www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Altar girls

For those that this bothers...

Why is a deacon in orar and riassa offputting and a priest in riassa and epitrachil okay?

What about the practice of having �altar boys�? What exactly is an �altar boy� but a way to address not having deacons or subdeacons? The same goes for other volunteer ministries such as cantors and lectors.

Priests, albeit mandated celibate ones, assumed many diaconal functions with the absence of deacons. The same goes for voluntary and often temporary �altar servers.� Both filled the void in a non-diaconal church. Consider the Great Entrance. Not only does the priest end up baking the bread, he transfers it and offers it up.

But since the Greek Catholic Church is still shy about ordaining its lectors, servers/subdeacons, cantors, and the like, we will continue trying to remedy one problem with another. We fail in utilizing one age-old means of recognizing service in our church with newer innovations, usually borrowed from other church traditions and rarely, if ever, from the Orthodox. That would be un-Catholic.

In the absence of ordination, there are those in the Church who dream up �certified� ministers.

In all, we have inherited one lousy solution after another. Since the Church can�t find itself to recognize and ordain those people already serving in the Church, it gets bye with void-fillers. Why pay a cantor if one can get one for free? Why ordain a subdeacon or lector if one can get a volunteer?

This all leads to the question of who is really being responsible here. The Church preaches stability and dedication, but like the non-committed man (or woman) with �cold feet� for marriage, backs out shy of making a relationship permanent.

Since the Church has done away with responsible and stable relationships with its ministers (volunteers are a dime a dozen), then should ANY service in church be permanent? Why does permanency stop at the presbyterate and diaconate? A multi-tier system?

Presbyters: absolutely necessary.
Deacons: helpful but not absolutely necessary.
Other: helpful but no need to stand committed.

Why should a minister, other than a priest, be committed and invest his time and life for the church after high school graduation if the CHurch won't be committed and invest in them? Why must all vocations be from "cold calls" and not harvested from our own backyard? Must we continue to behave and think like Latins? (no offense to our Latins though)

Comments?

Joe

Dear Cantor Joseph,

Excellent point! Very thought-provoking! And one that I have no idea about!

I look forward to the comments of those who do . . .

Alex

I am really not sure what an "altar server" is for us, but sure enough, there are two minor orders that serve in the altar: subdiacon and candle-bearer (acolyte). These roles are very different and not interchangable.

Now, for not having these roles properly or permanently. Tonsure and ordination seems to presume training and worthiness. It also requires much responsibility, both on the part of the one recieving tonsure and on the heirarchy. Both must ensure that the role fulfilled be executed faithfully accurately. This means training and preparation. This means providing resources to accomplish this end. Having volunteers reduces the liability of those in charge (it actually does not, but it is nice to believe), for nothing is invested in the lector/cantor/altar server. If the Service is not well served, who is to blame? Of course the volunteer is, for he has not done his homework well enough, on his own, without assistance and adequate materials. If he does well, this is only accidental: he was fortunate enough to find help from outside his situation. At any rate, our volunteers tries, and the Divine Service is not the best, not the most beautiful that can be served, but what else can he do? I am sure God understands.

Dear akemner,

Well, I was an altar-server and I also sang the responses and the Epistle etc.

Surely I wasn't a candle-holder - I couldn't hold a candle to any of you liturgical gurus here . . .

What was I?

Alex

Awhile ago i too saw a differentpicture of "altar girls" when i asked my priest about this he told me that the girls serving were called Martha and Mary servers. They are not allowed to go behind the iconostas and they don't really do much. My priest said that the parish woth the Martha and Mary servers was probably pressured by some of the congregation to have girls be servers. When i was young and not fully educated about our church i too wanted to be a server but my priest explained to me that women also had their roles in the church and i accepted that. It is sad that more of our tradition is slipping away. It just proves how much the outside influences are in our church.

-Katie g

Dear Lance,

We are only restoring the diaconate, and the first deacons are only a few months in their orders. How can we say it is a custom? It is a mistake. Now is the time to set the custom, and begin the tradition, and it is almost effortless to begin right. It is much more difficult to correct an error, after it has been around a long time.

There is absolutely no reason for a deacon to stand in the body of the Church with an orar on. Just as there is no reason for a priest to don the epitrachil, just because he is attending a Liturgy.

To receive communion behind the iconostas, a deacon asks the blessing for his vestments, and vests fully. You say "it is not possible to vest in both", but I would ask, why ever not?

I recently had the great joy to attend Liturgies served by some of our new deacons. Surely this is a wonderful sign of hope and promise to us all.

I would never complain about this wonderful and historic event, except to say that no two deacons served the same way, following the same pattern of serving.

The question then must be asked, should there be a uniform way for the deacons to be beginning their ministry? I would answer, yes. What possible way of serving can be agreed upon, by all the deacons? The answer must be the correct, and traditional way of celebrating, as set forth in the rubrics of the Liturgicon, and the instructions of the "Ordo Celebrationis".

