Should there be a dress code for EMHCs?

[Lepanto]

EMHCs are a scandal. St Thomas Aquinas declared it to be a mortal sin for a layman to touch the Blessed Sacrament! Imagine his horror at seeing not only layMEN manhandle the Host, but layWOMEN

For the record, as I have argued repeatedly in other threads (and as my signature will attest), I am absolutely opposed to communion in the hand and am against the use of EMHCs 95% of the time.

However, that’s not the topic of this thread. Please don’t get it locked.

 

[bbentrup]

The GIRM says they should use Albs. Elsewhere it points out that albs are to be worn with Amice and Cincture, unless designed not to need them.
GIRM:

1. Acolytes, lectors, and other lay ministers may wear the alb or other suitable vesture that is lawfully approved by the Conference of Bishops (cf. no. 390).

339 gives a lot of options. I think you are wrong that the GIRM says they should use albs. Perhaps you are referring to #336 - “The sacred garment common to ordained and instituted ministers of any rank is the alb, to be tied at the waist with a cincture unless it is made so as to fit even without such.”

An EMHC who is not an acolyte/lector is not an ordained or instituted minister. They are only deputed extraordinary ministers at that mass, so #336 doesn’t apply. Even if they were, #336 only tells us what is the common sacred garment, not when it should be worn. For that we refer to #339.

Non-instituted lay people may wear the alb according to 339, but should probably refrain from doing so under most circumstances in our present time since there might be an element of confusion among the laity.

Let me know if I missed something, or you were referencing a different paragraph of the GIRM.

 

[jmcrae]

I once noticed a eucharistic minister wearing her tennis outfit and visor too. Guess she was running late for mass after her match.

Or got pulled from the congregation at the last minute. Ever dropped in for for Mass on the way home from something, thinking you would just hang out at the back and not be noticed, and then they ask you to fill in for the absent whomever?

 

[Aramis]

EMHCs are a scandal. St Thomas Aquinas declared it to be a mortal sin for a layman to touch the Blessed Sacrament! Imagine his horror at seeing not only layMEN manhandle the Host, but layWOMEN

Not the only thing St. Thomas was wrong on.

St. Thomas Aquinas was not the Pope, and was not a council, so he didn’t have the authority to infallibly define it.

 

[UKcatholicGuy]

Not the only thing St. Thomas was wrong on.

St. Thomas Aquinas was not the Pope, and was not a council, so he didn’t have the authority to infallibly define it.

LOL and what council approved EMCHs?

 

[terryobrien80]

Regardless if you think that there should be a dress code for the entire parish, should there be a dress code at least for EMHCs? If so, what should it include?

How about we just do away with EMHCs?

I always wind myself around to where the priest is anyway, stepping on toes all the way - and I don’t care

 

[EasterJoy]

Look at posting #18. Imagine a well-regarded pastor trying to implement such a dress code. A good pastor would give current lay ministers a voice in what the “uniform” would look like. He would be tactful and exceedingly gentle in implementing the dress code, and he would do it in a way to give everyone plenty of time to get on board at their own pace. He would also quietly make it known that the parish would pay for anyones’ “uniform” where money was an issue.

I think even the best pastors would receive some level of resistance. Some EMsHC might even quit. In all honesty that might not be such a bad thing. In time the extremely simple uniforms would become part of the parish’s heritage. It would not only guard against lay ministers dressing inappropriately for Mass, it would also send a quiet signal to the rest of the parish members. It would also build espirit de corps among the lay ministers. New EMsHC would realize they need to wear the uniform before they ever applied.

I think it’s great idea, but most pastors simply lack the courage, tact and fortitude to implement such a code.

You’re right. Most EMHCs would not be pleased if they were asked to purchase clothes so that they might dress like the catering staff at a Martha Stewart wedding reception, instead of normal members of the laity, which is what they are.

