What Leadership Roles Can Women Play During Mass or in the RC Church

[The_Curt_Jester]

Catholicism really is a boys club isn’t it:shrug:

Actually I know more devout Catholics who are women than men. Interesting thing, but it seems that women have a tendency to be more religious than men, who tend to be more easily distracted from it by pleasures.

At least that’s observance I have made from where I have been.

 

[kozlosap]

First, the EF is exempt from the GIRM, since the GIRM by definition only applies to the Missal of Paul VI.

Second, my reading is that you are conceptually right, in that, just as with questions like the pre-Communion fast, the issue of who can be an altar server is governed by Church law and norms rather than by the liturgical books themselves, and thus the permission to use the liturgical books of 1962 does not – again, conceptually – extend to such matters. The EF is not a time warp back to 1962.

That said, people who like female altar severs wouldn’t be caught dead at an EF Mass, and people who go to EF Masses would never put up with female altar servers. Accordingly, if memory serves, to keep the peace the PCED has ruled as a pragmatic matter that EF servers are to be male.

The Mass is the Mass. There are not two separate churches, one for the EF and one for the OF. As much as some “super EF, we are the most Holy” groups would like to have the OF be seen as a “lesser” celebration, it isn’t. Each Bishop has the right to decide what role women and men will play at both masses…

 

[GloriousOrder]

Agreeing or disagreeing with the politics of any of the women that have been elected over the last fifty years have nothing to do with the fact that yes, some human beings are born leaders, be they male or female. Would you discourage your daughter from running for office in high school or college because “women aren’t natural born leaders”? What if your adult daughter was a physician who wanted to run for the president of the AMA, would you vote for a man rather than for her because, by nature, she isn’t leader material? Would you convey (verbally and in person) these views (and don’t say they are Traditional, they are not), to the women seated on the Supreme Court of the United States?

I would discourage any daughter of mine from assuming a leadership position of any sort. They would be bought dresses, not jeans; they would be given dolls, not trucks, and they would be loved as human beings distinct from other human beings. I would indeed tell her not to run for such things (and not only because I’m not in favour of Democracy ), be they High School presidency or the premiership of a country. I certainly wouldn’t encourage her to become a physician, and I would always vote for a man over a woman if I absolutely had to vote. This is me, not absolute universal law… and the thread wanted opinions, so I gave mine.

TI find using the Bible to justify one’s own superiority over a whole group to be disingenuous, to say the least. You appear from your posts to be a thoughtful person who loves God and wants to serve - could you explain this one blind spot?

I’m glad to explain my opinions! If I am ever thoughtful or even wise, I must acknowledge that God is the source. Wisdom is simply the right use of the intellect: engaging it in the venerable practice of considering our ultimate end and goal, which is God. He gives us all the graces to move forward, and we ought to thank Him for enlightening our dark, dark minds.

Naturally I don’t think my belief here is a blind spot. Women are women and men are men. Our own biological cycles are even different, so there’s no reason to assume we are equally capable of doing everything. The female psychology is vastly removed from male psychology! Any married man or woman knows this.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

These posts testify that I do respect women.

Not really.

You say you respect women, but you also call women emotional, irrational, and illogical. Moreover, you imply that a female leader is by definition a bad one.

This does not sound like respect to me.

It sounds like barely veiled contempt, or at least condescension.

 

[TMC]

First, the EF is exempt from the GIRM, since the GIRM by definition only applies to the Missal of Paul VI.

Second, my reading is that you are conceptually right, in that, just as with questions like the pre-Communion fast, the issue of who can be an altar server is governed by Church law and norms rather than by the liturgical books themselves, and thus the permission to use the liturgical books of 1962 does not – again, conceptually – extend to such matters. The EF is not a time warp back to 1962.

That said, people who like female altar severs wouldn’t be caught dead at an EF Mass, and people who go to EF Masses would never put up with female altar servers. Accordingly, if memory serves, to keep the peace the PCED has ruled as a pragmatic matter that EF servers are to be male.

I think you may be right as to the GIRM, but I think the Canon is probably the actual authority. The Canon formerly restricted that function to men, but the new Canon does not. The GIRM may or may not apply to the EF ,but the EF cannot be exempt from the Canon.

