women not allowed to distribute the Precious Body?

[Usige]

Of course this is all hypothetical…I would of course ask what the reasoning was. But I can’t think of one that would make me not want to quit.

How about if he did it because he wanted uniformity? By that I mean that since a priest (a male) distributes the Body, he wants the Body to be uniformly distributed by males because of some weird liturgical OCD. I know that might sound weird, but I have seen choir directors go into a tizzy when someone forgot that everyone was supposed to wear black slacks/skirts and white shirts. “OMG you are wearing a brown slacks. I don’t know why I try to make things perfect. I guess we’ll just have to hide you in the back.” (yes that’s a true story)

How about if he has taller men that would like to receive on the tongue, but perhaps on average since women are shorter it might make it difficult for some men to receive standing that way? The Cup doesn’t have the same logistic issues since two sets of arms are easier to negotiate the height difference.

I’m not saying those are the reasons, but they are some reasons that don’t involve him being some type of closet woman hater.

Personally unless he specifically said “I don’t think women are holy enough to distribute the Body” I would mark it up the same way I would priest that refuses to use chant. He doesn’t owe me an explanation of why he doesn’t like chant. I might not like it, but in the end should I take offense because his preference doesn’t match mine?

I am curious if people would assume the worst if the priest said he was encouraging men to become instituted acolytes and lectors? It could have the same effect to reduce places for women in the liturgy, but would they assume it was a sexist move?

Whether you chose to serve or not is your business. I am just curious why people assume he’s some kind of misogynist.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

How about if he did it because he wanted uniformity? By that I mean that since a priest (a male) distributes the Body, he wants the Body to be uniformly distributed by males because of some weird liturgical OCD. I know that might sound weird, but I have seen choir directors go into a tizzy when someone forgot that everyone was supposed to wear black slacks/skirts and white shirts. “OMG you are wearing a brown slacks. I don’t know why I try to make things perfect. I guess we’ll just have to hide you in the back.” (yes that’s a true story)

How about if he has taller men that would like to receive on the tongue, but perhaps on average since women are shorter it might make it difficult for some men to receive standing that way? The Cup doesn’t have the same logistic issues since two sets of arms are easier to negotiate the height difference.

I’m not saying those are the reasons, but they are some reasons that don’t involve him being some type of closet woman hater.

Personally unless he specifically said “I don’t think women are holy enough to distribute the Body” I would mark it up the same way I would priest that refuses to use chant. He doesn’t owe me an explanation of why he doesn’t like chant. I might not like it, but in the end should I take offense because his preference doesn’t match mine?

I am curious if people would assume the worst if the priest said he was encouraging men to become instituted acolytes and lectors? It could have the same effect to reduce places for women in the liturgy, but would they assume it was a sexist move?

Whether you chose to serve or not is your business. I am just curious why people assume he’s some kind of misogynist.

I never said I thought he was some sort of closet women hater. I just don’t find any of those reasons to be something I would want to participate in. I’m not going to sit in the pew and fume. But why should I be tied down like I am now for such silly reasons-especially if I didn’t agree with them?

If he only wanted men as readers…I would say good luck with that. But I would not be a fill in for when there is no men to read. And that is the way I would feel about the EMHC.

Look…whatever his reasons, he is within his right. But I still would not participate in it-whatever his reasons. Especially when I would feel disrespected as a woman. If a priest goes to all men readers, EMHC’s, or altar servers. That is fine but to have a half and half situation is just something I don’t agree with. And I would choose to express that by leaving the ministry quietly.

If a priest doesn’t use chant…it doesn’t affect you directly. Unless he is asking you to do the chant it doesn’t require anything of you. But like I already said…I end up serving a lot and it does tie you down. I just would not continue to do it a decision like that.

If I said I would quit because a priest was too
Liberal…no one would have a problem…so why all this?

 

[Corki]

Alright…let’s hear one…

I just stated what I would do. There hasn’t been any such good reason put forward here. Just if he would have the authority to do so. There has been no correct theological reason put forth. To me it would not matter if it was his “personal” preference.,still same effect. I would not appreciate that either.