I’m usually game to do whatever the parish asks, and if my pastor asked me to do this, I would, but I wouldn’t be pleased. I would have to buy new clothes, and so would my husband (he’s not an EMHC, but I don’t know what is anyone else’s closet). I do not own a white blouse suitable to go with a skirt (which I also do not own) and my heels are undoubtedly higher than you like. My husband does not own a white dress shirt or black slacks. As for the choice of clothing, I would rather wear the uniform I had to wear in high school, and I did not graduate with a fondness for that get-up.

With the exception of those few who look stunning in black and white, almost no one dresses like that for Mass on a regular basis. If someone were asked to fill in for an absent EMHC at the last minute, which sometimes happens, they would stick out like a sore thumb. Besides, it is very common that one of the EMHC do not act as such for a Mass on which they were assigned, because the parish’s transitional deacon, retired priest, or both decided to come. Again, anyone replaced by an ordinary minister would stick out like a sore thumb.

A dress code, I could live with, even if I had to buy different shoes. A uniform? I don’t think that’s a good idea.

 

[mullenpm]

I agree with the posters who would like to do away with EMHCs, but that is not going to happen anytime soon.

With respect to the garments being unisex and the cassock and surplice worn by a woman; all garments worn while serving at Mass would be male garments because females at altar is a new thing. What would you propose that women serving at Mass wear? The server at my church who is a woman wears a black cassock and white surplice exactly like the man who serves with her. Actually, it took me a little time to realize it was a woman.

But, that is the garb that the Rector wishes her to wear.

What do all the people who think we should have “altar girls” wear; they most certainly must wear identical garb as the altar boys. Anything else would look silly and emphasize the female aspect.

So, as long as some parishes have females serving at altar the look should be consistent. And I don’t know how one would mistake a person serving at altar in a black cassock and surplice with being a Priest or Deacon.

 

[Rickwood]

You’re right. Most EMHCs would not be pleased if they were asked to purchase clothes so that they might dress like the catering staff at a Martha Stewart wedding reception, instead of normal members of the laity, which is what they are.

That’s ridiculous. I wouldn’t have to buy a thing. I think that’s true of many people and there is nothing odd about the look except one does not normally wear a solid black tie except to funerals.

I’m usually game to do whatever the parish asks, and if my pastor asked me to do this, I would, but I wouldn’t be pleased. I would have to buy new clothes, and so would my husband (he’s not an EMHC, but I don’t know what is anyone else’s closet). I do not own a white blouse suitable to go with a skirt (which I also do not own) and my heels are undoubtedly higher than you like. My husband does not own a white dress shirt or black slacks. As for the choice of clothing, I would rather wear the uniform I had to wear in high school, and I did not graduate with a fondness for that get-up.

Wow, I think your wardrobe is lacking. A man without a white shirt? By the way, just how much do you think this “uniform” would cost?

With the exception of those few who look stunning in black and white, almost no one dresses like that for Mass on a regular basis. If someone were asked to fill in for an absent EMHC at the last minute, which sometimes happens, they would stick out like a sore thumb. Besides, it is very common that one of the EMHC do not act as such for a Mass on which they were assigned, because the parish’s transitional deacon, retired priest, or both decided to come. Again, anyone replaced by an ordinary minister would stick out like a sore thumb.

I am certain any pastor would be faced with a MILE of excuses.

A dress code, I could live with, even if I had to buy different shoes. A uniform? I don’t think that’s a good idea.

I think they are a good idea even for school.

 

[KathleenElsie]

That’s ridiculous. I wouldn’t have to buy a thing. I think that’s true of many people and there is nothing odd about the look except one does not normally wear a solid black tie except to funerals.

Most of the men that I know own dress pants and shirts. Then men and boys in our family wear them to Liturgy and Mass. Sadly many tend to only wear them for “special” occasions of which Mass is not one of them.

Wow, I think your wardrobe is lacking. A man without a white shirt? By the way, just how much do you think this “uniform” would cost?

