No Lectors?

[philothea]

Is it good, bad, or indifferent for the priest to do all the readings himself, when there are plenty of people who would be happy to read?

[peach_cube]

I would like to see the priest do all the readings, I have seen some horrible lectors.

[thessalonian]

It's fine. Though I don't think they usually prefer it.

[journeyman]

I think Cam pointed out in one thread that lector is one of the minor orders (then acolyte, then deacon?) and the lay person is a reader . . .

full active conscious participation vs. ordained to the function

I think most priests favor allowing the former rather than insisting on the latter

[Twentie Fow]

[quote]I have seen some horrible lectors[/quote]

Interesting, how were they horrible?

[phatcatholic]

a lector is "horrible" whenever his delivery takes away from the message. what he is reading should never be overshadowed by how he is reading it. so, mumbling, reading inaudibly, using a monotone voice, or reading flamboyantly (as if one was on stage or rehearsing for a play) could all be considered areas for improvement.

[journeyman]

I prefer flamboyance to mumbling monotonous inaudibility . . . if the lector has any life in their reading, that alone helps them project . . . the reader with no life to the reading is "horrible"

one of our visiting priests is a flamboyant reader of the Gospel, and while it might be called "entertainment" . . . I prefer to think that he is excited by the Word and he is trying to get us excited by it too . . . this guy is great, he throws our regular schedule to the wind . . . he comes into the sanctuary before Mass and "chats" about the readings . . . he talks to the kids before they leave for children's liturgy . . . he hands out sheets working the reading into a prayer . . . he encourages us to pass the prayers on to others . . . he distributes the Eucharist with a great big smile (bad analogy, but it's like he has a box of Cracker Jacks, and every time he reaches in there he pulls out a prize) . . .

I could see this guy as a parish priest with no problem . . . but right now he belongs to the Navy and we can't have him

[son_of_angels]

If a priest is going to read all the readings himself, why not just celebrate Mass sine populo with a few hymns thrown in. It seems like it would be easier, and more reverent.

[beata_virgo_maria]

[quote name='journeyman' date='Aug 21 2005, 11:42 AM']I prefer flamboyance to mumbling monotonous inaudibility . . . if the lector has any life in their reading, that alone helps them project . . . the reader with no life to the reading is "horrible"

[right][snapback]693065[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Flamboyance in readind can be better, as long as it's geniune sounding. I've heard lectors who read the gosple like they're reading a childrens' book to preschoolers, but at least you can hear them I guess.

[son_of_angels]

Better to reverently read the Holy Scriptures than to narrate them. A straightforward, slow, spiritual (as opposed to spirited), reading can awaken the mind of the listeners to God's Word.

Then again, why not just chant them to their proper tones in Latin? Read 'em later if you want or have the priest read them before the sermon after they are solemnly chanted.

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='philothea' date='Aug 20 2005, 07:22 PM']Is it good, bad, or indifferent for the priest to do all the readings himself, when there are plenty of people who would be happy to read?


[right][snapback]692387[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
from [url="http://www.cuf.org/faithfacts/details_view.asp?ffID=92"][b]this article[/b][/url] we read the following:[list]Second, the nature of the Mass demands the active participation of all the faithful (SC 14). For some, this participation includes serving as a lector or reader. Traditionally, the Church has not reserved this ministry to the celebrant. For this reason, the GIRM notes that “By tradition, the function of proclaiming the readings is ministerial, not presidential. The readings, therefore, should be proclaimed by a lector. . .” (no. 59). This means that although a deacon, or even another priest, is present, such ministers have a function separate from that of lector and their presence does not require the reader or lector to relinquish his role.[4]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[4] In contrast, an extraordinary minister of the Eucharist is expected to relinquish his role to an ordinary minister, namely a bishop, priest, or deacon. Cf. 1997 Vatican document, Instruction on Certain Questions Concerning the Collaboration of the Lay Faithful in the Ministry of Priests, art. 8. For further discussion of this topic, see CUF’s FAITH FACT, “Ordinary and Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers.
[/list]i think that finally answers your question

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[journeyman]

I don't want to pick on that poor footnote - but how often have you seen an extraordinary minister relinquish his role to an ordinary minister? How often have you seen the ordinary minister ask them to?

On at least two occasions in recent memory, an area wide confirmation and our sanctuary dedication, there were at least ten ordained present, and they sat while the EMs served.

Or is that just our poor benighted diocese?

[phatcatholic]

oh, don't worry, you're not the only one......

[Cam42]

[quote name='philothea' date='Aug 20 2005, 08:22 PM']Is it good, bad, or indifferent for the priest to do all the readings himself, when there are plenty of people who would be happy to read?


[right][snapback]692387[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


It is good. He is, properly speaking, the ordinary minster of the Word.

I would say this though....it is acceptable to have an extra ordinary minister lector, if the proper ministers are not able....

Example. I am an acolyte. I am also a Lector. I can, properly speaking, lector at any function as an ordinary minister of the Word. Would I? That is another question.

If there are those who are properly disposed, they should lector.....priest, deacon, acolyte, lector....ordinary ministers.....if they are present, they should read, if not, then it is ok to allow an extraordinary minister to do so.....catch the irony?

[philothea]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Sep 17 2005, 11:36 PM']It is good.  He is, properly speaking, the ordinary minster of the Word.

I would say this though....it is acceptable to have an extra ordinary minister lector, if the proper ministers are not able....
[right][snapback]728157[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Thank you, Cam.

I think it [i]was[/i] all good until my pastor started having heart trouble, and now doing everything himself at a mass wears him out too much. Unfortunately his fix was to eliminate most masses.