Listen…the priest has the choice to do it…but why do I not have the choice to continue to volunteer without being jumped on? Seriously I doubt it would really matter all that much in the scheme of things…,unless other females felt the same way.

Of course this is all hypothetical…I would of course ask what the reasoning was. But I can’t think of one that would make me not want to quit.

Well, if he were in my diocese, one reason might be that he intends to start making use of instituted acolytes. Since acolytes are only men, he could be gradually moving toward that.

FWIW, using EMHCs isn’t a theological issue so there is no requirement that there be a “correct theological reason” given for any choice as to if or how to use them.

And sure, you have the choice to stop being an EMHC if the priest’s choices make you uncomfortable. What I was “jumping on” was the idea that you would automatically assume that the priest’s decision was based on his belief that women were not “good enough”. When in doubt, we are to attribute the best motives, and not the worst ones, to decisions and actions we may not understand.

 

[Usige]

Look…whatever his reasons, he is within his right. But I still would not participate in it-whatever his reasons. Especially when I would feel disrespected as a woman. If a priest goes to all men readers, EMHC’s, or altar servers. That is fine but to have a half and half situation is just something I don’t agree with. And I would choose to express that by leaving the ministry quietly.

If a priest doesn’t use chant…it doesn’t affect you directly. Unless he is asking you to do the chant it doesn’t require anything of you.

What I am trying to understand is why splitting the distribution of the sacred species by gender is automatically disrespectful of women. It’s not like distributing the Precious Blood makes you a second class citizen. The Lord willing, someday I will be ordained as a permanent deacon. Deacons are properly ministers of the Cup so unless they are somehow inferior to a priest I don’t get the attitude that being asked to distribute the Cup is disrespectful.

As for a priest disallowing chant, it does impact me because it likely means that the introit and responses will use the dreck from Breaking Bread. I find most of their pieces asceticly lacking but I don’t think it’s done to disrespect me or others who prefer more traditional music. It directly impacts me because I still sing the parts of the Mass proper to the laity even if the music choice turns my stomach.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

What I am trying to understand is why splitting the distribution of the sacred species by gender is automatically disrespectful of women. It’s not like distributing the Precious Blood makes you a second class citizen. The Lord willing, someday I will be ordained as a permanent deacon. Deacons are properly ministers of the Cup so unless they are somehow inferior to a priest I don’t get the attitude that being asked to distribute the Cup is disrespectful.

As for a priest disallowing chant, it does impact me because it likely means that the introit and responses will use the dreck from Breaking Bread. I find most of their pieces asceticly lacking but I don’t think it’s done to disrespect me or others who prefer more traditional music. It directly impacts me because I still sing the parts of the Mass proper to the laity even if the music choice turns my stomach.

I said I would FEEL disrespected as a women-not that it automatically is. Although I can’t think of any valid reason for a priest to do this.

Look I would feel the same way if he said redheads can’t distribute the Body…because he didn’t want the hair color to be out of symmetry. It’s something I would disagree with and therefore would un-volunteer. It’s not like I need to be an EMHC to have full participation.

 

[aTraditionalist]

Take the lesson in obedience and move on. It is well within his authority and tradition.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

 

[zab]

Take the lesson in obedience and move on. It is well within his authority and tradition.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

This is really great advice. And it can be difficult at times even for the more traditional minded Catholic to follow. For example, when your bishop, who is well within his authority says that we should remain standing after the Agnus Dei.

 

[Cristiano]

Take the lesson in obedience and move on. It is well within his authority and tradition.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

Simple and to the point. When I read comments like the ones in this thread I think that people should simply read again the “Screwtape letters” and reassess their thinking.