You can get white shirts of all sizes and brands at the Salvation Army (new or only worn once or twice) for around $3. You can also find black or navy blue dress pants, also almost never worn, for around $4. A belt for $2.50. Shoes are harder to come by in many sizes but when they have them around $4. So total cost of this uniform for a boy or man in the family is around $13.50.

Change the pants to a skirt for the woman to maybe $5 and maybe eliminate the belt and you get a womans outfit at $12.00 up to a whopping $14.50 to dress in a modest uniform like outfit.

I am certain any pastor would be faced with a MILE of excuses.

Sad but true. I like the one that says “well at least they are at Mass”

I think they are a good idea even for school.

.

Home school, no fuss no gas not uniform. But, I will admit that the house is always messy from the kids being home and active.

 

[Michael038]

Our Diocese met with all of us EMHC’s and told us men that we should wear a shirt with a collar and a pair of dress pants and dress shoes. No tie is required but I wear one in the winter months usually with a suit. Women a nice pair of dress pants and a blouse with proper dress shoes no open toes were their requirements.

 

[EasterJoy]

That’s ridiculous. I wouldn’t have to buy a thing. I think that’s true of many people and there is nothing odd about the look except one does not normally wear a solid black tie except to funerals.

Wow, I think your wardrobe is lacking. A man without a white shirt? By the way, just how much do you think this “uniform” would cost?

I am certain any pastor would be faced with a MILE of excuses.

I think they are a good idea even for school.

I could have gone without your critique of the wardrobes at our house, if you don’t mind. I see formal businesswear at Mass all the time, but I will bet that 99% of the times I have seen a man in black slacks with a white shirt and a black tie, he was a either in a rented suit or taking orders at a restaurant. Lots of women have white blouses and black skirts or dress slacks, so your uniform would pretty much ensure we have even fewer men from the laity serving as EMHCs than we do now. Welcome to Oregon. Actually, welcome to the entire western United States, where the joke is that in California, formal means “wear socks.” (The Mormon missionaries don’t even wear black ties here.)

In any case, I think laity or non-ordained religious serving as extraordinary ministers, both male and female, should wear the clothing appropriately to be worn at Mass by others in the laity or their religious order. We EMHCs are not a minor order of ministers. We are extraordinary ministers, ready to melt back in with the rest of the laity at the first moment that an ordinary minister arrives on the scene to take their places. Let us dress accordingly. Leave the clerical garb to the ordinary ministers.**

 

[Rickwood]

Most of the men that I know own dress pants and shirts. Then men and boys in our family wear them to Liturgy and Mass. Sadly many tend to only wear them for “special” occasions of which Mass is not one of them.

You can get white shirts of all sizes and brands at the Salvation Army (new or only worn once or twice) for around $3. You can also find black or navy blue dress pants, also almost never worn, for around $4. A belt for $2.50. Shoes are harder to come by in many sizes but when they have them around $4. So total cost of this uniform for a boy or man in the family is around $13.50.

Change the pants to a skirt for the woman to maybe $5 and maybe eliminate the belt and you get a womans outfit at $12.00 up to a whopping $14.50 to dress in a modest uniform like outfit.

I am certain any pastor would be faced with a MILE of excuses.

Sad but true. I like the one that says “well at least they are at Mass”

Thanks for the comments. There would indeed be a MILE of excuses. Soon enough though the excuses would vanish and it would just become an standing expectation. I think if great care was taken to keep the uniform reverent and inexpensive, there would be no problems.

What always blows me away is the EMHC wearing worn blue jeans and a threadbare flannel shirt and sneakers for Mass. The same EMHC that seems to dress quite nicely when I see him at a fancy restaurant, at the philharmonic or a service at a funeral home.

I really don’t get it.

 

[Rickwood]

Our Diocese met with all of us EMHC’s and told us men that we should wear a shirt with a collar and a pair of dress pants and dress shoes. No tie is required but I wear one in the winter months usually with a suit. Women a nice pair of dress pants and a blouse with proper dress shoes no open toes were their requirements.

