Liturgy wrongs are rights

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ron3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Ron3

Guest
I was told by my spiritual advisor (our priest) that when we are in a common reunion reading the word of God at the end we must not say (Word of the Lord) because is not liturgical at those reunions. Is this correct? And if it is where does it say so.
 
When you say “reunion,” I suppose you mean a Bible study meeting or something similar. If so, the point is that a meeting or class of that kind is not the Holy Mass. The concluding words, “The Word of the Lord”, are spoken as part of the Liturgy of the Word, which is part of Holy Mass, but not otherwise.
 
BartholomewB said:
“The Word of the Lord”,
Click to expand...
I’ve never understood the modern practice of omitting “The” from the phrase.

It leaves it without grammatical meaning in English, and seems to be swung about as some kind of magic words.

“This is the Word of the Lord” (with which I grew up ) is a statement, a full sentence about what was just read.

“The Word of the Lord” is a full gramatical object, and the “object complement” of that which preceded it,

“Word of the Lord” by itself has no grammatical meaning that I can fathom.
 
Since I came back to the southwest in '05, I think every single reader I’ve heard in Nevada and California has omitted the “the”.
 
Ok is there something written down that explains or tells the do’s and don’ts of my initial question? I need a concrete answer so I can teach the church group the correct way
 
Last edited:
I’ve never seen such a writing. I would rely on the parish priest.
 
True, well I would have to rely on my parishioner, thanks
 
Last edited:
Ron3 said:
I was told by my spiritual advisor (our priest) that when we are in a common reunion reading the word of God at the end we must not say (Word of the Lord) because is not liturgical at those reunions. Is this correct? And if it is where does it say so.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight. He’s saying that it is wrong to essentially say “this is the Word of the Lord” after reading a passage from Holy Scripture to a group when the group is not at Mass? Or to thank God for having heard it?

Is it wrong to say, “The Lord be with you?” and to respond “And with your spirit”? Why would it be? Is it wrong to introduce a group recitation of the Our Father with “At the Saviour’s command and formed by divine teaching, we dare to say:” Why would it be?

I think I’d accept what he says out of obedience, but I don’t believe there is any prohibition on using manners of speech or prayer in daily life that are also used at Mass.
 
Last edited:
Since you are not in a liturgical celebration, why should it matter if one concludes, “The Word of the Lord” or not? If it’s just a gathering for the purposes of prayer or Bible study, then there are no liturgical rules either way. One is free to conclude with “The Word of the Lord. Thanks be to God” or not.

Now that said, there are some formulas laymen are not to use under any circumstances. Laymen are not to greet with “The Lord be with you” and receive a response of “And with your spirit” or bless in the manner of a priest (sign of the cross in the air, “May Almighty God bless you…”); these are specifically reserved to Holy Orders. You use adaptations for laity.
 
Last edited:
porthos11 said:
Laymen are not to greet with “The Lord be with you”
Click to expand...
Outside a liturgical situation? Why on earth not? I don’t see how it is different than “vaya con Dios.” It might sound odd for a layperson to say it, but that is a little different than saying it is forbidden.

Blessing in the manner of a priest, I agree, is a different manner. That is a distinctly priestly action both inside and outside of a liturgy, though. To merely say something like “let us pray” prior to leading a group in prayer isn’t quite the same.

Still, I would be obedient if a priest asked a Bible study not to do it. He is not violating anyone’s rights by giving that direction or denying any right of the faithful or anything.
 
Last edited:
dochawk said:
Since I came back to the southwest in '05, I think every single reader I’ve heard in Nevada and California has omitted the “the”.
Click to expand...
Northern Californian here. I’ve never heard it that way.
 
The phrase “The Word of the Lord” comes from the General Instruction of the Roman Missal paragraph 128. One website with the entire pdf file is at http://www.ldysinger.com/@magist/1978_SCDW/2011_roman_missal/THE ROMAN MISSAL-bookmarked.pdf

The Liturgy of the Word
128. after the collect, all sit. the priest may, very briefly, introduce the faithful to the Liturgy of the Word. then the reader goes to the ambo and, from the Lectionary already placed there before Mass, proclaims the first reading, to which all listen. at the end, the reader pronounces the acclamation The word of the Lord, and all reply, Thanks be to God.
 
Last edited:
dochawk said:
Since I came back to the southwest in '05, I think every single reader I’ve heard in Nevada and California has omitted the “the”.
Click to expand...
Is it possible that your southwestern neighbors are actually saying “the” but it just does not exit their mouths audibly? Perhaps speech patterns vary across regions?
 
Last edited:
Glennon_P said:
Come to the Midwest. We love our articles, definite and indefinite alike.
Click to expand...
babochka said:
Northern Californian here. I’ve never heard it that way.
Click to expand...
It’s been a while since I’ve attended more than a couple of western liturgies a year, but I’m pretty sure I heard this in my parents’ parish in San Jose some time ago.

I have noticed the article coming back–so I won’t have to brave midwestern weather again . . . 😱 😱 😱

I suspect that it came from poorly trained people “training” more, who did the same to others . .
Crocus said:
Is it possible that your southwestern neighbors are actually saying “the” but it just does not exit their mouths audibly? Perhaps speech patterns vary across regions?
Click to expand...
I doubt it–I was raised in San Jose, which has the “empty” television accent, which is also the dominant accent in southern Nevada.

I left Nevada or my eastern exile in 94, and when I returned in '05, this single word was missing . . .
 
dochawk said:
I suspect that it came from poorly trained people “training” more, who did the same to others . .
Click to expand...
Maybe they’re all secretly Russian spies, who can’t figure out the articles in English. It’s the little things that blow the cover… 🤫 😬 🤔 🤣
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top