Posted on 09/24/2003 3:06:09 PM PDT by Lorianne
Incorrect. The Mass was instituted by Christ, not men.
The way I think about God, is that an event which brings joy to his creatures, would be pleasing to God as well.
Joy is a passion experienced by created beings. God does not experience joy - God is joy and the source of all true joy.
Therefore, God might very well be leading the applause. Provided God has hands, of course.
I'm perfectly willing to consider the possibility that people may be moved to clap in Church as a direct movement of the Holy Ghost. But I don't think the Catholic clappers are amking that claim.
If you can name one diocese where altar girls and liturgical dance are the norm which has proportionally just 50% of the vocations of the Diocese of Lincoln, NE your point will be admirably proved.
What this article doesn't reveal is that there are also proposed restrictions on communion in the hand and under both kinds, both of which would never fly in the United States.
I'm pleased that someone is trying to restore dignity to reception. I don't much care how things will "fly."
It's obvious that a coterie of reactionaries decided to issue a trial balloon, and it is quickly losing air, as bishops and cardinals, in other versions of this article, have said "these will never be accepted."
If by "reactionaries" you mean "Catholics who have a modicum of reverence left" it's a shame that various liberal prelates are failing to appreciate their initiatives. But to politicians, politics and popularity will always be more important than the sacraments.
Trying to restrict quotations in homilies to Scripture alone?
I think you are distorting the proposals. I believe that they are calling for an end to including non-Scriptural readings - for example the replacement of the Epistle by a selection from Kahlil Gibran at one "Mass" I had the misfortune to attend.
Additionally I believe that they are calling for the homily to be more focused on and directly relevant to the readings of the Mass and less focused on the funny thing that happened to Father on his vacation to the Bahamas.
Or banning clapping for a newly baptized baby or new confirmand, or when the Pope processes in at Mass? Ludicrous.
Somehow my daughter bravely dealt with the ignominy of not having anyone clap, shout "whoop! there it is!" or pump their fists at her christening. No one at the time remarked that the lack of a sports stadium atmosphere was "ludicrous."
What are these dolts thinking?
Leaving aside the undeaconly insult, they were probably thinking that reverence is a virtue Catholics would cultivate. They were also probably thinking that their ideas would receive a fair hearing. They really had a high opinion of individuals such as yourself, it would seem.
It was certainly true.
Today, however, when most seminarians enter after college, or even later, altar service could hardly qualify as a "training ground" for priests.
You prove my point for me.
Besides, there's very little for servers to do at Novus Ordo Masses.
There is quite a bit for acolytes to do at reverently celebrated Masses of the New Rite, especially when the priest decides to actually leaf through the GIRM.
Huh? You say that altar service provides a recruiting ground for priests, I say it doesn't because most men entering seminaries enter later, and you say "I prove your point"?
Actually, I disprove your point.
They were also probably thinking that their ideas would receive a fair hearing.
This "proposal" is dead on arrival. It has nothing to do with "reverence," and more to do with rolling back "innovations" that some folks at the Vatican don't like. Reverence has nothing to do with manner of reception of the Eucharist.
That all pales in comparison to the sex scandals that the church finds itself embroiled in.
The solution to the sex scandals is a return to the orthodox faith given the Church by Our Lord. No one can claim that sex abuse is in any way consistant with orthodox Christianity, nor is the problem unique to, or even worse in Catholic clergy.
That should be the Vatican's top priority, not how to make the church even less attractive to future parishioners.
If you understood my point above, you'll understand how a more dogmatic and orthodox application of discipline within the Church will act to directly address the issue as well as the many other serious issues facing Christendom today.
By all means, talk about it. Don't just make a flippant and completely unsupported comment.
Where are you coming from?
A tiny backwater known as New York City, where I was raised in an obscure sect known as the Roman Catholic Church.
Rosa Park's disobedience (refusing to give up her seat when ordered) forced this country to take a harsh look at some of its terrible traditions and customs.
In point of fact, Rosa Parks' choice of seat went unremarked - it was only later that her role was acknowledged as the story of the Birmingham bus boycott became better known.