 

[namax91]

I have an update which will add even more confusion to this discussion. Today our associate pastor was the only celebrant (as opposed to last week when the pastor presided and the associate pastor concelebrated). At today’s Mass, the Precious Blood was not even distributed to the congregation, and the two lay Eucharistic ministers distributing the Precious Body were both women! So, is it up to the discretion of whoever is celebrating the Mass whether or not both Species are distributed as well as who can be the lay Eucharistic ministers? Or is it more likely that the pastor is just trying different things to see what feels best?

 

[namax91]

Simple and to the point. When I read comments like the ones in this thread I think that people should simply read again the “Screwtape letters” and reassess their thinking.

Throughout this whole process of switching to diocesan priests I keep thinking about the “Screwtape letters”. Would the pastor be allowed to require that the whole congregation read this book?

 

[Corki]

I have an update which will add even more confusion to this discussion. Today our associate pastor was the only celebrant (as opposed to last week when the pastor presided and the associate pastor concelebrated). At today’s Mass, the Precious Blood was not even distributed to the congregation, and the two lay Eucharistic ministers distributing the Precious Body were both women!** So, is it up to the discretion of whoever is celebrating the Mass whether or not both Species are distributed **as well as who can be the lay Eucharistic ministers? Or is it more likely that the pastor is just trying different things to see what feels best?

Yes, it is entirely up to the discretion of the celebrant to distribute Communion under one or both species. There have been some rare occasions where the Bishop has dictated that the cup be withheld due to a serious reason such as a dangerous flu epidemic, but otherwise it’s entirely up to the priest. Even a visiting priest who is not officially associated with the parish can exercise this discretion.

 

[Brendan]

Yes, it is entirely up to the discretion of the celebrant to distribute Communion under one or both species. There have been some rare occasions where the Bishop has dictated that the cup be withheld due to a serious reason such as a dangerous flu epidemic, but otherwise it’s entirely up to the priest. Even a visiting priest who is not officially associated with the parish can exercise this discretion.

Or, in the reverse, Cardinal Mahony had a mandate that both species be offered at every Mass within his Archdiocese.

That would, of course, obligate every diocesan celebrant.

 

[Corki]

Or, in the reverse, Cardinal Mahony had a mandate that both species be offered at every Mass within his Archdiocese.

That would, of course, obligate every diocesan celebrant.

That’s frightening.

 

[pnewton]

Or, in the reverse, Cardinal Mahony had a mandate that both species be offered at every Mass within his Archdiocese.

That would, of course, obligate every diocesan celebrant.

Galveston-Houston does the same thing. Exceptions are made as needed though.

 

[sw85]

Guys, don’t you know you’re supposed to be non-discriminating equalitarians like the good little liberals the world wants you to be? Sheesh!

 

[Corki]

Galveston-Houston does the same thing. Exceptions are made as needed though.

I don’t think this is true. I know most parishes on the west side don’t offer the cup at daily Mass and some not even every Sunday. My guess is that it’s a suggestion or guideline but not really a dictate. Either that or the “exceptions” are very generously given to the point of being close to the norm.

 

[pnewton]

I don’t think this is true. I know most parishes on the west side don’t offer the cup at daily Mass and some not even every Sunday. My guess is that it’s a suggestion or guideline but not really a dictate.

That may well be. I do not know the strength or even the truthfulness of what I was told. It could be just that it is encouraged. I have to say I have never been to Mass without both species, except once downtown at daily Mass. That was a rather unique chapel, not a parish. I would think that there is some wisdom in both a bishop giving guidance to what he think best, and the priest weighing that against what is best for the parish as the bishop’s representative.

 

[jeannetherese]

Last week all of the Dominican priests at my parish were replaced with…diocesan priests. (This has been quite controversial and many longtime members have left the parish) Anyway, one of the changes the new pastor made is not allowing the female lay Eucharistic ministers to distribute the Precious Body, but they are allowed to distribute the Precious Blood. I was quite confused by this…

Hi namax,
I followed the linkage from another thread that you started concerning the shift from Dominicans to Archdiocesan priests at your Newman center and found a post from one of the Dominicans stating that the Order is called to help rebuild a church and then moves on. He indicated that the Dominicans felt that the move was appropriate. Of course, the Archbishop considers it appropriate or he would not have brought in Archdiocesan priests to minister at the center.
Support on the part of the laity might be both charitable and appropriate.

