"Skit" for Good Friday's Gospel

  • Thread starter Thread starter hamburglar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hamburglar

Guest
I believe at my mother’s parish that for the Gospel on Good Friday, they do this little “skit” of the Lord’s Passion. The priest just sits to the side and watches.

I dislike this, and am curious if “acting out” the Gospel on Good Friday is even allowed.
 
Holy Week, especially the Sacred Triduum, should not be the time for creativity. The Gospel, according to Paschale Solemnitatis,must be proclaimed in the manner prescribed:
  1. The readings are to be read in their entirety. The responsorial psalm and the chant before the gospel are to be sung in the usual manner. The narrative of the Lord’s passion according to John is sung or read in the way prescribed for the previous Sunday (cf. n. 33). After the reading of the passion, a homily should be given, at the end of which the faithful may be invited to spend a short time in meditation. [69]
Click to expand...
You can find the entire document by clicking on to this link:

adoremus.org/PaschaleSolemnitatis.html#anchor270734

It is a shame that unwarranted liberties are taken during this most sacred time of the Church year.
 
benedictgal said:
Holy Week, especially the Sacred Triduum, should not be the time for creativity. The Gospel, according to Paschale Solemnitatis,must be proclaimed in the manner prescribed:

You can find the entire document by clicking on to this link:

adoremus.org/PaschaleSolemnitatis.html#anchor270734

It is a shame that unwarranted liberties are taken during this most sacred time of the Church year.
Click to expand...
I see it says to refer to 33, which reads (emphases mine)
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 part 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 the Christ should be reserved to the priest.
Click to expand...
So it is preferrable to have three ordained, perhaps the priest and two deacons, proclaim the Gospel. Lay people may be used as the narrator and the people, but the priest says the words of Christ.

I am watching the Liturgy from the Vatican on EWTN right now. They used three deacons, one being the narrator, one as Pilate, and one as Jesus. The choir read the parts of the people. Did the Vatican do the Gospel incorrectly, or am I missing something.

At the parish I was referring to, I remember they have a lay man read the narrator’s part, a lay man “play” Jesus, a lay man “play” Pilate, and a group of laity “play” the parts of the people. The priest sits in his chair. It isn’t necessary a skit, but rather the readers “dress up” as the part and follow the text of the Gospel. I don’t remember too much “improvising” but they don’t treat it as a play or skit.
 
hamburglar said:
I see it says to refer to 33, which reads (emphases mine)

So it is preferrable to have three ordained, perhaps the priest and two deacons, proclaim the Gospel. Lay people may be used as the narrator and the people, but the priest says the words of Christ.

I am watching the Liturgy from the Vatican on EWTN right now. They used three deacons, one being the narrator, one as Pilate, and one as Jesus. The choir read the parts of the people. Did the Vatican do the Gospel incorrectly, or am I missing something.

At the parish I was referring to, I remember they have a lay man read the narrator’s part, a lay man “play” Jesus, a lay man “play” Pilate, and a group of laity “play” the parts of the people. The priest sits in his chair. It isn’t necessary a skit, but rather the readers “dress up” as the part and follow the text of the Gospel. I don’t remember too much “improvising” but they don’t treat it as a play or skit.
Click to expand...
No, the Vatican is doing things as they should be done. The Passion is best proclaimed in the manner set forth by the Holy See. When three deacons are used, then, it falls to one of them to proclaim the part of Christ, since he is ordained. If there are sufficient clergy, then they should be the ones to proclaim the Passion narrative. However, having the choir/faithful singing/reciting the parts of the faithful is not wrong. Remember, we are that crowd.
 
benedictgal said:
No, the Vatican is doing things as they should be done. The Passion is best proclaimed in the manner set forth by the Holy See. When three deacons are used, then, it falls to one of them to proclaim the part of Christ, since he is ordained. If there are sufficient clergy, then they should be the ones to proclaim the Passion narrative. However, having the choir/faithful singing/reciting the parts of the faithful is not wrong. Remember, we are that crowd.
Click to expand...
Just as a note, I wasn’t implying that I thought the Vatican was doing it wrong. I just noticed that there were parts of the narrator, Jesus, the people, but also Pilate. Reading the Paschale Solemnitatis, with three parts, where does Pilate fit it?
 
hamburglar said:
Just as a note, I wasn’t implying that I thought the Vatican was doing it wrong. I just noticed that there were parts of the narrator, Jesus, the people, but also Pilate. Reading the Paschale Solemnitatis, with three parts, where does Pilate fit it?
Click to expand...
The third deacon was reading the parts of the speakers other than Christ.
 