I don’t think whether certain people would “put up” with female altar servers at the EF is the right question to ask. If the EF is to be merely a relic occasionally provided to appease old folks and nostalgics, then that may make sense. But if the EF is meant to be an alternate form of Mass for all Catholics, it seems to me it must conform to the norms of the Church and be available for all to attend.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I would discourage any daughter of mine from assuming a leadership position of any sort. They would be bought dresses, not jeans; they would be given dolls, not trucks, and they would be loved as human beings distinct from other human beings. I would indeed tell her not to run for such things (and not only because I’m not in favour of Democracy ), be they High School presidency or the premiership of a country. I certainly wouldn’t encourage her to become a physician, and I would always vote for a man over a woman if I absolutely had to vote. This is me, not absolute universal law… and the thread wanted opinions, so I gave mine.

So a man (any man) is automatically better than a woman (at least when it comes to leadership, healing, etc). If you truly believe that, then let us both hope that you never have daughters.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Naturally I don’t think my belief here is a blind spot. Women are women and men are men. Our own biological cycles are even different, so there’s no reason to assume we are equally capable of doing everything. The female psychology is vastly removed from male psychology! Any married man or woman knows this.

Of course not.

Generally speaking, the hardest flaws for us to see are our own.

 

[GloriousOrder]

No, not at all. In fact, if anything is striking about the preconciliar era, it is the immense faith and devotion of women. There are certainly elements of the liturgy that can resemble a boys’ club from time to time, but the liturgy itself is only a fragment of what it means to be Catholic.

This is at the heart of it. People are assuming that “leadership roles in the RC Church” extend merely to the holy Mass. I’m straining to think of places where women might work in the Church, other than as secretaries (which occupation women are eminently suited to).

You say you respect women, but you also call women emotional, irrational, and illogical. Moreover, you imply that a female leader is by definition a bad one.

This does not sound like respect to me.

It sounds like barely veiled contempt, or at least condescension.

Honestly, I’m not here to engage in the vice of human respect. We are to say what we think is true, stand for it, and try to explain it… but if it’s just going to become a “you’re against women!” fight, there’s no point. I hope you’ll just trust that I don’t hold women in contempt, though I condescend against them when they need to be condescended against.

Men can be stupid, violent, and narrowminded just as much as women can be emotional, irrational, and illogical. Why does my acknowledgment of these facts make me disrespectful? Observing and admitting a truth is eminently respectable, since it gives respect to the only one that matters, Who is Truth itself.

Your views would be welcome (because they so closely match the mainstream) in conservative Islam and Ultra-Orthodox Judaism as well.

I’m glad to hear that, because I think the better aspects of cultural Islam and Orthodox Judaism are needed in the West today. At least those people still believe genders are distinct in a meaningful way. Even people who are not Christians can believe things that are true!

So a man (any man) is automatically better than a woman (at least when it comes to leadership, healing, etc). If you truly believe that, then let us both hope that you never have daughters.

I never said any man would be better than any women in regards to ‘healing’ (whatever you mean by that). This whole spiel is related to the conversation about leadership. Women are eminently suited to be healers, but often of a spiritual sort (though they have to be careful, lest they fall into natural tendencies and exaggerate them).

Men are automatically better at leadership than are women, even if you only look at evolutionary theory. The masculine always dominates any culture (biological, civilised) that has become effeminate. As an atheist, you surely know that “the strongest survive”; since, as we know, leadership is required in matters of survival (every squad in battle needs a leader and every tribe or species needs strong ones to survive), and masculinity is better for survival (strength wins), so males should be leaders.

It is very tenuous as a metaphor, since evolution in the natural world is hardly related to Church liturgy (though debates in the latter can be as brutal as fights in the former)!

Of course not.

Generally speaking, the hardest flaws for us to see are our own.

You are correct! Thankfully it is very easy to enumerate the flaws of men, because we are so absolutely pathetic at doing our jobs that it becomes public and evident quickly. Our own nature keeps us humble!

 

[Phemie]

The Mass is the Mass. There are not two separate churches, one for the EF and one for the OF. As much as some “super EF, we are the most Holy” groups would like to have the OF be seen as a “lesser” celebration, it isn’t. Each Bishop has the right to decide what role women and men will play at both masses…

But the final call on altar servers belongs to the priest and I doubt that any priest who celebrates the EF will have female altar servers since that would fly in the face of the reason people want the EF Mass.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Honestly, I’m not here to engage in the vice of human respect. We are to say what we think is true, stand for it, and try to explain it… but if it’s just going to become a “you’re against women!” fight, there’s no point. I hope you’ll just trust that I don’t hold women in contempt, though I condescend against them when they need to be condescended against.

