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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think if you go back and read my post again, you will see that I did not say that all Traditionalists have rose colored glasses; but there certainly is a subset within them which does. And any number of them have expounded in the forums over the years in ways that reflect their views. All of them? Certainly not. But too many of them have a romanticized view of the Church prior to Vatican 2; little history, and no real experience.
And you know this how? How is a firm grasp of church teaching, an authentic expression of pure worship, a great love for the Church and fidelity to Tradition a sign of romanticism? You cannot possibly know their spiritual journey nor the experience that has lead to a greater faith life.
 
Correct. My daughter is singing in the choir and my son will be an alter server. Why is this so wrong?

My daughter wants to do a lot of things and I have to decide what is best for her, her siblings and me and my husband.
Bravo, mom! Guidance, nurturing, teaching, loving parenting! 👍
 
Would you still say that if this priest had commanded that all altar servers be female? Somehow, I think I know the answer to that. :confused:
Actually, yes. No one has a right to serve. However, the Church documents on the liturgy specifically set male servers as a norm. If a priest didn’t want male servers, his only legitimate option would be no servers at all. That doesn’t mean that any person or group has a right to serve at the altar, only that the priest is still obligated to follow Church directives. The current “rule” on altar servers is to encourage boys to serve and to sometimes allow girls as well.

It’s very similar to the directions for distributing Communion. A priest can choose to distribute Communion under both species or he can distribute Communion just under the species of bread (hosts). But he does not have an option of distributing only under the species of wine. This doesn’t mean that he couldn’t get permission to do so under certain circumstances, but it’s not one of his liturgical choices.

We have some Sundays where the only servers at a given Mass are girls. Not a big deal. But to only **allow **girls is not an option currently available to a pastor.
 
Another point: women are being shut out and left out of the few small spaces in the Church which they now occupy.
What positions in the Church/parish are they being shut out?

Do you agree with the Catholic Church’s position that only men can be Priests?
Cardinal Burke? Are you serious? Burke’s opinions—they are his opinions only, he cannot prove these allegations—show that he clearly has some fundamental psychological issues with women. His views have been discussed in other threads, and you really shouldn’t try to hijack this thread by using them. I will not discuss this subject any further here. Period.
Bolding mine. Are you a psychologist? Have you examined him?
 
Your comments are still, in fact, incorrect. Your efforts to put words in my mouth are failing. Just stop it.
I’m not putting any words in your mouth. You clearly view that only clergy have any power in the Church which would mean the women I mentioned don’t have any. Not a hard connection to make. Here let me help you-

-You hold that only clergy have power in the Church- Your response to the question- “How do you define “position of power,” exactly?” is “Let’s see, just off the top of my head: the power to celebrate Mass, perform the sacraments, have a say in the interpretation of doctrine, pick Popes…”
-The women who actually run parishes and dioceses and the women who form the core of religious education programs (and we might as well throw in charity efforts since women dominate in numbers and actually run those programs too) aren’t clergy.
-Conclusion- they don’t have any power in the Church since they aren’t clergy.

See, not hard to connect the dots.
 
Glad you found it useful, Pro. The good Sisters at St. Stanislaus in the “Polish ghetto” where I was raised in the fifties (to be religiously and politically conservative–some fled Poland where they learned about progressivism the hard way) gave up trying to make me even semi-proficient in the “dead language.” A regret I’ll take to the grave. But, at least I did like to learn the Latin roots of modern English.
Fortunately there are people who realize that once something is translated, the source shouldn’t be thrown out. As modern languages change, there may indeed be a need to retranslate, such as they did with the new English translations of the Mass. The Latin didn’t change.

Also to consider there is no such thing as an exact translation. From Latin to English there is a loss of subjunctive, a loss of inflection, a loss of intensity, a loss of gender relationships, loss of demonstrative precision, and modal verb manipulation* among other things. Polish to English isn’t much better. Translations can indeed corrupt the message or prayer altogether.
  • this is where, for example, things get translated as “should” or “must” but where the original intent lies somewhere in between.
 