I am still very upset at what I witnessed at today’s Good Friday service.

We had a skit where they actually changed words and edited the Gospel. The editing seemed to be designed to omit certain references to the Jews that some may deem to be politically incorrect in today’s modern age.

An example of word changes was the substitution of the word dice for lots. There were many others.

It was acted out by lay people while four priests sat and watched. Yes, they sat as did the entire congregation. I guess it would be too tough for us to stand for a long Gospel reading. In fact, our parish is so used to sitting during the Passion readings, including during Palm Sunday, that no one bothered to stand for the hymn sung before the Gospel. We used to at least do that, then wait for the presiding priest to tell us to sit during the Passion.

The part of Jesus was read by a lay woman. Instead of saying, “I AM”, she said “I am he”. As if she was impersonating a man answering a telephone call. You know when someone calls and asks to speak to you, you may respond by saying, “this is he”.

She, the woman who played Jesus, then burst into song at the point in the Gospel where our Lord carries his Cross. It was a song about the Dela Rosa.

I know there were many changes because I was reading my Missal during the entire farce as I could not bear to even look at them. I was ready to walk out and go to another service I knew of in the area that would begin at 5 pm.

For the last couple of years, we have had an actor who is a member of our parish read the Gospel on Palm Sunday. Although I do not enjoy this at all and mockingly refer to it as bad ‘dinner theater’, at least he stays true to the Gospel in reading it verbatim as he acts it out. But, when they expand the cast on Good Friday, they literally re-write John’s Gospel.

When we got to the part where our Savior dies on the cross, we still kneeled. Although by the time that rolled around I honestly wondered what the point in that gesture was. To say the gesture seemed hollow would be an understatement. Not to worry, we were soon able to go back to sitting.

Is there any advice on how to approach the Pastor to put an end to this?
 
Hello,

At our parish, there is a “youth Mass” with a gospel skit performed by the youth group. The youth group acts the gospel out while the priest reads it.

This isn’t kosher, is it? It seems to me that it couldn’t possibly be. However, I can’t find any church documents that say it’s not allowed. Can anyone help me?

Thanks!

P.S. Sorry if this has been covered before–I tried to do a search, and couldn’t find anything.
 
Thomas62408 said:
The part of Jesus was read by a lay woman. Instead of saying, “I AM”, she said “I am he”. As if she was impersonating a man answering a telephone call. You know when someone calls and asks to speak to you, you may respond by saying, “this is he”.

You had plenty to legitimately be upset about but “I am he” is what is written so she read it exactly as it was supposed to be. Check it out in the NAB, the NRSV, the KJV, etc.
Click to expand...
 
Thomas62408 said:
I am still very upset at what I witnessed at today’s Good Friday service.

We had a skit where they actually changed words and edited the Gospel. The editing seemed to be designed to omit certain references to the Jews that some may deem to be politically incorrect in today’s modern age.

An example of word changes was the substitution of the word dice for lots. There were many others.

It was acted out by lay people while four priests sat and watched. Yes, they sat as did the entire congregation. I guess it would be too tough for us to stand for a long Gospel reading. In fact, our parish is so used to sitting during the Passion readings, including during Palm Sunday, that no one bothered to stand for the hymn sung before the Gospel. We used to at least do that, then wait for the presiding priest to tell us to sit during the Passion.

The part of Jesus was read by a lay woman. Instead of saying, “I AM”, she said “I am he”. As if she was impersonating a man answering a telephone call. You know when someone calls and asks to speak to you, you may respond by saying, “this is he”.

She, the woman who played Jesus, then burst into song at the point in the Gospel where our Lord carries his Cross. It was a song about the Dela Rosa.

