Will "Altar Girls" lead to Women Priests?

[Lux_Ad_Orientum]

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)

Check yourself before you wreck yourself! Is what my brother used to say. Something is an ABUSE if it goes against GOD. Selling induclgences was an abuse even when it was permitted, but thanks be to God and the Saints the Church came to her senses and eradicated it. Femailes in the Sanctuary is an ABUSE AGAINST GOD. Are there any holy men left in the Institutional church who can eradicate THEM??

So check yourself before you wreck yourself. And it is fine if you wreckyourself (actually not fine and I will pray for your soul) but I do not want demonicly sent ABUSES to wreck my Church any more than the Evil One and his modernist henchmen have managed to do already with stripping all the holy things out of our churches and our rites, and allowing unclean things and people to come in and DEFILE them.

 

[Apollos]

Well, I am still deeply troubled by the misogynistic tenor of many of the posts in this thread. Between the misogyny and the portrayal as boys as fragile little things that are harmed by girls participating in the same things they do, I am just at a loss for words.

I resent the label. No one here is a misogynist. Disapproval of altargirls because of the numerous inappropriate messages it sends does not equal a vicious hatred of women because they are women.

 

[Lux_Ad_Orientum]

I resent the label. No one here is a misogynist. Disapproval of altargirls because of the numerous inappropriate messages it sends does not equal a vicious hatred of women because they are women.

You are a TRUTH TELLER! Keeping people in their proper places does not have to do with opinions or love/hatred, it has to do with what pleases God most. So love of God. I sure don’t think God likes seeing women traipse around his sanctuaries because never in 1962 years did any of his Saints, Popes or Prophets allow it. Many Saints would have layed down their LIVES as martyrs to keep the sancturary safe from intruders. Now we rip out the railings and let every unconsecrated Man or FEMALE in?? The saints are crying.

 

[PaulinVA]

I resent the label. No one here is a misogynist. Disapproval of altargirls because of the numerous inappropriate messages it sends does not equal a vicious hatred of women because they are women.

As I said later, having an opinion that girls should not be altar servers is not misogynistic. However, I went back through the thread and came up with eight posts that showed a contempt for women before I quit.

It should be possible to discuss this subject without demeaning women.

 

[Apollos]

As I said later, having an opinion that girls should not be altar servers is not misogynistic. However, I went back through the thread and came up with eight posts that showed a contempt for women before I quit. It should be possible to discuss this subject without demeaning women.

I would love to know what those posts are. I for one see no demeaning of women in any of these posts.

 

[ConstantineTG]

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.

Only men can be ordained. So women cannot be deacons because deacons are ordained.

 

[pnewton]

Yet you argue against those of us that choose to remain the way we were …

No, not in the least. I do not appreciate being bossed around with uncharitable remarks, but otherwise I totally respect the right of anyone to disagree with girls being altar servers. However, by definition, it is not an abuse unless they are disallowed by Canon Law or some competent authority. When you say, “the way we were for 1900 years”, you are aware, are you not, that many the Church has never been stagnant. There are truly few things that have been around for that long and I know of no disciplinary practice that has remained unchanged.

 

[archangel04]

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.

Agree took the words out of my mouth

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

Always does

Check yourself before you wreck yourself! Is what my brother used to say. Something is an ABUSE if it goes against GOD. Selling induclgences was an abuse even when it was permitted, but thanks be to God and the Saints the Church came to her senses and eradicated it. Femailes in the Sanctuary is an ABUSE AGAINST GOD. Are there any holy men left in the Institutional church who can eradicate THEM??

So check yourself before you wreck yourself. And it is fine if you wreckyourself (actually not fine and I will pray for your soul) but I do not want demonicly sent ABUSES to wreck my Church any more than the Evil One and his modernist henchmen have managed to do already with stripping all the holy things out of our churches and our rites, and allowing unclean things and people to come in and DEFILE them.

Great responce!

As I said later, having an opinion that girls should not be altar servers is not misogynistic. However, I went back through the thread and came up with eight posts that showed a contempt for women before I quit.

It should be possible to discuss this subject without demeaning women.

I would like to see those 8 post.

 

[pnewton]

Check yourself before you wreck yourself! Is what my brother used to say. …So check yourself before you wreck yourself. And it is fine if you wreckyourself (actually not fine and I will pray for your soul) but I do not want demonicly sent ABUSES to wreck my Church any more than the Evil One and his modernist henchmen have managed to do already with stripping all the holy things out of our churches and our rites, and allowing unclean things and people to come in and DEFILE them.

*1 If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal. **2 **And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing. **3 **If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing. **4 **Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, (love) is not pompous, it is not inflated, **5 **it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury, **6 **it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. **7 *It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. I Corinthians 13

 

[GetToMass]

Alter Girls won’t lead to Women Priests. The term Woman Priest is an oxymoron. Women can’t be priests no more than men can have babies. And sense Alter Girls won’t lead to Women Priests I don’t think we should have them leave it to the boys please.

If we let boys wear nursing bra’s or maternity clothes we’d all say that’s ridiculous because boys can’t have babies, its not how they were made. Yet we let girls be alter servers when they can’t be priests and say there’s nothing wrong with that. Catholics have gone astray with our thinking. God put us here for a specific purpose and we are fooling ourselves if we allow our boys and girls to participate in roles they weren’t meant for we do them great disservice.

