Q:         What does the GIRM 2000 say about the reading of the Passion?  

A:         The GIRM mentions the proclamation of the Passion in reference to the distribution of duties during the celebration of the Mass. “…For example…if there are several readings,  it is well to distribute them among a number of lectors…But it is not at all appropriate that several persons divide a single element of the celebration among themselves, e.g., that the same reading be proclaimed by two lectors, one after another, except as far as the Passion of the Lord is concerned” [109, emphasis added]. 

Q:         Other readings may not be divided? Why is that “not at all appropriate?” 

A:         Perhaps dividing one reading among several people tends to change “proclamation” into “dramatization.”  This is an important distinction.  Effective proclamation of the scripture draws the assembly into the work active listening; dramatization of the scripture is likely to create an “audience” of spectators.  

 This strong expression (“not at all appropriate”) could also be a response to the practice of dividing some of the longer Gospel readings. The proclamation of the Gospel at Mass is part of the deacon’s ministry.  If there is no deacon, the priest proclaims the Gospel.  It is not the role of the lector to proclaim even part of the Gospel at Mass.  The exception to this is the proclamation of the Passion.

 Q:         Does the GIRM 2000 say how the Passion should be divided? 

A:         No, the GIRM doesn’t say anything else about the proclamation of the Passion except that it may be divided.   

The 1975 Sacramentary (we don’t have the official English translation of the 2000Sacramentary/Missal yet – just the General Instruction) says: “The passion is read by the deacon or, if there is no deacon, by the priest.  It may also be read by lay readers, with the part of Christ reserved, if possible, to the priest” [found in the entry under Passion Sunday (Palm Sunday)].  The 1988 Circular Letter Concerning the Preparation and Celebration of the Easter Feasts says: “It [the passion] 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 Christ should be reserved to the priest” [33].  Neither the Lectionary nor the Book of the Gospels actually “script” how this division is to occur.  

Q:         If a deacon is ministering on Palm Sunday or Good Friday, should he take the role of the narrator?  

A:         The Circular Letter says that the Passion can be proclaimed in its entirety by a deacon, OR that it may be divided “in the traditional way.” It also says that if the Passion is being divided” in the traditional way,” the priest should take the part of Christ.  It doesn’t really say whether the deacon should or should not take the part of the narrator.  (As was mentioned in the answer to the previous question, neither the Lectionary nor the Book of the Gospels actually provides for a “narrator.”)  The question of whether the deacon should be the “narrator” needs to be worked out in each individual parish.   At this point, there really isn’t a black/white answer.

Q:         When should the Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion come up to help with the distribution of the Body/Blood of Christ?   

A:         “These ministers should not approach the altar before the priest has received Communion…” [GIRM 2000, 162].  

Q:         In our parish, the extraordinary ministers come up during the Lamb of God.  May they continue to do that? 

A:         It depends on what you mean by “come up.”  It would probably be acceptable for the extra-ordinary ministers to come forward (for example, to the steps or threshold of what would be considered the sanctuary) during the Lamb of God, or to stand far enough behind the altar (if there is enough space), so that it doesn’t look as if they are standing at or around the altar.  Then they can move closer to the altar after the priest has received the Body and Blood of Christ. 

Q:         May the deacon or each of the extraordinary ministers  be given a piece of the Eucharistic Bread (or a Sacred Host) before the priest’s communion, so he/she they may consume it at the same time as the priest does?  

A:         No.  This practice would be too much like the way concelebrating priests receive Holy Communion.  It would be a contradiction of the directive in Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the United States of America: “Neither deacons nor lay ministers may ever receive Holy Communion in the manner of a concelebrating priest” [39]. 

Q:         In some parishes, the extraordinary ministers wait until after everyone else has received before receiving Holy Communion themselves.  Is anything said about that practice? 

A:         Number 39 in Norms continues: “The practice of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion waiting to receive Holy Communion until after the distribution of Holy Communion is not in accord with liturgical law.”

Q:         I saw something in the GIRM about intinction.  I thought that wasn’t allowed.  Have I been wrong? 

A:         Intinction is confusing to many people.  What is sometimes referred to as intinction is the following: the communicant comes forward, receives the consecrated bread, and rather than consuming it, takes it to the minister of the cup and dips it into the Precious Blood, and then consumes it. This is not what the GIRM means by intinction, and this procedure is not permitted. 

Q:         So what does the GIRM mean by intinction? 

