Catholic Online Forum

Lately we've been instructed at my Catholic church to not read along when the Word Of God is read aloud during Mass. We've not only been told adamently not to do it, but all the missalettes containg the readings are bring removed from the pews.

Supposedly this is being directed by a letter from the Bishops, but curiously, the other Catholic churches in my area are not implementing this, and not even mentioning it.

I've had other priests who have told me in the past that I should read the scripture (during Mass) out of my own Bible that I take to Mass.

What do you folks think about this issue? It's really bothering a lot of people, and causing some to switch churches.

_________________
~~Karl~~

God bless you

Both parishes I attend are ministered by Spanish-speaking priests with strong accents when speaking English, if I did not follow along I would only get every third word or so. I follow along both as a means of fully "hearing" the gospel and as a means of "active participation".

_________________
BobA

I have a profound hearing disability that prevents me from understanding what is said over the microphone at Mass if the English is perfect. (I haven't understood a homily in years!). If I didn't follow the reading in the missalette, I wouldn't even know what was said.

_________________
In Christ,

Jim B

I will consider your position if stated with firm, well-thought-out, quiet reasoning. Hateful diatribe, ad hominem attacks and shouted rhetoric don't impress.

There will be a limited number of missalettes available, upon request at Mass for the hearing impaired. The problem I see is that it's just not the hearing impaired who may need to read along, it's also people like me who seem to absorb the Word better if I read along with it.

I guess I'm disturbed that such rules come up that seem unnecessary, yet cause division and unhappiness amongst the parishioners.

I think I'll just take my Bible to Mass and read along with it. I may take some heat for that, but so be it.

_________________
~~Karl~~

God bless you

That seems a little strange. However that is the way I have always attended mass. I want to hear the word proclaimed, I can always read it at home

_________________
Bob C

Frankly, I think it's to save money.

The hearing impaired are often elderly people So, will there be ushers at every entry to go fetch a missal so as to prevent an elderly person from having to walk a long distance to get one? Doubtful. I'm with you, if I want to read along because it's easier for me to focus that way (and it is) then I should be allowed, especially since we have a couple of people as lectors who are hard to understand or hear. I try and read the readings before Mass but don't always and I mostly don't read along but open my missal when the responsorial psalm is sung because I either don't understand what the cantor is singing or can't remember it verse to verse (and yes, my memory is that bad sometimes). The missal also makes it possible for non Catholics who are exploring Mass or new converts to follow along and be able to read the parts we recite. I have a hard time focusing when it's verbal, I have to keep going back and back and back to listening. We also have one woman who reads in a low sultry voice, drives me crazy when she is reading.

I have heard of other parishes doing this...it saves a lot of money but I also think it's an "innovation" that is being foisted upon the people. I realize there were no missals during the middle ages but somewhere along the way, we found them useful. Do they have the verses for the readings posted somewhere so you can follow along in your bible (and make even more noise turning the page and trying to find the readings than the noise that's made when the whole congregation is turning the page)?

_________________
Valerie Garcia
vals1990@yahoo.com

"Listen, O my son, to the precepts of thy master, and incline the ear of thy heart, and cheerfully receive and faithfully execute the admonitions of thy loving Father, that by the toil of obedience thou mayest return to Him ....." St. Benedict

I tried unsuccessfully to find on the USCCB site or any other Catholic site any instruction prohibiting or even discouraging the reading of a personal bible, missal or parish missalette during the gospel. The GIRM does say we should listen intently to the Word but does not go further to suggest reading along is wrong. Anyone have a legitimate reference source?

_________________
BobA

Val,



Oh, yes there were. Some very beautiful ones.





Most images are copyright, so I can't put them here. Just search on "medieval missal".




