Lay people reading Scripture in Mass

[Sirach2]

Since we were speculating on how many people understand this, I’m interested in seeing how others answer this question. I hope you don’t mind if I delay giving my answer.

Thank you, Floresco. I would have deferred to your response, but since you delay, may I share a beautiful concept of the readings as Pope Francis related in his very first homily, March 14th in the Sistine Chapel.

In these three readings, I see a common element: that of movement. In the first reading, it is the movement of a journey; in the second reading, the movement of building the Church; in the third, in the Gospel, the movement involved in professing the faith.** Journeying, building, professing.**

Journeying. “O house of Jacob, come, let us walk in the light of the Lord” (Is 2:5). This is the first thing that God said to Abraham: Walk in my presence and live blamelessly. Journeying: our life is a journey, and when we stop moving, things go wrong. Always journeying, in the presence of the Lord, in the light of the Lord, seeking to live with the blamelessness that God asked of Abraham in his promise.

Building. Building the Church. We speak of stones: stones are solid; but living stones, stones anointed by the Holy Spirit. Building the Church, the Bride of Christ, on the cornerstone that is the Lord himself. This is another kind of movement in our lives: building.

Thirdly, professing. We can walk as much as we want, we can build many things, but if we do not profess Jesus Christ, things go wrong. We may become a charitable NGO, but not the Church, the Bride of the Lord. When we are not walking, we stop moving. When we are not building on the stones, what happens? The same thing that happens to children on the beach when they build sandcastles: everything is swept away, there is no solidity. When we do not profess Jesus Christ, the saying of Léon Bloy comes to mind: “Anyone who does not pray to the Lord prays to the devil.” When we do not profess Jesus Christ, we profess the worldliness of the devil, a demonic worldliness.

So as not to deflect from his sentiments, I will share another Motu Proprio from Pope Paul VI in a separate post.

 

[Sirach2]

Pope Paul VI:

Certain ministries were established by the Church even in the most ancient times for the purpose of suitably giving worship to God and for offering service to the people of God according to their needs.** By these ministries, the offices to be carried out in the liturgy and the practice of charity, deemed suitable to varying circumstances, were entrusted to the faithful**. The conferring of these functions often took place by a special rite, in which, after God’s blessing had been implored, a Christian was established in a special class or rank for the fulfillment of some ecclesiastical function.

We see then, that this ministry is not a new one entrusted to the faithful. The Pope sets aside in this M.P. the former offices of sub-deacon, porter, and instituted lector, and relegated the ministry to the faithful, whose ministry it rightly pertains to. Source

Nevertheless, since the minor orders have not always been the same and many functions connected with them, as at present,** have also been exercised by the laity**, it seems fitting to reexamine this practice and to adapt it to contemporary needs. What is obsolete in these offices will thus be removed and what is useful retained …

The GIRM of 2002, which many are more familiar with, states:

1. By tradition, the function of proclaiming the readings is ministerial, not presidential. The readings, therefore, should be proclaimed by a lector, and the Gospel by a deacon or, in his absence, a priest other than the celebrant. If, however, a deacon or another priest is not present, the priest celebrant himself should read the Gospel. Further, if another suitable lector is also not present, then the priest celebrant should also proclaim the other readings.

Most likely, those who celebrate the EF liturgy will have difficulty perhaps in understanding this as a “ministerial” duty. I cannot quote how far back this liturgical function was exercised by a lay person, as mentioned by Pope Paul, but I believe he researched the matter thoroughly before making his decision to render a M.P.

Personally, I never heard anyone who attends the OF express disdain for the laity in a role as Lector. My only problem is when an untrained family member desires to read the scripture for a funeral. It bothers me.

 

[PJM]

=RaphaelJ;10736856]I was browsing around Wikipedia in the Pope Paul Vi Mass and I was surprised to see that one criticism of the Mass was that lay people were allowed to read the Scripture except for the Gospel. What possible reason could there be for this criticism?

BECAUSE ALL Protestants [Preachers included] are “lay people”; not always guided by the Holy Spirit. This is clearly in evidence in the large number of differing sets of faith-beliefs, and divergent understandings of God’s “single truth.”

The Gospel: “THE GOOD NEWS” being explained and shared has always been by the Ordained as was Christ mandates:

[Take note of the cf. “you” [singular]

**Mark 16;14-15 **"At length he appeared to the eleven as they were at table: and he upbraided them with their incredulity and hardness of heart, because they did not believe them who had seen him after he was risen again. And he said to them: **Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. **

**Matthew 28: 16-20 ** “And the eleven disciples [Apostles]went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

So the Church is just Obeying Gods Orders; many are uncomfortablw with this fact.

