<h3>
Why do we need servers at all?</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Before diving into my argument about how certain servers kill priestly vocations, let
me make one thing clear. Servers are not absolutely necessary to the Mass. The Mass
is a participation in the eternal sacrifice. In as much as this is the case, everything
that we do on earth is merely a reflection of what already takes place in eternity.
The only person necessary for the Mass to take place is a validly ordained priest,
who stands as mediator <i>in persona Christi</i>&nbsp;(in the person of Christ).
The altar server is necessary for the sake of reflecting more fully and fittingly the
eternal divine liturgy. Therefore, if the server does a poor job and takes away from
this imagery, it is better for the sake of the faithful that no servers are used at all. Fr.
Dwight Longenecker, in his address to altar servers does a nice job explaining the
role of the server:</div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Our worship on earth reflects the worship in heaven. What we do here at the holy
sacrifice of the Mass is a kind of distant echo of what goes on in heaven. There, the
Lamb of God is offered in one timeless and eternal sacrifice. There the saints and
angels worship around the throne of the Lamb. In that city there is no sun, moon, or
stars, for the Lamb Himself is the light of that city. This altar you see here is a
reflection of the altar in heaven. This chalice is a sign of the eternal Precious Blood
of the Lamb. This host is, on earth, the sign of the Eternal Bread of heaven. The
priest is an icon of Christ the Lord — and who are you? You represent and reflect on
earth the heavenly host...&nbsp;That’s why we have children serve the Mass if we
can, because you children remind us adults of what the Lord Jesus said: “Unless you
become like a little child, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.” So just by being
children you remind us what we must be like to become like the saints and
angels.</blockquote>
<a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/what-i-tell-my-altarservers">(Read the full text)</a><br />
<br />
Secondly, let me make clear that the majority of seminarians used to be servers. The
number one ministry in the Church that contributes to priestly vocations is altar
serving. Every year newly ordained priests are surveyed, and every year the number
of priests who used to be servers hovers around 75%. It is not a shocking number.
There is a natural progression of ministries. It begins with altar server and moves to
priesthood. The problem is that we have a problem getting young boys and men to
serve in the first place. So, what are we doing to ensure that more young boys and
men get the chance to serve? And what sort of things prevent young boys and men
from serving? Here is my list of five kinds of servers that take away from the natural
progression toward priesthood:<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Overzealous Adult Server</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Although today we are seeing an influx of 'second career' vocations, the majority of
vocations are called at a high school and college level. Generally, they are referred to
in the Church as the "youth," which is anywhere between 16-35 years of age. So, in
order to draw more youth into the seminary, they ought to serve anywhere between
7-35 years of age, and the younger the better. Discernment does not start as an
adult. We often times hear our call from an early age. So, we should encourage
young boys to serve as early as possible and start fostering an openness to priestly
life.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The overzealous adult server (OAS) is one that show up infrequently, but
nevertheless, does great harm to early discernment. &nbsp;The OAS shows up to
Mass early, helps the sacristan (or is the sacristan), and then decides that he is going
to serve. His heart is usually in the right place. He wants to help as much as possible.
He wants to make sure that the Mass is beautiful, but he often fills a role that can be
filled by someone who is in the early stages of discernment.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When someone shows up to serve, he might say, "It's ok. I can serve for you if you
don't want to," or "Don't worry so-and-so we have enough servers today." It is
perfectly acceptable to have more than two or three servers. Consideration should
always be made for as many servers as you can fit in the sanctuary. Each server can
and should perform a different function, e.g. one server should be solely concerned
with the Missal, another with the candles, another with the thurible, another with
the lavabo, etc... In fact, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal requires this,
when it is possible:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
All, therefore, whether ordained ministers or lay Christian faithful, in fulfilling their
function or their duty, should carry out solely but totally that which pertains to
them. (<a href="http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/romanmissal/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/girm-chapter-3.cfm">GIRM
91</a>)... If there are several present who are able to exercise the same ministry,
nothing forbids their distributing among themselves and performing different parts
of the same ministry or duty... However, it is not at all appropriate that several
persons divide a single element of the celebration among themselves, e.g., that the
same reading be proclaimed by two readers, one after the other, with the exception
of the Passion of the Lord.&nbsp;If at a Mass with the people only one minister is
present, that minister may exercise several different functions.&nbsp;(<a
href="http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/roman-missal/general-
instruction-of-the-roman-missal/girm-chapter-3.cfm">GIRM 109110</a>)</blockquote>
Generally, these rules are written for ordained ministers. As you can see, however,
from the first line, "All, therefore, whether ordained ministers or lay Christian
faithful..." this rule extends, therefore, even to servers. Following Fr. Longenecker's
logic, the servers represent the angelic host, different servers representing different
choirs of angels and each choir performing a different function.<br />
<br />
This should also not be taken to mean that it is never appropriate for adults to serve.