A:         The GIRM 2000, previous General Instructions, and other documents describe intinction as a form of Communion from the chalice. It is to take place in this manner:

“…each communicant, holding a communion plate under the chin, approaches the priest, who holds a vessel with the sacred particles, a minister standing at his side and holding the chalice.  The priest takes a host, dips it partly into the chalice and, showing it, says…(The Body and Blood of Christ). The communicant responds, Amen, receives the Sacrament in the mouth from the priest, and then withdraws” [GIRM 2000, 287].

 Q:         Is Communion by intinction (in the correct way) encouraged? 

A:         It is not forbidden, but neither is it strongly encouraged.  In Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United states of America we find: “Among the ways of ministering the Precious Blood as prescribed by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, Communion from the chalice is generally the preferred form in the Latin Church, provided that it can be carried out properly according to the norms and without any risk of even apparent irreverence toward the Blood of Christ” [Norms, 42].  

Q:         What is the norm in our Diocese? 

A:         Our current Liturgical Guidelines for the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston say: “Communion by intinction is not the norm for parish liturgy.” The reasoning behind this is that this practice “may remove the communicant’s legitimate option to receive Communion in the hand or, for valid reasons, not to receive the consecrated wine” [Liturgical Guidelines for the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston, Celebration of Sunday Eucharist, 6].  

Q:         Wouldn’t intinction be a more sanitary alternative to drinking directly from the cup? 

A:         As far as sanitary practices, there are, of course, always exceptions in exceptional times.  However, the symbolism of actually drinking from the cup/chalice might get lost if intinction were the normal practice.  In the Introduction to the Order of Mass, the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, we read: “Drinking at the Eucharist is a sharing in the sign of the new covenant (see Lk 22:20), a foretaste of the heavenly banquet (see Mt 26:29), a sign of participation in the suffering of Christ (see Mk 10:38-39)” [134].

Q:         According to the GIRM 2000, who may break the bread and pour the precious blood?  

A:         Short answer: a Bishop, priest, or deacon.  

 The presiding celebrant (priest or Bishop) breaks the bread. In the event that assistance is needed (many potential communicants, many large altar breads/hosts, etc.) deacons or concelebrating priest(s) may help. The GIRM is very firm: “This rite is reserved to the priest and the deacon” [83].  

The question of pouring the precious blood into several cups/chalices is not addressed in the GIRM, but rather in Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America, which was approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on June 14, 2001 and granted “recognition” by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments on March 22, 2002.  In this document we read: “The deacon or priest…pours the Precious Blood into enough additional chalices as are required for the distribution of Holy Communion” [Norms, 37]. 

Q:         Is this something new?   

A:         Not really; it’s more of a clarification.  The previous GIRM read: “The priest takes the host and breaks it over the paten” [113].  The pouring of the Precious Blood into extra chalices/cups was not mentioned in this document. The need for assistance with this rite (with either the breaking or the pouring) was probably not anticipated at the time it was written. 

Q:         If there is no deacon, may the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion help to distribute hosts into separate patens or assist with the pouring of the Precious Blood? 

A:         No.  Again, this is found in the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America: “The deacon or priest places the consecrated bread in several ciboria or patens and, if necessary, pours the Precious Blood into enough additional chalices as are required for the distribution of Holy Communion.  If it is not possible to accomplish this distribution in a reasonable time, the celebrant may call upon the assistance of other deacons or concelebrating priests” [37].       

 Q:         This seems so restrictive, especially concerning the pouring of the Precious Blood.  How can the pouring be accomplished “in a reasonable time” when there is a large community and no deacon or other concelebrant(s)? 

A:         The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops did request a dispensation from this ruling (from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments), but the indult, which would have permitted extraordinary ministers to assist with the pouring of the Precious Blood into additional chalices/cups, was not granted. 

The concern of the Congregation was not for efficiency, but rather that the roles of the ordained and the non-ordained might be blurred by the participation of the extraordinary ministers in this manner.   

Q:         Is there anything new in the GIRM 2000 concerning the Rite of Peace?  

A:         Yes. The previous General Instruction said: “The priest may give the sign of peace to the ministers” [112].  GIRM 2000 adds the following: “...but always remains within the sanctuary, so as not to disturb the celebration” [154, paragraph 2].   

            Regarding the assembly, the previous GIRM said: “All exchange the sign of peace and love, according to local custom” [112].  GIRM 2000 says: “It is appropriate that each person offer the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner” [82. paragraph 2].

 Q:         What’s this all about?  It seems so unfriendly... 

