Liturgical feminsm

  • Thread starter Thread starter misericordie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

misericordie

Guest
Why is it that most religious orders of both men and women which are very liberal, and in which MOST members are usually older than 50, are also the orders which have very few vocations, and who’s members are the ones still stuck(for the most part) liturgically in the 1970’s? In other words: in Mass the stole is OVER the chusable(rainbow colored stoles) or the priest celebrates Mass ONLY with alb and stole, or eucharistic ministers (almost always middle aged women) are the ones who distribute while the priest sits or leads in song. Why is it the VATICAN does not tell these orders (they seem to be the LARGEST ones still) to return to the spirit of their founders?
All in all, if I was to become a priest, I would prefer a religious order, and one which is Pontifically approved. I understand they don’t respond to ONE Bishop of a diocese, but rather to a Provincil superior. Hence, it is not easy for a liberal bishop to quite an orthodox member of a religious order of Pontifical right.
Any thoughts on this???
 
"eucharistic ministers "

Gentle reminder only priests and deacons are Eucharistic Ministers, other lay ministers are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion

Otherwise I don’t know why this persists. Once upon a time the Franciscan Renewal Center here was reknown for its retreats. Now it is definitely stuck in the 70’s as you say with all sorts of new age things. No kneelers. Bread in hunks used for communion. They have classes on dream interpretation, enneagrams, and one can walk the labyrinth - too bad because it is a lovely location and could be a real spiritual center sans new ageness.

But this feminism has spilled over into most parishes and a lot of the litrugical “cuteness” is at the hands of women but I don’t blame them, I blame the priests for allowing them to take over.

Since you note that most are over 50 and probably under 70 - it will eventually fade away - even Old Hippies die sometime . That said, I have noticed a lot of younger people are returning to traditionalism and vocations in more traditional seminaries are on the upswing.

Forgive me for quotin an old Bob Dylan tune but I think “the times they are a changing”
 
Gentle reminder only priests and deacons are Eucharistic Ministers, other lay ministers are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion
Click to expand...
If you want to get really technical, only Priests and Bishops are even Eucharistic Ministers. Deacons cannot confect that Sacrement, so they are not Ministers of the Eucharist.

Deacons, like Priests and Bishops are Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.
 
😃 CatholicLady, and Bren. Thanks, great (name removed by moderator)ut. Yes NO one should say(with regards to the laity) Eucharistic Ministers. It IS true: ONLY the priests are Eucharistic Ministers. ALL OTHERS ARE EXTRA-ordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.

PERSONALLY, when I am in line for Communion in ANY parish, and I see there is a EXTRA-ordinary minister of the Eucharist giving the Eucharist in one line, and the priest giving on the other line, i side swipe to the priest’s line. I ALSO do the same when there is a priest AND Deacon, I go to the PRIEST!. Then ONLY receive Communion ON THE TONGUE (MY PERSONAL CHOICE: I HAVE THE RIGHT TO RECEIVE ON THE TONGUE). What ever happened to the words of the Angelic Doctor: Saint Thomas Aquinas when he says, that nothing but the consecrated ahnds of a PRIEST is to touch the Host. I would also say, the SACRED Vesels TOO!.
 
40.png
misericordie:
PERSONALLY, when I am in line for Communion in ANY parish, and I see there is a EXTRA-ordinary minister of the Eucharist giving the Eucharist in one line, and the priest giving on the other line, i side swipe to the priest’s line. I ALSO do the same when there is a priest AND Deacon, I go to the PRIEST!
Click to expand...
You probably won’t care about this, but our small parish started using EM’s in the 1970’s by having two lines, the priest on one side and the EM on the other. Well, there was one family that always sat on the “EM” side of the church, and would go through all sorts of contortions to get into the priest’s line. If they were trying to send a “message”, no one ever said it out loud. But as a kid I thought it looked pretty silly, no one ever joined them, and the fact that I remember it 25 years later shows that it made an impression.

The Church has authorized EM’s. For you to go out of your way to avoid them, seems defiant.
 
Defiant? It is a Catholics right to switch lines for communion, and many stoll do so when a EM is present, they just do so quietly. Also, and Mr. Keating raised this up in another thread, overuse of EMEs is an abuse as well. Again, I am sadded that faithful Catholics can justify practices that were started in true dis-obidience, and still in many cases abuses.
 
Sorry to disagree but Bishops, Priests and Deacons are Ordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.

Clerics have a special relationship to the Eucharistic Lord by reason of Holy Orders. This is a different relationship than that which is enjoyed by all the baptized. Clerics (bishops, priests, deacons) are Ministers of the Eucharist and not just “of Holy Communion.”

It is not who can consecrate the Eucharist that makes this difference.

All others are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion although I have read that Installed Acolytes may be called Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist -

It is the Holy Orders (which includes a deacon) which makes the difference.

"The priest and deacon, ordained to service at the altar, are the ordinary ministers of the Eucharist. Ordinary does not mean “commonplace” here. Rather, the priest and deacon are the usual persons, by virtue of their ordination, to distribute holy Communion " Bishop Chaput

Since this keeps coming up, perhaps Karl will give us a “once and for all” ruling on it.
 
Catholic Lady

From the Code of Canon Law
ARTICLE 1: THE MINISTER OF THE BLESSED EUCHARIST
Can. 900 §1 The only minister who, in the person of Christ, can bring into being the sacrament of the Eucharist, is a validly ordained priest.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between a Minister of the Eucharist and a Minister of Holy Communion.

A priest (and thus a Bishop) is the only Minister of the Eucharist

A deacon, along with the other clerics are Ministers of Holy Communion.

The laity can act as EXTRA-Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.
 
misericordie said:
: PERSONALLY, when I am in line for Communion in ANY parish, and I see there is a EXTRA-ordinary minister of the Eucharist giving the Eucharist in one line, and the priest giving on the other line, i side swipe to the priest’s line. I ALSO do the same when there is a priest AND Deacon, I go to the PRIEST!.
Click to expand...

Ditto–you are not alone–
 
I am not disputing the fact that only Priests can consecrate the bread and wine and bring it to being the presence of Christ -

What I am speaking of is per the CCC Para. 1570:" Deacons share in Christ’s mission and grace in a special way (Cf. LG 41; AA 16). The sacrament of Holy Orders marks them with an imprint (“character”) which cannot be removed and which configures them to Christ, who made himself the “deacon” or servant of all (Cf. Mk 10:45; Lk 22:27; St. Polycarp, Ad Phil. 5, 2; Sch 10, 182). Among other tasks, it is the task of deacons to assist the bishop and priests in the celebration of the divine mysteries, above all the Eucharist, in the distribution of Holy Communion, in assisting at and blessing marriages, in the proclamation of the Gospel and preaching, in presiding over funerals, and in dedicating themselves to the various ministries of charity (Cf. LG 29; SC 35 § 4; AG 16). "

Again I ask Karl Keating to clarify this for us because I have been taught and believe that Bishops, Priests and Deacons, all ordained and having Holy Orders are considered Ordinary Ministers of the Eucharist (which does not have anything to do with the consecration) - because they are Ordinary Ministers, they cannot be Extraordinary Ministers - that is the word to concentrate on in this context.
 
CatholicLady,

Per Canon 910 The Bishop, Priest and Deacon are all Ordinary Ministers of HOLY COMMUNION
Can. 910 §1 The ordinary minister of holy communion is a Bishop, a priest or a deacon
Click to expand...
.

That is different from being a Minister of the EUCHARIST, which IS a function of the confection of the Sacrement.

That is why there is no such thing as an Extraordinary Eucharistic Minister, but only Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

The distinction was very clearly covered in my Sacramentology class at the Seminary ( I’m a deaconal student in the ArchDiocese of Detroit)

I’ll post thiso post this in the ‘Ask an Apologist’ section for an official answer.
 
Here’s the scoop, according to Redemptionis Sacramentum:

“As has already been recalled, 'the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi* is a validly ordained Priest.’ Hence the name ‘minister of the Eucharist’ belongs properly to the Priest alone*. Moreover, also by reason of their sacred Ordination, the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are the Bishop [who is a priest], the Priest and the Deacon [who is not a priest], to whom it belongs therefore to administer Holy Communion to the lay members of Christ’s faithful during the celebration of Mass. In this way their ministerial office in the Church is fully and accurately brought to light, and the sign value of the Sacrament is made complete” (RS 154; emphasis and explication added).