In cases where there is an insufficient number of servers, adults are quite necessary.
Furthermore, they can fill a much needed role as Master of Ceremonies (MC). MCs
take a central role in directing servers from within the liturgy. A good MC directs not
only servers but the priest and deacon as well.<br />
<br />
Acolytes are generally seminarians instituted in preparation for diaconate. "The
acolyte is instituted for service at the altar and to assist the Priest and Deacon. It is
his place principally to prepare the altar and the sacred vessels and, if necessary, to
distribute the Eucharist to the faithful as an extraordinary minister." In the
progression from server to cleric, it is the last step before diaconal ordination. The
acolyte is an altar server much like the MC. In fact, the MC usually performs the
functions of the acolyte when he is not present. The MC, however, should not
distribute Communion. When both an MC and acolyte are present, the MC does
nothing more than direct liturgical traffic. Good MCs lead to good servers, which in
turn leads to more vocations.<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Sloppy Server</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Juthu9qL84/TbjmQfg4dmI/AAAAAAAACfU/EMz96JnYgYw/s400/chimpanzee+altar+servers.j
pg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; marginleft: 1em;"><img border="0" height="185" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/Juthu9qL84/TbjmQfg4dmI/AAAAAAAACfU/EMz96JnYgYw/s200/chimpanzee+altar+servers.j
pg" width="200" /></a></div>
The Sloppy Server is one who cannot keep his act together while serving. Maybe the
poor fella' suffers from Attention Deficit Disorder. Maybe he has just never been
properly educated about the role an altar server plays in the liturgy. Maybe it is
simply some combination of the two. Whatever the reason is, the Sloppy Server is a
distraction. He plays with his cincture and is constantly adjusting his alb. He has
suddenly discovered he has cuticles and has a deep scientific interest in them. There
is a song playing in his head and he compulsively sways to the beat of it. His Nike®
basketball shoes are untied and his cassock is too small, showing the slightest bit of
leg so that you know he is wearing shorts (you hope). His hands are never joined
prayerfully. He is sleeping in the corner of the sanctuary during the first and second
readings. He is simply a hopeless cause and ought to be commended to the
intercession of St. Jude.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Then again, maybe he is not so hopeless after all. Maybe this young man has a
vocation to the priesthood stirring within him somewhere deep down inside. It is
locked up in a room that no one has bothered to open. It is not his fault he cannot
stay focused. He has nothing to do. The pastor has eliminated nearly every server
role other than holding the Missal and washing the hands.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I think you get the picture. The Sloppy Server is probably one of the most common
servers we see today. With the right training he would probably develop a sense of
the necessity of his duties. He might actually learn that all the little things he does
has meaning, and the things that he should not do take away from that meaning.
Meaningful actions are very rarely boring. They engage our attention and put us into
a sort of trance.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Anyone who has ever trained servers or been trained as servers knows that there is
a tendency to set aside the meaning and focus on the usefulness or practicality of
altar serving. At parishes where the servers still ring bells at the consecration (yes,
there are some parishes where this does not happen), how often is this action
explained as, "We ring the bells to get everybody's attention because this is the most
important part of the Mass, Jesus is now present." Setting aside the fact that this is
not the most important part of the Mass, we have failed to explain why we use bells.
