Liturgy of the Word question

[caleb83]

Is the Liturgy of the Word practiced apart from the Eucharistic celebration? Is the Eucharist celebrated seperate from the Word or the Mass or are they definitive of the Mass?

I remember going to a place, a chaple, and the priest was there and handed out the Host but I think it was Eucharized (if you will) already, what is that practice called? Was that a Mass?

 

[Nickkname]

You mean “Eucharisted”? Was it a Communion Service, by any chance?

 

[caleb83]

I don’t know what it was, but there is such a thing? It is not a Mass or a “Liturgy of the Eucharist”? I don’t remember wine involved, just bread-looking stuff. It was a little group and not in the main sancuary area with a whole, you know, congregation.

 

[SMHW]

There can be a “Celebration of the Word with Communion” liturgy which is not a Mass.

This would look more or less like a typical Liturgy of the Word from a Mass followed by communion using hosts which had been consecrated at a Mass at some other time. These are typically held on Sundays when no priest is available to say Mass. They are sometimes held on weekdays but that should be a rare event.

Such a liturgy will vary depending on whether it is a deacon or lay person leading it but there is a definite liturgical format which is to be followed.

 

[dconklin]

I remember going to a place, a chaple, and the priest was there and handed out the Host but I think it was Eucharized (if you will) already, what is that practice called? Was that a Mass?

Are you sure it was a Catholic church? Many of our Protestant brothers have communion at their services, but it is not the Eucharist.

---

Now playing: P.O.D. - Goodbye for Now
via FoxyTunes

 

[caleb83]

Oh it was most definitely a Catholic Church. It sounded like what SMHW described. Was it strange that it was the priest who lead the service? Could he have just performed a little Mass just as easily, or is that more complex or something. It sounded like a “Celebration of the Word with Communion” I think there was a Rosary involved and a sermon by the Father. There was a chest and light in the front of the chaple and I think this was a time for Adoration. The main church room is not open all the time and I think there were set times when people could come to the chaple and the Sacrement would be there in the box.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Are you sure it was a priest and not a deacon? And, what day did it take place? If it was Good Friday, there are no masses celebrated at all, only “services”, which include the reading of the Passion, veneration of the cross, prayers, and distributing Communion Hosts that were consecrated at Mass the night before (Holy Thursday Mass of the Lord’s Supper). Otherwise, I can’t imagine why a priest wouldn’t just celebrate Mass.

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[caleb83]

I am sure it was a priest, he was the pastor of the church and i went to Mass and he celebrated and I only ever saw a deacon once on like a Solumnity or something. Why didn’t he just have a Mass? That is what I was thinking

 

[LilyM]

I am sure it was a priest, he was the pastor of the church and i went to Mass and he celebrated and I only ever saw a deacon once on like a Solumnity or something. Why didn’t he just have a Mass? That is what I was thinking

So you’re positive he didn’t do the consecration at all? That he never said the words ‘This is My Body, This is My Blood’ over the bread and wine? One form of the Eucharistic prayer is very short and it’s possible, if one isn’t paying attention and there are no bells used, to miss it.

 

[caleb83]

So you’re positive he didn’t do the consecration at all? That he never said the words ‘This is My Body, This is My Blood’ over the bread and wine? One form of the Eucharistic prayer is very short and it’s possible, if one isn’t paying attention and there are no bells used, to miss it.

Huh, maybe that is it. Maybe he did, that would explain things. But my original question was if the two primary Liturgys could be done seperate and now I find that there is a “Celebration of the Word with Communion”. Is this a “Liturgy of the Word” in the full sense, like I have been reading about from Scott Hahn? I mean a practice that isn’t just reading from Scripture but is like a big and major definitive . . . thing?

 

[AJV]

The Liturgy of the Eucharist can never be celebrated apart from the Liturgy of the Word. “They form but one single act of worship” (Sacrosanctum Concilium). However, there are services patterned on the Liturgy of the Word which are called “Celebration(s) of the Word of God”.

Before 1970, the liturgical books did not have that much provision for the reading of passages from Scripture outside of the Mass or the Divine Office. In the late 40’s, a type of service now called the Celebration of the Word of God became popular.

These were essentially “Bible services” and initially followed a very loose pattern. The number of readings varied (from one to three or four) and so did their position (e.g. the Gospel might be read first). Some added additional prayers while others restricted themselves to only a prayer, readings and a homily.

