In the wake of the large gathering of altar servers, male and female, in Rome this last week, the Vatican’s newspaper L’Osservatore Romano has an essay by one Lucetta Scaraffia.
Lucetta Scaraffia is not a girl or young woman who was an altar server in the crowd who wrote an essay: "What I did on my summer vacation". No, she has appeared in the electronic pages of this blog before (here). This is from her bio on the Italian Wikipedia: She was born in 1948, so she isn’t young. She teaches at La Sapienza. During the 60’s she left the Faith and joined a militant feminist movement. Through her study of St. Rita of Cascia and St. Theresa of Avila reverted. I am guessing this had something to do with the Communita di Sant’Egidio, since her recoversion was celebrated in some way at the the Basilica of S. Maria in Trastevere. She is married to Ernesto Galli della Loggia, an editorialist for Corriere della Sera.
Panorama had a longish interview with her entitled "I, a heretic, explain my conversion."
John Allen of the NCR saved me time by providing a translation of part of the recent essay in L’Osservatore Romano.
Here’s the relevant section from Scaraffia’s essay, in NCR translation to which I add emphases and comments:
"Being an altar server was always understood as a service but, at the same time, as a privilege, [to which no person has any right] because it leads one into the heart of the liturgical celebration, in the space of the altar, to direct contact with the Eucharist. [Which leads us to the question of why the priest’s hands are anointed, and the reason for a sanctuary in a church which is already a sacred space, and why only males are ordained and why the Lord was male.] The exclusion of girls from all this, for the sole reason of belonging to the female sex, [I don’t think this is a fair way to frame it. There are other factors involved.] has always weighed heavily and signified a profound inequality within Catholic education, [education? It is possible that the Italian "educazione" is to be taken here as more than what is supposed to happen in a school room. "Educazione" has to do with the larger concept of upbringing.] which fortunately has been cancelled ["cancellata", maybe the impact of this is "corrected… eradicated"] by now for several decades. Even if perhaps many pastors have been resigned to altar girls only in the absence of available boys, for young women overcoming this barrier was very important, [For whom?] and in fact that’s how it’s been understood: the presence of a female majority at the tenth gathering of ‘ministrants’ which recently took place in the presence of the pope demonstrates it." [I don’t know what it demonstrates. It might demonstrate that the boys were playing soccer or were hiking.]
[And we now careen into the thought of a feminist…] "For girls, entering into the space of the altar has meant the end of any attribution of impurity to their sex, [Does it? I didn’t think this was really an issue. But since L’Osservatore Romano brings it up, perhaps we ought to reexamine why God Himself gave divine positive laws in the Old Testament concerning these matters. We live under the NEW covenant, of course. But obviously God thought that the differences of sex meant something.] it’s meant the possibility of living this formative experience of extraordinary importance in religious education, [See what I mean about "educazione"? If this is merely "education" in the sense of learning, then Mass is being reduced to a "learning experience". But Mass is not a didactic moment, as if it were a tool of social formation. I think to save this thought, that "educazione" has to be something like "upbringing". Even then, there are questions raised.] and it’s meant a different kind of attention to the liturgy as well as coming closer to the faith by drawing near to its very heart." [I hope the writer isn’t saying that in order to "draw near to [the liturgy’s] very heart" you have to be – at least – an altar server.]
I am not sure what L’Osservatore Romano is driving at here.
Perhaps we can go back to their essays on Michael Jackson, the Blues Brothers, etc. for a hermeneutic with which to read this. Frankly, I prefer Romans 12:2.
L’Osservatore Romano last March published a piece by Lucetta Scaraffia which asserted that the clerical sexual abuse of minors would not have happened had there been a greater presence of women in leadership in the Church. That assertion is, of course, specious. Women have been abusers and women have also covered up abuse. Just ask SNAP what it thinks about the cooperation they have received from the LCWR. The seemingly anti-Catholic Irish Times published an edited version of Scaraffia’s piece in L’Osservatore.
