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.
I never compared the authority of the management of the ... to the Holy See. I only pointed out that disobedience, at times, leads to change for the good. Stop trying to make bizarre leaps.
Essentially you're arguing that two thousand years of the Church's witness is "terrible" because it upsets the sensibilities of Gloria Steinem.
Whaaa?
When, I agree, is immaterial. What is important is how. And that how is through specifically orchestrated acts of disobedience by radical feminist apostates.
Women's suffrage came about through the efforts and disobedience of radical feminists. Does that mean we should go back in time and take away the right to vote from women? You argument is akin to saying the VW bug is bad because it was one of Hitler's brainchilds. In the case of the beetle, I'd rather have someone make the point that it's a bad car because it's unsafe in an accident rather than saying that the person who conceived it was evil. In the same vein, I would rather you explain why altar girls are a bad idea in 2003 rather than point out that the originators of the concept were 'radical feminist apostates'.
I already have. It is an ongoing manifestation of disobedience and it ruins the natural mechanism of fostering vocations.
It is not an ongoing manifestation of disobedience. It is allowed at the discretion of the bishop under certain circumstances. You have not shown any connection or proof of how it ruins the fostering of vocations.
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.
I did not say the motive is irrelevant, and don't make the illogical leap that anyone who supports girl altar servers today has the bad motives of the folks who originally came up with the idea (if indeed they truly had the motives you ascribe to them). I claim that people who support girl altar servers today are not necessaritly radical feminist apostates. My daughter will be an altar server. I have no interest in the priesthood being open to women. In fact, there is no one who would describe me as a feminist either in regards to church doctrine or societal norms in general.
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.
I never made any of these claims. What I said, if you took the time to read my many posts on the subject today, is that traditions and customs should adapt but only after careful and deliberate consideration...this clearly flies in the face of making people happy from moment to moment.