Is it reasonable to have a dress code for liturgical ministers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Duesenberg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Walking_Home said:
All I’m saying is that – we are responsible for our on sin/distractions – and cannot lay the blame on another.
Click to expand...
There is nothing at all wrong with directing liturgical ministers to dress modestly. It’s very wrong for them to dress immodestly/provocatively so as to create distraction. That’s simply unacceptable.
 
They sold the building for financial reasons. Yes, the Franciscans owned the mission. I’ve heard different stories as to why the noviate was moved, but in retrospect I wonder if they were advance planning for this change. I wasn’t Catholic yet when the novitiate left.

The spiritual director of our OFS fraternity is an OFM Friar in Nipomo. We held our Transitus with the OFM novices at Saint Paul’s, and it made me wish we did still have the novitiate at OMSM.

I’m definitely going to have to shop for a new pair of sandals. I want ones like the OFM brothers wear, but I don’t know where to find them or if they come wide enough for my fat feet.
 
Last edited:
Technically, the regular use of Extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist is a minor abuse. They are only intended for “extraordinary” circumstances, as the name suggests. It should not be the norm that they assist at every mass. I’ve seen masses where there are a large number of priests on the altar and loads of EM’s come forward.
I think a dress code is perfectly reasonable. But I also think that in training EM’s it should be made clear that it is not their “right” to distribute the Eucharist and that they should only come forward if called by the priest.
 
Last edited:
You keep turning a blind eye/deaf ear to Pope John Paul II Exhortation on personal sin. One who pays “attention”/scrutinizes/ogles teenagers/women and yoga pants/etc. – needs to own it up completely – and not scapegoat the other.
 
AdamPeter said:
They are only intended for “extraordinary” circumstances, as the name suggests.
Click to expand...
Extraordinary circumstances can also happen weekly – even daily, so their frequent use is not a liturgical abuse depending on the individual situation.
 
If it happens every day it’s not an “extraordinary” circumstance. Also the role or EM’s is always supposed to be provisional.
When you think about it, they really are over used. I mean, if the priest spends 15 mins giving out communion to 400 people then what’s the big deal? You’re supposed to pray after you receive anyway. I know in Latvia, where my wife comes from. They just don’t have EM’s and they manage fine.

This is a paragraph from Redemptionis Sacramentum on EM’s

[151.] Only out of true necessity is there to be recourse to the assistance of extraordinary ministers in the celebration of the Liturgy. Such recourse is not intended for the sake of a fuller participation of the laity but rather, by its very nature, is supplementary and provisional.[252] Furthermore, when recourse is had out of necessity to the functions of extraordinary ministers, special urgent prayers of intercession should be multiplied that the Lord may soon send a Priest for the service of the community and raise up an abundance of vocations to sacred Orders.[253]
 
Walking_Home said:
You keep turning a blind eye/deaf ear to Pope John Paul II Exhortation on personal sin. One who pays “attention”/scrutinizes/ogles teenagers/women and yoga pants/etc. – needs to own it up completely – and not scapegoat the other.
Click to expand...
Yeah…but some clothing is not suitable for mass. Out of respect for the Eucharist could people not just dress well for mass.
If you were visiing the Queen of England would you not dress for the occasion?
 
@Walking_Home why are you on @Duesenberg’s back? It almost looks like you’re nitpicking him. Is St. Peter’s Basilica also turning a blind eye to JP2? And this is a requirement for ALL attendees: (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Our parish has to have emhc at every Sunday noon mass, because between regular attendees and tourists (historical mission) communion would take an hour, even if both of our priests could be there (they can’t.) As it is we often get through two full hymns, repeating one of them during the times we’re packed (near Easter and Christmas, and Summer holidays.) That’s with the priest and up to five EMHC (two with chalice up front with the priest, and one with bread with two emhc with chalices at the back half.)

Anyway, a very minimal dress code is appropriate for servers (lectors, emhc, etc), and one should be suggested (though not mandatory) for the rest of the parishioners. Like I said, I’m new to Catholicism, but I thought there was a sin of immodesty before the Eucharist, which included being properly covered. Regardless of how others may or may not sin because of one’s clothing, which is not one’s responsibility, I believe modesty, including in clothing, is a virtue in general, and especially before the Divine Presence in the Holy Eucharist. Even protestants usually dress nice for church, and they don’t believe in transubstantiation and the real Presence in the Eucharist.
 