Why not a fog horn? The meaning has been left out and the practicality has become
central.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To paraphrase Fr. Robert Barron, the Mass is the most useless and therefore the
most important thing that we do. The idea is that it is not done for some practical or
useful purpose. The Mass is simply the worship of God. It is done for no other
reason. God does not need our worship. It is done solely to express our great desire
and love for the Author of Creation. It is a thing of profoundest meaning and
completely impractical.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The key corrective to the sloppy server is meaning. Meaning and importance are
tied to each other so tightly that our entire life becomes a sort of gospel about what
is most meaningful to us. If we teach the meaningfulness of the Mass to the servers,
we might just end up with a couple of them dedicating their lives to God, His Church,
and the Mass in priesthood.<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Tyranno-server rex</h3>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The T. rex Server is in charge, he is a tyrant king, as the name implies. As I pointed
out in section on the OAS, duties are to be divided up among many servers and "in
fulfilling their function or their duty, should carry out solely but totally that which
pertains to them." The T. rex Server dominates everything. He carries the
processional cross, holds the book, rings the bells swings the incense, and all to the
exclusion of other servers.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Tyranno-server-rex eats unconfident, poorly trained servers for breakfast. You have
no right stepping foot in his domain unless you are his equal. If you have not
received enough training to fulfill duties flawlessly, step aside. The T. rex server is
dedicated to serving properly and beautifully. He strives for excellence and
orthodoxy. He, however, lacks true charity. Real charity is not exclusive. It is a
gathering force. A so-called "orthodoxy" that lacks charity is a cheap imitation of
true orthodoxy. So, in his attempt to please God, because of his exclusion and
domination he fails to obey the rubrics of the Church and fails to please God.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The skilled server ought to teach, train, and encourage less skilled servers. In the
words of St. Thomas Aquinas, "It is better to illuminate than to shine..." The
philosophical principle, "The good is self-diffusive," means that charity cannot help
unite. A server who wants to please God cannot help but teach, train, and encourage
less skilled servers, whereby he draws them closer to God. Sharing knowledge of the
meaningfulness is maybe one of the most important things that a skilled server can
do.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
A good server draws other young men to serve at the altar. The more male servers,
the more likely more young men start discernment early. Early discernment is
particularly effective when it is accompanied by skilled servers who are charitable
and inclusive. This is why the Tyranno-server rex is so harmful to priestly
vocations.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3>
The Alb Server</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
There are three different paragraphs that set the rule for what altar servers are to
wear. I will admit in advance that the rule is for altar servers, and others, to "wear
the alb or other appropriate and dignified clothing," e.g. the cassock and surplice.
This seems to indicate that the primary and suggested attire for the altar server is
the alb. That being the case, it should be made clear that there is no provision made
for additions to the alb, such as a cross on a necklace, other than the cincture. In the
General Instruction of the Roman Missal, the law is:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://blog.syracuse.com/family/2008/10/altarserver.jpg"
imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left:
1em;"><img border="0" height="242"
src="http://blog.syracuse.com/family/2008/10/altarserver.jpg" width="320"
/></a>339. In the Dioceses of the United States of America, acolytes, altar servers,
readers, and other lay ministers may wear the alb or other appropriate and
dignified clothing.</blockquote>
This law is adapted from the Latin, which states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
339. <i>Acolythi, lectores, aliique ministri laici albam vel aliam vestem in singulis
regionibus a Conferentia Episcoporum legitime probatam induere
possunt.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
339. Acolytes, lectores, and other lay ministers wear the alb or they may wear
something else&nbsp;legitimately approved&nbsp;in each region by the Conference
of Bishops.</blockquote>
This law proceeds from paragraph 336, which states
(<i>emphasis</i>&nbsp;mine):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
336. The sacred garment common to <i>all ordained and instituted</i> ministers of
any rank is the alb, to be tied at the waist with a cincture unless it is made so as to fit
even without such. Before the alb is put on, should this not completely cover the
ordinary clothing at the neck, an amice should be used.</blockquote>
Altar servers, however, unless they are instituted acolytes, are not "instituted
ministers." Altar servers are <i>deputed</i> lay ministers not <i>instituted </i>lay
ministers. It is important to keep in mind that "<span style="background-color:
white;">the non-ordained faithful do not have a right to service at the altar, rather
they are capable of being admitted to such service by the Sacred Pastors. (</span><i
style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times,
Arial;">Notitiae</i><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', Times, Arial;">&nbsp;- 421-422 Vol 37 (2001) Num/ 8-9 - pp 397399)</span><span style="background-color: white;">" Instituted ministers have an
obligation to service that deputed lay ministers do not. For this reason, when an
instituted lector is present, a lay reader should not read.&nbsp;</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br />
</span><span style="background-color: white;">The alb, according to the Universal
Church, is proper to bishops, priests, deacons, acolytes, and lectors, not to servers,
readers, cantors, and the like. Regional law (p. 339 in the Dioceses of the United
States) extends this vestment to altar servers, readers, and other deputed lay
ministers. According to p.336 the the original unadapted text of p.339 should be
understood like this, acolytes and lectors wear the alb, but they and other lay
ministers may also wear something else legitimately approved. This rendering does
not imply that the regional Conference of Bishops does not have the authority to
extend that privilege. They do. Unfortunately, extending that privilege does not
seem faithful to the first paragraph in the series on the matter, which states
(<i>emphasis </i>mine):</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
335. In the Church, which is the Body of Christ, not all members have the same
function. This diversity of offices is shown outwardly in the celebration of the
Eucharist by the diversity of sacred vestments, which must therefore be a sign of the
function proper to each minister.&nbsp;</blockquote>
Continuing then with the subsequent paragraphs, 339 seems out of
place:&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
336. The sacred garment common to all ordained and instituted ministers of any
rank is the alb, to be tied at the waist with a cincture unless it is made so as to fit
even without such. Before the alb is put on, should this not completely cover the
ordinary clothing at the neck, an amice should be used.</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
339. In the Dioceses of the United States of America, acolytes, altar servers, readers,
and other lay ministers may wear the alb or other appropriate and dignified
clothing.</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
My argument seems to favor the alb, in this sense: If the alb is the proper vestment
of the ordained, servers who wear the alb should feel more priestly and should
identify themselves more closely with the priest, right? No. Servers wearing albs
conflates, visually, the offices and functions of the ministers, deputed, instituted, and
ordained. In doing this, each office loses its meaning and becomes a matter of utility.
