Would Instituting Acolytes Really Help?

[Rickwood]

I have seen some suggest that one solution to the use of non-instituted EMsHC (in addition to more ordained men of course) is to permanently institute men as acolytes.

I’m curious – just what would that accomplish?

Now if a serious formation was required for being instituted, I could see where being instituted would be a most positive thing – although that could also be done with EMsHC (defined as non-instituted EMsHC for this discussion.) Such a formation might also be just the environment necessary for some men to heed a call to the priesthood or permanent diaconate too. Conversely if a man was willing to undergo a serious formation to be instituted and he would not do so to be commissioned as an EMHC then we have a whole other issue.

Without a serious formation (at least 2 years) I see no real benefit to instituting men except for one thing. Instituted men can licitly purify sacred vessels.

On the down side I see a big negatives. Some men would do it just for prestige (look for those who would dislike a serious formation.) Some would also say it would be wrong to limit a woman’s opportunity to serve – at least until we have enough ordained me to fill all the slots currently filled by laypersons (wow, watch out for the heat-seeking missiles in response to that, huh?)

So why institute more “permanent” acolytes unless doing so were prefaced by a serious formation? Why not also make such formations a part of being commissioned as EMsHC?

 

[Aramis]

I have seen some suggest that one solution to the use of non-instituted EMsHC (in addition to more ordained men of course) is to permanently institute men as acolytes.
…]
So why institute more “permanent” acolytes unless doing so were prefaced by a serious formation? Why not also make such formations a part of being commissioned as EMsHC?

Most of the reasons tie in to barring non-Acolytes from serving as EMHC’s. Heck, pre 1983, Roman deacons were EMHCs, not OMHC’s. (Canon law changed, to reflect a return to the pre-Trent tradition of the Deacon as minister of the Cup).

The instituting of Acolytes puts their service at the bishop’s discretion, rather than the Pastor’s. It also obligates them to serve EVERY mass they attend within that diocese, exactly as a Deacon is obligated, (or a Subdeacon, for that matter).

The office of instituted Acolyte also puts a man under the obligation of saying office of the hours, as well.

An instituted Acolyte is part of the Tradition, a man in the state between ordinary layman and proper cleric, once called a clerk.

Currently it is a transitional office en route to ordination, tho not always used; I think it should be returned and EMHC’s restricted to instituted Acolytes, as a return towards Tradition.

 

[Rickwood]

Most of the reasons tie in to barring non-Acolytes from serving as EMHC’s. Heck, pre 1983, Roman deacons were EMHCs, not OMHC’s. (Canon law changed, to reflect a return to the pre-Trent tradition of the Deacon as minister of the Cup).

The instituting of Acolytes puts their service at the bishop’s discretion, rather than the Pastor’s. It also obligates them to serve EVERY mass they attend within that diocese, exactly as a Deacon is obligated, (or a Subdeacon, for that matter).

**The office of instituted Acolyte also puts a man under the obligation of saying office of the hours, as well. **

An instituted Acolyte is part of the Tradition, a man in the state between ordinary layman and proper cleric, once called a clerk.

Currently it is a transitional office en route to ordination, tho not always used; I think it should be returned and EMHC’s restricted to instituted Acolytes, as a return towards Tradition.

I was not aware of that. Do you happen to know where it’s documented? It that’s the case, I would add it to the list of why men should be instituted as acolytes.

 

[Mattapoisett64]

The office of instituted Acolyte also puts a man under the obligation of saying office of the hours, as well.
QUOTE]

Perhaps this is true in certain Rites. It was my understanding that in the Latin Rite, the LOH obligation attaches to Holy Orders,
which would mean deacons are so obligated, but not Instituted Acolytes or Lectors who remain laymen in the Latin Rite.

 

[John_Lilburne]

I think its important that the liturgical books be followed and that bishops give a good example of this. One of the liturgical books is “Ceremonial of Bishops”. It has a section on Instituted Acolytes, including: “28. … But in celebrations presided over by the bishop it is fitting that all such ministerial functions be carried out by formally instituted acolytes, and if a number are present, they should divide the ministries accordingly.” (Ceremonial of Bishops, Liturgical Press, 1989, page 24).

 

[japhy]

I was not aware of that. Do you happen to know where it’s documented? It that’s the case, I would add it to the list of why men should be instituted as acolytes.

When the minor orders still existed, it wasn’t the case: so says FishEaters.com: “Those of the Minor Orders are not obligated to pray the Divine Office or bound to the rule of celibacy”.

