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

[KSU]

… Pastoral discipline is not weakened. Rather, the decision to allow girls to serve or not is a strengthening of the pastoral element of discipline…

I know what you meant, p, but you probably didn’t mean to say it that broadly.

Allowing girls to serve GENERALLY has not been a strengthening of the pastoral element of discipline. Rather, it’s been an understandable but misguided attempt, at the expense of discipline, to show girls the truth–that they are loved, wanted, needed and appreciated.

As you saidl in #332: “… the Catholic Church has been on the forefront of women’s rights, not the misogynistic organization it is represented as by feminists.”

 

[Prodigal_40s]

I know what you meant, p, but you probably didn’t mean to say it that broadly.

Allowing girls to serve GENERALLY has not been a strengthening of the pastoral element of discipline. Rather, it’s been an understandable but misguided attempt, at the expense of discipline, to show girls the truth–that they are loved, wanted, needed and appreciated.

As you saidl in #332: “… the Catholic Church has been on the forefront of women’s rights, not the misogynistic organization it is represented as by feminists.”

The problem I have with that is that it’s a deliberately used secular term that has all manner of connotations particularly when applied by the LCWR. The Church wants to save the souls of the Church Militant so that we can join the Church Triumphant and that’s EVERY soul.

That means following the path of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ. He had 12 apostles and…you get the gist of what I’m saying…

 

[KSU]

The problem I have with that is that it’s a deliberately used secular term that has all manner of connotations particularly when applied by the LCWR. The Church wants to save the souls of the Church Militant so that we can join the Church Triumphant and that’s EVERY soul.

That means following the path of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ. He had 12 apostles and…you get the gist of what I’m saying…

Very good point!

 

[Elizium23]

The San Francisco Mission

A simple altar boy policy at my parish, Star of the Sea Church, has unleashed a media firestorm. Hundreds of parishes in this country, and some entire dioceses, do not permit altar girls, so why the outrage? It is because I tried this in San Francisco, the city I love, the city that was founded in 1776 as a Catholic mission, the city whose churches flourished for a time, but the city that has once again become mission territory.

I explained to our school parents the reasons why we are declining the “innovation” of altar girls, pointing to the essential connection between the Church’s male priesthood and the acolytes who participate intimately in their high priestly office. This beautiful big parish church that we’ve been given to administer needs more members to sustain its irreplaceable mission of word and sacrament in the city. To revive a parish we look first to the sacred liturgy, and among other improvements we wish to strengthen the altar server, lector, and sacristan programs. We consider that developing an all-boys and father-son acolyte program will strengthen the community as it has in many parishes by bonding boys and focusing their efforts on the Mass as sacrifice offered by the priest. We are also training our lectors, and most of them are female, many of them girls from our school.

A number of parents remained unconvinced that an all-boys program was a good idea, and worked behind the scenes to undermine the authority of the Holy See, their archbishop, and their pastor. Somehow CBS got wind of their unhappiness. The night before the massive Walk for Life in San Francisco, complete with grim anchorpersons and shocked reporters live-on-the-scene, KPIX portrayed our parish as demeaning women in their lead story on the nightly news.

Television and newspapers around the country grabbed the story, and a storm of controversy ensued. Of the hundreds of emails and calls from across America, Ireland, England and Australia, almost every one from the San Francisco area was condemnatory, and almost every one from outside our area was supportive.

 

[pnewton]

I
Allowing girls to serve GENERALLY has not been a strengthening of the pastoral element of discipline. Rather, it’s been an understandable but misguided attempt, at the expense of discipline, to show girls the truth–that they are loved, wanted, needed and appreciated.

Except I agree with most of the priests that have expanded serving to girls and do not view it as misguided. I think it is a welcome change, at least in most American parishes. Yet, I understand that not all hold to this opinion, and respect those that hold differently.

 

[religioussoup]

Yeah, but what about the third point: Boys don’t want to catch cooties? I even saw it in a Superbowl commercial.

I asked my brother, who is 7, if he would like to be an alter server when he is of the age. Our sister, who is 13, is an alter server. He said that he would like to. I asked him if other girls were serving, would he still be an alter server? And he said yes, it didn’t matter if there were girls or boys.

News flash: he actually wants to be an alter server, when he is at age, because of our sister.

 

[KSU]

Originally Posted by KSU
Allowing girls to serve GENERALLY has not been a strengthening of the pastoral element of discipline. Rather, it’s been an understandable but misguided attempt, at the expense of discipline, to show girls the truth–that they are loved, wanted, needed and appreciated.

Except I agree with most of the priests that have expanded serving to girls and do not view it as misguided. I think it is a welcome change, at least in most American parishes. Yet, I understand that not all hold to this opinion, and respect those that hold differently.

I’m sorry to hear that you agree with priests who disagree with the Church on this issue; priests who seem to have no discipline when it comes to a choice between secular preferences and Vatican preferences regarding service at the alter.

It’s nice, though, that you respect the Vatican’s different opinion while you welcome the dissident practice.