When this happens, there is no longer an ordered trajectory towards the priesthood.
Rather, the server feels more like he is bussing a table than filling an office.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/l4BP4TQk1iw/UKGTCrEPO7I/AAAAAAAAAEc/evXWmi1YgRQ/s1600/Altarboys.jpg
" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right:
1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/l4BP4TQk1iw/UKGTCrEPO7I/AAAAAAAAAEc/evXWmi1YgRQ/s320/Altarboys.jpg"
width="320" /></a></div>
In that case, there is no identification with the priesthood. Only when there is a
hierarchical structure of servers duties and a visual distinction between the highest
duty and the lowest instituted office will there be a sense of priestly identity. The
server needs to feel as though he is getting closer to the priesthood in order to
discern his vocation. By drawing closer to the priesthood, his own identity is
juxtaposed with the identity of the High Priest Himself.<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Female Server</h3>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This is always the most controversial issue of all. If you say that you are not in favor
of female servers, you are automatically and erroneously pegged as a chauvinist.
Trust me, I am no chauvinist. If I can nuance my position enough, maybe you will
agree with me, not on the matter of whether or not there ought to be female servers,
but simply regarding priestly vocations.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The Church has taken a stance on priestly ordination of women. No one should be so
deluded as to think that the Church, who has not changed Her position on the fact
that God is Triune since Her inception, is going to change that stance now or ever.
That being the case, anyone concerned about the decline in numbers of priestly
ordinations since the 1960s should make every provision to ensure that every male
Catholic asks the question sometime in their life whether or not God is calling them
to priesthood.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a
href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_5WUZDXTJTFw/TGGy1TlTRzI/AAAAAAAABvk/A
OmtIi-YiXI/s1600/Holy+Thursday+2010+317.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear:
right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0"
height="213"
src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_5WUZDXTJTFw/TGGy1TlTRzI/AAAAAAAABvk/AO
mtIi-YiXI/s320/Holy+Thursday+2010+317.jpg" width="320" /></a>I have already
expressed my position that more servers equals more discernment. So, let me go
one step further. The more you serve the Mass, the more you discern a priestly
vocation. The more you identify yourself as a server, the more you identify yourself
on that trajectory towards priesthood. So, just as with the OAS, room should be
made for <i>young, male</i>&nbsp;servers.&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
On this matter, the Church has said (<i style="background-color: white; font-family:
'Times New Roman', Times, Arial;">Notitiae</i><span style="background-color:
white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, Arial;">&nbsp;- 421-422 Vol 37
(2001) Num/ 8-9 - pp 397-399)</span>:&nbsp;</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times,
Arial;">"It will always be very appropriate to follow the noble tradition of having
boys serve at the altar" (Circular Letter to the Presidents of Episcopal Conference,
March 15, 1994, no. 2). Indeed, the obligation to support groups of altar boys will
always remain, not least of all due to the well known assistance that such programs
have provided since time immemorial in encouraging future priestly vocations (cf.
ibid</span><i style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',
Times, Arial;">.</i><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New
Roman', Times, Arial;">)</span></blockquote>
Therefore, even though there is nothing theologically or ontologically that can
prevent female servers, we ought to keep in mind that altar servers more than any
other group or ministry contribute the greatest numbers of men to priestly
discernment. Moreover, their discernment often times begins as servers. Logic and
basic mathematics demands more than any theological argument that male servers
should be the norm.<br />