The Lay Ministries

[diggerdomer]

The poster is asking about the instituted ministries, essentially, minor orders. VII imposed a terminology change, which also eliminates a category of persons under canon law: clerks.

Under the old Canon Law, you had Major Clerics, Clerks (aka minor clerics), tonsured religious, and laity. Now, you have major clerics and laity, with some alterations for professed religious.

Instituted Lectors and Instituted Acolytes perform exactly the same liturgical roles as did the minor-orders ordained Lectors and ordained Acolytes.

Lay-readers are different from Lectors, and Altar Servers are different from Acolytes; in both cases, they are extraordinary ministers vs ordinary ministers.

I’m not aware of any Church teaching or legislation that states “lay-readers” (as you call them) are “extraordinary ministers.” Do you have a reference for that? It’s an intriguing idea.

To my knowledge, the Church only uses “extraordinary ministers” regarding communion, not the proclaiming of the Word.

Thank you.

 

[Aramis]

I’m not aware of any Church teaching or legislation that states “lay-readers” (as you call them) are “extraordinary ministers.” Do you have a reference for that? It’s an intriguing idea.

To my knowledge, the Church only uses “extraordinary ministers” regarding communion, not the proclaiming of the Word.

Thank you.

CIC Canon 230, §3…
Can. 230 §1. Lay men who possess the age and qualifications established by decree of the conference of bishops can be admitted on a stable basis through the prescribed liturgical rite to the ministries of lector and acolyte.

Nevertheless, the conferral of these ministries does not grant them the right to obtain support or remuneration from the Church.

§2. Lay persons can fulfill the function of lector in liturgical actions by temporary designation. All lay persons can also perform the functions of commentator or cantor, or other functions, according to the norm of law.

§3. When the need of the Church warrants it and ministers are lacking, lay persons, even if they are not lectors or acolytes, can also supply certain of their duties, namely, to exercise the ministry of the word, to preside offer liturgical prayers, to confer baptism, and to distribute Holy Communion, according to the prescripts of the law.
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2L.HTM

Same paragraph as the authorization for EMHC’s.

 

[Phemie]

The Church does make regular use of these ministries.

I’m sorry, given that fact, what is your question/concern?

His question was about the use of instituted lectors and acolytes as permanent ministries in a parish in the way permanent deacons are used (perhaps ‘use’ is not the best term).

Canada won’t allow it; in the US only a few dioceses institute men who aren’t seeking ordination and, from what I see on these boards, those dioceses that DO use them seem to be the dioceses with the greatest number of priestly vocations.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I’m not aware of any Church teaching or legislation that states “lay-readers” (as you call them) are “extraordinary ministers.” Do you have a reference for that? It’s an intriguing idea.

To my knowledge, the Church only uses “extraordinary ministers” regarding communion, not the proclaiming of the Word.

Thank you.

I would say they were “extraordinary” in the sense that Canon Law and the rubrics in many liturgical books and guidance in the Ceremonial of Bishops calls for lectors and acolytes to carry out certain functions at the Mass and in other liturgical rites.

These two ministries were established by Pope Paul VI as ordinary ministries open only to lay men by his Apostolic Letter given motu proprio “Ministeria Quadam” (15th August 1972). In this motu proprio he abolished first tonsure, the minor orders, and the subdiaconate. Until then men had become clerics by the rite of first tonsure. In this motu proprio he decreed that men become clerics when they are ordained as a deacon. Before the minor orders were abolished men were ordained to minor orders. When he abolished the minor orders he created two new ministries. Men enter these ministries by institution. They remain lay men. Paul VI decreed in this motu proprio that men preparing for the priesthood had to first be instituted as a lector then subsequently instituted as an acoloyte. He also provided that lay men not preparing for the priesthood could be instituted to these ministries.

I suppose we would call readers and altar servers “extraordinary” in that they are carrying out tasks that should really be carried out by lectors and acolytes. Although what an altar server can do is more limited that the full role of an acolyte. It’s similar to how we call laypersons who distribute Holy Communion extraordinary because they perform a function for which the ordinary ministers are bishops, priests, and deacons.

In another sense readers and altar servers may be considered “ordinary” because for the vast majority of us that would be what we usually experience at Mass. As far as I’m aware I’ve never been to a Mass where they used lectors and/or acolytes.

 

[Aramis]

In another sense readers and altar servers may be considered “ordinary” because for the vast majority of us that would be what we usually experience at Mass. As far as I’m aware I’ve never been to a Mass where they used lectors and/or acolytes.