God Bless,
pat/PJM

 

[pnewton]

I’ll bite. What are the positive reasons for allowing Lay Readers?

A better question is why not? Here are some reasons why this might be a benefit though. First, it gives the priest a break and allows him to prepare mentally for the Gospel and homily he is to give. Second, a sung Psalm allows for someone who can actually sing to do so. Third, a break of voices makes for easier listening than listening to a single voice. Fourth, the emphasis is on the Word of God being read as opposed to the priest doing the reading. This might be particularly important for those who have a traditional type of clericism that elevates the reader over that which is read. Fifth, it allows for a different type of involvement for the laity.

The biggest downsides are: One, untrained readers can really butcher pronounciation (but so can our previous deacon). Two, it could give the laity an improper sense of being clerical.

 

[pnewton]

It was seen as moving towards a rejection of ordained priesthood to be replaced by a “priesthood of all believers” - a Protestant idea. If this were actually true, it would be very serious and they would be right to be concerned.

This is not a Protestant idea. I it is a theme in the New Testament, particularly, to uh, our first pope, Peter who introduced this idea. From the Catechism:

1284 The baptized have become “living stones” to be “built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood.” By Baptism they share in the priesthood of Christ, in his prophetic and royal mission. They are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, that [they] may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called [them] out of darkness into his marvelous light.” Baptism gives a share in the common priesthood of all believers.

 

[SMHW]

Originally Posted by floresco forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
It was seen as moving towards a rejection of ordained priesthood to be replaced by a “priesthood of all believers” - a Protestant idea. If this were actually true, it would be very serious and they would be right to be concerned.

This is not a Protestant idea. I it is a theme in the New Testament, particularly, to uh, our first pope, Peter who introduced this idea. From the Catechism:

The priesthood of all believers is not a Protestant idea. But the idea that you can reject and* replace* the ordained priesthood is protestant.

 

[pnewton]

The priesthood of all believers is not a Protestant idea. But the idea that you can reject and* replace* the ordained priesthood is protestant.

I see. Perhaps I should have diagramed the sentece to see both possible meanings. I do not think, however, the Catholic Church ever had the idea of replacing the ministerial priesthood with the laity. I have never even heard a fringe theologian suggest that priests be done away with.

 

[SMHW]

I do not think, however, the Catholic Church ever had the idea of replacing the ministerial priesthood with the laity. I have never even heard a fringe theologian suggest that priests be done away with.

I don’t think the Church ever intended that either. Likewise, I don’t recall ever hearing a representative of the Church say such a thing.

But I’ve heard Catholics (who had been assigned at least some small bit of teaching authority) make statements that were delivered without the qualifying context necessary to make them true. And I think it’s reasonable to be concerned that many Catholics would not understand the difference between the priesthood of all the baptized and the ordained priesthood.

 

[PietroPaolo]

I had a similar question, although more along the lines of “Can a priest do all the readings himself (or between himself and a deacon) or must lay people be involved.” I had heard that it was inappropriate for a priest to read the OT and Epistle. From reading the comments hear, I’d guess a priest could do the readings, although it is customary for the the OT and Epistle to be read by laymen.

 

[TimothyH]

I’ll bite. What are the positive reasons for allowing Lay Readers?

Full and active participation.

-Tim-

 

[PietroPaolo]

Full and active participation.

-Tim-

That seems problematic. Would only the readers then be fully and actively participating? Would actively and fully listening to the readings not be full an active participation?

 

[TimothyH]

I had a similar question, although more along the lines of “Can a priest do all the readings himself (or between himself and a deacon) or must lay people be involved.” I had heard that it was inappropriate for a priest to read the OT and Epistle. From reading the comments hear, I’d guess a priest could do the readings, although it is customary for the the OT and Epistle to be read by laymen.

It doesn’t directly have to do with your post but it got me thinking, and I’d like to note that the deacon is the ordinary minister of the Gospel in the Church.

The deacon recieves a threefold ministry when he is ordained: word, liturgy and service. The deacon is ordained into service of the Church, ordained into assistance at the liturgy and is the minister of the Word of God in the Church. Through his ministry of the word, the deacon is the official proclaimer of the Gospel in the Church.

Every priest is also a deacon, and that is why there is no such thing as a Mass without a deacon. When a priest approaches the ambo to proclaim the Gospel, he is doing so as part of the ministry he recieved when he became a deacon, not when he became a priest. When you see a priest reading the Gospel at Mass, he is exercising his ministry as a deacon.