I am copying and pasting the quote
“Br. Jude OP • 5 months ago
I am also a member of the Province that ran the Newman Center in Albuquerque, and I have to say that I understand and even support the Archbishop’s decision. The Master of the Dominican Order, Fr. Bruno Cadore, has said several times that we are not diocesan priests. Our task is to preach the Gospel and revitalize the Church. To that end, if a Province has a flourishing parish then they should give it back to the diocese and take over a parish that is struggling. I will also say, it’s amazing how much support and encouragement we’ve seen since the change was made public. And I would hope that the local Church will continue to support the parish and Newman center after we leave.”

At CAF we have been blessed with the knowledge of brother JReducation (a Franciscan) who has many times noted that religious orders have missions that are different than those of the diocesan priests, and who encourages us to respect these differences.

I just visited the Newman Center webpage
aquinasnm.org/
where I found this information:

"LECTOR OR EXTRAORDINARY MINISTER OF HOLY COMMUNION

If you are currently a Lector or Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion or are interested in becoming one, a training class will be held on July 19 at 10:00am in the Newman Center gathering space."

Do you think it might be more helpful to attend the meeting and then, respectfully submit your questions to the person presenting after the meeting is over? This will give you information from someone who is familiar with the practices at your center.
I hope you will share what you learn with us at CAF.
May God bless you and the priests and religious who have served and who continue to serve your community.
Amen.
jt

 

[Walking_Home]

Guys, don’t you know you’re supposed to be non-discriminating equalitarians like the good little liberals the world wants you to be? Sheesh!

---

Here is one – whose name you will recognize – welcoming and thanking altar servers of both sexes.

BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE

St Peter’s Square
Wednesday, 2 August 2006

Special catechesis for the European Pilgrimage of Altar Servers

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Thank you for your welcome! I greet you all with great affection. After an interval, due to my stay in the Aosta Valley, today I am resuming the General Audiences. And I am starting with a truly special Audience, because I have the joy of welcoming the large European Pilgrimage of Altar Servers. Dear boys and girls and young people, welcome! Since most of the Altar Servers who have gathered in this Square today are German-speaking, I will first address them in my mother-tongue.

BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE

St Peter’s Square
Wednesday, 4 August 2010

[Video]

Saint Tarcisius

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

I would like to express my joy at being here with you today in this Square, where you have gathered festively for this General Audience, attended by such large numbers of the great European pilgrimage for altar servers! Dear boys and girls and young people, welcome to Rome! Since the vast majority of the altar servers present in the Square are German-speaking, I shall speak to them first of all in my mother tongue.

BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE

Castel Gandolfo
Wednesday, 29 August 2012

Martyrdom of St John the Baptist

To the 2,600 French altar servers:

Dear Brothers and Sisters, I greet you with affection dear altar servers who have come from France on your national pilgrimage to Rome, as well as Bishop Breton, the other bishops present and those who have accompanied this large group. Dear young people, the service you carry out faithfully enables you to be particularly close to Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.

 

[Corki]

That may well be. I do not know the strength or even the truthfulness of what I was told. It could be just that it is encouraged. I have to say I have never been to Mass without both species, except once downtown at daily Mass. That was a rather unique chapel, not a parish. I would think that there is some wisdom in both a bishop giving guidance to what he think best, and the priest weighing that against what is best for the parish as the bishop’s representative.

I tried to find a reference on the Archdiocese website but the only thing I could find was the check list for Masses when a Bishop is coming. It has a box to check for “one species” or “both species” with a footnote that says that both species is the norm but if there is carpet, the cup should not be offered without extra precautions. It doesn’t say any permission is needed if the person filling out the form checks “one species”.

A lot of the daily Masses I go to are school-related so that may explain part of the difference in perception. The school Masses, even high school, don’t ever seem to offer the cup.