Not bad.

I cannot play golf in a shirt without a collar. I cannot enter certain venues in blue jeans.

It seems like we should pay at least that much respect to God’s house.

 

[Rickwood]

I could have gone without your critique of the wardrobes at our house, if you don’t mind. I see formal businesswear at Mass all the time, but I will bet that 99% of the times I have seen a man in black slacks with a white shirt and a black tie, he was a either in a rented suit or taking orders at a restaurant. Lots of women have white blouses and black skirts or dress slacks, so your uniform would pretty much ensure we have even fewer men from the laity serving as EMHCs than we do now. Welcome to Oregon. Actually, welcome to the entire western United States, where the joke is that in California, formal means “wear socks.” (The Mormon missionaries don’t even wear black ties here.)

I could have gone without you equating a white dress shirt, black slacks and a black tie to “the catering staff at a Martha Stewart wedding reception.”

All you are doing is pumping-out excuses. Remember, no one is doubting there would be a TON of excuses if a uniform was introduced. They would stop soon enough though.

I think there would be real value in expecting EMsHC to dress in a manner that might seem too formal or staid to many.

In any case, I think laity or non-ordained religious serving as extraordinary ministers, both male and female, should wear the clothing appropriately to be worn at Mass by others in the laity or their religious order. We EMHCs are not a minor order of ministers. We are extraordinary ministers, ready to melt back in with the rest of the laity at the first moment that an ordinary minister arrives on the scene to take their** places. Let us dress accordingly. Leave the clerical garb to the ordinary ministers.

I never mentioned “clerical garb.”

 

[EasterJoy]

I could have gone without you equating a white dress shirt, black slacks and a black tie to “the catering staff at a Martha Stewart wedding reception.”

All you are doing is pumping-out excuses. Remember, no one is doubting there would be a TON of excuses if a uniform was introduced. They would stop soon enough though.

I think there would be real value in expecting EMsHC to dress in a manner that might seem too formal or staid to many.

I never mentioned “clerical garb.”

I’m sorry, but I’ve arranged catered events and I know what kind of uniforms the staff members wear. They are distinctive at these events. Like it or not, your description hit the nail on the head. You don’t have to believe me, but I’m telling you that almost nobody else out here dresses like that. I think that ignoring this obvious parallel would be ill-concieved, to say the least! Do you really want EMHCs to look like the people who circulate through the crowd with trays of appetizers and champagne at wedding receptions?

I don’t need any excuses. If my pastor decides to institute a dress code, he probably won’t ask for my vote. If he does, I’ll tell him what I told you. In any event, whatever he tells us to do, I’ll do. That’s what he does when the bishop tells him to do something, and that is good enough for me.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I’m sorry, but I’ve arranged catered events and I know what kind of uniforms the staff members wear. They are distinctive at these events. Like it or not, your description hit the nail on the head. You don’t have to believe me, but I’m telling you that almost nobody else out here dresses like that. I think that ignoring this obvious parallel would be ill-concieved, to say the least! Do you really want EMHCs to look like the people who circulate through the crowd with trays of appetizers and champagne at wedding receptions?

I don’t need any excuses. If my pastor decides to institute a dress code, he probably won’t ask for my vote. If he does, I’ll tell him what I told you. In any event, whatever he tells us to do, I’ll do. That’s what he does when the bishop tells him to do something, and that is good enough for me.

Well just as waiters are responsible for the trays and things. So are the EMHCs responsible for the proper distribution of the PRECIOUS BLOOD and BODY of OUR LORD. So being humble in the way you dress should not be a problem.

Well if you insist that “service staff” is who wears this type of clothing then so be it. EMHCs are staff that “serves” parish needs.

