Liciety of Female Readers at Tridentine Masses

[Miles_Mariae]

Wait a second, lay readers would have to get a tonsure?

http://www.execulink.com/~dtribe/blog/cap004.jpg

That ought to be a sufficient deterrent! Let’s re-institute this!

That’ll be “in” this fall.

 

[Padua_Minded]

Wait a second, lay readers would have to get a tonsure?

Lector was the second ‘minor order’. Today it is considered an office of institution, rather than an order of sorts. An beautiful explanation of the various minor orders is at the [SSPX seminary site](javascript:location=‘javascript:void(0)’;window.open(‘steps/steps.shtml’,‘win1999’,‘height=535,width=676,scrollbars=no,toolbar=no,status=no,menubar=no,location=no,resizable=no’)).

http://www.execulink.com/~dtribe/blog/cap004.jpg

That ought to be a sufficient deterrent! Let’s re-institute this!

I think that’s La Barroux? Anyway the monastic tonsure differs greatly from the tonsure given to secular seminarians. In the latter case, due to historic persecution, the bishop only cuts a snipling of hair from the seminarian:

fssp.org/album/O20071020/p1030293.jpg

 

[Freshman88]

Lector was the second ‘minor order’. Today it is considered an office of institution, rather than an order of sorts.

Those minor orders still exist today, within Traditionalist orders.

In any case, I think it’s quite a stretch to say that the laity can fill in these positions. It certainly wouldn’t be needed at a High mass because three clerics are required to say the mass anyway. It also wouldn’t be needed at a low mass, because the celebrant is supposed to recite the epistle. And lastly, it isn’t allowed at a sung mass because only the celebrant or a minister may recite the epistle, according to the rubrics.

 

[Padua_Minded]

sanctamissa.org/en/rubrics/

I was confused by what you meant when you said “lectors”.
.

A lector was a minor order, but minor orders were suppressed by Paul VI. It is now an office of institution. Previously tonsure marked the entry of the clerical state, and an tonsured seminarian would be incardinated into a diocese. Nowadays, ordination to the diaconate marks the entry into the clerical state. A lector is technically the ‘ordinary’ reader at Mass, in the same way an acoloyte is the ‘ordinary’ altar server. Lectors today are instituted and are invariably males. If a lector were to present himself at a traditional mass, the priest would technically be supposed to allow him to read the epistle. The lector would certainly have the right to do so, if not the duty.

 

[Padua_Minded]

Those minor orders still exist today, within Traditionalist orders.

They are certainly allowed to conduct the ceremonies, but some of them are redundant. Although the FSSP tonsure their seminarians, it has no canonical effect whatsoever. Until the reforms, the tonsured man would become incardinated into a diocese and would wear a cassock. He was a cleric in law.

The minor orders of lector and acolyte conferred on the seminarians does however have an effect. They are considered fully instituted into those ministries under canon law. Novus Ordo seminarians in diocesan seminaries are also instituted into those ministries.

 

[DarkNight]

Even if it were permitted, **the idea of some old lady in a pantsuit waddling ** into the sanctuary to do the readings is so utterly foreign to the spirit of the liturgy, it just wouldn’t be feasible.

What a horribly offensive statement!

How can you consider yourself Christian, much less Catholic, when you think (and post) such thoughts? You imply that the “little old lady …” is less reverent and has less ability to perform the readings than a man of the same age and gait.

I have listened to both men & women speak from the sanctuary.
The reverence in which the reading was delivered never had anything to do with gender, age, clothing or gait.

If those are the things by which you judge a person then you have missed much in your spiritual journey.

Go with Love, Go with God

 

[Freshman88]

They are certainly allowed to conduct the ceremonies, but some of them are redundant. Although the FSSP tonsure their seminarians, it has no canonical effect whatsoever. Until the reforms, the tonsured man would become incardinated into a diocese and would wear a cassock. He was a cleric in law.

The minor orders of lector and acolyte conferred on the seminarians does however have an effect. They are considered fully instituted into those ministries under canon law. Novus Ordo seminarians in diocesan seminaries are also instituted into those ministries.

The lector is merely a stepping stone to the other orders though, and is primarily ceremonial. In ancient times this role may have been more involved, but that is not the case today with respect to the EF. Now I glanced quickly at the article at new advent, and it said that they are only two occasions when a lector may recite the epistle.

“The lector is still mentioned twice in the Roman Missal. In the rubrics at the beginning it is said that if Mass be sung without deacon and subdeacon a lector wearing a surplice may sing the Epistle in the usual place; but at the end he does not kiss the celebrant’s hand (Ritus celebr. Missam”, vi, 8). On Good Friday the morning service begins with a prophecy read by a lector at the place where the Epistle is usually read (first rubric on Good Friday)."