A:         It is possible that these additions were made as a response to complaints that the Rite of Peace was taking on a life of its own.  Perhaps in some places the length of time involved for this rite was disproportionate to its role in the Mass. The U.S. Bishops have adapted the directive so that it is a little more sensitive to certain situations.

“In the dioceses of the United States of America, for a good reason, on special occasions (for example, in the case of a funeral, a wedding, or when civic leaders are present) the priest may offer the sign of peace to a few of the faithful near the sanctuary” [154, paragraph 2].

            The new GIRM promotes more restraint at the Rite of Peace. Although the ritual is not to be performed in an “unfriendly” manner, it is more than a feel-good expression of friend-ship or even of hospitality.  This is not necessarily the time for the priest celebrant to be shaking hands with everyone in the church, nor is it the time for a game of “peace-tag” among the members of the gathered assembly.

 Q:         Well, then what is the purpose of the Rite of Peace? 

A:         It is a rite “by which the Church asks for peace and unity for herself and for the whole human family, and the faithful express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communication in the sacrament” [82, paragraph 2].  In the previous General Instruction, simpler words were used: “...before they share in the same bread, the people express their love for one another and beg for peace and unity in the Church and with all mankind” [56, b].  During the Rite of Peace we have the opportunity to express, in a concrete way, reconciliation with one another before we approach the Table of the Lord.  

Q:         And how should we offer and receive the sign of peace? 

A:         Probably not with a flurry of waves, “Good mornings,” long-distance peace signs, etc., but rather in a sincere, heartfelt, and deliberate manner.  The gesture itself should be “a sign that expresses peace, communion, and charity” [154 paragraph 2], but it is not specified (The decision on this has been left to the discretion of the Bishops’ Conferences.  The U.S. Bishops have not singled out any one gesture as the sign of peace.) People usually have a sense of what is appropriate, and with whom.  It would be good to pay attention, to look into the faces of the persons with whom you are exchanging this sacred sign. These words are suggested in the GIRM: “The peace of the Lord be with you always.”  Other words may be used.  It is important to remember that it is not our peace that we are extending – it is Christ’s peace.

Q:         What does the GIRM 2000 say about the reading of the Passion?

 A:         The GIRM mentions the proclamation of the Passion in reference to the distribution of duties during the celebration of the Mass. “…For example…if there are several readings,  it is well to distribute them among a number of lectors…But it is not at all appropriate that several persons divide a single element of the celebration among themselves, e.g., that the same reading be proclaimed by two lectors, one after another, except as far as the Passion of the Lord is concerned” [109, emphasis added].

 Q:         Other readings may not be divided? Why is that “not at all appropriate?”

 A:         Perhaps dividing one reading among several people tends to change “proclamation” into “dramatization.”  This is an important distinction.  Effective proclamation of the scripture draws the assembly into the work active listening; dramatization of the scripture is likely to create an “audience” of spectators.

  This strong expression (“not at all appropriate”) could also be a response to the practice of dividing some of the longer Gospel readings. The proclamation of the Gospel at Mass is part of the deacon’s ministry.  If there is no deacon, the priest proclaims the Gospel.  It is not the role of the lector to proclaim even part of the Gospel at Mass.  The exception to this is the proclamation of the Passion.

Q:         Does the GIRM 2000 say how the Passion should be divided?

A:         No, the GIRM doesn’t say anything else about the proclamation of the Passion except that it may be divided. 

 The 1975 Sacramentary (we don’t have the official English translation of the 2000Sacramentary/Missal yet – just the General Instruction) says: “The passion is read by the deacon or, if there is no deacon, by the priest.  It may also be read by lay readers, with the part of Christ reserved, if possible, to the priest” [found in the entry under Passion Sunday (Palm Sunday)].  The 1988 Circular Letter Concerning the Preparation and Celebration of the Easter Feasts says: “It [the passion] 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 Christ should be reserved to the priest” [33].  Neither the Lectionary nor the Book of the Gospels actually “script” how this division is to occur.

 Q:         If a deacon is ministering on Palm Sunday or Good Friday, should he take the role of the narrator?

A:         The Circular Letter says that the Passion can be proclaimed in its entirety by a deacon, OR that it may be divided “in the traditional way.” It also says that if the Passion is being divided” in the traditional way,” the priest should take the part of Christ.  It doesn’t really say whether the deacon should or should not take the part of the narrator.  (As was mentioned in the answer to the previous question, neither the Lectionary nor the Book of the Gospels actually provides for a “narrator.”)  The question of whether the deacon should be the “narrator” needs to be worked out in each individual parish.   At this point, there really isn’t a black/white answer.

