Installation Mass for a Woman

[PaixGioiaAmor]

Thurifer, if you are still following this, keep in mind that 1) being anointed bishop does not presume that the individual thereby is endowed with liturgical expertise, and 2) much of what is set up liturgically for a bishop to do in a diocese is set up by others far in advance, and usually with little or no (name removed by moderator)ut by the bishop. That this was done in the manner reported is not necessarily a reflection on the bishop or his orthodoxy.

Much has been said elsewhwere (and should remain elsewhere and not derail this thread) about the liturgist for John Paul 2. Without arguing the rightness or wrongness of the liturgical celebrations JP2 had as he travelled around the world, it might be kept in mind that JP2 was anything but a fool and a simpleton, he was the pope, and some of the liturgical folderol was of questionable heritage. He was a good and great pope in spite of that. You might keep that in mind in viewing your bishop.

Not to mention that a bishop must be political as well, as much as we may not like to think of this.

If there is a tradition in the particular diocessan community for this, and the people expect it, a bishop has to evaluate how, if at all, objectionable this practice is.

A bishop may rightly conclude that as long as he’s not violating canon law and directly going against existing documents, he will continue a beloved practice, even if the general tenor of such a practice goes against his better judgement. This way, by using compromise in smaller matters, he can be sure to gain cooperation in bigger matters.

I don’t live in the diocese of Youngstown, Ohio, but I have been told that the former bishop didn’t seem to realize this - and thus this failure to realize this was part of the process that led him to basically request to be sent to any other diocese after he couldn’t get cooperation from the clergy and faithful on even the most basic of initiatives.

 

[THurifer2]

I don’t live in the diocese of Youngstown, Ohio, but I have been told that the former bishop didn’t seem to realize this - and thus this failure to realize this was part of the process that led him to basically request to be sent to any other diocese after he couldn’t get cooperation from the clergy and faithful on even the most basic of initiatives.

What former bishop of Youngstown was transferred?

The new bishop in my diocese has never been an diocesan ordinary. He was Auxiliary of another diocese. My diocese has never recieved a bishop from youngstown.

 

[PaixGioiaAmor]

What former bishop of Youngstown was transferred?

The new bishop in my diocese has never been an diocesan ordinary. He was Auxiliary of another diocese. My diocese has never recieved a bishop from youngstown.

No, I was not implying that the former bishop of Youngstown is your new bishop. I was simply using him as an example of a situation where a bishop didn’t think he had to be political at all, and what the end result is. I was explaining why sometimes a bishop may go along with some things that even he doesn’t full agree with, in an effort to avoid that bishop’s situation.

As I said, I do know your bishop. And yes, he was the auxilary here, and he is much missed.

 

[THurifer2]

I was simply using him as an example of a situation where a bishop didn’t think he had to be political at all, and what the end result is. I was explaining why sometimes a bishop may go along with some things that even he doesn’t full agree with, in an effort to avoid that bishop’s situation.

As I said, I do know your bishop. And yes, he was the auxilary here, and he is much missed.

I cannot compare clevalnd to my diocese. Clevalnd has 800,000 Catholics and my diocese has 90,000 Cahtolics. Clevaland covers 3400 saure miles…my diocese covers 11,000 square miles. I can guarantee you not playing politics in my diocese would be as simple as canning about 6 people. our chancery staff is likely smaller than many cleveland parishes staff. i am sure that playing politics would be more appealing in a huge diocese…I was talking to a deacon friend the other day…and we decided that the power in our diocese rests in the hands of about 5-6 people. If those 5-6 were simply canned or removed from position you wouldn’t have had me posting about mini-priestesses being installed…I know for fact that there is an agenda behind the article cited in the original post…I heard it from the horses mouth myself.

 

[benedictgal]

You read text messages during Mass?

I briefly left for a bathroom break, if you must know, and my father sent me a very fast word. Believe me, if there is any thing I remember about a particular day, it would have to be April 19, 2005, a truly blessed moment.

Nonetheless, inasmuch as the “rite” may have received approval from the Holy See, it was probably done for extraordinary reasons and was not to be considered the norm. I still maintain that these instances should not be confused with those wherein a priest assumes pastoral care of a parish. These are two entirely different matters.

 

[PaixGioiaAmor]

The article writer may very well have an agenda. This does not make it the bishop’s or the parish’s or the diocese’s agenda.

I have up to now only commented on particular posts in this thread, avoiding the subject. Consider this: as Catholics, we do almost everything with mass, and rightly so. Presidents of Catholic colleges, a lay diocessan CFO, and lay administrators of offices and parishes all are sometimes installed with the celebration of mass. Sometimes graduations are celebrated with mass, as well as all sorts of occasions.

Presenting this woman to the parish and giving her the authority to administrate it is likely to occur inside of mass because that is our tradition. Now what about the bishop installing her and having her wear an alb? Why is there a need for that to be done?

To put it simply, it is often done to make clear her mission and authority. If I were installed as a lay parish administrator (perish the thought), I would INSIST upon such a ceremony. Why? Because I am full of myself? Because I want to be a priest? No. Not for any of those reasons. I would insist upon it so that EVERYONE is very clear how this will work and where things stand. Without the bishop making clear what responsibility and authority he is giving this woman, it is likely that people would refuse to listen to her. It is very likely that they would begin calling the priest that she brings in to say mass, whose daily responsibilities are NOT this parish. By the bishop presenting her (or his representative), he is making the expectations very clear: She is in charge of the parish. Responsibility and authority go together, or else one will fail.