Please, why is it impossible to vest in the orar and stichar, to receive communion?

Elias

My dear intrepid Doctor Alex,

If you did not hold candles (or lanterns) during the entrances, i am not sure what you did when you served. When you read the Epistle, that is easy enough: you were a reader. When you sang the responses, that too is simple: you were a worshipper.

A note about Readers: It seems that in that oder, there are two roles. The bigger of the roles is of Psalmist, ie, one who reads the Psalms. For the Divine Liturgy, his parts would be the Antiphons, the verses of the Prokimen and Alleluia, and the verses at Communion. The other is of (equivocally) of Lector, or one who reads the Epistle. In Old Believer practice, the Psalmist reads the psalms at the Hours (before Liturgy), and the Reader reads the rest of the Hour. Typika is also read before Liturgy, and the Psalmist reads the Typikal Psalms, and the Reader reads the rest. The Psalmist leads the choir on the men's side, the Reader leads the choir on the women's side.

A few people in this thread have referred to the roles of women in the Church. What exactly is the role(s) of women in the Byzantine Church?

Perichoresis

Don, yes that is me, how observant. The lads from Yorkton and I were singing the Pochaiv Akathist melody during that part of the procession...

(And you will notice NO ORARION over my riassa...I had a talk with those guys about that, as a matter of fact. The one deacon directly behind me didn't put his on after our little talk - we'll take even the little victories)

This was a procession of the holy and miracle-working relics of our holy father and martyr St. Vasyl Velychkovsky. There is no altar in a procession. The specific provisions of particular law for women refer to services at the altar. And while yes, ideally they should have been dressed differently, I also agree with Adam's post on the previous page. Plus, they didn't ask me in advance for my opinion when planning everything...

I somehow think St. Vasyl would have been very pleased by the devotion, respect and spirit present during the procession of his holy relics. Anyone with specific complaints about this service can forward those to the Metropolitan in Winnipeg.

If a Deacon is to receive Holy Communion in the Altar, he properly vests in sticharion, CUFFS, and orarion. The cuffs, in fact, are the distinctive diaconal vestments [all ordained clerics wear the sticharion - it's a stylized form of the baptismal robe - and subdeacons wear the orarion]. Incognitus

Incognitus, that is not correct. The priest also wears the epimanikia as does the bishop.

The orarion directly over the riassa serves no liturgically reasonable role. The priest wears the epitrachil over the riassa because he can bless. Deacons can not bless liturgically, and thus should not confuse their roles with this practice. The orarion strictly speaking can only be vested over the stikharion. It is an additional sign of office, as readers can wear stikharions but not orarions.


Adam makes a good point about readers in the Old Rite. This also continued (although somewhat mitigated) through the post-Nikonian Russian usage with a "senior reader" or "first reader" having similar precedence over the other "readers".

In both the Old Rite and post-Nikonian usage the subdeacon has the privalege of being the ranking "senior reader" when present (I know Adam already knows that, too ).

Akemmer is right. Responsibility is reciprocal. Unfortunately, a lot of burden is placed on volunteer and/or "certified" ministers (or whatever one is permitted to call them - since "minister" is only reserved for clergy). Our traditions can best be guarded if, for example, cantors were ordained as before and commissioned by his bishop. His fidelity and stability to his Church and bishop is matched by the proper support and training from his church leaders. But giving cantors their proper place in the church means that presbyters, who might be comfy in being the center of attention calling the shots without being questioned, might not like the COMPETITION. Heaven knows how many cantors are purposely ignored in their parishes because the pastor "expects" the parish to provide him with a cantor but is never willing to work with him (or her). Pastoral ministry is usually reserved for other people.

Subdeacons and lectors are critical too. How would the future hold if many of our youths were guided to ministry from an early age? So far, the attrition rate for "altar boys" after high school graduation is dismal, if not pathetic. But you oly get what you pay for. Serving at the altar remains a 'boyish' thing like one's time spent in the boy scouts.

But the innovations continue ...

There is a lack of respect for the ministry treasures we ALREADY have on the books. We still feel obliged to borrow derivative ministries.

Who be the man to dust the covers off those old liturgical texts and finally take all this talk about 'returning to traditions' seriously? Or is mimicking the Orthodox just too much?

Joe

Maybe mimicking the Orthodox is too much. All these special minister jobs brings us more in line with current RC practice.

Sarcasm aside, a full restoration of the orders can only enhance the celebration of the Liturgy, which , in turn, can only increase our evangelism appeal. Being like the Orthodox is secondary; being true to ourselves and to our traditions ought to be primary. This will help us to preserve our Church, and to grow, especially in the knowledge and love of God.

Here are some pictures of what I shall term 'processional female servers' holding torches during a Greek Orthodox procession in Astoria, NY:

http://www.stirene.org/Photo%20Page%20Feast.htm

So, it's not just some Canadian Ukrainian Greek Catholics who do such things, although these girls are not dressed in sticharia.

I also like the marching band, complete with a nun banging a talanto.

Only in America!

Dave