Altar Boys

[ncjohn]

Initially Altar Girls were promoted not because of an indult but because of a rejection of authority or disobedience which was directly opposed to truth.
Not because this was a Catholic tradition that needed to be upheld but because there were some who rejected Catholic tradition to do their own thing. Primarily because of the want for women priests.

And again I say that this unsupported statement is highly insulting to the many, many girls who have served, and their families. There is absolutely no evidence that anyone has provided here to support this accusation. While it may be true that some girls were serving before the indult, this judgment on the motivation for that has no support.

And given that the indult has been in place for some time, most of the girls serving would have no knowledge of any such motivation and to be judging either them or their families as being unsupportive of tradition, when they are doing something fully approved by the Church, is totally wrong.

As I said before, if you want to argue that the permission should never have been granted, fine. But please stop making judgments about people following what the Church says is ok and then pretending that if the Church only knew what you prefer they would immediately come to their senses.

Small-t “tradition” is wonderful, but we need to take care to not make an idol of it lest we start to “…make the traditions of man be the Traditions of God.”

Peace,

 

[baltobetsy]

Besides, in my personal opinion, if a boy thinking about the priesthood is that anti-female that he would withdraw simply over a girl serving alongside him, I personally don’t want him as my parish priest one day.

I do. I want my parish priest to be normal in every way. It is a very normal thing for boys of elementary and middle school age to prefer not to associate with girls. At this point, they may not be thinking about the priesthood, but if the presence of girls has driven them away from serving at the altar at an early age, they’re not going to have the same opportunity to consider a vocation as do the young men who have been part of an exclusively male group of servers.

Picture a ten-year-old boy in a mixed group of servers. He’s a typical boy, with issues of neatness, attention, etc. The girls of the same age are more mature and refined, and frankly, do the job better than the boys. The girls get praised and thanked, and the boys get corrected on a regular basis. How long do you think this typical boy will put up with the situation? How long before soccer or baseball looks a whole lot better to him than serving at the altar?

Betsy

 

[ncjohn]

From the other side, a Mass has to be several indultive practices or else they scream and holler.

The only time I see anyone hollering, it is because those on the “traditonalist” side want to eliminate the approved indults. If people are following approved practices of the Church, then they should be allowed to do so without being judged because someone else doesn’t like the practice.

There was a comment on one of the other threads in the Traditional Catholicism forum, by a self-proclaimed “traditionalist”, that the traditionalists aren’t really interested in just having what they want. What they seek is to have their foot on the neck of those who support otherwise. It is statements like what we see in threads like this that make it clear how true that statement really is, and that the true aim for at least a large proportion is nothing less than elimination of everything that has happened since Vatican II.

And I find it very sad that we can’t recognize that people respond to God in different ways and that we can’t allow ourselves to allow them to respond to something that is different from what “I” prefer, even though the Church says it’s just fine. I guess when people talk about making the liturgy “our own private property” it really cuts both ways.

 

[ncjohn]

I do. I want my parish priest to be normal in every way. It is a very normal thing for boys of elementary and middle school age to prefer not to associate with girls. At this point, they may not be thinking about the priesthood, but if the presence of girls has driven them away from serving at the altar at an early age, they’re not going to have the same opportunity to consider a vocation as do the young men who have been part of an exclusively male group of servers.

Picture a ten-year-old boy in a mixed group of servers. He’s a typical boy, with issues of neatness, attention, etc. The girls of the same age are more mature and refined, and frankly, do the job better than the boys. The girls get praised and thanked, and the boys get corrected on a regular basis. How long do you think this typical boy will put up with the situation? How long before soccer or baseball looks a whole lot better to him than serving at the altar?

Betsy

Again, with all due respect, that’s the same idle speculation without anything to back it up.

I guess I have more trust that the Spirit will call those that are really called. Quite frankly I would be more prone to praying for parents who would support and encourage vocations. If they aren’t encouraging their kids to at least listen for the call, the world will be more than happy to tell them that soccer and baseball look better.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

The only time I see anyone hollering, it is because those on the “traditonalist” side want to eliminate the approved indults. If people are following approved practices of the Church, then they should be allowed to do so without being judged because someone else doesn’t like the practice.

