Female Altar Servers? How has this 11 year experiment gone?

[Purificator]

misericordie:

To have “altar girls” is one of the most politically correct things the AMERICAN CHURCH has done. I choose to follow the Roman Catholic one. The purpose of “altar boys” is that they will eventually think of entering the priesthood. As of yet=women cannot be priests.
Actually, it is current ROMAN policy that not even a Bishop can force a PASTOR to have altar girls. This is a novelty of the American Church, (as always).

I’m not sure what the “American Church” is (a Protestant sect you belong to, perchance?) but the final choice of using or not using female altar servers is up to the priest celebrating the Mass – in the USA and everywhere else.

 

[steve_green_2]

Do what you want with the NO liturgy. Bare fruit and scandal. A 40 year old experiment that has failed ( I am being very generous when I say this). Notice I did not judge doctrinal soundness or validity !

Just leave the TLM ALONE ! Thank the Lord, the ancient rubrics do not allow for female altar servers, communion in the hand, shaking hands yada, yada, and more yada.

 

[Luke1_48]

Since I’m young, here’s what I think. I have no problem with girls serving, but altar boys were a way to discern a vocation. Girls cannot be priests, so I see it as almost useless, but I don’t have a problem with it.

 

[Psalm45_9]

MrS:

They are acceptable today (as even the late bishop of Rome said), but are still unnecessary, and will be eliminated by Benedict XVI.

They will??? :bowdown: :bowdown2:

 

[mgarstin]

You really meant the title to be “Girl Altar Boys.”

 

[Purificator]

Do what you want with the NO liturgy. Bare fruit and scandal. A 40 year old experiment that has failed ( I am being very generous when I say this). Notice I did not judge doctrinal soundness or validity !

Just leave the TLM ALONE ! Thank the Lord, the ancient rubrics do not allow for female altar servers, communion in the hand, shaking hands yada, yada, and more yada.

You’re also being extremely erroneous…

 

[Purificator]

batteddy:

I say we officially institute more men into the offices of Acolyte and Lector and stop having any unofficial “readers” or “altar servers” or “EMCs”. Acolytes can official distribute communion if necessary.

I suppose even boys could be instituted Acolytes to continue an “altar boy” tradition…but people with official liturgical roles should be official instituted…

**Otherwise it makes things much too protestant, blurs the distinction between clergy/officially-instituted-offices ** and “lay participants”, and makes it all seem very inclusive.

First, instituted acolytes are laymen…

Second, the formation to become an acolyte (which follows that of lector) is quite long – at least a couple of years. Not something geared for “boys.”

Third, if you dumb-down the requirements for men to be instituted as acolytes, you’ll really cause a problem because acolytes are instituted for life. The same problems will exist as with EMsHC, only now they would be far more difficult to fix…

 

[JKirkLVNV]

While I do not think that it is an abuse per se to have a girl serving at the altar, I think that we need to set that service aside for boys, who may (or may not) thereby discern a calling to the priesthood. If boys are not interested, whether it’s because they are more interested in other activities or because of some fear of predation, as Kielbasi suggested (and with all of the attention that’s been focused on that, I think it’s a sensible observation), why not encourage fathers and sons to serve together. Sons would have an opportunity to see their fathers engage in an act of supreme reverence. What could make a bigger impression on them than that?

Also, I find this odd: I belong to a huge parish, some 5, 000-6,000 people. We have a pastor, 2 vicars, and never have a problem with supply priests, either (I am humbly aware of our blessings in this regard) and yet no vocations to the diaconate. In fact, in this metropolitan area of over 1,000,000, where the only group to rival the Catholics is the LDS, I am aware of only one permanent deacon. We ordain several priests every year and we attract priests from elsewhere, but no deacons. I think the Church at large should emphasize this order more, seek them out, ask pastors to nominate men to go through training, and ordain and encourage them. If there was (depending on the willingess of the men to be ordained) a deacon for every, say 750 people, there might never be a need for EMHC, which, let’s face it, is supposed to be an EXTRAORDINARY need. I will say, however, that I would rather have an EMHC than to have a situation where the laity was denied the Chalice, which is what I forsee if they were ever curtailed (which I admit they need to be). There is no reason why a priest cannot communicate an entire congregation with two deacons (or two priests, in the case of my parish, where they could just stay on hand for communion) manning the Chalices. I would also have to echo support for the idea of instituted Lectors, not merely because of gender, but because hopefully we would get a decent quality of reader!

 

[Iohannes]

No boys will want to serve Mass under a older girl telling him what to do. At the early age, boys want to do boy stuff and girls want to do girls stuff. There are lots of things girls can do, like be flower girls during the Corpus Christi processions. Or help with the votive candles.

Originally Altar severs were men training to be priest.

Catholic 2003, Before 1994, having girls serving at the altar was liturgical abuse. Inastamiable Donum(which was never inforced) by Pope John Paul II says this. The CCC did not say that altar girls could serve.