Now i’m not too sure as to how update these rubrics are. The set of rubrics at missa sancta.com certainly don’t mention this.

In any case, it seems that a lector may only recite the epistle at a sung mass, if there is no subdeacon present, and if the celebrant chooses to not recite the epistle himself.

Certainly seems like a fay cry from having a duty to recite the epistle.

 

[Dauphin]

What a horribly offensive statement!

How can you consider yourself Christian, much less Catholic, when you think (and post) such thoughts? You imply that the “little old lady …” is less reverent and has less ability to perform the readings than a man of the same age and gait.

I have listened to both men & women speak from the sanctuary.
The reverence in which the reading was delivered never had anything to do with gender, age, clothing or gait.

If those are the things by which you judge a person then you have missed much in your spiritual journey.

Go with Love, Go with God

The question is, why does she feel the need to take centre stage? I’m sure she has the ability to read, and perhaps to do so reverently, but what’s the need? Women have no place taking over the responsibilities of clerics, even if they might do a better job of it. Scripture is clear in saying that women have no place in public teaching, which is exactly what the reading of scripture is. There’s absolutely no sound reason for the minister not to proclaim the readings.

The Mass isn’t about making everyone feel ‘included’. It isn’t about showing off how very wonderful we are. This sort of idea has been at the centre of liturgical collapse for the last 40 years, and it’s not a “Catholic” approach to liturgy at all.

 

[Padua_Minded]

In any case, it only seems that a lector may recite the epistle at a sung mass, if there is no subdeacon present, and if the celebrant chooses to not recite the epistle himself.
.

Interesting article. I’d say that the minor order itself, like acolyte, had become so unpractical to the extent that it was seen as redundant. This article points out that in the event of a subdeacon and deacon being missing, that a lector can properly substitute, however the Roman Missal did not explicity ban them from reading the epistle. I suspect that in law, it would be perfectly licit for a lector to announce the epistle at the old Mass but it would need to be clarified by the Congregation for Rites/Congregation for Divine Worship.

 

[Freshman88]

Interesting article. I’d say that the minor order itself, like acolyte, had become so unpractical to the extent that it was seen as redundant. This article points out that in the event of a subdeacon and deacon being missing, that a lector can properly substitute, however the Roman Missal did not explicity ban them from reading the epistle. I suspect that in law, it would be perfectly licit for a lector to announce the epistle at the old Mass but it would need to be clarified by the Congregation for Rites/Congregation for Divine Worship.

Yes, so it seems that three requirements have to be made.

1. It is a sung mass (there is no room for a lector at a high mass or low mass, with exception to the Good friday service).
2. There is no subdeacon/deacon or priest to take his place.
3. The celebrant himself chooses to have the lector recite the epistle, instead of himself.

 

[Freshman88]

The question is, why does she feel the need to take centre stage? I’m sure she has the ability to read, and perhaps to do so reverently, but what’s the need? Women have no place taking over the responsibilities of clerics, even if they might do a better job of it. Scripture is clear in saying that women have no place in public teaching, which is exactly what the reading of scripture is. There’s absolutely no sound reason for the minister not to proclaim the readings.

The Mass isn’t about making everyone feel ‘included’. It isn’t about showing off how very wonderful we are. This sort of idea has been at the centre of liturgical collapse for the last 40 years, and it’s not a “Catholic” approach to liturgy at all.

I believe I am going to mimic certain posters in these forums by replying with…

" :clapping: :clapping: :extrahappy: :dancing: :tiphat:

 

[mattwcu]

If a parish is considering have lay readers at an EF then I think that is extremely un-pastoral.

Go ahead and let them read and see how many people come back the next week. Just sayin’

 

[Miles_Mariae]

you have missed much in your spiritual journey.

I knew it, Dauphin. We should have taken the first exit onto Wymympreest Blvd. and swung by the circus where they have clowns and liturgical dancers. But no, you had to stop and ask Tradition and Antiquity for directions.

 

[Dauphin]

I knew it, Dauphin. We should have taken the first exit onto Wymympreest Blvd. and swung by the circus where they have clowns and liturgical dancers. But no, you had to stop and ask Tradition and Antiquity for directions.

