Liciety of Female Readers at Tridentine Masses

[CradleCath]

The “pantsuit old lady,” is a definite stereotype, but a true one. An older, most-likely pro-feminist, suburbanite woman who has my haircut(meaning basically a man’s short haircut) and wears those 1980’s pantsuits that are an attempt to be gender neutral.

It’s not uncharitable to point out that liturgical events tend to be often dominated by people who fit the above description. Entire “progressive” religious orders are apparently, if NCR can be relied on at all.

They DO love their polyester, don’t they??:yup:

 

[PrayforMallory2]

They DO love their polyester, don’t they??:yup:

Heh. It wouldn’t be so bad if they weren’t associated with so many problems, such as insubstantive prayers, etc.

Many of them no doubt have valuable talents and help the Church. I’d like to think that’s true of myself. I’m perfectly fine not having a public role in the Liturgy. I wonder what people would think if there was a stereotype of 25 year old guys in trendy t shirts desacralizing everything?

I can’t really grasp the need to be seen in the Liturgy, myself.

 

[PrayforMallory2]

Argh! I regret my participation in this thread. My tone got a little too harsh. The sarcasm was too much.

The whole muzzling of every kind of criticism gets to me, though. And I can’t stand it when threads get derailed. For one, it means I have to participate long after my interest in a thread has faded.

 

[rjs1]

Dauphin raised the matter of the teaching in Scripture, in St Paul’s letters, that women are not to speak (meaning in a teaching or authoritative way) in Church.

It’s interesting that there have been a lot of replies to Dauphin’s reference - the replies have spoken about female bosses, female presidents, respecting women etc etc - yet there has not been one single reference to actually obeying the word of God in Scripture.

Why? Because today we are all so concerned with our rights, with establishing our power.

How about a little God given humility? How about we realise that the Mass is not there to provide us with a public performance stage, but rather we are meant to bow in awe before God, as we participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, at which Our Lord is offering His one eternal Sacrifice for us and for mankind. Our part is one of worship and prayer.

 

[CradleCath]

Dauphin raised the matter of the teaching in Scripture, in St Paul’s letters, that women are not to speak (meaning in a teaching or authoritative way) in Church.

It’s interesting that there have been a lot of replies to Dauphin’s reference - the replies have spoken about female bosses, female presidents, respecting women etc etc - yet there has not been one single reference to actually obeying the word of God in Scripture.

Why? Because today we are all so concerned with our rights, with establishing our power.

 

[Just_Lurking]

It’s interesting that there have been a lot of replies to Dauphin’s reference - the replies have spoken about female bosses, female presidents, respecting women etc etc - yet there has not been one single reference to actually obeying the word of God in Scripture.

See post #62. You seem to be interpreting this scripture in a different way than the Church does.

 

[Jfran41]

Some postings speak of the Mass in the past tense as if what was practiced in the 1960’s or 50’s or 40’s is no longer appropriate. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not like some article of clothing that changes from decade to decade and season to season.

 

[Julianna]

I am a 66 yr. old woman & I love

 

[I_Believe]

lol, I avoided this thread as long as I could, and here I am. I just HAD to look at it.

All I’ll say is, women do not belong in the Sanctuary. They should not even approach it if anything other than their face and hands are exposed.

Ladies, if you have a great figure, hide it at Mass. If you have a less than nice figure, a trench coat would be nice as well.

 

[rjs1]

See post #62. You seem to be interpreting this scripture in a different way than the Church does.

The Haydock Bible (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible with a commentary by the Rev. George Haydock) is a highly respected Catholic Bible, in fact the one used at the inauguration of the first Catholic President of the United States, John Kennedy. The commentary in the Haydock Bible on the several verses by St Paul about women not teaching in Church supports the idea that women should not teach in Church. It in no way tries to explain it away or re-invent it to suit some modern interpretation.
I do not understand therefore why you would say that “You seem to interpreting this scripture in a different way than the Church does”.

In addition the rules from Rome about who can deliver a homily in Church are clear.

**FROM **Redemptionis Sacramentum
VII 2. Preaching
[161.] As was already noted above, the homily on account of its importance and its nature is reserved to the Priest or Deacon during Mass.[260] As regards other forms of preaching, if necessity demands it in particular circumstances, or if usefulness suggests it in special cases, lay members of Christ’s faithful may be allowed to preach in a church or in an oratory outside Mass in accordance with the norm of law.[261] This may be done only on account of a scarcity of sacred ministers in certain places, in order to meet the need, and it may not be transformed from an exceptional measure into an ordinary practice, nor may it be understood as an authentic form of the advancement of the laity.[262] All must remember besides that the faculty for giving such permission belongs to the local Ordinary, and this as regards individual instances; this permission is not the competence of anyone else, even if they are Priests or Deacons.

