Catholics in San Francisco Respond: Mass Mob Planned at Star of the Sea Catholic Church

Catholics in San Francisco Respond: Mass Mob Planned at Star of the Sea Catholic Church April 17, 2015
Fr. Joseph Illo and Fr. Patrick Driscoll, Star of the Sea Catholic Church (Photo from Facebook)
Fr. Joseph Illo and Fr. Patrick Driscoll, Star of the Sea Catholic Church (Photo from Facebook)

When Fr. Joseph Illo, the pastor at San Francisco’s Star of the Sea Catholic Church, announced his decision to train only boys to be altar servers, some parishioners and others protested.  Amidst the hullabaloo, the media jumped at the chance to criticize both Fr. Illo and his beleaguered bishop, Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone.

Religion News Service quoted Fr. Illo, who explained his reasons for enacting the policy:

The first…is that “boys usually end up losing interest (in altar service) because girls generally do a better job.”

The second and more important reason, Illo said, is that “altar service is intrinsically tied to the priesthood and serve as feeder programs for the seminary.”

“If the Catholic Church ordained women, altar girls would make sense, but the Catholic priesthood is a male charism,” he said. “Nothing awakens a desire for the priesthood like service at the altar among the brotherhood of young men. At the risk of generalizing, I suspect young men serving with young women might just distract them from the sacrifice of the Mass, and perhaps even from a priestly vocation.”

The Huffington Post injected feminism into the conversation, jumping in to declare that the Catholic Church has far to go to achieve equality for women.

Some of the outrage directed toward Fr. Illo and Archbishop Cordileone is a straw man argument, intended to discredit the archbishop for his defense of marriage as between one man and one woman.  I reported yesterday about an open letter to Pope Francis, demanding Archbishop Cordileone’s replacement as archbishop.

Here’s the thing:  One may argue whether Father Illo’s reasoning is correct.  One cannot, however, dispute that he is within his rights as pastor to make that decision for the good of his flock.  His archbishop approved his decision.  Cardinal Burke has expressed the same concern–that the feminization of the Church has been harmful to efforts to attract young men to the priesthood.

But while the San Francisco Chronicle may believe that the 100 signatories on the open letter represent the Catholic population in the city by the Bay, I do not.

And next weekend, we’ll see who’s right.  The OTHER Catholics in the San Francisco area–those who are faithful to the Magisterial teaching of the Church–have organized a Mass Mob at Star of the Sea, Fr. Illo’s parish.  They are inviting area Catholics to attend the 4:30 p.m. Vigil Mass on Saturday, April 25, and to sign a Spiritual Bouquet, offering prayers for Fathers Illo and Driscoll.  The Spiritual Bouquet will be presented after Mass on that day.

If you’re in the San Francisco area, consider showing your support for Father Illo by attending the Mass next weekend.  If you’re elsewhere in the country but you support this holy priest, please consider signing the Spiritual Bouquet at their website, and committing to pray for Father Illo and his associate pastor, Father Patrick Driscoll.

There is also a Facebook page for the movement.

Bay Area Mass Mob

 

"I'll follow you over Kathy. I was probably in more sympathy with your point of ..."

Parting Is Such Sweet Sorrow…. My ..."
"If you're at all interested in knowing . . . the Catholic Dogma . . ..."

Parting Is Such Sweet Sorrow…. My ..."
"Thank you, Mrs. Harris! Christmas blessings to you. I hope to see you over at ..."

Parting Is Such Sweet Sorrow…. My ..."

Browse Our Archives



TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • PetrusRomanus1

    If a boy or young man is going to be DISTRACTED by a female altar server, lector, extraordinary minister, or even a female sacristan, I would certainly wonder about what that “future priest’s” vocation really is, given the current discipline of celibacy for priests of the Latin rite, along with the freedom of choice which any ordination requires of the candidate.

    All such experiments along these lines that I have witnessed have done more harm than good. Nevertheless, I can certainly acknowledge your constitutional and canonical rights to a “Mass Mob,” even as I must question your wisdom and your rationale.

    • AnneG

      Do you have a problem with a bunch of rich Catholic dissenters writing an “open letter” to Pope Francis? Which is worse? Going to Mass or dragging this crap into public and slandering a bishop and priest?

      • PetrusRomanus1

        These “rich Catholic dissenters” are also acting well within their constitutional and canonical rights. Even though you obviously differ with them, your disapprova;l does not extinguish their rights.

        • AnneG

          They have a constitutional right, but not canonical. They can appeal to Rome, but it is inappropriate to do so in a newspaper ad. This isn’t about getting rid of +Cordileone, though they would be happy if they could. This is about slander, threat and intimidation by Sam Singer.

  • Sandro Palmyra

    Bishop Sal needs at least one place he can go in the city and feel accepted, maybe even respected. Maybe Star of the Sea can be it for him. Maybe not. We will see. It must be hard for him, being so isolated in a community that normally reaches out inclusively towards Gay men.