Of course they should be allowed to act within the boundaries of licit practice without anyone judging the state of their immortal soul, but that doesn’t mean they should be free from judgment about the prudence of their actions. That would leave mean every single ecclesiastical discipline would be beyond debate and only the pope would be allowed any sort of opinion expressible by changing the law. Claiming Catholics act viciously by criticizing a licit practice as ill-advised does plenty of justice to Know-Nothing stereotypes but not nearly as much to well-developed ecclesiology (there *are *cases in which you can both obey and disagree at the same time, for instance).

I happen to think most female altar servers or, if they are young enough, their mothers, have no idea of the history of the practice and probably have no illusions of the priesthood. Nevertheless, I still think the indult for female altar service was incredibly stupid on a multitude of levels and will probably never get over the *gut *reaction (which I do try to overcome with my intellectual acknowledgment of liceity and good intention) that a girl serving looks out of place and a woman doing it looks just plain ridiculous.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

We have to remember that the resistance to female altar servers stems not simply from a tradition of boy altar servers but from a more robust tradition of the sanctuary and all liturgical roles reserved to males. That’s not a custom particular to one area of the Church or arising out of a specific time period but a basically universal and initial practice of all apostolic churches until 1994. When you get to that level of antiquity and force across cultural divide, the fact that it is only a discipline becomes fairly insignificant. You’d better have some really good reasons to tinker with it.

On the other hand, the larger rationale about male ministry had slowly been weakening over time. Initially, all the liturgical roles were considered essentially clerical, and since only males could be clerics it was reasoned that someone substituted for them had to be at least that similar to the office holder. Come the late middle ages/early modern period, though, singing in the choir, until then reserved to males, lost its image as a clerical function (or else the image seemed less important with polyphony meaning exploration in a much wider range of notes) and women were allowed into this role. In the 70s, women were allowed to proclaim the readings and assist with distribution of communion - also both clerical functions. I happen to think the changes of the 70s happened for no other reason than misguided “equality,” but someone could still create a paradigm of gradual loosening of restriction that would naturally culminate in allowing females to serve at the altar as well.

That said, even if such a natural result should have eventually happened, we did not get girls at the altar through natural development but through blatant disobedience. We have no evidence that John Paul II ever actually wanted female altar servers. He actually quite clearly condemned the idea a decade before allowing it. He was just kind enough that, if need be to keep the peace, he was willing to budge. Ultimately, one of the reasons “some quarters of the church” prefer boys is that even the pope who finally gave in to girls preferred boys - as evidenced in his actions (not using his own indult) and words (Redemptionis Sacramentum “encourages” boys and “allows” girls to serve).

 

[ncjohn]

Of course they should be allowed to act within the boundaries of licit practice without anyone judging the state of their immortal soul, but that doesn’t mean they should be free from judgment about the prudence of their actions.

I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. If they are acting within licit, approved practices, what “prudence” should they be getting judged for? And who should be making these judgments and on what basis?

I happen to think most female altar servers or, if they are young enough, their mothers, have no idea of the history of the practice and probably have no illusions of the priesthood. Nevertheless, I still think the indult for female altar service was incredibly stupid on a multitude of levels and will probably never get over the *gut *reaction (which I do try to overcome with my intellectual acknowledgment of liceity and good intention) that a girl serving looks out of place and a woman doing it looks just plain ridiculous.

I can certainly respect that opinion, even while disagreeing with it. And as long as we can do that without trying to make each other “wrong” within licit bounds, we can be the “universal yet diverse” Church that our history shows we have always been.

Peace,

 

[scylla]

And again I say that this unsupported statement is highly insulting to the many, many girls who have served, and their families. There is absolutely no evidence that anyone has provided here to support this accusation. While it may be true that some girls were serving before the indult, this judgment on the motivation for that has no support.

You have just proved the statement by your last sentence.

If there were girls serving before the indult it was done out of disobedience as it was not allowed.