Some time ago, Sandro Magister wrote a piece about how L’Osservatore Romano "broke a taboo" by printing something by Scaraffia about brain death and organ transplants. Fr. Lombardi of the Press Office was quick to put some daylight between the Holy See and the newspaper (which raises a lot of questions), saying at that time that the article "is not an act of the Church’s magisterium, nor a document of a pontifical organism," and that the reflections expressed in it "are to be attributed to the author of the text, and are not binding for the Holy See."
She also has an interview on the site of Roma Sette of the Diocese of Rome.
An interesting figure.
But the fact that she is interesting doesn’t mean that L’Osservatore Romano is throwing out a lot of confused and confusing signals.
Loading ...
Can any reasonably orthodox (“neo-conservative” or otherwise) Catholic truly wonder why the SSPX still has some currency among the faithful?
What the majority of girls at the altar server gathering says, is what I have seen in parishes that have girl servers: boys stop serving when girls start. It is predictable and verifiable. When girls enter the “domain” of boys, the boys go elsewhere. The gathering is simply showing us, on a macro level, what has been seen on the micro level since the change.
Father, thanks for the link to the Magister article. I hadn’t been aware there was an undercurrent in the Church toward rethinking the ‘brain death’ standard. This is hopeful news, even if old news.
Girl altar-boys are a grave scandal. This practise must be done away with asap.
There is nothing more tedious than moribund fads, in this case, feminism in its fatuously inclusive aspect. In most parishes where I have attended mass, the servers of either sex tend to act in a very casual manner befitting the laziness of those charged with their instruction, most often, adult females, lay or religious.
Why on earth did JPII ever allow this? It is highly detrimental to boys / young men thinking of the priesthood at a time when they should be encouraged more than ever.
Another Post Vat II paradox.
Women can NEVER serve in the altar or even enter it in the Byzantine Rite except within a convent (one exception I have heard of, and it is rare, is post menopausal baba’s allowed in to clean, but, they can still never touch the altar, and this is a non-liturgical function). Also, a female priest, deacon, subdeacon, or reader would be forbidden from serving the blood less sacrifice if they themselves were cut or bleeding because men in these orders are forbidden to serve if bleeding. This would mean a woman could not additionally serve in any of these orders while on her monthly cycle, or for forty days after birth for example. A woman cannot be ordained for a service which she cannot fulfill. For this same reason men in orders cannot have deformity of hands, or, other issues of body which would impede liturgical function. It makes no sense to have female altar servers when we need more vocations.
I was an altar girl back in the late 80’s – early 90’s, one of the first ones at my parish.
Because there were altar girls, Father stopped taking the boys up to Emmitsburg to meet the seminarians and play football with them. (It had been a treasured trip.)
Altar girls were quickly the majority.
I can’t speak to the effect it had on the parish boys, but it had a horrible effect on me. I decided that I should get to be a priest. Why was it OK for girls to serve at the altar, but not for us to be ordained? To a ten year old, it seemed like a pretty arbitrary place to put the wall.
I went the whole liturgy-nazi-WOC route for a few years in college– thankfully, the Doctors of the Church came along and whacked me in the head with actual…you know… theology (Western civ course. Taught by a quaker. Shook me to the core.)
Anyway, serving at altar is damaging to GIRLS. My childhood intuition was right–it SHOULD be the first step in discerning a vocation to the priesthood. Which is why it should NOT be open to girls. It confuses them and embitters them.
Deirdre, thanks for the wonderful testimony. You did touch on a very important issue – that being an altarboy is a stepping stone oftentimes to the priesthood. I’ve heard many say when altargirls come in, altarboys go away, along with potential vocations. Best, Tom
The concept of girl altar boys reduces Liturgy (a God given privilege in and of itself) to a profane matter of civil rights. Allowing women into the sanctuary is a major step in removing feminine identity and also male identity as well.
I thought the point of “L’Osservatore Romano” was that it was to be a paper of record
and that the views which it expressed represented the “official stance” of the Holy
See on the issues on which it prints a story. The content had some sort of imprimatur.It was not supposed to be like other newspapers where debates could be started or “balloons” floated to test opinion. Or has that role been given to Civilita Cattolica ?
Hello Joseph,
Also, a female priest, deacon, subdeacon, or reader would be forbidden from serving the blood less sacrifice if they themselves were cut or bleeding because men in these orders are forbidden to serve if bleeding.