These services had advantages of their own. Because they were not liturgical (paraliturgical) they could be conducted in the vernacular, at a time when the Mass was in Latin. The priest could also choose prayers and texts of his own, as he felt the circumstances of the people demanded. And the people got to hear Scripture.

The Celebrations of the Word of God were highly promoted by the Liturgical Movement and became very popular in the late 50’s and early 60’s. The instruction Inter Oecumenici laid down some of the first guidelines for Celebration(s) of the Word for Sundays and Holy Days. It was decided that “the plan of such a celebration shall be almost the same as that of the liturgy of the word at Mass.” An additional factor favouring such celebrations was the increased popularity of Eucmenical gatherings. Since this could not be at Mass, such celebrations were utilized instead.

In the revised liturgical books, a reading Sacred Scripture has been added to virtually all the rites, even optional. For example, almost all the major blessings now have one. Similarly, the sacraments which formerly did not have Scripture readings now do – e.g. Sacrament of Reconciliation (though I’ve never been to confession where it is used) and the Sacrament of Confirmation and Marriage outside Mass. The format of the Celebration of the Word of God varies from a single reading (and psalm) or it can be as at Mass (reading, psalm, Gospel).

The Celebration of the Word of God can also be celebrated as a rite/service in itself and is suggested for “vigils of major feasts, on some of the weekdays of Advent and Lent, and on Sundays and days of precept”. This consists of the introductory rites (hymn, greeting, prayer) followed by Scripture, homily, the Our Father blessing, and dismissal (Go in the peace of Christ. Thanks be to God).

 

[AJV]

The Liturgy of the Eucharist can never be celebrated apart from the Liturgy of the Word. “They form but one single act of worship” (Sacrosanctum Concilium). However, there are services patterned on the Liturgy of the Word which are called “Celebration(s) of the Word of God”.

Before 1970, the liturgical books did not have that much provision for the reading of passages from Scripture outside of the Mass or the Divine Office. In the late 40’s, a type of service now called the Celebration of the Word of God became popular.

These were essentially “Bible services” and initially followed a very loose pattern. The number of readings varied (from one to three or four) and so did their position (e.g. the Gospel might be read first). Some added additional prayers while others restricted themselves to only a prayer, readings and a homily.

These services had advantages of their own. Because they were not liturgical (paraliturgical) they could be conducted in the vernacular, at a time when the Mass was in Latin. The priest could also choose prayers and texts of his own, as he felt the circumstances of the people demanded. And the people got to hear Scripture.

The Celebrations of the Word of God were highly promoted by the Liturgical Movement and became very popular in the late 50’s and early 60’s. The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council approved of it in Sacrosanctum Concilium (35,4). Following this, the instruction Inter Oecumenici laid down some of the first guidelines for Celebration(s) of the Word for Sundays and Holy Days. It was decided that “the plan of such a celebration shall be almost the same as that of the liturgy of the word at Mass.” An additional factor favouring such services was the increased popularity of ecumenical gatherings especially after 1964. Since ecumenical gatherings could not be at Mass, such “bible services” were utilized instead.

In the revised liturgical books, a reading Sacred Scripture has been added to virtually all the rites, even optional. For example, almost all the major blessings now have one. Similarly, the sacraments which formerly did not have Scripture readings now do – e.g. Sacrament of Reconciliation (though I’ve never been to confession where it is used) and the Sacrament of Confirmation and Marriage outside Mass. The format of the Celebration of the Word of God varies from a single reading (and psalm) or it can be as at Mass (reading, psalm, Gospel).

The Celebration of the Word of God can also be celebrated as a rite/service in itself and is suggested for “vigils of major feasts, on some of the weekdays of Advent and Lent, and on Sundays and days of precept”. This consists of the introductory rites (hymn, greeting, prayer) followed by Scripture, homily, the Our Father blessing, and dismissal (Go in the peace of Christ. Thanks be to God).

 

[caleb83]

Something like that yes, that is definitly it. Very good answer, I would vote for you if this was that silly Yahoo Answers.

 

[rwoehmke]

I have never heard of A Celebration of the Word of God. Interrsting We have from time to time had Scripture Services without communion. Usually not led by a priest and not in place of Mass.