This disobedience was not done out of ignorance as everyone knew it was not allowed, and it was being requested to be allowed.

I am not insulting those who’s kids are serving whom have girls and allow them to serve. Please read my post, there are many good people who know nothing behind the evil intent of those who initially promoted altar girls. Again I am not claiming to know the motivation of those who currently promote altar girls, that doesn’t matter at all. Most are very good people just wanting to be nice to girls.

If I promote disobedience for a non-catholic agenda then I am doing wrong. Such as those who promote women priests and they are the ones who promoted altar girls in the beginning.
This is common knowledge, here is an article from an older This Rock Magazine,
catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9305fea2.asp

Now we must alway be kind and nice to the good folk whose girls serve as most do not know the reason behind the allowance.

They do no wrong in allowing their girls to serve, it is those who knowingly do wrong in disobedience to God as a statement of their own selfishness such as Call to Action and the like.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. If they are acting within licit, approved practices, what “prudence” should they be getting judged for? And who should be making these judgments and on what basis?

Let’s try a different example, one not embroiled in controversy. There are roughly 15 options for the penitential rite in our current missal, at least 4 Eucharistic prayers, a handful of mysteria fidei, etc. Let’s say a pastor used a different combination of options every single time he said Mass. He thinks it opens up the richness of possibilities, and he’s fully entitled to choose whatever options he wants and does no wrong in doing so.

There is still room, nonetheless, for someone to say it is imprudent. An individual, for instance, might have grown up with great continuity of liturgical custom and be distracted by it and bring this to the attention of the pastor for consideration. A different individual, on the other hand, might actually really like the practice but from conversation with others realizes it is creating the impression among fellow parishioners that the priest is just making things up and is free to do so. A bishop might wish (and ask) his priests to limit themselves to a smaller set of options for purposes of uniformity, of applicability to the diocese’s particular spiritual needs, etc. I think all those are legitimate reasons for questioning the prudence of an action that still leave untouched the debate about the advisability of overturning bimillenial custom, which I think must be considered when talking specifically about the thread topic.

 

[jmcrae]

Picture a ten-year-old boy in a mixed group of servers. He’s a typical boy, with issues of neatness, attention, etc. The girls of the same age are more mature and refined, and frankly, do the job better than the boys. The girls get praised and thanked, and the boys get corrected on a regular basis. How long do you think this typical boy will put up with the situation? How long before soccer or baseball looks a whole lot better to him than serving at the altar?

This is ridiculous. Girls shouldn’t serve because they would outclass the boys?

Thank God that’s not the mind of the Church.

(What if we said that boys aren’t allowed to study Mathematics or the physical sciences, because they tend to be better at these subjects than girls are, and might hurt the girls’ poor little feelings when they get higher grades in these subjects? )

 

[scylla]

This is ridiculous. Girls shouldn’t serve because they would outclass the boys?

Thank God that’s not the mind of the Church.

(What if we said that boys aren’t allowed to study Mathematics or the physical sciences, because they tend to be better at these subjects than girls are, and might hurt the girls’ poor little feelings when they get higher grades in these subjects? )

Your right that is not the best reason. It is a secondary reason to not have altar girls.
You are also correct that feelings don’t matter, no matter how much we like having altar girls or how good it feels we should uphold principles and truth.
Right now it is allowed and so there is nothing wrong with allowing altar girls to serve, though I would contend it is not wise and not a good practice.
Just because something is allowed doesn’t mean it is good.

Just because I can miss Mass in extraordinary circumstances doesn’t mean that it makes it good to do so.
In the same way permission to do things because of circumstances do not make it good to do such things.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[jmcrae]

Your right that is not the best reason. It is a secondary reason to not have altar girls.
You are also correct that feelings don’t matter, no matter how much we like having altar girls or how good it feels we should uphold principles and truth.
Right now it is allowed and so there is nothing wrong with allowing altar girls to serve, though I would contend it is not wise and not a good practice.
Just because something is allowed doesn’t mean it is good.

Just because I can miss Mass in extraordinary circumstances doesn’t mean that it makes it good to do so.
In the same way permission to do things because of circumstances do not make it good to do such things.