Ah, I understand.

You don’t think women are contemptible, merely pitiful.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I’m glad to hear that, because I think the better aspects of cultural Islam and Orthodox Judaism are needed in the West today. At least those people still believe genders are distinct in a meaningful way. Even people who are not Christians can believe things that are true!

Would one of those ‘better aspects’ be Sharia law?

 

[kozlosap]

I would discourage any daughter of mine from assuming a leadership position of any sort. They would be bought dresses, not jeans; they would be given dolls, not trucks, and they would be loved as human beings distinct from other human beings. I would indeed tell her not to run for such things (and not only because I’m not in favour of Democracy ), be they High School presidency or the premiership of a country. I certainly wouldn’t encourage her to become a physician, and I would always vote for a man over a woman if I absolutely had to vote. This is me, not absolute universal law… and the thread wanted opinions, so I gave mine.

I’m glad to explain my opinions! If I am ever thoughtful or even wise, I must acknowledge that God is the source. Wisdom is simply the right use of the intellect: engaging it in the venerable practice of considering our ultimate end and goal, which is God. He gives us all the graces to move forward, and we ought to thank Him for enlightening our dark, dark

Oh my! What would you do with a daughter with an IQ of 160 who decided that she wanted to be educated? Would you expect her to graduate from high school and then be a secretary until the “right” man came along to carry her away? Education is not the enemy of “the truth”, it is the enemy of intolerance and ignorance. What happened to you GO, that you are so in denial about living in the 21st century? If you went to the hospital and the best surgeon available to do your brain surgery was a woman, would you ask for a lesser skilled surgeon because “women aren’t supposed to be physicians” in your realm of experience? No matter how you tilt at the windmills that were change in the last one hundred years, things will not revert. We will not go back to a society where women and people of color were considered property and not worthy to vote. Women will not be told that they are not worthy of obtaining a higher education. Who do you talk with in everyday life? I can’t imagine you have any friends that are women. I can’t even imagine that your own mother holds these views. I almost feel like you are just baiting the rational thinkers on this forum and really don’t hold these extreme views. (BTW, how old are you?)

 

[GloriousOrder]

Ah, I understand.

You don’t think women are contemptible, merely pitiful.

Not at all! I said I condescend to women when they need to be condescended to. In matters of moving heavy objects, women should be condescended to because they are not the expert or superior in the matter. In matters of nurturing love and gentle child-rearing, women should be the ones condescending because they are the expert and superior in the matter by nature. We men are often too brutal with things, so we need the softness of women. These are ontological differences: universals, not nominal distinctions.

You have to look deep into a matter to get a real answer to a question like this. It’s true that I’ll never have daughters; my dream, in fact, is to become a priest so I may instruct other mens’ daughters, and thus corrupt a far greater number of children with those evil notions of traditional gender roles! Mwahahahahhaa!

Would one of those ‘better aspects’ be Sharia law?

No. Willful oppression and superstitious hatred lapped on any human beings is evil. We’re talking about societal opinions, not laws. Perception is not always judicial action, my friend!

What happened to you GO, that you are so in denial about living in the 21st century? If you went to the hospital and the best surgeon available to do your brain surgery was a woman, would you ask for a lesser skilled surgeon because “women aren’t supposed to be physicians” in your realm of experience? No matter how you tilt at the windmills that were change in the last one hundred years, things will not revert. We will not go back to a society where women and people of color were considered property and not worthy to vote. Women will not be told that they are not worthy of obtaining a higher education. Who do you talk with in everyday life? I can’t imagine you have any friends that are women. I can’t even imagine that your own mother holds these views. I almost feel like you are just baiting the rational thinkers on this forum and really don’t hold these extreme views.

I don’t believe in baiting… if you see a post by me, it’s my own opinion. You’re free to try to change it.

