From: bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Altar Girls Documentation
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:56:24 GMT
Organization: Exxon Research and Engineering Co., NJ

In article <1992Nov6.184743.12798@u.washington.edu> djo7613@hardy.u.washington.edu (Dick O'Connor) writes:
>We don't have altar girls these days.  We have presider's assistants, of
>both genders.  Let me explain what I see as the distinction (at least in
>our parish).

You have the right to make that distinction, however, reading the General 
Instructions of the Roman Missal in the front of most Sacrimentaries indicates
quite clearly what the role of those people who are in the sanctuary AT THE TIME
A MASS IS CELEBRATED is to be, and what the qualifications are for those 
ministers.  You can call them altar servers, acolytes, presiders assistants, 
or flea circus trainers.  It don't matter.  Even the US Bishop's addendum to the
GIRM is quite clear about the role of women-and my copy of the missal was updated in
the 80's.  

>
>I was an altar server as a lad; learned Latin and the whole nine yards.
>Even had to re-learn it all in English before I "retired" in high school!
>The role of altar server included many duties that aren't a part of the
>liturgy today, such as reciting certain prayers (in Latin, then in English)
>FOR THE PEOPLE, such as the Confiteor, the Orate Fratres, etc.  I seem to
>recall that we were called "acolytes", and considered a formal step on the
>way to full ordination.  We reminded people when the Elevation occurred by
>ringing bells.  We even had to provide a continual presence at "40 Hours
>Devotion" (anyone remember that?) FOR THE PEOPLE who couldn't be there 
>themselves.  So, in many ways, we were a lot like the priests, in that we
>performed certain duties and said certain prayers in place of the 
>congregation getting directly involved.

You will find if you read the GIRM that the things we did as altar boys, acolytes,
or whatever were never done away with.  The bells are still called for at the
elevation(s), and the responses that should be provided to the priest's 
prayers by a good altar server (the official term) are still in there when the
congregation is not part of the prayer or songs are being sung such as 
at "Blessed are you, God of all creation....Response: Blessed be God forever..."
.  It is still considered a formal ministry within the Church on the path, and 
participating in, the sacerdotal nature of the priesthood.

And let's use the proper terms here:  A _PRIEST_ is the celebrant of the MASS,
a _presider_ is a lay person leading a non-eucharistic service such as the
pre-midnight mass choral.  A PRIEST performs the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass,
a presider merely is a participant.  A congregation is not strictly necessary for
the celebration of a licit mass as long as an altar server is present.  Calling a 
PRIEST a mere presider is, in my estimation, a denegration of the special nature of
his ministry and personal sacrifice.

>
>Things are different now.  The presider's assistants just act as silent
>helpers, holding the book of prayers, taking care of candles, cross, and other
>items needed in the processions, and setting the Table.

All these tasks are listed in the GIRM and church documents as being ministerial
tasks associated with the deacon and altar servers.  Of course, if you don't
call the participants in the Mass by their proper name, or understand their 
proper place in the celebration, then you can call them anything you want
and assign whatever task you want to any of them.  Makes it easier to not
follow the regulations laid down, verified, and codified that spell out the
proper path to follow to celebrate and participate the Roman Catholic Mass according 
to the Missale Romanum of 1969.


>                                                            They no longer
>speak/pray FOR THE PEOPLE; instead the people are responsible for involving
>themselves in the worship.  They're simply not altar servers, serving the
>congregation anymore, but just helpers for the presider.  I don't see this
>as semantics, but a truly functional difference.  And so I don't see what
>all the fuss is about.  Your mileage may, of course, vary!  :)
>

This is all well and good, but, functionally, there are proper ministries that
have been opened up to the women of the Church.  The US Bishops, collegially, 
have permitted readers, choir leaders, eucharistic ministers, and so forth as
being available to women.  But, I think it is an egregarious abuse of the 
children to allow young girls to be altar servers (which is not licit in any 
case, regardless of the intention.).  What we are doing is practicing a blatant
double standard: "well, if you don't agree with what someone in authority 
has decided, you can ignore it if you don't like it...".  Even worse, in 
my estimation, is lying about whether it is allowed (and it is not) to
soothe or smooth over people's feelings or be "in sync with the modern world".
What is the fuss is about?  Simply?  There are no current indults, motu proprio, or
permissions from the Holy Father, the Vatican, or Bishops (collegially) permitting
female persons to act as, work as, be in the place of, or provide services to the 
priest as outlined in the GIRM.  requests for relief have been, and are currently
being refused by the hierarchy.  

Yeah, real strict, and probably not "politically correct".  But faithful to
Roman (as opposed to american) Catholic faith.

Bryan D. Boyle     |Opinions mine, not Exxon's
Senior Engineer    |Sovereign Military and Hospitaler Order of St. John
bdboyle@erenj.com  |of Jerusalem, Knights of Malta
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU