Laity Explanation of the Gospel

[libman]

Our Parish has reinstituted a practice of having a member of the laity, actually our Liturgical Minister, standing on the Altar after Mass has started (once the Priest is in the sanctuary) and reading an explanation of the Gospel and how it pertains to our lives. I view this practice as illicit.

Thank you.

 

[passus]

Our Parish has reinstituted a practice of having a member of the laity, actually our Liturgical Minister, standing on the Altar after Mass has started (once the Priest is in the sanctuary) and reading an explanation of the Gospel and how it pertains to our lives. I view this practice as illicit.

Thank you.

Can you give us some more information?

At which point during the Mass does this happen? How long is the explanation? Would you consider it a homily? Does the priest preach a homily in addition to this lay “explanation?”

 

[Newbie2]

Sounds like a homily to moi.

 

[Digitonomy]

Our Parish has reinstituted a practice of having a member of the laity, actually our Liturgical Minister, standing on the Altar after Mass has started (once the Priest is in the sanctuary) and reading an explanation of the Gospel and how it pertains to our lives. I view this practice as illicit. Thank you.

You’re welcome! Here is how the role of commentator was defined in De Musica Sacra in 1958:

The Commentator
96. The active participation of the faithful can be more easily brought about with the help of a commentator, especially in holy Mass, and in some of the more complex liturgical ceremonies. At suitable times he should briefly explain the rites themselves, and the prayers of the priest and ministers; he should also direct the external participation of the congregation, that is, their responses, prayers, and singing. Such a commentator may be used if the following rules are observed:

a) The role of commentator should properly be carried out by a priest or at least a cleric. If none is available, a layman of good Christian character, and well instructed in his duties may fill the role. Women, however, may never act as commentator; in case of necessity, a woman would be permitted only to lead the prayers, and singing of the congregation.
b) If the commentator is a priest or a cleric, he should wear a surplice, and stand in the sanctuary or near the Communion rail, or at the lectern or pulpit. If he is a layman, he should stand in a convenient place in front of the congregation, but not in the sanctuary or in the pulpit.
c) The explanations and directions to be given by the commentator should be prepared in writing; they should be brief, clear, and to the point; they should be spoken at a suitable time, and in a moderate tone of voice; they should never interfere with the prayers of the priest who is celebrating. In short, they should be a real help, and not a hindrance to the devotion of the congregation.
d) In directing the prayers of the congregation, the commentator should recall the prescriptions given above in paragraph 14c.
e) In those places where the Holy See has permitted the reading of the Epistle and Gospel in the vernacular after the Latin text has been chanted, the commentator may not substitute for the celebrant, deacon, or subdeacon in reading them.
f) The commentator should follow the celebrant closely, and so accompany the sacred action that it is not delayed or interrupted, and the entire ceremony carried out with harmony, dignity, and devotion.

It seems to me that if his statement about the Gospel is limited to a sentence or two synopsis of the text and the basic theme the Church is following by including that Gospel that Sunday, it would be legit - especially since it sounds like the commentator is reading a text that I assume the priest has approved ahead of time.

If it’s a more extensive exploration of the Gospel, it starts to resemble a homily, which obviously can only be given by a deacon or priest.

 

[libman]

Thank you. Here is some additional information. The timing of the Explanation of the Gospel is done once the Priest has made his way to the sanctuary and is standing in front of his chair. This is at the conclusion of the Processional Hymn. The length of the Explanation is 2-3 minutes; describes what we will hear and goes on to explain it’s application to our lives. It is succinct and, in and of itself, has value, but I highly question the timing since this is done within the Mass. Let me know if you would like some additional information. Thank you!

 

[libman]

One other point. This same lay person, our Liturgical Minister, is responsible for the writing of the text as they are also responsible for writing all of our petitions read during Mass.

 

[zab]

You’re welcome! Here is how the role of commentator was defined in De Musica Sacra in 1958:It seems to me that if his statement about the Gospel is limited to a sentence or two synopsis of the text and the basic theme the Church is following by including that Gospel that Sunday, it would be legit - especially since it sounds like the commentator is reading a text that I assume the priest has approved ahead of time.

If it’s a more extensive exploration of the Gospel, it starts to resemble a homily, which obviously can only be given by a deacon or priest.

Thanks for the reference. We recently had a fill-in priest while the pastor is on vacation. This priest gives an introduction to the readings that lasts as long as a weekday homily. Then after the readings gives a homily. Not to mention other pauses in the Liturgy to give a short explanation. I gather his commentary would be “legit” if he kept it to a sentence or two.

 

[Digitonomy]

Thanks for the reference. We recently had a fill-in priest while the pastor is on vacation. This priest gives an introduction to the readings that lasts as long as a weekday homily. Then after the readings gives a homily. Not to mention other pauses in the Liturgy to give a short explanation. I gather his commentary would be “legit” if he kept it to a sentence or two.

First, let me clarify that my guess as to what is legit is simply my interpretation of what seems reasonable based on De Musica Sacra - I’m not sure if there are other guidelines, or if what is truly legitimate is more expansive or restrictive than what I’ve posted.

Second, I think what the priest celebrant does wouldn’t really be governed by the rules for the commentator - I think there are other rules (probably in the GIRM) that more explicitly allow for the priest celebrant to interject explanations during the mass.

 

[passus]

Thank you. Here is some additional information. The timing of the Explanation of the Gospel is done once the Priest has made his way to the sanctuary and is standing in front of his chair. This is at the conclusion of the Processional Hymn. The length of the Explanation is 2-3 minutes; describes what we will hear and goes on to explain it’s application to our lives. It is succinct and, in and of itself, has value, but I highly question the timing since this is done within the Mass. Let me know if you would like some additional information. Thank you!

It’s definitely not a homily, but it does indeed overstep the bounds of what I would consider a commentary. I also do not like the timing as it seems disruptive to the Introductory Rites of the Mass.

Perhaps you could talk to your priest about it. It sounds as though this would fit better before the Mass–before the opening hymn–as sort of a welcome or introduction:

“In today’s Gospel, we read…”

 

[benedictgal]

The commentator is only supposed to give a brief explanation, not launch into a two-minute diatribe. I am afraid that this is a homily with a mask on it.

[64.] The homily, which is given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass and is a part of the Liturgy itself,142 “should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating Priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to a Deacon, but never to a layperson.143 In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a Priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate”.144

[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.

[66.] The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach** within the Mass **applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as “pastoral assistants”; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association.146

Thus, I think that even Redemptionis Sacramentum manages to cover this.

Why not have this person write a column in the Church bulletin? That is what I used to do. I called it reflections from the back pew. Naturally, my rector would read through it and make sure that it was doctrinally, theologically and liturgically correct. It’s a good way to get the message across without having to interfere with the Mass.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Thank you. Here is some additional information. The timing of the Explanation of the Gospel is done once the Priest has made his way to the sanctuary and is standing in front of his chair. This is at the conclusion of the Processional Hymn. The length of the Explanation is 2-3 minutes; describes what we will hear and goes on to explain it’s application to our lives. It is succinct and, in and of itself, has value, but I highly question the timing since this is done within the Mass. Let me know if you would like some additional information. Thank you!

It might be better were this comment to be made BEFORE the opening hymn.

One other point. This same lay person, our Liturgical Minister, is responsible for the writing of the text as they are also responsible for writing all of our petitions read during Mass.

The only “Liturgical Ministers” are the Priests and Deacons who are actually celebrating at that particular mass.

“Liturgical minister” as it is being used here, is at best meaningless and worst a misnomer.

 

[John_Lilburne]

From the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) approved for the USA, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html :
“105. …
b. The commentator, who provides the faithful, when appropriate, with brief
explanations and commentaries with the purpose of introducing them to the
celebration and preparing them to understand it better. The commentator’s remarks
must be meticulously prepared and clear though brief. In performing this function the
commentator stands in an appropriate place facing the faithful, but not at the ambo.”

“50. … After the greeting of the people, the priest, the deacon, or a lay minister may very briefly
introduce the faithful to the Mass of the day.”

From the 1981 Introduction to the Lectionary: “42. The one presiding is responsible for preparing the faithful for the liturgy of the word on occasion by means of introductions before the readings. [footnote 70, 1975 GIRM n. 11] These comments can help the gathered assembly toward a better hearing of the word of God, because they enliven the people’s faith and their desire for good. He may also carry out this responsibility through other persons, the deacon, for example, or a commentator. [footnote 71, 1975 GIRM n. 68]”. (My bold text).

 

[EasterJoy]

The commentator is only supposed to give a brief explanation, not launch into a two-minute diatribe. I am afraid that this is a homily with a mask on it…Why not have this person write a column in the Church bulletin? That is what I used to do. I called it reflections from the back pew. Naturally, my rector would read through it and make sure that it was doctrinally, theologically and liturgically correct. It’s a good way to get the message across without having to interfere with the Mass.

That’s a great idea. We have something like that in the Catholic Sentinel, too, written by the chancellor, Mary Jo Tully. The paper comes out on Thursday; it’s a nice part of preparation for the Sunday liturgy. There is something shorter on the front of the bulletin; also very nice.

There is only that one time when we laypeople can’t preach: the homily at Mass. With all the other opportunites for preaching that go begging, why try to usurp the priests? Our mission field is quite big enough, and the chances to approach it are many.

 

[SteveGC]

Bumping this thread a bit only because I have a question similar to the OP…

There is an occasional practice at my parish, during the seasonal stewardship focus, to have a layperson speak to the parishoners during the Mass, specifically right after a brief homily from the priest. The purpose of this brief talk is to appeal to the parishoners to consider and act upon the call to stewardship (time, talent, treasure) within the parish. It usually is about 2-3 minutes in length, and then the Mass continues with the creed, etc…

My instinct is that this is not just disruptive and inappropriately placed in the middle of Mass, but that it is borderline abusive to the liturgy. Does this classify as “commentation” as described in this thread? My guess is ‘no’.

