Following the Rites

[acamon]

Hiya,

I was wondering how closely/exactly a priest has to follow the words and actions that are in the “The Rites of the Catholic Church” (that big book with the rites of baptism, marriage, initiation of adults, etc). I know that the priest can’t just make up the words to mass but with other rites are the allowed to pick and choose which bits to bother with.

I know that for sacraments they may be valid or invalid (baptism without water wouldn’t be a baptism) but can a priest just drop bits out (perhaps as a pastoral decision to speed something up). Is it up to them? Or are they obligated to follow rites as they put forth in the book?

Thanks,

A

 

[DixitDominus]

“Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the Liturgy on his own authority.” (Sacrosanctum Concilium 22)

 

[acamon]

Thanks for such a swift response! Your quote (and what i perceive as the general Church attitude) seems to point towards doing whatever is in the official texts.

One further question is what counts as ‘the Liturgy’. I understand that the Mass and the Liturgy of the Hours are definitely ‘Liturgy’. But what about marriages, reconciliation or Christian Initiation of Adults? Are these strictly Liturgy? If there not, does that give the priest more leeway to drop bits or change parts?

 

[Joannm]

Hiya,

I was wondering how closely/exactly a priest has to follow the words and actions that are in the “The Rites of the Catholic Church” (that big book with the rites of baptism, marriage, initiation of adults, etc). I know that the priest can’t just make up the words to mass but with other rites are the allowed to pick and choose which bits to bother with.

I know that for sacraments they may be valid or invalid (baptism without water wouldn’t be a baptism) but can a priest just drop bits out (perhaps as a pastoral decision to speed something up). Is it up to them? Or are they obligated to follow rites as they put forth in the book?

Thanks,

A

With some of the rites there are optional things that the priest does not have to do. For example, in the baptism rite, the ephatha rite (opening of the ears and mouth) is optional. In other rites there might be different options, for example in the rite of marriage the couple can memorize the vows, or repeat them after the priest.

 

[puzzleannie]

there is a rite for each sacrament, and the priest must follow the rites as written, but there are usually several choices for some of the prayers, blessings etc., and there are usually several minor parts of the rite that are optional, and he makes a pastoral decision on whether or not to include them. He also has some latitude, with weddings for example, to include local or cultural customs of popular piety, even though they are not in the rite (the lasso at the wedding of two Hispanics for instance). These types of things are generally covered by particular law of the diocese.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Basically, anything that has an official “rite” counts as part of the liturgy, the liturgy being the official public prayer of the Church. That includes all seven sacraments and the Divine Office/Liturgy of the Hours as well as all the official blessings of the Church, with a handful of other things thrown in. If it is in the Rites book to which the OP referred, the priest is bound to it just as closely as the missal, keeping in mind that the book itself will spell out areas in which he has certain latitudes.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

In military procurement there are many standards labeled MIL-
STD- nnnn. If one wished to really irritate shop personnel one added the label MIL-TDP-41. [Make It Like The Darn Print For Once] to a blueprint.

I am often tempted to add the label DIL-TBL-41 [Do It Like The Blessd Liturgy For Once.] to someof our scripts.

 

[mystified]

“Read the black, DO The Red.”"

 

[justinkolo]

In military procurement there are many standards labeled MIL-
STD- nnnn. If one wished to really irritate shop personnel one added the label MIL-TDP-41. [Make It Like The Darn Print For Once] to a blueprint.

I am often tempted to add the label DIL-TBL-41 [Do It Like The Blessd Liturgy For Once.] to someof our scripts.

 

[FrDavid96]

Hiya,

I was wondering how closely/exactly a priest has to follow the words and actions that are in the “The Rites of the Catholic Church” (that big book with the rites of baptism, marriage, initiation of adults, etc). I know that the priest can’t just make up the words to mass but with other rites are the allowed to pick and choose which bits to bother with.

I know that for sacraments they may be valid or invalid (baptism without water wouldn’t be a baptism) but can a priest just drop bits out (perhaps as a pastoral decision to speed something up). Is it up to them? Or are they obligated to follow rites as they put forth in the book?

Thanks,

A

A,

The priest must follow the words and the ritual exactly.

Having said that, though, there is considerable latitude in many of the liturgical rites. In most of the Sacraments, there are several options (prayer, A, B, C etc.), and in many of the introductory parts, the priest may often use “these or similar words”, sometimes a part may be omitted or added, etc. etc.

The bottom line is that it all comes down to a matter of whether or not the priest is actually following the books. If an option is given, he may exercise it. If the rubrics say “these or similar words” he may indeed do that. If those options are not given, then the priest certainly may NOT take it upon himself to make changes. It all depends on the exact liturgical moment–the answer might be yes, or no, but it must be done completely within the rubrics printed by the Church.

 

[SMHW]

A,

The priest must follow the words and the ritual exactly.
.
.
.
If those options are not given, then the priest certainly may NOT take it upon himself to make changes. It all depends on the exact liturgical moment–the answer might be yes, or no, but it must be done completely within the rubrics printed by the Church.

Fr. David, I wonder if you could comment on something.

I know that during the Mass it is permissible to have a commentator. In more than a few Masses I have attended, the priest takes that role himself and throws in a comment here or there.

I think that often during the administering of a sacrament, a priest or deacon will insert comments, directions, and explanations. Since the physical layout of every Church is a bit different and because people don’t always say or do exactly what they should when they should, it’s often necessary to give explicit directions.

Whether it is the Mass or some other sacrament such as baptism, are there any “rules” about where comments and directions can be included? Sometimes such extras are seemingly inserted within the prescribed words for a liturgical action. The priest may have intended such words to be commentary but they might give the impression that they are “additions”.

 

[FrDavid96]

Fr. David, I wonder if you could comment on something.

I know that during the Mass it is permissible to have a commentator. In more than a few Masses I have attended, the priest takes that role himself and throws in a comment here or there.

I think that often during the administering of a sacrament, a priest or deacon will insert comments, directions, and explanations. Since the physical layout of every Church is a bit different and because people don’t always say or do exactly what they should when they should, it’s often necessary to give explicit directions.

Whether it is the Mass or some other sacrament such as baptism, are there any “rules” about where comments and directions can be included? Sometimes such extras are seemingly inserted within the prescribed words for a liturgical action. The priest may have intended such words to be commentary but they might give the impression that they are “additions”.

As far as I know, the rules on “directions” or explanations is that they may be given as necessary–in other words, the Church doesn’t actually specify the exact moments when such directions may be given, but yes, they are permitted. This is more of a “common sense” issue than anything else. If the rubrics say that everyone stands, a simple “please stand” from the priest at that moment might be appropriate.

This is very much a subjective thing. Is it necessary? Is it appropriate? How often does it happen? It’s one thing to say “please stand” a few times until people catch-on (like the relatively recent change made to standing at the offertory) but once it crosses a certain imaginary line and goes from being a genuine direction to an outright liturgical addition, that’s the point where it becomes inappropriate.

There are a few times when a priest is specifically permitted to give such introductions even if they happen all the time. A good example of that is that he may very briefly introduce the Mass of the day after the opening sign of the cross. (note that the rubrics say “very briefly” and not that this is to become the “first homily”). Not only is this permitted, but if it’s done properly it can be a very good thing.

It just comes down to a matter of common sense. If there’s no defined moment for an explanation (like the above paragraph) then it realy comes down to asking the question “is this truly necessary?” If the comment is just a matter of the priest trying to “personalize” the Mass to make it his own, then it would not be appropriate.