 

[Rickwood]

I think its important that the liturgical books be followed and that bishops give a good example of this. One of the liturgical books is “Ceremonial of Bishops”. It has a section on Instituted Acolytes, including: “28. … But in celebrations presided over by the bishop it is fitting that all such ministerial functions be carried out by formally instituted acolytes, and if a number are present, they should divide the ministries accordingly.” (Ceremonial of Bishops, Liturgical Press, 1989, page 24).

Is that a binding document?

 

[japhy]

Is that a binding document?

The Ceremonial of Bishops? Yes. It’s like the GIRM, but more particularly for pontifical liturgies; that said, it can still be applied to liturgies where a Bishop is not the celebrant. The GIRM refers to it on occasion (e.g. footnotes 80, 92, 99, etc.)… but the CB refers to the GIRM too. It’d be nice if there were standalone versions of these texts.

 

[Rickwood]

The Ceremonial of Bishops? Yes. It’s like the GIRM, but more particularly for pontifical liturgies; that said, it can still be applied to liturgies where a Bishop is not the celebrant. The GIRM refers to it on occasion (e.g. footnotes 80, 92, 99, etc.)… but the CB refers to the GIRM too. It’d be nice if there were standalone versions of these texts.

I have a copy of the CB but I’m not at all sure about tis authority…

 

[japhy]

I have a copy of the CB but I’m not at all sure about tis authority…

Is the GIRM an authoritative document? Is it binding? I’m certain the CB is of the same level (if not greater) as the GIRM. What language are you looking for in the document (or another document commissioning it) for whether or not it’s authoritative and binding?

Update: Here’s what the Decree on page 9 of the CB says:
This Ceremonial is intended to present the entire reformed liturgy in a suitable manner…

The new Ceremonial of Bishops cannot be regarded as a liturgical book in the proper sense, since it is not a book for use in liturgical celebrations. But this Ceremonial will be helpful to bishops…

The Ceremonial of Bishops describes the rites carried out by a bishop in such a way that the traditions and requirements proper to each place can be retained.

The aforementioned pastoral and juridical norms issued by the Apostolic See, as well as the norms and rubrics already laid down in the liturgical books, remain in force, unless this Ceremonial corrects them. Additional provisions are made with the intention of achieving a liturgy for bishops that is genuine, simple, clear, dignified, and pastorally effective. These norms foster unity of spirit and avoid introducing any pointless singularity into the liturgy as celebrated by a bishop. …

By mandate of Pope John Paul II this Congregation for Divine Worship therefore publishes the new Ceremonial of Bishops and decrees that it supersedes the previous Caeremoniale Epsicoporum as soon as it is issued.

All things to the contrary notwithstanding.
I would say that the new CE has the same authority and binding power as the CE it superseded…

 

[benedictgal]

Is the GIRM an authoritative document? Is it binding? I’m certain the CB is of the same level (if not greater) as the GIRM. What language are you looking for in the document (or another document commissioning it) for whether or not it’s authoritative and binding?

Update: Here’s what the Decree on page 9 of the CB says:
This Ceremonial is intended to present the entire reformed liturgy in a suitable manner…

The new Ceremonial of Bishops cannot be regarded as a liturgical book in the proper sense, since it is not a book for use in liturgical celebrations. But this Ceremonial will be helpful to bishops…

The Ceremonial of Bishops describes the rites carried out by a bishop in such a way that the traditions and requirements proper to each place can be retained.

The aforementioned pastoral and juridical norms issued by the Apostolic See, as well as the norms and rubrics already laid down in the liturgical books, remain in force, unless this Ceremonial corrects them. Additional provisions are made with the intention of achieving a liturgy for bishops that is genuine, simple, clear, dignified, and pastorally effective. These norms foster unity of spirit and avoid introducing any pointless singularity into the liturgy as celebrated by a bishop. …

By mandate of Pope John Paul II this Congregation for Divine Worship therefore publishes the new Ceremonial of Bishops and decrees that it supersedes the previous Caeremoniale Epsicoporum as soon as it is issued.

All things to the contrary notwithstanding.
I would say that the new CE has the same authority and binding power as the CE it superseded…

As someone who has planned liturgies for the bishop, I can tell you how invaluable this book is. It is a necessary tool, especially when it comes to the nuts and bolts of a liturgy with the bishop, including working with the seminarians who assist the ordinary.

 

[scylla]

I called my diocese about this as it is funny to hear the silly responses they give me when I ask about the way they destroy the faith of the faithful in my diocese.
It would be funnier if it wasn’t so sad and diabolical the way they twist the faith but that is for another thread. Just call the office of worship in my diocese and you will find out.

I asked if it would be possible to be instituted an acolyte as I was interested in being considered for their consideration in the role. The answer was no, it is not done as it is exclusive to people.
I responded that it didn’t exclude me, since I am a man,
They then said it just isn’t done in this diocese and that is the answer.