In Christ
Scylla

I agree with the Church that boys should be preferred at the Altar because it encourages them to seek vocations to the priesthood.

I reject any and all sexist explanations of the practice, and, in the light of Mulieris Dignitatem, I believe that I am in accord with the mind of the Church in so doing.

 

[ncjohn]

You have just proved the statement by your last sentence.

If there were girls serving before the indult it was done out of disobedience as it was not allowed.

The only thing that proves is that some people did it before it was approved. Unless you can cite the circumstances you cannot prove any wilfull disobedience. It may well have come from parishes that had no boys to serve and somebody volunteered girls, not thinking there was any big deal to it. I don’t know, and I have yet to see anyone document the circumstances other than by innuendo.

This disobedience was not done out of ignorance as everyone knew it was not allowed, and it was being requested to be allowed.

See above. If you can document that, please do.

Please read my post, there are many good people who know nothing behind the **evil intent **of those who initially promoted altar girls.

Again, if you have documentation of there being “evil intent” please provide it. If not, you are casting aspersions on people’s character without facts and those statements should cease.

I have a real problem with making assumptions of people having “evil intent” in a desire to serve God. Did some people “jump the gun” a little? Apparently so. How many? I have no idea and have seen no one provide any numbers. Were they promoting a “female priesthood”? I have seen no evidence of any such thing. Did they have “evil intent”? Again, I have seen no evidence of anything other than a willingness to serve God in some capacity.

And of course all of that is irrelevant to the condemnatory attitudes taken toward the current state–what the OP addresses–which is in fact approved by the Church, but for which people still cluck and tsk that there is something wrong with those who are participating in a Church-approved activity. I’m not saying that you are doing so here, but there is a prevalence of it throughout the many threads on the topic.

I truly wish I could put my finger on why it is that so many followers of the Christ who simply said “come, follow me” feel such a need to chop other such followers to pieces over differences in preference. It comes from both “sides” and it truly is discouraging to one who seeks peace among all.

 

[ncjohn]

There is still room, nonetheless, for someone to say it is imprudent. An individual, for instance, might have grown up with great continuity of liturgical custom and be distracted by it and bring this to the attention of the pastor for consideration. A different individual, on the other hand, might actually really like the practice but from conversation with others realizes it is creating the impression among fellow parishioners that the priest is just making things up and is free to do so. A bishop might wish (and ask) his priests to limit themselves to a smaller set of options for purposes of uniformity, of applicability to the diocese’s particular spiritual needs, etc. I think all those are legitimate reasons for questioning the prudence of an action that still leave untouched the debate about the advisability of overturning bimillenial custom, which I think must be considered when talking specifically about the thread topic.

Ok. I got the impression you were questioning the prudence of the girls who were serving and couldn’t understand why. I see you here questioning the prudence of having options available at all, or of changing from the Tridentine traditions (400-500 years, not bimillenial–but that’s a whole different topic ).

I have no problems at all with questioning whether it was a good idea, as I’ve said several times. You bring up some valid points as to whether it can create confusion. I personally think that some education is needed so people will better understand what is going on and what is and isn’t allowed, though I personally don’t have a problem with the “options” themselves. Hopefully some of the more confusing things like the mysteria fidei will get resolved with the new translation, whenever that comes out.

I only have problems with questioning the motivations and impugning the character of those who serve, and who believe it is ok to serve as the Church has approved. I know that you have presented reaonable arguments on the broader subject, even if your preference against it is clear. And I know that sometimes it’s hard to separate the two. But to me it truly is important, as followers of the Prince of Peace, to constantly seek to build up rather than tear down. That is the only thing I seek.

Peace,

 

[scylla]

Is disobedience bad? Yes

Were altar girls allowed before the indult? No

So those who were allowing them were being disobedient. Yes

They were doing wrong deliberately as to be obedient is to seek truth and uphold it. Those who weren’t were doing wrong. Yes

This is evidenced by your acceptance that people did do so before they were given permission, this can be read about in the old article I linked to describing the intent of those who did these actions.