    • oyecomova

      practicing sodomites are no worse or better than other sinners, the only problem is they refuse to have their proclivity called sinful, unlike adulterers, gossips, incestuous,liars,drunkards, thieves, etc. who as yet have not organized with mass media support to force any religious affiliation to declassify their behavior from sinful to ‘acceptable’. We are all sinners and the church does indeed reach out to all humanity on the understanding that we have to bend the knee to the Word of God and recognize and accept sin for what it is …. not agitate for our particular sin to be ‘declassified’…. as if that were possible. Can’t be done by any priest or Pope, but the liberal secularists and ‘Catholics’ can’t see that simple reality because they don’t really believe in the sanctity of ‘the Word of God’. They equate it with human inspired social movements and legal precepts…in the same way they reason holy matrimony is nothing more than a business contract which can be set aside as required ….. denying the ‘vows’ before God. Not promises to try your best, but ‘holy vows’ to stick it out, whatever the circumstances. Go Father. Don’t be intimidated. Having said that, there is a middle way where 2 groups of altar servers, male and female, take it in turns to serve Mass. But not, together. After all, if a young man may get a vocation to the priesthood or brotherhood by serving on the altar, a young girl may get a vocation to being a nun. The second most honored person in Catholicism is a woman,Mary the mother of Jesus and women are represented in the Doctors of the Church.There are so many recognized female Saints in the church nonsense about women being subjugated in Catholicism is clearly clutching at straws.

  • Tom Panes

    This mob is composed of gay and lgbt people, right?

    • IntellectOne

      Let us hope not!

  • 4christianforces7

    he is following the truth women be silent in the church this a true priest

  • Korou

    “The feminization of the Church!”
    Well, thanks for one good laugh today.

    • AugustineThomas

      Have you been to a Novus Ordo Mass in the last 50 years?

      • Korou

        I have not.

    • jgmitzen

      And the Burke fellow who said it is known for wearing ridiculous outfits that look like dresses. After he said it, the Internet lit up with photos of him in feminine attire that would make Ru Paul jealous. I’m sure you can google it. He’s either a misogynist or… based on the other stuff he said… possibly a self-hating person of his own cross-dressing tendencies. He’s also not a favorite of the Pope and keeps getting demoted. He may BE an altar boy before too long!

      • Korou

        Wouldn’t that be ironic.
        Maybe that is what they mean about the feminisation of the Church. Those bishop’s robes do look awfully soft and frilly.

  • dave

    Nobody is forcing anyone to be Catholic. You don’t like it? simply leave. There are over forty-thousand denominations of Christianity. I’m sure one can be found tailored to your viewpoint.

    • Tom Harris

      Bingo Dave!

    • AugustineThomas

      You shouldn’t encourage people to put their souls in jeopardy. You should encourage them to embrace the truth even if they have to give up their favorite sins and offend their secularist friends to do it. The One True Church is the only way to Heaven.

      • simplynotred

        People need to listen first to the Authority that they have been given. Second if they reject that authority, they have put themselves in jeopardy. How do you say “NO” to someone who is selfish and will not listen to the authority that they are under. It would appear that some Democrats are too wealthy to listen to either the authority that they have been given, or even God himself. They have decided what god is with their own set of values. The Catholic church has never promoted the “Tradition of Conscious”, “Inclusiviism,” or “Human Respect” to the point that respect – denies the Authority that it has been given.

        Theologically speaking, the worldviews of “Inclusivism” and Catholicism are not compatible because “Inclusivism” seeks a universality essentially defined apart from the Christian gospel and the Catholic Church. In other words, it thinks itself more inclusive than God, and on better terms. God’s and the Church’s terms are defined as narrow or hateful or inquisitorial. The Catholic Church connects with eternal life; “Inclusivism” with the short-term satisfaction of desires oriented toward the things of this world only.

        These 108 individuals do not promote Catholicism but rather “Rebellion.”

        • jgmitzen

          >These 108 individuals do not promote Catholicism but

          >rather “Rebellion.”

          They represent people thinking for themselves and not checking their brains at the door. Sexism is wrong, and they won’t rationalize it away. If God has a problem with that, let God show up in the flash mob.

          • simplynotred

            These 108 rebellious souls have absolutely lost sight of their own faith, show little intelligence, and are in fact excommunicated ipso facto. 2 CPTG

          • Korou

            You sure took a long time to confirm what jgmitzen said.

        • wildoakvirginia

          No, those who took the time to express their outrage are speaking for many catholics. How on earth do you think change comes to this church? you still agree that slavery is blessed by god? that mix raced couples should not be allowed the sacrament of marriage? that mixed faith couples should not be married? that the sun revolves around the earth? change comes to our church when those with courage stand up and say ENOUGH.

          • simplynotred

            Taking time to express your opinion in matters of politics can be important.

            Wasting expressions of opinions that have no surface tension is senseless.

            In other words if you want to change Catholic Dogma to fit your designs for a metropolitan area, and they don’t correspond to the teaching of the Catholic Faith, then make your own religion. Don’t waste everyone’s time.