Yes – I read Elf01 post and your response. Elf01 – put the responsibility on both – you agreed. Pope John Paul II Exhortation says otherwise . It is to deny our own personal dignity and freedom – to blame/transfer/place responsibility for our own sins/ “distractions” onto another.

Quoting the Pope :
“Hence there is nothing so personal and untransferable in each individual as merit for virtue or responsibility for sin.”
 
My responses are not aimed at the dress code. Only that —each one of us is solely responsible for how we look at other people.
 
Dude – seriously – pray for the Grace – to keep custody of the eyes.
 
I’ll post the same response – I posted to Boler.

My responses are not aimed at the dress code. Only that —each one of us is solely responsible for how we look at other people.
 
Each of us is solely responsible for our own personal sin, so in that sense I agree with you. But that’s not the sense you’re pushing. You’re pushing, as I see it, this common attitude in modern feminism (it’s a very uncharitable one) that a woman should be allowed to dress how ever she pleases without regard for how men respond and irrespective of the realities of physiology.

Regardless, the idea presented in this thread is one of decorum. That you seem to be so dismissive of this idea is beyond me.
 
Last edited:
Boler said:
Each of us is solely responsible for our own personal sin, so in that sense I agree with you. But that’s not the sense you’re pushing. You’re pushing, as I see it, this common attitude in modern feminism (it’s a very uncharitable one) that a woman should be allowed to dress how ever she pleases without regard for how men respond and irrespective of the realities of physiology.

Regardless, the idea presented in this thread is one of decorum. That you seem to be so dismissive of this idea is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Home run…

Thank you for pointing this out so eloquently.

Some clearly do not like to be reminded that they play a part in sin when they knowingly facilitate the sin of others. They prefer to ignore their own culpability.
 
Last edited:
AdamPeter said:
If it happens every day it’s not an “extraordinary” circumstance. Also the role or EM’s is always supposed to be provisional.

When you think about it, they really are over used. I mean, if the priest spends 15 mins giving out communion to 400 people then what’s the big deal? You’re supposed to pray after you receive anyway. I know in Latvia, where my wife comes from. They just don’t have EM’s and they manage fine.

This is a paragraph from Redemptionis Sacramentum on EM’s

[151.] Only out of true necessity is there to be recourse to the assistance of extraordinary ministers in the celebration of the Liturgy. Such recourse is not intended for the sake of a fuller participation of the laity but rather, by its very nature, is supplementary and provisional.[252] Furthermore, when recourse is had out of necessity to the functions of extraordinary ministers, special urgent prayers of intercession should be multiplied that the Lord may soon send a Priest for the service of the community and raise up an abundance of vocations to sacred Orders.[253]
Click to expand...
It certainly could be. Your understanding of the term “extraordinary” is clearly deficient:

ex·traor·di·nar·y
ikˈstrôrd(ə)nˌerē,ˌekstrəˈôrdnˌerē/
adjective
adjective: extraordinary; adjective: extra-ordinary
Code: 
1.
**very unusual or remarkable.**
"the extraordinary plumage of the male"
synonyms:	**remarkable, exceptional, amazing, astonishing, astounding, sensational, stunning, incredible, unbelievable, phenomenal; More**
** striking, outstanding, momentous, impressive, singular, memorable, unforgettable, unique, noteworthy;**
out of the ordinary, unusual, uncommon, rare, surprising;
informalfantastic, terrific, tremendous, stupendous, awesome;
literarywondrous

A priest could have a parish that gets a 1,000 attendees per Mass. He’s the only cleric on the grounds and the bishop has no more to send. The extraordinary event is the Mass itself, and ministering to the people of that Mass with the resources availabe, not the frequency in which EMsHC are used.
 
Last edited:
The only sense I’m conveying – is that each one of us is soley responsible for our own sin.

And when we encounter someone – as Pope John Paul II says – have a Christ like attitude towards them.
 
Last edited:
Walking_Home said:
The only sense I’m conveying – is that each one of us is soley responsible for our own sin.
And when we encounter someone – as Pope John Paul II says – have a Christ like attitude towards them.
Click to expand...
Now you’re just covering your tracks and attempting to implicate us: that we somehow disagree with this.
 
Reminds me of last week’s Gospel (I think it was last week…) where the master had everybody invited to the feast in his great hall but threw the guy out who wasn’t dressed appropriately…

I wonder if we know where we are when we’re at Mass… and who we’re going to see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top