Female altar servers.

[Redratfish]

1. Altar service as a stepping stone to the priesthood (acolyte = minor order)
2. Politicizing worship (“women’s rights”, feminism)
3. Inching toward women’s ordination
4. Ignoring the long-standing tradition of the Church
5. Called an “evil practice” by Pope Benedict XIV in Encyclical Allatae Sunt*
6. Forbidden by Popes Gelasius and Innocent IV

Gee, “zero” is a bigger number than I thought. Must be that new math from the 1960s.

• • Some doubleplus ungoodthink from a notorious cohort of Emmanuel Goldstein:
    papalencyclicals.net/Ben14/b14allat.htm

1. Priesthood, no. Perhaps encourage a girl to grow in her faith? Yes. If anything it encourages her to become a Nun. The Pope has said that even if the Church one day allows women priests, it would not be spiritually valid.
2. …What? Seriously? I had never heard a feminist praise a girl altar serving. I have herd one once yell that women should be able to be a priest, but never have I seen one happy about girl altar servers.
3. See 1,2
4. Creationism was a tradition that was considered the only valid idea for where we came from by the Church for a long time. We may now choose whether to believe that, or theistic evolution. Girl altar servers are not based on faith or morals. I could care less about what the previous generation thought, just as I don’t care that the Church once taught that evolution was false. It’s what is being taught now that I care about.

5,6, See NewEnglandPries

 

[Catholicben]

I am one of the strong conviction that males should be the only ones able to serve. First of all, something is to be said for the very good tradition of having boys and men serve at the altar. PaulinVA and NewEnglandPries, no, you do not have to serve but…

Originally, serving at the altar was reserved to instituted acolytes (ie, men on their way to the priesthood) and later, because it was not practical to have acolytes serve all masses, it was widened to all males. Still today, if an instituted acolyte is present, he still has the right to serve, and is preferred to distribute communion in place of/with EMHCs.

Church documents have also not put female servers on the same par as male servers, so just saying “female servers and male servers are both allowed to serve” doesn’t really do it justice. Here’s what the documents say:

• All servers are “subs” for instituted acolytes, and thus, it is best to have things be the closest to the ideal (ideal = only instituted acolytes serve. Closest to ideal = only males serve, since women can not become instituted acolytes)
• All priests may not, in any way, exclude male servers, while they also priests have no obligation whatsoever (even if the bishop has given his permission_ to use female servers
• Rome has recommended to retain as far as possible the custom of having only boys as servers (adoremus.org/CDW-AltarServers.html).

The church seems to clearly put male servers above the level of female servers.
Unlike the right to receive communion and assist at (attend) mass, serving is NOT a right, as many people seem to think and imply that it is, but rather it is a privilege, that I, and many others believe is best reserved for males.

 

[Adeodatus]

“Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.”



Well, OK then. I got nothin’.

 

[siena_avila]

I was a female altar server. I was a kid and wanted to serve my church and my priest. Being an altar server was the only way I could contribute at 10 years old. I remember reading in a theology class book that despite not being able to be priests, women had important roles in parish life, including cleaning. That made me feel like Martha, and all I wanted to do was be like Mary and choose the better part.

I think what needs to be clearly stated is a modern understanding of the role. To the OP, I say have a conversation with your daughter about why she wants to serve. If you’re friendly with the mothers of similarly aged boys, ask if the reason they don’t serve is because they see a girl up there. I doubt it. My twin brother just didn’t want to be goody-two-shoes Catholic and “churchy.” It wasn’t cool to him or any of his 12-year-old friends.

I’m reminded of the following words from St. Paul. I include these by no means to support female ordination, but to point out that the church from its inception has had a history of female service, and I’m curious to read explanations as to why they cannot serve in an assistance capacity at Mass, since the role of altar server has taken on a different common cultural perception:

“Greet Prisca and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus,”

" “I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a minister of the Church at Cenchreae, that you may receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the holy ones, and help her in whatever she may need from you, for she has been a benefactor to many and to me as well” (1-2)."

"Of Mary, he notes that she “has worked hard for you.”

and

" Similarly, Tryphaena and Tryphosa are commended as “workers in the Lord.”

 

[CatholicLife]

Being an altar serve myself, I don’t think girls should serve. Now don’t call me a sexist , but I think that a Mass looks more solemn and traditional when it is only guys serving. I find it wierd if there is five guys serving and just one girl.I have also seen alot of girl altar servers wear heels , Crocs , and wear inappropriate clothing, while serving.