I’ve been asked to do this talk this year…end of this month…and although I agreed, I am quite hesitant to agree to the timing of the talk. Is it indeed an abuse? If not, is it atleast discouraged in most diocese? How did parishes evolve to the point where they thought this would be a good idea…as opposed to before the processional, or atleast during the announcements at the end? I can understand that they want a captive audience, a difficult thing at many parishes outside of Mass, but right smack in the middle of Mass? Seems strange. Anyway, thanks in advance for the guidance…

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

this is illicit. The commentator is not supposed to give any “application to our lives” That is what the homily is for. You should talk to your priest about this.

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

Bumping this thread a bit only because I have a question similar to the OP…

There is an occasional practice at my parish, during the seasonal stewardship focus, to have a layperson speak to the parishoners during the Mass, specifically right after a brief homily from the priest. The purpose of this brief talk is to appeal to the parishoners to consider and act upon the call to stewardship (time, talent, treasure) within the parish. It usually is about 2-3 minutes in length, and then the Mass continues with the creed, etc…

My instinct is that this is not just disruptive and inappropriately placed in the middle of Mass, but that it is borderline abusive to the liturgy. Does this classify as “commentation” as described in this thread? My guess is ‘no’.

I’ve been asked to do this talk this year…end of this month…and although I agreed, I am quite hesitant to agree to the timing of the talk. Is it indeed an abuse? If not, is it atleast discouraged in most diocese? How did parishes evolve to the point where they thought this would be a good idea…as opposed to before the processional, or atleast during the announcements at the end? I can understand that they want a captive audience, a difficult thing at many parishes outside of Mass, but right smack in the middle of Mass? Seems strange. Anyway, thanks in advance for the guidance…

can this talk occur at the end of the Mass with the other announcements? Do they give a reason as to why it occurs in the middle of the Mass? Check this out:

docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:jAkN8QuDqQ0J:www.cuf.org/FileDownloads/announce.pdf+announcements+in+the+Mass&hl=en&gl=us

 

[SteveGC]

can this talk occur at the end of the Mass with the other announcements? Do they give a reason as to why it occurs in the middle of the Mass? Check this out:

docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:jAkN8QuDqQ0J:www.cuf.org/FileDownloads/announce.pdf+announcements+in+the+Mass&hl=en&gl=us

Thanks, TA.

I wouldn’t necessarily classify my talk as “announcements”, but I do think it fits the bill for “application” for the faithful. Therefore, I concur that this talk should happen during the same time as announcements would be made. I indeed will ask my Msgr if we can change the timing, without challenging him too much on why he agreed to have me talk right after his homily. I do think I’ll make him aware of my discomfort with the original timing, though.

Anyone else with thoughts? Has this type of talk I describe ever happened at other parishes?

 

[benedictgal]

Thanks, TA.

I wouldn’t necessarily classify my talk as “announcements”, but I do think it fits the bill for “application” for the faithful. Therefore, I concur that this talk should happen during the same time as announcements would be made. I indeed will ask my Msgr if we can change the timing, without challenging him too much on why he agreed to have me talk right after his homily. I do think I’ll make him aware of my discomfort with the original timing, though.

Anyone else with thoughts? Has this type of talk I describe ever happened at other parishes?

I really dread stewardship time. Unfortunately, there is a bad trend in my diocese that this is the time that usurps the homily. In several parishes, the celebrant gives a three-minute homily and then lets the layman take over for 10 minutes.

Stewardship pleas are important, but, they should never usurp the homily. When the pleas come during that time, I have made a quick exit to the bathroom. I will give at my parish, but, not at the expense of the homily.

 

[pnewton]

I am intrigued that this sort of thing is permitted. I have heard it on occassion while visiting. I personally do not like it. It tends to slow down the liturgy with fluff. I guess I think I am an adult and can tell what the Gospel and the readings are about without being told by someone what they think they are about. This is just a personal preference, of course.

 

[FrDavid96]

Although it might not sound like it as one reads this post, 2 to 3 minutes is actually quite a long time.

If it happens before the sign-of-the-cross I don’t think it would be an abuse against the letter of the liturgical law, but it would certainly be one against the spirit of the law.

Note that the Sacramentary (and GIRM) allows for a very brief introduction to the Mass after the blessing “the Lord be with you.” Not just a brief introduction, but a very brief introduction. Personally I believe that anything longer that let’s say “today is the feast of St. soandso, a 4th century martyr and the patron saint of suchandsuch” is taking things too far. That’s just me. But I do think that anything that would exceed a full minute would be too much–remember not just brief but very brief.

Even if it’s done before the sign of the cross, I think it comes down to this: if it sounds like a homily then it’s a homily and it should not be done. The very fact that people might be confused is a good indicator that it isn’t appropriate.