The WO advocates would throw that rule out the window in jig time as well – and you know it. Such a rule is intricately bound up in the idea of mass as sacrifice; and their conception of ministry is, in fact, Protestant.
Thanks also to Dierdre for her testimony. It hits home.
Oh I am so tired of these feminazis, whether in the Church or in secular society. They need to be zapped by the Holy Spirit! I no longer even want to hear women lectors.
asperges, it is enlightening to read the path by which we did get this. As I recall, there was a country who disobeyed, & had girls serving anyway. Then the Pope’s hand was forced when the request was made; he gave permission. That’s seems to be the process the rebels use – do what you want and permission will come later.
Sandy, that’s how we got Communion in the hand.
Please don’t blame the girls for being feminists. In my case it was my feminist mother who pushed me to be an altar girl, the one who she wasn’t allowed to be. I did not even like it, mostly because I was shy and didn’t like feeling like I was on stage. One time I tripped in front of everyone. Another time the priest had to remind me what to do through the microphone. I was relieved when the year was over. At least it did not turn me into a feminist or make me want to be a priest.
The entire gist of the article above is based on emotion and not theological or spiritual ideas. No references to Scripture, to the fact that Christ, as God, chose men for the priesthood, and no reference to Vatican documents.
We are to “feel” for women who are treated with such inequality. Of course, girls think they can be priests if they are serving. I am convinced that such persons as Scaraffia, honestly do not really believe in the Incarnation-that is, that Jesus was fully God and fully Man ergo, not a prisoner of His time.
As to blaming education, what she means is cultural education-that which the feminist sees as horribly binding cultural rules which keeps the ladies down. Marriage is usually seen as slavery and childbearing a curse. As to altar girls, yet another connection to the changes in the Rite of Ordination, which should never have happened.
The one priest in our deanery who said from the pulpit that he wanted to see boys applying to be servers, as he only had girls, was not only severely criticized by his parishioners, but by some of his fellow priests in this area. The attitude of those in the congregation who opposed him said he had no “right” to prefer and want boys for servers.
This is obviously a touchy subject, but, for instance the Council of Laodicea, can. 44 decreed that women must not enter the Sanctuary, and Pope Innocent III wrote “Although the Blessed Virgin Mary was of higher dignity and excellence than all the apostles, it was to them, not her, that the Lord entrusted the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”
Listen, there IS a difference between men and women! My wife recently had a baby (our fifth, and counting should God will it) and I don’t whine that I can’t bond with the baby in the same manner as her (the baby being truly flesh of her flesh, and even after birth the baby is nourished by her body) trust me, that’s a special thing that men can’t share (not that we desire it! But it is special.) So, I just don’t get the whole impetus that makes some women want to nudge into the Sanctuary. Altar servers should be boys because the Sanctuary is the training ground for future priests!
I even had a priest wanting to make altar servers out of my daughters, and I said “no way!” (Fortunately, I can now attend the TLM.)
Female altar servers is another post-Vatican II novelty damaging to the Church.
Our youngest son just started serving last Sunday – we were all very nervous. He actually was allowed to receive First Holy Communion one year before his classmates, because he really wanted to serve.
Until last Sunday, our small parish had only two girls in their late teens as servers – they had been doing fine, no general problem (only the occasional over-casual wear underneath, like shorts or flip-flops).
When I asked our son what the Priest had told him to wear he said: long, dark pants and black shoes. Considering the casual wear of the girls, I found it a bit strange, but was very happy with that. I wouldn’t have dressed him in any other way. He does seem a lot more comfortable with instructing the boy.
The biggest difference is the reaction of the people. The second he processed in with our Priest, you could hear the elderly ladies sigh and dab their eyes at the sight of an eight year old altar boy with the pure face of an angel (sorry, I love the kid – he’s an angel to me), while everybody else looked at him in an adoring way. He gave out shy smiles occasionally when the Priest regarded him with an approving, encouraging look, and did very, very well.
There is a difference. Even if people don’t want to admit – even if this an emotional argument.
