Reading Vs. Listening to Scriptures

[englishredrose]

Reading v Listening.

We are given the choice as the readings are on the parish news sheet and we can read that at the same time or we can just listen if thats what we prefer. If someone is harder to hear I will follow it on the news sheet but I don’t mind either way. Ideally that is the way forward so that those who don’t have missals/books at home can take the news sheet home with them and use it, In the service they can choose to read or not and its not a question of being distracted by finding the right pages in the book.

Perhaps you could suggest to him to have a parish weekly news sheet that on one side of A4 is the Collect, First and Second Reading and the Gospel and the final prayer and on the other side as such is the welcome to our parish bit, who is celebrating the service today. Hymn numbers and Psalm reponse and on the back page is just bits of Church News. That was people wont be lost trying to find the right pages but those of you who want to read can still read.

Silent feud isn’t getting you anywhere it seems

 

[Cristiano]

I think that there here there is more to the point of reading vs. listening. The other point is an exercise of obedience toward the pastor. The pastor asked nobody to do something immoral, However, I highly question withholding money from the donations and making a point to inform the pastor about it, is that a moral behavior?

 

[ProVobis]

Reminds me of a workshop for readers that I did about 30 years ago. The priest started to read and then suddenly his volume changed. We all looked up from our missalettes to see him standing at the ambo with his back to us. Once he was pretty sure we were all looking at him he turned around and said “If you aren’t going to look at the reader who is talking to you why should he bother to look at you.”

Ad orientem. Some people actually prefer that.

 

[jim6918]

I think that there here there is more to the point of reading vs. listening. The other point is an exercise of obedience toward the pastor. The pastor asked nobody to do something immoral, However, I highly question withholding money from the donations and making a point to inform the pastor about it, is that a moral behavior?

When you lose respect for your priest because of his dictatorial attitude, I guess the moral alternative would be for me to attend another parish, thereby depriving the parish permanently of my weekly financial committment, as opposed to what amounted to a single $20, symbolic deduction, from one weeks donation.

 

[Cristiano]

When you lose respect for your priest because of his dictatorial attitude, I guess the moral alternative would be for me to attend another parish, thereby depriving the parish permanently of my weekly financial committment, as opposed to what amounted to a single $20, symbolic deduction, from one weeks donation.

Morality of an action is based on intent, act and circumstances. Be careful before saying that an alternate action is moral. Charity must be our driving strength, my suggestion is to stop playing hardball with the priest and talk to him with an open heart, you would be surprised by the insights that you might learn.

 

[Alan55]

In our parish, the worst lectors are the foreign-born priests whose pronunciation is often very difficult to understand.

I agree that removing the missals entails a responsibility to ensure that the lectors are well-trained, and that poorly performing lectors are asked to pursue a different ministry.

 

[Cristiano]

In our parish, the worst lectors are the foreign-born priests whose pronunciation is often very difficult to understand.

I agree that removing the missals entails a responsibility to ensure that the lectors are well-trained, and that poorly performing lectors are asked to pursue a different ministry.

Couples are not willing to have children, parents are not willing to raise priests, people do not like to see to many women involved with ministries, men do not like to be involved with ministries. Do we ever wonder why we have problems understanding some readers?
I think that we mainly have problems understanding the teachings of the Church.

BTW I think that the missalets should be available for people to read and understand the readings and the Psalm before Mass starts. Such a practice would eliminate the flipping through the missalets during the Mass.

 

[coachdennis]

The major way the Word of God has been handed down throughout history has been orally, even in recent centuries. People do need to be trained to listen, but blaming their inability to not listen on poor lectors and lack of audio systems doesn’t cut it. There were no microphones until electricity was invented. Those proclaiming God’s word were not always great speakers, either. Only a few people have been noted to be great preachers. The majority of people could not read. They did not depend on the written word to communicate the way we do today.

We don’t know how to listen, even face to face with one another. Just observe people sometime–today especially. They often don’t make eye contact. They often are not paying attention to what others are saying, but looking around, or texting, or on a cell phone, or fiddling with something. How many people can repeat accurately what you have just said? Yet the ancients did it, without sound systems, the printed word, great speakers, books to read, etc. And they transmitted things extremely accurately for thousands of years before they were finally written down. They knew how to listen. That is the value of silence. You learn to listen.

I doubt we will ever regain that ability again in this country unless some major disaster happens and we lose our ability to communicate as we do now. But it really does not hurt to try to develop listening skills. I stated earlier how in my parish we got rid of the Missalettes, except for those who really needed or wanted them years ago. We do not have extraordinary lectors and the acoustics in our church are poor due to the carpeting and padded pews, but we are learning to listen. I have had discussions with fellow parishioners regarding this subject, and it is remarkable how well received it is. People have told me (and I have noticed in my own life) that they are much more aware of what is going on and are more mentally alert once they learned the art of silence and listening. They did not believe at first that it would work, but it does. It is really quite amazing.