The answers is, until we start putting women in the role it wont be done in my diocese. It is well known that our diocese rejects many liturgical practices openly and does not promote faithfulness to the Church. Hmm, why do we have a priest shortage?.. because they do not want male priests.

So yes would it help, of course… It would be great for the Church, for vocations, respect for the Holy Eucharist and for faithfulness.

But, they don’t want a healthy Church, they want a state of emergency to ordain openly homosexual priests, married priests, women priests and a faith that doesn’t teach about respect, sin or hell.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Rickwood]

I called my diocese about this as it is funny to hear the silly responses they give me when I ask about the way they destroy the faith of the faithful in my diocese.
It would be funnier if it wasn’t so sad and diabolical the way they twist the faith but that is for another thread. Just call the office of worship in my diocese and you will find out.

You really think there are “diabolical” things going on in your diocese under the control of your bishop?

I asked if it would be possible to be instituted an acolyte as I was interested in being considered for their consideration in the role. The answer was no, it is not done as it is exclusive to people.
I responded that it didn’t exclude me, since I am a man,
They then said it just isn’t done in this diocese and that is the answer.

Did you talk to your pastor and bishop?

The answers is, until we start putting women in the role it wont be done in my diocese. It is well known that our diocese rejects many liturgical practices openly and does not promote faithfulness to the Church. Hmm, why do we have a priest shortage?.. because they do not want male priests.

They said that about women? Your bishop?

So yes would it help, of course… It would be great for the Church, for vocations, respect for the Holy Eucharist and for faithfulness.

I’m not sure it would be good for the Church in the least. While acolytes can purify sacred vessels and CB says they should be used whenever possible for episcopal Masses, I don’t see either as a huge plus and I see the risks of instituting men for life (without a very involved formation) to be quite high. There were problems in the past with subdeacons and porters who were really not prepared/able to do their ministries.

But, they don’t want a healthy Church, they want a state of emergency to ordain openly homosexual priests, married priests, women priests and a faith that doesn’t teach about respect, sin or hell.

God Bless
Scylla

Who said that? Your bishop?

 

[THurifer2]

The office of instituted Acolyte also puts a man under the obligation of saying office of the hours, as well.

.

I am sure you can back this statement up. But I call to question if you are correct. To the best of my knowledge Even Deacons are not “obligated” to say the office. I have a friend who is an instituted Acolyte and I know for fact he does not pray the office because he asked me one time “what is the office”.

Also as a man in diaconal formation I was told by our director that Deacons are strongly Encouraged to pray Mornng and Evening prayers but not required to.

 

[THurifer2]

I’m not sure it would be good for the Church in the least… I don’t see either as a huge plus and I see the risks of instituting men for life (without a very involved formation) to be quite high. There were problems in the past with subdeacons and porters who were really not prepared/able to do their ministries.

It would take very little formation for a man to become an Acolyte.

Here is the ROle of an Acolyte.
The chief offices of an acolyte are to light the candles on the altar, to carry them in procession, and during the solemn singing of the Gospel; to prepare wine and water for the sacrifice of the Mass

Besides the super difficult task of Lighting Candles I really dont see your point. Maybe pouring the wine could involve a little more formation…but c’mon!

Perhaps you have an exalted view of what an acolyte is. How in the world could they be improperly formed? Its not exactly Rocket Science.

 

[scylla]

You really think there are “diabolical” things going on in your diocese under the control of your bishop?

I am quite certain there are “diabolical” actions going on in my diocese. My bishop is not in control of everything, it is a large diocese and some very horrible abuses of the Eucharist are quite common.
Any disregard, disrespect and diminishment of Christ does have its roots in Satan and his works.

Did you talk to your pastor and bishop?

I have no pastor in my parish, my bishop is quite unaccessible. It is a large diocese with few priests.

They said that about women? Your bishop?

They did say that about women, this is the general thinking in my diocese. Feel free to call my office of worship yourself if you feel like it and see if they will strongly defend faithfulness to the Church. My Bishop has not said this, he is quite busy and this is what the ladies in the office of worship say.
(though I did have one quietly disagree with the others)

I’m not sure it would be good for the Church in the least. While acolytes can purify sacred vessels and CB says they should be used whenever possible for episcopal Masses, I don’t see either as a huge plus and I see the risks of instituting men for life (without a very involved formation) to be quite high. There were problems in the past with subdeacons and porters who were really not prepared/able to do their ministries.

You do have a point, training can be lacking and there could be problems, and I am not sure if it would work in parishes such as mine without a Priest. Yet I am sure it would highlight the importance of the Eucharist and the respect needed for the sacred vessels.

Who said that? Your bishop?

