What Does the Pope Say About Female Servers?

[weepixie71]

Pope Benedict XIV explicitly condemned females serving the priest at the altar with the following words:

"Pope Gelasius in his ninth letter (chap. 26) to the bishops of Lucania condemned the evil practice which had been introduced of women serving the priest at the celebration of Mass. Since this abuse had spread to the Greeks, Innocent IV strictly forbade it in his letter to the bishop of Tusculum: "Women should not dare to serve at the altar; they should be altogether refused this ministry." We too have forbidden this practice in the same words in Our oft-repeated constitution Etsi Pastoralis, sect. 6, no. 21."[2]

A female person may not minister. An exception is permitted only when no male person is available and if a just cause is present. The female person may not, however, approach the altar under any circumstances, and may only respond from afar’. (Canon 813/2).

1980 Pope John Paul II stipulated in an instruction entitled ‘The Inestimable Gift’ that ‘women are not permitted the functions of an altar server’.

The decision came in the form of a circular letter[7] from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to presidents of episcopal conferences on 15 March 1994, which announced a 30 June 1992 authentic interpretation (confirmed on 11 July 1992 by Pope John Paul II) from the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. This authentic interpretation said that canon 230 §2 states that service at the altar is one of the liturgical functions that can be performed by both lay men and women. The circular letter, written by the cardinal-prefect of the Congregation, also clarified that canon 230 §2 has a permissive and not a preceptive character, that is, it allows, but does not require, the use of female altar servers. Thus it was for each diocesan bishop to decide whether to allow them in his diocese.

so what in your opinion is the right thing to do?

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Since, from the beginning, the Church has taught that where the bishop is there is the Church we should follow the lead of the bishop. After all, he is a successor to the apostles and is charged by the Holy Father with the administration of the local Church. Since the appropriate congregation, with the approval of the Holy Father, has said that women may serve as altar servers if the bishop permits it, we should follow the guidance of the bishop.

Deacon Ed

 

[Dauphin]

Since, from the beginning, the Church has taught that where the bishop is there is the Church we should follow the lead of the bishop. After all, he is a successor to the apostles and is charged by the Holy Father with the administration of the local Church. Since the appropriate congregation, with the approval of the Holy Father, has said that women may serve as altar servers if the bishop permits it, we should follow the guidance of the bishop.

Deacon Ed

How far does this loyalty to the Bishop extend?

Did not Pope Innocent III say “No one may depart from the universal customs of the Church.”?

Would we be required to follow our local ordinary off a cliff?

 

[Deacon_Ed]

How far does this loyalty to the Bishop extend?

As far as the Church tells us it does. As long as the bishop is conforming to the teachings of the Church we are obliged to follow him.

Did not Pope Innocent III say “No one may depart from the universal customs of the Church.”?

Innocent was referring, of course, not to discipline but to doctrine and dogma. Since the pope is responsible for legislation, i.e., discipline, and since he promulgated to code of canon law and approved the action of the CDW permitting female altar servers we are not departing from the custom of the Church which is to humbly submit to the will of the Holy Father.

Would we be required to follow our local ordinary off a cliff?

Depends on what he leading you to, doesn’t it?

Deacon Ed

 

[Corki]

How far does this loyalty to the Bishop extend?

Did not Pope Innocent III say “No one may depart from the universal customs of the Church.”?

Would we be required to follow our local ordinary off a cliff?

Fortunately, this isn’t an issue the ordinary layperson has to face. Any priest can choose to have only male servers at Masses he celebrates. He can only chose to add females to the roster if the Bishop has already given permission.

As a woman, I would not accept a request that I serve at the altar nor would I allow my daughters to serve. But if there are women or girls serving at Mass, it is mildly annoying but not a real problem for me. The whole obediance issue just doesn’t exist at this level for Mass attendees as it does for Bishops.

 

[weepixie71]

The Lord Jesus Christ warned His followers, "Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves (Matt. 7:15).
The warning was important because Jesus later said to them: “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; therefore be shrewd as serpents, and innocent as doves” (Matt. 10:16).
The apostle Paul, with a deeply troubled spirit and in tears, penned a similar warning: “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

Several times in the Bible we are warned to not to be passive sheep.

