Can Priests Read the First Readings at Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Student09
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Student09

Guest
At Mass today, the celebrant stated, “If there are no laypeople present to proclaim the first readings [prior to the Gospel] they should go unread, because it’s not the place of the priest to read those, it’s the role of the laity.”

Is this true?
 
Student09 said:
At Mass today, the celebrant stated, “If there are no laypeople present to proclaim the first readings [prior to the Gospel] they should go unread, because it’s not the place of the priest to read those, it’s the role of the laity.”

Is this true?
Click to expand...
No (and partly yes). The readings have to be read, even if nobody else is present – or if, let’s say, other people are present but nobody else is willing to do do the readings. The relevant passage of the GIRM provides:
59. The function of proclaiming the readings is by tradition not presidential but ministerial. Therefore the readings are to be read by a reader, but the Gospel by the Deacon or, in his absence, by another Priest. If, however, a Deacon or another Priest is not present, the Priest Celebrant himself should read the Gospel, and moreover, if no other suitable reader is present, the Priest Celebrant should also proclaim the other readings as well.
So your priest is partly right, in that the readings are not traditionally the domain of the presider (though in the pre-reform liturgy, the presider would always read them silently while another cleric was reading them out loud). The conclusion he draws, however, is way off base.
 
At our little rural parish, we only have one weekday Mass available. Usually, the reader is either myself or another woman. If she doesn’t show, and I’m wrangling a toddler and a baby, the priest will take the first reading himself.

Very odd that your priest would take that tack-- and at a Sunday Mass? :confused:
 
Yeah, somebody already answered this well, but the readings always have to be read. I have seen priests do it in the absence of somebody else.
 
Student09 said:
At Mass today, the celebrant stated, “If there are no laypeople present to proclaim the first readings [prior to the Gospel] they should go unread, because it’s not the place of the priest to read those, it’s the role of the laity.”

Is this true?
Click to expand...
No! I’d actually say that if the priest did all the parts of the Mass that would be great even if the laity are present. Keep in mind, when a priest says Mass privately, he has to say all the parts without the laity.
 
As I understand the way many seminary’s work is that a person on his route to the priesthood will be installed as

an Acolyte - assists priest at mass
later
a Lector - proclaims the non-gospel readings
later
a Deacon - proclaims the gospel, the prayers of the faithful and is Minister of the Cup
finally
a Priest - offers the mass.
And one does not stop being one of these when one takes on a later roll. So the priest can act as any or all of these if there is noone else present.
 
Leon_Bloy said:
Yeah, somebody already answered this well, but the readings always have to be read. I have seen priests do it in the absence of somebody else.
Click to expand...
I have been to Sunday Mass with 50+ people no 1st Reading, psalm or Gospel Acclaimation. However to answer your question they have to be read.
 
At four am while awaiting an air-raid by the Luftwaffe I can see that, but meanwhile back to reality: the readings need to be done, and the psalm should by rights by chanted/sung.
 
MariaGoretti88 said:
Keep in mind, when a priest says Mass privately, he has to say all the parts without the laity.
Click to expand...
That’s what I thought. And what if you had a community of priests having Mass together, or a small religious community where all the lay brothers were sick one morning, etc. It seemed very fishy to me! Taking the whole “laypeople are important too” idea a little bit too far, I think.
 
The 1973 Directory for Masses with Children has:
“42. With regard to the number of readings on Sundays and feast days, the decrees of the conferences of bishops are to be observed. If three or even two readings appointed on Sundays and weekdays can be understood by children only with difficulty, it is permissible to read two or only one of them, but the gospel reading should never be omitted.” This is in the section “Masses with Children in Which Only a Few Adults Participate”. But with a bishop’s permission it can also apply to “Mass with Adults in Which Children also Participate” (n. 19).

So it seems to be possible to have a Mass with only the gospel reading, depending on the decrees of the conferences of bishops.

The 2002 GIRM has:
“362. In addition to the options noted above for choosing certain more suitable texts, the Conference of Bishops has the faculty, in particular circumstances, to indicate some adaptations as regards readings, provided that the texts are chosen from a duly approved Lectionary.” (Roman Missal, English translation according to the third typical edition, approved for use in the dioceses of Australia, England and Wales, and Scotland, published by Catholic Truth Society, in 2010, ISBN 9781860827303, page 112).
 
triumphguy said:
At four am while awaiting an air-raid by the Luftwaffe I can see that, but meanwhile back to reality: the readings need to be done, and the psalm should by rights by chanted/sung.
Click to expand...
We had a Holy Ghost missionary for several years at my childhood parish. He stayed in the African brush after the first two times he was ordered out of the country, and knew the bare minimums for a valid clandestine Mass . . .

(this came up after I was surprised by a one sentence Gospel at my high school, and asked . . .)

It’s possible to actually omit the Gospel if necessary. He said there were four parts that absolutely must occur: The Eucharistic Prayer, the priest’s reception of the Eucharist, and, unfortunately, I forget the other two.

And I. The soviet gulag, priests manage to condense the Divine Liturgy into four minutes:eek: They would be use barely fermented wine from a grape or three hidden away from a meal, and a bit of hidden bread for the Precious Gifts, and the priet’s hand for the Holy Table (and under the circumstances, they paid no regard to the schism either–it had little meaning to those that might be hanged or shot at any moment!)

anyway, getting back to the topic, the Gospel isn’t the only part of the Mass reserved to the deacon–I believe it’s also the Prayers of the Faithful that are to be lead only by the deacon, unless no deacon is present and capable (not discretionary with the priest or deacon!)

(the Deacon has more parts in the Eastern liturgies)

hawk
 
Hey,

Normally it’s not to the Priest to read the First or the Second reading, He is supposed to proclaim the Gospel.
So it’s important for laypeople to take their place in the Church and during the celebration. I can not Understand How it’s possible that it’s the Priest who has to make the First Reading!

To my mind, you have to understand his position, it’s just a way for him to incite laypeople to read during the Mass and to take part completely during the celebration.

The mass without the First reading is not in the magister of the catholic church, and today many priests try to adapt celebrations with the situation of their parish or their mission.

God Bless You.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top