I wasn’t going to opine any further on altar servers, but a reader asked my opinion about what to do with altar girls if you have them.
First of all, it is obviously okay to have altar girls. Rome allows it. You don’t have to have them, but you may. If I went to a parish where there was a group of boy and girl altar servers, this is what I’d do:
But first the method behind the madness: the underlying principle is that in the created economy and the economy of salvation men and women are both necessary and equal, but different. St Paul says this in (I think) I Corinthians, “man is dependent on woman and woman on man.” Adam and Eve played different roles in the fall. Mary and Jesus played different roles in the plan of salvation. Women and men play different, but equal roles in the sacrament of marriage and the mystery of child bearing and family life. The liturgy should reflect all these truths.
This means getting rid of the whole unisex mentality. The unisex mentality subtly undermines true distinctive sexuality and blurs the lines of the developing sexual awareness of both genders, and therefore doesn’t do anyone any favors. Furthermore, there is a kind of assumed uniformity to the genders in the unisex mentality which is untrue and destructive to true masculinity and femininity and only causes confusion in an already very confused society.
So I would first of all dress the boys and girls in different outfits. The cassock albs are more suitable for the female form, so I’d ask the girls to wear those and kit out the boys in cassock and surplice. In the combox Karen already spoke well about girls’ apparel. Under the cassock alb a dark skirt and white blouse, or certainly nothing that would show through and distract. Hair neatly cut or, if long, put up neatly without attention grabbing hair ornaments. Shoes should be simple black pumps. No flip flops, no glitzy high heels or sandals. Neither gender should wear distracting jewelry of any kind. Make up should not be distracting.
Then I would give them separate roles both behind the scenes and in the sanctuary. I’d ask the girls to fill ciboria, replenish the wine and water cruets, dress the chalice and perhaps help with preparation of altar hangings and vestments. I’d ask the boys to maintain the incense, thuribles, books and candles and manage any movement of furniture.
In the procession I’d have the boys carry the cross and candles and thurible. Girls would come next, before the clergy. In the sanctuary I’d have girls serve the alter, helping deacon prepare the altar and serving the water, wine, priestly ablutions and ablutions after Mass, while the boys hold the book for the priest, process with candles for the gospel, and carry the crucifix for the offertory procession.
Both boys and girls should be well trained, expected to be on time, dressed smartly and contribute fully to the liturgy.
Well that’s my two cents worth. It’s not gospel. It’s not infallible. It’s not even my own. Shoot it down if you want.
My former parish would not mix the sexes: servers at a given Mass were all boys or all girls.
Father, I really like that solution. My parish has about equal numbers of boys and girls who serve. My daughter served for a year, and then decided it made her too nervous (she only served once a month and forgot what she was supposed to do in between). I think it was meaningful for her and I am not against it in principle. But I do think it fosters a false sense of there being no difference between girls and boys.
While I understand your thoughts on this Father I find fault in the rolls you assign the genders. The rolls you assign to the females are the rolls that actually are traditionally reserved to the clergy: the actual handling and care of the sacred vessels and the assistance at the altar of sacrifice.For time immemorial, only the Priest Deacon, and Subdeacon were even allowed to touch the vessels. If you must have girls, even though I would say the ideal solution in a climate that was so hostile would be to have no servers instead of mixed gender servers, I would assign tasks such as holding candles or something that does not have a direct liturgical function. It is to be remembered that service at the altar is a privilege extended to laymen by the clergy, who possess that roll by right. A female can never become a member of the clergy and therefore should not fulfill the rolls of the clergy unless there is absolutely no other man to fill that roll.In the past, if there were no men servers, a woman would be allowed to assist the priest at Mass but outside the sanctuary proper and she would only make the responses, and not actually perform any action.This is all considered in the climate of hostile feminists and harsh politically correct bishops of course. No priest can ever be forced into letting a female serve at the altar and if it angers some people that their girls aren’t allowed to be an altar boy then oh well, Christ didn’t bend over backwards to make everyone happy about everything, we should follow His example.