 

[benedictgal]

The article writer may very well have an agenda. This does not make it the bishop’s or the parish’s or the diocese’s agenda.

I have up to now only commented on particular posts in this thread, avoiding the subject. Consider this: as Catholics, we do almost everything with mass, and rightly so. Presidents of Catholic colleges, a lay diocessan CFO, and lay administrators of offices and parishes all are sometimes installed with the celebration of mass. Sometimes graduations are celebrated with mass, as well as all sorts of occasions.

Presenting this woman to the parish and giving her the authority to administrate it is likely to occur inside of mass because that is our tradition. Now what about the bishop installing her and having her wear an alb? Why is there a need for that to be done?

To put it simply, it is often done to make clear her mission and authority. If I were installed as a lay parish administrator (perish the thought), I would INSIST upon such a ceremony. Why? Because I am full of myself? Because I want to be a priest? No. Not for any of those reasons. I would insist upon it so that EVERYONE is very clear how this will work and where things stand. Without the bishop making clear what responsibility and authority he is giving this woman, it is likely that people would refuse to listen to her. It is very likely that they would begin calling the priest that she brings in to say mass, whose daily responsibilities are NOT this parish. By the bishop presenting her (or his representative), he is making the expectations very clear: She is in charge of the parish. Responsibility and authority go together, or else one will fail.

I would have to respectfully disagree with you. If I were given the responsibility of a parish, I would not insist upon a Mass as the venue for my installation. First of all, the “Installation Mass” is approrpriate only for the investiture of the pastor, bishop, and Pope. Why? They are clergy. They are the ones who are going to be the celebrants and concelebrants. When a new pastor is installed, he concelebrates with his bishop to show unity with his ordinary. When a new bishop is installed (especially if a new diocese is erected as part of the process), the new Ordinary concelebrates with his priests and brother bishops as a sign of unity and fraternity. When a new Pope is installed, he concelebrates with the college of Cardinals to show, once again, unity. Furthermore, the new pastor, bishop and Pope, take possession of their respective parish, diocese and Petrine ministry.

As a lay woman, I do not see the Mass as the appropriate vehicle to have the bishop install me into something that is rather extra-ordinary to begin with and is mostly administrative in nature. It gives me the appearance of something that I am not. Inasmuch as many have said that the Vatican does have a rite for it, I would rather not make this area any grayer than it has already become.

The bishop does not need the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to make clear what the woman can and cannot do. This can certainly be done with a letter to the parish and, perhaps, with a personal meeting with the faithful. I certainly would not want the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to be used for that. While I would want the Lord’s help in undertaking what I hope will be a temporary duty, I would not want my “installation” to be within the confines of the Mass because it is not fitting. I do not need to be on stage and have accolades piled on me. Just let me do my job while we wait for a priest to take rightfully come and be pastor.

 

[Walking_Home]

Presenting this woman to the parish and giving her the authority to administrate it is likely to occur inside of mass because that is our tradition. Now what about the bishop installing her and having her wear an alb? Why is there a need for that to be done?

To put it simply, it is often done to make clear her mission and authority. If I were installed as a lay parish administrator (perish the thought), I would INSIST upon such a ceremony. Why? Because I am full of myself? Because I want to be a priest? No. Not for any of those reasons. I would insist upon it so that EVERYONE is very clear how this will work and where things stand. Without the bishop making clear what responsibility and authority he is giving this woman, it is likely that people would refuse to listen to her. It is very likely that they would begin calling the priest that she brings in to say mass, whose daily responsibilities are NOT this parish. By the bishop presenting her (or his representative), he is making the expectations very clear: She is in charge of the parish. Responsibility and authority go together, or else one will fail.

---

You are giving her authority — which she does not have.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1U.HTM

Can. 517 §1. When circumstances require it, the pastoral care of a parish or of different parishes together can be entrusted to several priests in solidum, with the requirement, however, that in exercising pastoral care one of them must be the moderator, namely, the one who is to direct the joint action and to answer for it to the bishop.

§2. If, because of a lack of priests, the diocesan bishop has decided that participation in the exercise of the pastoral care of a parish is to be entrusted to a deacon, to another person who is not a priest, or to a community of persons, he is to appoint some priest who, provided with the powers and faculties of a pastor, is to direct the pastoral care.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_interdic_doc_15081997_en.html

The non-ordained faithful, as happens in many worthy cases, may collaborate effectively in the pastoral ministry of clerics in parishes, health care centres, charitable and educational institutions, prisons, Military Ordinariates etc. Provisions regulating such extraordinary form of collaboration are provided by Canon 517, § 2.

§ 1. The right understanding and application of this canon, according to which “si ob sacerdotum penuriam Episcopus dioecesanus aestimaverit participationem in exercitio curae pastoralis paroeciae concredendam esse diacono aliive personae sacerdotali charactere non insignate aut personarum communitati, sacerdotem constitat aliquem qui, potestatibus facultatibus parochi instructus curam pastoralem moderetur”, requires that this exceptional provision be used only with strict adherence to conditions contained in it. These are:

a) ob sacerdotum penuriam and not for reasons of convenience or ambiguous “advancement of the laity”, etc.;
b) this is participatio in exercitio curae pastoralis and **not **directing, coordinating, moderating or governing the Parish; these competencies, according to the canon, are the competencies of a priest alone.

 

[THurifer2]

The article writer may very well have an agenda. .

Where did I say the articles writers agenda.?..I am referring to the director the of the Lay ministry program and others who are of position in the diocese.