 

[Orionthehunter]

I am torn over this issue.

First, I am a father of three girls (two of whom served as altar servers). I know that it was a positive spiritual experience for them and don’t like the idea that it could have been an experience denied.

However, my Pastor who has no political agenda has told me that he has trouble keeping boys as Servers after 7th grade and the reason they sight is they don’t like serving with the girls. He believes that it ends up discouraging young men from being exposed to the calling to the Priesthood. He also believes that Mass is more reverent with older Servers.

This is a very tough question.

 

[GoLatin]

I also prefer male servers. I think that female servers, readers, EMHCs(which I don’t care for AT ALL, male or female), and other such people contribute to the liberalization of the Church. I don’t mean that in a good way!

And yes, I am a woman! I don’t like to see women in the sanctuary!

 

[ncjohn]

Orionthehunter:

However, my Pastor who has no political agenda has told me that he has trouble keeping boys as Servers after 7th grade and the reason they sight is they don’t like serving with the girls. He believes that it ends up discouraging young men from being exposed to the calling to the Priesthood. He also believes that Mass is more reverent with older Servers.

This is a very tough question.

That is an interesting observation. My son and I served together until he left for college. My daughter never expressed an interest although she did act as an EMHC and a catechist when she was older. I also handled training for the altar servers for several years.

We had boys and girls of different ages during the time I handled that and I never heard any comments about them serving together. Had there been one who was more “in charge” that might have been an issue, but we never delineated things that way. I would tend to agree that on the whole things get more “reverent” with age as the servers come to greater experience of what they are doing, but that is not always the case as there are still many who continue to do it, as they continue in Boy Scouts or sports, because they are pressured into it by their parents.

I wonder if there have been any studies done to see whether callings to the priesthood have been decreased for that reason. It makes for interesting speculation, but I’m not sure that a true call to the priesthood would be influenced in that way. If that were found to be the case I would definitely be more in favor of finding other appropriate ministries for the girls.

Indeed a complex and tough issue, especially for rural parishes like ours with limited numbers of young people.

Peace,
John

 

[alterserver_07]

In our parish it is kinda a life saver since we do not have enough boys to serve. The girls help out a lot because of numbers.

 

[Catholic2003]

Iohannes:

Catholic 2003, Before 1994, having girls serving at the altar was liturgical abuse.

This is the position that radical traditionalists take; however, the majority of canon lawyers think otherwise.

Iohannes:

Inastamiable Donum(which was never inforced) by Pope John Paul II says this.

Inaestimabile Donum is an instruction, so it doesn’t have the force of law. It merely explains the law. And the law that it explains is the 1917 Code of Canon Law, which was the law in effect in 1980.

After the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, Inaestimabile Donum no longer applied.

Iohannes:

The CCC did not say that altar girls could serve.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has nothing to do with liturgical law.

 

[YinYangMom]

Young girls these days need every bit of encouragement they can get to lead chaste lives.

The altar server’s role is to assist…I’ve never understood or accepted that only boys had the skills and sense to fulfill the obligations.

I could understand where altar servers being boys was like a stepping stone into the priesthood, but in reality, these days, in the West, it really serves to introduce and prepare young people to/for other ministries available as they mature in their faith/age.

Several of our young ladies have gone on to be Eucharistic Ministers, along with the boys…and from there, young men can consider the priesthood, while young women can consider vocations outside the priesthood.

Better yet, should the women choose the vocation of marriage, how wonderful it is that they have this background experience to share with her children someday as she guides them to become actively involved in the Church.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Catholic2003:

This is the position that radical traditionalists take; however, the majority of canon lawyers think otherwise.

It doesn’t matter what canon lawyers think, if the Pope says no altar girls then they are forbidden. John Paul II never said the new code gave permission for altar girls. Adhering to certain canon lawyers rather than the Pope is the position taken by radical modernists.

Inaestimabile Donum is an instruction, so it doesn’t have the force of law. It merely explains the law. And the law that it explains is the 1917 Code of Canon Law, which was the law in effect in 1980.

After the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, Inaestimabile Donum no longer applied.

Canon law cannot be interpreted apart from the teaching of the magisterium. What you are saying is that canon law is the highest authority in the Church, even higher than the Pope. Your interpretation of Canon 230 of the new code is not the interpretation of the magisterium. If it were, then John Paul II would not have issued a letter allowing altar girls in 1994. Once again, this is the postion taken by the radical modernists who want to make the Church in their own image and likeness instead of obeying lawful authority.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

alterserver_07:

In our parish it is kinda a life saver since we do not have enough boys to serve. The girls help out a lot because of numbers.

Get rid of altar girls and you’ll see an increase of altar boys. My parish has only altar boys serving Mass and there is no shortage of servers. We have so many that some altar boys may only serve a couple times a month. This includes daily Mass as well as Sunday Mass.

