S.F. Catholic Church priest bans girls as altar servers

[Corki]

There is “Catholic authority” saying that only boys on the altar is better or worse. The fact that the Vatican allowed girls in the first place indicates the official position is that girls on the altar are not harmful, and that it is not intrinsically better for the Church to have boys only.

The parishes who decide to have boys only are making that decision based on their “observations and opinions”. there is no teaching or evidence that supports the decision to exclude girls. It is a personal decision of the priest based on their opinion. I can offer my “observations and opinions” as to the effect that has on the perception of the Church. I think we can all agree a negative perception of the Church is not in its best interest.

If you want to dismiss my position just because I’m not a priest, feel free.

Actually the Catholic authority does not say whether it is good or bad to have girls serving at the altar. She does, however, say that it is good to have boys serving at the altar and directs priests and bishops to encourage boys to do so.

A pastor who decided to not to exercise an optional practice does so out of a combination of his opinion as well as his experience in that parish and throughout his priesthood. It’s not just a whim.

I am not “dismissing” your opinion. I am simply saying that your opinion probably doesn’t carry as much weight as the opinion of the pastor and Church authority.

 

[otjm]

it’s about time!

the next thing they need to do is re-institute the discipline of meatless fridays. this will quickly separate the nominal catholics from the real catholics or at least those who really care about what they believe in

Real Catholics are those who follow Christ, who seek to be Christ-like. They don’t need a re-instatement of the discipline of meatless Fridays to be real Catholics; and since the discipline is still in force, although relaxed (as we may choose alternates), it is more than likely that real Catholics already practice some form of penance.

In the 1950s, which was the peak of Mass attendance on a regular basis, the majority of Catholics did not eat meat on Fridays; and in spite of the discipline, Mass attendance started dropping - which was during the reign of Pious XII and while the discipline was in force.

Rules do not distinguish real Catholics from cultural Catholics as where there is a strong culture, the rules tend to be followed. But following rules does not make one a real Catholic; following Christ does.

 

[otjm]

Here’s one that will help. The USCCB with Georgetown University did a study of Men who were ordained to the Priesthood last year. One of the major findings was that 80% of those ordained were altar servers.

For every girl altar server is one less boy and as seen one less potential Priest.

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/vocations/ordination-class/upload/Class-of-2014-report-FINAL-2.pdf

That presumes several things; among them, that a boy who does not serve will not consider the priesthood - but by your own statistics, 20% of those ordained did not serve - but still managed somehow to consider priesthood.

I would lay dollars to donuts that if the survey asked a few more questions, they would find that a very significant number of priest had also attended either Catholic grad school, high school or college, or some combination of the above.

I attended Catholic grade school from 1952 to 1960, and was an altar server. So were most of the rest of my classmates (all male), with the exception of one who was not Catholic, and a couple who couldn’t learn the Latin responses. Out of that parish, there have been two who went to seminary; one of my classmates and myself, and neither of us were ordained. And that grade school still exists.

There are something like 17,000 parishes, and for sure we are not getting 17,000 recruits for seminary. And that includes how many boys who serve along with girls? Yes, 80% served as altar boys, but this continual focus on boys serving as altar boys being a major recruiting force is more than just a bit thin on causation.

How many of them (ordained) said a family rosary? How many of them were in any sort of Catholic youth group? What other similarities are there for those who are ordained, which they shared as youth? It may be a factor in the possibility that a boy will go to seminary, and so will a lot of other factors. In particular, one factor may be how willing the parents are to encourage the possibility of a vocation, as opposed to emphasizing other vocations.

It would be interesting if the USCCB and CARA (which is the group at Georgetown doing surveys) would do one on young women - say under the age of 30, who are joining orders of sisters and of nuns. I’ll bet another dollar for your donuts that it would be a surprising percentage.

 

[pnewton]

That doesn’t mean the answer is to start excluding women or girls from roles without any sound theological reason for doing so.

Not all decisions need be based in doctrine. Most pastoral decisions are based more in prudence. I think it unfair that this priest be accused of promoting outmoded stereotypes. That may not be his intent at all. There are legitimate differences in gender. In a society which takes dogma the equality and equivalency of all genders, and even makes up new ones, there may be a reason to teach that this is not so.

 

[pnewton]

In our old Parish there were not enough boys to serve so girls were permitted to serve.
After that there was an uproar in the parish and all of a sudden boys wanted to serve and serve with all boys. It was simply a political issue at the end of the day.

Mary.

I think sometimes this issue can become a polemic of traditionalist vs. progressive. Politics can overshadow doing what is best for the actual kids.

 

[pnewton]

I don’t think the diocese really had a choice. The priest is really “in charge” of his own Masses. To dictate to the priest how he says Mass, would really open up a canonical can of worms.

I do not know. Most options are the choice of the ordinary, the bishop. I believe altar servers is an episcopal decision. I will check canon law later.

 

[irishpatrick]

The critical question (imo) is:

Do female altar servers contribute to an increase of vocations to the Priesthood?

