Talk:Altar server

Eastern Orthodox

When adding this section I realized that I may have introduced a problem in Acolyte. I claimed there that Orthodoxy no longer had a separate office of "taper-bearer" based on the service books available to me, but these all reflect the Slavic tradition. I knew that Greek altar boys were ordained to something, but as I wrote this it occurred to me that I didn't know exactly what. I said Reader (minor orders) here in the event, but it may be that the Greeks still have a distinctive "taper-bearer" and that's what their altar boys are ordained as. I would appreciate it if someone who knows for sure would fix this. TCC (talk) (contribs) (old comment)

List of famous altar boys

I think it'd be interesting if we had a list of famous (former) altar boys. Archbishop Desmond Tutu was an alter server in 1946.

References

comment at the beginning of RC altar boy

As a former altar server as well, I can tell you for a fact that there was formal training involved. After your training, you received your cassock and surplus from the parish priest. --209.244.30.235 (talk) 18:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

comment at the end of RC altar boy

'Many altar servers see themselves usually not as priesthood candidates, even if the church sometimes tries to influence them in this direction.'

This i think, is not 'entirely' true.. All the altar boys in my parish (including myself) and lots in most other parishes ive served at etc all feel they have a vocation to the sacred Priesthood, which is the only reason we are serving! :). I dont know for sure, but im thinking this is a genreal sweeping statement, feel free to discuss though.

The "gold standard" for Wikipedia entries is verifiability. This article is sadly unreferenced overall, mainly becuase it's not a topic much written on. Editors are therefore writing from their personal experience. In this case that's mainly reliable as far as what being an altar server entails, but when it comes to subtopics that really should be statistically based, personal experience is a hazardous guide. If a study or two could be cited, giving the proportion of priests who were altar boys, or the proportion of altar boys who became priests, that would be much more reliable. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

'Other churches'

Ive corrected/added to the point made at the bottom of the article on other churches. Mostly based on my own past experiance and understanding with Anglo-Catholic churches. Feel free to correct if needed.

Rape

Why is there no talk of the rape of altar boys in this article?

Win —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.2.230.166 (talk) 15:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Is there a point to your bigotry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.13.157 (talk) 00:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Replace Missal with Sacramentary

I believe that since the 1960's, the missal has been phased out and replaced with the Sacramentary that contains all the prayers related to the mass. Would it be correct to change references to the missal in this article to the Sacramentary? Benrr101 (talk) 23:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Altar server vs altar boy

The article's assertion that altar server has "almost completely replaced" altar boy may well be true within the church itself, but it certainly is not so in general/colloquial use. "Altar boy" is, at least here in the UK, far more common (unless, of course, the person in question is not a boy). See, for example, this BBC article, which uses "altar boy" while mentioning the past of a murder victim. 86.132.140.207 (talk) 01:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Female altar servers

The material on female altar servers is well sourced, so I have restored it again. Please discuss any problems with it here rather than continuing to remove it. Thanks! -- Cat Whisperer (talk) 23:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Altar boy

"Alter boy" is not the usual term anymore, incorrectly stated in the article. Alter server is much more popular, as is female altar servers.Mazeau (talk) 21:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The appropriate term is "altar boy," and girls serving as altar boys are called "female altar boys."75.27.148.62 (talk) 20:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey, there are new things under the sun: female boys. -- Turris Davidica (talk) 23:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

No, they are girls doing the duties of boys as if they were also boys.75.27.148.62 (talk) 05:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

No Sir, this is why we call it altar server. --Turris Davidica (talk) 20:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion does not change the fact that girls are serving as altar boys, hence the term "female altar boys."75.27.148.62 (talk) 04:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

They are serving as altar servers (what abount adult men? Boys too?). There is no such term as female altar boy. But there's no point in discussing this here, since "female boy" is unsourced. --Turris Davidica (talk) 22:15, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Merge with Acolyte

These two articles discuss the same subject; they should be merged. Neelix (talk) 02:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

No, an altar server is different from an acolyte even if their duties largely overlap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.57.98 (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I think, me being a former Lutheran, now Roman Catholic, that they are two completely different people, with different duties. Shark96z (talk) 04:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Gay altar servers

I noticed that there was a controversy surrounding the existence of gay altar servers, notably about one such altar server in the Canadian province of Ontario, who announced he was launching a human rights complaint against the Church for having been dismissed while he was living with his male partner. The issue of gay altar servers is not really the same as gay altar boys, given that the former are adults, while the latter were often involved in clerical child abuse cases. [1] ADM (talk) 15:09, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Merge

please merge this article with acolyte --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 02:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Do not merge

The lay ministry of altar server, usually filled by young laypersons (usually now both boys and girls), is not the same- not as expansive a role- in the Catholic churches as the former minor order of Acolyte. An instituted acolyte is (especially since Pope Benedict XVI's instruction limiting the role of Acolyte to the following cases) usually a seminarian in graduate theology school or a permanent deacon in formational training who has not yet been ordained a deacon (or who may have been allowed to retain the role when he left beforehand). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.133.1 (talk) 02:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

You are right in stating the expressions should not be confused. Just let me add that of course the acolyte, although instituted, is also a lay minister.--Turris Davidica (talk) 17:48, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Altar boys since when?