Q:         During the Lamb of God, should someone bring the ciborium from the tabernacle, so that the extra Eucharistic bread/hosts consecrated at a previous Mass can also be distributed?

 A:         Neither the GIRM 2000, previous General Instructions, nor Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America recommend (or even mention) this practice.  On the contrary, this practice is not encouraged.

 Q:         Where do we find that?

 A:         In the GIRM 2000, we read: “It is most desirable that the faithful, just as the priest himself is bound to do, receive the Lord’s Body from hosts consecrated at the same Mass and that, in the instances when it is permitted, they partake of the chalice,…so that even by means of the signs Communion will stand out more clearly as a participation in the sacrifice actually being celebrated” [85, emphasis added].

             This is not original to the GIRM 2000.  The same directive can be found in the 1975 GIRM [56h], but the words “just as the priest himself is bound to do” have been added to the 2000 version.  This seems to give more weight to the directive.

             In Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America: we find:

“…careful planning should be undertaken so that: enough bread and wine are made ready for the communication of the faithful at each Mass.  As a general rule, Holy Communion is given from hosts consecrated at the same Mass and not from those reserved in the tabernacle” Norms, 30].

 Q:         What do we do if too many hosts (more than will be needed for the sick) have been consecrated?

 A:         This should happen only rarely.  More care should be taken to make an accurate estimate before Mass begins. (This should really be a priority!)  That way, there will not be a “build up” of consecrated hosts in the tabernacle, and it will not be necessary to distribute the previously consecrated hosts as a way of diminishing the surplus.

As for what to do with extra consecrated elements after the Communion of the Faithful, the GIRM 2000 says: “When the distribution of Communion is finished, the priest himself immediately and completely consumes at the altar any consecrated wine that happens to remain; as for any consecrated hosts that are left, he either consumes them at the altar or carries them to the place designated for the reservation of the Eucharist” [163].  The Norms say: “…the consecrated bread that remains is to be reserved in the tabernacle” [Norms, 51].

On the very rare occasion that a relatively large number of hosts (beyond the needs of the sick and for adoration) have been consecrated at a previous Mass, and in order that they be respectfully consumed before they become stale,  the following is suggested in Introduction to the Order of Mass: A Pastoral Resource of the Bishops ’ Committee on the Liturgy: “If it is necessary to use the hosts consecrated from a previous Mass, a priest or deacon should bring the reserved sacrament to the altar from the tabernacle, reverently but without ceremony” [Introduction, 21, paragraph 3, emphasis added].

Q:         I’m pretty sure that I know when to stand and sit during the Introductory Rites and the Liturgy of the Word.  But I’m confused about our postures during the Liturgy of the Eucharist.  Do we stand from the “Pray, brothers and sisters…” until after we receive Communion?

 A:         No.  In the dioceses of the United States of America, we stand from the “Pray, brothers and sisters…” through the Preface until the end of the Holy (Sanctus).  Then we kneel until after the Great Amen.  We stand again for the Lord’s Prayer, and (in the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston) remain standing until we return from receiving Communion.  Then (again, in the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston) we may remain standing, kneel, or sit, according to parish custom and personal choice, until everyone has received Communion. At this time everyone sits, including the priest celebrant, for a time of prayer (or a song of praise).  We stand again for the “Let us pray” (which calls us to the Prayer after Communion), remain standing for the parish announcements and continue standing until the end of Mass.

Q:         Are there any exceptions to the kneeling from the end of the Sanctus to the end of the Great Amen?

 A:         The exceptions given in the GIRM 2000 are: “reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason” [40].  So, a different posture (most likely standing) would be permitted in unusual circumstances, but not as a regular practice. 

Q:         What should we do if we’re in one of these exceptional circumstances, and we are standing instead of kneeling?

 A:         “Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration” [43].        

 Q:         What if one is worshiping in a church or chapel where there are no kneelers?

 A:         On the one hand, the GIRM specifies kneeling, but says nothing about kneelers. On the other hand, if you find yourself at Mass in a church or chapel without kneelers, it would probably be better to be in a unity with the posture of the other worshipers.

Q:         According to the new GIRM, what is the proper posture for the deacon during the Eucharistic Prayer?