All theological agruments aside – It seems that young boys are instinctively adored as servers, where girls are basically accepted.
We have a very young Priest, who seved
…sorry… too early in the morning over here… need more coffee..
Our Priest is very young (31) and has served himself from First Communion on until he was called to do his obligatory military service. He’s very good with children and I really hope he’ll inspire more boys to follow our son’s example… or his own.
Re: past practice, it should be said that back when there were deaconesses, they were allowed up in the altar area in the East and elsewhere. Why? Because they took the Eucharist to homebound women (whom non-related men could not either legally or non-scandalously visit, depending on the time and place). Once men could do this, this deaconess function faded away. Anyway, thus the special blessing on deaconesses.
Re: bleeding, it’s a cogent argument. However, you know and I know that some people would just think, “Oh, that means it’s okay if I take one of those all-year no-period birth control pills!”
Re: impurity, some men did argue this way in the past — and we call them nice heretical things like “Jansenists” or “Manichaeans”. The general flow of teaching from our Magistra the Church, and from the OT, is that there’s nothing impure about being female, being pregnant, etc. Like food laws, the ritual purity laws were supposed to be about conforming yourself to God’s commands the way Adam and Eve didn’t, not about anything intrinsic to having gone to a funeral or touched someone of the opposite sex.
In Christianity, it was pretty clear (if you read the texts!) that churching was about praying blessings and praise upon a woman who’d gone into danger by giving birth, had to rest at home, and now was finally come out again. It was like giving a celebrity a comeback tour. How feminists transmuted this into “the popes hated women and thought pregnancy was dirty” is really puzzling to me. (Maybe Anglican churching had some sort of unfortunate phrasing?)
My understanding is that deaconesses in the early Church assisted at women’s Baptism. Having said that, I don’t much buy the Early Church argument as a justification for certain actions.
In more recent times, deaconesses were used in women’s monasteries to read the Gospel at Matins.
I was in Rome during the Altar Servers meeting. Most of the female servers were German (Of course, Germans made up about 80% of the attendees). The ones from Eastern Europe were almost all male.
But the parishes with female servers seem to have a majority of female servers, so it does seem to keep guys from becoming servers.
Also, the female servers were often somewhat older – 15, 16, 17. And many were, to put it delicately, kinda cute. I am not sure if it is a good idea for a celibate priesthood to be surrounded by nubile young ladies at Mass. Not just because of the near occasion of sin issues, but also because it just looks wrong!
Yeah, I thought the deaconesses only did the baptism thing too, but this seems to have been around also. And yeah, “The early Church did it” isn’t a good reason….
The thing is, where they exist, liturgical functions for them seem to be peripheral; their primary functions were helping with the Church taking care of the needy and converts, and helping with women religious who were dedicated to praying the Hours. The liturgicalish stuff seems to have been pointed at that.
And yet, the women’s ordination people aren’t saying, “Please, make me a deaconess so that I can help convert Muslim ladies”, or “As a deaconess, it would be my daily duty to go from door to door making sure our elderly parishioners are okay” or “I would dedicate myself to RCIA, and to directing a small group of likeminded women in singing all the hours of the Office every day and night in our church”, or even “I’m already an EMHC for the homebound, but becoming a deaconess would help with this ministry”. They aren’t availing themselves of the fact that laywomen nowadays can take on many of those things, any day of the week; or that women religious can do them. So yeah, deaconesses seem pretty useless at present, besides being a subject that’s a weirdo-magnet. (I ordered that French guy’s book on Amazon, and you wouldn’t believe the recommendations that showed up. Yucko.)
What would be more to the point is if American parishes would quit abdicating all their parish responsibilities for every soul (Catholic or not) living inside their borders, and comfortably trusting the welfare state, while patting themselves on the back for running social justice committees. We really don’t know our neighbors to know when they need help. The early Church was dealing with crowded, chaotic urban environments while often in danger and using nothing but volunteers and ad hoc donations, and yet it managed to deal with all sorts of problems on the local level and to know everyone and everything needing help. With times getting tough, this really would be a good time to look to the early Church’s example, when it comes to taking care of each other.
