E
EIF5A
Guest
Actually, yes. Please provide concrete examples of the Church becoming feminized. Maybe I just happen to attend parishes where the men don’t seem “hen-pecked” and “bored”.
Cardinal Raymond Burke: ‘Feminized’ church and altar girls caused priest shortage
- Status
P
ProVobis
Guest
E
EIF5A
Guest
Unfortunately, I don’t have time to read an entire thesis on this topic.
Care to share personal observations from your own parish? You must have seen or experienced it yourself to feel that it’s a big problem in church.
Because all I’m reading is blaming women for lack of male participation. What ever happened to the manly characteristic of personal responsibility? How are men being discouraged, directly or indirectly, from becoming more active in church?
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I would never stop going to Mass, no matter what. I would grit my teeth in a particularly badly done one, but I would still go.
I’m not sure about the strict discipline and perfect form, and there may not be anything that could be done to correct the thing that irks me the most; the awful way people dress for Mass. I just hate it. I always wear a coat and tie, no matter what. It’s a reverence thing to me. Even my son and grandsons do it as well.
I don’t much like the hand-holding, and won’t do it. For a guy, or at least this guy, it’s more embarrassing not to do it than to do it. Who am I going to hold hands with? I’ll hold hands with my wife or a child relative, but it gives me the crawls to hold hands with a guy, and I just won’t do it. I get just as jumpy about holding hands with a teenage girl or, worse, somebody else’s wife. Old ladies are okay, but other than family and old ladies, I just won’t hold hands with anybody. Shaking hands is, in this culture, manly enough. If Frenchmen kiss each other, let them. I’m not a Frenchman.
I don’t understand why people do that “orans” thing. It’s so Assembly of God. Since their world HQ is right here, I guess that’s where it came from. But I won’t do it.
I do like statues and pictures, though i don’t like the cadaverous caricature figures in some of the “modern” parishes. I’m fine with statues of Our Lady and any female saint one wants to name. I don’t mind flowers and think they’re a good idea. (Did you ever notice how full of flowers most ethnic Polish churches are? Polanie: “People of the fields”. Interesting.) Ethnic German churches are “in the woods”. Germans are “wood people” and want to be in the forest at Mass, I guess. A little gloomy for my taste, but okay.
Ornamentation is fine with me, but I like a little grandeur too. I really don’t like “intimate worship spaces”. I had an argument with a woman once about that. She favored cave-like church interiors because the are, she said “intimate worship spaces”. I don’t know where she got that terminology, but I hate “intimate worship spaces”, “in the round”, sunken sanctuaries, dim lighting, weird decor, no kneelers as often as not, tabernacle off in an even more “intimate worship space”.
I recall asking her if she had ever seen artists’ renderings of the Roman Forum. She had. I asked her if she knew why it looked the way it did. She didn’t. I said it was made ultra-grand in order to impress the citizenry and foreigners with the fact that Rome and its institutions were “bigger than them”; bigger than any man, emperor included. I said boys and young men (and grown men too) like grandeur and respond to it. I know when I was growing up, tall columns, majestic statuary (both male and female) high ceilings, fabulous choir lofts were fascinating to me and made me experience God as grandeur; the “Lord of Hosts”. Big angels with big wings. That some looked rather female was not a problem. After all, Athene Nike in the Parthenon was female and grand simultaneously. Personally, I think boys and men need to have it demonstrated from time to time that there is something “bigger than them”. I don’t think anybody denies anymore than men are very visual creatures. Boys are too.
women shouldn’t object to men being impressed that they’re not the grandest thing in the universe. Or at least I wouldn’t think they would.
S
StSentry83
Guest
Are you suggesting that the liturgy is “male”? Because in order for something to be emasculated, it needs first to be male, yes?
I don’t understand how V2 could have been such an unmitigated disaster as many think, considering that the Holy Spirit is supposed to preserve the Church. What gives?
Also, this is another mystery to me: how did an organization whose upper ranks are filled with men and men alone become so “impotent”?
As you can see, I have many areas of confusion on this!
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I’m going to bore everybody here to tears, but I just have to say the following.
I’m not Polish, but one of the books that rang a major bell in my mind was Michener’s “Poland”. “Polishness” it turns out, is a pretty complicated thing, but it’s a culture all its own.
One of the essential features of “Polishness” is the Polish view of Poland as the “savior nation”. They have been in the path of every conquerer of consequence other than the Romans, much of whose culture, interestingly, they adopted, rejecting both “Russianness” and “Germanness”. “Romanitas”, in fact, is part of “Polishness”; an essential ingredient.
