The Stable Ministries of Lector and Acolyte

On a certain diocesan website (not the one from which the above photo is taken) reporting the conferral of the ministry of Reader upon some candidates for the permanent diaconate (congratulations to them), it was recently stated that "The conferral of this Ministry (of Reader) is one of the steps on the path to ordination."

Well, that's true of course, but this always brings to my mind an express wish of Pope Paul VI in his post-Conciliar reforms which has not been implemented in any region with which I am familiar.

The reforms are described in Pope Paul's Apostolic Letter Ministeria Quaedam "on first tonsure, minor orders, and the subdiaconate." The Pope abolishes the subdiaconate, (please leave aside any opinions concerning the more ancient usage known as the Extraordinary Form for the time being) subsuming it into the ministries of readers and acolyte. He also abolishes tonsure, and says that thenceforth there will not be reference to ordination but to institution. So there are no more "minor orders" but rather "ministries".

He promulgated the following norms to become effective January 1, 1973 (with some comments from me in parentheses):

1. First tonsure is no longer conferred; entrance into the clerical state is joined to the diaconate.
2. What up to now were called minor orders are henceforth to be called ministries.
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. [In other words, they are to be stable.]
4. Two ministries, adapted to present-day needs, are to be preserved in the whole Latin Church, namely, those of reader and acolyte. The functions heretofore assigned to the subdeacon are entrusted to the reader and the acolyte; consequently, the major order of subdiaconate no longer exists in the Latin Church [of course, we know it does, in those institutes dedicated to the preservation of the older liturgy whose members are still ordained to the subdiaconate, and even when the extroardinary form of the Mass is celebrated in a more solemn form, priests or deacons or even lay people take on the role of subdeacon]. There is, however, no reason why the acolyte cannot be called a subdeacon in some places, at the discretion of the conference of bishops. [Interesting!]
5. The reader is appointed for a function proper to him, that of reading the word of God in the liturgical assembly. Accordingly, he is to proclaim the readings from sacred Scripture, except for the gospel in the Mass and other sacred celebrations; he is to recite the psalm between the readings when there is no psalmist; he is to present the intentions for the general intercessions in the absence of a deacon or cantor; he is to direct the singing and the participation by the faithful; he is to instruct the faithful for the worthy reception of the sacraments. He may also, insofar as may be necessary, take care of preparing other faithful who are appointed on a temporary basis [ah, so there can be temporary appointment to this ministry, but clearly there is to be a distinction between the stably instituted lector and the temporarily appointed person] to read the Scriptures in liturgical celebrations. That he may more fittingly and perfectly fulfill these functions, he is to meditate assiduously on sacred Scripture. Aware of the office he has undertaken, the reader is to make every effort and employ suitable means to acquire that increasingly warm and living love [7] and knowledge of Scripture that will make him a more perfect disciple of the Lord.
6. The acolyte is appointed in order to aid the deacon and to minister to the priest. It is his duty therefore to attend to the service of the altar and to assist the deacon and the priest in liturgical celebrations, especially in the celebration of Mass; he is also to distribute communion as a special minister when the ministers spoken of in the Codex Iuris Canonici can. 845 are not available or are prevented by ill health, age, or another pastoral ministry from performing this function, or when the number of communicants is so great that the celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged. In the same extraordinary circumstances an acolyte may be entrusted with publicly exposing the blessed sacrament for adoration by the faithful and afterward replacing it, but not with blessing the people. He may also, to the extent needed, take care of instructing other faithful who on a temporary basis are appointed to assist the priest or deacon in liturgical celebrations by carrying the missal, cross, candles, etc., or by performing other such duties. He will perform these functions more worthily if he participates in the holy eucharist with increasingly fervent devotion, receives nourishment from it, and deepens his knowledge about it. As one set aside in a special way [pretty strong - one set aside in a special way!] for the service of the altar, the acolyte should learn all matters concerning public divine worship and strive to grasp their inner spiritual meaning: in that way he will be able each day to offer himself entirely to God, be an example to all by his gravity and reverence in church, and have a sincere love for the Mystical Body of Christ, the people of God, especially for the weak and the sick.
7. In accordance with the ancient tradition of the Church, institution to the ministries of reader and acolyte is reserved to men. [Aha! Let me repeat: "In accordance with the ancient tradition of the Church, institution to the ministries of reader and acolyte is reserved to men." Could this be the reason why hardly any episcopal conferences have, in fact, established these stable ministries among lay people and still only confer these ministries upon candidates for ordination, ignoring Pope Paul's intentions as stated in (3) above?]
8. The following are requirements for admission to the ministries:
   1. the presentation of a petition that has been freely made out and signed by the aspirant to the Ordinary (the bishop and, in clerical institutes, the major superior) who has the right to accept the petition;
   2. a suitable age and special qualities to be determined by the conference of bishops;
   3. a firm will to give faithful service to God and the Christian people.
9. The ministries are conferred by the Ordinary (the bishop and, in clerical institutes, the major superior) through the liturgical rite De institutione lectoris and De institutione acolythi as revised by the Apostolic See.
10. An interval, determined by the Holy See or the conferences of bishops, shall be observed between the conferring of the ministries of reader and acolyte whenever more than one ministry is conferred on the same person. [Should one precede the other? Logically, and following the tradition, the ministry of acolyte would be considered a "higher" ministry and so one would receive the ministry of reader before that of acolyte, and this is, of course, the order followed for those who are candidates for ordination.]
11. Unless they have already done so, candidates for ordination as deacons and priests are to receive the ministries of reader and acolyte and are to exercise them for a suitable time, in order to be better disposed for the future service of the word and of the altar. Dispensation from receiving these ministries on the part of such candidates is reserved to the Holy See.
12. The conferring of ministries does not bring with it the right to support or remuneration from the Church.
13. The rite of institution of readers and acolytes will soon be published by the competent department of the Roman Curia.