God Bless,
John 6:54
www.GetToMass.com

 

[ac_claire]

And its contrary to what you believe, with all due respect. Because clearly Traditionalists are the one dissenting on the decision. So why rile your most loyal followers?

With all due respect, I think you’re stuck on the labeling. You’re the one who’s brought up “traditionalists” and “dissenters”, etc. Why even go there? Why can’t we be Catholics discussing our opinions?

Like someone else said, I don’t know if it’s possible to “dissent” against an optional discipline that was outlawed for the entire history of the Church until very recently. I’m not a “traditionalist”…I don’t think that I know better than the Church. It’s just my opinion that this optional allowance isn’t a great idea and I’d like to see less priests taking the option. Is that dissent or is it just my opinion?

These are the facts: he institution of altar girls (unlike that of altar boys, which is across the board approved of and allowed no matter what) was a liturgical abuse for many, many years. Eventually, Rome decided to allow altar girls *not across the board *but only at the discretion of the local bishops and with the agreement of each individual parish priest. And the GIRM straight out says that although girls are now *permitted *to serve if the priest agrees to it, this is not to be at the expense of instituting altar boys…Thus, boys are the ones who should be strongly *encouraged *to serve because of the possibility of inspiring future vocations to the priesthood. Boys, not girls. That’s from the GIRM.

So from that, I conclude that having altar girls is not a liturgical abuse anymore but having boys serve is still better and makes more sense in my opinion. Therefore, I hope more bishops and priests utilize their right to stand up and say no to the practice of instituting altar girls. Because any girl that serves at the altar is one less boy that’s serving at the altar. That’s not dissent. I think that’s a pretty rational opinion to have given the history and the facts of the matter.

And yet it is still allowed. Doesn’t that tell you something?

It tells me that it’s simply allowed under certain circumstances, as I just explained, and that Rome no longer considers it a liturgical abuse. That’s all.

 

[pnewton]

I think it would be wise to reconsider whether this topic can be discussed with charity. Emotional outbursts do little to reflect on the topic at hand and only reflect on the one who makes the outburst. Cardinal Arinze addressed the topic with aplumb. We would do well to emulate his attitude. After all, Satan has many avenues to attack us. If he can destroy our charity, he has destroyed all. No topic, not argument, is worth that.

 

[ac_claire]

As I said later, having an opinion that girls should not be altar servers is not misogynistic. However, I went back through the thread and came up with eight posts that showed a contempt for women before I quit.

It should be possible to discuss this subject without demeaning women.

I’d like to see the posts as well, because at the moment I think the “sexist” and “demeaning to women” charge is a straw man at best; an attempt at emotional manipulation at worst.

 

[Lux_Ad_Orientum]

*1 If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal. **2 **And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing. **3 **If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing. **4 **Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, (love) is not pompous, it is not inflated, **5 **it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury, **6 **it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. **7 *It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. I Corinthians 13

And your point is???

With the emergency crisis in the World and the Church today, Traditional (True) Catholics are called to be like Jesus in the Temple. When he flogged the moneylenders, turned over their tables, and chased them out, did he not love them? God IS LOVE, incase you hadn’t heard. That was an act of love. It could not be anything else. Today the Temples (Churches) are filled with Females, homosexuals, and others where THEY don’t belong, peddling their wears of disgrace. That is what woman’s ordnination and homosexuals acts are: disgraces to the Church. Traditional Catholics need to teach them and everyone else a lesson of LOVE with the same actions that Christ used against the moneylenders. I hope it does not come to that we have to flog them, but if it does and there are any Faithful Catholics left to do it then we take the greatest example of all time in that act of LOVE.

So don’t lecture me about love. When I stand with the True Church I am filled with the TRUE LOVE that comes from Jesus through his faithful bishops and priests!

 

[pnewton]

And your point is???

I thought it stood in contrast to your post. After all, no one here is lending money in the temple. There was no need for a whip. That, and you do not have the authority of Jesus to do the whipping.

There are many good reasons for an all male altar server rule. I was hoping you might consider that a path ruled more by reason and less by passion would be preferable. Attacking other posters is not allowable here, nor does it recommend a new poster as someone with something to say. If you are here for discussion, then it will benefit you better to keep it civil. If you are here to vent and attack, you are in the wrong place.

 

[Apollos]

the “sexist” and “demeaning to women” charge is a straw man at best

Straw person.

 

[MarkThompson]

[Rethought message for being nonsensically ironic. Bad sarcasm!]

 

[ProVobis]

There are truly few things that have been around for that long and I know of no disciplinary practice that has remained unchanged.

But Canon Law does protect customs.

 

[MarkThompson]

I’d like to see the posts as well, because at the moment I think the “sexist” and “demeaning to women” charge is a straw man at best; an attempt at emotional manipulation at worst.

Okay, on a non-sarcastic note, I’m curious – and I assume from your username that you’re a woman – whether you find it “demeaning” to have it said, not just that altar girls are a poor idea pragmatically, but that they “DEFILE” a place by their presence.

 

[Magnus467]

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

Are you saying the Church has not innovated in the last 1900 years? The Church has certainly changed much over the years. Tradition has remained firm but most else has changed. One of the things that hasn’t changed is respect and obedience to the laws of the Church. If people like you do not like a law you just say it was made by crock pot liberals! Enough of this madness! I always thoroughly enjoy pnewton’s posts because they are level headed and charitable. Keep up the good work my man.