Msgr. Guido Marini give the altar girls at Pope Benedict's Mass some last minute instructions as any good MC would do!
Altar girls during Pope Benedict's Holy Mass:
Yes, Virginia, there are women in the Church. And yes Virginia, current liturgical legislation, that my clairvoyance tells me will not change, allows them to be readers, Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion and altar servers. Holy Mother Church allows for this and be it far from me to question Holy Mother when she, who is she, allows for such disciplinary possibilities.
Some say that having only boys/men in these positions will lead to more vocations to the priesthood. I say balderdash! What leads to more vocations to the priesthood and religious life are families that have more that 1.4 children, who understand that the family is the Church in miniature and families that promote respect for Holy Mother Church, the Holy Father, the Bishops in union with him and the clergy and religious of the Church, respect in the areas of faith, morals, and Church discipline.
Amongst all the members of the Church, the greatest, was, is and will always be our Blessed Mother. She is higher than the pope and the bishops and all the clergy combined. And if she were to be in the flesh today, and invited to participate in her Son's most Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, she would gladly be a proclaimer of her Son, the Word Incarnate, whom she gave physically to the world and would do so physically by reading at Mass. And if asked to serve the altar of her Son, she would do so as she was His servant as His mother and did more than offer him water and wine, but changed His diapers. And asked if she would distribute Holy Communion to her children in Christ, she would do so as she did throughout her life, starting with the Incarnation and Virgin Birth.
I was reared as a pre-Vatican II Catholic by pre-Vatican II parents and the thing they instilled in us is that we are to respect the Pope and the bishops in the areas of faith, morals and canon law and other legislation which includes liturgical. Why else do you think I celebrate the EF Mass as an Extraordinary expression of the Latin Rite's two forms of Masses? Why else to allow for what the Church allows liturgically not only for the EF but also for the Church's normal, regular celebration of the one same Holy Sacrifice, the Ordinary Form?
Catholics of whatever ilk need to understand that heterodoxy disguised as tradition is still heterodoxy and it might well be a combination of Gnosticism and Pelagianism in the modern understanding of these terms as defined by His Holiness, Pope Francis, Bishop of Rome and Supreme Pontiff as well as Supreme Legislator. Oh, the glory of being a faithful, orthodox, obedient in the areas of Faith, Morals and legislation Catholic!
45 comments:
This was not a "Papal Mass". It was a parish-planned Mass at which the parish-made plans provided for these altar girls.
Can you imagine that a Pope so kind and humble as Benedict would brusquely dismiss innocent young girls who had been invited to serve, however he might disapprove of them personally?
As Pope, Benedict accepted any things that were imposed upon him against his wishes. It may have been a defect that as Pope he did not impose his will more, but at least it can be said that he did not arrogantly impose his personal preferences contrary to local practice where he found it.
I believe the use of altar girls, etc. is a matter of the Priest's discretion. Why not opt for the more conservative choice which may send a message to those who would use the more liberal choice as a wedge? Good Priests like you, Fr, who try to strike a middle ground and who do not want to offend too much by taking unpopular positions will be co-opted and swept away by the Progressivist forces who seize upon any compromise to further their agenda.
I know the Mamas would raise hell and people would grumble. I wonder how they will feel when the first Vatican sanctioned womyn priests appear in the Sanctuary or when their cute little altar girl daughters are lured into lesbian relationships...or when "limited birth control" is sanctioned...or when gay marriages are blessed. Then, they will all look back and scratch their uncovered heads and cry, "How did this happen?" That is where we are headed...I see nothing to indicate otherwise, despite all the Papal and Magisterial huffing and puffing. No real counter action is being taken, and Hamlet may as well be Pope at this point. Sorry for the rant...
Reports may be recalled that British bishops (and/or their liturgists) fought and screamed unsuccessfully to include altar girls in the plans for all of Pope Benedict's Masses in the trip to England. German bishops were more devious and sandbagged him on his German trip with more girls around the altar than he (through Msgr. Marini) had reluctantly agreed to, knowing that he would not arrogantly impose his personal will at the last moment.
Is the message in all this that the Church needs more manly decision-making examples at every level, from pope to bishop to local priest--especially on matters more important than the question of altar servers?
Henry, Yes.
Can you stop altar servers at Saint Josephs from receiving Communion in the hand please?
Thank you, Father, for this blog. While I do not personally like to have girl altar servers, the points you make are excellent. As a woman, I have never felt discriminated against by the Church. Mary is held in such high esteem, and being able to identify with her (sinful though I am) has made me feel very much included in our Church!