In the Novus Ordo Church which the vast majority of us inhabit, I think our sense of order in the liturgy would be vastly improved if suitable men were chosen to be stably instituted as lectors and, later, acolytes. What about the women? They could still be temporarily appointed to fulfill the function of a reader on  occasion, or even of an acolyte. But I would consider this to be an extraordinary circumstance.

Now, anyone from my parish who reads this needn't get themselves up in arms - I am not about to exclude all the women who have been entrusted with these roles from doing them in the future. I do, however, think it is only right that we know clearly what the intentions of the post-Conciliar reform were. After all, Pope Benedict has asked that in the Year of Faith we study again the documents of the Second Vatican Council. I think everyone knows of my concern at the fact that the majority of our Readers and Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are women. If the need for more readers and EMHC's to replace any who step down arises, I'll be looking for men to step up first to at least redress the balance of male performance of these roles.

But what if conferences of bishops enacted Canon 230 of the Code of Canon Law? Of course there is no obligation upon them to do so, but Pope Paul was pretty clear about his intentions as also about his view about the ancient tradition of the Church.

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.

See how America Magazine mis-represents Vatican II

In a post dated October 10th 2011 (it's only October 3rd as I write) entitled Save the Altar Girls, the editorial reports on the decision by the rector of Ss Simon and Jude Cathedral in Phoenix, Arizona to restrict serving at the altar to boys. This, of course, was always the Church's practice until a 1994 decision to permit girls to serve.

Now, the Second Vatican Council was concluded in 1965 and it made no mention of allowing girls to serve at Mass. Yet America Magazine writes:

These moves to limit laywomen’s access to the altar threaten to drag the church back into the pre-Vatican II world. One wonders if next the altar rail will return, another barrier between the priests and the people.

Where was the removal of altar rails mentioned in Vatican II? It wasn't.

This is a so-called "Spirit of Vatican II" article which bears no resemblance to the letter of the Council.

The editorial makes the following case:

The key issue is the status of the baptized: that the laity may be called by the Spirit to offer their talents in various roles. The rejection of altar girls disregards the counsel of the Second Vatican Council that the charisms of the baptized “are to be received with thanksgiving and consolation.” By virtue of baptism, the council reminds us, “there is neither male nor female. For you are all ‘one’ in Christ Jesus.” There is “a true equality between all with regard to the dignity and activity which is common to all the faithful in building up the Body of Christ” (“Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,” Nos. 12, 32).

But this argument could be used in support of a campaign for the admission of women to the ranks of the priesthood, yet this is clearly not possible. There is no distinction between male and female in terms of their equal dignity before God, but male and female not only have different physical attributes (only one can be father/husband and only the other mother/wife), they have distinct sacramental attributes to, signs of Christ as bridegroom and the Church as bride respectively.

Clearly America magazine is worried that the Phoenix decision might lead to a trend, and I think they are right to be worried as many of the innovations made over recent decades are being re-examined and rolled back. Whatever their views on girls and altar serving, they should not be invoking the spirit of Vatican II. Altar rails are making a come back too.

Father L. Dudley Day OSA, funeral homily

A friend has sent me a link to the funeral homily for her cousin, Father L. Dudley Day. Father Day was a pastoral assistant at St John Cantius in Chicago (see my previous post) for the last few years of his life. His cousin relates that he went to St John's because they shared the same values. He suffered great misunderstanding by "modernizers" who objected to his unwavering committment to the Holy Father and the Magisterium.

The homilist (skillfully avoiding a canonisation homily) speaks eloquently about Father Day's teaching what has now become known as the hermeneutic of continuity - that there is only one Church, that the Church after Vatican II must be the same Church as before Vatican II, if it is the Catholic Church. Our faith must be the same faith as that of our ancestors, and we must hand this on. He says how his brother, ten years younger than him, came once saying how interesting Father Day's Masses were because he taught them all the things his Catholic school was failing to teach.

Watch the videos. It is worth it.

An obituary can be found here.

May he rest in peace.
Part 1:


Part 2:

Bishop of Sioux City: 'hermeneutic of discontinuity' has wreaked havoc in the Church.

The Bishop of Sioux City R. Walter Nickless has written a 17 page pastoral on the authentic understanding of the Second Vatican Council.