I was taught that female servers would never happen when I was a young girl because it was the first step to priesthood. But I have been told time and time again that priests and nuns are telling me wrong. Popes throughout history told us that it would be wrong to have female servers. Now all of those pope’s were wrong?
Since pope’s throughout history would be wrong on this issue are they now going to be wrong about female priests if Vat II says so?
Where do we as responsible members of the Catholic church say our pope’s from the past could not have been wrong on so many issues?

 

[Deacon_Ed]

I was taught that female servers would never happen when I was a young girl because it was the first step to priesthood.

Prior to the revisions following the Second Vatican Council by Pope Paul VI the cursus honorum (the path to ordination) began with doorkeepers/porters, lectors, acolytes, exorcists, sub-deacons, deacons and priests. The role filled by altar servers since about the 18th century has been part of what acolytes filled. It was not a formal step to the priesthood but, rather, and introduction to the role of service at the altar which might lead to the priesthood. Surveys in the 1930s show that some 60% of priesthood candidates had started as altar servers. By the 1960s that number was down to 20%. There are a number of theories that address the reasons for this decline, but no one is sure of the full reasons behind it.

But I have been told time and time again that priests and nuns are telling me wrong. Popes throughout history told us that it would be wrong to have female servers. Now all of those pope’s were wrong?

No, they expressed a cultural norm that was present at that time. In fact, the demands of culture were incorporated in the 1917 code of canon law. When the code was revised the restrictions about non-ordained service at the altar were removed.

Clearly Holy Orders remains limited to men, and that is not changable. However, we must always be careful to distinguish between disciplines which are changable and doctrines/dogmas which, while subject to reformulation to make them clearer in a given place and time, may not be changed.

Since pope’s throughout history would be wrong on this issue are they now going to be wrong about female priests if Vat II says so?

Vatican II never addressed the issue of female priests so you are making quite a leap here. Pope John Paul II has said that ordination to the priesthood is reserved to men and the Church does not have the authority to change that.

Where do we as responsible members of the Catholic church say our pope’s from the past could not have been wrong on so many issues?

We don’t – the Church (the Magisterium which is the teaching authority of the Church) addresses issues as the arise and provides guidance for us. We, as “responsible members of the Church” must submit to those teachings (or, at least, that’s what the FIRST Vatican Council teaches).

What we cannot do is express our personal opinions or desires as the teachings of the Church. We must take what the Church teaches the way She teaches it.

Deacon Ed

 

[savienu]

I served as an altar girl when I was 7- turns out, that was illicit, as the practice wasn’t allowed until 1995, I believe. Had I known then what I know now, I never would have done it.

I don’t agree with the decision to have women at the altar, but I know that it is allowed right now, at least. However, I wonder if the Pope has ever had women servers?

This all happened after Vat II during the “feminist” and “women’s rights” movements. It really does make you pause and wonder why. The American bishops have done a lot of things that I think have been poorly thought out. Since this is discipline, and not doctrine and dogma, we are allowed to disagree, right? This is not under the charism of protection from error, so the Bishops could be wrong about this.

 

[Dauphin]

No, they expressed a cultural norm that was present at that time. In fact, the demands of culture were incorporated in the 1917 code of canon law. When the code was revised the restrictions about non-ordained service at the altar were removed.

It seems to me that it’s the introduction of altar girls which is really “culturally conditioned”. Our feminist culture demanded that the Church do this, and it crumbled. It gave in to the world.

Opponents of altar girls are opposing the modern culture and the spirit of the world. Their opposition isn’t based on cultural demands, but a conviction that altar girls are being used as a backdoor route to female “ordination”. The more women crowding the sanctuary, the less practical difference female ordination makes.

Permitting the use of altar girls was a gravely imprudent decision. The Church will come to regret it, but it will be too late by the time it’s reversed. The seeds of dissent have been firmly sewn.

 

[savienu]

It seems to me that it’s the introduction of altar girls which is really “culturally conditioned”. Our feminist culture demanded that the Church do this, and it crumbled. It gave in to the world.

Opponents of altar girls are opposing the modern culture and the spirit of the world. Their opposition isn’t based on cultural demands, but a conviction that altar girls are being used as a backdoor route to female “ordination”. The more women crowding the sanctuary, the less practical difference female ordination makes.