I think it causes chaos in a parish when one priest allows one thing and another another thing. For example the reception of Holy Communion in the hand is one of the two options that communicants have and the choice is theirs not the "minister" whether he be ordinary or extraordinary. A priest does have the authority and the responsibility to make sure that Holy Communion is received in the hand as it concerns current Church legislation about reverence, the bow before receiving and receiving properly on the palm and then placing the Holy Eucharist in one's mouth prior to departing the Communion station.
Anonymous, Indeed. Every Sunday we are treated to the altar servers and the EMHC's pawing the Host and popping it into their mouths. Nice...
Having female altar servers is nothing to do with the Novus Ordo. In 1970 it was forbidden, and remained so for many years afterwards. However, like Communion in the hand (which I first encountered in Germany in 1967 while on a school exchange trip when I was 16) it was a liturgical abuse which was retrospectively authorized because it would have been too troublesome to suppress.
Not long ago I overheard a conversation outside the Birmingham Oratory, in which a couple were saying that they used to regularly worship there, but had had to change parishes because their 12-year-old daughter wanted to be "on the altar", which of course the Oratorians do not allow.
Apart from anything else, if a parish offers both forms of the Mass it is going to have to tell the girls that they are not allowed in the sanctuary for the EF. How does it make it up to them? By enhancing their role in the OF? Hardly a way to emphasize the continuity of the newer form with the older.
Thirty years ago, when Cardinal Basil Hume allowed women to distribute Holy Communion at Mass (which scandalized many people then, and still does today) a non-Catholic friend of mine said "for all you know she might be menstruating". Not a politically correct comment, but in the wider context of the history of Judaeo-Christian ritual, not a consideration that can be simply dismissed out of hand.
Receiving in the hand and versus populum are the two greatest symptoms of the degradation of the Mass and of the Church. One does not have to be a MENSA member to see this.
Denial ( to the tune of "Tonight," with apologies to "West Side Story")
Denial! Denial! Let's all stay in denial
And think that we have come very far!
Denial! Denial! We want no further trial
Denial will be our guiding star!
Denial, the Church degrades so quickly,
But, we need not feel sickly
Because we all are in sweet denial...
__________
Now, anyone up for a new version of "Maria" or are you afraid of going to Hell...LOL!
John Nolan, Hear, hear. If I move to England will you adopt me? LOL!
Henry's comment is only partly correct. Female servers were in evidence at all Benedict's Masses in Britain, but were not given prominent roles. At Westminster Cathedral there were two female torch bearers, and at the Newman Beatification Mass at Cofton Park one carried the papal mitre, and another the ferula.
I'm talking about requiring just the altar servers (and maybe the Eucharistic Ministers) to receive on the tongue. Not the rest of the church.
I don't have the authority to do so. I don't think the bishop has authority either, but I could be wrong.
Modernists will change a tradition because of the times.
Catholics, on the other hand, recognize that in order to make a change there must be articulated a sufficient reason to explain why the existing tradition is somehow incorrect and why supplanting it is warranted. This is called prudence and it's a virtue.
Just because the last couple generations lacked the virtue of prudence and mocked the piety of their Catholic forebears doesn't mean we need to continue to perpetuate their errors.
John: "At Westminster Cathedral there were two female torch bearers, and at the Newman Beatification Mass at Cofton Park one carried the papal mitre, and another the ferula."
I believe what I said was literally correct--that the British liturgical establishment sought unsuccessfully to have girl altar servers at all the Pope's Masses there, but that their attempts were negotiated down to the minimal involvement you mention.
I myself am not sure that female torch-bearers and mitre carriers are objectionable in the same sense that female acolytes (e.g.) actually serving at the altar would be.
Fr. McMillan: "I don't have the authority to do so"
But surely you have the authority to suggest that all within the sanctuary receiving on the tongue would contribute to a wholesome uniformity of decorum around the altar.
Yes, we can dismiss out of hand the taboos surrounding menstruation and "ritual impurity."
Jesus ignored ritual impurity laws - Mark 5:25-34 - allowing the woman with menstrual bleeding for 12 years to touch him. He also spoke to her and cared for her, curing her flow of blood.