He writes about the period that followed the Council:

Sometimes we set out to convert the world, but were instead converted by it. We have sometimes lost sight of who we are and what we believe, and therefore have little to offer the world that so desperately needs the Gospel. A pendulum effect began in the Church and has not yet stopped swinging. In the effort to correct exaggerations or one-sidedness in various areas, the reform often times swung to the exact opposite pole.

This pendulum swing can be seen in the areas of liturgy, popular piety, family life, catechesis, ecumenism, morals, and political involvement, to name just a few. It seems to me that in many areas of the Church’s life the “hermeneutic of discontinuity” has triumphed. It has manifested itself in a sort of dualism, an either/or mentality and insistence in various areas of the Church’s life: either fidelity to doctrine or social justice work, either Latin or English, either our personal conscience or the authority of the Church, either chant or contemporary music, either tradition or progress, either liturgy or popular piety, either conservative or liberal, either Mass or Adoration, either the Magisterium or theologians, either ecumenism or evangelization, either rubrics or personalization, either the Baltimore Catechism or “experience”; and the list goes on and on! We have always been a “both/and” people: intrinsically traditional and conservative in what pertains to the faith, and creative in pastoral ministry and engaging the world.

My brothers and sisters, let me say this clearly: The “hermeneutic of discontinuity” is a false interpretation and implementation of the Council and the Catholic Faith. It emphasizes the “engagement with the world” to the exclusion of the deposit of faith. This has wreaked havoc on the Church, systematically dismantling the Catholic Faith to please the world, watering down what is distinctively Catholic, and ironically becoming completely irrelevant and impotent for the mission of the Church in the world. The Church that seeks simply what works or is “useful” in the end becomes useless.

Our urgent need at this time is to reclaim and strengthen our understanding of the deposit of faith. We must have a distinctive identity and culture as Catholics, if we would effectively communicate the Gospel to the people of this day and Diocese. This is our mission. Notice that this mission is two-fold, like the Second Vatican Council’s purpose. It is toward ourselves within the Church (ad intra), and it is to the world (ad extra). The first is primary and necessary for the second; the second flows from the first. This is why we have not been as successful as we should be in bringing the world to Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ to the world. We cannot give what we do not have; we cannot fulfill our mission to evangelize, if we ourselves are not evangelized.

With respect to the liturgy, what I wrote in today's 'Desktop' in the parish newsletter might be of interest to readers:

Last Saturday a good number of parishioners enjoyed a lovely day at Aylesford as we joined between seven and eight thousand faithful in honouring St
Thérèse of Lisieux and in venerating her relics. St Thérèse is a ‘Doctor of Love’ in the Church, and the peace and harmony of everyone gathered in Aylesford was a testimony of the love of God that binds us as faithful Christians from so many parts of the world to one another.

Many non-Catholics attended too: one of our own group, spouses married to Catholics, and the driver of our bus Tony. Tony joined the queue of those venerating the relics and said at the end of the day how he couldn’t help but enter into the spirit of such a joyful pilgrimage. He told me that, although not a regular church goer, whenever he finds himself tired after a stressful day, he puts some Gregorian chant on to listen to and soon finds himself relaxed and at peace.

Gregorian chant CD’s have become chart-toppers in recent years. Seeing the commercial potential of this beautiful music, record companies engage communities of monks and other choirs in recording contracts to enable people with or without faith to experience this music in the comfort of their homes. But where is the proper ‘home’ of Gregorian chant? It is the Sacred Liturgy which is celebrated in our churches day in and day out. Is it not ironic that as Gregorian chant increases in popularity in the charts, there are those who resist or even resent its use in its proper setting: the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? As children fed on a diet of burgers and chips would find more healthy food unpalatable, it is understandable that those who have been fed on a liturgical diet of ‘Kum ba yah, my Lord’, ‘Bind us together, Lord’ and the ‘clapping Gloria’ might find the rather richer diet of Gregorian chant difficult to digest. However, according to the Second Vatican Council, the chant ‘should be given pride of place in liturgical services’ and, as a recent teaching document of the Church states, ‘Such chant has a great power to lift the human spirit to heavenly realities.’

Since the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict have all asked that the faithful in ordinary parishes not be denied access to this rich liturgical heritage but, on the contrary, be helped to participate in it. I would ask those parishioners who choose not to attend the 10am Mass on those Sundays when we sing some Gregorian chant to reconsider. I wish to congratulate our choir on the Communion antiphon they chanted last Sunday and to encourage all our parishioners to either actively join in the singing of the chant as best they can, being patient if at first they find it unfamiliar, or passively allow themselves to be raised up by it.

After Mass last Sunday morning a couple from Norwich introduced themselves to me as visitors. She was born and raised a Catholic and said how nice it was to hear the Latin chant. Her husband had only been received into the Church last Easter. He too appreciated the opportunity to experience it. In the words of Psalm 51(50), we can pray: ‘O Lord, open thou my lips, and my mouth shall show forth thy praise.’

The full text of the pastoral letter can be read here.

H/t Lifesitenews. Also covered in depth at Te Deum Laudamus (1) and (2)