I have… about 70 of them, in fact… 50 or so during the year my dad was an instituted Acolyte and Instituted Lector, and about 20 during the next cycle of deaconal formation after that.

If an Instituted Lector is present (or an Eastern Church Ordained Lector), he reads one or both readings. He reads any letters from the Bishop. He also reads the prayers of the faithful if no deacon is present. He leads the Psalm if it is not being sung. A non-instituted reader may perform all of these in his absence… During that year, I went to a few masses without Dad, but he read at EVERY mass he was at once he was instituted.

 

[jmcrae]

Why is the hierarchy so resistant to their use?

It’s possible that it’s not the hierarchy who is resistant, but the laymen themselves.

I know of very few people, male or female, who will commit to more than one year of service in any volunteer capacity - and it’s mostly the women that we get for one year - men will come and assist with a one-day or weekend project if their work schedule permits, but can’t normally be relied on to come every week or every month for a scheduled commitment.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I have… about 70 of them, in fact… 50 or so during the year my dad was an instituted Acolyte and Instituted Lector, and about 20 during the next cycle of deaconal formation after that.

If an Instituted Lector is present (or an Eastern Church Ordained Lector), he reads one or both readings. He reads any letters from the Bishop. He also reads the prayers of the faithful if no deacon is present. He leads the Psalm if it is not being sung. A non-instituted reader may perform all of these in his absence… During that year, I went to a few masses without Dad, but he read at EVERY mass he was at once he was instituted.

I note that you are a Ruthenian Catholic. Could it be a difference in our Churches that makes the difference?

 

[Matthew_Holford]

It’s possible that it’s not the hierarchy who is resistant, but the laymen themselves.

I note you are in Canada. In your country’s case it’s the hierarchy who are resistant. Your national bishops’ conference has specifically stated that it will restrict these two ministries to seminarians and those preparing for the permanent diaconate.

The USA’s national bishops’ conference has said that it will accept men into these ministries but if one reads between the lines they are clearly reluctant.

I know of very few people, male or female, who will commit to more than one year of service in any volunteer capacity - and it’s mostly the women that we get for one year - men will come and assist with a one-day or weekend project if their work schedule permits, but can’t normally be relied on to come every week or every month for a scheduled commitment.

I know of men and women who regularly serve the Church and who don’t just drop out of providing their service after a year or so.

May be people don’t volunteer for these ministries either because I believe that a lot of lay folk aren’t even aware they exist. That has to be down to the hierarchy.

It’s my opinion, and only my opinion, is that is comes down to political correctness. Off the top of my head I don’t think there’s anything that females are not permitted to do in church. They can be readers, altar servers, extraordinary ministers of the holy communion, sacristans, catechists, etc. However, these two ministries are restricted to men. I wonder if the bishops fear some form of backlash if they made these ministries widely known and attempted to recruit men to these ministries. It would probably steer to close to the argument over the ordination of women to the sacred ministries.

 

[John_Lilburne]

I posted the following in 2007 at forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=139543 :

… Here is a list of 10 ideas on the excuses they may give for not implementing the 1972 Motu Proprio Ministeria Quaedam “3. Ministries may be assigned to lay Christians; hence they are no longer to be considered as reserved to candidates for the sacrament of orders.”:

1. Embarrassment about old minor orders.
   Most bishops would be of an age that before their ordination they were required to become Exorcists who did not do exorcisms. It did not make much sense and perhaps they would rather forget it and keep quiet about the steps required for ordination today.
2. Undermining parish priests.
   An instituted lector it forced upon a parish to do the readings. The parish priest is not free to pick and choose who they would like to encourage and reward.
3. Promote celibate vocations.
   Often there will be prayers for “vocations to priesthood and the religious life.” To encourage this one approach would be to reduce other options, such as vocations to be instituted lectors and acolytes.
4. Females may be disheartened by more “male only” ministries.
5. Inertia, lack of confidence in this reform of the liturgy. Unsure how this new ministry will work out.
6. Apparent lukewarm encouragement of instituted ministers by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. I have only found 4 mentions of them by John Paul II, which I have listed at romanrite.com/johnpaul.html . Only recently has Benedict XVI promoted instituted acolytes in the USA by refusing the purification indult there. The 2007 Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis had no direct references to them, despite encouraging resolutions from the Synod of Bishops discussed at romanrite.com/synodoninstituted.html .
7. Concern about lay people in the hierarchy.
   The Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church has:
   “178. How are the people of God formed? 873 934
   Among the faithful by divine institution there exist sacred ministers who have received the sacrament of Holy Orders and who form the hierarchy of the Church. The other members of the Church are called the laity. …”. But the liturgical books give a special leadership role to instituted ministers, such as leading blessings in the Book of Blessings.
8. A preference for children altar servers, rather than adults.
9. Institution is quiet permanent. It is not clear how to stop someone being an instituted minister, short of a tribunal penalty of “loss of office” or excommunication.
10. Nobody asks the bishop to be instituted.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

1. Nobody asks the bishop to be instituted.

They would have to know the ministries existed and I firmly believe that the majority of the laity are not aware of their existence.

