MERGED: Is this allowed?/Gospel Interruption/Lay Gospel readers

[TheMc]

**“Say the Black, do the Red” ** is a cute catch phrase and all but it answers no questions.

I have a stellar idea. Instead of complaining about those who wish to be faithful to the rubrics, why don’t you look into reading about the liturgy to find out why its important?

Yes, all you liturgy buffs, and liturgy buff wannabes, do this. One good place to start is reading the GIRM.

Just bookmark this, and read a little bit each day. Maybe even print out and highlight the important pages and sections.

This will greatly help your understanding of the Mass, and will help you think for yourself instead of always having to rely on others to tell you what is right and wrong in the liturgy. It’s been a great help for me, and helps clear up many misconceptions on my part.

 

[Spelling]

Yes, all you liturgy buffs, and liturgy buff wannabes, do this. One good place to start is reading the GIRM.

Just bookmark this, and read a little bit each day. Maybe even print out and highlight the important pages and sections.

This will greatly help your understanding of the Mass, and will help you think for yourself instead of always having to rely on others to tell you what is right and wrong in the liturgy. It’s been a great help for me, and helps clear up many misconceptions on my part.

Did you even read posting #68 where I referenced both the GIRM and RS?

In any event I already have a printed version of the GIRM and the PDF on my computer. Even more important I’m very well aware that the primary purpose of the GIRM is not to better understand the Mass and it’s certainly not to “help you think for yourself.”

In the hands of far too many “liturgical auditors”, the GIRM is abused much like the NT is abused by some fundamentalist Protestants. Not everything is as cut and dried as some would like to suggest, particularly those that pour over documents like the GIRM in a vacuum.

The GIRM defines the Mass in a practical sense. Anyone trying to make use of this document had better understand that. They had also better understand how the document relates to other Church documents and where the authority to regulate the liturgy resides within the Church.

One of the greatest sources of erroneous information has to be un/under-educated individuals who rely on their reading of documents like the GIRM to “know” everything there is to know about the Mass.

 

[StTommyMore]

What it comes down to is the Mass is not for us. It is for God, therefore we must do it the way God wants it done. How do we know how God wants it done? Through the government he established, that is, the Church.

 

[benedictgal]

LOL!

Is that how things work in your diocese?

I did e-mail my pastor and to his credit he responded by 09:00 this morning. In essence he said that in this case, beauty was in the eye of the beholder. I know for a fact that the Gospel proclamation was butchered at least as bad at the other Masses so I’m not sure what he was referring to.

He said he is going to take my question to the head of the Diocesan Office of Divine Worship (a nun) and the Bishop. I guarantee that this horrible practice will be supported by both. My pastor also recommended the reference “Gospel Proclamations for the Scrutinies” taken from volume II of Who Calls You By Name by Victoria M. Tufano and David Hass…

Turano and Haas are no authorities in the liturgy, thus, the book that your pastor cited would not be a legitimate resource. Maybe they can do this performance during the time that the Elect are dismissed as they are learning about the readings, but,never during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

The prevailing citations already provided from the GIRM and Redemptionis Sacramentum state that these deviances should not be happening. Furthermore, this is not a matter that the bishop could not overrule, even if he wanted to do so.

 

[Spelling]

What it comes down to is the Mass is not for us. It is for God, therefore we must do it the way God wants it done. How do we know how God wants it done? Through the government he established, that is, the Church.

The Mass is CERTAINLY for us. One could argue that the primary reason for the Mass is to represent the Paschal Mystery. However the grace flowing from that representation (the most profound gift we receive as followers of Jesus Christ here on Earth) is definitely for us.

You suggest “…we must do it the way God wants it done” and I certainly agree but understanding what God wants does not come from studying a print-out of the GIRM in a vacuum.

 

[Phemie]

The Mass is CERTAINLY for us. One could argue that the primary reason for the Mass is to represent the Paschal Mystery. However the grace flowing from that representation (the most profound gift we receive as followers of Jesus Christ here on Earth) is definitely for us.

You suggest “…we must do it the way God wants it done” and I certainly agree but understanding what God wants does not come from studying a print-out of the GIRM in a vacuum.

No, we go to Mass to worship and praise God with and through his Son, Jesus Christ. The Church tells us how to do that. Why can’t we listen?

 

[TheMc]

In the hands of far too many “liturgical auditors”, the GIRM is abused much like the NT is abused by some fundamentalist Protestants. Not everything is as cut and dried as some would like to suggest, particularly those that pour over documents like the GIRM in a vacuum.

I don’t think this is a fair comparison. In the case of the GIRM, it (at least the rubrical section) is written to be clear, so that you can read it and decipher what you or the priest should be doing. It is almost a “manual on how to celebrate Mass”.

The new testament is quite different. The NT is the word of God, and should be understood on many different layers.

For example:

When it says:

1. The text of [the gloria] may not be replaced by any other text.

it means what it says, in every sense of the word. It means that literally, the gloria is not to be modified. However, when it says in Matthew 23:9:

Call no one on earth your father

What, then, do you call the man who married your mother?

Clearly, the GIRM and the NT are not equivalent.

 

[Spelling]

I don’t think this is a fair comparison. In the case of the GIRM, it (at least the rubrical section) is written to be clear, so that you can read it and decipher what you or the priest should be doing. It is almost a “manual on how to celebrate Mass”.

The new testament is quite different. The NT is the word of God, and should be understood on many different layers.

For example:

When it says:

1. The text of [the gloria] may not be replaced by any other text.

it means what it says, in every sense of the word. It means that literally, the gloria is not to be modified. However, when it says in Matthew 23:9:

Call no one on earth your father

What, then, do you call the man who married your mother?

Clearly, the GIRM and the NT are not equivalent.

I never, never suggest the GIRM and the NT are equivalent. Your claim about the GIRM being “clear” is the same claim made by many about the NT. I have read arcane arguments here and elsewhere on interpreting bits of the GIRM. I have also seen ignorance when it comes to understanding where power and responsibility lies within the Church. When all is said and done, neither your interpretation of the GIRM nor my own amounts to a hill of beans.

 

[Spelling]

No, we go to Mass to worship and praise God with and through his Son, Jesus Christ. The Church tells us how to do that. Why can’t we listen?

That’s a good question although it’s clear not everyone understands the Church’s directions.

 

[pnewton]

What it comes down to is the Mass is not for us.

:ehh:
I bet you can not find where the Church teaches this. Perhaps this needs rephrasing?

 

[StTommyMore]

:ehh:
I bet you can not find where the Church teaches this. Perhaps this needs rephrasing?

Why does it need rephrasing? Mass is not primarily for us, but is the public worship offered to God. it is not ours to do with as we please.

 

[pnewton]

Why does it need rephrasing? Mass is not primarily for us, but is the public worship offered to God.

The addition of the word “primarily” modifies your previous post, especially if we understant the word as in having the first position. However, it is not without reason that the Church chose the term “Mass”. The word has no meaing in regard to worship of God, but applies to the Church as a community. We come to *Mass *to be commissioned and sent forth. Therefore, I would never present the two aspects as a dichotomy where worship is set against reception of Grace, as the two are inseparable. I hope that explains my question.

In any case, whether for worship or for the faithful, the Mass is not open to change, and on that we agree.

 

[StTommyMore]

The addition of the word “primarily” modifies your previous post, especially if we understant the word as in having the first position. However, it is not without reason that the Church chose the term “Mass”. The word has no meaing in regard to worship of God, but applies to the Church as a community. We come to *Mass *to be commissioned and sent forth. Therefore, I would never present the two aspects as a dichotomy where worship is set against reception of Grace, as the two are inseparable. I hope that explains my question.

In any case, whether for worship or for the faithful, the Mass is not open to change, and on that we agree.

how does the word Mass refer to the Church as community? It is derived from the Latin “Ite missa est” in which “missa” is a dismissal.

 

[Brendan]

That’s a good question although it’s clear not everyone understands the Church’s directions.

That is why the CDWDS exists. To issue clarifications when asked.

 

[pnewton]

how does the word Mass refer to the Church as community? It is derived from the Latin “Ite missa est” in which “missa” is a dismissal.

CCC # 1332 Holy Mass (Missa), because the liturgy in which the mystery of salvation is accomplished concludes with the sending forth (missio) of the faithful, so that they may fulfill God’s will in their daily lives.
usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art3.shtml#i

FYI - I think reading through the whole section gives a balanced view of what the Mass is and what the Mass is for.

 

[TheMc]

When all is said and done, neither your interpretation of the GIRM nor my own amounts to a hill of beans.

But the thing is, much of it can be interpreted clearly. In fact, when it is as simple as the example I stated above, it doesn’t even need interpretation, just the ability to read.

1. The text of [the gloria] may not be replaced by any other text.

Obviously my “interpretation” of at least some parts of the GIRM adds up to something. How else would you interpret the above quote from no. 53?

 

[Spelling]

That is why the CDWDS exists. To issue clarifications when asked.

No.

That’s why the bishops exist.

I remember reading on one of these forums where one of the posters asked a question of the CDWDS. Sure enough he got a response. I had to laugh out loud at the thought of telling my bishop that he was doing things wrong. That according to a letter sent to an anonymous posting on CAF, he had to change his existing procedure in order to be in compliance with the Church.

 

[Spelling]

But the thing is, much of it can be interpreted clearly. In fact, when it is as simple as the example I stated above, it doesn’t even need interpretation, just the ability to read.

Obviously my “interpretation” of at least some parts of the GIRM adds up to something. How else would you interpret the above quote from no. 53?

Well at least now you’re conceding that interpretation IS necessary and only “much” of the GIRM can be interpreted clearly – which I happen to agree with. That is is long way (and a vast improvement) over believing the GIRM requires no interpretation on any of its contents.

 

[Phemie]

Well at least now you’re conceding that interpretation IS necessary and only “much” of the GIRM can be interpreted clearly – which I happen to agree with. That is is long way (and a vast improvement) over believing the GIRM requires no interpretation on any of its contents.

Which part of the GIRM do you think requires interpretation rather than just straightforward reading? Only such article springs to mind and it was very clear in the 1975 one, much less so in this one because of the addition of a few words.

 

[benedictgal]

No.

That’s why the bishops exist.

I remember reading on one of these forums where one of the posters asked a question of the CDWDS. Sure enough he got a response. I had to laugh out loud at the thought of telling my bishop that he was doing things wrong. That according to a letter sent to an anonymous posting on CAF, he had to change his existing procedure in order to be in compliance with the Church.

Actually, I would not so readily dismiss the CDWDS. The sad fact remains that there are some bishops and even Conferences of Bishops that have been erroneous in their interpretation of liturgical law.

The biggest case in point came from the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference which had allowed “general absolution” to be imparted in Communal Penance Services. The Venerable Pope John Paul II and the Curia intervened and told them that this had to stop. This led to the promulgation of the Circular Letter concerning the Sacrament of Penance which corrected the abuse.

Furthermore, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments had to personally intervene on several occasions when bishops refused to permit priests to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass ad orientem (facing the Tabernacle).

In addition, the point of liturgical abuses got so bad that the Venerable Pope John Paul II initially addressed the issue in one of his last Encyclicals. This led to the promulgation of Redemptionis Sacramentum, written through the collaborative efforts of the CDWDS and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed at the time by none other than the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.

We need to realize that obedience flows both ways. Just as the diocesan bishop expects obedience from his clergy, he, too, must submit himself in obedience to the Holy Father and the Holy See.

I would not so easily dismiss the authority of the Holy See in this case. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has been most helpful to me and my father in clearing up some serious matters down here. There still remains work to be done, but, there is some very gradual progress.