me (as a lay catechist) sometimes have a discussion with the children sitting down in front of the altar in place of the homily (in this parish CLOW was for toddlers only). We prepare it before hand so that the discussion can also be simultaneously directed at the adults. It works and it was fun.

Keep it up, people and I hope the links in my earlier posts helps anyone running CLOWs.

 

[Phemie]

Great to see so many responses with active and healthy Children Liturgies of the Word.

I can’t see why this practice would be so controversial. It is provided in DMC no 24 for an adult to speak to the children. I would presume that the adult concerned is properly formed spiritually and is not using it as a pulpit to ‘play priest’. We do get lay people (my experience is that they are always lay - never had problems with clergy) who quote rules etc on what CLOWs are doing wrong. As along you have the support fo your pastor, it really doesn’t matter.

In one parish I was in, the priest and me (as a lay catechist) sometimes have a discussion with the children sitting down in front of the altar in place of the homily (in this parish CLOW was for toddlers only). We prepare it before hand so that the discussion can also be simultaneously directed at the adults. It works and it was fun.

Keep it up, people and I hope the links in my earlier posts helps anyone running CLOWs.

The problem is that the DMC dates back to 1973 and different rules have come into play since, first with the 1983 Code of Canon Law, 1997 Ecclesiae de mysterio, and then with 2004’s Redemptionis Sacramentum which says

[65.] It should be borne in mind that any previous norm that may have admitted non-ordained faithful to give the homily during the eucharistic celebration is to be considered abrogated by the norm of canon 767 §1.[145] This practice is reprobated, so that it cannot be permitted to attain the force of custom.

 

[jimkhong]

The problem is that the DMC dates back to 1973 and different rules have come into play since, first with the 1983 Code of Canon Law, 1997 Ecclesiae de mysterio, and then with 2004’s Redemptionis Sacramentum which says

Thanks for bringing it up Phemie.

I really have a bone of contention with those who prohibit something that everyone agrees is good, just because of a rule. Should interpretations of the law hold back good pastoral work? I can’t see the present environment engendered by the good Pope Francis ever allowing that.

We are taught that Church laws are based on reason and nature, not divine revelation (although many church laws are derived from doctrines which are divine revelation; but not the laws themselves and certainly not this one). As Jesus said, the law was made for people and not people for the law.

For the legalists
But for those of legalistic minds, here are some considerations. You can check it out with canon lawyers but most of those who raised them have not and have usually became experts because they read the law (or attended a GIRM seminar), without any understanding of the jurisprudence underlying the formulation of those laws:

1 What constitute a homily? Would a discussion be a homily? I believe that SHMW is interpreting a discussion to be not a homily.

2 If the reading takes place outside the ambo and outside the consecrated church, would we still technically be at mass? How far from the church would the rules and rubrics of the mass apply? I imagine that it would stop applying at one point. Could I not opt out of the mass, conduct a celebration akin to a liturgy of the word otuside of mass proper and then return for the Liturgy of the Eucharist? In most cases, you only have time only for one reading & no homily and so it is not the same liturgy of the word as that taking place in the church. And anyway, people opt out of the mass for their duties (eg., going into the sacristy for various reasons like lights, getting more elements, or locking the collection away) and then return to the mass all the time. I can’t imagine that they are still subject to the rubrics of the mass when they go into the sacristy to get more water for mass.

3 The specific laws normally take precedence over the general laws unless the general laws make specific reference to the specific laws. In this case, when the Canon Law was written, did the authors/approvers have in mind a situation like the Children Liturgy of the Word - we don’t know but I think unlikely.

4 The bishop is the chief liturgist in his diocese unless over-ruled by the Vatican (church laws are very clear on this - that the bishops are not extension of the Vatican) and the pastor is his delegate in that parish. Where the pastor has allowed or has not disallowed (most new pastors normally let CLOW continue on after taking over the parish and thus, did not give his explicit affirmative formal assent to it), tha practice should stand.

None of the above is intended to be my arguments but just to illustrate that the law is more complex than most people think. I will not get into any argument over any legalism as it often takes place over words and not the reality. I am not saying that the law means nothing - it certainly necessary to guide our thoughts and our practices but we have to understand why it was set up in the first place. Otherwise we end up with something like Pharisaic Sabbath laws that Jesus argued against and is still in force among many Orthodox Jews today (it would be quaint if it wasn’t so sad). See the secton on Sabbath in this post.

What we need to do
The important thing is the support of the parish pastor. I normally put the arguments for or against a particular practice before him and let him decide & I follow. It may be a good idea for CLOW facilitators to be commissioned annually, as the priest’s delegate to speak to the children. This will ensure compliance with no 24 of DMC if compliance is necessary (otherwise, the presiding priest will have to do the delegating at every mass). But more so, as a sign to the community that this good pastoral ministry has the backing of the authorities.

There is a small minority of people who opined that taking the children out of mass is not conducive to the spritual well-being of the children and/or the community. I would be happy to debate with them as we would (hopefully) be talking about a pastoral reality and not words in a legal document. Then, let the pastor decide. I understand a pastor was said to have discontinued CLOW according to one poster, but that is rare.

In the end, we all love the Church and we all love the children. Our ministry brings both together and get them to know each other better. God bless all your hard work and patience.