It has been argued with some cogency that having girl altar servers will tend to discourage boys from serving and is a contributory factor to the loss in vocations. However, as girl altar servers are apparently here to stay, assigning clearly defined different roles seems a sensible way out. In all charity though, I can’t help thinking that this is but an exercise in damage limitation.
Cassocks and albs I know, but what does a cassock alb look like?
At our church, the rector very recently sparked debate by deciding to involve altar girls at Mass.After quite a bit of consternation by the more traditional (or, some might say, “orthodox”) crowd, a wonderful agreement was made. The altar girls would serve together, apart from the boys. But, best of all, everything they do will be overseen by a group of nuns from a local convent. It was the best way to deal with the “altar boys lead to vocations” argument. Sure, the “altar boys lead to priests” argument is still unsolved, but we need nuns, too!
Well we just don't have them here at the Oratory. I think they look plain ridiculous anyway. it is nice to save some jobs for the boys! My 2 cents!& I have 8 daughters who have never once questioned boys only serving..& they're not thick either!
A+, Father, for suggesting a solution where the situation already exist. Far better never to start it. We have a daily Mass with our nearly 500 students. The boys are on a rota to serve; the girls are on a rota to be greeters at the door, distributing Mass booklets, etc. Even though some of the girls at our school attend other parishes where there are girls serving, there’s never been a single comment or request for it here. They simply know what our practice is.That’s why I say, “Don’t even start the practice.”
It’s not a bad way of doing things. I’d agree that it’s best to have the tasks assigned so that each knows what his/her job is. The only fly in your ointment may be in smaller parishes, or if you have a full crew but kids out sick, on vacation with family. My own parish has narrow boundaries, no school (ergo not many young families either) and sits smack in the middle of a tourist area. On any given Sunday 50% or more attending Mass are tourists. At most we’ve had 3 servers for a Mass (unless it’s something out of the ordinary like Holy Thursday or the Easter Vigil. For some reason known only to a previous pastor, we have very awkward candles. They’re not the relatively short ones that pull of of their stands at the top. So the younger children including the boys simply can’t hold them steady enough at the gospel or in procession. All through the 34 years I’ve been assisting at Mass in one way or another, we’ve managed to have an even distribution of sexes, but sometimes the boys tend to be older, sometimes they’re younger. It wouldn’t do to have younger boys under 12 try and hold those stupid candles steady – it just doesn’t work. If you assign the tasks to sex like that, with small server crews, if a kid or two is out, then a kid who’s been used to only doing book/candles/cross is suddenly thrown in to doing a task he/she may not know how to cover. All kids should, in theory know how to cover each position. I always had the kids rotate so we didn’t have any of that “how come you always get to ring the bells” argument. Thurifer, was always a special case. All kids (above a certain age, anyway) should know how to QUICKLY light the coals without making a mess. Usually, the assignment was given in advance, and went to the oldest, sharpest server, with one of the younger kids acting as boat bearer.I can also see, in some cases, if the pastor sees a need, to separate the groups – and maybe that is only needed for boys in a certain age range
Watch it Karen! You’re coming over!
Nope, Jackie,I’m not remotely “coming over.” I’ve always said that if for pastoral reasons a pastor needs to keep certain boys in a male only team, then that’s fine. That doesn’t mean “shut out the girls.”Our own servers U are used to being mixed in certain age ranges of little league. [12 and under baseball – after that the sexes for sure need to separate!] the trick is to keep a fairly even # between boys and girls. You have to watch though that you don’t assign a lot of older girls with a couple younger boys. ALL of our kids have served until at least age 16, and often until they go off to college.
Sometimes you just don’t know how good you have it until it’s gone. I visited the catherdral in Charlotte this weekend, and the comparison with St. Mary’s was shocking. The two servers wore the cassock albs, one with tennis shoes. They stared out into the congregation as if they had finished a 12 hour Pac Man marathon. The pastor had to give them multiple directions, and with the Arch-Bishop there to boot. Thank you for all you’re doing so well in Greenville.