There is no denial of the disordered ideas of the 21st century here. I recognise them and fight against them. It is a very terrible mistake to ignore your enemies, but it’s even worse to just hate them outright. Bad ideas are still bad ideas, and ought to be dismantled. You’re taking so much more out of my posts than can be taken out of them. Just because I don’t think women should be liturgical experts, I’m suddenly saying we ought to own people as property! How ridiculous! God forbid it, as St. Paul would say. Simply because we live in the 21st century does not mean that universal absolute moral truth changes. C.S. Lewis called this attitude “chronological snobbery”, whereby we think we’re better just because we are further forward in time. Who cares whether it’s the 21st century or the 12th? Truth is truth.

Never mind who I befriend; in fact, never mind who anyone befriends. Let’s deal with issues and facts, not personalities. Stop considering me; consider the subject. So what if I’m a ‘sexist’? It’s either right or wrong to have women proclaiming the Word of God in Mass, altar-serving, singing, etc., and we have to find out which it is. By conversation, we will!

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I never said any man would be better than any women in regards to ‘healing’ (whatever you mean by that). This whole spiel is related to the conversation about leadership. Women are eminently suited to be healers, but often of a spiritual sort (though they have to be careful, lest they fall into natural tendencies and exaggerate them).

You said you would discourage any daughter you had from becoming a doctor.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I never said any man would be better than any women in regards to ‘healing’ (whatever you mean by that). This whole spiel is related to the conversation about leadership. Women are eminently suited to be healers, but often of a spiritual sort (though they have to be careful, lest they fall into natural tendencies and exaggerate them).

Men are automatically better at leadership than are women, even if you only look at evolutionary theory. The masculine always dominates any culture (biological, civilised) that has become effeminate. As an atheist, you surely know that “the strongest survive”; since, as we know, leadership is required in matters of survival (every squad in battle needs a leader and every tribe or species needs strong ones to survive), and masculinity is better for survival (strength wins), so males should be leaders.

Might makes right?

THAT is the sole basis of your non-religious argument

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You are correct! Thankfully it is very easy to enumerate the flaws of men, because we are so absolutely pathetic at doing our jobs that it becomes public and evident quickly. Our own nature keeps us humble!

You are not coming across as humble.
You seem very proud of your masculinity.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

We will not go back to a society where women and people of color were considered property and not worthy to vote.

Sorry for the off-topic again, but in the old days a vote was considered a family’s vote, not just the vote of the man. When a man and woman are united in matrimony, they become ONE, remember? Why not vote as one as well? The only reason needed for two votes is to allow them to offset each other, which is self-defeating.

 

[GloriousOrder]

You are not coming across as humble.
You seem very proud of your masculinity.

Do you think you could just edit one or two of your posts to contain new edits? It’s really confusing to have a new one every three or four minutes, and the moderators probably don’t like it.

My masculinity is something I have because God gave it to me. I’m thankful for it, but I’m thankful that we have the feminine nature to balance us. What’s so hard about this, that you refuse to believe it? My wording comes across as harsh because it’s so cold and technical, but you cannot say it’s all about me. I really want others to find out what is true, just as much as I’m in this thread to discover the truth. If someone can show me that the Mass becomes more reverent and the Church is better served by females running things, I’ll accede to the notion. The fact is that there has been a correlation between women getting more power in the Church, and the Church losing seminaries, parishes being merged, faithful falling away, and Catholics being raised with hardly any notion of the most basic prayers and virtues. If it’s “post hoc; ergo, propter hoc”, then please show us.

Kozlosap, I’m 22.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Not at all! I said I condescend to women when they need to be condescended to. In matters of moving heavy objects, women should be condescended to because they are not the expert or superior in the matter. In matters of nurturing love and gentle child-rearing, women should be the ones condescending because they are the expert and superior in the matter by nature. We men are often too brutal with things, so we need the softness of women. These are ontological differences: universals, not nominal distinctions.

You have to look deep into a matter to get a real answer to a question like this. It’s true that I’ll never have daughters; my dream, in fact, is to become a priest so I may instruct other mens’ daughters, and thus corrupt a far greater number of children with those evil notions of traditional gender roles! Mwahahahahhaa!

Well, I suppose one more bad priest at this point won’t make much difference:shrug:

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Sorry for the off-topic again, but in the old days a vote was considered a family’s vote, not just the vote of the man. When a man and woman are united in matrimony, they become ONE, remember? Why not vote as one as well? The only reason needed for two votes is to allow them to offset each other, which is self-defeating.

People are individuals.

What you are talking about is collectivism at best, and turning every family into a tiny absolute monarchy at worst.