 

[KSU]

I asked my brother, who is 7, if he would like to be an alter server when he is of the age. Our sister, who is 13, is an alter server. He said that he would like to. I asked him if other girls were serving, would he still be an alter server? And he said yes, it didn’t matter if there were girls or boys.

News flash: he actually wants to be an alter server, when he is at age, because of our sister.

So, he wouldn’t actually want to be an alter server if his sister stopped being one?

 

[otjm]

I’m sorry to hear that you agree with priests who disagree with the Church on this issue; priests who seem to have no discipline when it comes to a choice between secular preferences and Vatican preferences regarding service at the alter.

It’s nice, though, that you respect the Vatican’s different opinion while you welcome the dissident practice.

A practice is dissident when it is not allowed., Rome itself has allowed girls to serve; and girls serving has yet to be shown to exclude boys.

CARA reports that 80% of those ordained served; and since 20% didn’t, there is no showing that not serving will prevent one from becoming a priest - although there seems to be that thought lingering in the background.

There has been absolutely no showing of how many boys start serving and actually quit because of girls; only apocrypha, which appears to overstate the case.

And no one has spoken to reasons that boys might not serve (even with girls!), such as school, recreational and Classic soccer; school and non-school football; school and non-school baseball, to name three sports which tend to predominate; music lessons; less than weekly attendance at Mass; parental inability or unwillingness to add one more activity to already overcrowded schedules; and I suspect we can come up with more issues.

Priests who make secular choices?? So if a girl serves, and as part of her involvement directly in the Mass by serving at the altar, she discerns a possible vocation to the professed religious life, that is a secular matter?

It is too bad that CARA has not done a study of religious orders and candidates, postulants and novices as well as professed religious, to see how many of them served Mass. I’d lay dollars to donuts they would not have to search with a microscope and a search light to find them.

 

[MaryT777]

I’m to the point let all boys serve, even though girls are “allowed” to serve and see if there is an increase in vocations. Here as I noted before there were not enough boys to serve, the girls THUS were THEN allowed to serve as next choice.

That said many will grow up to be mothers who may help a son to a vocation.

JMO

Mary.

 

[Denise1957]

APriests who make secular choices?? So if a girl serves, and as part of her involvement directly in the Mass by serving at the altar, she discerns a possible vocation to the professed religious life, that is a secular matter?

I’m glad you brought up discernment of a possible vocation. Before girls were allowed to serve at the altar, what were the usual ways in which women discerned a vocation?

Also, if we were to take the view that girls are to discern a religious vocation by serving at the altar, shouldn’t boys, or young men, be able discern a vocation by volunteering at a women’s religious order? Why aren’t boys or young men clamoring to discern a vocation to the priesthood by being involved in a female religious order? Maybe they are, and I’ve just not heard of it.

 

[Prodigal_40s]

I didn’t realise the Catholic church was a democracy? Just for those who think otherwise, we follow Church teaching and when the Vatican encourages parishes to facilitate boys to serve on the altar…and they do…WE DO WHAT WE’RE TOLD…PERIOD!

 

[KSU]

A practice is dissident when it is not allowed., Rome itself has allowed girls to serve; and girls serving has yet to be shown to exclude boys.

CARA reports that 80% of those ordained served; and since 20% didn’t, there is no showing that not serving will prevent one from becoming a priest - although there seems to be that thought lingering in the background.

There has been absolutely no showing of how many boys start serving and actually quit because of girls; only apocrypha, which appears to overstate the case.

And no one has spoken to reasons that boys might not serve (even with girls!), such as school, recreational and Classic soccer; school and non-school football; school and non-school baseball, to name three sports which tend to predominate; music lessons; less than weekly attendance at Mass; parental inability or unwillingness to add one more activity to already overcrowded schedules; and I suspect we can come up with more issues.

Priests who make secular choices?? So if a girl serves, and as part of her involvement directly in the Mass by serving at the altar, she discerns a possible vocation to the professed religious life, that is a secular matter?

It is too bad that CARA has not done a study of religious orders and candidates, postulants and novices as well as professed religious, to see how many of them served Mass. I’d lay dollars to donuts they would not have to search with a microscope and a search light to find them.

The Church has instructed that if, on the basis of Canon 230 #2, for a specific local reason, it is decided to deviate from the norm and permit females to serve at the altar, the decision must be clearly explained to the faithful, and must be done with a view to the ordered development of liturgical life. It must also be clearly understood that the liturgical service is carried out merely as a temporary deputation.

The Church then adds that the “Holy See wishes to recall that it will always be very appropriate to follow the noble tradition of having boys serve at the altar. As is well known, this has led to a reassuring development of priestly vocations. Thus the obligation to support such groups of altar boys will always continue.”

ot, your reiterated contrary opinions and protestations are irrelevant because you don’t even pretend to address the above Church requirements. You said in #278, “Rome may say any number of things; the statistics speak for themselves.”

 

[otjm]

The Church has instructed that if, on the basis of Canon 230 #2, for a specific local reason, it is decided to deviate from the norm and permit females to serve at the altar, the decision must be clearly explained to the faithful, and must be done with a view to the ordered development of liturgical life. It must also be clearly understood that the liturgical service is carried out merely as a temporary deputation.