But one of the central features of Polish culture, according to Michener anyway, is “male as self-sacrificing hero”. He’s the one who mounts his horse and charges off into impossible battles with Huns, Mongols, Tatars, Russians, Swedes, Turks, Germans and, in so doing, saves family, society, and the whole West in the bargain, or at least attempts it.
That struck me as being almost equivalent to “maleness”. The true man, in my mind, is one who teaches his children religion with conviction and persuasiveness, who teaches them kind discipline, who protects them and his wife, who is the primary person who goes out to face what the world has to hand out. Not for his own benefit, but for theirs. He dresses for Mass and goes without fail, and he does not even allow of the possibility that his children will not go with him. He participates with dignity even if everybody else is slouching there wearing a “Say whut?” T-shirt. Like the Pole, he supports “Romanitas”. As erstwhile “heroes”, we men are often ridiculous to women, just as the Polish horseman often drew the irritation of his wife when he mounted his horse and charged off, sword in hand, in an impossible battle with the Mongols. He might not come home, just as a real man in our own time might, due to stress or work hazards, not come home one day. But I genuinely believe women like that kind of ridiculousness; a virtually laughable attempt to protect her and family against all the world.
But a real man goes out anyway. He does not set himself up as his wife’s rival in those things she, as a woman, wants to do and feels part of her “womanness”. If she fancies herself a “recipe whiz”, he does not rival it by learning fancy French cuisine that’s better. He does not argue with her decor decisions. In her gentleness and motherliness with children, he does not attempt to rival her. In her sharing grief of others, he stands stolid as a comforter even if his heart is breaking. If she grows old so that every woman on the street looks better, he tells her that her beauty is undiminished. If she gets sick, he tends to her. But if he gets sick, he “mans up” and goes through it.
If the toilet ceases to function, he volunteers to fix it. If her tire is flat, he changes it. If an errand must be run in frigid temperatures, he tells his wife “a little fresh air would do me good” and goes. If the baby fouls his diaper, he changes it. If the baby has colic, he holds the little thing on his chest to warm its little stomach. He is the man on horseback, meeting the foes of the family.
I have little patience with the modern view that a man should feel free to cry in front of his lady. What kind of silliness is that? If he shows courage and solidity, she is more free to give vent to her feelings. But he should always do it gently, and with whatever remedial action he can think of. And guess what? If, at some point, he just can’t help it no matter how much he tries to stifle, and at least tries to hide it, it has meaning beyond the manifestation of a crybaby.
I’m glad I read “Poland”. It personified in a particular kind of culture, what I have long believed about true manhood. The man on horseback riding into a world full of Huns for his family, his friends and his Church. I like that image. In my view, every man should.
And young boys need to be given heavy doses of manliness early on. They need to learn self-discipline. They need to know there is grandeur in the self-sacrificing role. They need to see it and to live it. Being told they have no specific role as “little men” is a terrible disservice to them. If they fail to learn it, they will be either wimps or Huns as men, guaranteed.
E
EIF5A
Guest
(I read the entire post above but abridged it to save space. And I wasn’t bored
)Self-discipline and manliness – yes, I agree. But I still don’t understand how the decrease in male participation at Church is due to a “feminized” Church.
What makes Church feminized these days and so uncomfortable for men?
What changed that shifted the balance toward women, and how is this balance manifested in an average parish life?
L
LisaA
Guest
Apparently the message still isn’t clear. I don’t see so much blaming the girls…after all we should be happy SOMEONE is serving…as thinking about why boys aren’t serving and if this could be changed. I think most Catholics like the idea of boys participating in the Mass as Altar Servers because this has long been considered a way to greater appreciation for our faith and a track for vocations.
Honestly I hadn’t thought about some of these issues and find this discussion very valuable. I am a Convert and didn’t attend Church prior to Vatican II or before all of the 60s and 70s craziness impacted the Church. I can see in my parish why there are almost no boys serving now and plan to speak up about whether or not we want to reconsider how we might inspire more boys to step up. One of the best ways to encourage people of any age, sex or ability to participate is to have the priest behind the effort. It starts at the top. I know our Founding Priest was a fantastic shepherd and we used to joke no one can turn Fr J down when he asks us for help. Plus his attitude, his friendliness, his desire to engage with young people resulted in many children participating. Since he left well there is a different style of leadership…will leave it at that.