I know there were many changes because I was reading my Missal during the entire farce as I could not bear to even look at them. I was ready to walk out and go to another service I knew of in the area that would begin at 5 pm.

For the last couple of years, we have had an actor who is a member of our parish read the Gospel on Palm Sunday. Although I do not enjoy this at all and mockingly refer to it as bad ‘dinner theater’, at least he stays true to the Gospel in reading it verbatim as he acts it out. But, when they expand the cast on Good Friday, they literally re-write John’s Gospel.

When we got to the part where our Savior dies on the cross, we still kneeled. Although by the time that rolled around I honestly wondered what the point in that gesture was. To say the gesture seemed hollow would be an understatement. Not to worry, we were soon able to go back to sitting.

Is there any advice on how to approach the Pastor to put an end to this?
Click to expand...
The Gospel of Good Friday should not be acted out and if it is, the acters may be what is called plastic chracters. In other words, they do not speak. The simply pose off to the side or some place. The actual words are to be read by the clerics and the congregation.

At the Vatican, another reason that they use the choir for the parts ofthe congregation is due to the many languages that the people in the congregation speak. It is more practical to have a chorus that speaks the same language.

The change in dice for lots is not the precise trasnlation, but I would not be upset about it, because we know that lots were dice. I personally would have left the word lots in it. In some language translations the word used is dice. I believe that is the case in the Spanish lectionary, if I remember correctly from my mission days in South America. The Spanish word is “dados” which means dice. There is no Spanish word for lots. A “lot” in Spanish refers to a piece of land. My point is that the word dice has been used in other languages where the word lots does not exist or has a different meaning. The use of dice is not earth shattering.

But the proclamation of the Gospel should always be done by the clerics.

Fraternally,

JR 🙂
 
JReducation said:
The Gospel of Good Friday should not be acted out and if it is, the acters may be what is called plastic chracters. In other words, they do not speak. The simply pose off to the side or some place. The actual words are to be read by the clerics and the congregation.

At the Vatican, another reason that they use the choir for the parts ofthe congregation is due to the many languages that the people in the congregation speak. It is more practical to have a chorus that speaks the same language.

The change in dice for lots is not the precise trasnlation, but I would not be upset about it, because we know that lots were dice. I personally would have left the word lots in it. In some language translations the word used is dice. I believe that is the case in the Spanish lectionary, if I remember correctly from my mission days in South America. The Spanish word is “dados” which means dice. There is no Spanish word for lots. A “lot” in Spanish refers to a piece of land. My point is that the word dice has been used in other languages where the word lots does not exist or has a different meaning. The use of dice is not earth shattering.

But the proclamation of the Gospel should always be done by the clerics.

Fraternally,

JR 🙂
Click to expand...
Thanks for your response. I understand that dice in lieu of lots is minor, perhaps I shouldn’t have even mentioned it. These were things I could remember off the top of my head. My main point was that whole sections were edited out.

The front row was playing the part of the Chorus and were members of the High School Youth Ministry. I got the feeling that all the players involved had a hand in rewriting some of this Gospel. I think that may also account for them getting lost and repeating some lines at times.
 
Phemie said:
You had plenty to legitimately be upset about but “I am he” is what is written so she read it exactly as it was supposed to be. Check it out in the NAB, the NRSV, the KJV, etc.
Click to expand...
I was surprised to find my DR version agreed with what you wrote.

However, the NAB does in fact have “I AM”. Capitalized to bring home the first reference to this quote spoken by God to Moses at Mt. Horeb.

3
So Judas got a band of soldiers 3 and guards from the chief priests and the Pharisees and went there with lanterns, torches, and weapons.
4
Jesus, knowing everything that was going to happen to him, went out and said to them, “Whom are you looking for?”
5
They answered him, “Jesus the Nazorean.” 4 He said to them, “I AM.” Judas his betrayer was also with them.
6
When he said to them, “I AM,” they turned away and fell to the ground.
7
So he again asked them, “Whom are you looking for?” They said, “Jesus the Nazorean.”
8
Jesus answered, “I told you that I AM. So if you are looking for me, let these men go.”
9
 
Thomas62408 said:
I was surprised to find my DR version agreed with what you wrote.

