Passion Narrative

[benedictgal]

Excuse me

The part of Jesus is reserved to both, the deacon in the first instance of priority, and then to the priest in the second instance.This is mandated by the nature of their sacramental ordinations and is the same priority of any other Gospel reading. The phrase is “deacons or priests,” and not “deacons and priests,”. The coma after this phrase is very important because once you have a deacon then the “or” cannot properly be understood to be “and”. If there are not enough deacons then we look to the additional readers contained in the second part of th sentence which are lay readers. This is not a novel reading of the instruction based on the traditional methods of proclaiming the passion narrative, the considered opinion of Father McNamara accepts it, and the GIRM is also very clear and forceful in that a priest will not read the Gospel when a deacon is present. As such in the second instance when only priests (because if there were deacons there would be no priests reading) and lectors are present then the role of Jesus is reserved to the the priest.

Priests are not instructed to read the passion narrative when a deacon is present and do so on there own initiative. This is not an outrageous conclusion and is also the consider opinion of Father McNamara. This potential liturgical abuse effects the nature of the mass and the functions of its ordained ministers.

Pax

But, PS makes it very clear that the part of Christ is reserved to the priest. That is something that you do not seem to want to understand, as I have read your posts. Furthermore, the deacon is already reading the Passion narrative when he serves as the narrator. Thus, if the deacon is reading the part of the narrator, either another deacon, or the non-celebrant priest could read the part of the speaker other than Christ. If no one else is available, then a layman could do that. But, the part of Christ is always reserved to the celebrant, the priest.

 

[Deacon2006]

Reading one clause from a compound sentence and ignoring the primary clauses is clearly not accepted by any liturgists as the intent of the SP.

There is no mention of the deacon reading with a priest and as such it must be an innovation of the priest to force himself into reading the gospel with the deacon. Every liturgical principle on point says that priests are never to read the gospel when a deacon is present. It destroys the nature of the ministry of deacons as the minister of the gospel which must always be protected from confusion with the priests ministry of presider.

Pax

 

[benedictgal]

Reading one clause from a compound sentence and ignoring the primary clauses is clearly not accepted by any liturgists as the intent of the SP.

There is no mention of the deacon reading with a priest and as such it must be an innovation of the priest to force himself into reading the gospel with the deacon. Every liturgical principle on point says that priests are never to read the gospel when a deacon is present. It destroys the nature of the ministry of deacons as the minister of the gospel which must always be protected from confusion with the priests ministry of presider.

Pax

What I believe that you do not understand is that the Passion Narrative is a special case. The deacon, when he is serving as the Narrator, is already doing his part. Remember, that the Passion Narrative is the only Gospel that is allowed to be divided into parts. Thus, it is perfectly licit for the priest to read the part of Christ, as indicated in Paschale Solemnitatis.

No one is destroying the nature of the ministry of the deacon; however, from you comments, you seem to want to diminish the role of the priest. Because he is the celebrant of this particular liturgy, he acts in Persona Christi. You seem to be confusing things here.

 

[Deacon2006]

What you fail to understand is that for 1500 years the passion narrative has been read by deacons first with only one deacon in three different tones and then with three deacons and others dressed as deacons. The reason why is that precisely because the PN is so special that ministry of deacons is to be showcased and celebrated on these two solemn days.

“The passion narrative occupies a special place. It should be sung or read in the traditional way, that is, by three persons who take the parts of Christ, the narrator and the people. The passion is proclaimed by deacons or priests, or by lay readers. In the latter case, the part of Christ should be reserved to the priest.

Traditional way = three deacons (PS instructs us to look to the reforms of 1955 for clarity)

Deacons or priests = is the essential restrictive clause “or” is an exclusionary word when used in the middle of a clause and not set apart by a comma as is the second clause of the sentence. It does not modify the first phrase of deacons.

The only proper reading is if one or more deacons are present then no priests, if no deacons then one or more priests. (this is exactly the way all the liturgical texts see the priority and exclusive nature between deacons and priests for any gospel)

It would be a disingenuous interpretation to say that we are serving apples or oranges to mean that we are serving apples and if we run out than we serving oranges and apples.

or by lay readers = this is the non essential clause it has no restrictive character in modifying the first clause. “or” is now used a conjunction to modifying the first clause to allow for the possibilities of no deacons and no priests (religious communities, parishes without priests etc.) or services with not enough deacons in the first instance or not enough priests in the second instance. This is made even clearer in the next sentence.

In the latter case, the part of Jesus is reserved for the priest = the situation specifically mentioned is when one or more priests are present and they are assisted by lectors.

It does not apply when the Passion Narrative is read by three lay readers in a community without clerics, it does not apply when the passion narrative is read by three deacons, and it does not apply when the passion narrative is read by less than three deacons and they are assisted by lectors. It only applies to the situations of using priests

This is the specific reading of the text, this is the way the liturgists have read it in Canada in publishing the Ordo and instruction of the Holy Week , this is the way Bishop Elliot has read the instruction in publishing his commentary, and while more circumspect, this is the way Father McNamara has read the instruction and published in Zenit.

The only place we have a divergence of opinion is in the local parish were a priest interjects his presence into the Gospel when a deacon is present. The motivations for doing so are plentiful but they all are liturgical innovations rejected from the plain text reading of the instruction and the tradition of the church. The only justification I have found for this has been with Father McNamara but he speaks of necessary conditions that might force this situation and as such does not see it as the normal instructed solution.

PAX