Permitting the use of altar girls was a gravely imprudent decision. The Church will come to regret it, but it will be too late by the time it’s reversed. The seeds of dissent have been firmly sewn.

I agree. The more women taking over traditionally male roles, the less men will do them. I see it in my parish, and in almost every parish I visit. There are hardly any laymen taking any leadership roles. It is disgraceful. Most people don’t understand now why women can’t be priests- and who can blame them, with women storming the altar?

I for one am happy to be a woman of God, and find value in the roles I can take in the Church- I don’t need to usurp the roles that belong to the men to do it.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

It seems to me that it’s the introduction of altar girls which is really “culturally conditioned”. Our feminist culture demanded that the Church do this, and it crumbled. It gave in to the world.

Hmmm…this is an interesting claim, but I think it’s one where one’s own thinking is revealed rather than actual fact. The underlying permission for female altar servers is found in the change to the code of canon law. While the 1917 code specifically prohibited females from serving at the altar, this is not found in the current canon. This is a case where the liturgical law was based upon canon law and, as a consequence, Rome determined that there was nothing to prohibit the use of female altar servers. However, in deference to possible cultural settings Rome left it up to the individual bishop to decide if this option would be available in his diocese.

Opponents of altar girls are opposing the modern culture and the spirit of the world. Their opposition isn’t based on cultural demands, but a conviction that altar girls are being used as a backdoor route to female “ordination”. The more women crowding the sanctuary, the less practical difference female ordination makes.

I certainly can’t disagree with those who would oppose the use of female altar servers on the grounds of opposition to some perceived cultural setting in which female altar servers were objectionable in and of themselves. However, suggesting that there is no “p0ractical difference” between female altar servers and the ordained is certainly stretching credulity. While the “willing suspension of disbelief” is a requiste in the fiction, it doesn’t apply to liturgical functions or theology in general.

Permitting the use of altar girls was a gravely imprudent decision. The Church will come to regret it, but it will be too late by the time it’s reversed. The seeds of dissent have been firmly sewn.

You are certainly entitled to hold this position. I disagree with it, but you are within your rights as a Catholic to hold and espouse it.

Deacon Ed

 

[Dauphin]

Hmmm…this is an interesting claim, but I think it’s one where one’s own thinking is revealed rather than actual fact. The underlying permission for female altar servers is found in the change to the code of canon law.

I’m certain that feminism existed before 1983. This omission in the Code was no doubt designed to open the way for altar girls, in line with the Church’s surrender to modern culture. It is a culturally conditioned corruption of the Church’s tradition.

I certainly can’t disagree with those who would oppose the use of female altar servers on the grounds of opposition to some perceived cultural setting in which female altar servers were objectionable in and of themselves. However, suggesting that there is no “p0ractical difference” between female altar servers and the ordained is certainly stretching credulity. While the “willing suspension of disbelief” is a requiste in the fiction, it doesn’t apply to liturgical functions or theology in general.

That’s not what I’m saying at all. There is obviously a very real difference between female altar servers and female priests.

I’m saying that having women serve in a capacity traditionally reserved for men and which has become associated with vocations to the priesthood is one step in a surreptitious attempt to achieve the “ordination” of women.

 

[PJM]

Pope Benedict XIV explicitly condemned females serving the priest at the altar with the following words:

"Pope Gelasius in his ninth letter (chap. 26) to the bishops of Lucania condemned the evil practice which had been introduced of women serving the priest at the celebration of Mass. Since this abuse had spread to the Greeks, Innocent IV strictly forbade it in his letter to the bishop of Tusculum: "Women should not dare to serve at the altar; they should be altogether refused this ministry." We too have forbidden this practice in the same words in Our oft-repeated constitution Etsi Pastoralis, sect. 6, no. 21."[2]

A female person may not minister. An exception is permitted only when no male person is available and if a just cause is present. The female person may not, however, approach the altar under any circumstances, and may only respond from afar’. (Canon 813/2).

1980 Pope John Paul II stipulated in an instruction entitled ‘The Inestimable Gift’ that ‘women are not permitted the functions of an altar server’.

