Women...

[morostheos]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Sep 26 2005, 03:07 PM']the Church prefers males only at the altar.  she prefers first and foremost that stable ministries be used in the service of the altar.  she only allows men to be admitted to these stable ministries (acolyte, lector, cantor)

in cases when these stable ministries are not available, she allows an extraordinary use of laypeople with a quasi-ministry (reader, altar server, music director)

she promotes the use of altar boys to serve after the manner of the acolyte.  she allows altar servers as well in the case of people with stable ministries not being available.  but altar boys may be used even with an acolyte there because that practice is PROMOTED, the other one is grudgingly allowed for cases of necessty.

References:
[url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html"]Redemptionis Sacramentum[/url] # 44, #45, #47

There are other documents to illustrate the point I'm sure, but I don't have time to look for them right now.  However, the stable ministries of that altar which are prefered and alone can be used ORDINARILY are reserved to men.  It is clear the Church still promotes a gender differentiation between the role of those on the altar being people with priest-potential and the people in the congregation to be laity.
[right][snapback]737969[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Not all of your points were in Redemptoris Sacramentum. It makes mention that the practice of boy altar servers is laudably retained, but it says no where that girl altar servers are only grudgingly allowed, or that they are allowed only to solve the problem of disobedient dioceses which allowed girl altar servers. While Mother Teresa might not have agreed with him, I think it is very unlike John Paul II to have written an instruction to appease the disobedient.

Also, it makes no mention of whether it is preferable to have male or female readers. As the practice of female readers is quite widespread, I would think if it was such an important issue it would have been mentioned.

Edited September 28, 2005 by morostheos

[Aloysius]

you fail to see the distinction made between LECTORS which are preferred and READERS which are merely allowed.

Anyway, to understand my invoking of those numbers of Redemptionis, you have to understand the nature of a stable ministry such as the minor orders supressed by Paul VI (except for the indult societies) and an unstable extraordinary ministry.

[quote][43.] For the good of the community and of the whole Church of God, some of the lay faithful according to tradition have rightly and laudably exercised [b]ministries [/b]in the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy.[109] It is appropriate that a number of persons distribute among themselves and exercise various [b]ministries [/b]or different parts of the same ministry.[110]

[44.] Apart from the [b]duly instituted ministries[/b] of acolyte and lector,[111] the most important of these ministries are those of acolyte[112] and lector[113] by [i]temporary [/i]deputation. In addition to these are the other functions that are described in the Roman Missal,[114] as well as the functions of preparing the hosts, washing the liturgical linens, and the like. All, “whether ordained ministers or lay faithful, in exercising their own [b]office or ministry [/b]should do exclusively and fully that which pertains to them”.[115] In the liturgical celebration itself as well as in its preparation, they should do what is necessary so that the Church’s Liturgy will be carried out worthily and appropriately.

[45.] To be avoided is the danger of obscuring the complementary relationship between the action of clerics and that of laypersons, in such a way that the [b]ministry [/b]of laypersons undergoes what might be called a certain “clericalization”, while the sacred ministers inappropriately assume those things that are proper to the life and activity of the lay faithful.[116[/quote]

I emphasized all the uses of the word "ministry" to illustrate this point. When rome talks about a ministry she is talking about a stable ministry unless she otherwise indicates by the term "extraordinary" or "by temporary deputation"

It mentions first and preferentially duly instituted ministries of acolyte and lector, and then mentions "acolyte[112] and lector[113] by [i]temporary[/i] deputation". It's something temporary, something extraordinary and not for ordinary use.

All this is illustrating the point that Rome prefers the stable ministries (to which she allows only males). She also treats the practice of altar boys preferentially. It is obvious in the way it is mentioned, first and foremost laudably praising excessibely the practice of altar boys and putting a small aside at the very end. #47 seems designed as an argument for altar boys only with a small allowance for the decision ultimately to be made by the bishop.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that Rome prefers male [i]readers[/i], I'm arguing she prefers LECTORS (which can only be male) over READERS (which are extraordinarily to be used by temporary deputation in case of necessity and can be either male or female)

And it most certainly is like the excessively-pastoral John Paul II to issue a decree to appease people already disobeying on a matter of discipline that he deems not to be too essential.

[morostheos]

The thing about it is that duly instituted acolytes and lectors are EXTREMELY uncommon, at least in the United States. In my entire life, I've never met one. Therefore, readers take their place.

Also, judging from what someone else posted in this topic from EWTN, it is not a common process for those not on their way to priesthood to be instituted as acolytes or lectors. I would agree that this is something that should be promoted much more, but as it is not currently the case and pretty much all with have in the U.S. are readers, not lectors, I don't see how men are preferable over women.