Suburbanshee,
The thing is, where they exist, liturgical functions for them seem to be peripheral; their primary functions were helping with the Church taking care of the needy and converts, and helping with women religious who were dedicated to praying the Hours. The liturgicalish stuff seems to have been pointed at that.
In Scripture there is no liturgical function for deacons mentioned. The irony is that is what the permanent diaconate has become.
There is also a theological problem of the diaconate, whose ordination is usually considered to imprint a character. With episcopal and presbyteral ordination the character is a spiritual power. The deacon, however, does not receive any spiritual power to distinguish him from a layman.
Well, I believe that (at least in canon law) you started being considered to have a character imprinted on you, way below deacon. Medieval clerical privileges and penalties started pretty low, if I recall… but I’ve never really studied about it.
You know, even in secular life, certain offices print a character on you, without ordination even being involved. You can’t become an un-president of the US, or an un-father of a child. :)
Shrug. It doesn’t really bother me, because I’m a medieval person at heart. I expect everybody to have their own special privileges, appurtenances, regalia, obligations, and horrible penalties. So the diaconate being a bit weird seems perfectly logical to me.
Well, I believe that (at least in canon law) you started being considered to have a character imprinted on you, way below deacon. Medieval clerical privileges and penalties started pretty low, if I recall… but I’ve never really studied about it.
Comment by Suburbanbanshee
Trent says that there are 7 Orders, major and minor. It also says that a character is imprinted at Ordination, not making the distinction between the diaconate those inferior orders.
And that enforces my point: If we say that the Ordination to the Diaconate imprints a character without there being any spiritual power, then there is no reason to deny that a character is also imprinted in Ordination to the subdiaconate and minor Orders.
And that invites questions about Ministeria Quaedam.
I allowed my daughter to serve for a while. I wish I hadn’t.
I realize now that girls on the altar detract from the Mass. Forgive me for not having a better argument than “a bobbing, perky ponytail distracts me”, but it’s true. A solemn boy intent on the liturgy is an inspiration and a hope – – there is something truly edifying in watching a solemn altar boy assiting the priest (esp. at a TLM).
Every moment this basket case of a periodical functions with color of Church sanction is scandal.
Instead of publishing how Mass attendance is 18% (and falling) in America or that a visitor from planet Vulcan would conclude that all Catholics 20-30 died in a recent Crusade …L’Oss writes essays on a secular movie from thirty years ago and declares Michael Jackson’s work causes goosebumps.
I am a fairly recent convert (2 years) so my experience is limited, but it seems that apparently our parish is fairly unique in regard to altar servers. We do have both girls and guys, but the man (lay) who trains the altar servers has some very rigid rules that must be followed, and there is extensive training. All the servers wear heavy soft-white albs with hoods, reaching the top of the shoes (which must be dress shoes), clean and polished. They are trained to move slowly and reverently, and the object is to be essentially invisible – to draw no attention to themselves. The goal is for no one to really remember who were the altar servers for the day.
If girls serve, they must wear their hair tighly bound in a bun at the nape of the neck and they cannot wear noteable make-up. They are trained to move in unison, so there is no excess movement, and no individualistic movements. The effect is of angels serving at the altar, gender is essentially unnoticeable. Time after time I have observed visiting priests and deacons and even bishops, transfixed by these young people. They never fail to mention the reverence and unearthly beauty of the service our servers render.
I thought this was just the way Catholic altar servers did things, being so new to the Faith, but apparently not. I cannot even imagine pony tails bobbing and make-up, etc. to emphasize their “cuteness,” or otherwise drawing attention to themselves. Interestingly, the ratio of boys to girls is about 2 to 1 in favor of the boys, and this has remained steady over time. Perhaps eliminating the ability to show-off in any way, naturally limits the servers to only those who are really serious about serving the Lord. None of the girls seems to have any inclination toward wanting to be a priest. They seem to see this opportunity as something like a direct corollary of the kind of service that Anna and even Our Lady rendered in the Temple in their day.