 A:         In Chapter IV, under the heading “B. Mass with a Deacon,”  the GIRM states:

During the Eucharistic Prayer, the deacon stands near the priest but slightly behind him, so that when needed he may assist the priest with the chalice or the Missal. From the epiclesis until the priest shows the chalice, the deacon normally remains kneeling [179].At the final doxology of the Eucharistic Prayer, the deacon stands next to the priest, holding the chalice elevated while the priest elevates the paten with the host, until the people have responded with the acclamation, Amen [18

Q:         Epiclesis? Doxology? 

A:         The epiclesis (a Greek word, pronounced ep-i-KLEE-sis or e-PICK-le-sis) is the invocation of the power of the Holy Spirit for both the transformation of the gifts of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, and the unity of those who will partake of the Body and Blood of Christ.  It begins after (but not immediately after) the Sanctus and continues after the institution narrative (the recalling of the Last Supper) and the words of consecration (“This is my body…This is the cup of my blood…”).  The epiclesis begins at slightly different times after the Sanctus, depending on which Eucharistic Prayer is being prayed.  Here are the beginning words of the epiclesis in Eucharistic Prayers I-IV and Eucharistic Prayers for Masses of Reconciliation I & II:

Eucharistic Prayer I (Roman Canon): “Bless and approve our offering…”

Eucharistic Prayer II:  “Let your Spirit come upon these gifts…”

Eucharistic Prayer III:  “And so, Father, we bring you these gifts…”

Eucharistic Prayer IV: “”Father, may this Holy Spirit sanctify these offerings…”

            Reconciliation I:   “Look with kindness on your people…”

                                    Reconciliation II:  “We ask you to sanctify these gifts…”

A doxology (also a Greek word) is a hymn or prayer of praise, usually in worship the Triune God.

Sometimes a conclusion to a prayer uses words of praise and glory and invokes the Trinity, and this kind

of a conclusion is also called a doxology.  The doxology referred to in GIRM #180 is the “Through Him,

with Him, in Him…” to which all respond “Amen.” 

Q:         Getting back to the deacon – according to the “directions” given in GIRM 2000, 179-180, it seems that the deacon is supposed to kneel a little after the assembly  kneels and stands a little sooner than the assembly stands (so that he can elevate the chalice during the doxology).  What if it is too difficult (physically) for the deacon to kneel and then get up for the elevation of the chalice?  

A:         Then the deacon should remain standing throughout the Eucharistic Prayer (and make a profound bow when the priest genuflects). Remember the maxim “nemo tenetur ad impossibilem” – no one is bound to the impossible.  If kneeling is physically impossible or seriously inconvenient (serious arthritis, broken leg, knee replacement etc), than one is not bound to kneel – deacon or not.

Q:         The GIRM 2000 says that the text of the Gloria is not to be replaced by other texts [53]. What is that all about?  We would never replace the Gloria with another text or song.

 A:         This hasn’t really been an issue in the United States.  This prohibition may have been aimed at the practice of substituting a text or song of praise for the Gloria in some European countries (notably Germany).

Q:         Sometimes we omit the Gloria. Is that allowed? 

A.         The Gloria “is sung or said on Sundays outside the Seasons of Advent and Lent, on solemnities and feasts, and at special celebrations of a more solemn character” [GIRM 2000, 53].

Q:         Why do we omit the Gloria on the Sundays of Advent and Lent? 

A:         The Season of Advent is “a period for devout and joyful expectation” [General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar, 39].  So, holding back in anticipation, we omit the Gloria during this season.  Then, when we sing this ancient hymn again at the Masses of Christmas, we appreciate in a new way its “tidings of comfort and joy” and its connection to the seasonal gospels.  During the season of Lent, one of our penitential and anticipatory practices is “fasting” from both the Gloria and the Alleluia.

 Even during these two seasons, there are exceptions: we sing or recite the Gloria on the solemnities of the Immaculate Conception (December 8) and Our Lady of Guadalupe (December 12), Saint Joseph (March 19) and the Annunciation of the Lord (March 25).  It is interesting to note that even when we sing the Gloria on the two solemnities that occur during Lent, we don’t sing the Alleluia on those days.

Q:         It seems inconsistent to recite the Gloria. It is, after all, a hymn of praise. Is it OK to skip the Gloria, rather than recite it, on Sundays of the Christmas Season, the Easter Season, or in Ordinary Time?

 A:         Neither the previous GIRM, the GIRM 2000, nor the rubrics in the present English translation of the Roman Missal offer this as an option.  “If not sung, it is to be recited either by all together or by two parts of the congregation responding one to the other” [GIRM 2000, 53]. However, regarding the Alleluia, that celebratory acclamation may be omitted if it is not sung [63].