Comparing the authority of the management of the Birmingham Public Bus Company to the authority of the Holy See is a bit silly.
Essentially you're arguing that two thousand years of the Church's witness is "terrible" because it upsets the sensibilities of Gloria Steinem. In that case, why bother being a Catholic at all, if you think that the Church could essentially have everything all wrong since Pentecost?
Frankly I don't care how the practice of altar girls came about...whether it started 15 years ago or 150 years ago, it is totally irrelevant to whether girls should serve on the altar today.
When, I agree, is immaterial. What is important is how. And that how is through specifically orchestrated acts of disobedience by radical feminist apostates.
Again, why belong to the Catholic Church if the concept of obedience is so deeply repugnant to you?
Explain to me why it's bad to have altar girls today.
I already have. It is an ongoing manifestation of disobedience and it ruins the natural mechanism of fostering vocations.
I'll be happy to entertain that type of argument.
Already submitted, and you didn't even address it - you simply dismissed it.
The presence of altar girls at my church this past has nothing to do with morality.
Only if you believe that obedience is a virtue. If you do not believe obedience is a virtue, then it isn't much use being a Catholic - it's best to make up one's own religion so one never needs to endure the horrible yoke of obedience.
It is not an immoral act and has nothing to do with situational ethics.
Yes it does. You have twice repeated the idea that it does not matter how a practice started - all that is important is its perceived usefulness "TODAY." If the motive of an act is irrelevant and all that matters is its utility in a current situation, we are in the realm of situational ethics.
You statement is incoherent.
An unintentionally amusing statement.
What is actually incoherent is claiming to be a Catholic and then simultaneously claiming that obedience is irrelevant, tradition is unimportant and that only what makes people happy from moment to moment counts.
There are many, many altar boys in my parish.
Good.
The presence of altar girls has actually increased the number of boys.
This is a phenomenon I have never witnessed.
A few years ago we had about 5 altar boys...now we have about 40 altar servers.
I'll take your word for it.
Not at all. As you point out, many seminarians are only finding their way to the priesthood later in life. In the days when the acolytate was the primary recruiting ground for the seminary, young men found a quicker, more direct path - like the minor seminary.
It has nothing to do with "reverence," and more to do with rolling back "innovations" that some folks at the Vatican don't like.
It has everything in the world to do with reverence. If one believes that the Eucharist is the Real Presence of Christ's Body and Blood, then one wants to make sure as few opportunities as possible exist for it to be profaned.
Having hundreds of people handle the Eucharist instead of one multiplies the chances of profanation.
Reverence has nothing to do with manner of reception of the Eucharist.
It has absolutely everything to do with it. One's attitude shows through one's actions.
Not at all, unfortunately. It will be a long arduous process with many setbacks.
What about the scandal?
What about it? The Church is taking steps to remedy some problems - reasserting the policy that sexual inverts should be rooted out at the seminary level, for instance. It's a start.
That's what I started out discussing.
And that's what I've been suggesting: that all forms of disobedience are linked.
Restoring orthodoxy, if that is the goal, should begin with the clergy.
It's always supposed to start with someone else, isn't it?
Why is using altar girls an act of disobediance?
Because it was always forbidden, and then certain radicals introduced the practice specifically to jumpstart a political goal.
Disobediant how?
Disobedient to Church law as I have described.
In a properly celebrated Mass quite a bit.
From what I can tell, the young boy or girl processes in and out with the priest, holds the book for the priest to read prayers, sometimes holds the waterbowl and towel for the washing of hands.
It sounds like your parish has very stripped-down rubrics.
If men feel inhibited from responding to the call to the priesthood because of the presence of an altar server who is a girl, he certainly does not have a strong vocation to begin with.
Vocations do not usually happen spontaneously. They are composed of a thousand small inspirations and are often interfered with by the promptings of human nature.
Our daughters had no interest in becoming altar servers, but they have helped take up the collection and handed out bulletins after Mass.Any objections to this?
Neither of these helpful activities is liturgical.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.