The word "Saint" Omitted From Readings

[patrick1945]

In the missal that our church uses, the word “saint” is often omitted from the readings. rather than “The Gospel according to Saint John”, it’s simply “…according to John”.

Why the omission?
Thanks.

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t think any books of the Bible are prefaced with Saint or Sanctus, which can also be “Holy.”

 

[Phemie]

I think only St. Paul gets that designation in our Lectionary.

 

[patrick457]

I don’t think any books of the Bible are prefaced with Saint or Sanctus, which can also be “Holy.”

Well, technically, as you may know, the evangelists are never called ‘Saint’ during the announcement before the gospel reading either, at least in Latin. The gospel is called ‘holy’ (Lectio/Initium/Sequentia sancti evangelii secundum…), but the evangelist is never called ‘Saint’, because the emphasis is on what Jesus said and did, not on who wrote the gospel. Hence why we say ‘the holy Gospel according to Matthew/Mark/Luke/John.’

For the epistles, the author is referred to as beati … apostoli (‘blessed … the Apostle’), but this is where the current custom (based on the former translation of the lectionary) doesn’t quite reflect what the Latin says. For the other books, the emphasis is on the author’s authority as sacred writers, that’s why we give Sts. Paul or Peter titles are ‘blessed’ while the evangelists are left untitled.

I believe this post is quite helpful: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2456296&postcount=21