The decision came in the form of a circular letter[7] from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to presidents of episcopal conferences on 15 March 1994, which announced a 30 June 1992 authentic interpretation (confirmed on 11 July 1992 by Pope John Paul II) from the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. This authentic interpretation said that canon 230 §2 states that service at the altar is one of the liturgical functions that can be performed by both lay men and women. The circular letter, written by the cardinal-prefect of the Congregation, also clarified that canon 230 §2 has a permissive and not a preceptive character, that is, it allows, but does not require, the use of female altar servers. Thus it was for each diocesan bishop to decide whether to allow them in his diocese.

so what in your opinion is the right thing to do?

Yes… no priest, NO Jesus!

The Church Fathers of Vatican II, supported the position, as does the current, valid, and licit Code of Canon Law, under ordianry, that is common ciecumstances:thumbsup:

 

[Deacon_Ed]

I’m certain that feminism existed before 1983. This omission in the Code was no doubt designed to open the way for altar girls, in line with the Church’s surrender to modern culture. It is a culturally conditioned corruption of the Church’s tradition.

Here you are ascribing motive without evidence. Hardly worth addressing…

That’s not what I’m saying at all. There is obviously a very real difference between female altar servers and female priests.

I’m saying that having women serve in a capacity traditionally reserved for men and which has become associated with vocations to the priesthood is one step in a surreptitious attempt to achieve the “ordination” of women.

Again, this claim has been made but never supported by evidence that it has merit. I have seen lots of female altar servers. I’ve never seen a female priest (at least, not in the Catholic Church). Since the Church has never ordained a woman to the priesthood and since Pope John Paul II has made it clear that the Church doesn’t have the authority to ordain a woman to the priesthood I don’t understand why this argument persists. Yet, if you wish to make the argument, go ahead. It simply strikes me as being as meaningless as declaring that God can make a rock so big He cannot lift it (or, if He can’t, He isn’t God).

Deacon Ed

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Because John Paul II was a real pope who promulgated a real code of canon law that contains the implicit permission for female altar servers, I have to accept that there is nothing inherently evil or impossible about females serving at the altar. The Church cannot bind an evil discipline upon the faithful.

But then we come to the real question: what is the right thing to do? Here the only right thing I can see is to follow the bimillenial discipline of the Church. If the Holy See required (or allowed bishops to require) female altar servers, I would have to obey, but since it is only a permissive norm there is no way that I, in could conscience, think I could allow something routinely condemned through the course of our history until 1994. The modern change is born of misguided feminist power politics and ill-conceived liturgiology, neither of which is sufficient reason to overthrow bimillenial tradition.

 

[Dauphin]

Here you are ascribing motive without evidence. Hardly worth addressing…

Women serving the altar just happened by accident, did it? There was no ideological motivation?

I’m not saying that the Vatican desired it, so much as they crumbled under pressure from modern society.

Again, this claim has been made but never supported by evidence that it has merit. I have seen lots of female altar servers. I’ve never seen a female priest (at least, not in the Catholic Church). Since the Church has never ordained a woman to the priesthood and since Pope John Paul II has made it clear that the Church doesn’t have the authority to ordain a woman to the priesthood I don’t understand why this argument persists. Yet, if you wish to make the argument, go ahead. It simply strikes me as being as meaningless as declaring that God can make a rock so big He cannot lift it (or, if He can’t, He isn’t God).

Deacon Ed

Obviously, women cannot be ordained to the priesthood. They could go through the ceremony of ordination, but nothing would happen.

This doesn’t mean that people won’t try, and that women won’t make an attempt to pass themselves off as priests. This is already happening; valid Catholic Bishops have attempted to ordain women.

 

[weepixie71]

Prior to the revisions following the Second Vatican Council by Pope Paul VI the cursus honorum (the path to ordination) began with doorkeepers/porters, lectors, acolytes, exorcists, sub-deacons, deacons and priests. The role filled by altar servers since about the 18th century has been part of what acolytes filled. It was not a formal step to the priesthood but, rather, and introduction to the role of service at the altar which might lead to the priesthood. Surveys in the 1930s show that some 60% of priesthood candidates had started as altar servers. By the 1960s that number was down to 20%. There are a number of theories that address the reasons for this decline, but no one is sure of the full reasons behind it.