I urge people to give it a try, a serious try, to develop silence and listening skills if you have the physical ability. You will begin to hear things you never noticed before. Any non-sighted person will tell you that–they do it all the time. It is remarkable how poorly developed some of our senses can become when we are not forced to use them.[/Q[/COLOR]UOTE]

Everyone you say is absolutely true BUT most of us do live in a society where there is the technology to amplify the spoken word AND the ability to train lectors. So what is the big deal with people in the pew expecting that resources (both human and mechanical) that exist today be used in their worship at the SAME TIME people take responsibility and learn or re-learn how to listen?

 

[ProVobis]

Everyone you say is absolutely true BUT most of us do live in a society where there is the technology to amplify the spoken word AND the ability to train lectors. So what is the big deal with people in the pew expecting that resources (both human and mechanical) that exist today be used in their worship at the SAME TIME people take responsibility and learn or re-learn how to listen?

You’re absolutely right. There is also the closed caption technology that is now available on most TV stations, DVD movies, commercials, telephone conversations, etc., even translated into different languages. Once you’re hooked on it, why pass it up? There’s a lot of things that can be missed from simple listening. How many can remember a 10-20-word responsorial phrase (after the first reading) while trying to listen to another versicle, even if it’s said clearly? I know I can’t.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I agree that actively listening to the epistles, gospels, etc. after having read them previous to the service would be something worthwhile to pursue.

I hesitate to bring this up as I’m sure it is something that does not happen often, but it’s something I have personally noticed in various places over 50 something years of Mass-going. . .

That is, if a church does not have missalettes or 'written out parts of the Mass, the people do not know when the priest or lectors change the readings (yes, I am aware that sometimes the readings can be changed due to feasts, I am NOT talking about that). . .and change the Mass parts.

Especially with the new changes to the GIRM, if you have a priest or two who want to ‘keep’ parts of the old Mass and mix them with parts from the new, having a Missalette would let everybody ‘see’ what was being changed around.

NOT having a Missalette, especially if prior to November 2011 Father was already ad libbing and changing the older Mass parts anyway, would make people even LESS likely to know what was being changed today. If Father is careful to let the people know that THEIR part has changed, but doesn’t let them know HIS part has changed, he could then keep on doing "his’ Mass just the way he likes it.

I am not going to name names but this is the situation in one parish (if not diocese) in the U.S. right now which I personally witnessed in the last few months. I was able to do so because I had my own Missalette and was familiar with the changes in the priest’s part because in my own parish the priest has complied with the changes. In this other parish. . . not so much. And because I only heard it once at one Mass, until I return (and I will) and hear it happening again, and actually speak with the priest involved to find out why ‘my’ Missalette is not showing what Father says, I’m not going to address it to the bishop. It was troublesome but again, it might have been a priest for whom English was a second language, or who was retired and had come to fill in, or who just hadn’t quite understood that he’d been wrong to ad lib before and that this is not allowed. I am going to hope it is something that has either already been addressed, won’t happen again, or can be easily corrected.

But again, I really do not think that had I been a regular parishoner in this place that I would have known, without a Missalette being available, that what Father was saying in Mass was not what all the OTHER priests in the U.S. are saying (or should be saying) at Mass.

So to sum up, I think that Missalettes should always be AVAILABLE for reference for occasional use by individuals. The older (or younger) person who is hard of hearing might need to check the book a few times during the service. The person who is new to the parish might need to check the book a few times if what he is hearing differs from what he has heard. People who learn less quickly (for any reason) might need to check the book occasionally just to get not only the ‘oral’ reinforcement but the ‘visual’ as well.

I think that either banning Missalettes completely OR insisting that they be scanned totally by everybody 100% through Mass would be an extremist kind of position.

 

[Corki]

I think that there here there is more to the point of reading vs. listening. The other point is an exercise of obedience toward the pastor. The pastor asked nobody to do something immoral,

While not immoral, what the priest is asking could be just wrong. This whole debate about listening vs. reading is silly. For most people, it’s listening AND reading. Our priests are supposed to be our teachers. One of the first things teachers learn is that people have different learning styles. Some people (a fairly large percentage) will retain very little of material that is presented only orally. A priest should know that and try to make the teaching accessible to the largest number of people, not just those who learn well from the spoken word.

It’s nice he’s willing to make allowances for the hard of hearing. However, in these times, there is also likely to be any number of people who have attention disorders, who do not comprehend English easily, who do not understand the priest or reader’s accent, who are distracted by a child and miss a sentance or two, etc. etc.

The goal of the readings should not be to exclude people. That is wrong and a priest that wants to do that is wrong too. I don’t think we are expected to give complete obedience to a priest who is wrong – especially if it makes it difficult to fully participate in Mass.

 

[superamazingman]

While not immoral, what the priest is asking could be just wrong. This whole debate about listening vs. reading is silly. For most people, it’s listening AND reading. Our priests are supposed to be our teachers. One of the first things teachers learn is that people have different learning styles. Some people (a fairly large percentage) will retain very little of material that is presented only orally. A priest should know that and try to make the teaching accessible to the largest number of people, not just those who learn well from the spoken word.