We have female altar servers and Sisters who help as well. I don’t have an issue with either all male or male and female. As long as the priest making the decision is doing so for sound reasons based on certain traditions. If he did it because he didn’t like girls on the altar or had issues with women in general, I’d be concerned.

When I was in the military, some COs preferred some ceremonies to be all male while others didn’t care. There are still height and sex requirements for certain honor guards in the military. I participated in a sword arch for a shipmate’s wedding. I was actually surprised he didn’t want only male shipmates. I was honored to be asked, but I wouldn’t have thought less of him if he picked only males.
 
???
You won’t* let* your daughter be an altar server?!

You mean…she wants to be an altar server, and your parish allows it, and the pope has decreed it…and yet, you will not *let *her?

:nope:

.
Finally women at great effort and sacrifice achived banning gender discrimination in law and industry and the chuch should too, although in real life we still have a long ways to go. Women still earn about thirty percent less for the same work they perform with less of a chance to leadership positions. The church receives most of its financial support from WOMEN, then turns around and bits the hand that feeds it.
 
I don’t understand why the secular press takes such an interest in such a local matter
The secular press is concerned with the affairs and pursuits of the world which Jesus warned us about. As you know, we have to be in the world but must not be of the world. At present, the world is Satan’s.

That’s why the world, led in large part by the allied militant homosexual and militant Socialist lobbies (think for example San Francisco), fears and detests the orthodox/conservative/traditional element of the Church while promoting and fawning over the Call to Action element.
 
Awesome, great decision by this priest. The parishioners who don’t like it can go and be Episcopals and just get it over with.
Sadly, after this and about a dozen other issues I have, I’m considering doing just that.
 
Would you still say that if this priest had commanded that all altar servers be female? Somehow, I think I know the answer to that. :confused:
Your question is invalid. If you had read the materials I have posted, you would know that no priest has the authority to do this. Either he allows boys and girls, or he allows boys, or he allows nobody.
 
And you know this how? How is a firm grasp of church teaching, an authentic expression of pure worship, a great love for the Church and fidelity to Tradition a sign of romanticism? You cannot possibly know their spiritual journey nor the experience that has lead to a greater faith life.
There are an ample number of people who by their statements show more than you seem willing to admit. I did not direct the comment to you, and if you take umbrage with it, then I have to ask why you presume to paint all people with one brush - because I don’t.

I was born in the 40’s, and I am well aware not only of the positive values of the Church pre-Vatican 2, but also aware of problems that existed then. I am also aware of problems that exist now. I have come across enough people who have expressed that pre Vatican 2 was the height of the Church and that it has descended since then to know that their grasp of pre Vatican 2 is through rose colored glasses.
 
The secular press is concerned with the affairs and pursuits of the world which Jesus warned us about. As you know, we have to be in the world but must not be of the world. At present, the world is Satan’s.

That’s why the world, led in large part by the allied militant homosexual and militant Socialist lobbies (think for example San Francisco), fears and detests the orthodox/conservative/traditional element of the Church while promoting and fawning over the Call to Action element.
The good news, however, is that 'call to action was noted as greying about 15 years ago, and about the only thing that has changed is that they are dying, and the younger generation is not joining up with them. Time will eventually solve the matter.
 
I’m not putting any words in your mouth. You clearly view that only clergy have any power in the Church which would mean the women I mentioned don’t have any. Not a hard connection to make. Here let me help you-
You’ve been doing so for a number of posts and you’ve just done it again.
You hold that only clergy have power in the Church-
I **never **said this. You’ve inserted the word “only” which changes my statement entirely.
Your response to the question- “How do you define “position of power,” exactly?” is “Let’s see, just off the top of my head: the power to celebrate Mass, perform the sacraments, have a say in the interpretation of doctrine, pick Popes…”
-The women who actually run parishes and dioceses and the women who form the core of religious education programs (and we might as well throw in charity efforts since women dominate in numbers and actually run those programs too) aren’t clergy.
-Conclusion- they don’t have any power in the Church since they aren’t clergy.
Your conclusion is based on faulty assumptions.
See, not hard to connect the dots.
Yes, it was fairly easy of you to connect some dots, unfortunately, the dots weren’t of **my **making, but of yours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top