reflections from a former altar girl

[ProVobis]

“Active participation”… these two words are so badly misunderstood, where everyone thinks it means they need to “do something”.
I wish someone would clarify this, but the bus appears to have left the station (ie pagan liturgical dancing at parishes still to this day).

The Latin is “actuosa participatio” which is more literally “actual participation.” IMO It has a better meaning in the Spanish, “real participation.”

Like many other things it’s been mistranslated, this to the point of as you say, everyone needs to do something (active). It seems if they wanted “active participation” they would have used “activa participatio.” Actuoso is more interior, according to Fr. Z.

wdtprs.com/blog/2006/03/the-true-meaning-of-active-participation/

 

[Brendan]

Parishes forget, or pastors forget? Nothing prevents a pastor who has both boy and girl altar servers from encouraging the boys to consider the priesthood.

As you are not the only one to stat the issue about encouraging boys, I wonder if there is a subliminal current that somehow, encouraging boys to consider priesthood would be fruitless should a girl stray into the sanctuary as a server. These are not mutually exclusive issues.

It depends, the obligation is towards groups of boys. If a parish does not have groups of boys actively serving, then it is not fulfilling it’s obligation.

 

[Sirach2]

I am I never gave it much thought until I joined that parish and saw the huge number of vocations that came from that altar boy cadre

8 priests in 1he last 10 years, with 4 more in the seminary.

Would that be a seminary to train them solely for ministry within the Extraordinary Form?

 

[Sirach2]

It depends, the obligation is towards groups of boys. If a parish does not have groups of boys actively serving, then it is not fulfilling it’s obligation.

Most , if not ALL, parishes now have a mix of both genders. I don’t see how it would be failing in one’s obligation if none come forward to serve. My parish has opened the ministry of server to adult men and women for our daily liturgies, and it has been very well received. Being married, I doubt any of them will be called to a vocation to priesthood or religious life.

 

[Sirach2]

“Active participation”… these two words are so badly misunderstood, where everyone thinks it means they need to “do something”.
I wish someone would clarify this, but the bus appears to have left the station (ie pagan liturgical dancing at parishes still to this day).

Here is the specific designation in Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II:

English version:
19. With zeal and patience, pastors of souls must promote the liturgical instruction of the faithful, and also their active participation in the liturgy** both internally and externally** …

Latin version:
19.Liturgicam institutionem necnon actuosam fidelium participationem, internam et externam…

Actuosam has unfortunately been erroneously translated by some as meaning “active internal receptivity.” Yet that is not what the document indicated.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Most , if not ALL, parishes now have a mix of both genders. I don’t see how it would be failing in one’s obligation if none come forward to serve. My parish has opened the ministry of server to adult men and women for our daily liturgies, and it has been very well received. Being married, I doubt any of them will be called to a vocation to priesthood or religious life.

Our’s too. But it’s still difficult to get kids (of both genders) to serve at the 8:15 Mass. I think a large problem lies in the parents who do not want to shuttle their children to an early morning Mass.

 

[phil19034]

Here is the specific designation in Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II:

English version:
19. With zeal and patience, pastors of souls must promote the liturgical instruction of the faithful, and also their active participation in the liturgy** both internally and externally** …

Latin version:
19.Liturgicam institutionem necnon actuosam fidelium participationem, internam et externam…

Actuosam has unfortunately been erroneously translated by some as meaning “active internal receptivity.” Yet that is not what the document indicated.

The external participation is supposed to be the oral receitiation of the Our Father and other prayers, the tapping on the chest during the Confitor and the bowing of our heads at the mention of Christ, the Trinity, the Blessed Mother and the Saint of the Day. Also, the profound bow during the Creed.

It was not intended to be “everyone hold hands during Our Father,” having 10 EMHCs, 3 Lectors, a band playing heterodox music next to the altar, and/or altar servers in jeans at Mass

 

[Sirach2]

The external participation is supposed to be the oral receitiation of the Our Father and other prayers, the tapping on the chest during the Confitor and the bowing of our heads at the mention of Christ, the Trinity, the Blessed Mother and the Saint of the Day. Also, the profound bow during the Creed.

I wondered how long it would be before someone challenged the Church’s teaching. (Not too long, I see)

Anyway, you failed to mention that this interpretation is yours, not the Church’s.

The “external” participation is not limited to bodily posture and gestures, but it embraces vocal participation, singing, responding to prayers.

What are those actions that make for true active participation in the liturgy? These must be both internal and external in quality, since man is a rational creature with body and soul. The external actions must be intelligent and understood, sincere and pious internally. The Church proposes many bodily positions: kneeling, standing, walking, sitting, etc. It likewise proposes many human actions: singing, speaking, listening and above all else, the reception of the Holy Eucharist. They demand internal attention as well as external execution.

(It is) that form of devout involvement in the liturgical action which, in the present conditions of the Church, best promotes the exercise of the common priesthood of the baptized: that is, their power to offer the sacrifice of the Mass with Christ and to receive the sacraments.

It is clear that, concretely, this requires that the faithful understand the liturgical ceremonial; that they take part in it by bodily movements, standing, kneeling or sitting as the occasion may demand; that they join vocally in the parts which are intended for them. It also requires that they listen to, and understand, the liturgy of the word. It requires, too, that there be moments of silence when the import of the whole ceremonial may be absorbed and deeply personalized.
(Colman E. O’Neill, “The Theological Meaning of Actuosa Participatio in the Liturgy,” in Sacred Music and Liturgy Reform after Vatican II. Consociatio Internationalis Musicae Sacrae, Rome, 1969. p. 105.)

The second paragraph of your post just sounds like sour grapes and those who understand the directives by the USCCB will just disregard it. It has been hashed to death by malcontented folks.