I never meant to imply that a stranger to that parish, or someone who didn’t know that Rome had promulgated a rite of celebration of Communion to be used in the absence of a priest, should automatically know these things and be OK with it. Of course not.
It’s been long established by Rome (I believe the relevant provision is in the Code of Canon Law) that ANY layperson may vest in an alb, for any reason or no reason. The alb is NOT restricted to ordained persons but is permitted to all the baptised faithful, so no-one is acting like a priest in wearing one. You’re thinking of the cassock, a different garment altogether.
I can understand your shock,never- the- less perhaps you should have stayed on,the reason being, that you would have found out, if the lay person said the consecration.If she did not and obtained the Concecrated Hosts from the Tabenacle you would have concluded that it was a communion service and not a Mass.You are right,she should not have had a stole on-as they are part of the vestments only used by Priests or Deacons–women love to dress up don’t they!! I wander what was more important–you leaving the communion service or you receiving Our Lord in Holy Communion.–I once went to a similar situation and the religious sister said all the prayers of the congregation–but in this case she was “new age”!! However you cannot answer one way or the other by leaving,though maybe your “sense of the faithful”(sensus fidei) might have been right.A priest friend of mine used to say “the lay people have much to put up with”! Ummmm,a Mass it was not for sure!! You are a good person, please pray that we will have good and holy vocations to the priesthood and the religeous life.This morning, I went to a Catholic Church up in the Mountains. Unfortunately, the priest was who-knows-where. It was the only Catholic church in the area, and it only had one priest. I went in and started praying, as is my custom before mass. The alter servers soon came in, followed by the first reader, then by a woman dressed in an alb! When she went up to the alter, she immediately started, with the confession of sins! (I have sinned through my own fault, through my thoughts and my actions…). At this point I was really weirded out, can’t only a priest say that? I patiently sat through it, all the way through the second reading. Then the choir started singing “alleluia”; she went over, kissed the alter, picked up the gospel, and went over podium! At this point I left the church, in total disgust. I then remained outside, praying the rosary for the rest of the “mass”, despite my parents asking me to come back in. It turns out, that they were doing a community gathering or something instead of a mass.
Am I in the clear for missing mass, and did I do the right thing? I’m not quiet sure, but I would do the same had I gone back.
And this is a prime example of how rumours start and spread.
The alb is proper to all the faithful. You also were vested with it at baptism. And for whatever of the more priestly gestures, like kissing the altar, that this woman did, she was not wearing a stole or chasuble.
She was not wearing a stole, or at least that was the impression I received from the OP not mentioning it.
But it’s a possibility, isn’t it? Especially when it upsets the worshipper when he sees this kind of service. How can you be properly disposed to receiving Communion when your adrenalin level reaches its all-time high?
A feeling isn’t a sin. An act is a sin. And feelings and adrenalin levels are involuntary. The point some of us are trying to make, I think, is this: it seems to have been a legitimate communion service offered in the absence of priest. That is approved by the Church. If we think with the mind of the Church, then such things MIGHT not raise our adrenalin levels.
If only it were that easy to control our adrenalin levels when we see these innovations.
You did the right thing, these “communion services” (which btw is a Protestant term) are borderline heretical, especially a women leading a group in prayer from the altar!People will start saying why not make them Priests? Read Chapter two of First Timothy!!
And a woman should never read the Gospel in public.
BTW they don’t count for your Sunday obligation whether you stay or not, one is obligated to attend the Sacrifice not recieve Communion.
This is an excellent point. Most of my friends attend the Novus Ordo Mass. All of them have boys, but only one has boys willing to serve at Mass. The reason being is that most of them attend Mass where girls serve along side the boys. The boys do not want to serve with the girls therefore, they do not serve at all. As a result, the parishes they attend have mostly girls serving with an occassional boy. The one friend whose boys do serve, only serve because they attend a parish where the priest does not allow girls to serve (one of the few priest in our diocese who does this). Prior to switching to this parish, her boys refused to serve too. I think this plays a large part in the lack of vocations these days. Serving as an altar boy aids in the discernment of a vocation. If boys are not serving, there will naturally be less vocations.
Valid, or not, no one need attend one if they do not wish to. Just because Rome may allow the Communion Service, does not mean you have to attend one. I would not attend one. I would rather drive to the next parish that did have a Mass. That may be more difficult to do in some very, very rural areas but in most places it is not. We do live in a rural area, and yet there are a number of Churches one can drive to without much difficulty.
Agreed. Many churches have altar guilds or societies which can accomodate women and girls who wish to take an active role.
However, the part about kissing the altar is not supposed to be done. That is clearly wrong.
Granted, the reverence of the altar by kissing is also done by the deacons, this should not have been done by a layperson, male nor female.
Communion Services, if done according to the ritual books, are not heretical. While they are properly called “Sunday Celebrations in the Absence of a Priest” the average person uses “communion service” as slang since its easier to say and convey what’s happening.
Chapter II: Conditions for Holding Sunday Celebrations in the Absence of a Priest:especially a women leading a group in prayer from the altar!
Not sure where you get that from. Only priests or deacons can proclaim the Gospel during Mass. However since this is a liturgy that can take place without a priest or deacon it would seem odd that the leader of the assembly (who may be a woman) could not read the Gospel for the day. Even more so since according to the documents (no. 43) the leader may read a homily written by the pastor.
Arrogant? No, just tired of people who sound off without reading. And tired of people with ample opinions formed out of whole cloth.
It would appear he is a minor (and I may be mistaken, but his reference to his parents would seem to indicate such). He is lucky he is not mine, as I would not have “requested” that he return. I would not cross my child’s conscience had they indicated that they could not receive because of sin. However, no minor of mine would be determining for themselves what was right and what was wrong in a liturgical service because of their opinions.
Speaking of “arrogant wagons,” you might want to check your own vehicle. As has clearly been established by other posters, an alb is the liturgical garb appropriate for all the baptized. I have a copy of the approved ritual for “Sunday Celebrations in the Absence of a Priest” in front of me (Liturgical Press 1997). P. 29: Liturgy of the Word: "The gospel is proclaimed by the leader. A layperson omits the greeting “The Lord be with you.’” The rubrics do not limit the role of “leader” to men. The rubrics clearly allow for the role of “leader” to be filled by either a man or woman: P. 21: “The laypersons appointed as leaders should regard the office entrusted to them not so much as an honor but as a responsibility . . .” Also on P. 21: “The leader who is a layperson uses the special forms indicated in the rites . . .” and “The laypeson wears vesture that is suitable for his or her function . . .” And finally, P. 119, under “Gospel:” “#133 A deacon proclaims the gospel in the usual manner. However, a layperson omits the greeting, ‘The Lord be with you,’ before reading the Gospel.”
Communion Services in the Absence of a Priest aare fully approved and valid, they fulfill the sunday obligation, and thus leaving them would be sinful (although if one is not in knoeldge of this its not because kowing that a sin is such is required for culpability…)Although I would say only a male should do them, but approval has been given for females…