It’s nice he’s willing to make allowances for the hard of hearing. However, in these times, there is also likely to be any number of people who have attention disorders, who do not comprehend English easily, who do not understand the priest or reader’s accent, who are distracted by a child and miss a sentance or two, etc. etc.

The goal of the readings should not be to exclude people. That is wrong and a priest that wants to do that is wrong too. I don’t think we are expected to give complete obedience to a priest who is wrong – especially if it makes it difficult to fully participate in Mass.

Exactly! It’s both/and not either/or.

Sometimes (not all the time, just some of the time) it really helps me to read while I’m listening to the readings. It seems crazy that priests are taking materials out of the hands of people that could help them understand it better. It seems like trying to put a one size fits all idea on everyone. I find it wrong as well.

And anyways, if people want to, they can just bring their own missals!

Someone did bring up a good point that giving people the actual texts would be a detriment to those who wish to experiment with the texts. All the better! If that’s what it takes to get the pastor to stop changing the texts, I’d be handing out missals at the door on my own dime somedays.

 

[twopekinguys]

Tell your priest that “Reading is FUNdamental”

 

[novusCatholic]

I’ve heard it said that lectors should feel honored that God is borrowing their voice to proclaim the Word. With this in mind, I try to be respectful and look to the lector while listening. Sometimes it does seem disruptive when I hear hundreds of pages being turned at the same time, BUT there have been many times when I have taken a glance myself because I didn’t quite understand something.

A balanced approach, I say.

 

[ProVobis]

A balanced approach, I say.

 

[jeannetherese]

I agree that actively listening to the epistles, gospels, etc. after having read them previous to the service would be something worthwhile to pursue.

I hesitate to bring this up as I’m sure it is something that does not happen often, but it’s something I have personally noticed in various places over 50 something years of Mass-going. . .

That is, if a church does not have missalettes or 'written out parts of the Mass, the people do not know when the priest or lectors change the readings (yes, I am aware that sometimes the readings can be changed due to feasts, I am NOT talking about that). . .and change the Mass parts.

Especially with the new changes to the GIRM, if you have a priest or two who want to ‘keep’ parts of the old Mass and mix them with parts from the new, having a Missalette would let everybody ‘see’ what was being changed around.

NOT having a Missalette, especially if prior to November 2011 Father was already ad libbing and changing the older Mass parts anyway, would make people even LESS likely to know what was being changed today. If Father is careful to let the people know that THEIR part has changed, but doesn’t let them know HIS part has changed, he could then keep on doing "his’ Mass just the way he likes it.

Unfortunately, I’ve experienced this as well. Giving everybody access to proper form and readings encourages the use of proper form and readings.

 

[Alan55]

Without meaning to thump my chest, I’m an excellent lector. I prepare well, giving due attention to the details, dynamics and meaning of the text. I’m one of those chosen to do a reading at the Easter Vigil or other important feasts.

However, there are some who cannot hear me or catch the full meaning of the text only by hearing me in most congregations due to poor hearing, short attention span, etc. Additionally, like me, some want to read and reflect on the readings before the Mass or even the psalm, knowing that it will be swapped out for a hymn. I also like to see the prayers for the Mass, follow along with the Creed (still getting used to the new wording…), etc.

I agree that the situation is both/and. Great lectors and cantors (I’ve done some of that too) help make the Word come alive for the congregation. Missals that provide the readings help too and are vital for some in order to participate fully in the liturgy. If a congregation can hear the lector, and the lector does a good job, they tend to look up, listen attentively, and not consult their missals. They know what they want and need.

 

[jim6918]

Without meaning to thump my chest, I’m an excellent lector. I prepare well, giving due attention to the details, dynamics and meaning of the text. I’m one of those chosen to do a reading at the Easter Vigil or other important feasts.

However, there are some who cannot hear me or catch the full meaning of the text only by hearing me in most congregations due to poor hearing, short attention span, etc. Additionally, like me, some want to read and reflect on the readings before the Mass or even the psalm, knowing that it will be swapped out for a hymn. I also like to see the prayers for the Mass, follow along with the Creed (still getting used to the new wording…), etc.

I agree that the situation is both/and. Great lectors and cantors (I’ve done some of that too) help make the Word come alive for the congregation. Missals that provide the readings help too and are vital for some in order to participate fully in the liturgy. If a congregation can hear the lector, and the lector does a good job, they tend to look up, listen attentively, and not consult their missals. They know what they want and need.

I certainly think I have made my point but the vast majority of the readers in our parish have been taught the “slower is better” method. They read slowly (too slowly in my opinion) and pause every 3 words, regardless of whether or not the pharasing calls for it. I have actually been told by the head lector that they train their readers that way so that the meaning can “sink in.”

Again, thank you everybody for your observations and comments.