            The Faith isn’t based upon change, the Faith is based upon consistency of Belief. Those who are expressing their opinion regarding Church teaching, and desiring to change same, MUST UNDERSTAND that changes are not relegated to the laity, never have been, never will be. The church is NOT a Democracy as you may think.

            That is your flaw.

            Why would you continue to ask stupid question like do I believe that Slavery is blessed by God, and what has that got to do with Church Dogma – NOTHING! Do you believe that an anus IS part of the functioning components for procreation. That would be stupid as well. So stupidity isn’t the issue now is it?

            Your questions regarding the Catholic Bishops position are not anything but heretical propositions that have been tried and tried thousands of times by many non-believers, or those who have made the error of believing that they where in the Right Will of God.

            Your in the Right Will of God when you uphold, not rebel against the Dogma of the Catholic Faith. Therefore don’t rebel against the Bishop.

            People can be married based upon their own choices, but if their choices don’t abide by Church teachings the individuals MADE their choice to either (1) be in abeyance or (2) rebel against Church teaching.

            Question.

            Can you speed in a 30 mile an hour zone?
            Sure you can.

            Does that mean that you will not get a speeding ticket and have to pay a fine? It depends if there is someone watching who happens to be a police officer.
            MOST LIKELY YOU WILL PAY A FINE. Which means you broke the law. So who will fix your problem – you or some else?

            TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT YOU CHOOSE. If you choose not to be responsible, why should other people fix your problem. Being an adult is also being intelligent. Many adults prefer to be irresponsible and also not take care of their own lives. Is that intelligent?

            What is odd about the 108 is their hubris in believing themselves superior to the bishop, when in fact that they all look rather irresponsible and NOT adult like. Childish may define it better.

          • wildoakvirginia

            thank you for pointing out my flaws. How very catholic and chiristian of you to think that your opinion is the only one that is based on perfect reasoning. the church has made drastic changes over the last 2000 years from what books can be included into the bible to what catholics believe. At one time the catholic church denounced scientific studies that later accepted. this pope is truly challenging catholics to behave the way jesus demanded: to love god and to love each other. You may be weak willed enough to say that standing up to the church is anti dogmatic but you are wrong. jesus himself stood up and changed the course of history by rebelling against dogma of his day. The church went to saying that scieintific discoveries were heretical to now saying that if and when we find other life on other planets that that life is also god given and Christ died for those beings, too.

          • simplynotred

            Your Welcome, except it’s not my opinion, which is your lack of fortitude and comprehension – another flaw. No Changes to the Faith have been made in 2000 years. Much has been revealed, that was already part of the mystery of the faith, but in 2000 years the Faith is still the same, no changes, no opinions, not even mine. Many heretics have tried to change the faith, but in the end they are merely heretics without the faith. Rubrics change, additions which do not go against the faith have been added, but the Faith still remains.

            You weakness in the overview of the Churches perspective on science is NOT what is true, that is merely a generic worldly opinion, the Church held that the earth was round from its very beginning and that it had accepted much of he science of the Greeks. The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to ancient Greek philosophy from around the 6th century BC,[1] but remained a matter of philosophical speculation until the 3rd century BC, when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given. The paradigm was gradually adopted throughout the Old World during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages You shallowness regarding historical fact begs the question, Why do you believe what you have been told?

            Galileo was not burdened by the Church because of his accumulated astrophysical facts, but rather that he was expressing ecclesiastical views that had no support, and without that burden applied to him the very Protestants would have hung him the moment they got hold of him, if he was not hidden from their sight. Fr. Teilhard de Chardin a Jesuit, Anthropologist tried to bend the Faith In a collection of essays, titled “God and Evolution.”

            The principal obstacle encountered by orthodox thinkers when they try to accommodate the revealed historical picture of human origins to the present scientific evidence, is the traditional notion of original sin.
            The trouble is that The French Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin is one of the most audacious, prolific and influential of all the disciples of the heresy of Modernism. Modernism is the most dangerous of all heresies because it destroys any basis for belief in a supernatural world, whereas previous heresies had restricted themselves to denying one or more teachings of the Catholic faith.

            The outbreak of World War I in 1914 interrupted Teilhard’s pursuit of paleontological interests in Paris. Although an ordained priest, he absolutely refused to minister to dying soldiers as an army chaplain. Instead, he joined the army as a stretcher bearer! After the war, he enthusiastically returned to the study of his fossils, and took a doctorate from the Sorbonne in 1922. For a very brief period he taught geology at the Catholic Institute of Paris, but his heterodox opinions, especially with reference to Original Sin, precipitated his termination.

            Much of Moderism impact on the Catholic Faith has much to do with Teilhard de Chardin, but in the end his own words summarized his full intentions.

            “Rome does not want me to return to my professorship. They do not seem to have taken a dislike to me, far from it; but they want to save Religion … I would take enormous delight in breaking all ties.” (Letter, Feb. 14, 1927)

            Scientific advances are not always advances i.e. the Nuclear Bomb, abortion, and the pseudo Environmental Sciences to name a few. Additionally Scientific theories which most common people have been told by secular media, believe to be facts are in reality still theories, i.e. that the universe has always existed, that Homosexuals are born, and not developed, that the evil doesn’t really exist.

