What would happen if JPII did this?

[Crusader]

The church teaches:

That only men can recieve Holy Orders

*The church does not teach: *

That this point is open for discussion and can change at some time in the future.

The absence of a negative does not prove your point. The church does not expect us to be constantly speculating about what she does not publically teach but instead expects humble assent to what she does in fact teach.

God Bless

PS liturgical reform is not an adequate example when we are talking about form and matter of a Sacrament. Try to find examples where the church has ever changed the matter of a valid sacrament. I won’t be holding my breath while I wait.

You suggest that you are in a diaconate formation, yet it truly sounds like you are following your own ideas, and not what the Church actually teaches.

What sort of philosophical and theological training does your formation require prior to admission? Many people go to college for 4-6 years to really do nothing but learn how to think in a critical manner. Is that something that is tested as a prerequisite to admission the the formation program in your diocese?

It sorta blows me away that someone in a diaconate formation could have the views you express here. THEN AGAIN, depending on where your formation is taking place, this might actually be what you are being taught, although I sorta doubt that.

It would be very interesting to hear more about the content of your formation…

 

[DominvsVobiscvm]

NEITHER 1 nor 2 has been done.

#1 has been done. Ordinatio Sacerdatolis? [sp?]

I would think 90%+ of all altar servers who become priests or deacons are “ordinary lay males.” The balance are already seminarians or those in a diaconate formation…

I don’t understand what you’re saying here.

The point is, the Church has never required that only potential seminarians, or those eligible for seminaries, should be altar servers. This is what you seemd to say.

 

[Crusader]

#1 has been done. Ordinatio Sacerdatolis? [sp?]

I don’t understand what you’re saying here.

The point is, the Church has never required that only potential seminarians, or those eligible for seminaries, should be altar servers. This is what you seemd to say.

In the plainest terms possible:

I believe all altar server slots should be filled by those males who just might be possibly be discerning a call to the priesthood or permanent diaconate.

In the broadest terms that might be males from post first communion (the earliest age typically allowed for servers) to those up to perhaps 60-65 years of age? (I would go with the individual diocese’s regulations on maximum age for ordination.)

This group would certainly not include those males who have stated that they would never consider a call to the priesthood or permanent diaconate, or those males who for any reason are not ordainable…

 

[Crusader]

katherine2:

And many pastors are quite capable of doing the above and still able to find a role (“slots”, as you say) for others. That is the reason the Church leaves this to each pastor rather than some rigid universal rule inappropriate for a particular local community.

You seem to be missing the point. All altar server slots should go to males who might just be discerning a vocation to the priesthood or the permanent diaconate. All of them.

It’s simply impossible for all altar server slots to go to said males when some are being assigned to “others.”

 

[DominvsVobiscvm]

Crusader:

You really outa take a hike.

Alrar serving is not merely a “stepping stone” or “training ground” for future priests. In many ways, its a vocation in its own right, a grace from God. I know of no other precedent in the Church, historical or theological, for suggesting that we restrict serving positions the way that you do.

Your arrogance, post after post, really sickens me. It’s obvious to anyone who reads your psots that you haven’t the faitnest clue about anything authentically liturgical. Once in a while, you hit on a truth, but even then it seems it’s almost accidental!

I just hope the other posters on here have the good sense to dismiss you as much as I do.

 

[katherine2]

Crusader:

You seem to be missing the point. All altar server slots should go to males who might just be discerning a vocation to the priesthood or the permanent diaconate. All of them.

It’s simply impossible for all altar server slots to go to said males when some are being assigned to “others.”

You don’t seem good at math. If there are ten “slots” (this is your term; I find it rather odd) and six males who might be discerning a priestly vocation, then their are four “slots” remaining.

Back to my original point. Your attempt to force my parish to tell a lovely and faithful young man he must stop being allowed to serve because he has a handicap is the most mean spirited position I have ever heard. I feel confident i have nothing to fear but hot air from you, but if you ever showed up in my parish and tried to do this, I guarantee you that you would be hurting real bad from the wrath of one old lady. Just be careful starting your car after Mass.

 

[Deacon2006]

katherine2:

No. The Church teaches only men can recieve priestly ordination. Show me the teaching document on diaconial ordination. Even EWTN considers it a point of discussion.

In all charity Katherine I love EWTN but they are not the teaching arm of the church.

The only teaching documents ever released by the Vatican on this subject have all said that only men can be deacons. This is proof of my statement.

But let me be the first to say that if the church were to teach something different I would quickly assent.

So many think that just because a group of theologians or even a bishop make a claim about something, or if the pope ask for pastoral record of all the current academic beliefs on a subject, then it must mean that the matter is still open in the mind of the church. They like to base their thoughts on their personal agendas, innuendo and word games, as if the church expects us to be sophists to understand what it teaches.

The pope is so frustarted by this false understanding of the hierachy of truth that he and three congregations released the following statement specifically about women deacons.

"Our offices have received from several countries signs of courses that are being planned or underway, directly or indirectly aimed at the diaconal ordination of women. Thus are born hopes which are lacking a solid doctrinal foundation and which can generate pastoral disorientation.

Since [the Church] does not foresee such ordination, it is not licit to enact initiatives which, in some way, aim to prepare women candidates for diaconal ordination."
JP2, Cardinals Joseph Ratzinger, Jorge Arturo Medina Estévez and Dario Castrillon Hoyos.

The pope clearly wants everyone to stop promoting the idea that the church does not have a publicly taught position on this matter.