That is important.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Karl,



That is an outrage! Provided you are not disturbing or distracting anyone else, it's none of anyone's business what you are doing.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

I could regurgitate what I have read in the past about this, but it is done far better by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

From:



He goes on to discuss some of the excellent uses of hand missals and the advantages of their use even in Mass. He concludes:



I strongly encourage people to read the whole link. In addition, I encourage people to read an additional follow-up that Father McNamara wrote, which with "Follow-up: Use of a Hand Missal at Mass [11-8-2011] Several readers wrote in asking for clarifications on the Oct. 25 piece regarding the use of hand missals." at this link: http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur382.htm

I also strongly encourage people to receive this instruction from the successors of the Apostles prayerfully, with docility and not put it aside merely because it disagrees with our preferences and it's not an authoritative instruction for the universal church promulgated from the Vatican. If we choose to disagree with our shepherds' recommendations, we should have good reason to do so.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

I would be interested to see the language used in this. Can you point to a parish bulletin perhaps that details this policy and its reasons?

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Technically, of course your are correct.

Practically, an extremely small percentage of the faithful had the means to acquire missals until the 19th century and for at least a millenium the vast majority of the faithful could not have read it if they had such means.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,



So there were no computers in the 1960s?

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

This is an irrelevant rabbit hole. The point is that for at least 1400 years the use of missals was limited to a very small percentage of the Church, and our faith was passed on effectively.

That said, I do not think that it follows from these facts that the use of Missals is to be discouraged or prohibited. As with all changes in technology, just because it worked fine before does not mean it cannot work BETTER now.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,

On the other hand, it's probably true that a great many of the faithful never heard the word of God because they were in large churches and simply couldn't hear it prior to amplification. Probably a part of why so many were busy doing their own prayers or praying the rosary during Mass.

I think it's unfair to categorize some of the objections as personal preference when there are real issues with hearing and the ability to focus on the word when verbally proclaimed. It's more than personal preference, it's a desire to be more attentive to the Word than when it's only available in verbal form.

_________________
Valerie Garcia
vals1990@yahoo.com

"Listen, O my son, to the precepts of thy master, and incline the ear of thy heart, and cheerfully receive and faithfully execute the admonitions of thy loving Father, that by the toil of obedience thou mayest return to Him ....." St. Benedict

Val,

I deliberately did not quote anyone in this thread regarding that comment. I don't feel it's my place to tell someone that their reason for or against hand missals is personal preference or anything else; I can't read minds or hearts. I made it a general statement that is very much an "If the shoe fits" warning. That is, if the shoe fits, wear it. If it doesn't, just leave it there.

For the record, I also haven't mentioned in this thread what position I take. In part because I'm not sure what my position is yet. I used to be very much in favor of hand missals for my own use. I'm not sure that was for the right reasons.

But I am strongly of the opinion that we should not blithely dismiss the guidance of our bishops. Even when perfect obedience is not required of us.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,

I read the full link. Father McNamara understands that some people are more attentive in a good way when they can read along. He also called the committee that issues the guidelines, "low level". I realize they are still our bishops but it's a bit like the argument made to renovate our church based on one committee at the USCB voicing their own opinions which were not at all in the Vatican II documents as regards art and architecture in our churches. What are we to do when a local or national bishop prefers we do something that Rome does not ask us to do?

_________________
Valerie Garcia
vals1990@yahoo.com

"Listen, O my son, to the precepts of thy master, and incline the ear of thy heart, and cheerfully receive and faithfully execute the admonitions of thy loving Father, that by the toil of obedience thou mayest return to Him ....." St. Benedict

I can't really answer that. I'm not qualified to tell someone else what they should do. I'll tell you what *I* do.

I consider the reasons our bishops put forth, understand them in the context of the rest of Church teachings on the matter, think about their reasoning giving them every possible benefit of the doubt, the default state being that our bishops are correct, and pray about it. I consider the impact of my actions on the Church community around me, as best I can. All in the context of prayer, humbly asking God to guide me in the correct way to go. I actively surrender to him my own preferences and preconceptions. And if, after all of that, I continue to think the best thing for ME (or my family) is to do differently than is recommended, I act accordingly as I have the freedom to do. That is, if it is a matter of obedience, I do what I am told. If it is not a matter of obedience, I do what I think is best.