We are a large diocese, we rarely see our Bishop or hear any teaching from him about the faith. He is quite busy and I am not sure if he really is involved much in defending the faith in any liturgical way.
He does seem quite involved in social justice, he does quite a bit of good in that regard. Vocations have been terrible until the last couple years and that is great news…
(this year we had a great year of vocations, 6 Priests ordained this year which is great since we have only had 7 priests ordained in the last 10 years) There might be a turnaround in the future, and I will praise my Bishop for this, as he was sure to have at least something to do with it.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Rickwood]

I am quite certain there are “diabolical” actions going on in my diocese. My bishop is not in control of everything, it is a large diocese and some very horrible abuses of the Eucharist are quite common.
Any disregard, disrespect and diminishment of Christ does have its roots in Satan and his works.

You’re actually suggesting that Satan is in charge of part of your diocese and parish?

They did say that about women, this is the general thinking in my diocese. Feel free to call my office of worship yourself if you feel like it and see if they will strongly defend faithfulness to the Church. My Bishop has not said this, he is quite busy and this is what the ladies in the office of worship say.
(though I did have one quietly disagree with the others)

So you did not talk to your bishop or a visiting priest. OK.

You do have a point, training can be lacking and there could be problems, and I am not sure if it would work in parishes such as mine without a Priest. Yet I am sure it would highlight the importance of the Eucharist and the respect needed for the sacred vessels.

How?

We are a large diocese, we rarely see our Bishop or hear any teaching from him about the faith. He is quite busy and I am not sure if he really is involved much in defending the faith in any liturgical way.
He does seem quite involved in social justice, he does quite a bit of good in that regard. Vocations have been terrible until the last couple years and that is great news…
(this year we had a great year of vocations, 6 Priests ordained this year which is great since we have only had 7 priests ordained in the last 10 years) There might be a turnaround in the future, and I will praise my Bishop for this, as he was sure to have at least something to do with it.

God Bless
Scylla

I will pray for you.

 

[Rickwood]

It would take very little formation for a man to become an Acolyte.

Here is the ROle of an Acolyte.
The chief offices of an acolyte are to light the candles on the altar, to carry them in procession, and during the solemn singing of the Gospel; to prepare wine and water for the sacrifice of the Mass

Besides the super difficult task of Lighting Candles I really dont see your point. Maybe pouring the wine could involve a little more formation…but c’mon!

Perhaps you have an exalted view of what an acolyte is. How in the world could they be improperly formed? Its not exactly Rocket Science.

If the tasks are so trivial, why institute acolytes to perform them? Because they can also licitly purify the sacred vessels? That makes absolutely no sense.

Acolytes and lectors are instituted for life. If you think it would be healthy to permanently institute men following only a bit of practical training then I would suggest you really have no real understanding the ministry. Men in their formation to the priesthood or diaconate are only instituted as acolytes and lectors after more than two years of formation – at least in my diocese. While that might be a tad much, it’s pretty close.

If this ministry was afforded only trivial formation, I can most certainly see the wrong sort of men getting involved – and it would be tough to get rid of them.

It would be interesting to see what Lincoln Nebraska does not only in terms of formation but also in the selection process.

 

[Rickwood]

…Also as a man in diaconal formation I was told by our director that Deacons are strongly Encouraged to pray Mornng and Evening prayers but not required to.

Does your formation directior ( ) know you make unkind comments like:

"Perhaps you have an exalted view of what an acolyte is. How in the world could they be improperly formed? Its not exactly Rocket Science."

 

[scylla]

You’re actually suggesting that Satan is in charge of part of your diocese and parish?

No, the Bishop is in charge, and I respect and honor him. If the people hired by him give in to temptation and instead of uphold the Catholic faith, attack it, then they are giving in to sin and Satan. This is where the devil attacks, at the influential parts.

So you did not talk to your bishop or a visiting priest. OK.

What can a visiting priest do? Yes I have talked to them and they recommend we just be faithful and strong. If they speak out too loudly they will not be invited back to the parish and lose out on their stipend. My Bishop is pretty inaccessible and very busy.
I am still working my way up the chain seeing if anyone is strongly faithful to the Church, I am still hopeful.

How?

How would it highlight the importance and respect for the Eucharist? It would illustrate the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist by expressing it in our actions. No priest in my parish ever cleans the vessels, this is left up to the laity.
In my parish people seldom genuflect or pay respect for the Eucharist. It is something that seems to be forgotten, and every little action that highlights the Presence of Christ will help.

I will pray for you.

Please pray for me and my parish. In an area with about 35,000 people we have a parish of a total attendance each weekend of about 600. We need all the help we can get.

God Bless
Scylla