 

[Diaconia]

This is an interesting issue. While it is true that:

MrS:

The use of female servers began as an abuse… period.;

After some time, bishops decided to make it a norm, and it is only that today.

They are acceptable today (as even the late bishop of Rome said), but are still unnecessary, and will be eliminated by Benedict XVI.

It does NOT follow that a “close reading” of B16’s homily by Fr. Fessio indicates anything other than Fr. Fessio’s desire to halt the use of female altar servers.

Our Holy Father has much bigger fish to fry than this.

When the use of girl altar servers was an abuse I fought against it, I didn’t like it, and I tried to avoid it.

But as the adage goes, “Rome has spoken, it is settled.” Our late great holy father among the saints, John Paul II allowed the use of girl altar servers. If your bishop has also allowed it, than it’s a done deal, folks. Why argue with a decided question?

I happen to train the altar servers in my own parish, and I can honestly tell you that the girl altar servers (as a group) are more attentive, follow directions better, and are more mature than their male counterparts. I don’t have a problem with either boys or girls as altar servers - just glad that these young people have an opportunity to serve our Lord at the Eucharist.

One theory that is often thrown around in this discussion is the fact that a great majority of priests today were once altar boys. While that is true, a great majority of readers, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are as well. I myself am a cleric, a Roman Catholic deacon, and I was an altar boy, too.

But of course, there were not girl altar servers 20 and 30 and 40 years ago, which is the time frame you would need to look at to see if there is a correlation between them.

So, you might need to look at this issue again in 10, 20 & 30 years and see if those altar girls grew up to be Sisters, readers, EMHCs, choir members, whatever. Chances are there will probably be a correlation there as well.

It probably boils down to this, those involved with the Church when they were young people are much more likely to be involved with the Church (and consequently be better stewards) when they are adults.

Encouraging more priestly vocations is probably mostly tied (in the US) to American families being less materialistic and selfish. And quit trying to vicariously re-live your own childhood by getting your kids involved in every sort of sport and extra-curricular activity.

Take the time you would have spent at soccer or baseball or football or basketball practice each week, for example, and go with your children to the nursing home or food pantry and volunteer.

Instead of your daughter playing volleyball, softball, tennis, track & field and dance, cheer, etc. Replace one (or more) of them with weekly visits to the homebound or those in the hospital.

Here’s another way to look at it:

• Your son is WAY more likely to become a priest or brother than he is to become the next Tiger Woods or Brett Favre.
• Your daughter is WAY more likely to become a Sister than Chris Evert or Peggy Fleming.

And by the way, we need Sisters, Brothers & Priests way more than we need another athlete.

In the service of Him who walked among us,

 

[Catholic2003]

John Paul II never said the new code gave permission for altar girls.

Pope John Paul II might have never said that personally, but the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts did so with its authentic interpretation that I quoted above. The dubium asked whether canon 230 §2 gave permission for female altar servers. The “Affirmative” response is pretty clear to those who follow the magisterium of the Church instead of their own personal preferences.

Canon law cannot be interpreted apart from the teaching of the magisterium. What you are saying is that canon law is the highest authority in the Church, even higher than the Pope.

I have no idea where you get this idea. The Pope promulgates canon law himself; he is the Supreme Legislator.

Your interpretation of Canon 230 of the new code is not the interpretation of the magisterium.

I’ve quoted the authentic interpretation of canon 230 §2, which affirms that the canon allows for female altar servers.

If it were, then John Paul II would not have issued a letter allowing altar girls in 1994.

The 1994 letter provided guidance on the use of female altar servers. It did not, in and of itself, allow female altar servers. It did not need to, because they were already allowed.

Once again, this is the postion taken by the radical modernists who want to make the Church in their own image and likeness instead of obeying lawful authority.

Why not just say that female altar servers were allowed in 2004 by paragraph 47 of Redemptionis Sacramentum. That way you can accuse these “radical modernists” of ten more years of liturgical abuse.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Catholic2003:

Pope John Paul II might have never said that personally, but the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts did so with its authentic interpretation that I quoted above. The dubium asked whether canon 230 §2 gave permission for female altar servers. The “Affirmative” response is pretty clear to those who follow the magisterium of the Church instead of their own personal preferences.

I have no idea where you get this idea. The Pope promulgates canon law himself;** he is the Supreme Legislator.**

QUOTE]

Quite right, and he can interpret it or set it aside at his good pleasure. If he allows it, it isn’t an abuse. Really, though, I think the point of the thread is has this been a positive thing for the Church? Since it’s a discipline, not a matter of faith and morals, surely we can discuss its impact on the Church or lack of impact? I must admit, our little altar girls are very reverent and attentive (though they slide when they wear those backless shoes and click when they wear heels). Is that plus enough, however, to outweigh what others perceive to be problems?