            No Christ died for those who want to be with him, and obey his Fathers Commands, and “Eat his Flesh, and Pray daily to save their souls, and believe the Apostles Creed – although it was the Will of His father that all should be saved, not all in fact are save.

            There you have another flaw and that is believing that All rather than many will get to Heaven which is the precipitation of what you call changes, but in fact are denoted as ERRORS, I just call them flaws.

      • Jim H

        “The One True Church is the only way to Heaven.”

        That is not what the Church teaches. Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church concerning “The Church and non-Christians” beginning at 839.

        http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p3.htm

        Only the heretical sedevacantists teach otherwise.

      • Laureen

        Yes.
        CCC, #846-8:
        “Outside the Church there is no salvation.”

        “This is a hard saying; who can believe it?” (John 6:60)

      • yankee111

        NONSENSE!!! The Catholic Church is a COMPLETE FRAUD and LIE!!!

        True church is a institution that Protects and Covers up for Child MOLESTERS!!!

        ——————————————–

      • Jim H

        You are getting increasingly cowardly about responding to legitimate challenges, even when the challenge concerns your own misrepresentation of stated Church teaching.

        Do I need to question your gender again to get your attention?

    • radiofreerome

      And I congratulate you in finding a religion that justifies your prejudices.

      • dave

        I’m not prejudice-

  • oyecomova

    the support page has a glitch… my message could not be sent due to ‘unknown error’ despite checking and attempting to send many times ….. one wonders?

  • Korou

    Thanks for the link to the Huffington Post. Reading it, you realise how skewed this post is! For one thing, I didn’t realise that girls actually were allowed to serve as altar servers. It wasn’t a case that the Church said “Only boys should be allowed to serve at the altar,” which, although sexist would be their prerogative. No, what they’re saying is “We’ve decided to reverse our longstanding policy. Although girls have been allowed in for the last twenty years we’ve now changed out minds – boys only from here.”
    No wonder San Fransiscan Catholics are outraged. The Church treats them with contempt.

    • AnneG

      20 years is very small in the history of a 2000 year old Church and 4000 year old tradition. Rich that an iconoclast is appealing to tradition.
      Btw, the “outraged San Franciscans” are dissenting and not very Catholic and this is an AstroTurf attack carefully orchestrated by a master smear campaign.

    • fredx2

      You are horribly confused. Where is the statistical analysis that says San Franciscan Catholics are outraged? We have a few of the usual very liberal suspects, backed by the Human Rights Campaign, it seems, hiring a big name PR firm to bash the church, to stage supposed demonstrations of “normal Catholics” to get stories planted in the media.

      No, San Franciscan Catholics are not much affected at all. The media is upset, the usual liberal manipulators of the media are upset. But no, regular Catholics have not indicated one way or the other.

      • Korou

        You’re right to point out that we have no idea about the percentage of San Fransiscan Catholics involved. My meaning was that it is not surprising that there are Catholics in the city who are outraged, and are right to be.
        Hardly surprising that we’d find Seasons of Grace and its commenters attempting damage control. Not a very graceful blog, I fear; more interested in protecting the powerful than seeing justice done.

  • Michael Skiendzielewski

    “…..One may argue whether Father Illo’s reasoning is correct. One cannot, however, dispute that he is within his rights as pastor to make that decision for the good of his flock. His archbishop approved his decision. Cardinal Burke has expressed the same concern–that the feminization of the Church has been harmful to efforts to attract young men to the priesthood….”

    (1) Where is the data, evidence, facts, etc. to corroborate Father Illo’s reasoning? Has such research been conducted re male and/or female altar servers? When one practices his/her religion, there are two components, faith and facts.

    (2) Whether or not one can establish whether Fr. Illo’s decision is based on facts and evidence, he still may be within his rights as pastor to make that decision (for the good of his flock, is another issue altogether). Absent any hard evidence to support Fr. Illo’s claim, the parishioners of the parish are within their rights to voice their own opinions relative to this issue because the parish belongs to the faithful as well.

    (3) Without the evidence and facts to support Father’s Illo’s contentions relative to having only male altar servers, the archbishop’s approval of this action is irrelevant. Affirming an idea or program is meaningless unless the steps taken can be supported and corroborated.

    (4) Using Cardinal Burke as a source/resource to support Father Illo’s decision and purportedly the archbishop’s approval of same is simply preposterous. By the way, what is the “feminization of the Church”?

    • AnneG

      Michael, the Catholic Church is not a democracy. The pastor of a parish is responsible for all the souls in his parish and the administration of the parish. There are lots of ways that administration takes place. He has a lot of latitude in that regard.
      The Catholic Church and a Catholic parish is not a government bureaucracy where you try to find consensus, usually a fruitless waste of time.
      A parish is not a court where you are required to weigh evidence.
      So, where, exactly, do you get the idea that Fr Illo has to follow your rules?
      Finally, there is a campaign against boys, men and masculinity in general in the U.S.
      Though you have a right to your opinion, Cardinal Burke has more authority and responsibility before God.