BTW if we think the Catholic Church suffers from too much feminine influence, attend a mainstream Protestant church like the Episcopal, Methodist or Presbyterian. Between female pastors (pervasive) and female deacons (almost exclusive) those teaching Sunday School and assisting with the Youth Group there are few men to be seen, either in the pulpit or in the pews. A bit better with the Evangelicals and our Mormon friends never seem to lack for men getting involved in everything from the message to education to the Boy Scout troop to officiating at funerals.
H
Havard
Guest
I skimmed it a bit. No substitute for reading, but I did come upon this example:
Now, I know anecdotal evidence isn’t exactly the best type of evidence, but when I went to Notre Dame, the girl’s dorm that bordered ours had pajama Masses, and the hosts were leavened and sweetened with sugar and honey. Extra/unconsumed bread was passed out afterwards through the pews, and I honestly can’t recall if they were consecrated. As a result of all that, I knew several gals that came to our (men’s) dorm specifically because it wasn’t so loosey-goosey, because it “felt more like Mass”.
E
EIF5A
Guest
But that’s definitely not the norm. Or even common…
This seems to be a pervasive issue, so it must be something that affects a large percentage of parishes.
What is it?
E
EIF5A
Guest
OK, so why aren’t boys interested? Because there’s a perception of it being feminine?
What could possibly be feminine about serving at Mass? That there’s a girl helping the priest?
Altar Servers are not 5 years old. They don’t think the opposite gender have cooties.
Mass is not a military exercise. It’s the Sacrifice of Our Lord. Perhaps we should cultivate this mystery and awe so that piety and reverence may naturally occur. The outward form is secondary.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
I’ve asked this in other threads. No one answers.
Yep. Over and over again.
‘Girls became Altar Servers, boys got the cooties, and now there aren’t enough (masculine) priests.’
O
on_the_hill
Guest
Ok., that’s weird. I used that same word in my post.
What we need to do is push women off of the altar, make sure that all priests can bench press their own weight, and add more car chases to the liturgy.
L
LisaA
Guest
As always anything but boring and while I’m at it, appreciated our earlier post on dressing for Mass, showing respect and I agree about the hand holding…fine within a family or with friends but awkward with strangers and certainly male to male.
I was thinking about this on the way in and the same image came to me. How does Christ prove his love? Not with sweet words or gooshy songs. Even his healings were swift, effective and off you go…This is a masculine approach, the role of provider, protector and the understanding that one would lay down his life. Self sacrifice, self giving, standing between the weaker and the influence of Satan.
This is not belligerence or aggressiveness or violence, perhaps the downside of male nature. But I think in our fear of these characteristics, we fail to recognize, acknowledge and praise what is truly a masculine role.
N
NovusFidem
Guest
I would like to thank you all for the discussion. I have been following the news on National Catholic Reporter online (a friend usually shares the news on facebook), and I got quite fond of Cardinal Burke (I am from Brazil). Seeing the news had me really saddened, as it shows Burke as someone REALLY, err, with some issues.
While I understand that his statements are not entirely sensible, I am glad they are not entirely intolerant (or illogical) as well. The National Catholic Reporter pictures him as some sort of crazy extremist/misogynist…
Again, thank you all for the discussion!
While I understand that his statements are not entirely sensible, I am glad they are not entirely intolerant (or illogical) as well. The National Catholic Reporter pictures him as some sort of crazy extremist/misogynist…
Again, thank you all for the discussion!
L
LisaA
Guest
Golly we’ve answered question 1 repeatedly. Do you not read the other posts or do you just disagree with the responses?
Question 2 sounds disingenuous. This has been discussed at length.
Sentence three seems rather disingenuous. Is this supposed to be funny?
Your final comment is cogent, and helpful to the discussion. We do need to cultivate our own sense of mystery, reverence and awe. But unfortunately while outward form is secondary, it is not without influence. For example our parish has been engaged in a really annoying practice; we are told to stand and greet one another before Mass begins. So we greet those with whom we were probably sitting for the last year, it’s noisy and the complete antithesis of reverence and awe. Then we are told to be quiet and immediately transition into our “holy mode.” For me, the moments prior to the beginning of Mass are for prayer, to read the Gospel, and focus on Christ. I find this distracting and much as I’d like to stay in a prayerful attitude. It’s impossible. Thus the subject of this thread…
P
ProVobis
Guest
I believe I responded with a suggestion to visit St. John Cantius in Chicago and check out the environment there.
E
EIF5A
Guest
Do you really think that’s 1) feasible for most people and 2) the only way to answer a simple question?
Since most people can’t just hop on a plane, please describe what you have seen there and how that contrasts with your experience where the men are bored.
E
EIF5A
Guest
It’s a tenuous excuse that teen-ish kids with the mature mind to serve at Mass would be deterred by the presence of girls.
