From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: Altar girls and millstones update
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:15:46 GMT

In article <9210082226.AA00901@alsvid.cs.cornell.edu> aitken@CS.CORNELL.EDU ((William E. Aitken)) writes:
>	Well I just got back from doing a spot of research on this subject.
>In particular, I was reading the Canon Law Society of America's
>translation of and commentary on the 1983 Code of Canon Law published
>by the Paulist Press.  It has a Nihil Obstat and an Imprimatur (for
>those of you interested in such things).  It claims fairly firmly
>that the prohibition on female altar servers present in #70 of GIRM
>and the 1917 Code no longer binds.   In particular, it mentions that
>Inaestmible Donum [sp?] has no legislative force beyond that
>of GIRM or the (then still in effect) 1917 Code.  In short, there
>seems (at the very least) to be bona fide doubt whether there is,
>in fact, any active Canonical prohibition on the use of female
>altar servers.
>
>	There seem to be three main arguments for the statement that
>the old law no longer binds.  First, the very nature of the office is
>fundamentally changed under the new Canon Law.  Second, the prohibition
>of the 1917 code is not carried forward to the 1983 code.  Third,
>the prohibition in GIRM is part of a more general prohibition on
>females serving in the sanctuary.  Since 1967, this prohibition has
>been removed [aid to infirm priest, non-ordained reader, extraordinary
>minister of Eucharist, etc.]
>
>	I have been unable to find any Roman or National Documents
>post-dating the publication of the 1983 Code with Legislative
>or Juridicial authority that suggest that the prohibition is
>still in effect.  If someone can point me at such a document, I might
>believe that those who employ female altar servers are in clear violation
>of Church Law.  Otherwise, it seems to me that they are not.

   Father Peter M. J. Stravinskas, in _The Catholic Answer Book_ (a
collection of questions to the title column of the magazine _The
Catholic Answer_), discusses this very subject.  He talks about the
very same commentary book you referenced.  Here are excerpts from his
response:

	   Both writers cite as their authority the commentary on the
	Code of Canon Law produced by the Canon Law Society of
	America; however, that work is merely a collection of opinions
	or interpretations of various American canon lawyers.  As
	such, it is not authoritative.  For that, it is necessary to
	consult either the Roman Commission for the interpretation of
	the code or the appropriate Roman Congregation which handles a
	particular area of Church life. 

	   ...  The 1983 Code of Canon Law differs from that of 1917
	in many ways, not the least of which is its intention to touch
	upon liturgical law only when absolutely necessary.  And so,
	Canon 2 states: "Liturgical norms existing at present retain
	their force unless some of them are contrary to the canons of
	the Code."  Furthermore, the new code avoids simply negative
	statements, perhaps explaining the lack of a direct
	prohibition.

	   Therefore, what does liturgical law say about altar girls?
	The General Instruction of the Roman Missal, in speaking of
	liturgical duties given over to lay people, notes that
	"services performed outside the sanctuary may also be given to
	women at the discretion of the rector of the church" (no. 70).
	This obviously excludes service at the altar.  Nevertheless,
	some interpreted that to mean that girls could carry in
	procession the cross and candles, for example, "dropping them
	off," as it were, and thus not violate liturgical norms.  A
	1984 (post-code!) response from the Congregation for the
	Sacraments and Divine Worship, however, determines otherwise:
	"Girls and women may NOT carry the cross, the books, the
	candles."

   Father Stravinskas then goes on to say that a recent synod on the
laity in Rome also upheld this prohibition, and that he stands by his
previous statement.  He also notes that doing the readings is a
service directed to the congregation, whereas serving at the altar is
directed to the priest.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU