Mother Miriam on EWTN states that women should not be in the Sanctuary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lenny
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I still haven’t found a transcript or video of Mother Miriam’s remarks about women in the sanctuary at Mass. From this discussions it seems she promotes a ban on that. Perhaps Mother Miriam has never heard of the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity, in which a woman becomes Bride of Christ at the hands of her bishop. The rite, very similar in form to an ordination, begins by the bishop calling the virgin candidate from the assembly, and from that point forward she is seated in the sanctuary (in Latin, presbyterum). The ritual makes clear that the proper “home” for this Bride of Christ and “alter Ecclesiae” is with her Bridegroom, in the sanctuary, in the place of sacrifice.

Maybe if we had more girls serving at Holy Mass we would foster more vocations to Consecrated Virginity!
 
Oh well, this version of the Rite of Consecration (that you’re referring to) is a post-Vatican II version, which seems to be the era that Mother Miriam doesn’t necessarily accept.
Older versions of the rite (to the extent that they were used) seem to be different, and women certainly weren’t invited to go sit in the sanctuary.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15458a.htm
 
Last edited:
Even in the Pre-Vatican-II version, the CV received Holy Communion directly at the altar, from the hands of the bishop, under both species as was her distinct privilege. This would require ascending all the steps to said altar rather dramatically. Therefore she would most certainly have been in the sanctuary during Mass.
 
ChemicalBean said:
Even in the Pre-Vatican-II version, the CV received Holy Communion directly at the altar, from the hands of the bishop, under both species as was her distinct privilege. This would require ascending all the steps to said altar rather dramatically. Therefore she would most certainly have been in the sanctuary during Mass.
Click to expand...
May I ask where you are seeing a description of this Rite where it says the Consecrated Virgin receives Communion at the altar?
 
SeekSalvation said:
40.png
gracepoole:
Sorry, I was referring to Church teaching, which does not prohibit women from being on the altar. If you believe “it isn’t their role,” I’d gently suggest you have a problem with Church teaching.
Click to expand...
2000 years of Church history proves your not correct in your statement, yet you ‘progressively’ attack (name removed by moderator).
Click to expand...
What part of “gently suggest” = “attack”?
 
I originally got my information from another poster to this site, and I once went looking for this myself. I’m trying to type from a photograph of a copy of the Roman Pontifical of Benedict IV (edit: published 1818 under Pius VII). The rubric (red type) of Communion says:

Postquam Pontifex se de Corpore et Sanguine communicaverit, tum accedunt ad supremum gradum altaris Virgines ipsae binae et binae, et ibidae genuflectunt: Pontifex vero singulas communicat, et omnibus communicatis, ipsae Virginis ante altare, unt in Missa fuerunt genuflexae, simul cantant Antiphonam…

I have very little Latin, but with the help of Google even I can read that the Virgins go to the highest step of the altar two by two (presumes more than one!) and are communicated by the bishop.
 
Last edited:
Regardless of what Mother Miriam prefers, Holy Mother Church allows it. Never confuse "right vs wrong " and “preferences”
 
Please be more specific in what you are quoting. We all know that even St Paul said things that were more reflective of his culture and his preferences that Holy Mother Church does not require.Thanks
 
Which logically means that the Church can “allow” that which is “bad.”
 
Lea101 said:
If lay women are unfit to be on the sanctuary, lay men should be as well.
Click to expand...
Which is actually the Eastern approach, Orthodox and Catholic . . . modernly, though, it is unfortunately necessary to use those that could be ordained as subdeacons in the place of actual subdeacons (I forget which thread I mentioned my strong support for ordaining subdeacons for this purpose . . .)

(btw, ordained or not, our readers don’t do it from within the Holy Place, but from within the congregation)
Sarcelle said:
Wasn’t there a time when women who were menstruating or have just given birth forbidden to attend mass?
Click to expand...
Staying away after birth and “churching” the mother an infant a week or so before baptism is alive and well in much of the east.

Not so much “unclean”, but, for crying out loud, she was exhausted after giving birth without modern medicine, and was excused . Note that at the time this developed, missing liturgy three weeks in a row without cause incurred excommunication . . .

Generally, 40 days, iirc. (but then, 40 day periods other than St. Phillip’s fast generally aren’t exactly 40 days . . .)

I’ve heard references to menstruation as well, but don’t know enough to comment. In the reference I’ve heard, it had to do with blood–but again, I don’t know enough to comment (so I’ll punt and again suggest the East and West forum at byzcath.org, where I know it’s been discussed).
 
a postscript that bounced into my head this morning during the post-anaphora prayers . . .

as the cobwebs and dust give way to snippet of memory, I want to say that it wasn’t menstruation that was the issue pe se, but rather the rules regarded blood. That is, that the same rules applied to open bleeding wounds and mensruation. I couldn’t tell you if that dates to Jewish law, but Weil make my usual deferral to the byzcath.org forum archives.
 
Pardon my absence. In the beginning, Eve did try to remove herself from under the authority of Adam. The directive to not eat the fruit was given from God to adam. Adam then commanded eve to not eat the fruit, this is done to show Adams authority over Eve. Thus, whenever Eve eats the fruit she is disobeying God, yes, but more directly she is disobeying Adam and the authority given him over her. She is trying to do this independently of her husband(obviously because she doesn’t seek his council or anything like that) she is trying to be self sufficient In her actions. We also see that after she eats, she then gives it to her husband. This is done to to establish a sense of authority over him, not as a way to let adam “be free” as she supposedly then was. To give him the fruit, is to try to control him and his action in that moment.

You say “women can contribute more than just by being mothers and nuns” almost as if those aren’t the highest honors a women can strive for in life? I may be mistaken, it is likely I am. Women do contribute in the parish life, but to Say we only want them in the background “doing the heaven lifting” because we don’t think it appropriate to have them in the sanctuary serving is silly. Catholicism is the fulfillment of Judaism. When we look at our Jewish roots, we see ONLY men in the service of the sacrifice. Now, one might say here that only the high priest and priests are in service, not laymen of other tribes. This is true, but when you look at the contrast between now aNd then, there wasn’t a lack of men in the priesthood. Lay men had to come into the picture because of a falling number of vocations. We didn’t have all the minor orders any longer to fulfill these serving roles at mass. Therefore it is fitting that men be the ones fulfilling these roles. Serving is used also as a Step in discernment for young men. Women have no hope of being ordained clerics in the Catholic Church, and therefore should leave the actions that assist in discernment to those who can be ordained clerics in the church. Of course, there is always the exception of if a parish has no young boys and all the men are too frail to assist in Holy Mass.
 
Dovekin said:
40.png
Tis_Bearself:
40.png
Shakuhachi:
Maybe Mother Miriam shlods keep her opinions to herself.
Click to expand...
Why? You and I don’t. Neither do many other Catholic speakers from Fr Martin to Fr Mitch to Fr Z to Fr Ripperger.
Click to expand...
Mother Miriam is speaking out of a tradition that says women should not teach. Yes, there are lots of qualifications to be made to that, but the core principle is that women should have no say in what happens at the altar.

She promotes that opinion by keeping hers to herself. When she offers her opinion on what happens at the altar, she is saying women should offer their opinions.

Personally I am grateful for Mother Miriam’s, and Mother Angelica’s before her, outspoken opinions. But I disagree with them. If I agreed with them, I think I would have to be against them speaking out.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but I don’t think this is a completely accurate statement. Mother Miriam has NO problem with women teaching. She herself does it.

What she believes is that only males should SERVE at the Altar.

At traditional parishes, they have very well developed Altar Server programs, where boys as young as 6/7 are serving the altar (after First Communion), learning from older boys and adult male servers. The view is that being an Altar Boy in these traditional parishes is far more than just helping the priest. They have to memorize parts of the mass in latin, study theology, etc. It’s truly a internship in the priesthood for these boys & young men.

ADDITIONALLY, most of the traditional groups also have a group for girls that essentially teaches them what it’s like to be a nun. Here is a pic of some of these girls (in the blue sashes) receiving communion
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Here are other pics of some girls in two different groups, partaking in a mass procession at the local Cathedral.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Phil19034
Could you provide more info on that group for girls? I would love to see something like this started in my parish. Thanks
 
This is an extract from a long letter from Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales (Manila, Philippines) about 10 years ago explaining why there should not be female altar servers:

Altar Servers
  1. From antiquity, the altars (sic) servers have exercised their ministry within the assembly and they have helped to enhance the quality of the celebration by taking part in processions and by ensuring that all the requisites for the celebration are available at the appropriate time. (GIRM, 100)
  • It is a proven fact that many ordained ministers developed their vocation to the priesthood because of their membership in this ministry when they were young. We therefore wish to continue the practice of reserving this ministry to young boys, in order to introduce them to the life and ministry of the Church. (Redemptionis Sacramentum)
 
Traddy1962 said:
In the beginning, Eve did try to remove herself from under the authority of Adam. The directive to not eat the fruit was given from God to adam. Adam then commanded eve to not eat the fruit, this is done to show Adams authority over Eve. Thus, whenever Eve eats the fruit she is disobeying God, yes, but more directly she is disobeying Adam and the authority given him over her. She is trying to do this independently of her husband(obviously because she doesn’t seek his council or anything like that) she is trying to be self sufficient In her actions. We also see that after she eats, she then gives it to her husband. This is done to to establish a sense of authority over him, not as a way to let adam “be free” as she supposedly then was. To give him the fruit, is to try to control him and his action in that moment.
Click to expand...
This seems like an interpretation from someone who’s looking at the text with a very specific lens. To try to find some sort of feminist sin in it. It’s simply not the lens the Church uses though, according to the catechism.
Traddy1962 said:
I may be mistaken, it is likely I am.
Click to expand...
You’re definitely mistaken.
Traddy1962 said:
You say “women can contribute more than just by being mothers and nuns” almost as if those aren’t the highest honors a women can strive for in life?
Click to expand...
These aren’t the only highest honors a woman can strive for. Actually I would say being a Saint is the highest, but nobody here disagrees.

It’s just frankly a little frustrating to be dismissed in such a way when women talk about roles in the Church. We already know that there are good mothers and sisters out there. It’s just a misdirection.
Traddy1962 said:
Therefore it is fitting that men be the ones fulfilling these roles.
Click to expand...
This isn’t that convincing. Perhaps you should expand more. Being in these roles doesn’t mean that the person is discerning priesthood. I don’t see people saying married men shouldn’t be in these roles, too.
Traddy1962 said:
Women have no hope of being ordained clerics in the Catholic Church, and therefore should leave the actions that assist in discernment to those who can be ordained clerics in the church
Click to expand...
Being in these roles doesn’t necessarily equate to assisting in discernment. Women who have served in these areas have said it has helped with their prayer life and spirituality. It doesn’t necessarily lead to them wanting to be priests. Barring one gender for the sake of the other seems pretty discriminatory. Also, there are many other actions that can help in one’s discernment. Should be just bar women from everything? Of course not!
dochawk said:
(btw, ordained or not, our readers don’t do it from within the Holy Place, but from within the congregation)
Click to expand...
I don’t really know what you mean by this. All of the readers I’ve seen read from the sanctuary. In different parishes. Unless you mean something else?
 
Lea101 said:
This seems like an interpretation from someone who’s looking at the text with a very specific lens. To try to find some sort of feminist sin in it. It’s simply not the lens the Church uses though, according to the catechism.
Click to expand...
Well humanity was in paradise until the woman got all uppity. :roll_eyes:
 
Last edited:
Traddy1962 said:
Eve did try to remove herself from under the authority of Adam. The directive to not eat the fruit was given from God to adam. Adam then commanded eve to not eat the fruit, this is done to show Adams authority over Eve.
Click to expand...
The conversation Eve had with the serpent revolved around what God said. There is no indication she is trying to remove herself from under the authority of Adam as a motive. The serpent deceives her into believing that what God said had an ulterior motive, namely He didn’t want them to be like God knowing good from evil.
Traddy1962 said:
She is trying to do this independently of her husband(obviously because she doesn’t seek his council or anything like that) she is trying to be self sufficient In her actions. This is done to to establish a sense of authority over him, not as a way to let adam “be free” as she supposedly then was.
Click to expand...
Again, the story doesn’t indicate she had this as her motive.
Traddy1962 said:
To give him the fruit, is to try to control him and his action in that moment.
Click to expand...
Again, reading a motive into the story that is not indicated in the text. She offered and he simply ate. He didn’t question or object. She wasn’t trying to control him because he was perfectly willing to eat the fruit.
Traddy1962 said:
You say "women can contribute more than just by being mothers and nuns” almost as if those aren’t the highest honors a women can strive for in life
Click to expand...
Men and women strive for sainthood. Motherhood/Fatherhood and religious life are vocations that we are called to by God in which we work for sainthood. In that sense, all vocations are honorable and noble because they can all lead to being a saint.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top