In 601, St. Augustine of Canterbury, the “Apostle of England,” (@604) wrote to St. Gregory and asked whether menstruating women should be allowed to go to church and receive Communion. St. Gregory’s response:
"A woman should not be forbidden to go to church. After all, she suffers this involuntarily. She cannot be blamed for that superfluous matter that nature excretes…She is also not to be forbidden to receive Holy Communion at this time. If, however, a woman does not dare to receive, for great trepidation, she should be praised. But if she does receive she should not be judged. Pious people see sin even there, where there is none. Now one often performs innocently that which originates in a sin: when we feel hunger, this occurs innocently. Yet the fact that we experience hunger is the fault of the first man. The menstrual period is no sin; it is, in fact, a purely natural process. But the fact that nature is thus disturbed, that it appears stained even against human will – this is the result of a sin…So if a pious woman reflects upon these things and wishes not to approach communion, she is to be praised. But again, if she wants to live religiously and receive communion out of love, one should not stop her." (PL 77, 1183)
Fr. McD,
It seems to me as no individual has the right to be an altar server, you may impose reasonable quid pro quos in exchange for accepting someone as an altar server. A reasonable quid pro quo in the name of decorum or standardization or whatever could be reception on the tongue. You're not denying them the right to receive in the hand, but if they want to do that, they will do it as members of the congregation and not as altar servers.
By way of analogy, I have the right to wear an unwashed ragged t-shirt and stilettos to Mass, but if I applied to be an alter server I've no doubt that you would (rightly) require me to forego exercising that right in consideration for being named an altar server.
Anon 5 - No, the universal norms of the Church cannot be negated by parochial rules and regulations.
A pastor, for example, cannot forbid the marriage of a couple of different braces for the sake of "decorum." He cannot require that all women in the congregation wear skirts or dresses for "decorum." He cannot require all men to wear ties for "decorum."
Universal norms cannot be superceded by a pastor's preferences regarding decorum or standardization.
"We're not denying you the right to vote, just requiring a poll tax that you cannot afford to pay..."
Anon 5: I've burned my eyes trying to visualize you in heels. Curse you.
I think the notion that female altar servers doesn't influence vocations negatively hasn't looked at the numbers. TLM Parishes produce vocations exponentially greater than OF Parishes. the number of vocations produced by the SSPX alone, extrapolated across the whole Church would actually yield a surplus of some 20,000 priests world wide.
As for EMHCs, male or female theya re an abomination. They aren't necessary at ANY Mass with under 1000 attendees if 2 Priests, or a Priest and a Deacon are available. The abuse of using the Chalice, which last Sunday I got to watch an EMHC drink from and not even bother wiping the Chalice, is part of the subterfuge that drives the need for EMHCs.
PI, I hate when I have to marry a couple and the bride has one color of braces and the groom another. I feel like canceling the wedding.
However, a pastor can regulate who serves and how they dress and comport themselves. We require girls to pull their hair back in a pony tail and to wear appropriate shoes, no heels and no jewelry or make-up. And as our culture is going, we require the same of the boys.
But no, I cannot change a liturgical option other than to supervise that the option chosen is in the parameters of decorum and reverence. Our servers know that if they are holding something, like a paten, which we use, or candles, they are to receive on the tongue.
Templar, the new movements, progressive or traditional are the ones producing vocations. It is due to the fact that those who are a part of these communities do so intentionally because they want something more than what the rank and file post Vatican II parish can provide. As I have stated before, we have more vocations coming from the Alleluia Charismatic Covenant Community in Augusta than any other parish or subgroup in the diocese. To say that their liturgical style is emancipated would be an understatement. (Fathers Firmin and Tim McKewon are two examples of many more). A goodly number of these vocations came from my former parish while I was there, Most Holy Trinity in Augusta, where altar girls have been in abundance.
Fathe McDonald, you said about the Blessed Mother, "And if she were to be in the flesh today,"
Father, father father.... have you forgotten her Assumption? She was taken up to heaven body and soul... she is, indeed, in the flesh today.
You need to brush up on your catechism.
Re: "...if she were in the flesh today." Don't worry, Fr. It is only words. They don't mean anything. God loves us and knows what we mean. Halleluja.
On the question of both EMHC (male or female) and female servers the Church's attitude seems to be "OK, you can have them, but EMHC can only be used when it is absolutely necessary, and we prefer servers to be male". At parish level things look rather different. EMHC are used to being called 'special ministers' or even 'Eucharistic ministers' - haven't they had specialist training, and been commissioned by the bishop in a special ceremony? They exercise their 'ministry' as of right. A parish priest had 'rostered' a female EMHC to administer the chalice but then found he had the services of a deacon. Before Mass he told the lady her services would not be required. She was offended, he was called insensitive and unpastoral. (This is a true story). A priest is under no obligation to accept a female server. But what about a priest who doesn't want altar girls but takes over a parish which has a gaggle of them?
