Presiding at Mass, or Celebrating Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter commenter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

commenter

Guest
In the past I would hear only about priests celebrating Mass, or rarely, concelebrating. In recent years I see references to Fr. X as presider for the Mass.

This seems problematic. Anyone can be a presider at a prayer service. If a priest happens to be present, he often does “preside”, though he may let some layperson lead.

But at a Mass, the most important part is the Consecration, which is the priest. He, and only he, is acting on the person of Christ, specifically at Mass.

Yes, he does preside at the Mass. In my former parish, the pastor was a Member of the parish council. But that’s not how his title is given on the cover of the bulletin. If you were to introduce him to someone, you would say here’s Fr. Bill, our pastor.

The term “presider” seems to depict the Mass as a social gathering, in need of an Emcee type, make everybody feel welcome and inspired.
 
The GIRM uses both terms when explaining the role of those with holy orders in the Mass.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...en.html#I._THE_DUTIES_OF_THOSE_IN_HOLY_ORDERS

They are basically synonyms here. Presider is often used to designate the principle celebrant when there are several concelebrants.

It’s fine to note the definition of these words outside the context of the liturgy as long as you acknowledge their meaning and use inside the liturgy isn’t always the same as the “dictionary definition” or the secular context of the term.
 
There’s a lot of terms floating around that bother me. Like Eucharistic Minister. Only a deacon, priest, or bishop can be one. Everyone else is extraordinary.
I personally wish all laity would cease to be lectors, servers, ministers of the eucharist. I think the priest should just do all of the readings and the Vatican should change the rubrics so this is possible and just have priest and altar servers serving.
I feel there is the priest and then an informal hierarchy in many parishes where the laity involved think they are somehow elevated because of their role serving the mass.
It shouldn’t be like this.
 
Last edited:
Celebrant is more of an old-fashioned term. But now, don’t you know, we’re all celebrating Mass?
The priest is just presiding nowadays.
 
Last edited:
Jen95 said:
Celebrant is more of an old-fashioned term. But now, don’t you know, we’re all celebrating Mass?
The priest is just presiding nowadays.
Click to expand...
Maybe we should put a notice This Mass will be consecrated by Fr. Y.
 
Prodigal1984 said:
There’s a lot of terms floating around that bother me. Like Eucharistic Minister. Only a deacon, priest, or bishop can be one. Everyone else is extraordinary.
I personally wish all laity would cease to be lectors, servers, ministers of the eucharist. I think the priest should just do all of the readings and the Vatican should change the rubrics so this is possible and just have priest and altar servers serving.
I feel there is the priest and then an informal hierarchy in many parishes where the laity involved think they are somehow elevated because of their role serving the mass.
It shouldn’t be like this.
Click to expand...
These innovations are permanent, at least in the OF. We have to pick our battles.
What we can do is fight the abuses or distractions that have crept in.
Extraordinary ministers should sit in the front pew till they need to come up for their service.

Candles have always been part of the service at the altar. A few decades ago people began lighting candles alongside the lecturn, because supposedly the Bible needed Equal Time, maybe self esteem issues. That could be cut.

In my diocese it used to be common for all the Extraordinary ministers to hold a host during consecration, implying they are Co consecrators. That happens rarely if at all now.
 
Last edited:
Ceremonial of Bishops, Part II MASS, Chapter 3 “MASS AT WHICH THE BISHOP PRESIDES BUT NOT AS CELEBRANT”.

It includes in n. 175: “If he is present at a Mass but for good reason is not the celebrant, nor is another bishop the celebrant, he should preside at least by celebrating the liturgy of the word and by blessing the people at the end.”

[Excerpt from the English translation of Ceremonial of Bishops, © 1989, International Commission on English in the Liturgy Corporation. All rights reserved.]
 
Prodigal1984 said:
There’s a lot of terms floating around that bother me. Like Eucharistic Minister. Only a deacon, priest, or bishop can be one. Everyone else is extraordinary.
I personally wish all laity would cease to be lectors, servers, ministers of the eucharist. I think the priest should just do all of the readings and the Vatican should change the rubrics so this is possible and just have priest and altar servers serving.
I feel there is the priest and then an informal hierarchy in many parishes where the laity involved think they are somehow elevated because of their role serving the mass.
It shouldn’t be like this.
Click to expand...
A deacon is not a Eucharistic minister. He’s an ordinary minister of Holy Communion. Only priests and bishops are Eucharistic ministers.
 
That’s simply a matter of translation. The first translation of Ministeria Quaedam called it the instituted ministry of reader. Later that was retranslated to lector. Only in English do we feel the need to use a different word for those who are not instituted.
 
Regarding the lighting of candles alongside the lecturn/ambo:-

Permanent Candles At The Ambo By Father Edward McNamara 2015

"Candles are traditionally brought to the ambo only for the reading of the Gospel and usually accompany the procession of the Book of the Gospels from the altar to the ambo. Certainly, all Scripture is God’s word, but the Gospel has traditionally received special veneration.

According to some authors, the candles burning next to the ambo or altar should remind us especially of the tongues of fire that appeared above the apostles when the Holy Spirit descended on them at Pentecost. Just as the Almighty was present in them, he is present in the Word of God …"

And later in GIRM, No. 133:

"If the Book of the Gospels is on the altar, the priest then takes it and goes to the ambo, carrying the Book of the Gospels slightly elevated and preceded by the lay ministers, who may carry the thurible and the candles.

These norms are basically repeated, albeit with some further specifications, by the U.S. bishops’ guidelines for church building, “Built of Living Stones.

Regarding the ambo itself it says:

"61. … An ample area around the ambo is needed to allow a Gospel procession with a full complement of ministers bearing candles and incense.

"92. Candles, … appropriate to carry candles in the entrance procession and during the procession with the Book of the Gospels .

As we can see from these documents, there is no requirement for any permanent ambo candle. In fact, there is not even a justification for the existence of such a candle. In other words, the only candles envisaged by the Church near the ambo are those accompanying the proclamation of the Gospels and the Easter candle.

… a practice in the Benedictine monastery of Cluny and its related monasteries between the years 1000 and 1100 in which a candle was kept permanently lit near the ambo, because “Your word is a lamp to my feet, and a light to my path.” This lamp was eventually transferred to before the tabernacle as the custom of reserving the Eucharist in a prominent place became more widespread.

End of quotes.
 
1ke said:
Masses are not consecrated.
Click to expand...
And moreover at concelebrated Masses, all concelebrants are saying the words of the consecration.

Honestly, presider and celebrant are just fine and can be used interchangeably, though “presider” may make a wee bit more sense in the case of concelebration. But then you can still say “celebrant” for the priest leading the Mass.

Almost all the Masses I attend are concelebrated incidentally, as my usual place for Mass is a Benedictine Abbey where all priest-monks concelebrate, roughly 15 in all, more when there are visiting priests, less when one or two priests are missing.
 
OraLabora said:
Honestly, presider and celebrant are just fine and can be used interchangeably, though “presider” may make a wee bit more sense in the case of concelebration. But then you can still say “celebrant” for the priest leading the Mass.
Click to expand...
If there are three priests celebrating Mass, one would be the “Presider”, Presiding over that trio, all of whom are celebrating. But I would rather use a different term, since people tend to misunderstand it.

A prayer meeting has a Presider. But what happens is different from a Mass.
 
I think a prayer service only has a presider if he is a cleric such as a priest or deacon. If a Communion service or Office of the Liturgy of the Hours only has a layperson to lead, he or she is called a prayer leader, not a presider.
 
Last edited:
Back in the day, one would just say that the priest “said Mass.” “Offer” is a better term, which describes the specific function of a priest (ie, one who offers sacrifice). “Celebrate” is probably the best, because it describes the whole activity: “to perform with appropriate rites and ceremonies; solemnize:.”

Unfortunately, “celebrate” has taken on a more informal, party-like meaning, like this definition: “Acknowledge (a significant or happy day or event) with a social gathering or enjoyable activity” which is what leads to things like balloon masses…
 
Phemie said:
A deacon is not a Eucharistic minister. He’s an ordinary minister of Holy Communion. Only priests and bishops are Eucharistic mini
Click to expand...
Canon Law:

Can. 910 §1 The ordinary minister of holy communion is a Bishop, a priest or a deacon.
 
thistle said:
40.png
Phemie:
A deacon is not a Eucharistic minister. He’s an ordinary minister of Holy Communion. Only priests and bishops are Eucharistic mini
Click to expand...
Canon Law:

Can. 910 §1 The ordinary minister of holy communion is a Bishop, a priest or a deacon.
Click to expand...
Did I not say that? A Eucharistic minister and an ordinary minister of Holy Communion ARE NOT the same thing.
Redemptionis Sacramentum
156. This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Prodigal1984 said:
There’s a lot of terms floating around that bother me. Like Eucharistic Minister. Only a deacon, priest, or bishop can be one. Everyone else is extraordinary.
I personally wish all laity would cease to be lectors, servers, ministers of the eucharist. I think the priest should just do all of the readings and the Vatican should change the rubrics so this is possible and just have priest and altar servers serving.
I feel there is the priest and then an informal hierarchy in many parishes where the laity involved think they are somehow elevated because of their role serving the mass.
It shouldn’t be like this.
Click to expand...
In 1972, St. Pope Paul VI established the discipline for the formally instituted Lector and Acolyte, through Motu Proprio Ministeria quaedum. Instituted Acolytes and Lectors wear the alb or cassock and surplice for liturgical celebrations. The instituted Acolyte is an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top