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

That seems problematic. Would only the readers then be fully and actively participating? Would actively and fully listening to the readings not be full an active participation?

The Body of Christ is more actively and more fully participating.

Sacrosanctum Concilium explains it well.

-Tim-

 

[PietroPaolo]

The Body of Christ is more actively and more fully participating.

Sacrosanctum Concilium explains it well.

-Tim-

Yes, but as Pope Benedict noted, “it should be clear that the word ‘participation’ does not refer to mere external activity during the celebration.” (Sacramentum Caritatis, no 52.)

 

[PJM]

=PietroPaolo;10747472]I had a similar question, although more along the lines of “Can a priest do all the readings himself (or between himself and a deacon) or must lay people be involved.” I had heard that it was inappropriate for a priest to read the OT and Epistle. From reading the comments hear, I’d guess a priest could do the readings, although it is customary for the the OT and Epistle to be read by laymen.

Either a Priest or a Deacon IS permitted to do all of the READINGS:thumbsup:

 

[PJM]

=PietroPaolo;10747487]That seems problematic. Would only the readers then be fully and actively participating? Would actively and fully listening to the readings not be full an active participation?

the TERM Means all of these:thumbsup:

Actively ENGAGED!

Praying

Singing

Listening

Offering up with the Priest

 

[Sirach2]

Either a Priest or a Deacon IS permitted to do all of the READINGS:thumbsup:

That is true, but only if a lector is not available to do the first two readings and psalm, as per GIRM guidelines.

1. By tradition, the function of proclaiming the readings is ministerial, not presidential. The readings, therefore, should be proclaimed by a lector, and the Gospel by a deacon or, in his absence, a priest other than the celebrant. If, however, a deacon or another priest is not present, the priest celebrant himself should read the Gospel. **Further, if another suitable lector is also not present, then the priest celebrant should also proclaim the other readings.

**

 

[PietroPaolo]

That is true, but only if a lector is not available to do the first two readings and psalm, as per GIRM guidelines.

1. By tradition, the function of proclaiming the readings is ministerial, not presidential. The readings, therefore, should be proclaimed by a lector, and the Gospel by a deacon or, in his absence, a priest other than the celebrant. If, however, a deacon or another priest is not present, the priest celebrant himself should read the Gospel. **Further, if another suitable lector is also not present, then the priest celebrant should also proclaim the other readings.

**

Interesting. So the question is what makes a lector suitable? Would this require the priest to defer to laymen or just to another priest, deacon, or instituted lector?

 

[Sirach2]

Interesting. So the question is what makes a lector suitable? Would this require the priest to defer to laymen or just to another priest, deacon, or instituted lector?

I don’t think the regulation specifies what suitability is, but that the role of Lector is “ministerial.” Generally, they are commissioned by their pastor and undergo a certain amount of theological preparation to understand the ministry they are undertaking. There is also some practical hands-on training at the ambo.

If the Lector who is scheduled to serve at a liturgy cannot be present for a variety of reasons, then the priest would do the readings. Most lectors are on a schedule and have a list of other parish lectors they can call to take their place that day, so it is not likely to happen that one is unavailable.

 

[PietroPaolo]

I don’t think the regulation specifies what suitability is, but that the role of Lector is “ministerial.” Generally, they are commissioned by their pastor and undergo a certain amount of theological preparation to understand the ministry they are undertaking. There is also some practical hands-on training at the ambo.

If the Lector who is scheduled to serve at a liturgy cannot be present for a variety of reasons, then the priest would do the readings. Most lectors are on a schedule and have a list of other parish lectors they can call to take their place that day, so it is not likely to happen that one is unavailable.

So you are reading “suitable lector” as a layman trained as a lector not necessarily an instituted lector. I think that is a fair reading especially in light of GRIM 101 (especially the section in bold), although the section underlined seems to leave room for a priest to forgo using laymen altogether.

1. In the absence of an instituted lector, other lay people may be deputed to proclaim the readings from Sacred Scripture, people who are truly suited to carrying out this function and carefully prepared, so that by their hearing the readings from the sacred texts the faithful may conceive in their hearts a sweet and living affection for Sacred Scripture.

I tend to favor restricting the sanctuary during Mass to as few laymen as possible as it tends to reduce the image of the “Holy of Holies” and seems to lend a more informal, less sacral air to the Mass, but I think you are on solid ground with your interpretation.