Extraordinary Form

[oopsorganist]

Do the altar servers at such a mass ie pre Vatican 2 have to be male?

[Becky]

They do, yes.

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/20 ... -old-mass/

[oopsorganist]

Thanks for that Becky.
There is no way I can get my head round that. Why one language should permit inclusion and the other be all discriminatory. Surely it is the same meaning in each activity.

[IncenseTom]

I'm not sure it's the language which is the defining factor.

[oopsorganist]

Er so,
What is the defining factor?

It's not institutional misogeny is it?
Or perhaps, re enactment accuracy?

What is it. Please tell me. I need to know.

http://www.dioceseofleeds.org.uk/news/2142

[alan29]

Its the liturgical rules for that form dating from before the word misogyny was current.
Got to say the use of the word "Triumph" in the headline of that link took me aback.

[IncenseTom]

Why one language should permit inclusion and the other be all discriminatory.

Well you can't blame inequality in terms of altar servers' gender on the fact that the Extraordinary Form is in Latin.

I think it's more to do with the rubrics, doctrine, norms etc surrounding how the liturgy was celebrated pre-Vatican II.

Plus, encouraging boys and young men into the priesthood, the institution of the priesthood, the priest being the only person who could touch the host, the hierarchy of Servers, MC, Sub-deacon, Deacon, Celebrant etc was all very 'male'.

I'm sure this is the sort of thing that would easily looked up in whatever the relevant books are. You'd get a clearer answer than I can provide.

[oopsorganist]

The article took me aback for other reasons.
The Bishop is glad for this service to be midday as he states that people should not have to attend Mass in the afternoon because this is "family time". So.

And yet, people with disabilities have their service mid afternoon. And last time, no priest came so there was no Mass. Here are the most vulnerable without a priest. Or even a Communion Minister to hold a thingy whatsit instead.

Sometimes when you apply Gospel values to the organisation of the church - things are lacking.

The phrase "Man enough for the job" also jars with me. It's such a struggle sometimes to love a church which fails to include. Me. And my friend with her enormous wheelchair. Many the people that yearn to belong......

[IncenseTom]

And yet, people with disabilities have their service mid afternoon. And last time, no priest came so there was no Mass. Here are the most vulnerable without a priest. Or even a Communion Minister to hold a thingy whatsit instead.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're referring to here.

The phrase "Man enough for the job" also jars with me. It's such a struggle sometimes to love a church which fails to include. Me. And my friend with her enormous wheelchair. Many the people that yearn to belong......

Surely they meant "people (men) who know how to serve the Old Rite"?

And just so people know, I was at the first EF Mass at St Joseph's, Bradford (which was well attended) and there was a lady in a wheelchair. So, I'm afraid I don't recognise your picture of the church - this particular celebration or the wider church - failing to include the disabled.

[oopsorganist]

Ah you were there then?
I was in Leeds at another Mass which failed to happen, as 'appens. No priest available you see. Mid afternoon. In my family time.

"Man enough for the job" is not a good phrase really. It's oppressive language.

[oopsorganist]

Ah
I googled. A little randomly perhaps. But different viewpoints came up for me to read.
So. All those roles - like readers, Eucharistic Ministers and so on, are delegated to the laity by the powers of authority. Nowadays, they can be delegated to males and females. This delegation can be revoked. It is just on loan. Altar servers are a bit different because they have always been there - but female altar servers are permitted by delegation and this too can be revoked.

In fact readers etc - these are doing bits of the celebrants work. But servers are assisting the priest. There are probably a lot of better words for all this.

So in the case of the Tridentine Mass the norms that exist now in the Mass - that bit where permission has been given for female altar servers - that bit has been revoked - where the case is that female altar servers are barred. Although there seem to be cases where female altar servers have somehow snuck in.

Or, the doctrines of the Tridentine Mass bar women from assisting and I would guess that would be in any role? I haven't googled that. I will do though.

The argument exists that male altar servers when assisting the priest are more likely to see a job opportunity. Our God is a God of tea towels after all.

And the other arguments being put forth for such discrimination, are that when girls assist the priest they are so much better at it that they put the boys off.

This being so, I guess the only certain and sure role for females is actually playing the organ or other musical contributions. Oooh, can you have female organists at a Tridentine Mass? I shall get googling!

[keitha]

I think the point is that female servers were authorised for the Ordinary Form and, at the time, no-one could see any need to consider the Extraordinary Form because it was so rarely used. It's rather like the positions of deacons and subdeacons. In the Ordinary Form priests cannot act as either, but in the Extraordinary Form they can 'take' both parts. Indeed, I cannot, in the days when the Extraordinary Form was the norm, recall a single High Mass when there was a 'real' deacon or subdeacon, which always struck me as a little odd.

[alan29]

I am not at all sure that readers and servers are taking delegated bits of the priests role.
They are minor orders in their own right - though only as a step in seminaries.
Surely Christians exercise ministries as a right by virtue of their baptism. The fact that some sections of the church seek to limit the ways in which they are exercised is an issue not totally to do with theology.

[oopsorganist]

I was reading more today. I found this
"The reasons why the rubrics 'in no way contemplate the possibility of female servers' is because female servers were restricted by the 1917 Code (c. 813, §2). The 1917 Code is now completely abrogated, along with the prohibition on female altar servers, in virtue of the promulgation of the 1983 Code (c. 6). This was confirmed by means of an authentic interpretation of c. 230, §2. Such interpretations have the same force as the law itself (c. 16, §2).

"Due to the above juridical considerations, I concluded: 'If female altar servers are employed in other celebrations of the Mass according to the ordinary form, there is no reason to restrict the use of female altar servers when utilizing the 1962 Roman Missal on the basis of abrogated liturgical discipline. Of course, the liturgical setting of the extraordinary form, and the sensibilities of the faithful would be especially important to consider when deciding whether to permit the use of female altar servers when celebrating according to the extraordinary form of the Roman rite. Nevertheless, the same disciplinary laws — the ius vigens — govern these two usages of the one Roman rite' (p. 79)."

the webpage article Follow-up: Female Servers in the Extraordinary Form [9-22-2009]
was on
Common Questions on Liturgical Norms.
www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/LITURIND.HTM

[oopsorganist]

Perhaps these two articles available online sum up the issues and debates around female altar servers, lay ministries and women's difficulties within the Catholic church so I will try to link them thus saving anyone reading the thread from confusion. (Oo, that must be a first )

For Canon Law -
Cardinal Burke On Female Altar Servers - Catholic Stand : Catholic ...
www.catholicstand.com/cardinal-burke-on ... ar-servers

The problems for women -
Will Francis Alter Roles, Rules Affecting Catholic Women? - VOA News
www.voanews.com/a/will-francis-alter-ro ... 71998.html