This happened in a London parish which was moving in a more traditional direction (including having an EF Mass on Sunday morning). No girls were fired, but no new ones were recruited. The existing ones left to go to university etc and now all the servers are male.
In 2005 I attended a Mass and Blessed Sacrament procession in a Bavarian village on Whit Monday. Everyone, young and old, turned out in what is still a very Catholic part of the world. The priest, a young Croatian, surrounded himself at the altar with a bevy of teenage girls. The boys were relegated to lesser roles like carrying banners.
Well, I suppose it proved he wasn't an uphill gardener ...
I think it's easy to misunderstand how things work to produce vocations in the Traditional Chapels when one has never gone to one.
But since I have gone to such chapels and parishes in Alabama, Missouri, Georgia, Maine, and Virginia - with the FSSP, SSPX, ICRSS, and diocesan. I can say with confidence that there is a difference in these places.
If you've seen a young man serve as MC at a Solemn High Mass, you know there is a world of difference and you know what I'm talking about. Honestly, I don't expect a Novus Ordo priest to understand because the use of altar servers is completely different in the Novus Ordo. There's nothing particularly priestly about carrying a towel and sitting off to the side of the table.
PI
The universal norm of the Church is reception on the tongue. If the local Ordinary allows CITH, then a priest must permit it in the OF, but an Ordinary would be within his rights not to allow it. This has happened, for instance in Sri Lanka and Kazakhstan. In practice, however, a bishop would be unlikely to break step with the National Conference on this (more's the pity).
A recent case concerned a priest who in the interests of uniformity insisted on his servers receiving in the hand. One boy objected but was told to toe the line or leave. So to insist on the universal norm (reception on the tongue) for servers would not be ultra vires.
Regarding menstruation, the fact that St Augustine asked the question more than 500 years after the foundation of the Church is revealing. And receiving Communion isn't the same as distributing it. It is not in the tradition of the Roman Rite for the laity to pick up the Sacred Species in their fingers. Period. (Sorry, full stop).
I think it's kind of funny when people argue with John Nolan. Doubly so when it's priests because it demonstrates that a layman knows much more about this than the priests who presumably went to school specifically to learn this stuff.
Never underestimate a dedicated layman! John Nolan is like our own personal Michael Davies.
I'd sooner wrestle a grizzly than argue with John Nolan about liturgics, the Mass, or things Catholic.
Well, as I continue my journey to becoming a Byzantine Catholic, I would like to note my observations. We do not have altar girls, or EMHCs. So, what role do women play? I think first and foremost, motherhood is strongly celebrated with the Byzantine emphasis on the Mother of God in the Divine Liturgy. Over and over in the liturgy, our Breviary (the Horologions) and our prayers (such as Akathists) we hear about Mary's glorious motherhood, her wonderful maternity. We do not have altar girls, but I find that most Byzantine choirs are dominated by women, and ours is in the charge of a Russian Orthodox woman. I made the mistake of sitting in the wrong side of a Ukrainian Catholic and was booted by the "boss" woman to the men's side. The women in my parish have no problem in telling men what to do. I was told, we need a Lector and you will do it and chant the epistle. So, I complied. None of the ladies find any offense in not being admitted to the altar. One lady put it well, "the church has the altar of fatherhood, the home (domestic church) has the altar of motherhood."
My wife said she feels more womanly and motherly in the Byzantine rite. She said to me "[h]ere a woman can be a woman and not be surrounded by woman trying to be men."
Ultimately, to develop a positive theology of women that Pope Francis calls for would have to emphasize the maternity of the Mother of God. Restoring the lost feast in October would be a start (remember the roots of this feast go back to the Council of Ephesus and the title Theotokos). Emphasizing the sacramental of churching would also be good. Another concrete effort in this direction is the blessing of the unborn child.
Pater: all of your examples are materially distinguishable from my scenario, and your final quotation is a distortion and not an analogy, but I lack both the time and inclination to spell it out for you case by case.
So many EMHC, choirs up front, laity over-involved in the Liturgy may be diluting and demasculating the priesthood...and turning a priest's servanthood into servilehood.
Why else would a priest admister Holy Communion to the dozen or so EMHCs before himself?
Saw it with my own eyes.
In my opinioin this has far reaching consequences. Those who see this are taught by it, and lose the sense of respecting authority.