      • Michael Skiendzielewski

        Never said, suggested or implied that the RCC is a democracy. If that is the conclusion that you drew from my analysis, then you are mistaken. Certainly, I have never suggested that he has to follow my rules. Where is the evidence of a campaign against boys, men, masculinity within the US? How does Cardinal Burke have more authoritybefore God?

        • AnneG

          Michael, by appealing to rules of evidence regarding how a parish is administered you are implying democratic order.
          Cardinal Burke has the responsibility of the priesthood and episcopacy as well as being a “prince of the “Church” and therefore has authority and responsibility before God. His authority makes him responsible before God in ways that I am not. Neither are you, unless you are a Cardinal.
          Boys are medicated in school to get them to sit still over girls by a factor of 10 to 30, depending on the study. There are even campaigns to get men not to stand up to void. A lot of these things attack the essence of boys and men. Check it out.

          • Michael Skiendzielewski

            Let’s end this right here. You are just making such broad , opinionated, subjective statements that are not in response to the issues in the article and the points I have raised. Your last paragraph would be laughable if it were not so tragic.

          • AnneG

            Michael, I answered each of your points, politely, I might add. You just don’t like it.
            So, may the Lord, in His Infinite Mercy, show you His Love.

          • Michael Skiendzielewski

            You answered the question whether or not there was fact, evidence, etc. to support Father Illo’s philosophy of male-only altar servers (in light of his reasons for doing so)?
            Where?

          • fredx2

            She answered your questions. you did not like the answers.

          • AnneG

            Michael, Fr Illo does not have to refer to academic or sociological studies. He has the responsibility and authority to administer the parish. You sited that requirement, a requirement that does not exist.

          • Michael Skiendzielewski

            AnneG,

            So you didn’t answer the question. I did not ask whether or not Fr. Illo HAD TO base his decisions on facts, evidence. I asked whether or not there WAS ANY facts, evidence, etc. to support his male-only altar server program.

            ………..according to your logic, a pastor has the ultimate authority to institute ANY program (absent illegal or criminal conduct) within the parish? Is that what you are saying?

          • AnneG

            Ultimate authority and any program? No, that would be Protestant. See John Pper and Mark Driscoll at Mars Hill.
            Catholic priests function under their ordinary, Canon law, the GIRM, the CCC and, ultimately, the Pope.

          • Michael Skiendzielewski

            Under Canon Law,etc., did you know that he could decide to exclude all female participants from liturgical services within the sanctuary?

          • AnneG

            Yes. So what? Why are you obsessed with clericalism?

          • fredx2

            I work at a major corporation. I started noticing something about our marketing materials a few years ago – white men were disappearing from those ads/ materials. We had black women, black men, Hispanics, women of all races – but white men either disappeared altogether or became rare. Why would such a bizarre event occur? And it was not just our corporation – look at the marketing materials you receive in the mail. Try to find a white man.

          • SarahTX2

            I have never heard of this campaign. Seriously, what channels are you watching?

          • AnneG
        • Mary Anne

          Just flip on the TV (if you can stand it) to see the attack on masculinity. Very obvious.

          • SarahTX2

            Okay, I just flipped on the tv and saw the pictures of the people in New Hampshire running for President. No attack on masculinity there. And then I flipped over to the picture of the Presidents of the United States. Again, no attack. And then I went to CNBC to see who the CEO’s of the big companies are. Definitely no attack there. I’m sorry, what channel are you watching again? I guess you’re watching Bravo or something?

          • IntellectOne

            Just looking at the President makes you think of Feminization of the Nation.. Obama and Biden both hollering from the top of their lungs ( from the Bully Pulpit) that they want same-sex marriage.

          • Dan

            News programs…well, their influence isn’t as strong on the culture as those programs which fall under the category of “popular culture.” Look at the general trend in commercials and sitcoms and other popular media and you will see what Mary Anne is talking about.

          • AnneG

            Sarah, those are specious comments. The point is that masculinity is under attack. There is a book about the attack on boys reviewed here on Patheos. I can look for it if you like.

          • SarahTX2

            I can look for it myself and I can also look for an article or two here and there that supports any point of view, but the idea that men are under attack is total propaganda. All that has happened is that men are having to share the power and control that they held almost exclusively. This was inevitable after women started going to college and earning paychecks. But it is not an attack on men.

          • AnneG

            A couple small examples: boys are 10 to 30 times more likely to be drugged in schools than girls. Women outnumber men by 60% to 40% in college now.

          • AugustineThomas

            You’re arguing against yourself. The president and nearly every CEO are feminized at this point because they’re afraid they’d lose their positions if they acted like men.

          • Korou

            Such cunning feminists! Instead of replacing the leaders of countries and corporations with women they’ll turn them INTO women! Is there no end to their mendacity?

            …or to right-wingers paranoia?

        • fredx2

          How come you insist on peer reviewed research for those positions, but all the positions from the left require no such evidence? Besides, there are well known tendencies for men to avoid church more than women, this is a well known fact. So just start looking around tor it , rather than trying to pretend it absolutely positively could not possibly be true.

      • SarahTX2

        I remember hearing that phrase constantly when I was growing up. The Catholic Church is not a democracy. It doesn’t really mean anything though. Is it meant to imply that women have importance only in democracies? That doesn’t make sense. It’s a mantra that’s used for everything that doesn’t make sense. The other mantra is, why don’t you just leave if you need to be in a church that makes sense. Gee, what a great religion. I also remember being told that it was a sin to even ask questions that the priest doesn’t feel like trying to answer. Is that still the way children are being taught? Does “the Catholic Church is not a democracy” mean that everyone has to be dumb? Sorry, doesn’t make sense.

        • JohnnyVoxx

          You are so blind and full of hatred. Forgive them for they know not what they do.

          • SarahTX2

            You can be more original than that, can’t you?

          • Korou

            Standard tactic. Disagreement = blinded by hatred. A good reason to avoid listening.

        • fredx2

          Perhaps this will help: The church is based on a text – called the bible.

          In the US, our democracy is based on a text. Called the constitution. In order to make definitive judgments about what the constitution means, we have a Supreme Court – a group of very learned men who decide what those words in the Constitution mean.

          The church has a similar mechanism to decide what the bible means. It is called the Magisterium of the church. A very learned group looks at the bible and decides what it ultimately means.

          So, in the United States, we do not let every average person read the constitution and decide for themselves what it means, because a lot of people would come up with a lot of wrong answers.

          By the same token in the church, every person cannot decide what they think the bible means, because they will come up with varying, and wrong, and really wrong conclusions that do not take teh fullness of the bible into consideration.

          So yeah, the church is not a democracy, for a good reason.

          • SarahTX2

            Doesn’t make sense. You just said that even in the United States, a democracy, people can’t decide for themselves what the Constitution means. So the democracy is the same as the Catholic Church?

          • AugustineThomas

            Except that the Supereme Court has decided that mass baby murder is a right. Apparently you need the Holy Spirit involved or Satan takes over the whole process..

        • AnneG

          The Catholic Church is founded by Jesus Christ and exists under His Authority. She is not a political party where you have meetings and decide what to believe. “Everyone has to be dumb?” Well, the way to avoid that is to read, starting with the Catechism, the Church Fathers, the Documents of he Church.
          You bear responsibility for educating yourself. You have access to the Internet and there are lots of reliable sites where you can find everything I mention just for starters.
          Now, if you desire a church where lay people get to vote, they do that in the episcopal church. In the baptist churches they even get to hire their own pastors as they do in a lot of others.
          Does that make any sense?

          • SarahTX2

            No, because what you’re saying is that lay people in the Catholic Church might’s well not bother reading and educating themselves since they have no say in their religion one way or another. They have to take what they get. They have to do what they’re told. It would be easier for dumb people to do that than for smart people who read a lot. I read the Catechism. We memorized it. And very few questions were allowed. That’s not a real education. Memorizing doesn’t make anyone smart. It makes them robotic.

          • AugustineThomas

            I’m at least as smart as you are and yet it’s no problem for me to not be a priest and recognize that there’s a reason for obedience to God’s Church. Only people who rebel out of ignorant arrogance can’t find a reason to be obedient to God’s Church even if they don’t understand every single teaching. Perhaps you should pray for virtue rather than endanger your soul by working yourself into a frenzy over the teachings you disagree with.

          • Jim H

            Why aren’t you a priest? You seem totally dedicated to the Church and obedience to God. Wouldn’t making it your life accomplish more than arguing with “secularists” and “heathens” via the internet? What’s the story on you?

    • fredx2

      Do you have some sort of research that proves that altar girls lead to more priestly vocations?

    • wildoakvirginia

      OK, we refer to the church as Mother Church. But for gods sake, keep the women out!

  • captcrisis

    Fr. Illo suspects that having female altar servers is a step toward having female priests — after all, if altar servers are really a feeder into the priesthood, over the years a growing number of female ex-servers will accumulate. They will feel left out and become a powerful lobby for allowing female priests.

    This suspicion is correct. Paul (or someone writing in his name) said women should not speak in church. Yet now we have female readers, women leading antiphons, and girl altar servers. Eventually the last domino in the series will fall.

    • AnneG

      No,crisis, we will never have women priestesses in the Catholic Church. Doesn’t work that way.

      • captcrisis

        The present policy so offends the laity’s sense of justice, and is so obviously based on nothing but misogyny, and an all-male priesthood is so obviously inadequate, that you should “never” say “never”.

        • AnneG

          Everything you say is obvious, is not. The laity does not make doctrine, thank God. We’d be Arians if we did.
          This is not misogyny. Priests may be inadequate as individuals, but the Lord built His Church.
          If you want priestesses, the Episcopal church would be happy to have you.
          Never will there be women priestesses in the Catholic Church because we never have had women priestesses.

        • IntellectOne

          So you are a Protestant or a Heretic.

          • captcrisis

            My voice is the majority voice of American Catholicism. Look around you next Sunday. Most of the people attending agree with me, and disagree with you.

          • Korou

            Quite right. Take a look at the recent survey of the world’s Catholics. Quite simply, they line up with us on most issues.

          • AugustineThomas

            That survey is bunk. It was only filled out by leftist bishops in leftist dioceses and leftist parishes. As usual, orthodox Catholics were not invited to the party.

          • Korou

            I’m sorry, that’s just not so. Perhaps we’re thinking of different surveys?
            The one I was thinking of can be found here:
            http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/09/catholics-church-contraception-abortion-survey
            It’s true that Catholic opnions are much more in accordance with the Church’s teachings in poorer and less educated countries, but in America and the rest of the developed world the pattern is quite clear: a majority (and often a very large majority) of Catholics disagree with the teachings of the Catholic Church. They support the right to abortion, divorce, gay marriage and especially contraceptives.
            This isn’t news and it isn’t an isolated incident. Remember the Catholic blogs that posted about Father Peter Daley? He invited people to come to his church and tell him what objections they had to Catholicism. The overwelming response? It’s sexist and homophobic.
            The evidence is in. You’re losing.

          • Korou

            Oh, and look at this:

            “The Vatican is aware of a gulf between teachings and common practice on social issues. Last year it issued its own worldwide survey to try to gauge the attitudes of ordinary believers on subjects such as divorce, contraception and gay marriage, and last week bishops in
            Germany said its results showed that most Catholics in their country disagreed with the church’s stance on artificial birth control, premarital sex, homosexuality and communion for remarried divorcees.”

          • Neko

            In the US you were lucky to hear a peep about that survey from the parish priest.

          • Korou

            It’s immensely heartening to look through the survey results. The Vatican may be outmoded, sexist and homophobic but Catholics themselves are in a much healthier place. I do believe that, over time, the tide will swing towards a better Church – but it will be a long, painful process.

          • Neko

            We agree. Hang in there!

          • AugustineThomas

            The Arian Heresy was once the majority belief of members of the Church. Truth is not a democracy; you only think it is because you’re a secularist.

          • Jim H

            “The Arian Heresy was once the majority belief of members of the Church.”

            Are you admitting that Constantine “rigged the vote” at Nicaea? How else would the Arianists lose the vote, if they were the majority?

          • Neko

            Actually, yes. Constantine pretty much strong-armed the bishops at Nicaea.

          • Jim H

            Thank you.
            Augustine Thomas will never admit to it, but it seems that would be the only way that what I understand was a very popular view could lose.

          • Neko

            Constantine was determined to find a resolution to the Arian controversy. Only a fraction of the bishops invited to the Council showed up. Most of the bishops in attendance were from the East. Pope Sylvester of Rome sent two envoys.

            Eventually even Arias signed off on the Creed, but he was exiled anyway. The only other dissidents, two Libyan bishops, were also exiled. (They were all reinstated a few years later, however.) Thus was Jesus proclaimed consubstantial with the Father, a development that almost certainly would have astonished Jesus of Nazareth.

            Constantine wasn’t even baptized at the time.

          • Jim H

            As I remember, Constantine was baptized only on his death bed and had worshipped both Apollo and Mithras during his life.

          • Neko

            You’re right. Apparently he had plans to be baptized in the Jordan but illness prevented him from traveling to to the Holy Land.

            Ironically the Roman Senate declared Constantine a god after his death.

          • AnneG

            We don’t vote on dogma.

          • captcrisis

            Most dogma was in fact voted on, at the ecumenical councils where the dogma was declared.
            Anyway, restricting the priesthood to males is not dogma.

          • captcrisis

            Most dogma is the result of ecumenical councils and was done by vote.

            Anyway an all male priesthood isn’t dogma.

        • Westphilo

          Then find another church.

          • SarahTX2

            Mantra #2.

          • AnneG

            That is really juvenile. If you disagree, fine. But, it is an answer. You just don’t like it.

        • fredx2

          Oh, I see you are confusing “the laity” with “the radical politicized left leaning liberal-homosexual group” Obviously, those are two entirely different groups. I can’t see how you mixed up the two.

    • Actually, you’re not far off- there’s a lot of evidence that that particular phrase was added later by a more misgynoist editor; the Greek tone and grammar pattern doesn’t match up with Paul himself.

      • captcrisis

        It’s also inconsistent with Paul’s references to specific women as teachers and leaders. He even refers to a female as an Apostle — are we to believe that an Apostle is not to speak in church?

  • AnneG

    Wonderful idea to support both Fr Illo, Abp Cordileone and the parish.

    This is a good article about this attack being choreographed by a professional media manipulator, Sam Singer, and a bunch of dissident Catholics.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417116/among-catholic-leaders-against-cordileone-some-veteran-activists-against-catholic

    • fredx2

      For this group of people, the church is just another political organization, and therefore they need to wage political campaigns, complete with political style media pressure PR events, lying about the opposition etc.