Is it true that the tradition to have "normal" boys (rather than adult men or seminarists) as altar servers dates from the pontificate of Pope Pius X, i.e. after 1900? Generally there is too little on the history of altar servers in this article! -- 77.7.142.251 (talk) 09:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Traditional Catholics

There should be some mention of girls being disallowed service at the altar in Traditional Catholic parishes, as well as by Sedevacantists.75.27.148.62 (talk) 20:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Ministrant

"Ministrant" is a redlink now. On the other hand, altar ministrant redirects here. Can anybody turn it blue? Staszek Lem (talk) 23:45, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Altar server. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071007142135/http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2006/images/auspetrapavla.jpg to http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2006/images/auspetrapavla.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090520061122/http://moas-srcp.catholicweb.com/ to http://www.moas-srcp.catholicweb.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714132029/http://snpmas.multiply.com/ to http://snpmas.multiply.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Extraordinary form duties

There is a marked lack of mention of any duties altar servers have in the context of the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite. These duties are extensive compared to the Ordinary Form, and include making all the Latin responses to the priest's prayers, e.g. the Confiteor. I would think that an extra section could be opened to document these duties. It is not enough to mention them parenthetically interspersed in the Ordinary Form descriptions. 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 15:10, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Communion-plate during distribution

As it was required for the Communion of the Faithful in 1929 when there was never distribution of the Chalice or intinction, the Communion-plate is obviously for any situation in which the sacred host is administered. Redemptionis sacramentum makes that clear, as well as common practice throughout the world where the custom is still retained (e.g. any community that celebrates the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite.) So it is fitting that, since this is a standard practice recommended by the Church herself, that it be placed in order with the other duties of the acolyte. 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 17:53, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

The section concerns the duties of servers in what is today "the normal form – the forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic liturgy" (not the 1962 form, officially authorized for use but only as an extraordinary (exceptional) form and which you have suggested should be the subject of a new section). What is the relevance of the 1929 form? The Roman Missal in use in 1929 said nothing about the then novel communion-plate: it did not "require" its use. On the contrary, it still kept the centuries-old text: "If some are to be given communion within Mass, the priest, after consuming the Precious Blood and before the purification, genuflects and places the consecrated small hosts in a ciborium or, if only a few are to be given communion, upon the paten (unless from the beginning they were put in a ciborium or another chalice). Meanwhile a server extends before them a white linen cloth or veil, and makes confession for them, saying: Confiteor etc. ..." (Ritus servandus in celebratione Missae, X, 6). The 1962 Missal kept the opening phrase, "If some are to be given communion within Mass", but radically rewrote the following words, omitting the mention of the traditional white linen cloth and saying nothing of a communion-plate. The 1962 Missal did include the 1960 Code of Rubrics, which under the heading "Preparation of the altar for Mass" says at number 528: "On the Epistle side, on a table set for this purpose, cruets of wine and water with a bowl and a finger towel are to be prepared, along with a small bell and a plate for the communion of the faithful". It said nothing else whatever about that communion-plate, whether for instance two-handled for the communicant to hold or equipped with a long pole for a server to extend.

I think you need a statement by a reliable source, not just a personal opinion, to delare that a communion-plate "is obviously for any situation in which the sacred host is administered". Is it obvious, for instance, that those who receive in their hand (the majority in most countries) must also manage to hold a communion-plate, or that, in transferring the host to their mouth, they must overcome the obstacle of a communion-plate that a server is holding under their chin?

A statement by a reliable source is needed for placing among the normal functions of a server the holding of a communion-plate under the chin of communicants (in contradiction to GIRM, which says the communicants, at least if receiving by intinction, themselves hold it. Should it not be put as an exceptional duty, such as holding mitre or crozier or carrying a baldachin? Or does it belong to the section you desire (and that perhaps you will write) on a server's functions in the 1962 form?

Redemptionis sacramentum, 93 does not say: "The plate is held under the chin of the communicant". Bealtainemí (talk) 10:16, 27 June 2018 (UTC)