The Church then adds that the “Holy See wishes to recall that it will always be very appropriate to follow the noble tradition of having boys serve at the altar. As is well known, this has led to a reassuring development of priestly vocations. Thus the obligation to support such groups of altar boys will always continue.”

ot, your reiterated contrary opinions and protestations are irrelevant because you don’t even pretend to address the above Church requirements. You said in #278, “Rome may say any number of things; the statistics speak for themselves.”

The issues were addressed when the ruling came out; whether all bishops and all pastors addressed it I can’t say, but if you are implying that it wasn’t’ addressed, that is not correct.

My comments are not irrelevant; I was not addressing the Canon, but the comment that Rome says that there is a connection between serving and priesthood.

I have not said there is no connection. I have said that the connection is not as great as some seem to believe, and that the protestations in this thread that boys can’t serve is not true, nor is it true that boys are leaving serving in droves. That is simply an urban myth. Any boy who wants to serve is going to have a slot, and can do so. And should be encouraged to do so. But getting rid of girls is not going to get more boys to serve as there are a multitude of reasons that boys don’t serve.

When I was an altar boy in the 50’s and very early 60’s, there were boys in my Catholic grade school class who did not serve. It is still pretty much the same; some will, some won’t.

So you know the average age (as of 2009) of priests being ordained - 1982 - 2009?

It is 37.

 

[ProVobis]

So you know the average age (as of 2009) of priests being ordained - 1982 - 2009?

It is 37.

All this seems to say is that men aren’t exactly beating down doors to become priests. Or at least it’s not their top aspiration in life.

This coming from one who studied nuclear physics when he was still a teenager.

 

[KSU]

The issues were addressed when the ruling came out; whether all bishops and all pastors addressed it I can’t say, but if you are implying that it wasn’t’ addressed, that is not correct.

My comments are not irrelevant; I was not addressing the Canon…
.

You have been attempting ad nauseam to show that your statistics are more germane than the statement by the Vatican and every prelate who tells us that the fewer the number of male alter servers, the fewer the number of vocations to the priesthood. Please excuse me if I think that seems a bit pretentious.

The Church requires that in order to deviate from the prescribed norm of male servers, there must be a specific local reason to do so; the decision must be clearly explained to the faithful; it must be done with a view to the ordered development of liturgical life in the parish; and it must be clearly understood that it’s merely temporary. Those requirements are based in large part on the fact that the fewer the number of male alter servers, the fewer the number of vocations to the priesthood.

My friend, you can’t tell me how those requirements were met in your own parish, much less how they have been met even generally for the country. Your statistics are unimportant in any case because they wouldn’t change the Vatican’s position even if they meant something; something I must be missing.

Fr. Illo, who most certainly didn’t want the ugly storm of protest and corrupt media attention, couldn’t meet the requirements. Neither could my pastor. Nor could any other pastor who has shown his discipline and obedience to the Church by returning to the norm.

Thank God for courageous priests like that. The terrible “Spirit of VCII” is finally starting to go back where it came from.

 

[pnewton]

“Ad nauseum?” “dissent?”. Your charity is lacking. The CCL, 230-2, states:

§2. Lay persons can fulfill the function of lector in liturgical actions by temporary designation. All lay *persons *can also perform the functions of commentator or cantor, or other functions, according to the norm of law.

Gender is not an issue. Which is more in line with the Catholic Church? Holding an opinion allowed by the Catholic Church and in union with almost every single priest and bishop in the United States? Or, holding that such opinion, even though permitted, is dissent. There is no need for dissent, or descent into uncharitable rhetoric on the basis of disagreement, when, according to Canon Law, options exist.

The current prescribed norm is “persons”.

 

[pnewton]

From the USCCB:

1.Although institution into the ministry of acolyte is reserved to lay men, the diocesan bishop may permit the liturgical functions of the instituted acolyte to be carried out by altar servers, men and women, boys and girls. Such persons may carry out all the functions listed in no. 100 (with the exception of the distribution of Holy Communion) and nos. 187 - 190 and no. 193 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal.

The determination that women and girls may function as servers in the liturgy should be made by the bishop on the diocesan level so that there might be a uniform diocesan policy.

usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/frequently-asked-questions/guidelines-for-altar-servers.cfm

 

[Sirach2]

From the USCCB:

usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/frequently-asked-questions/guidelines-for-altar-servers.cfm

Good job!

 

[ProVobis]

“Ad nauseum?” “dissent?”. Your charity is lacking. The CCL, 230-2, states:

Gender is not an issue. Which is more in line with the Catholic Church?

pn, you’ve made a case for females being allowed in the sanctuary since all barriers (such as the communion rails) had been removed in the 60’s. That’s why I wasn’t surprised when altar girls were introduced. Perhaps it was the fact that they are liturgically garbed, tend to be younger, and more influenced by parents, that brought the altar girl issue to such controversy? What do you think?