 

[Redratfish]

Being an altar serve myself, I don’t think girls should serve. Now don’t call me a sexist , but I think that a Mass looks more solemn and traditional when it is only guys serving. I find it wierd if there is five guys serving and just one girl.I have also seen alot of girl altar servers wear heels , Crocs , and wear inappropriate clothing, while serving.

Traditional, yes. However, I have stated above that I feel that times have changed, and so have the teaching of the traditions of the Church

To your statement about 5 guys and 1 girl, perhaps there is only one girl, because the other ones have been forced by their parents (as the OP wants to) to quit serving.

I have also seen guys who wear sneakers, and jeans while serving, should guys not be allowed to serve because of a few of them are improper?

 

[Kit15]

Serving Mass and saying Mass are quite different things. I don’t think any 10-year-old altar server has ever thought of him/herself as a concelebrant.

Any girl with proper catachesis that is.

Give us some credit. Most of us do know that we don’t have a career in the priesthood waiting for us.

Personal preference is personal preference. As long as the bishops have the authority to grants such permission to the pastors and the pastors in turn open up alter serving to girls, even if they have to take a backseat in order to give preference to boys, then there is nothing theologically wrong with it. If such permission is revoked then it would be a good teaching moment about obedience to the Church. It would be easier to teach such a lesson if the child saw there were no exceptions (like women and the priesthood). It would be much more difficult if a parent pulls the girl out of serving but the girl still sees other girls continue to serve. If that’s the course of action, then be honest with who is actually saying the “no” here. It’s a parental decision, which is perfectly fine since you are a parent after all, and not a decision from the Church.

My three sisters and I all went through alter serving and we all dropped out once we hit high school and moved on to other things.

Also…clothing is not a valid reason to bar girls from serving. Dressing poorly is a reflection on the individual and not an entire gender.

 

[choy]

Altar servers at a parish level are no such thing. Lector is also a stepping stone to priesthood yet canon law explicitly opens up the role of lector to women.
And anyways that’s an argument about rules not theology.

Catechists as well. when i introduced myself to our new pastor and told him i’m one of the prep teachers, his first question was if i am becoming a priest. i quickly told him i’m married

 

[apricot_yogurt]

Thank you for all the replies. I won’t pull her. It did bring up a conversation about women priests, she was under the impression they were allowed-probably because we have a lot of women Anglican “priests” in our town, so we have been discussing what the church teaches on this.
I also attended Mass in the extraordinary form this last weekend, and I was struck by the difference in reverence, and piety shown by the boy servers.

 

[Just_Lurking]

Still today, if an instituted acolyte is present, he still has the right to serve,

This is a recent rule dating to the 2002 GIRM, so your “still today” is referring to a tradition of only 8 years.

Here’s what the documents say:

No, that is not what the documents say. That is what a conservative re-interpretation of the documents say.

Rome has recommended to retain as far as possible the custom of having only boys as servers (adoremus.org/CDW-AltarServers.html).

Here is the actual quote from the document: “it will always be very appropriate to follow the noble tradition of having boys serve at the altar”. Notice that you have added the word “only” to what Rome has actually said.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I have also seen alot of girl altar servers wear heels , Crocs , and wear inappropriate clothing, while serving.

I’ve also seen boys show up in sandals, crocs, baggy shorts, t-shirts, etc. Both sexes can be inappropriate in their own ways…

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I also attended Mass in the extraordinary form this last weekend, and I was struck by the difference in reverence, and piety shown by the boy servers.

I think that in the EF if girls were allowed to serve that you’d see the same reverence and piety. I don’t think that girls are somehow geneticly unable to show the same reverence and piety as boys…

 

[snowlake]

I’ve also seen boys show up in sandals, crocs, baggy shorts, t-shirts, etc. Both sexes can be inappropriate in their own ways…

This is true. If only our priests could set a better example for them. One of mine comes
in in shorts and t-shirt and throws his vestments on over these. Unfortunately, his
plastic flip-flops are still visible.

 

[CDNowak]

Altar servers at a parish level are no such thing.

They are no longer a formal step, however the Church recognizes the importance of boys serving as an informal step (eg in the synod propositions from 2005)

Lector is also a stepping stone to priesthood yet canon law explicitly opens up the role of lector to women.

But they are not admitted to the ministry of Lector, rather they serve as a reader.

What? This doesn’t make any sense. Either something is able to be done by a female or its not. There’s no politics in it.
…
Only if one lacks all logic and reason. Serving Mass and saying Mass are quite different things. I don’t think any 10-year-old altar server has ever thought of him/herself as a concelebrant.

There was a good deal of politics and stepping-stone-towards-ordination reasoning in the birth of the practice, some 20 years (this time around, nearly 2000 since the first recorded attempts) before it was accepted. No there may not be as much, but for those of us with long memories it can be hard to separate the two.