These rulings make it clear that lay people (men or women) should never preach the homily at mass and should only preach in other settings as the exception, not the norm.
This certainly rules out “public teaching of an authoritative nature” that you refer to in post #62.

 

[Just_Lurking]

These rulings make it clear that lay people (men or women) should never preach the homily at mass and should only preach in other settings as the exception, not the norm.
This certainly rules out “public teaching of an authoritative nature” that you refer to in post #62.

Yet this thread is about the Liciety of Female Readers at Tridentine Masses, not the Liciety of Lay Readers at Tridentine Masses.

So are you in agreement with the concept that in those circumstances when lay preaching is permitted, both males and females can perform that function, St. Paul’s comments notwithstanding?

 

[rjs1]

Yet this thread is about the Liciety of Female Readers at Tridentine Masses, not the Liciety of Lay Readers at Tridentine Masses.

So are you in agreement with the concept that in those circumstances when lay preaching is permitted, both males and females can perform that function, St. Paul’s comments notwithstanding?

I think you missed one of the points of my last post. That is that lay preaching is NOT ever to be regarded as a norm, at mass or at other occasions. This means that neither lay men or lay women should not be preaching.

Do I on any occasion disregard St Paul’s comments? Absolutely not. The reference I made to the Haydock Bible was to show that at least one Church authority accepts what Scripture says on this matter as it is stated in Scripture, not with some modern interpretation.

Do I admit that the rules from Rome seem to allow some rare circumstances where a lay person might preach outside of mass and that the lay person is not stipulated as having to be male? Yes, I will give you that. Do I still think that this goes against Scripture? Yes, I do.

I think we may have to agree to differ on this one.

 

[CradleCath]

You know you are right…I do see that. I have to wonder if it’s the “women took over” as most seem to think…or the “men” don’t want to do it.

Sorry, it took me so long to answer you. IMO., the women took over shortly after the council & yes, after a while the men sat silently & let them do it. It was not always this way.

My Father & his Father belonged to the Holy Name Society:
An indulgenced confraternity in the Catholic Church. The primary object of the society is to beget due love and reverence for the Holy Name of God and Jesus Christ. The secondary object is to suppress blasphemy, perjury, oaths of any character that are forbidden, profanity, unlawful swearing improper language, and, as far as the members can, to prevent those vices in others (Pius IV, 13 April 1564).
holynamesociety.info/index1.sh.

The men in this society were MANLY men. There were some scholars, there were lots of men who sold shoes, worked in a factory, or owned a small business. Every parish had a Holy Name Society & most men of the parish belonged. We went to the HNS., for just about everything…from raising the funds to shore up the steps in front of the Church to purchasing the Children’s Latin/English missals that were given to them, from the parish, at their First Communion.

My Father, husband & sons all belonged/belong to the Knights of Columbus. Aside from drinking beer at their meetings , they provide more services than there is space to mention…for the parish & for Catholicism all over the world.

There is no longer a HNS. in my city. There are 7 parishes here & not ONE Holy Name Society.

#1. It hasn’t been promoted from the pulpit since Vatican II.
#2. The women just stepped in at my old parish &, whether we want to admit it or not, when women are in the majority…whether it be in a club, at the city council meetings or in the parish…men seem to step back.
#3. The men who did try to ensure a masculine influence in the parishes had problems with the fact that it was so difficult for them to relate to the many priests who are gay & vice versa. As the word from Rome says:
“Priests must be suitable for marriage and able to exercise fatherhood over God’s children. And it is under those mature conditions that he renounces exercising them in order to give himself to God in the priesthood,”
" the need for a priest to be heterosexual in order to see himself and for others to see him as the “bridegroom of the church” and as a “spiritual father” to those to whom he is ministering" is crucial. Therefore the church calls only “men mature in their masculine identity” to the diaconate and priesthood".

The above are SOME of the reasons that I have seen that prevent our husbands & fathers from assuming their role as leaders of the parish. However, I’d be interested in hearing from others about their perception of the feminization of the Catholic Church. I’m sure the problem of “few strong Catholic men in evidence in the parish” is more complicated.