What I have not worked out is where the lines are. When precisely should I trust the authorities, and God who appointed them, and obey even against my own conclusions? When should I exercise the freedom I have to do otherwise, such as switch parishes (which technically I can do, but is discouraged) or attend an EF mass because the OF mass is awful or not give as much money to my parish because the pastor focuses way too much on social justice and not enough on sound theology?

And when the bishops tell me that the Gospel is to be received primarily in hearing, both internally and externally, when do I put aside what I think works best for me, to read and hear at the same time, and trust them and the God who appointed them, that I should externally hear and receive the Word? I don't know.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,



You may switch parishes any time you please. All you need do is move to another address in a different parish.



You are perfectly free to attend Mass in either form of the Rite.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Jeff,



It's called a refutation by analogy.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Not the rabbit hole I was indicating was irrelevant

_________________
Jeff Stevens

.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,

I hear what you are saying about not being rebellious against something declared by a priest or a group of Bishops.

However, I do have some concerns about the rule that we shouldn't read the Word while it is being proclaimed. I was a fundamentalist protestant for several decades before returning to the Catholic Church about 12 years ago. The fundamentalist denomination actually had some good points, one of which was an emphasis on reading the Bible, both at home and in the church service. In fact, if you didn't bring a Bible and the preacher didn't hear the turning of pages from the congregation during the sermon, something was usually said about it. I agreed in my heart with that and I still do.

My wife is still a member of that denomination and has slowly been coming around to accepting the Catholic Church, probably not becoming a member but at least being okay with, and respecting the Church. She was, however, aghast when this rule about not reading along in the misallette was announced. I was later told by a few of my fellow Catholic parishioners that they were upset as well. I hadn’t even brought the subject up; they did.

I think a rule like this will give further ammunition to the non-Catholic Christians who have always said that Catholics are soft on reading the Bible. If Catholics are being discouraged from reading the Bible in church, it looks very bad to those people, to my wife, and as I said, even to some Catholics.

My concern includes that, plus the concern for people who just can’t get the Word very well unless they’re reading along, and also for visiting non-Catholics who feel more comfortable reading the Bible.

Another concern I have is the manner in which this rule is being implemented in an enforcement and shaming mode. The congregation for the last two weeks has been critiqued as to how well they are doing. That approach seems heavy-handed to me.

Maybe the Lord is telling me to change churches, to go to a different Catholic church, which in all honesty I am probably going to do. I would do that for my wife as much as for me. She hardly ever goes to Mass with me, but I think she would go more often if we went to a different church.

_________________
~~Karl~~

God bless you

Karl,

I encourage you to do what you think best. I am certainly not in a position to tell you what you should do.

I am still very curious about the wording used regarding this policy.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

The announcements in the bulletin have been fairly neutral. The verbal talk has been quite a bit more challenging.

I am not going to quote what I heard the priest say because it would not be fair to the priest, and in my opinion would be a serious sin on my part to do so. Our priest is a very good man whom I have a lot of affection for. He is the only priest in a huge church that until last June had always had a second priest. He's under a lot of pressure and stress, and some of this I think is a result of that. I really love him, and my decision to go to a different church would not be because of him. There are several reasons in addition to the missalette issue. In fact I feel a bit guilty for even bringing it up here. I needed some feedback and guidance on this. It's a tricky issue.

I will pray about this tonight.

_________________
~~Karl~~

God bless you

Karl,

Given what Jeff has provided in the way of documentation, it's probably up to the diocesan bishop to decide whether the guidelines will be implemented across his diocese. Absent that decision, it goes to the pastor. Since other parishes in your area seem to be keeping missalettes, it seems to be a decision your pastor approved in response to the guidelines.

While I don't have a problem with the parish removing the missalettes except for those who are hearing-impaired, I do have a very big problem if there is such zealous enforcement of the policy that parishioners who bring their own missals are bullied for using them. I can't see how this can lawfully happen. A letter to the chancery asking about this might be in order, calling attention to the bullying.