 

[jeanannemarie]

there is nothing wrong with young females (girls) serving on the altar; of all the things you can and should be strict about as as a parent i don’t see this issue as one to dig your heels in over

pick your battles better

If you want to understand things like this topic you must read things about the Mass and find that it is not your opinion and that there is support for the idea that girls shouldn’t serve. Read about saints and about the Church. Don’t just go for public opinion.

 

[ProVobis]

It would be interesting if the USCCB and CARA (which is the group at Georgetown doing surveys) would do one on young women - say under the age of 30, who are joining orders of sisters and of nuns. I’ll bet another dollar for your donuts that it would be a surprising percentage.

FWIW, it seems the barrier was broken a long time ago when priests would say Masses for the nuns in their own chapels and the nuns would ring the bells and say the Latin responses. Most likely from their pews but nevertheless they were the tasks of the servers at the time. Just sayin…

 

[Corki]

I do not know. Most options are the choice of the ordinary, the bishop. I believe altar servers is an episcopal decision. I will check canon law later.

The GIRM and Redemtionis Sacramentum are pretty specific about who has the “power” to make decisions about Mass. Almost all of them are either the Vatican’s or the priest celebrant’s. Only a few fall to the Ordinary. Now, of course, a Bishop could just order a priest to do something under his promise of obedience but, if the priest decided to appeal to the CDW, the Bishop wouldn’t have a very good case if it was something where the decision was delegated, by documents, to the celebrant.

When I was talking about choice, I was speaking more about practicality than canon law. If the Bishop;s office intervened on something that was supposed to be the pastor’s prerogative, he would be inundated with the (un) faithful’s demands that he “rule” on anything they didn’t like at Mass. There would be nothing left that would truly be up to the celebrant to decide and the Bishop would be micromanaging every Mass. That’s the can of worms I don’t think any Bishop wants to open.

 

[pnewton]

If you want to understand things like this topic you must read things about the Mass and find that it is not your opinion and that there is support for the idea that girls shouldn’t serve. Read about saints and about the Church. Don’t just go for public opinion.

It is also not your opinion that matters. As the Catholic Church allows for girls to serve altar, there are also reasons to support the idea that girls should serve. I think it bad form to assume someone is less read because they do not agree, and send them off with a dismissal to go read more to agree with you. Lack of respect for disagreement is one reason this topic becomes more heated.

As to the question of canon law, I found this.
catholicexchange.com/canon-law-and-altar-girls

The decision on the use of lay ministers is left to the USCCB. The USCCB has stated that it is the bishops decision on the use of girls as altar servers. A bishop can (and has) restricted service to boys. In this case, the bishop allows the priest to do what they think best. I think that is the norm, but a bishop can restrict it, or open it to both genders, throughout the diocese.

 

[sttcatherinefan]

I’m actually a bit surprised that no one has responded to my previous post or commented on Legion of Mary.

I personally feel that the Parishes and Church would be better off if the Altar Boy program was designed as a seminary prep program (still allowing any boys though). They should visit the seminary at least once a year (if not more), etc.

Meanwhile, have a Legion of Mary program for the girls where they attend adoration, pray the rosary as a group, help the priest read and pray all the parish intentions, and lead Marian prayers before and/or after Mass. Run this like a nun prep program. They can visit convents and even visit with elderly nuns to assist them around the convent. Plus they can assist with CCD if already Confirmed.

Vocations would increase for both priests and nuns. Others would become strong Catholics and perhaps lay leaders in the Church.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=12700269&postcount=34

God Bless

The Legion of Mary promotes a 1950s version of strict gender roles that I don’t think would fly in the 21st century. It seems to encourage women to be submissive housewives.

 

[Mulligan2]

I know you are stuck with the title of the news story, but he didn’t “ban” altar servers. Pastors have lots of options when it comes to Mass. One of those options is whether to have male only or a mixed male and female group serve at the altar. Using the term “ban” is just trying to stoke the fires of people who are always looking for a victim.

If a priest decides to distribute Communion under one species would we say he has “banned” the Precious Blood? No, this is a valid option at Mass.

If a priest decides to skip the shared sign of peace, would we say he has “banned” the practice of shaking hands? No, this is a valid option at Mass.

If a priest chooses more traditional hymns for Mass, would we say he has “banned” Hagen, Haas and Schute? No, this is a valid option at Mass.

No, this priest didn’t “ban” anything. He just made a choice from among the many options allowed to him BY THE CHURCH regarding altar servers. He also gets to decide how many servers he wants at each Mass, what they will wear, and whether one serves as thurifer, whether any of them carry candles in procession, the age range for altar servers and who is in charge of training them. Lots of options, lots of combinations of choices. But this one gets the press because it serves someone’s agenda.

With all due respect, that seems like a distinction without a difference.

 

[Corki]

With all due respect, that seems like a distinction without a difference.

Not really. Every time a new pastor arrives, he makes choices. Sometimes those choices involves a different option than what the previous pastor chose. There are so many things that have options. It’s not “banning” to chose one option over another one.