 

[EasterJoy]

Well just as waiters are responsible for the trays and things. So are the EMHCs responsible for the proper distribution of the PRECIOUS BLOOD and BODY of OUR LORD. So being humble in the way you dress should not be a problem.

Well if you insist that “service staff” is who wears this type of clothing then so be it. EMHCs are staff that “serves” parish needs.

I disagree, on two counts. One is that it is of paramount importance to emphasize that this extraordinary ministry is fundamentally different from work in food service. The other is that the relationship between the ordinary ministers, EMHCs, and the rest of the laity is fundamentally different than the analogy you’re suggesting.

On count one: It is not that the dress is too humble. It is that it brings to mind a secular role of an entirely different nature. I think it is worth avoiding any parallels between the Body of Christ and a canape, don’t you?

On count two: It is better that the EMHCs dress as the rest of those dressed for the wedding feast of the Lamb. And again, better that their dress emphasize that their role is extraordinary, not ordinary. The EMHC are not only servants at the wedding feast of the Lamb. They are also counted among the ordinary guests. This is not a direct analogy (because I feel very strongly that the spiritually nourishment of the Eucharist should not be carelessly equated with normal food service), but if the aunties or other family members are called upon to help with the cake at a normal wedding, they do not dress as if they had been hired to do the job. They dress as guests at the wedding. By dressing as the rest of the guests do, it is clear that their service is not in exchange for a wage, but given freely in honor of their closeness with the bride and groom. Their attire attests that they serve the rest of the guests purely out of their love of the bride and groom. EMHCs should not dress as if they are not associated with the celebration, serving only for a wage, nor as if they have been given a more permanent role than they have.

And again, this is a ministry normally reserved for those ordained to it. It is, whenever possible, a role for those who have been set aside, consecrated. Clergy are servants, but they are also vessels given over to a particular and sacred use. If I went back to the wedding analogy, the EMHC are more like the aunties that get a corsage. They should be careful not to dress so as to be mistaken for a bridesmaid. A cross or something else that can be readily removed if their services are not called for is sufficient to set them apart.

My opinion is that a dress code is fine, but instituting a uniform is out of place. In the end, though, if I’m asked to dress according to some kind of a uniform, I’ll dress that way. I don’t think there is much chance of that happening in this area of the country, but I would comply if asked. I would consider the uniform of Post #18 a penance, though.

PS to Post #18: Are there women who have to be told not to wear white hose with a white blouse and a black skirt?

 

[jmcrae]

Well if you insist that “service staff” is who wears this type of clothing then so be it. EMHCs are staff that “serves” parish needs.

Actually, they aren’t - EMHCs are not a “special class” of parishioners - all they are is just the folks who were asked, right before the beginning of the Mass, whether they would serve today. The priest knew what they were wearing at the moment that he asked them to serve that Mass, and obviously, it wasn’t a problem for him. They don’t receive anything for performing this service, either - it is purely voluntary.

Anyone, including you, might be asked to serve - there are no special qualifications, other than that one has received the Sacrament of Confirmation and First Holy Communion, and is over the age of 16 - and of course, that the priest has asked you to serve.

 

[Michael038]

Actually, they aren’t - EMHCs are not a “special class” of parishioners - all they are is just the folks who were asked, right before the beginning of the Mass, whether they would serve today. The priest knew what they were wearing at the moment that he asked them to serve that Mass, and obviously, it wasn’t a problem for him. They don’t receive anything for performing this service, either - it is purely voluntary.

Anyone, including you, might be asked to serve - there are no special qualifications, other than that one has received the Sacrament of Confirmation and First Holy Communion, and is over the age of 16 - and of course, that the priest has asked you to serve.

My Diocese doesnt just pick people out of the pew’s before Mass. People wishing to serve volunteer, undergo training, get a blessing of commission, receive a certificate for the length of their term, and are placed on a schedule to serve one Mass per month. It may be different in your parish, but I’m just letting you know that it doesnt always work like you explained in the thread.