Altar Girls in Cassock/Surplice

  • Thread starter Thread starter EcceAgnusDei
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
johnmann said:
I’m resurrecting this topic because I was looking for advice on what we should have our altargirls wear and found this.

I initially favored the cassock and surplice because it resembles a nun’s habit but it’s more of an approximation than an imitation. Reading other responses talking about the cassock as clerical and the alb as liturgical has me changing my mind. I wish altargirls had their own vestments in imitation of nuns.

But whatever they wear, I’m thinking they should be veiled. It’s traditional for lay women and it imitates nuns. What do you think?
Click to expand...
What? Women wearing the same thing men at the altar wears? That is unheard of in the long history of the Church!!!

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

:rolleyes:
 
johnmann said:
I’m resurrecting this topic because I was looking for advice on what we should have our altargirls wear and found this.

I initially favored the cassock and surplice because it resembles a nun’s habit but it’s more of an approximation than an imitation. Reading other responses talking about the cassock as clerical and the alb as liturgical has me changing my mind. I wish altargirls had their own vestments in imitation of nuns.
But whatever they wear, I’m thinking they should be veiled. It’s traditional for lay women and it imitates nuns. What do you think?
Click to expand...
Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I’m struggling to believe your post. Why would you base your deciscion on a online thread? Why would the priest or the diocese not be making the decision? On top of that you throw in something controversial like veiling hmmm.
.

Btw, I love the photo above.
 
LucyLight said:
Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I’m struggling to believe your post. Why would you base your deciscion on a online thread? Why would the priest or the diocese not be making the decision? On top of that you throw in something controversial like veiling hmmm.
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with look to the internet for ideas about anything?

What makes you think I’m not the priest? Okay, I’m not but I could’ve been. The priest will make the decision. I never said he wouldn’t.

Veiling is controversial? What is this world coming to?
 
johnmann said:
What’s wrong with look to the internet for ideas about anything?

What makes you think I’m not the priest? Okay, I’m not but I could’ve been. The priest will make the decision. I never said he wouldn’t.

Veiling is controversial? What is this world coming to?
Click to expand...
Sorry If I have misjudged you, but when you are a new poster there is the suspicion of being a troll when you bring up something controversial. Veiling is controversial around here because some people hold radical views about it that are against church teaching (e.g. all women should veil and no women should veil).

Another thing is this thread will likely be closed because resurrecting old threads is against forum rules. There is a sticky about this at the top of this forum. Your instead encouraged to start a new thread. I’m sure you’ll get responses this seems like a topic that attracts a lot of posts.🙂
 
Hey…come on. Why not ! After all VII basically says anything goes! Put on the garb and you can be anything you want to be. How about a concelebrant?:eek: Give the girls a chance to prove they can do the job.🤷 After all VII was all about bring the Church up to date. You go girl, but sorry, I will not follow. :banghead:
 
Silver_Thread said:
Hey…come on. Why not ! After all VII basically says anything goes! Put on the garb and you can be anything you want to be. How about a concelebrant?:eek: Give the girls a chance to prove they can do the job.🤷 After all VII was all about bring the Church up to date. You go girl, but sorry, I will not follow. :banghead:
Click to expand...
Vatican II did not even suggest any of the changes attributed to it:

catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=1145

Not one. What was Vatican II about? Have you read the documents?

I see the women priests posters are back.

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2011/06/08/vatican-girls-are-not-permitted-to-serve-at-old-mass/

ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwcomm.htm

Peace,
Ed
 
Silver_Thread said:
Hey…come on. Why not ! After all VII basically says anything goes! Put on the garb and you can be anything you want to be. How about a concelebrant?:eek: Give the girls a chance to prove they can do the job.🤷 After all VII was all about bring the Church up to date. You go girl, but sorry, I will not follow. :banghead:
Click to expand...
Really? Why don’t you write to the Pope and correct the Pope? Please read the forum rules.

I hope the moderator will shut down this old thread.
 
Silver_Thread said:
Hey…come on. Why not ! After all VII basically says anything goes! Put on the garb and you can be anything you want to be. How about a concelebrant?:eek: Give the girls a chance to prove they can do the job.🤷 After all VII was all about bring the Church up to date. You go girl, but sorry, I will not follow. :banghead:
Click to expand...
VII does not indicate anything of the sort.

Of course, that does not stop people from running with what they believe to be ‘the spirit of…’

Vatican II was not a bad thing.
The “spirit of Vatican II” however is.
 
vz71 said:
VII does not indicate anything of the sort.

Of course, that does not stop people from running with what they believe to be ‘the spirit of…’

Vatican II was not a bad thing.
The “spirit of Vatican II” however is.
Click to expand...
The completely fictional “spirit of Vatican II” is a bad thing.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The completely fictional “spirit of Vatican II” …
Click to expand...
Fictional in what sense? It certainly wasn’t something formally promulgated by the Fathers of the Council, yet it seems its existence and impact cannot be ignored.
 
ByzCathCantor said:
Fictional in what sense? It certainly wasn’t something formally promulgated by the Fathers of the Council, yet it seems its existence and impact cannot be ignored.
Click to expand...
It’s a fictional story. It has no basis in fact. It’s like the idea, mentioned here more than once, that Church traditions and rituals were borrowed from pagan practices that existed in the early Church’s time period. In the past, heresies like Arianism, existed and had an impact but it didn’t make it true. The same is the case here. The Church has been dealing with false, unsupported by facts, and wrong interpretations of Scripture during its entire existence.

The spirit of Vatican II was created for one purpose: to be the scapegoat for all the changes it never even suggested in the Church shortly after, and to deflect attention away from the Sex without love Revolution that was being supported by dissidents inside and outside the Church. You’ll note that most of the problems today revolve around the misuse of human sexuality, including abortion.

To this day, some Catholics are asking, what happened to the Church starting in the late 1960s, and the fake answer they’re getting is: blame it on Vatican II. Or, and I heard this one recently, people simply freaked out when it no longer became mandatory to not eat meat on Friday. What? People ran out and started sinning the moment they heard this? The same with the spirit of Vatican II – let’s not talk to our parish priest, let’s not ask any questions. A few posters here have made the claim that, once again, people just freaked out.

I was there before and after Vatican II in Catholic school. I did not love God less after.

Peace,
Ed
 
This picture is fabulous! 😃 Can you tell us who, where, when? Which orders, etc.
 
Cassock was originally designs for men not and the cassock is more masculine and it encourage boys vocation to priesthood
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top