Female altar servers at Latin Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter LindaCapp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
estesbob said:
The Pope did not roll the clock back to 1962. He merely allowed for the Tridentine mass to be said. The rubrics of 2007 apply to all masses celebrated regardless of what form they take.
Click to expand...
estesbob said:
The pope said nothing about returning to the rubrics of 1962.
Click to expand...
You are confusing canon law and mass rubrics. The rubrics of the OF do not factor into the celebration of the EF and vice-versa. That is not to say I agree with those who think canon law trumps traditional practice in the EF. I believe these issues have yet to be clearly worked out. I do not think the Pope had in mind turning the TLM into the N.O. when he freed it from its previous constraints. Judging from the following statement from his explanatory letter accompanying the MP, he seems to have a different idea of the direction of influence:“The celebration of the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI will be able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage. The most sure guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives. This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal.”
 
Cranch said:
You are confusing canon law and mass rubrics. The rubrics of the OF do not factor into the celebration of the EF and vice-versa. That is not to say I agree with those who think canon law trumps traditional practice in the EF. I believe these issues have yet to be clearly worked out. I do not think the Pope had in mind turning the TLM into the N.O. when he freed it from its previous constraints. Judging from the following statement from his explanatory letter accompanying the MP, he seems to have a different idea of the direction of influence:“The celebration of the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI will be able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage. The most sure guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives. This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal.”
Click to expand...
The letter says aboslutely nothing about using the rubrics of 1962.
 
estesbob said:
The letter says aboslutely nothing about using the rubrics of 1962.
Click to expand...
Never said it did. I quoted the letter to illustrate my opinion of the Pope’s thoughts on the possible influence of one form of mass on the other, not to make a point about rubrics. The Motu Proprio says it, though. That’s what “celebrating the mass following the typical edition of 1962” means. The missal’s rubrics instruct how to celebrate the mass. The OF has a different missal, different rubrics. My original objection was to your conflation of rubrics with canon law. They are two different things.
 
estesbob said:
I doubt the Church fathers would ever dreamed that mess would be celebrated in a language foreign to the participants.

The Pope did not roll the clock back to 1962. He merely allowed for the Tridentine mass to be said. The rubrics of 2007 apply to all masses celebrated regardless of what form they take. I suspect that there will be few if any Tridentine masses that will have f altar girls or give communion in the hand. But there is nothing to keep a priest from doing so. In addition the Vatican has said in no uncertain terms that you must give communion to a person whether they want in their hand or in their mouth. That is not the discretion of the Priest
Click to expand...
That may happen if a Novus Ordo priest celebrates the TLM but when an FSSP or Christ the King priest celebrate the TLM the rubrics of 1962 will be enforced. There is no way that my FSSP priest would give someone communion in the hand or have an altar girl. He would have to be ordered to do so by the Bishop and even then he might resist. This is why he became as FSSP priest.
 
Sure said:
St. Maria,

Did you ever receive documentation from your FSSP priest on his opinion that Communion in the hand is not permitted and that he would refuse to offer Communion in that manner?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
No. I have never heard back from the main office of the FSSP just my local priest. I would like to hear something definite on this. I cringe at the thought of the TLM being forced to abide by the rubrics of the Novus Ordo.
 
The letter says aboslutely nothing about using the rubrics of 1962.
Click to expand...
Sure it does. The missal contains the rubrics; they are part of it, as much as the text of any prayer, antiphon or reading.
 
This interview has just been posted in another thread

catholic.org/diocese/diocese_story.php?id=25761

CARDINAL ARINZE
“There are some people in the church, however, who prefer the former way in which the Mass was celebrated** because it nourished their spirituality more**. This document is issued to say to them, “All right. You can have it.” The pope calls it the extraordinary form. The way we have said Mass these 40 years is the ordinary form, presuming the priest is following what is in the books and is not adding or subtracting anything”

If communion in the hand and altar girls and pop music ect were forced into the TLM then my spirituality would NOT be nourished. It would be confused and bewildered.
 
No priest celebrating the extraordinary Mass would allow a female altar girl.

As for Communion in the hand, that is not in the rubrics of the extraordinary Mass. And that is why the FSSP exists because these priests could not in good conscience read the New Mass with all its crazy permissions. One is Communion in the hand.

