Why the alb?

  • Thread starter Thread starter slewi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

slewi

Guest
Hi!

Can anyone clear this up for me? Is there any particular reason that altar boys now for the most part wear albs? (blech) The only place I have seen cassock and surplice worn in my diocese is at the TLM. Every other parish wears the alb. (blech again)

Is it because they are cheaper than cassock and surplice? Is there anything doctrinal that supports their usage over the TRADITIONAL cassock and surplice?

Also is it true that girls are still prohibited by the 1983 Code of Canon Law to perform the duties of altar boys?

Stephen
 
40.png
slewi:
Also is it true that girls are still prohibited by the 1983 Code of Canon Law to perform the duties of altar boys?

Stephen
Click to expand...
I don’t have an answer for you first question (Sorry) but, I don’t think that CCL forbids girls to be alter boys. I remeber Seeing in one of my first masses a female alterboy (her name escapes me now but, we were in the same grade) and I don’t think that the preist at the time (it wasn’t Father Paul the Current preist at OLOL) and I think southeast Texas is a little to Conservative to stray from any norms set down. But, I could be wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time.
 
well most of the altar people(to be politically correct) at my church are females…
 
I would suggest that those interested in this question have a look at THIS THREAD especially the last couple of posts.

BTW, at my parish, with only a few exceptions…the girls are the best, most attentive, and reverent servers.

Pax vobiscum,
 
The problem that I have with altar girls is it gives a false impression. Traditionally, serving at the altar was a precursor to the priesthood. So I think this creates a false hope. On the parts of the servers themselves, because as time goes on, they learn that they (if female) can never perform in the function of a priest. And on the part of the laity, it gives the false impression that one day female priests might be ordained, when this is actually impossible to do. All of this has the potential for creating division within the church, which could be destructive for the church on all levels.

Pax,
Dean

PS: To answer the original question, no I do not think there is any preferance, but if everyone continued to use the traditional cassocks, I think this would not seem proper, as only priests wear cassocks, and if there was a female altar server, there could only be more confusion amongst some people… For the record, I would like to a return to the traditional cassock, such as at my parish (the below is our Altar Servers Guild):

http://www.fssp.org/album/VPSA2005/image006.jpg
 
40.png
slewi:
Hi!

Can anyone clear this up for me? Is there any particular reason that altar boys now for the most part wear albs? (blech) The only place I have seen cassock and surplice worn in my diocese is at the TLM. Every other parish wears the alb. (blech again)

Is it because they are cheaper than cassock and surplice? Is there anything doctrinal that supports their usage over the TRADITIONAL cassock and surplice?

Also is it true that girls are still prohibited by the 1983 Code of Canon Law to perform the duties of altar boys?

Stephen
Click to expand...
I altar serve…I think its because the Cassock is quite expensive yes, and also quite hot? Not to mention the “traditional” connotations of it (which I love) and also the girls wearing a black cassock…not a good idea…just my thoughts.
 
40.png
slewi:
Can anyone clear this up for me? Is there any particular reason that altar boys now for the most part wear albs? (blech) The only place I have seen cassock and surplice worn in my diocese is at the TLM. Every other parish wears the alb. (blech again)

Is it because they are cheaper than cassock and surplice? Is there anything doctrinal that supports their usage over the TRADITIONAL cassock and surplice?
Click to expand...
My understanding is: Albs have gained favor because, as a liturgical vestment appropriate to any member of the faithful (it is the white garment of baptism) it may be worn by both girls ad boys.

Cassock and surplice are a liturgical vestment of clerics, and while it is okay to allow boys to vest in them (because they might someday become clerics), to allow girls to so vest is right out.

Or so I’ve been told.

tee
 
No albs here at Sacred Heart in Tampa on altar persons.
**But since Halloween is coming up maybe they can dress up in albs and be **Casper the Ghost 🙂
 
40.png
tee_eff_em:
My understanding is: Albs have gained favor because, as a liturgical vestment appropriate to any member of the faithful (it is the white garment of baptism) it may be worn by both girls ad boys.

Cassock and surplice are a liturgical vestment of clerics, and while it is okay to allow boys to vest in them (because they might someday become clerics), to allow girls to so vest is right out.

Or so I’ve been told.

tee
Click to expand...
That’s pretty much on the mark.

The alb is a sign of Baptism, and can be worn by any Baptized member of the faithful.

The cassock is a sign of clerical status. While boys may wear that garment when acting in a clerical role (as acolytes), girls or women may not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top