What does greeting people before Mass (which I agree with you is not conducive to reverence) have to do with feminization of the Church? Is it a female thing to greet people?
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I don’t blame women for lack of male participation. Women are just fine. I’m married to one and have four daughters and more granddaughters than I can easily count.(I read the entire post above but abridged it to save space. And I wasn’t bored
Self-discipline and manliness – yes, I agree. But I still don’t understand how the decrease in male participation at Church is due to a “feminized” Church.
What makes Church feminized these days and so uncomfortable for men?
What changed that shifted the balance toward women, and how is this balance manifested in an average parish life?
It isn’t that.
What I think has happened (and I don’t pretend to expertise) is that when the Church in the U.S. virtually flew apart in the “interpretation period” of Vatican II, many in the Church were so anxious to depart from what they considered “old fashioned” that they shot the Church in the foot. Orders of nuns went to “new ministries”, largely secular or even political. Some were given to very radical feminism and still are. Some of them, as well as sometimes misguided laywomen, saw “maleness” in the Church as “patriarchal” and “oppressive”. I think it was an overkill largely emanating from the desire of some of those nuns to become priests and the belief that if they could just exert enough pressure they would get it done. In the event, many have become virtually protestant or, worse, pagan, because their desire for “power” in the Church was frustrated. (Maybe I’ll be banned for saying this, but has anyone ever noticed how “mannish” some of them seem to be in their ways?)
Laywomen, I fear, often bought into at least a “feminism lite” in which any “male domain” other than (and sometimes including) the priesthood was due for extirpation. And so the Church in the U.S. (or perhaps more accurately, many churchmen) somehow got the idea that removing all gender identity within Church practices and structures would somehow satisfy the dissidents, and I think many churchmen really believed that things like removing “all men” and that sort of thing from everything would somehow satisfy.
The Church resisted all efforts at female ordination, despite its adoption in virtually every other Christian church, but a lot of churchmen thought somehow that “de-gendering” everywhere else would somehow make the dissidents at least less harping about “patriarchalism” and “oppression of women”. I don’t think a lot of them realized that nothing short of a female Pope would satisfy the most vociferous, but they tried anyway.
The misrepresentation of gender roles in the past has been outrageous. The great abbesses of orders of nuns were equal in rank to princes in their realms. The Church is replete with female saints, and there are female Doctors of the Church. There were always female rulers, oftentimes of great power. The whining about “patriarchalism” is an entirely modern thing, and it’s as wrong as wrong gets.
And so here were the altar boys. For goodness sake, they were all boys! Not only that, they wore priest-like cassocks and provided functions around the altar that were almost priest-like. Not only that, there was the “flip side” of “being altar boys doesn’t increase vocations to the priesthood”, being “but maybe it does. Can’t have that if girls can’t”
And so, we not only removed the only boy-specific role there was, we adopted “unisex” altar server garb to ensure that it would remain that way. We couldn’t even have specifically “boy” or “girl” apparel, despite the fact that both females and males, pretty much always and everywhere, have worn gender-specific garb. So, whose garb are those “gender neutral” outfits? Well, now that girls are practically the only servers anywhere, they’re “girl outfits” and boys don’t want to wear them. From “little priests” with a lot to do during Mass, they went to “hermaphrodites” with nothing to do but sit there with the girls. Boys don’t hate girls. But they don’t want to be girls, and they sure don’t want to dress like girls and have the exect same role girls have.
And in many parishes, the priest was reduced to a murky presence behind the altar while women were in the front of the sanctuary, being cantors and readers and such. I have seen Masses in which the priest was a cipher and in which there were three or four women up there with microphones. I don’t object to women readers and cantors, but they don’t have to be the main items at Mass.
And churchmen “took it like a man”, so to speak, because they were AFRAID. They were afraid of the loud voices and the published accusations and the taunts of the Church and secular left, and feared that ordinary laywomen would be just as offended by “all men” and “altar boys” as the loud ones were.
Like many ill-considered changes (and our time has seen a lot of those) it is hard to go back. Mommy’s little girl is going to be told she can’t serve anymore? Now it’s personal. I think women would have, in the main, been okay with altar boys, but now it can’t be any other way, any more than women with microphones (I have even seen them with little desks in the sanctuary) who drown out the Mass can be extricated from the sanctuary.
It’s not women, really, it’s radical feminism in its gradient of manifestations, and the more it goes on, the more difficult it will be to do anything to fix it. The more boys have no role, the less role they will expect to have in any other way.
(continued)
- Status