 

[PrayforMallory]

Apparentely it was perfectly licit for women to read the epistle or even the gospel at a dialogue Tridentine Mass (which was the norm in Europe, and became increasingly popular in the British Isles). Such readings could be done in the vernacular. Was this ever licit for non-Dialogue Masses? Would this still be licit today? Would it be pastorally prudent, in your opinion, for a priest to allow women to read at the old Mass?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Private Response of the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith
December 16, 1961
(Canon Law Digest 6, 153)

On the 9th day of November last, His Excellency, the Most Reverand Maximiliam de Furstenberg, Apostolic Delegate to Australia, New Zealand and Oceania, submitted the following question to this Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith on behalf of His Lordship, the Most Reverand Launcelot Goody, Bishop of Bunbury:
“Is it permitted in a community of religious, or at a Mass when only females are present, or at a school Mass, when both boys and girls are present, for a female religious, or a schoolgirl to read the epistle or the gospel or both in the vernacular during a dialogue Mass?”
In reply I wish to inform Your Excellence that this Sacred Congregation, after mature deliberation, answers: “Yes.”

In communities of religious women, Masses where only women or children are present, this is licit, according to this response. We could just legalistically leave it at this, but I think that’s part of the problem in the contemporary Church.

We could solve all problems by having lay members of the choir chant the readings from the 62 Missal vernacular translations, hidden in the choir loft. At the same time the ordinary ministers read the readings quietly in Latin, and preserve both the integrity of the Liturgy and the ability of lay people to participate in and understand the readings. We’d also not have to deal with the aesthetic schizophrenia of people in regular clothes standing up there with a priest in 16th century attire. There would be no banality in this arrangement. Everything would be fine. The literary masterpiece of the Douay Rheims translations could be chanted in the vernacular. Everyone could understand and be edified.

This isn’t what would happen if the Holy See confirmed this, though. St. Suburbanites would tromp all over the altar, stand in the ambo, and draw as much attention to themselves as they could, while they read less than immaculate translations of scripture, etc.

For some reason good taste and common sense are not prevalent in our Churches. Instead we have banality and lowest-common denominator styled self satisfaction in the liturgy. The liturgical equivalent of a five year old getting to honk the horn of daddy’s car.

 

[keepitreal]

It says in the vernacular. What that means is that the priest or deacon would chant the readings, in Latin, and then someone else would read the vernacular translation.

Admittedly, not follwing the true spirit of what was intended by the rubrics, as no one but the priest or deacon is supposed to read the Gospel, but it was the 60’s. What can you say

Quite true. In Europe, the Liberal liturgical mindset was
well underway. forecasting the liturgical revolution of Vatican II. They even were saying mass *versus populum *and were giving Communion in the hand as well. They were well-liked by the Liberal clergy in the and departments in Rome.

 

[KestrelRose]

You really are a sweet heart aren’t you?

Even if it were permitted, the idea of some old lady in a pantsuit waddling into the sanctuary to do the readings is so utterly foreign to the spirit of the liturgy, it just wouldn’t be feasible. You’d have difficulty finding a single woman in the congregation who’d want to do it.

Why on earth shouldn’t the priest simply chant the word of God - announcing it with dignity and reverence? Why is there any need for the laity to involve themselves in a function which properly belongs to the ordained? It seems that some people are still caught up in the idea that the Mass is about making people feel ‘included’…

 

[DarkNight]

Originally Posted by Dauphin
Even if it were permitted, the idea of **some old lady in a pantsuit waddling into the sanctuary **to do the readings is so utterly foreign to the spirit of the liturgy, it just wouldn’t be feasible.

What a horribly offensive statement!

How can you consider yourself Christian, much less Catholic, when you think (and post) such thoughts? You imply that the “little old lady …” is less reverent and has less ability to perform the readings than a man of the same age and gait …

Perhaps I should have been more explicit than just using bold & underline features.
Your discriptive statement …** some old lady in a pantsuit waddling** … is compltely offensive, made even more so since you are describing your view of women in general rather than one specific person.

We all meet spiritually beautiful men & women of all ages, sizes and gaits on our journey. It would be sorrowful to ignore a messsage because of such a bias against the messenger.

Go with Love, Go with God

 

[Dauphin]

Perhaps I should have been more explicit than just using bold & underline features.

Your discriptive statement…** some old lady in a pantsuit waddling** … is compltely offensive, made even more so since you are describing your view of women in general rather than one specific person.

We all meet spiritually beautiful men & women of all ages, sizes and gaits on our journey. It would be sorrowful to ignore a messsage because of such a bias against the messenger.

Go with Love, Go with God

I’m not saying that old ladies are bad people. I used that image because it is my most common experience with lay-readers. I find it degrading to both the liturgy and to the lay-reader, who I have no doubt is doing it out of good intentions. The proper place of that old lady, along with every other lay person, is in quiet devotion during the Mass.

 

[PrayforMallory]

I’m not saying that old ladies are bad people. I used that image because it is my most common experience with lay-readers. I find it degrading to both the liturgy and to the lay-reader, who I have no doubt is doing it out of good intentions. The proper place of that old lady, along with every other lay person, is in quiet devotion during the Mass.

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.