I took a non-Catholic friend with me to all the Masses last Holy Week. She was overwhelmed when all the deacons, the priests and then 200 young altar servers prostrated themselves in all the aisles. Their dignity and reverence was something she had never imagined before, and she commented “Now I understand what worship in Heaven must be like.” I asked her did she notice that there were a number of girls. She replied that no, she hadn’t noticed.
I certainly would never push a girl (or a boy) to be an altar server, and I would discourage a girl who had serious feminist leanings (especially if she wanted to actually be a priest)from participating. However, I am not inclined to believe the position should be off-limits to girls if the proper mindset is established.
jmabrymd,
My experience is similar. A slightly different approach taken by the permanent deacon in charge of our altar servers — he organized them along military lines, with extensive drill, training, ranks and promotion on merit. That tends to weed out the ‘girly girls’ and those who aren’t serious. All the servers are absolutely focussed and dignified at the altar, I’ve never seen any bobbing ponytails, cracking gum, giggling, etc. although occasionally one of the younger ones (boy or girl) will lock their knees and fall out . . . .
My daughter was an altar server from the time we converted until she went off to college. She got a late start, but she was eventually promoted to the rank of colonel and to the Elite squad (team leaders who promise to serve through high school). She was a senior acolyte (i.e. assisting the priest at the lavabo, presenting the elements, etc.) at our former ‘high’ Episcopal parish, but they were all very formal, serious, and dedicated over there too. She’s got no ambitions towards the priesthood (she wants to be a biologist, probably doing forensics, and she’s serious about a Nice Catholic Boy that she met in college).
I am so very tired of articles from l’Osservatore Romano of this type.
Father Lombardo can point out that the articles in the paper are not a part of the Magisterium and not official “Vatican” pronouncements until he is blue in the face, but the fact of the matter is that 99.9999% of the people who DO hear something about an article in l’Osservatore Romano–usually because the Drudge Report links to a tabloid newspaper’s coverage of the article–will never hear or see anything that Father Lombardo has to say about the distinction. Instead, they will simply be left with the impression the Vatican must be spending a lot of time promoting the Blue Brothers, or Michael Jackson, or whoever, and therefore the Catholic Church must really not care about all that messy, annoying old Jesus/Eucharist/salvation/morality stuff anymore. Alternatively, they just laugh at the silliness of it all.
Either way, the paper’s current attempt to be more relevant to the modern world–a noble goal in itself and one that deserves serious attention–does not result in the salvation and conversion of souls or the spread of the Church’s message. Instead, it simply creates fodder for ridicule or–as in the case with the article Fr. Z linked to above–the subtle, quiet promotion of a mindset of dissent.
There is a reason why the White House, or Wal-Mart, or GE, or any number of large, powerful entities do not put out “official” news magazines in which they publish articles about themselves. There is a reason you have never heard about the Obama White House’s Press Office putting out lists of “10 Best Movies for Democrats,” or the Bush White House Press Office sending out press releases about “Cool Cultural Trends Affecting the GOP. The reason? They understand an important concept: message control.
There are many excellent Catholic newspapers and journals that cover contemporary issues in the Church. That task should be left to them. As an official paper, l’Osservatore Romano should be tasked with writing about things that are…official.
(I have seen this first hand with my wife. She is an evangelical, but she knows a fair amount about Catholicism thanks to her marriage to me. Still, like Fr. Lombardo, I can make distinctions about l’Osservatore Romano until I am blue in the face, but if she knows something is published in the “Vatican’s official paper,” she knows it MUST be what The Catholic Church and the Pope himself now believe–after all, if it wasn’t official, it wouldn’t be in the official paper, right?)
My Daughter told me she wanted to be an Altar Girl. I refused her request with the traditional explanation of our 2000 year ecclesiastical tradition.
Thank you modern Popes for making the job of Christian Fathers harder than it ought be.
I RELISHED confronting the evils, stupidities, corruptions, and inanities of our Culture when I was educating my children while I ABHORRED the revolution the Hierarchy introduced into the Church Jesus established that FORCED me to oppose the Magisterium in her prudential decisions.
Again, thanks modern Popes.
Speaking just for my own self, you, The Hierarchy, the ones who created this revolution, have the DUTY to restore Tradition; in all of its magnificent and beautiful glory.