The Gospel reading on Palm Sunday (multiple readers)

[cricket36]

I think we need to make a distinction between two different elements of this thread.

1. How should the parts of the Passion be divided? In segments of one reader following the other; or by the “character” * doing the speaking?
2. The comments in the OP made a point that people should be experiencing the Passion and not be distracted by having their noses stuck in the books. I think that everyone who has posted here thus far would agree to that point, but I haven’t seen much discussion about it. It seems to me that this was the major thrust of the article quoted in the OP.

In my parish, the reading is divided by parts. There is a Narrator, a Voice (this person does all the minor speaking roles), Jesus (always the priest) and the Crowd (the last few years, this has been the choir rather than the people in the pews). Our parishioners stand throughout and without missals to follow. If one has an excellent Narrator, the Passion can be very moving. This year our priest in the role of Jesus was the best I have heard him. I mentioned to him later this very comment. He said he had really gotten into the role. I’m sure there were tears in the congregation.

I don’t know who publishes our books with the different Passions inside.

 

[FrDavid96]

The 1962 Missal, on the other hand, does have the divisions marked. The different speakers are, I think, N:, S:, and +: (for the priest).

But here again, I would ask the question (question, not conclusion) of whether those divisions are actually defined by the Church or simply done by the publisher as a matter of making it convenient for the reader?

The Church does say “this is how the Passion might be proclaimed.” No doubt about it; lest anyone think I’m trying to imply otherwise.

PS It might be an interresting exercise to look at different 1962 missals from different sources and compare them.

 

[japhy]

I would ask the question (question, not conclusion) of whether those divisions are actually defined by the Church or simply done by the publisher as a matter of making it convenient for the reader? … It might be an interresting exercise to look at different 1962 missals from different sources and compare them.

To clarify, I do not mean a personal or daily Missal, I meant the 1962 Missale Romanum that I have in PDF form.

Here’s an excerpt from one PDF:

C. Adhuc eo loquente, ecce Iudas unus de duodecim venit, et cum eo turba multa cum gladiis et fustibus, missi a principibus sacerdotum, et senioribus populi. Qui autem tradidit eum, dedit illis signum dicens: S. Quemcumque osculatus fuero, ipse est, tenete eum. C. Et confestim accedens ad Iesum, dixit: S. Ave, Rabbi. **C. **Et osculatus est eum. Dixitque illi Iesus: ✠ Amice, ad quid venisti?

Here’s another copy, essentially identical:

C. Adhuc eo loquénte, ecce, Judas, unus de duódecim, venit, et cum eo turba multa cum gládiis et fústibus, missi a princípibus sacerdótum et senióribus pópuli. Qui autem trádidit eum, dedit illis signum, dicens: **S. **Quemcúmque osculátus fúero, ipse est, tenéte eum. **C. **Et conféstim accédens ad Jesum, dixit: **S. **Ave, Rabbi. **C. **Et osculátus est eum. Dixítque illi Jesus: ✠ Amíce, ad quid venísti?

The three roles are C, S, and ✠ (the priest, speaking the lines of Jesus).