However, the NAB does in fact have “I AM”. Capitalized to bring home the first reference to this quote spoken by God to Moses at Mt. Horeb.

3
So Judas got a band of soldiers 3 and guards from the chief priests and the Pharisees and went there with lanterns, torches, and weapons.
4
Jesus, knowing everything that was going to happen to him, went out and said to them, “Whom are you looking for?”
5
They answered him, “Jesus the Nazorean.” 4 He said to them, “I AM.” Judas his betrayer was also with them.
6
When he said to them, “I AM,” they turned away and fell to the ground.
7
So he again asked them, “Whom are you looking for?” They said, “Jesus the Nazorean.”
8
Jesus answered, “I told you that I AM. So if you are looking for me, let these men go.”
9
Click to expand...
Actually, the capitalization of “I AM” in John’s gospel is the translators being cute. Because there’s such a theological significance to Christ’s words “I am” (in Greek Ego Emin), in recent translations, they’ve decided that this sentence/clause should be capitalized whenever it appears in printings of the Gospel of John.

You’re right, it does harken back to Exodus.

I find the capitalization utterly useless, completely silly and thoroughly distracting.

This is the same group of people who decided that Christ should be crucified between 2 “revolutionaries.” Who gets to play the part of Fidel?
 
FrDavid96 said:
Actually, the capitalization of “I AM” in John’s gospel is the translators being cute. Because there’s such a theological significance to Christ’s words “I am” (in Greek Ego Emin), in recent translations, they’ve decided that this sentence/clause should be capitalized whenever it appears in printings of the Gospel of John.

You’re right, it does harken back to Exodus.

I find the capitalization utterly useless, completely silly and thoroughly distracting.

This is the same group of people who decided that Christ should be crucified between 2 “revolutionaries.” Who gets to play the part of Fidel?
Click to expand...
The funny thing is that in the DR version, it does in fact say “I am he”, in the above referenced part of the John’s Passion narrative. And I was surprised by that.

I can see your point that the capitalization is unnecessary. I remember once reading John Chapter 8, where Jesus is talking to the Pharisees. I believe the line goes something like this, “Before Abraham, I am”. It was very powerful to realize it on my own, without the proverbial training wheels.
 
Thomas62408 said:
I was surprised to find my DR version agreed with what you wrote.

However, the NAB does in fact have “I AM”. Capitalized to bring home the first reference to this quote spoken by God to Moses at Mt. Horeb.
Click to expand...
Not my 1976 edition of the NAB with the Imprimatur of Patrick Cardinal O’Boyle of the Archdiocese of Washington.
  1. Jesus, aware of all that would happen to him, stepped forward and said to them, “Who is it you want?”
  2. “Jesus the Nazorean,” they replied. “I am he,” he answered. (Now Judas, the one who was to hand him over, was there with them.)
  3. As Jesus said to them, “I am he,” they retreated slightly and fell to the ground.
  4. Jesus put the question to them again, “Who is it you want?” “Jesus the Nazorean,” they repeated.
  5. “I have told you, I am he,” Jesus said, “If I am the one you want, let these men go.”
Is there an updated translation of the NAB?
 
Phemie said:
Not my 1976 edition of the NAB with the Imprimatur of Patrick Cardinal O’Boyle of the Archdiocese of Washington.
  1. Jesus, aware of all that would happen to him, stepped forward and said to them, “Who is it you want?”
  2. “Jesus the Nazorean,” they replied. “I am he,” he answered. (Now Judas, the one who was to hand him over, was there with them.)
  3. As Jesus said to them, “I am he,” they retreated slightly and fell to the ground.
  4. Jesus put the question to them again, “Who is it you want?” “Jesus the Nazorean,” they repeated.
  5. “I have told you, I am he,” Jesus said, “If I am the one you want, let these men go.”
Is there an updated translation of the NAB?
Click to expand...
Yes, it’s the RNAB, and it is not the best when it comes to proclamation. It also has I AM in it.
 
It certainly is not allowed. One of my old parishes, however, used to do a “living stations of the cross” BEFORE the start of the Good Friday service (and on a side note, this is the only day where one may properly call the Catholic liturgy a “service” - all other days, it is “mass”).

MT
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top