Who can claim ignorance if it was prohibited and not part of tradition? Are you saying the Pastors and Bishops who allowed this were ignorant of the prohibition?

Please don’t try and avoid the premise of the discussion by stating that I am attacking those good people who unknowingly allow their girls to do so today. They are not doing wrong, by doing so and I have never stated that. I do not believe the girls have done wrong.
(if you did not understand or mistakenly thought that I thought the girls were evil or doing bad please forgive me if I didn’t speak clearly)

Were Adam and Eve doing evil by not obeying God? Good people sometimes do evil things. This is what I accuse the Pastors and Bishops of allowing before there was permission.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[THurifer2]

We never found any such thing. The boys and girls served alongside each other and nobody ever thought anything of it.

Peace,

Your situation must be the exception. It was a diocese wide occurance in my diocese. I was one of those altar boys who bolted. I was serious about it. It changed my life when it happened. Being an altar boy did help me to identify that I might possibly become a priest. The day the girls showed up and all thoughts of it vanished along with my participation until recently. That was over 25 years ago. Before Females were allowed my parish had 10-15 junior and senior boys serve as altar boys. My mother is still a member of that parish and there is only 4 male altar servers and they are all in 4th grade.

 

[az_4_faith]

A long time ago, in a parish far, far away . . .

my family left a parish for many different reasons - mostly alot of liturgical disobedience - and one disobedience in particular that really bothered us was that the parish was allowing altar girls to serve before the indult was announced.

A few years after we left, the indult was announced and this particular pastor was used as a source in the local newspaper about the indult. His reply was that he had allowed altar girls before the indult because “when something feels right, you just do it”.

That about summed up his disobedience in all other matters as well.

Such a ‘60’ - 70’s attitude, eh?

My gripe with the pastor wasn’t so much the use of altar girls, it was his disobedience I found appalling.

In all fairness, after the indult, my daughter served at the altar for about five or six years. She was probably the best altar server the parish had.

But if I were to make the decision over again, I probably wouldn’t encourage her to serve in that capacity.

Just doesn’t “feel right”.

 

[Corki]

[47.] It is altogether laudable to maintain the noble custom by which boys or youths, customarily termed servers, provide service of the altar after the manner of acolytes, and receive catechesis regarding their function in accordance with their power of comprehension.[119] Nor should it be forgotten that a great number of sacred ministers over the course of the centuries have come from among boys such as these.[120] Associations for them, including also the participation and assistance of their parents, should be established or promoted, and in such a way greater pastoral care will be provided for the ministers. Whenever such associations are international in nature, it pertains to the competence of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to establish them or to approve and revise their statutes.[121] Girls or women may also be admitted to this service of the altar, at the discretion of the diocesan Bishop and in observance of the established norms.[122]

This is from Redemptionis Sacramentum. Just for reference since there have been a lot of posts about what the Church permits.

The wording is striking to me. Using boys is “laudable”, using girls too is “permitted”. Associations and “greater pastoral care” is referred to regarding the “boys such as this”.

The Vatican clearly has a preference for boys only as altar servers. The priest mentioned in the OP is simply sharing in that preference.

 

[ncjohn]

This is from Redemptionis Sacramentum. Just for reference since there have been a lot of posts about what the Church permits.

The wording is striking to me. Using boys is “laudable”, using girls too is “permitted”. Associations and “greater pastoral care” is referred to regarding the “boys such as this”.

The Vatican clearly has a preference for boys only as altar servers. The priest mentioned in the OP is simply sharing in that preference.

I don’t read it at all as a “preference”. I read it as encouraging boys to serve so they will have the exposure that might lead them forward, which they might not otherwise have. There is nothing said there about it being preferable or at the expense of the girls. If that were the case there would probably be wording like “Girls or women may also be accepted if there are not sufficient boys available.”

 

[jmcrae]

Your situation must be the exception.

Ours must be, too, then, since we have equal numbers of boys and girls.

Our parish school also permits boys and girls to play together on the playground, so they are already used to being with each other from a very early age.