 

[Tsuwano]

This case isn’t really about whether a community is progressive or traditional. In fact, I think this particular parish is probably similar to most parishes, a community of believers seeking to celebrate the Lord in their midst. This story, to my mind, is really about a man who has an ideological position he wishes to impose on a parish without really considering the experience and history of that community. He is able to do this because he is a cleric and the law gives all power into the hands of the clerics. The pastor can do anything he pleases in his parish and the parishioners be damned! This strikes me as little more than clerical colonialism. I have the power to impose my will, my ideology, my experience and view, and so I will . . . and you, the parishioners of the community, can’t stop me! There is no question that the pastor has the legal power to do what he proposes, but the question is whether he should do it without consultation from the parish or without considering how his actions may damage the parish community. His action doesn’t quite strike me as the model of leadership which Jesus uses in the Gospel.

 

[pnewton]

With all due respect, that seems like a distinction without a difference.

The difference is the attitude of respect due the authority of the one making the decision.

 

[Tsuwano]

This situation isn’t really about whether the parish is progressive or traditional. In fact, I think this particular parish is probably similar to most parishes, a community of faithful of various visions attempting to celebrate the Lord in their midst. This story, to my mind, is really about a man who has an ideological position he wishes to impose on a parish without really considering the experiences and history of that community. He is able to do this because he is a cleric and the law gives all power into the hands of the clerics. The pastor can do anything he pleases in his parish and the parishioners be damned! This strikes me as little more than clerical colonialism. I have the power to impose my will, my ideology, my experience and view, and so I will . . . and you, the parishioners of the community, can’t stop me! There is no doubt the pastor has the power to do what he is proposing, but should he do so without considering the views of the parish or how his actions may damage the parish community? His action doesn’t quite strike me as the model of leadership which Jesus uses in the Gospel.

 

[ChemicalBean]

If that is not enough, then ask yourself one critical question: Do the presence of girl altar servers lead to an increase in vocations to the Priesthood?

Remember, Priests bring the Sacraments, which means Priests bring us Jesus Christ. Even if we lose just ONE vocation due to the presence of female altar servers, that is too high a price to pay. Just one.

The critical question (imo) is:

Do female altar servers contribute to an increase of vocations to the Priesthood?

Okay, I’ll take up your bait.

The critical answer is Yes, of course they do. Anytime we can build up the church through the catechesis of young people and get them intimately involved in the liturgy, we can provide fertile ground for their personal relationships with God and their desire to grow in their primary Vocation: holiness. When the Church comes alive like this, more people listen and respond to their particular vocations, perhaps to Priesthood (and Diaconate), but also to Consecrated Life, dedicated Single life, and Marriage and Parenthood. Where will more priests come from, if not from faithful families?

I suspect that’s not the utilitarian answer you are looking for. So, consider this:

That female altar server might be on the path to becoming your diocese’s next Consecrated Virgin. What’s that, you say? It’s the complement to the priesthood’s image of Christ the Bridegroom; she becomes a living icon of the Bride of Christ, the Church. Ordered to the example of Mary, she becomes Virgin, Bride, and Mother.

Remember, Mary brought us Jesus Christ, our High Priest, and continues to help bring us Priests, and the Graces of the Sacraments flow through Her Treasury. Even if we lose just ONE vocation due to the ABSENCE of female altar servers, that is too high of a price to pay. Just. One.

 

[KSU]

… The USCCB has stated that it is the bishops decision on the use of girls as altar servers. A bishop can (and has) restricted service to boys. In this case, the bishop allows the priest to do what they think best. I think that is the norm, but a bishop can restrict it, or open it to both genders, throughout the diocese.

p, to cut to the chase, it’s my understanding that theVatican does not permit any national bishops’ conference or bishop to force a priest to use female alter servers. Isn’t that correct??

 

[NeedsMercy]

Here’s one that will help. The USCCB with Georgetown University did a study of Men who were ordained to the Priesthood last year. One of the major findings was that 80% of those ordained were altar servers.

For every girl altar server is one less boy and as seen one less potential Priest.

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/vocations/ordination-class/upload/Class-of-2014-report-FINAL-2.pdf

In a survey taken in 2014, there were 365 Ordinands to the Priesthood. Of those 365 men, 80% served as altar servers when they were younger!

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/vocations/ordination-class/upload/Class-of-2014-report-FINAL-2.pdf

No. This study is not addressing my statement at all, and the point of what Illo is saying. I suggested showing proof that having female altar servers dissuades young men from the priesthood. Illo said:

At the risk of generalizing, I suspect young men serving with young women might just distract them from the sacrifice of the Mass, and perhaps even from a priestly vocation.

starparish.com/news/official-statement-on-altar-boy-policy

I’m not sure I know all the ramifications of what he’s saying, but it appears he thinks that young men can’t focus on the Mass even if women are in the congregation. But for the sake of the thread, I’m letting that idea die right now and will entertain no further discussion on it. Back to the point. The USCCB study in no way, shape or form shows that altar servers that happen to be girls take away from vocations to the priesthood. As far as I know, there is no documentation supporting this. This is **not **the same thing as saying that 80% of ordinands in one particular class were altar servers at one point in their lives. Saying that “for every girl altar server is one less boy and as seen one less potential Priest” has, therefore, no basis in fact.