Latin Mass cancelled after row over woman server

[Brendan]

I made no comment about a priest being “obligated”…my comment was that if the Bishop allows it the priest can use female altar servers, even at the TLM.

No, you said that if a woman wanted to, they should be allowed to.

That is not the case. It doesn’t matter how much a woman wanted to serve. It doesn’t matter how much the Dean wanted the woman to serve. The celebrant of the Mass didn’t want her to serve, and that should have been enough for everyone.

And, on your point above, the Motu Proprio specifies that the rubrics for the EF Mass should be used. The rubrics for the EF refer to the altar servers in the masculine only. So, to follow the Holy See’s command, the altar servers must be male.

No bishop can override that.

 

[Yerusalyim]

No, you said that if a woman wanted to, they should be allowed to.

That is not the case. It doesn’t matter how much a woman wanted to serve. It doesn’t matter how much the Dean wanted the woman to serve. The celebrant of the Mass didn’t want her to serve, and that should have been enough for everyone.

And, on your point above, the Motu Proprio specifies that the rubrics for the EF Mass should be used. The rubrics for the EF refer to the altar servers in the masculine only. So, to follow the Holy See’s command, the altar servers must be male.

No bishop can override that.

Yes, if a female wants to and the priest allows female altar servers…sorry I have to spell it out, I thought the one would be assumed.

That’s YOUR interp of the specifics of female altar servers…we have a specific indult from the Vatican allowing female Altar Servers and we have rubrics from the TLM that was written PRIOR to the Indult…and prior to the 1983 Code of Canon Law which cites that females may also perform the role of Altar server…see, we’re not just discussing the rubrics, we’re also discussing the Code of Canon Law which was cited by Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts approved by Pope John Pau II as specifically allowing female altar servers…your arguement is with Pope John Paul II, not me.

 

[Brendan]

That’s YOUR interp of the specifics of female altar servers…we have a specific indult from the Vatican allowing female Altar Servers and we have rubrics from the TLM that was written PRIOR to the Indult…and prior to the 1983 Code of Canon Law which cites that females may also perform the role of Altar server…see, we’re not just discussing the rubrics, we’re also discussing the Code of Canon Law which was cited by Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts approved by Pope John Pau II as specifically allowing female altar servers…your arguement is with Pope John Paul II, not me.

Ah, but a Motu Proprio ( of which Summorum Pontificum is) is the highest authority for liturgical matters that the Church has, it supercedes both indults AND Canon Law.

The Pope ordered that the Missal of Bl John XXIII be followed, a Missal, in liturgical terms, is both the text of the Mass, and it’s corresponding General Instructions.

The General Instructions for the Missal of Bl. John XXIII indicates that it is a male who rings the bells, moves the books, carries the incense and makes all the responses.

Given that, what would there be for a female to do, if you follow the Pope’s overriding command to follow the Missal?

And if a priest or bishop preferred something different, well, their only recourse would be to take it up with the Pope, because there is no authority higher than the Pope on a motu proprio.

And if an interpretation of this is required, Canon 16 lists the legislative authority as being the entity that may issue an authentic interpretation. The legislative authority on Summorium Pontificum is the Pope.

 

[cathgal]

The Church made NO DISTINCTION between TLM or NO when it allowed female altar servers.

Was female altar server allowed since the existence of NO?

There was never a female altar server before that, was there?
Another word, when there was only TLM.

Maybe the Church didn’t make any distinction because TLM wasn’t celebrated that often.

I guess it is understood that no female altar server allowed for TLM. It is after all, *traditional. *

 

[mercygate]

Was female altar server allowed since the existence of NO?

There was never a female altar server before that, was there?
Another word, when there was only TLM.

Maybe the Church didn’t make any distinction because TLM wasn’t celebrated that often.

I guess it is understood that no female altar server allowed for TLM. It is after all, *traditional. *

I believe the first permission for female altar servers was published in 1994. It is just that, permission. It is not required that women be permitted to serve.

The more I see of this thread, the more absurd the idea seems that anyone of sound mind and body would propose the that girls/women would serve at the TLM. Those who attend the TLM are not of a frame of mind to disrupt the ancient rite in this way. Any woman showing up to serve and then, if denied, allowing a “row” to develop is suspect.

 

[LRThunder]

It is the permission of the Bishop that allows female Altar servers…so even if the rubrics for the TLM forbid it, the indult of the bishop SHOULD be sufficient to nullify that requirement. As I understand it, this is one area that a commission will look at.

Even if the bishop allows female altar servers, it’s not mandatory. A pastor could ban or allow them at his parish, and if he allows it, the celebrant could ban them or allow them when he’s celebrating Mass.

A bishop permitting something doesn’t make it mandatory.

 

[jc-servant]

This is a tempest in a teapot. Not every problem with a TLM is some great conspiracy to prevent it from happening.

If a certain group or priest is scheduling a TLM then the celebrating priest should contact altar servers in advance and get whomever he wants scheduled. If he (or an assistant) does not care enough to make accceptable arrangements in advance, then problems will occur. It might be having a woman show up who is on some general schedule or perhaps the next time not having anyone available to serve in sufficent numbers.

The article said there was a TLM society, so why didn’t they just make some advance arrangements? You cannot have any mass outside of the regularly scheduled ones at my parish without making arrangements to have the appropriate altar servers among other things. It is not a situation unique to TLM.

 

[KathleenElsie]

It is the permission of the Bishop that allows female Altar servers…so even if the rubrics for the TLM forbid it, the indult of the bishop SHOULD be sufficient to nullify that requirement. As I understand it, this is one area that a commission will look at.

It is by permission of the Bishop and at the discretion of the priest. No priest is forced to use females nor is he forbidden to use them.