Women...

[Aloysius]

lectors have never been and currently are not permitted to be women. we've established this and I believe that was what Socrates was referring to.

anyone can be a reader. that is an unstable ministry by temporary deputation for when there are no lectors available.

and when they say "feminization" of the liturgy, they mean to say that less and less men and more and more women are being seen in active roles on the altar. Not only is this troubling to liturgical symbolism as I mentioned before, but since studies show that men naturally tend to be less inclined towards attending religious events, taking away their big visible manly role models is not a good thing. We need an altar full of testosterone (not gross fluffy air extraction scratch and beltch testosterone, mind you, but natural levels) to show not only the liturgical male/female symbolism I explained above, but also to show real men that religion isn't just for sissies.

[hierochloe]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Sep 22 2005, 05:32 PM']I find women lectors annoying.
[right][snapback]734425[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Sep 23 2005, 11:33 AM']I find women readers annoying.
[right][snapback]735301[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Hehe, sounds like a personal problem tbh.

Completely agree with Oik, we males could use more charity in the way some of us express criticism of how these roles are ordinarily/extraordinarily filled.

Seriously though, I'm glad I finally read through this thread. I'm a complete ignoramus to the true nature of lector/cantor/acolyte roles.

[Oik]

[quote]Could you please point out where this is definitive Church teaching?[/quote]

???
You mean like a doctrine or dogma? I think whoat you mean to say is can you please point out where the church has taught this.

It is in Cannon law. I also, in this thread provided a Q and A from EWTN.

I hope this helps,
Chelsea

[Oik]

[quote]People who are arguing for male only lectors etc... are generally being extremely demeaning to the value of 52% of the population.[/quote]

sarah, I beseech you, please, not to indulge in such assumptions. The Church teaches that males can only be Lectors. Now, this much is fact. Al is right in his assessments.


[quote]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.[/quote]

Here, think propose claritfication on both parties. It is a well know fact that modern man uses the word 'feminine' to mean women embracing their own natures in realtion to sex.

I would interject here that when the word 'feminine' is used in this thread, it is done so in the Chestertonian way: that is to say to describe an ideology that has crept in, even infused itself and made itself synonomous (sp) with 'feminist.'

[quote]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...[/quote]

Your points are kindly taken.

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

???

[morostheos]

[quote name='Oik' date='Sep 29 2005, 04:33 PM']???
You mean like a doctrine or dogma? I think whoat you mean to say is can you please point out where the church has taught this.

It is in Cannon law. I also, in this thread provided a Q and A from EWTN.

I hope this helps,
Chelsea
[right][snapback]741201[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Socrates said it has always been Church teaching that women are not allowed in the sanctuary, and therefore should never be readers...

I was asking him to back this up in some way.

I know women can't be lectors, but there is no mention anywhere that they cannot be readers.

In Christ,
Claire

[stargirl3:16]

I think that one of the reasons there is such confusion is the terminology.
For the longest time, the lector was the person who got up and did the readings. I did not know that there was a distinction between a lector and a reader, and I bet that I'm not the only one.

I do the readings at my church and at college. I've been told that I'm good at it, and I like doing it. However, if the Church were to only allow men to do it, I would be willing to accept it.

[toledo_jesus]

I like the Easterners and their approach.

Where is Apotheoun? He needs to come in and remind us how awesome the Byzantines are. :

[Aloysius]

[quote name='stargirl3:16' date='Sep 29 2005, 05:30 PM']I think that one of the reasons there is such confusion is the terminology.
For the longest time, the lector was the person who got up and did the readings. I did not know that there was a distinction between a lector and a reader, and I bet that I'm not the only one.

I do the readings at my church and at college. I've been told that I'm good at it, and I like doing it. However, if the Church were to only allow men to do it, I would be willing to accept it.
[right][snapback]741271[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
if a real lector were to be available and present himself, you ought to defer to him. otherwise, there is nothing wrong with you being a reader. You needn't defer to a male reader or anything, but a lector automatically overrules you. You have temporary deputation, a lector has a stable ministry.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Sep 29 2005, 06:48 PM']I like the Easterners and their approach.

Where is Apotheoun?  He needs to come in and remind us how awesome the Byzantines are.  :
[right][snapback]741331[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
yeah, like the byzantines down the road from us who, last time I went, everyone serving at the altar besides the preist was a woman.

the byzantine church in america from my experience (or at least some of them) are about as disobedient as we were being prior to JPII saying female altar servers were allowed for us.

eh... american catholics... can't live with 'em, can't throw 'em in a volcano.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Sarah_JC' date='Sep 29 2005, 11:50 AM']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?
[right][snapback]741063[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

This post is evidence you did not carefully read my entire posts on this thread, because you are completely misconstruing what I said there.
Did you even read beyond the first sentence about the "feminization of the Church"? It doesn't appear so. My post was not at all a general attack on women or femininity, like you make it out to be. It's quite annoying when people read a line or two of a post, get upset, then go off on an angry rant (which has little to do with what was actually stated).

Maybe "emasculation of the Church" would be a better term, but I didn't invent the term. "Feminization" here refers to female dominance, or lack of masculine presence (as in the situation where it is mostly women who are involved in religious activities or attend mass.) If those involved in a parish are 80% women (in a place where there are an even number of men and women), this indicates a problem. Catholics should maybe stop back and think, "Why aren't men attending mass, etc.?"
Conversely, if Church membership or activity was disproportionately male, and women were avoiding church, this would also be a problem. However, this is not the case as far as I am aware.

The emasculisation and effeminization of the priesthood, etc. is both a root cause and a product of this problem.

The problem is NOT that the Church has become "too masculine for its own good." If that were the case, men would be flocking to the pews like they were football stadium bleachers, and women would be driven away.
The problems you mention really have little to with the Church being "over-masculine." Ugliness, dissent, etc. are really not specifically male qualities.

Women have their place in the Church (albeit not at the altar), and true feminity (something the dissenting feminist nuns and such lack) is to be encouraged.
My beef is with feminist-type arguments that the Church needs to change the liturgy to be more "female-centered," and that we need to focus more on "the feminine aspects of Christ," etc, while arguing that women "feel alienated" by the Church. It seems the truth is that more men are being alienated by effeminacy and feminism in the Church.

Hope this clears up a few things!

[Socrates]

[quote name='morostheos' date='Sep 29 2005, 02:54 PM']Socrates said it has always been Church teaching that women are not allowed in the sanctuary, and therefore should never be readers...

I was asking him to back this up in some way.

I know women can't be lectors, but there is no mention anywhere that they cannot be readers.

In Christ,
Claire
[right][snapback]741212[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

There is no "official" Church teaching that there can be no female "readers," (who normally are OUTSIDE the sanctuary), but the whole position of "reader" is a fairly recent one.

And we have a long tradition of women NOT reading or performing other such roles in the mass going back to the beginning. This tradition should be respected and not casually overturned or disregarded.

[hierochloe]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Sep 29 2005, 06:10 PM']Ugliness, dissent, etc. are really not specifically male qualities.
[right][snapback]741362[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Umm, everything sounded OK except for that, at least what it very candidly implies.

[Socrates]

[quote name='hierochloe' date='Sep 29 2005, 06:18 PM']Umm, everything sounded OK except for that, at least what it very candidly implies. 
[right][snapback]741368[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

They are neither truly masculine nor feminine. People need to stop trying to take everything I post as some kind of attack.

Edited September 29, 2005 by Socrates

[Aloysius]

lol... but girls ARE icky and ugly and have cooties! :

[dspen2005]

that's right... i'm glad someone is sane enough to recognize the REAL issue....