Will "Altar Girls" lead to Women Priests?

[ConstantineTG]

Is it possible to dissent from an optional discipline?

Beats me. Apparently allowing altar girls were supposed to calm dissenters. So there were already dissenters before who want altar girls. Thats the claim.

I think more people are in favor of altar girls, but aren’t going to argue for the status quo (L&S and News forums were more representative than the infamous Traditional forum.

I don’t know about being overly in favor. I think most people are just defending the fact that the Church allows for it and don’t mind having altar girls. I for one am not in favor, but I recognize the need for it in certain situations and since the Church allows for it, I accept it. I’m not going to create imaginary enemies just to justify an anti- stance.

I do recognize that there are feminists out there that push for these kinds of stuff but I believe they are in the very small minority. I don’t believe there are a lot of them because I never come across them so why are they trying so hard to avoid me?

The more vociferous dissenters (aka a feminist who writes for L’Ossovertore Romano) are the reason why we’ve had a half-dozen of these threads in two days.

In three forums. Don’t forget the three forums (Trad, L&S, Catholic News). Maybe we should create one in Apologetics?

 

[DOShea]

I’m sorry, but your question makes no sense at all? Do you realize there is such thing as a “Permanent Deacon” and a “Transitional Deacon”?

I realize the difference, but they don’t matter for the example I used in the discussion. I was merely trying to refute the assertion that anyone who serves at the altar will automatically want to be ordained a priest. The argument set forth in this topic was that it was wrong for girls to be altar servers because they will then want to become priests, and since they can’t, it would lead to something… frustration, leaving the Church, whatever.

My point was challenging the assumption that anyone who serves at the altar will want to be a priest. I used Deacons for example. They serve, and they all don’t want to be priests. Some of them cannot even if they did want to.

So when you lay the two side by side, I think it clearly shows (disputes) the notion that because someone serves at the altar, it will make them want to be a priest. If it does not dispute it, then it begs the question why anyone would not want that situation for a girl because of the problems it supposedly causes, but have no problem with it for men because of the problems it supposedly causes.

I personally don’t believe there is a problem caused by either group, but some do. To those I am asking why is one a problem, the other not a problem.

 

[Lux_Ad_Orientum]

Misogynistic is a label you put on us to make yourself feel better…just like calling someone a racist when they state the fact that the majority of crimes committed in this country are committed by black people…despite that it is the truth…and to answer your last statement, I guess the Catholic Church was a Cafeteria prior to 1962, since the Rubrics explicity denied any woman from serving in any capacity on or around the Altar. So what is it? By holding fast to Tradition as we are instructed to do by St. Paul against an abuse that is not a doctrine of The Church make us Cafeteria Catholics? I think not.

Yes!!! There are still a small handfull of Traditional Roman Catholics left who have read our Bible and know that God created MAN FIRST and then created the female SECOND to service him. FEMALE DOES NOT RUN THE CHURCH as Saint Paul said.

 

[CDNowak]

My point was challenging the assumption that anyone who serves at the altar will want to be a priest. I used Deacons for example. They serve, and they all don’t want to be priests. Some of them cannot even if they did want to.

Two reasons why the comparison fails: 1) The diaconate is a separate vocation in the Church that has existed since the beginning. 2) It is possible, (given a very unlikely change in discipline) for any deacon to be ordained a priest. It is impossible for a woman to be ordained.

 

[Lux_Ad_Orientum]

Just like we are dissenters because we want wider use of Latin in the OF, Communion on the tongue, Altar Rails, Statues, etc…we are such horrible Catholics.

You and me and a few faithful bishops will be the only Catholics left when the rest of the people who claimed to the Church has aboted and contracepted themself to Hell. When you throw out all of the paths to Sanctification that the saints gave us and bring in unsanctified things like Women you knoe what you will get.

 

[DWC_RC]

No, and that’s why allowing them is cruel.

Women have no place on the altar, lectoring, or as a cantor. IMHO. Women need to look to the Blessed Mother, not Oprah.

 

[Bluegoat]

I realize the difference, but they don’t matter for the example I used in the discussion. I was merely trying to refute the assertion that anyone who serves at the altar will automatically want to be ordained a priest. The argument set forth in this topic was that it was wrong for girls to be altar servers because they will then want to become priests, and since they can’t, it would lead to something… frustration, leaving the Church, whatever.

My point was challenging the assumption that anyone who serves at the altar will want to be a priest. I used Deacons for example. They serve, and they all don’t want to be priests. Some of them cannot even if they did want to.

So when you lay the two side by side, I think it clearly shows (disputes) the notion that because someone serves at the altar, it will make them want to be a priest. If it does not dispute it, then it begs the question why anyone would not want that situation for a girl because of the problems it supposedly causes, but have no problem with it for men because of the problems it supposedly causes.

I personally don’t believe there is a problem caused by either group, but some do. To those I am asking why is one a problem, the other not a problem.

To add to that, by this logic any boy or man who would not be eligible for the priesthood should not be allowed to serve. So, a boy who had a developmental disability but was able to act as a server, or perhaps even a celibate gay man. But no one seems to think that is the case.

 

[sulkow82]

Full disclosure: I’m for all-male altar boys, and am thankful my parish permits only boys. I think it sends a signal about the nature of altar service, and I think that many of the valid lay ministries at the altar are being abused to try and open the window for women’s ordination (something which is both impossible, and a reprehensible goal). But that’s a personal preference.

I would say fair enough to this.

The Church has spoken on this one – it’s not forbidden, or ontologically impossible, for women to serve the altar. That means both sides of this debate are well within the bounds of orthodoxy - let’s not demonize one side or the other, or treat them as “less Catholic” than use for doing something the Church says is permissible.

Thanks for this comment. I personally have no problem with female altar servers. I would have a SERIOUS problem with female Deacons or Priests. I just wonder what percentage of female altar servers go on to enter a Convent. I also wonder if this is a greater percentage than the general public of Catholics.

 

[DOShea]

Two reasons why the comparison fails: 1) The diaconate is a separate vocation in the Church that has existed since the beginning. 2) It is possible, (given a very unlikely change in discipline) for any deacon to be ordained a priest. It is impossible for a woman to be ordained.

You totally missed the point I was making with the comparison. It has nothing to do with Deacons being around forever or that some can be ordained. That would fall under why you might prefer no girls on the altar, but it has nothing to do with the comparison. Let’s try it in a syllogism and you can refute or support the premises.

P1. Girls will automatically want to be ordained just because they serve at the altar.
P2. Because they won’t be ordained, P1 will lead to some dysfunction
C. It’s wrong for girls to serve.
Compared to:

P1. Deacons will automatically want to be ordained just because they serve at the altar.
P2. Because some won’t be ordained, P1 will lead to some dysfunction
C. It’s wrong for Deacons to serve.

I do not think it is wrong for Deacons to serve; all I am trying to illustrate is two things:

1. The first premise in each is not based on facts; it’s wishful thinking maybe, but not true. An untrue premise means a false conclusion, therefore C1 and C2 are both false.
2. I don’t believe P2 is a true statement. I know many Deacons who are fine with their role and there is no dysfunction stemming from not being a priest, whether they want to or not, whether they can discern if they are called or not. Point is, NOT being ordained a priest does not cause them dysfunction. If it does NOT cause them any dysfunction, then why believe it will for women without any data to back it up? Why believe P2?

I only used Deacons as an example to show the flaws in the logic. I could make the same case with every male who was an altar server and did not become a priest. The logic fails in either case.

 

[archangel04]

I usually never go against anything the mother Church presents. But I am against alter server girls. This is coming from a guy who’s sister and cousins (females) serve, in fact I was the one that trained them. 10 years I served and when I first started it was all boys, and we were proud to be servers, but then they allowed 2 girls and within one year is went from 100% boys to 80% and all of a sudden within 5 years I was the only person serving at the Spanish mass while the rest had a mix of boys and girls. A year of me serving by myself I saw more girls joining after I had gotten other friends/boys to serve with me. Now at my parish it’s 80% to 90% girl altar servers. Boys no longer want to serve any mass where the girls are, not to mention since they dress the same as the boys. I think it’s time to bring back the tradition of boys/men only for altar serving. Not only so it lead to vocations in religious life, but so that young boys can nurture their faith, and basically be part of a brotherhood, just like Knight of Columbus, but for young boys and men. I think the requirements on becoming an alter server should be a little more strict (if too many volunteers are present) this will give young boys a much more appreciation of their roles as an alter server. In my opinion alter serving is a privileged/calling, and not a right.

 

[archangel04]

I know women could never become priest, but is it possible for them to become permanent deacon? If so then may God help us all.

 

[Lux_Ad_Orientum]

I know women could never become priest, but is it possible for them to become permanent deacon? If so then may God help us all.

A woman can NEVER be a deacon.

 

[archangel04]

A woman can NEVER be a deacon.

Sweet. But in all honesty there is no doubt that most women can do what men do as good if not better than us, it’s just honest truth, and they can work together and plan things better, again generally speaking. But God chose certain roles for men, so leave it for men.

 

[pnewton]

I please stop encouraging your daughters to pursue duties that are reserved for men

FYI - The topic is altar servers. This is not a duty reserved only to men.

You and me and a few faithful bishops will be the only Catholics left when the rest of the people who claimed to the Church has aboted and contracepted themself to Hell.

Again, the topic is female altar servers. You actually draw this extreme conclusion from those that do not agree with you on this topic? WOW!!!

Therefore, whoever thinks he is standing secure should take care not to fall.

• I Corinthians 10:12*

 

[Lux_Ad_Orientum]

Sweet. But in all honesty there is no doubt that most women can do what men do as good if not better than us, it’s just honest truth, and they can work together and plan things better, again generally speaking. But God chose certain roles for men, so leave it for men.

Yes! God set aside the Sancturary of every Roman Catholic Church for men, not for intruders. Men celebrate Mass, Men serve at Mass, and Men assist at Mass. Sorry if I am not very “politically correct” to say that! I was raised with a Traditional Catholic education and I will defend Traditional Catholic values forever no matter how much the modernists try to defile the Sanctuary. It is called a Sanctuary because it is supposed to be kept SAFE FOR THE LORD FROM INTRUDERS. Not anyone allowed to run around in there.

 

[Dum_Spiro_Spero]

You need to check yourself…IT IS AN ABUSE THAT IS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN

FYI - The topic is altar servers. This is not a duty reserved only to men.
.

• I Corinthians 10:12*

 

[Dum_Spiro_Spero]

Great post!!! I am not sure if these people know what a Sanctuary is anymore though…considering they advocating removing the Altar Rails in order to blend the Sanctuary with the rest of the Church…

Yes! God set aside the Sancturary of every Roman Catholic Church for men, not for intruders. Men celebrate Mass, Men serve at Mass, and Men assist at Mass. Sorry if I am not very “politically correct” to say that! I was raised with a Traditional Catholic education and I will defend Traditional Catholic values forever no matter how much the modernists try to defile the Sanctuary. It is called a Sanctuary because it is supposed to be kept SAFE FOR THE LORD FROM INTRUDERS. Not anyone allowed to run around in there.

 

[pnewton]

You need to check yourself…IT IS AN ABUSE THAT IS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN

Check yourself if you wish. I know a contradictory sentence when I see one. If a disciplinary practice, any practice that is disciplinary, is allowed by the competent authority to make such decisions, then by definition it is not an abuse.

(unless you define abuse as anything you do not like, as the personal supreme arbiter of the Catholic Church)

 

[Onegin]

Well, at least we can all agree that it was an abuse at some point. There are Church documents to back that up. Now, the question is whether there is sufficient justification to allow a prior abuse (disciplinary practice or not) to become an acceptable practice, especially when it has been shown to lead to drops in male altar servers and potentially drops in vocations as a result.

 

[Dum_Spiro_Spero]

Yet you argue against those of us that choose to remain the way we were for 1900+ years…choosing no innovations. And who says they are competent authorities? After Bella Dodd’s testimony…who’s words are truer today now more than ever… and Cardinals such as the one that presides out west in a Californian Arch-Diocese…whoes last name starts with Ma…, then please forgive me if I sometimes question “competent authority”…because he isn’t one

Check yourself if you wish. I know a contradictory sentence when I see one. If a disciplinary practice, any practice that is disciplinary, is allowed by the competent authority to make such decisions, then by definition it is not an abuse.

(unless you define abuse as anything you do not like, as the personal supreme arbiter of the Catholic Church)