Just Lurking Acolytes are the normative servers, have been since the minor order was established (a little longer ago than 2008). Altar boys have been a substitute for the
acolyte for as long as they have existed.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

They are no longer a formal step, however the Church recognizes the importance of boys serving as an informal step (eg in the synod propositions from 2005)

Yes, and canon law also allows girls to serve at Mass.

But they are not admitted to the ministry of Lector, rather they serve as a reader.

Well, the “reader” fulfills the function of Lector:
Can. 230 §2 “Lay persons can fulfill the function of lector in liturgical actions by temporary designation.”
In a similiar way the altar servers perform the function of acolyte to a limited degree.

 

[CDNowak]

Yes, and canon law also allows girls to serve at Mass.

Hence some of the confusion.

Well, the “reader” fulfills the function of Lector:
Can. 230 §2 “Lay persons can fulfill the function of lector in liturgical actions by temporary designation.”
In a similiar way the altar servers perform the function of acolyte to a limited degree.

Yup, just helping keep terms consistent and defined.

 

[snowlake]

Paulin to Adeodatus:
QUOTE=PaulinVA;6859181]
I am conservative both theologically and politically and I don’t see this. Actually, you are politicizing it by objecting to it on political grounds.] end quote

You may have misinterpreted what Adeodatus meant by “politics”. I clearly remember
how the whole thing came about. It was during a big push to include females in all areas
of the Church, including the priesthood. Priests/parishes were admitting altar girls LONG
before it was ever approved in the slightest. It seemed more like a hijacking operation than anything else. Since , as many here have been saying, altar boys are not necessarily acolytes, the Church eventually allowed it to avoid huge fallout.

It was very much inspired by a radical form of false feminism. I say “false”, because there
is a true and legitimate feminism such as that proposed and written about by Pope John Paul II. I’m not saying that female altar servers are not permissable or legitimate, but that the history of their appearance in the Church is not as pretty as some would like to think.
And it did not originate with the Teaching Church, although it was eventually permitted.

It is not illogical at all to say that this was, in microcosm, a sort of “rehearsal” for the ordination of women. As we’ve been reading in the press, there have been more than a
few “ordinations” recently. Some are under the impression that the same thing will happen that happened w/ altar girls : that it will be eventually okayed. But this is something the Church has no authority to change! Non-acolyte altar servers is one thing, but priesthood is another thing entirely.

Please do not call me “conservative”. I’m simply a Catholic. I’m a pro-life Democrat, so the term doesn’t even apply to my politics!

Also, I’m definitely not saying that all of the people involved, especially the girls and their
families, had the intentions described above. I’m suggesting that they were used as pawns for a powerful and clever radical feminist machine that you don’t even want to tangle with unless you want to get scratched badly.

 

[catholicwriter2]

I will see to it that my daughters do not become altar servers. Male only altar servers is a longstanding tradition of the church going back a millenia…why change a good and well established tradition?

one other thing I was thinking about is the importance of single-gender groups (think boy scouts or girl guides)…if the altar area is male only it can provide an area where young boys can develop a kind of “club” atmosphere that would make them more eager to participate in the liturgy…rather than thinking that helping out at mass is something for the “girls” to do.

My brothers and I have been altar servers for fourteen years now at our local parish. As long as I have been doing so I have been serving with girls. I don’t know where you get the idea that being an altar server is a “male only” tradition. I think you’re completely off on that. As for the actual question, hopefully my response to this person’s posting leads you in the right direction. There is nothing wrong with you daughter being an altar server, she is just as capable as any other young man who will be serving alongside her. If the other boys who are altar servers do not like this than so be it. You cannot change their thoughts on the matter, but that is no reason to have her stop doing something that she enjoys.

 

[snowlake]

NewEnglandPries to Adeodatus:

No, its still ZERO, zilch, nada. You made some nice arguments from man-made traditions, disciplines, and practicality but nothing about theology and dogma. Nice try.

He made two, zwei, dos. The connection w/ acolytes, and the ordination of men only.
You may disagree with his conclusions, but these topics are related to the teaching of the Church and of Christ about a male-only Priesthood , which is part of the Theology of the Priesthood.

 

[Phemie]

Originally Posted by Catholicben

No, that rule has been in place since the 1975 GIRM at least (#142. (…) The acolyte may have functions of various kinds and several may occur at the same time. It is therefore desirable that these functions be suitably distributed among several acolytes. But if there is only a single acolyte present, he should perform the more important functions and the rest are distributed among other ministers.