That is a good question. I’m sure if it were more widespread, the question would be addressed. But I would lean toward a yes, at least in many cases. Just as if a deacon is present, he should distribute communion before any EMHCs are used, an instituted lector should read before a “normal” layperson is called.
I do too. That would also be a load off of priests in bigger parishes who have to purify many vessels.
What does it matter what a woman is wearing? Would they say I could not read if I came straight to Mass from work wearing an EMS uniform or scrubs? What I wear does not change who I am or what’s in my heart (at least that’s what our Director of Liturgy and priest say), and it does not change how I approach the altar or the Eucharist.
Clothes DO matter. The priest, for example, is still the same person if he is up there at the altar wearing a bathrobe and slippers. His heart is still the same, he is not changed either. But the dignity of the Mass requires him to wear set attire.yt
There were no women priests, ever. In the early Church the only priest was the bishop, and it is clear with St. Paul’s Epistles that only men were bishops. Only later was the priesthood confered on the presbyters, but even before this time the presbyters (elders) were still only men.
I like how your mind worksThere in I think might lie the problem. My husband is a reader…but he would not want to read at EVERY Mass that he attends. In our parish…the readers are scheduled…so they can prepare ahead of time for the readings. And even then you don’t have people show up…sorry to say…mostly the men.
Well, I wouldn’t see it as a matter of being coarsely judged and condemned by apparel so much. Our Parish is small and Father Pérez ensures that every Mass is as reverent as it can possibly be. It’s just part of the culture and that’s why we love our parish.
I’m sorry, but this post made me laugh out loud.
But you need to make sure you are making a distinction when it comes to the priest. The priest (and other con-celebrants and Deacons) are required to wear certain vestments by the rubrics. On the other hand, the rubrics are silent as to what the appropriate wear is for any other ministers (readers and EMHC).
In the realm of possibility to require them to wear modest clothing appropriate for Church. Welcome to this Century, women are now allowed to wear pants or slacks and that is modest wear for them. To say “women shouldn’t wear pants” in this day and age is just downright silly.
All the same, you are there to assist the priest and serve in humility. If you don’t like the conditions the priest puts, then don’t do it.
For one, there could be many men instituted so that it’s not all on one or two men. And there could still be a schedule. It’s not as if a man would go to a different Mass than he usually goes to, and boot out the reader last minute, or be forced to read when he’s not prepared.
All these rules!!! I am amazed! Why do they matter??? OK, if the powers that be are really determined not to have women as priests, what can possibly be the objection to them READING in the mass? Or serving at the alter? Are women seen as unclean or something? I almost get the priest thing - altho’ I don’t agree with it - I see where your belief comes from… but why…I don’t know…(at the risk of sounding rude but I don’t mean to be - I can’t think of a phrase that sums up my thoughts better) - so much nit-picking!!!
because the office of lector is an office reserved to men alone. it’s just that simple.
No, it’s not that. Rather, we’re talking about the difference between a deputed minister and an instituted minister. The question primarily doesn’t come down to gender, but to the character of the ministry. In general, if there’s an ordained or instituted minister, then it is proper for him to perform the ministry appropriate to him. If there isn’t an instituted minister, then his ministry may be performed by another (e.g., a lay reader or a lay server).
It’s funny – when the Church doesn’t have a rule to answer a particular question, the criticism is “boy, you’d think you guys would have a rule!”, but when there is a rule, the reaction is often, “wow! you guys have lots of rules!”
Well, you’re right, in that your heart wouldn’t be in the wrong place. However, I think I would ask the question differently: in order to be a lector, you have to be prepared and should be properly disposed to perform the ministry (same thing for acolytes). If you’re running straight from work to Mass, and don’t have enough time to change clothes, isn’t that an indication that your ‘preparation’ is only the last minute or two before Mass? Isn’t it, then, preferable that someone who’s had the time to prepare and dispose himself more fully – without the rushing around that you seem to be implying – would be more appropriate to exercise the particular ministry at that particular Mass?
What if wearing work clothes means having enough time to prepare before Mass, but rushing to change clothes before Mass (to fit someone else’s idea of how one should look) leaves little or no time to prepare? This is my dilemma. I choose to prepare myself internally rather than externally. If my priest didn’t agree with this, he would have said something by now; and I would be able to be just another pew sitter.
There would be absolutely no advantage to permanently instituing acolytes and lectors unless the formation to institution was considerable. The purification of sacred vessels matter is simply not enough reason to permanetly institute acolytes given the potential downside of permanently instituting someone.
Why do you do all three liturgical ministries? I think one of the HUGE things hurting parishes are people that take on multiple liturgical ministries under the guise of “no one else will do it” while driving others away. That’s certainly the case in my parish. People are deeply entrenched and unless you happen to be one of them, good luck in becoming involved!
you can say that again. I’ve seen sacristies both ways, and the difference is palpable. I even had a friend’s mom (who helps clean altar linens and cassocks) that it’s sometimes a slightly weird feeling coming into the sacristy, because they *almost *feel out of place. However, next she said, without a breath, that that is the way it should be. It’s a sacristy. I can’t help but agree, at least in part. Maybe she didn’t phrase it as well as she could have, but the idea is still there.