[morostheos]

double post

Edited September 29, 2005 by morostheos

[dspen2005]

as my own personal preference -- i think women should not be in the sanctuary of the church.... :applause:

[Socrates]

[quote name='dspen2005' date='Sep 28 2005, 10:24 PM']as my own personal preference -- i think women should not be in the sanctuary of the church....  :applause:
[right][snapback]740613[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

This has always been the Church's teaching, it's not just your personal preference.

[dspen2005]

really?? then why is having women lectors ubiquitous practically??? even in the Vatican Basilica?

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Sep 28 2005, 11:39 PM']This has always been the Church's teaching, it's not just your personal preference.
[right][snapback]740631[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
when you live in Richmond diocese, personal preference has a lot to do with it. Sometimes the only way we get to see things done right is when the priest's personal preference is towards that same goal.

Things [i]are[/i] getting better though.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='morostheos' date='Sep 28 2005, 10:56 PM']The thing about it is that duly instituted acolytes and lectors are EXTREMELY uncommon, at least in the United States.  In my entire life, I've never met one.  Therefore, readers take their place.

Also, judging from what someone else posted in this topic from EWTN, it is not a common process for those not on their way to priesthood to be instituted as acolytes or lectors.  I would agree that this is something that should be promoted much more, but as it is not currently the case and pretty much all with have in the U.S. are readers, not lectors, I don't see how men are preferable over women.
[right][snapback]740582[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I never intended to label the use of readers, male and female, as an abuse at the PARISH level. the failure lies with the bishops who have not, in the DECADES since Paul VI supressed the minor orders for the sake of stable lay ministries, duly instituted enough acolytes.

It is up to the Bishops to come more in line with the intentions of Vatican II and of Paul VI and Rome for the past 4 decades. Until then, when stable ministries are not available, we use unstable ministries. This is not supposed to be an ordinary thing.

parishes are correct for using readers and extraordinary ministers of holy communion and singers in the abscence of real lectors, acolytes, and cantors. but the Church as a whole ought to be producing more lectors, acolytes, and cantors if it wants to keep in line with Rome's prefered and dictated norms.

[morostheos]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Sep 29 2005, 01:08 AM']I never intended to label the use of readers, male and female, as an abuse at the PARISH level.  the failure lies with the bishops who have not, in the DECADES since Paul VI supressed the minor orders for the sake of stable lay ministries, duly instituted enough acolytes.

It is up to the Bishops to come more in line with the intentions of Vatican II and of Paul VI and Rome for the past 4 decades.  Until then, when stable ministries are not available, we use unstable ministries.  This is not supposed to be an ordinary thing.

parishes are correct for using readers and extraordinary ministers of holy communion and singers in the abscence of real lectors, acolytes, and cantors.  but the Church as a whole ought to be producing more lectors, acolytes, and cantors if it wants to keep in line with Rome's prefered and dictated norms.
[right][snapback]740657[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I agree.

[morostheos]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Sep 29 2005, 12:39 AM']This has always been the Church's teaching, it's not just your personal preference.
[right][snapback]740631[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Could you please point out where this is definitive Church teaching?

[Theoketos]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Sep 23 2005, 11:33 AM']I find women readers annoying.
[right][snapback]735301[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


I just find readers annoying. That they are woman does not bother me.

O Lord save the liturgy!

[Aloysius]

exactly. reader is not an office that demands so much respect that we ought to be annoyed if someone without the potential for ordination takes it on... it's merely reading.

[dspen2005]

[quote name='morostheos' date='Sep 29 2005, 10:24 AM']Could you please point out where this is definitive Church teaching?
[right][snapback]740911[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

yes.. Socrates we are waiting.......

[Sarah_JC]

I think the reason we're getting arguments is because of this:
(or at least the reason I'm getting mad)

People who are arguing for male only lectors etc... are generally being extremely demeaning to the value of 52% of the population.
Please stop using feminizing for a synonymn for weakening. The word you're looking for is effeminite.

If the Church was becoming more feminine it'd be a good thing. The Church is supposed to be feminine. It's the Bride of Christ.

Since the Church has become more effeminite( which is similar to the word emasculate) it has lost some of it's feminine qualities, which is becoming a problem.
Beauty - In my diocese there are new churches in the suburbs that are really... ugly. And mass parts not being sung is such a wasted oppourtunity.
Submissiveness- many of the faithful seem unwilling to allow God to care for them. Birth control is the only example coming to mind, but there must be more.
Mystery- I guess the non-Latin liturgys lack a certain bit of mystery. But the language of the people seems to allow people to understand better, and I don't want to go back to people having to pray the rosary in mass because they don't understand... but...

I guess 3 examples will illustrate my point. Maybe the Church is becoming too masculine for HER own good?