Q:         Does the new GIRM say anything else about the Gloria? 

A:         Yes; “The Gloria is intoned by the priest, or if appropriate, by a cantor or by the choir; but it is sung either by everyone together, or by the people alternately with the choir, or by the choir alone” [53].  When using some settings of the Gloria, this might require a little adaptation.

Q:         What is the “Act of Penitence” referred to in the Introductory Rites of the Mass in the GIRM 2000?

 A:         This is the English translation of what was called the Penitential Rite in the previous GIRM.

Q:         The GIRM 2000 specifies that the words of absolution used by the priest at the conclusion of the Act of Penitence “lacks the efficacy of the Sacrament of Penance” [51].  Is this something new? 

A:         This isn’t a new concept, but rather a clarification.

Q:         Haven’t we been taught that the Eucharist wipes away venial sin? 

A:         We still hold the belief that the Eucharist wipes away venial sin [see Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1393-1394].

 Q:         And grave sin? 

A:         We also believe that the Eucharist is “not ordered to the forgiveness of mortal sins – that is proper to the Sacrament of Reconciliation” [CCC 1395].    

Q:         What is different about the words of absolution used at Mass and the words used during the celebration of the Sacrament of Penance/Reconciliation? 

A:         At Mass, the words used by the priest at the conclusion of the Act of Penitence are: “May almighty God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to everlasting life.”  While saying these words, the priest does not make the Sign of the Cross over the people.  In the celebration of the sacrament of Penance, the words of absolution are: “…through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”  While using this Trinitarian formula, the priest makes the Sign of the Cross over the penitent.  This seems more formal, in wording and in gesture – and indeed it is the “form” in the Sacrament of Penance.

Q:         I notice that many people make the Sign of the Cross during those words of absolution at Mass.  Is this necessary? 

A:         Neither the previous GIRM, the GIRM 2000, nor the rubrics in the Roman Missal call for this gesture.  The gesture isn’t forbidden, either, but when it is done, an observer might be led to believe that this absolution has the same “efficacy as the Sacrament of Penance.”

Q:         The GIRM 2000 refers to the importance of silence before the liturgy.  Is this new? 

A:         The practice of observing some silence before the liturgy is certainly not new, and most people through the ages have instinctively realized the value of some quiet time in preparation for worship.  What is new in the GIRM 2000 is that the following has been added to what had been stated in the previous GIRM regarding silence at certain points during the liturgy:

“Even before the celebration itself, it is commendable that silence be observed in the church, in the sacristy, in the vesting room, and in adjacent areas, so that all may dispose themselves to carry out the sacred action in a devout and fitting manner” [45].     

Q:         I thought we were just beginning to recognize the importance of hospitality before the Mass.  Now we’re supposed to have silence.  Complete silence? 

A:         Hospitality is not necessarily boisterous.  A choice does not need to be made between extending genuine hospitality and encouraging an atmosphere of reverence.  Providing the opportunity for all to make the transition from the noisy distractions, claims, and demands of the everyday world can be an act of supreme hospitality.  On the other hand, it doesn’t seem that the GIRM 2000 is demanding complete and total silence, since it says “it is commendable that silence be observed,” rather than “silence must be observed.” 

Q:         What about things like recited prayers, and music practice, and announcements before Mass? 

A:         Some parishes may have the custom of reciting certain devotional prayers before Mass (for example, the Rosary).  This ought to be something which helps the members of the assembly to prepare their minds and hearts for the Mass.  The Sunday liturgy is, after all, the prayer par excellence, Christ’s very prayer which the Church prays “through with and in Him, in the unity of the Holy Spirit” to the Father.  Such a practice of oral prayer before Mass ought to be approved by the pastor and agreed upon by a large number of the parishioners, lest it become a source of division.  So that others who might want to prepare for Mass in a different way (reading the scriptures for example) may do so, it would be a good idea to make sure that the recited prayers are completed about ten minutes before Mass is to begin.

If a music practice is for the benefit of the entire assembly, so that all might feel confident in participating in the singing, then this would be a worthy and hospitable thing to do.  The practice ought to be efficient (brief).

Ideally, music practices/warm-ups for cantors, choir, instrumentalists, etc. should take place in another space, if possible, rather than in the worship area. If another space is not available, the practice should be completed well in advance of Mass time – at least 20 minutes would be good.   

If an emergency announcement would need to be made before Mass (for example:  “There is a car in the parking lot with the lights on….”) it should not be made at the ambo.  Regular parish announcements are more appropriately made following the Prayer after Communion.