Girl Altar Serviers

  • Thread starter Thread starter tafan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Breaking with tradition sometimes is good; feminizing the sanctuary OMG and reduces vocation…I don’t think you can lay that on alter girls… 🙂

Bruce
I’m sorry, but no it’s not. Small (t) tradition gives us character, and identity.
 
The original posting asked this: *How many of you see any usefulness in having girl altar servers? Do you like it or not? *

In our conversation the main arguement against girl servers was that they could not be prepared for the priesthoods since women cannot be priests (and there was a conversation that discussed that old story) and basically those against alter girls were against because (a) its against long standing tradition, (b) girls are not as serious and all these badly used gender based arguements (i.e. high heels, and showing off), c) girls can’t be priests and so forth.

There was a legitimate development of the alter boy role since Roman times and that tradition needs - in my mind - to be honoured, but not at the cost of denying girls who feel they are called by God to serve as alter girls…and spirituality informed by female gender experience enriches the relationship between God and His people.

I totally support girls serving on an equal basis as guys as alter services. I find a lot of the rules and regulations around that as outdated…but that is my opinion…anyways, count me in as a progressive Catholic supporter of alter girls…

Bruce
 
Third Option: Neutral on the issue.

I don’t mind seeing girl altars up there… but I understand why some take issue with it. I don’t feel strongly either way. Wouldn’t be offended if girls stopped being altar servers, wouldn’t be offended if they continue being altar servers.
 
Am I the only one bothered by the gender imbalance in our church? The idea of the church being complimentary is good, but is it enough? Tradition often keeps us backwards and I think the idea of an alter boy only club is one of those traditions that we need to scrap…it may have worked the last thousand years, but it is 2012.

Bruce
 
John Paul II was very clear in his Instruction, Inaestimabile Donum:
“There are, of course, various roles that women can perform in the liturgical assembly: these include reading the Word of God and proclaiming the intentions of the Prayer of the Faithful. Women are not, however, permitted to act as altar servers.
It is common knowledge that political pressure (especially from America) was put on the Holy Father to compromise on this issue. Many parishes were already defying the clear instructions of the Holy See and were using altar girls illicitly. JPII capitulated in 1994 when he let the CDWDS allow altar girls on a limited basis.

In response to the decision, Archbishop Patrick Flores (San Antonio) commented, “I guess it shows the Vatican is obeying us.” While I won’t let HE Bishop Flores’s comment speak for all American Catholics, it does show the fact that there was a spirit of dissension that colored this issue.

In conscience, I am against the use of altar girls because it is a practice that came about through disobedience. It also violates the “hermeneutic of continuity” that Pope Benedict speaks of. It is not something that the Vatican graciously welcomed to the liturgical life. It is a big compromise that weakened Rome’s authority because it was a big capitulation to feminists. It showed that continued disobedience gets you what you want. Even though altar girls came with severe restrictions while altar boys were openly encouraged (read between the lines on that one), it was nonetheless taken as a major victory for those pushing for women’s ordination.
 
I’m sorry, but no it’s not. Small (t) tradition gives us character, and identity.
There are, however, traditions which are maleable. For example, I’m sure you would not assert that the church broke with it’s character and identity when it switched from versus populem to ad orientem in the 6th century… despite the fact that that was a departure from traditions at the time.

traditions evolve. It happens.
 
Am I the only one bothered by the gender imbalance in our church? The idea of the church being complimentary is good, but is it enough? Tradition often keeps us backwards and I think the idea of an alter boy only club is one of those traditions that we need to scrap…it may have worked the last thousand years, but it is 2012.

Bruce
And this is the kind of thinking that makes me want to cry as an 18 year old male.
 
Am I the only one bothered by the gender imbalance in our church? The idea of the church being complimentary is good, but is it enough? Tradition often keeps us backwards and I think the idea of an alter boy only club is one of those traditions that we need to scrap…it may have worked the last thousand years, but it is 2012.

Bruce
I’ve heard many people complain about the gender equality in the church. I would ask you, would you have complained to Jesus? Would you have said to him, “Why are your twelve chosen only male? Isn’t that inequality?”

I don’t believe the Church treats women badly. I do believe that certain jobs have been set in place for certain genders and it is not our place to change that.

God decided only women can be mothers.
God decided (through the person of Jesus) only men would be Apostles.
God decided to found this Church.

Who am I to question how things are?

It worked for 2000 years… why should we presume we know better?
 
Am I the only one bothered by the gender imbalance in our church? The idea of the church being complimentary is good, but is it enough? Tradition often keeps us backwards and I think the idea of an alter boy only club is one of those traditions that we need to scrap…it may have worked the last thousand years, but it is 2012.

Bruce
The ditching of traditional practices, along with the many innovations that occurred post-Vatican II has caused incredible amounts of damage in the Church. The Church is now in tatters in the West, and we are experiencing a crisis in faith.
 