I would suggest in the mean time that you pray the Sunday readings from your missal a couple of times leading up to the Mass, so that you already know them going in. This is what I do, because my parish doesn't have missals either for the same reason -- the bishops liturgy committee guidelines.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

Good references. I shall continue to use my missal as a means of preventing the distractions so prevalent in church these days from drawing my attention away from the liturgy and as a means of understanding the readings and Gospel in spite of strong accents and unskilled readers. Once I comprehend the Gospel I rely on the priest or deacon to reinforce or clarify what was written. The clergy will have to do their part in eliminating the inane chatter, noisy children and immodest, at the least, inappropriate attire of the congregation before I eliminate my use of the missal as a centering method. Am I disobedient, no, there is no official directive; am I stubborn, perhaps for my own salvation; am I trying to more fully participate in the Liturgy, yes.

_________________
BobA

A reference in support of the use of missal or missalettes from the Archdiocese of Denver, pay attention to item #15:

http://www.archden.org/repository/Documents/EvangCatech/Mass%20Appeal%200809.pdf

_________________
BobA

Not sure what you were trying to say here

_________________
Bob C

Heh. An ill advised post that I went back and removed about sixty seconds after submitting.

Have I thanked you recently for that feature? It has saved me many times.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

For the purposes of this discussion, are the entire contents of the Missal/Missalette being treated as exactly the same, or should we look at the Word of God (Scripture) a little differently than the prayers?

_________________
Rose West
"May God help us not to spoil His work" (Bl. Mother Theresa)

It would seem that there's a distinction, wouldn't it? After all, there's no requirement that people memorize the prayers during Mass, and if they don't have them memorized, how can they recite (or sing) them aloud?

Yet, the question of styles of active participation is an interesting one.

I'm assuming that the issue isn't simply, "I can't hear what they're saying, so I don't know what the readings are" -- that one is easily enough answered with a "can't you read them yourself as preparation for Mass, either at home, or when you sit in the pew?". Instead, it would seem that the question is about the mode in which a particular person best achieves "full and active participation".

_________________
Larry

When I found your words, I devoured them; they became my joy and the happiness of my heart, Because I bore your name, O LORD.

-- Jeremiah 15:16

I guess what's going through my head is that back when the idea of listening rather than reading the readings first came up here, years ago, I eventually figured out that when we listen, we are receiving the Word of God, which was made flesh and dwelt among us. It's one of the ways the Bride of Christ receives her Bridegroom.

That idea doesn't follow through if treat the whole Missal as if it was exactly the same. So it's kind of an important point for me.

_________________
Rose West
"May God help us not to spoil His work" (Bl. Mother Theresa)

For me it is the same, but there are really several issues in the use of the Missal. I find the constant turning of the pages and trying to figure out where the priest is at etc, a big distraction for me.

However I realize that I am in the minority and folks should do what is best for them. Sometimes when I am listening to the word, I hear something that seems extra important, I'll make sure I know where we were reading from and follow up at home with my Bible.

_________________
Bob C

Romans 10:17 I recall some years back a teenager in our neighborhood was very deaf. Her mother speculated that God must have a special provision for the deaf.

With poor hearing, I find I hear better if I am reading the words at the same time. The words come through more clearly when I know what they are.

Also, it keeps my attention better. If I miss hearing a few words I lose connection to the subject. Reading a bit bridges the gap and keeps me with the speaker.

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.

Rose,
The entire missal will be removed which at my church includes a section of prayers in the front. The pews are, however, stocked with pastic coated sheets that display the recently revised versions of the Mass prayers.

For clarification, the missalettes at my church really only contain two things, the readings and a section of th standard prayers. The liturgy of the Mass with the priest's prayers and the responses are not included. There isn't much shuffling of pages because the only time the missalette is used is to follow along with the readings.

_________________
~~Karl~~

God bless you

What seems extra important may be because of how it is read. A lector can emphasize or deemphasize certain phrases or passages. Of course, that emphasis may or may not be what was originally intended. And in some cases the way something is read can completely change the meaning.

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

Is it accurate to say that we are not receiving the Word of God when we read the scriptures?

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

David,



Which is precisely what they should not do. The readings should be recited in a flat almost dull tone. All too often the readings are done by well meaning people who want to show off their amateur acting skills - a highly animated and expressive performance. The problem is that we are getting their interpretation. That is not how liturgical readings should be done. Scripture operates at a number of different levels, all at once. We need to be able to be open to all of them.



No, it most certainly isn't.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Well, if you wish the congregation to tune out, that is probably good.

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

David,

Quite the opposite. The point is that certain aspects are not being excluded because of someone's interpretative performance.

Ideally, the readings should be sung. That eliminates the problem (as well as the problem of hearing, even in large spaces).

(It is really sad that there are so many Catholics who've never had the pleasure of hearing these beautiful chants.)

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Yes, and we can maybe presume that the Holy Spirit has an influence in how things are read.

_________________
Bob C

Many of the posts seem to assume that when we read along with the Gospel we somehow are deaf to the spoken word! Am I the only one capable of hearing the words, including inflections, while reading the same words silently, I suspect not. There are plenty of areas we can address that are far more important to the sacredness and impact of the Liturgy than this!

_________________
BobA

Bob,



Indeed so. When the person in question is an ordained cleric.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Yes. Can we presume that the Holy Spirit wants the scripture read differently in different parishes?

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

Then why do all the priests in our parish have such strong Spanish accents that very few can understand them? No we are not a Latino parish, the priestly order is from Spain.

_________________
BobA

James,



The closest I've come was when an Eastern Catholic priest participated in either the ordination of one of the monks or the abbatial blessing....forget which one was but it was so beautiful when he sang the Gospel.

_________________
Valerie Garcia
vals1990@yahoo.com

"Listen, O my son, to the precepts of thy master, and incline the ear of thy heart, and cheerfully receive and faithfully execute the admonitions of thy loving Father, that by the toil of obedience thou mayest return to Him ....." St. Benedict

Karl,



So if someone was unfamiliar with Mass they could not follow the order along? That's how our missals work with page numbers at the bottom indicating to turn to the next part of the Mass.

_________________
Valerie Garcia
vals1990@yahoo.com

"Listen, O my son, to the precepts of thy master, and incline the ear of thy heart, and cheerfully receive and faithfully execute the admonitions of thy loving Father, that by the toil of obedience thou mayest return to Him ....." St. Benedict

Perhaps the Holy Spirit works sometimes, but I wouldn't presume this. I've been through enough hearings of the Word proclaimed by lectors and deacons and priests, and a few times right up at the ambo as an altar server as the Gospel was proclaimed, to witness where some words or phrases are deliberately changed (not just emphasized or de-emphasized) by the one proclaiming, in order to convey a meaning that is slightly less sharp, or perhaps even different, from what the text conveys.

This past Sunday, the visiting priest, rather than using the Missal on the altar, had his own little binder for the Eucharistic Prayer, and he did not use the new translation for the words of institution. And he changed some other texts in the preface dialogue. I'm very doubtful the Holy Spirit was working there...perhaps some other spirit...but not the Holy Spirit.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

I am struggling with this. I understand what you're saying in the abstract, and there is certainly a great deal of value to it.

I'm concerned, however, that all too much of the reading of the Word I hear is extremely flat and, for lack of a better term, dead. Monotonous, almost. This misses an opportunity to engage the listener in the reading at all.

Grace builds on nature. I think there needs to be a both-and. Readers should read the text dynamically, varying their voice and giving life to the text, and avoid a monotone. But not shoehorn the text into their interpretation of it by emphasizing some words and de-emphasizing others, to permit, as you say, the text to speak in as many ways as possible to as many as possible.

As a reader, this is a balance I struggle with. I have received many compliments for my reading, but I may be infusing it with my own emphasis, even if I am honestly thinking that is what the text is saying, instead of letting the text speak on its own.

_________________
Jeff Stevens