SPLIT: Different rubrics for Altar Servers?

[jimrob]

When altar servers stand, sit and kneel is the decision of the celebrating priest (often relayed through the MC).
Rule 1 The priest is always right
Rule 2 When he’s wrong, refer to rule 1

The congregation are allowed more latitude, but what happens on the sanctuary has to be strictly controlled. If you don’t like it, don’t serve.

 

[MarkThompson]

But a normative posture that is not binding. People are still free to kneel, because this is the latin rite. No bishop, priest, deacon, or EHMC should be restricting their right to kneel.

This is true for the congregation, but it strikes me as good liturgical practice to have the altar servers, who should be representatives and role models for the worshiping community, adopt uniform and normative practices.

If they want to kneel, then by golly, they can kneel.

Oh yes indeed. And, by golly, the priest can terminate their tenure as altar servers right then and there. I think we’re agreed?

 

[TheMc]

When altar servers stand, sit and kneel is the decision of the celebrating priest (often relayed through the MC).
Rule 1 The priest is always right
Rule 2 When he’s wrong, refer to rule 1

The congregation are allowed more latitude, but what happens on the sanctuary has to be strictly controlled. If you don’t like it, don’t serve.

You’re missing the point. The priest does have more control over the servers. If he didn’t, it would be impossible to get anything done. But in matters as this, he still shouldn’t be restricting them.

Think about it this way: Why does he need to restrict them to standing only? The only answer I see is to further his agenda.

 

[TheMc]

This is true for the congregation, but it strikes me as good liturgical practice to have the altar servers, who should be representatives and role models for the worshiping community, adopt uniform and normative practices.

Why don’t you run that by the CDWDS? I’m guessing they’d agree with me.

 

[JGMendes4049]

I think the conflict here is the difference between what a priest can do and what a priest should do.

 

[johndan]

Interesingly enough, in other parishes where the pastor had all the altar boys kneeling for Communion, the pastors were instructed that they could not force the boys to kneel, so now all the boys are forced to receive standing.

 

[DCNBILL]

It would seem that simple obedience and humility should override personal piety in a situation such as this. Do as the priest or MC requests or do not serve at the Altar.

 

[Corki]

Then where is the defined line?

The line is when the priest directs the altar servers to do something that is not allowed.

Standing for Communion is allowed so the priest can use that standard for altar servers.

OTOH, I used to attend a parish where the priest directed the altar servers to all come and stand next to him (half on either side) from the Our Father up to the distribution of Communion. That’s not allowed. It would have been appropriate for someone to bring this up to Father and even to escalate it if he forced the issue.

 

[TheMc]

It would seem that simple obedience and humility should override personal piety in a situation such as this. Do as the priest or MC requests or do not serve at the Altar.

It’s more than a personal piety though.

 

[johndan]

Indeed it is more than personal piety, particularly when you know nothing about the person attempting to work this out.

 

[Elizium23]

I don’t understand how it extends past personal piety. As an example, I, a resident of the USA, choose not to eat meat on Fridays of the year. An option that is permitted by universal law, but waived by the USCCB. If my confessor or pastor urged me to substitute some other kind of penance on Fridays for the good of my soul, or the good of the community, why would I argue with his good advice?

 

[johndan]

My reason for seeking answers is not to banter with anyone. As far as what you do regarding meat on Friday, or what you call the good advice of the person you choose as a confessor is your business. If you choose to call my search for an answer personal piety, go ahead. I am not interested in engaging your assertion. I am seeking an answer to my question.

 

[GwenL]

Anybody who functions at Mass as other than “laity in the pews” needs to follow the rules set by the priest for posture, as long as his rules aren’t illicit. If he wants altar servers to stand to receive Holy Communion, they should either do so, or stop being altar servers. They serve at the altar at the pleasure of the priest celebrant. Altar serving is not a right.

In this case, the priest is not asking the servers to do something illicit. He’s asking them to do something that is in line with the norms set by the USCCB (and setting these norms is their prerogative).

At our Cathedral, the rector and PV don’t care if servers receive kneeling or standing. But the bishop’s MC wants everybody standing to receive (when the bishop celebrates). The MC isn’t young, and neither are the two vimps; probably none of them are physically spry enough to comfortably get back to their feet from kneeling without a rail or chair nearby. The MC wants uniformity of posture in the sanctuary and the bishop supports him. So everybody stands to receive when the bishop celebrates. If you don’t want to stand to receive, you are not in the sanctuary when he celebrates. That is the choice of the altar server.

I think that the OP and sons need to decide what is more important–serving, or receiving kneeling.

 

[johndan]

Great, where is the document with the ruling? [edited]

 

[Elizium23]

Canon 519 has already been mentioned, with basis in Holy Scripture, such as:

[bibledrb]Hebrews 13:17[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]1 Thes 5:12-13[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]1 Pet 5:2-3[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]1 Tim 5:17[/bibledrb]

[edited]

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Great, where is the document with the ruling? [edited]

I guess you could start with this, specifically the underlined (by me) part.

Can. 562 The rector of a church, under the authority of the local ordinary and observing the legitimate statutes and acquired rights, is obliged to see to it that sacred functions are celebrated worthily in the church according to the liturgical norms and prescripts of the canons, that obligations are fulfilled faithfully, that goods are administered diligently, that the maintenance and beauty of sacred furnishings and buildings are provided for, and that nothing whatever occurs which is in any way unfitting to the holiness of the place and the reverence due to a house of God.

Since the priest is not asking for anything that is not within the norm in the US, I would have to side with him on this one.

 

[Elizium23]

Code of Canon Law:

Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

Can. 223 §1. In exercising their rights, the Christian faithful, both as individuals and gathered together in associations, must take into account the common good of the Church, the rights of others, and their own duties toward others.

§2. In view of the common good, ecclesiastical authority can direct the exercise of rights which are proper to the Christian faithful.

 

[GwenL]

Great, where is the document with the ruling? Again i am asking a question, not interested in bantering or personal opinion. enlighten me!

I am absolutely amazed by the lecturing due to a question.

Why are you are surprised and seemingly offended to get peoples’ experiences and opinions, when posting on an internet forum? Your first two postings asked general questions, “does anybody know why the priest said/did this?”

If you are not interested in bantering or personal opinion, I suggest that you refrain from asking a question of people who frequent an internet forum.