There are, however, traditions which are maleable. For example, I’m sure you would not assert that the church broke with it’s character and identity when it switched from versus populem to ad orientem in the 6th century… despite the fact that that was a departure from traditions at the time.

traditions evolve. It happens.
Actually, some traditions evolve, organically, over hundreds of years. Such is with the practice of Communion in the hand for example. Sure, there is some evidence that suggests that Communion in the hand was a common practice in the early Church, but it gradually fell out of favour and by the 8th century had been ruled illegal.

As many, including Pope Benedict XVI have said, Vatican II was not a break from the past, or a ‘new Church’. Many people acted as if it was, chucking a whole lot of traditional practices out the window, which has in turn caused a crisis in faith, and a loss in identity.
 
The ditching of traditional practices, along with the many innovations that occurred post-Vatican II has caused incredible amounts of damage in the Church. The Church is now in tatters in the West, and we are experiencing a crisis in faith.
Well… not so fast, I wouldn’t claim that those are the responsibility of Vatican II, of the OF, or of 12 year old girls acting as altar servers.

I would actually lay the blame for those, as well as the low ordinations, on society itself. Worldwide, the “post V-II” period has seen the fastest growth of the Catholic church in the history of the Catholic church. Korea and Africa have so many priests and deacons that they don’t even need EMHCs or altar servers. The priest shortage, likewise, is a purely western phenomenon… today there are only 10,000 priests less than there were 50 years ago, but that is because priests outside the west have grown, while the west has lost a significant number of priests.

It’s not the fault of the mass or of disciplines in place since V-II, the failure in the west is a problem with us congregants in the west. It is our fault, our fault, our most grevious fault. If we were doing our catholic duty, these would not be issues.
 
I realize that, but by itself, that is not going to change much at large. Not yet.
In the west it will eventually, if only for the reason that more orthodox catholics will have more children, and thus eventually outbreed those who do not follow Church teachings.

In the non-western regions, not so much… those parts of the church are not nearly so infected with societal illness as we are in the west, so their promulgation is much more in line with church teaching…
 
Well… not so fast, I wouldn’t claim that those are the responsibility of Vatican II, of the OF, or of 12 year old girls acting as altar servers.

I would actually lay the blame for those, as well as the low ordinations, on society itself. Worldwide, the “post V-II” period has seen the fastest growth of the Catholic church in the history of the Catholic church. Korea and Africa have so many priests and deacons that they don’t even need EMHCs or altar servers. The priest shortage, likewise, is a purely western phenomenon… today there are only 10,000 priests less than there were 50 years ago, but that is because priests outside the west have grown, while the west has lost a significant number of priests.

It’s not the fault of the mass or of disciplines in place since V-II, the failure in the west is a problem with us congregants in the west. It is our fault, our fault, our most grevious fault. If we were doing our catholic duty, these would not be issues.
Many, many people would disagree with you. The Church has stood strong for 1800 years in the West, surviving empires, kingdoms, famines, the Black Death, the religious wars, the industrial revolution, huge societal changes (eg the slow emergence of the middle class after the Black Death), two world wars, the biggest atrocities man-kind has ever seen, and your telling me now, that it was the change in society in the 60s that has caused all of this?

Many would tell you, that Vatican II was meant to combat this with a change in pastoral teaching, but the Liberals hijacked the meaning of the council and caused a revolution in the Church. We are now seeing the after effects of feminism, paedophilia, and crushed gender roles being present in the Church for over 40 years.

The Church, if it held fast, would have easily survived almost unchanged through the societal changes of the 60s, just like it did with the emergence of the middle class, just like it did after the revolutions across Europe.
 
Am I the only one bothered by the gender imbalance in our church? The idea of the church being complimentary is good, but is it enough? Tradition often keeps us backwards and I think the idea of an alter boy only club is one of those traditions that we need to scrap…it may have worked the last thousand years, but it is 2012.

Bruce
This is something that is very hard for those of us in the Eastern Orthodox churches to hear. Male altar servers are a tradition of the undivided church, and one kept by both east and west for nearly a thousand years after the traditional date of the schism.

I hope you can understand why this change has a strong emotional effect at the lay level. It seems to confirm the stereotype of liturgical innovations leading to confusion about matters of faith. For example, I saw in a survey that around 10% of Orthodox in the US would support ordaining women as priests…the number among Roman Catholics was 63%! :eek: I should also note that according to this survey, far fewer Orthodox believe that women are marginalized in their church…so perhaps a firm adherence to tradition has its advantages.
 
In the west it will eventually, if only for the reason that more orthodox catholics will have more children, and thus eventually outbreed those who do not follow Church teachings.

In the non-western regions, not so much… those parts of the church are not nearly so infected with societal illness as we are in the west, so their promulgation is much more in line with church teaching…
Promulgation of what, if I may be so thick? Do note that I am not disagreeing with you, and if you find it desirable that we continue this in another thread or in a PM, by all means.
 
I couldn’t care less one way or the other.

It’s ok with the Holy Father, so it’s ok with me.

It’s ok with my Bishop, so it’s ok with me.

It’s ok with my Pastor, so it’s ok with me.

If my Bishop or my Pastor decided it was not ok with them, and disallowed the female servers, that would be ok with me too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top