Without doubly checking its contents right at this moment I believe that the same motu proprio gave episcopal conferences the right, subject to approval of the Holy See, to create other permanent lay ministires, even one under the name of subdeacon if they so chose.

 

[CDNowak]

It’s possible that it’s not the hierarchy who is resistant, but the laymen themselves.

I know of very few people, male or female, who will commit to more than one year of service in any volunteer capacity - and it’s mostly the women that we get for one year - men will come and assist with a one-day or weekend project if their work schedule permits, but can’t normally be relied on to come every week or every month for a scheduled commitment.

Quite a few of my peers who have discerned that they are not called to the priesthood (not to mention most of those discerning) would be willing to volunteer on a permanent basis. Many, however, are unaware that they could request to be instituted to the formal ministries, and those that are aware don’t tend to request when it is apparent such a request is unwelcome. Mr Liliburne has some first hand knowledge of opposition in his locale, I believe.

Matthew is correct about other ministries ahem Catechist ahem ought to be erected under Ministeria Quaedam, and the acolyte can be called the subdeacon (or rather, despite the name change Pope Paul didn’t see why they couldn’t still be called such in some places).

 

[pnewton]

Does anyone know of any reason why these roles should be expanded? Is there any benefit to a lay minor order person doing something as opposed to a lay not-minor-order doing the same function?

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Does anyone know of any reason why these roles should be expanded?

I’ll try to answer that as I started the thread. I don’t know of any reason why they should be expanded. As far as I understand it someone who is commissioned as a reader is able to do everything that an instituted lector can do. Altar servers do almost everything an instituted acolyte could do with a few exceptions. I think EMsHC could probably do nearly all the other things an acolyte can do. So, it is probably quite valid to ask the question do we need these lay ministries. From a practical point of view the answer is probably no. But that wasn’t the point of my original question. Perhaps it might have been better if I’d simply posed my question without the preamble I gave. I still think my question is valid even though it is probably academic. I just wanted to know if anybody knew why Pope Paul’s motu proprio about these ministries has in practice been ignored. In addition to establishing these two ministries he gave individual bishops’ conferences the right to create new ministries. As far as I am aware no bishops’ conference has taken advantage of this.

Is there any benefit to a lay minor order person doing something as opposed to a lay not-minor-order doing the same function?

In principle probably no. However, one might assume that they would be given a period of formation and they may be trained more extensively. They may then fulfil the roles better than some readers and altar servers. Then again may readers and servers carry out their roles admirably. But, as I said above that wasn’t the focus of my question.

 

[CDNowak]

Does anyone know of any reason why these roles should be expanded? Is there any benefit to a lay minor order person doing something as opposed to a lay not-minor-order doing the same function?

Given that the documents call for them (not just Ministeria Quaedam, but the GIRM and other liturgical documents as well): Is there a reason why they should not be extended?

As to practical benefit, while secondary, I do think there may be several: 1) a better line drawn between the priesthood and the laity, 2) a better understanding of actual participation in the liturgy 3)( For those who think unity comes from uniformity,) having instituted ministers allows for a centralized formation program, that will be able to aid the priest in meeting standards for the Liturgy, and 4) masculizing the sanctuary as an aid to encouraging vocations.

 

[diggerdomer]

CIC Canon 230, §3…
Can. 230 §1. Lay men who possess the age and qualifications established by decree of the conference of bishops can be admitted on a stable basis through the prescribed liturgical rite to the ministries of lector and acolyte.

Nevertheless, the conferral of these ministries does not grant them the right to obtain support or remuneration from the Church.

§2. Lay persons can fulfill the function of lector in liturgical actions by temporary designation. All lay persons can also perform the functions of commentator or cantor, or other functions, according to the norm of law.

§3. When the need of the Church warrants it and ministers are lacking, lay persons, even if they are not lectors or acolytes, can also supply certain of their duties, namely, to exercise the ministry of the word, to preside offer liturgical prayers, to confer baptism, and to distribute Holy Communion, according to the prescripts of the law.
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2L.HTM

Same paragraph as the authorization for EMHC’s.

where do those citations use “extraordinary” when referring to readers/lectors? That’s what I questioned, i.e. the use of “extraordinary” by the Church to classify or describe those who read/proclaim the Scripture at Mass who are not canonically enrolled as lectors and/or acolytes.