No, they expressed a cultural norm that was present at that time. In fact, the demands of culture were incorporated in the 1917 code of canon law. When the code was revised the restrictions about non-ordained service at the altar were removed.

Clearly Holy Orders remains limited to men, and that is not changable. However, we must always be careful to distinguish between disciplines which are changable and doctrines/dogmas which, while subject to reformulation to make them clearer in a given place and time, may not be changed.

Vatican II never addressed the issue of female priests so you are making quite a leap here. Pope John Paul II has said that ordination to the priesthood is reserved to men and the Church does not have the authority to change that.

We don’t – the Church (the Magisterium which is the teaching authority of the Church) addresses issues as the arise and provides guidance for us. We, as “responsible members of the Church” must submit to those teachings (or, at least, that’s what the FIRST Vatican Council teaches).

What we cannot do is express our personal opinions or desires as the teachings of the Church. We must take what the Church teaches the way She teaches it.

Deacon Ed/QUOTE

like i said i was told when i was a young girl that NEVER would a female be a server. i repeat NEVER. more than once. drilled into our heads what a impossibility this would be. liberal catholics pushed this issue and the church caved once again to what would be the more popular issue.
i am told now that women will never be priests. it would be an impossibility. lets see how many excuses have i heard from the females in parishes all over. like you i travel too.
if there are not enough men to become priests then they will have to make women priests.
i see no reason why women can be priests. in these times men and women are equal.
oh its just a matter of time before they let women be priests. the Catholic church already has the reputation of being chauvinistic pigs. and we know that they cave every time to the pressures eventually. i mean come one we accomplished all the other male roles. what is to stop us now.
so i hope you understand now, that it is hard to take magisterium seriously when the say there will never be female priests. to be honest conservative Catholics joke about it all the time.

 

[weepixie71]

i want to clarify when i said conservatives joke about it all the time. it is not all conservatives but many that i know and it isnt the kind of joking where it is at all humorous. it is more of a frustrated what else can we do but laugh and pray for a holy pope… its that or shake our fists and be furious with what vatican II is doing to our catholic traditions. just because they are not messing with dogma doesnt mean it is not serious and cant do serious damage to what takes place in the history of our church.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Women serving the altar just happened by accident, did it? There was no ideological motivation?

I’m not saying that the Vatican desired it, so much as they crumbled under pressure from modern society.

Again, you are ascribing motive where none is evident. How about the Church did not see a need to retain a cultural practice as a canonical regulation? Given that the Eastern Churches do not permit women to serve (except in monasteries where there are only nuns) and that relations with the Orthodox are important to Rome, this may become a moot issue in the next 10 years. However, for now, Rome has spoken, regardless of the reason, and kvetching about, while as much fun as jumping to contusions, certainly isn’t useful.

Obviously, women cannot be ordained to the priesthood. They could go through the ceremony of ordination, but nothing would happen.

This doesn’t mean that people won’t try, and that women won’t make an attempt to pass themselves off as priests. This is already happening; valid Catholic Bishops have attempted to ordain women.

Yes, I know it has happened. And every woman that has gone through this has been excommunicated. Whether or not the bishop(s) who do this are known to Rome, they too have been excommunicated. But nothing happens. They are not ordained. The Church has made it very clear that She does not have the authority to ordain women. This is a dogmatic issue and the Church never reverses dogmatic teaching (as opposed to discipline).

Deacon Ed

 

[Deacon_Ed]

like i said i was told when i was a young girl that NEVER would a female be a server. i repeat NEVER. more than once. drilled into our heads what a impossibility this would be. liberal catholics pushed this issue and the church caved once again to what would be the more popular issue.

There is no evidence that the Church “caved” to anything.

i am told now that women will never be priests. it would be an impossibility. lets see how many excuses have i heard from the females in parishes all over. like you i travel too.

But you also claim you never go to the “novus ordo” Mass – so you are clearly in no position to comment on what takes place there.

if there are not enough men to become priests then they will have to make women priests.

No, the Church does not have the authority to ordain women.

i see no reason why women can be priests. in these times men and women are equal.

Equal does not mean the same. Women cannot be fathers and men cannot be mothers. Women cannot be priests.

oh its just a matter of time before they let women be priests.

No, it’s not.

I tire of this discussion since it goes nowhere. Enjoy your life.

Deacon Ed