Anti-hierarchical sentiments are cultured in the minds of those who see it.
I could go on and on.
So may abuses I saw, that I had to spend some time in the pew after Mass and explain all these errors, and teach my child that these were examples of what NOT to do.
Had I not talked to her about it, my child would have innocently thought that it was OK to clap for the choir and EMHCs after and during Mass, for the priest to serve himself after the EMHCs, for ushers in suits and ties to serve at the altar, for the crucifix to display Jesus sleeping instead of suffering, for processional crucifix to have no corpus of Jesus on it.
This was in Orlando. not in Macon GA.
~SL
James Ignatius McCauley, Very nice. It occurs to me to ask why we need a "positive theology of women" in the Church and what in the Hell it might look like. I have some ideas...perhaps I may share them. That ought to really yank Ignotus' chain. LOL!
Marc and Gene,
It's flattering to be compared with Michael Davies, but the comparison is wide of the mark. Unlike him, I merely dabble. When I was younger I tended to the opinion that Davies overstated his case, and that those who argued for the Tridentine Mass were on the right side but probably fighting the wrong battle. I am no longer of that opinion.
James Ignatius McAuley, I too like (liked) October 11, Mary, Mother of God. But, I believe, It is (was) only put into existence in 1931 on the 1500th anniversary of the Council of Ephesus. What I have for a long time wondered is whether the "new" January 1 is a transfer from the former October 11 or whether it is an altogether new thing. (To what extent is it also still a celebration of Jesus' circumcision and the Octave Day of Christmas?)
- Ancil Payne
Marc, isn't it rather revealing to be reminded occasionally of how little so many priests of a certain generation know about Catholic liturgy, history, and doctrine. (Of course, I'm not referring to late but quick learners like Fr. M!)
Liberal seminaries and Divinity Schools, which is most of them, teach humanism and social gospel. I'm sure this is true at many Catholic schools, as well. At a major prot Divinity school/seminary I attended in the seventies, it was actually possible to graduate without having taken a single course in Bible, homiletics, or worship...only certain denominational requirements insured that candidates would take those courses, and not all denominations had those requirements. Honestly, most Priests at Masses I attend outside St. Jo's and the FSSP look like they are either in a hurry to get somewhere, bored to death, or lost.
Cultural and religious taboos regarding menstruation are based on ignorance and the fear that results from ignorance.
It is notable, however, that not all ancient societies shared this reaction to the "mystery" of menstruation. In some cultures, menstruation was understood to be a very positive thing, it was celebrated, and it did not result in the shunning or separation of menstruating women.
Menstruation does not render a women ineligible to attend mass, to receive or to distribute communion. It is a natural physiological process, as natural as digestion, defecation, or the sloughing off of dead skin cells.
Father, I heard that in one parish it was decided that the altar servers would only by men or boys but the girls would be trained as sacristans. That seems to me an eminently sensible idea. Having girls serve at the altar is a precursor to their or their parents' desire for them to be women priests, which can never happen as Pope Francis pointed out recently. Boys serving on the altar do lead to vocations, and as the good sisters in years gone by often were sacristans having girls trained in that role may well lead to vocations to religious life. I am a woman and many Catholic women I know are very sick and tired of a vocal minority of women who claim to be marginalised by the Church, which is completely untrue.
Jan
Good post, Jan.
I have a question about female sacristans: do they have to have special permission to touch the Sacred Vessels? How does this work?
(I'm talking about preVII rules here where only certain people could touch the vessels).
I view female sacristans as just as bad or worse than female altar servers. Sheesh!
Ancil Payne.
Reaading J.D. Cricton' book "our Lady and the Liturgy (Liturgical Press, 1997), Crichton notes that the feast on January 1, is more of a restoration, with the suppression of the Cicumcision. However, when we compare the propers for October 11 in the EF with January 1 today in the OF, the language in the OF regarding motherhood is much more subdued. Crichton notes the brutal reality that this feast is overshadowed by the secular new year celebrations.
Liturgical "purists" disliked the Feast of October 11 and desired it subjection, as shown in Dom E. Flicoteaux book "Our Lady in the Liturgy (Helicon, 1959.
For those in the OF, there is nothing to Prevent father Mike Kavenaugh or father Allan McDonald from using January 1 as a special mother's day to help take the day back from the secular revelers of New years eve.
James - I know of no Fr. "Mike" Kavanaugh..... To whom could you be referring?
RE: Mike Kavanaugh...maybe he is your twin who is an Episcopalian Bishop somewhere...
Post a Comment