You responded to my post about the term “extraordinary” being used for readers/lectors. Where does anything you posted support the use of the term “extraordinary” for such ministries?

 

[diggerdomer]

I would say they were “extraordinary” in the sense that Canon Law and the rubrics in many liturgical books and guidance in the Ceremonial of Bishops calls for lectors and acolytes to carry out certain functions at the Mass and in other liturgical rites.

These two ministries were established by Pope Paul VI as ordinary ministries open only to lay men by his Apostolic Letter given motu proprio “Ministeria Quadam” (15th August 1972). In this motu proprio he abolished first tonsure, the minor orders, and the subdiaconate. Until then men had become clerics by the rite of first tonsure. In this motu proprio he decreed that men become clerics when they are ordained as a deacon. Before the minor orders were abolished men were ordained to minor orders. When he abolished the minor orders he created two new ministries. Men enter these ministries by institution. They remain lay men. Paul VI decreed in this motu proprio that men preparing for the priesthood had to first be instituted as a lector then subsequently instituted as an acoloyte. He also provided that lay men not preparing for the priesthood could be instituted to these ministries.

I suppose we would call readers and altar servers “extraordinary” in that they are carrying out tasks that should really be carried out by lectors and acolytes. Although what an altar server can do is more limited that the full role of an acolyte. It’s similar to how we call laypersons who distribute Holy Communion extraordinary because they perform a function for which the ordinary ministers are bishops, priests, and deacons.

In another sense readers and altar servers may be considered “ordinary” because for the vast majority of us that would be what we usually experience at Mass. As far as I’m aware I’ve never been to a Mass where they used lectors and/or acolytes.

Yes, of course Canon Law has to be followed. But what about the liturgical law for the Mass? Where does the General Instruction of the Roman Missal require the same restrictions as Canon Law?

Altar servers are in no way “extraordinary” according to Church teaching. They serve the liturgical role previously prescribed for acolytes.

Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are just that. Your parallel to altar servers does not cohere with Catholic Church teaching.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Yes, of course Canon Law has to be followed. But what about the liturgical law for the Mass? Where does the General Instruction of the Roman Missal require the same restrictions as Canon Law?

Altar servers are in no way “extraordinary” according to Church teaching. They serve the liturgical role previously prescribed for acolytes.

Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are just that. Your parallel to altar servers does not cohere with Catholic Church teaching.

May I politely suggest that you read my last post again. I did not say that the Church teaches that altar servers were “extraordinary”. A previous poster asked if they were extraordinary. I suggested that we could possible consider them extraordinary if we used the analogy that they performed a role for which the ordinary minister was the acolyte. Your final statement is factually incorrect. They do not serve the liturgical role previously prescribed for acolytes. They serve some, but not all, of the liturgical role currently assigned to the ministry of acolyte. With your knowledge of Canon and liturgical law you should have known that.

 

[pnewton]

Given that the documents call for them (not just Ministeria Quaedam, but the GIRM and other liturgical documents as well): Is there a reason why they should not be extended?

Perhaps I missed this, but it everything I have seen says the bishops “can” or “may”. They seem optional. I saw no where that this positions were called for with any sort of mandate, but perhaps I missed something.

 

[Luger]

The Church has two ordinary lay ministries, Lector and Acolyte.

It seems that they are reserved, in practice, to men preparing for the Priesthood and Permanent Diaconate.

In most places readers and altar servers are appointed to carry out those duties assigned to Lectors and Acolytes respectively.

I understand that these ordinary lay ministries are not restricted to seminarians and men preparing for the Permanent Diaconate.

Why does the Church not make more regular use of these ministries?

I would suggest one reason is that the formation to be permanently instituted as a acolyte or lector would (or at least should) be rather lengthy. Why not just become a deacon OR remain a commissioned reader or altar server? Are you really going to use the vessel purification argument?

If I was a bishop I wouldn’t permanently institute a man to be a lector or acolyte without 2-3 years of part time formation…

 

[CDNowak]

Perhaps I missed this, but it everything I have seen says the bishops “can” or “may”. They seem optional. I saw no where that this positions were called for with any sort of mandate, but perhaps I missed something.

They are the ordinary ministers, and are referred to in the liturgical documents without any qualifier. This, along with the fact that MQ clearly states that they are not meant to be reserved, suggests wider usage.

However you haven’t answered my question: why shouldn’t they be more common?