It is shocking to see the number of names I have been called here when I only humbly acknowledge what the church and Holy Father teaches. They throw invective around without proof or evidence; they attack good and faithful bishops, priest and scholars who run formation programs without obtaining the competence or wisdom to make such an judgement.

It is a real shame.

God Bless

 

[Crusader]

DominvsVobiscvm:

Crusader:

You really outa take a hike.

Alrar serving is not merely a “stepping stone” or “training ground” for future priests. In many ways, its a vocation in its own right, a grace from God. I know of no other precedent in the Church, historical or theological, for suggesting that we restrict serving positions the way that you do.

Your arrogance, post after post, really sickens me. It’s obvious to anyone who reads your psots that you haven’t the faitnest clue about anything authentically liturgical. Once in a while, you hit on a truth, but even then it seems it’s almost accidental!

I just hope the other posters on here have the good sense to dismiss you as much as I do.

Perhaps you should consider your own advice before offering it to others?

Kettle/pot/black.

 

[Crusader]

katherine2:

You don’t seem good at math. If there are ten “slots” (this is your term; I find it rather odd) and six males who might be discerning a priestly vocation, then their are four “slots” remaining.

Back to my original point. Your attempt to force my parish to tell a lovely and faithful young man he must stop being allowed to serve because he has a handicap is the most mean spirited position I have ever heard. I feel confident i have nothing to fear but hot air from you, but if you ever showed up in my parish and tried to do this, I guarantee you that you would be hurting real bad from the wrath of one old lady. Just be careful starting your car after Mass.

Why are there only six males who may be “possiblity discerning” a vocation as a priest or deacon in your example? You’re trying to set an artifical number of men and boys – when it’s the actual number of altar servers needed that should always be the limiting factor.

Have some open slots? Find some young men to fill them. Never know who might become a deacon or priest. If they are young boys there is no better place to foster a possible vocation.

Please do not twist what I actually said which is: *All *altar serving slots should go to those who might just actually be discerning a call to the priesthood or permanent diaconate.

 

[Deacon2006]

DominvsVobiscvm:

Saying it does not make it so, Fake-Deacon2006.

Since you have not been content to limit your insults to just me but have tried to impune the calling that the Church feels I have received I will make this my last post in regards to anything you might have to say here without a sincere apology.

Those who are following this string may or may not agree with my understanding of the facts but that is a small thing compared to the calumny you are waging against me.

Can you imagine the Holy Father setting up a Commission to examine whether or not abortion was sinful, or whether or not God was really a Trinity, or whether or not Hell existed?

Yes, only the ill-informed would not know that Paul VI set up a theological commission for pastoral guidance on reproductive technologies. He rejected the findings in the midst of Vatican II and solemnly taught Humane Vitae. I can’t imagine you are so ignorant of such an important part of the modern church history.

Show me where the Church has ever said thaqt the matter for sacred orders, for each and every one of them, was a man.

I have shown you a statement that was issued at Nicea. I will quote it again
"Canon XIX… With regard to the deaconesses who hold this position we remind [church leaders] that they possess no ordination, but are to be reckoned among the laity in every respect.”

This is not conclusive for many and compelling for others, but it should cause a humble and faithful person to pause before launching into a tirade of insults.

The Pope has set up a comittee to investigate this issue. It’s thus considered an open question by him, and by the CDF.

Once again I can see how those with a narrow understanding of the English language may think that but youare unduly inserting your own bias into the action.

JP2 and the CDF have stated that the church does not envision women’s ordination to the deaconate. That may mean tomorrow or that may mean forever. Your speculation on the duration of this point is betrays your errors while I on the other hand simply accept it as a fact of my life as it is written without modification or equivocation.

I realise that big issues are sometimes hard for people to grasp so why don’t you read up on the issue. I suggest the book called “Deaconesses a Historical Study” by Aime Georges Martimort, Igantius Press

God Bless

 

[DominvsVobiscvm]

 

[katherine2]

Crusader:

Why are there only six males who may be “possiblity discerning” a vocation as a priest or deacon in your example? You’re trying to set an artifical number of men and boys – when it’s the actual number of altar servers needed that should always be the limiting factor.

Have some open slots? Find some young men to fill them. Never know who might become a deacon or priest. If they are young boys there is no better place to foster a possible vocation.

Please do not twist what I actually said which is: *All *altar serving slots should go to those who might just actually be discerning a call to the priesthood or permanent diaconate.

A sensible person can understand that at a certain point the number of persons discerning a vocation is exhausted. It is simply common sense that offering every person discerning a priestly vocation an opportunity to serve does not preclude other faithful people from doing the same. Heck, I have heard of parishes that even with a open appeal can’t find sufficient enough servers. If your parish is different, fine. All you have proven is this is a matter for each parish to handle, not some restrictive universal ruling.

 

[Crusader]

katherine2:

A sensible person can understand that at a certain point the number of persons discerning a vocation is exhausted. It is simply common sense that offering every person discerning a priestly vocation an opportunity to serve does not preclude other faithful people from doing the same. Heck, I have heard of parishes that even with a open appeal can’t find sufficient enough servers. If your parish is different, fine. All you have proven is this is a matter for each parish to handle, not some restrictive universal ruling.

You are incorrect.

There are a limited number of altar server slots in any parish. If enough effort is put into recruiting boys and men to fill these slots who might just happen to be discerning a vocation, there will be no open slots.

Make all the excuses you want, but if a parish was dead serious about supporting priestly vocations, it would most certainly limit serving at the altar to those who just might become priests or deacons.

 

[katherine2]

Crusader:

You are incorrect.

Hardly. I can name parishes where even with what imagine your twisted criteria, they still come up lacking. It is a matter for each parish to discern.