Dr. P. Lugmayr FSSP points out in his booklet that communion in the hand as practiced now was never practiced in the early Church. What is now done in the New Mass with communion in the hand is an innovation and aberration and the Church will eventually forbid it. In the early Church practice, the Host was placed in the right hand, since the right is the superior side according to ancient tradition and the host was consumed from that hand with careful licking of it only after He was adored. In other words the hand served as a kind of paten. But the Church in her wisdom and due to abuses wanted to protect our Lord and eventually had communion only on the tongue and eventually metal patens were held under the chin in order to try to prevent the accidental dropping of the Host.
 
EHMCs are also not allowed in the Extraordinary Mass. That was the whole point of the establishment of traditional orders and monasteries by the Pope’s approbation. These priests and monks
could not in good conscience participate in such aberrations.

Yes, they may be allowed in the New Mass, but it doesn’t mean they are required for even the ordinary Mass.

EHMCs will also be outlawed one day.
 
The Holy Father Needs to act quickly in this circumstance before the LIBBYS deconstruct the Traditional rite.
 
stmaria said:
That may happen if a Novus Ordo priest celebrates the TLM but when an FSSP or Christ the King priest celebrate the TLM the rubrics of 1962 will be enforced. There is no way that my FSSP priest would give someone communion in the hand or have an altar girl. He would have to be ordered to do so by the Bishop and even then he might resist. This is why he became as FSSP priest.
Click to expand...
Rome spoke with absolutely no uncertainty about the ability, or lack of ability of a priest to refuse communion to someone kneeling. Given that the the issue was over kneeling as opposed to standing which was the new norm, I would not want to be the priest that gets reported to Rome for denying someone Communion during an EF; not unless I was willing for Rome to have my guts for garters.

Communion in the hand, while by indult, is permitted. Given that it is specifically permitted, and kneeling, which resulted in someone being denied Communion, was not specifically permitted, it is beyond a stretch of the imagination that Rome would tolerate a priest refusing Communion in a manner specifically permitted. Rome was clear to say that denial of Communion is a sanction in Canon law and the priest does not have the ability to impose such a sanction for such an action (non-specifically permiited kneeling). It is even less likely that Rome would tolerate the imposition of a canonical sanction for a permitted means of reception.

This has nothing to do with a bishop’s requirement; it has to do with the imposition of a canonical penalty. My bets are the FSSP may not be as acquainted wtih Canon law as he might need to be to make such a determination.
 
stmaria said:
No. I have never heard back from the main office of the FSSP just my local priest. I would like to hear something definite on this. I cringe at the thought of the TLM being forced to abide by the rubrics of the Novus Ordo.
Click to expand...
There is no need to cringe. It is how Communion was received for several centuries. It is not like it is some innovation.
 
EHMCs are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

Yes, the way communion in the hand is practiced is an aberation and innovation. In the early Church where it was practiced, the Host was placed in the right hand, not the left as the current instructions say, and it was consumed without the communicant touching it with the other hand.

Yes, the current practice will also be outlawed when our bishops finally love our Lord and care more about His safety more than the wishes of men.
 
Leeta said:
EHMCs are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.Yes, the current practice will also be outlawed when our bishops finally love our Lord and care more about His safety more than the wishes of men.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Leeta. I’m curious – how is our Lord’s safety compromised by reception of the Eucharist in the hand? I had not hear of this danger before.
 
Cranch said:
Summorum Pontificum, in article 1 says:It is, therefore, permissible to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated.
The use (and behavior) of EMHCs in the OF is governed by specific rubrics as well as canon law. There are no corresponding rubrics in the EF. EMHCs cannot be simply injected into the TLM willy-nilly. They cannot be used there and not only because the chalice is not offered to the congregation.
Click to expand...
It might be helpful for you to go back and read some of the earlier posts. Yes, the rubrics of the 1962 Missal are in force. However, the rubrics of 1962 do not cover the sex of the altar server nor who may distribute Communion, nor if Communion may be received in the hand. These things are all covered by canon law, which in 1962 did not allow them. But today’s canon law does allow them and so they are permitted. Even traditionalist priest Fr. Z admits that it is true (read post 91 in this thread).

If you have any documentation that the rubrics of 1962 specifically prohibit these things, please post them.

And just to be clear, no one is advocating the adoption of these permitted practices, we are just defining what the Church actually teaches.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top