In short: Ministers of the Eucharist are priests. Bishops are priests, so they can also be considered ministers of the Eucharist. Deacons are not priests and so are not ministers of the Eucharist. As the title “minister of the Eucharist” is tied to the ability to “confect the sacrament,” a power reserved to priests, there are no extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist. By virtue of their ordination, deacons are ordinary ministers of holy Communion (as are bishops and priests, in addition to being ministers of the Eucharist). Laypeople who are so deputed for the service are extraordinary ministers of holy Communion.
 
40.png
misericordie:
Why is it the VATICAN does not tell these orders (they seem to be the LARGEST ones still) to return to the spirit of their founders?
Click to expand...
Hi Mis -

I share your pain.

Truth be told, the Vatican HAS TOLD THEM to stop! See the “Redemtionis Sacramentum” published a couple months ago, but as is so often true in the American church the VATICAN IS BEING IGNORED!

catholic.com/library/redemptionis_sacramentum.asp
 
40.png
misericordie:
Why is it that most religious orders of both men and women which are very liberal, and in which MOST members are usually older than 50, are also the orders which have very few vocations, and who’s members are the ones still stuck(for the most part) liturgically in the 1970’s?
Click to expand...
The reason is these people are literally stuck in the 60’s. At that time you had the civil rights movement, sexual revolution, and an overal philosophy of skeptisim of anything traditional. They generally had a distrust anything their parents stood for because they felt their parents were to blame for all the problems (civil rights) in the world. Combine this with vatican II and you get a big mess.

The problem is they threw out the baby with the bathwater. Most of them are too old and stubborn to realize this. We just have to wait until they die. This crisis we’re in is a purification of the church. Most young people are more conservative because they can see how foolish their parents are and have more in common with their grandparents who fought in WWII who are generally thought to be the “greatest generation”. they sacraficed a lot more for our country than the 60’s radicals ever did.

bottom line, blame it on the hippies.
 
Melman:
You probably won’t care about this, but our small parish started using EM’s in the 1970’s by having two lines, the priest on one side and the EM on the other. Well, there was one family that always sat on the “EM” side of the church, and would go through all sorts of contortions to get into the priest’s line. If they were trying to send a “message”, no one ever said it out loud. But as a kid I thought it looked pretty silly, no one ever joined them, and the fact that I remember it 25 years later shows that it made an impression.

The Church has authorized EM’s. For you to go out of your way to avoid them, seems defiant.
Click to expand...
No, hopefully it does not "seem" defiant, it actually is. I make it my intention, as due my family and friends to ONLY go to the priests line. It's not our fault they have four "EXTRA-ordinary ministers of the Eucharist and only ONE priest distributing; well, we Choose the PRIEST.
 
I’m not trying to date anyone here, but I just thought I would inject a young person’s perspective into all the talk about Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. This office is just another example of my generation’s (I’ll be a senior at Notre Dame next year) ignorance of the Church’s not-so-distant past. I grew up never realizing that things had ever been different. Sure there was talk about the Mass having been in a different language when my parents were kids, but the wholesale changes made to the liturgy were something that I only slowly discovered throughout my college years. When I learned that lay ministers are supposed to be an EXTRA-ordinary circumstance, it was like a bucket of cold water to the face. Here every parish in America has its schedule of ministers, I’m guessing at least three per Mass no matter how small the parish (1 for Body, at least 2 for Blood), and it’s supposed to be something used, strictly read, in times of necessity. You’re all exactly right in reading my generation as becoming traditional in response to the stupidity of our parents’, and that’s the way I see the issue of extraordinary ministers as well. I would rather give up the cup and take twice as long for the distribution of the Eucharist (we’re never given enough time to meditate after reception anyway) in order to only receive from ordinary ministers. However, since the Church has declared the use of extraordinary ministers licit, it does seem a little defiant to go to great lengths to avoid them. At the same time I must confess I am also an occasional perpetrator of liturgical abuse; if there’s a communion rail I kneel at it, even though the new Roman Missal actually forbids reception of the Eucharist while kneeling (which I find ludicrous). So go ahead and be a little defiant as long as it’s respectful and well-intentioned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top