      It is all rather creepy that they would infest our church with this low minded political strategy. It was revealed that most of them have given large sums to the Nancy Pelosi campaigns, etc.

      I say to them “Keep your creepy political hands off my church.”

      • jgmitzen

        >It was revealed that most of them have given large sums to the
        >Nancy Pelosi campaigns, etc.

        So the people freaking out here are a bunch of arch-conservatives of the conspiratorial mindset who see political conspiracy in every act? It sounds like they don’t represent “real Catholics” at all, just the extreme right wing who want to make everything about politics. Perversely, you’re projecting this same mindset onto the people you’re villifying rather than accept it’s just you and your fellow travellers here who see the world that way.

  • $130667811

    As an altar boy in the past, and even now at times, I can say that Fr.’s assessment is true: being an altar boy gave me a hunger for the priesthood.

    • Laureen

      Good for you–I hope you act on it!

  • SarahTX2

    So, should they bring their daughters with them to support the marginalization of girls in that parish? How do they explain it to their daughters? Are the daughters trained to just not ask about it?

    • IntellectOne

      Are you the parent or the child? Explain to the daughter exactly like the priest explained it. Who is in charge in you household? The children?
      Women can never be priests. That is just the way God Planned it.
      Tell the daughter that Jesus Christ’s Mother, The Blessed Virgin Mary, was not a priest either and that she was the most beautiful creature that God had ever Created. Had Jesus Christ wanted women priests He would have chosen Her to sit in the Holy Chair of Peter. The One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church is the ‘Bride of Christ’. Therefore, no women or homosexuals allowed into the priesthood. The priesthood should never be feminized because the priests are ‘Fathers’ : Protectors of the Faith and provider of the Soul’s Spiritual needs of the people in the pews. “Do you Love Me Peter?” “If you love Me Peter, feed My Sheep”.

      • SarahTX2

        I told her about the Virgin Mary, but she said women can’t be like her either because she married and didn’t have sex, so which people are women supposed to be like? I told her, I don’t know, they’re not supposed to be like the other Mary either, so I guess there was a Sarah in there somewhere who’s maybe the one they’re supposed to be like. And then I told her I am in charge of this household, and you are not allowed to ask who you’re supposed to emulate. She totally apologized and said she realizes that the Church is not a democracy. Whew. That mantra worked for another day.

        • IntellectOne

          Tell her she can be a nun or a contemplative sister and that would make her the Mystical Bride of Jesus Christ and be a saint that she was meant to be. Build your treasures in Heaven and only then will you have everlasting live love and happiness..

          • Korou

            Tell her whatever fairy tale you like to get her to be quiet, the little feminist!

          • SarahTX2

            You’re funny.

          • Korou

            Thanks!

        • AnneG

          Who is she supposed to emulate? How about St Gianna Berretta Molla, St Katherine Drexel, St Elizabeth Ann Seton, there are a lot of them in all vocations. Not hard to find great saints, lay or consecrated religious in the Church.

          • SarahTX2

            Oh, cool, none of the people she’s ever heard of in the Catholic Church. That’ll make a lot of sense.

          • AugustineThomas

            Perhaps you should stop searching for reasons to complain and instead teach her about the saints!

          • AnneG

            A mind is a dangerous thing to waste. Have her look them up. I suspect your comment makes me suspect you don’t know who they are, either. You might find them fascinating. I love both St Katherine Drexel and St Elizabeth Ann Seton, who was a widow with children and an Anglican convert, btw. She was also the first American saint.

      • Máire Ní Bhroin

        There has been no mention of Ireland’s St. Brigid who was ordained a priest by St. Patrick. He set a shining precident for women priests hundreds of years ago. If women were allowed to be ordained, they might stop the unholy scourge of child sexual abuse by Catholic male priests.The argument that Jesus appointed only males was simply a matter of the cultural norms of the day in a patriarchal society.Both Mother Mary & Mary Magdalene were followers & His disciples for in those times woman were seen and not heard, yet Jesus saw and heard them and the many women he ministered to in the New Testament. Since it was not safe for women to go from town to town alone evangelizing, the male followers took on that role back then.

        • Korou

          Your comment has absolutely no place on this thread.
          It is much too sensible.

          • Máire Ní Bhroin

            Thanks.God bless you!:)

        • AnneG

          Máire, again, Bless your heart. Regarding St Patrick, that is a complete myth. Not true. Never happened.
          Jesus could have chosen whoever He wanted for Apostles, and He did. Fact is, He chose no women. This is one of those ghost of VII myths that rattles around in dissident parishes.
          A woman cannot be a priest because she is a woman all the way down to the depths of her soul. That is the way God made her. God chose the priesthood for men.

          • Máire Ní Bhroin

            Hi Anne, Bless your heart too! I was going to reply to your earlier comment about child sexual abuse being eliminated in the church now (excuse my paraphrasing). According to an Associated Press article dated May 7th, 2014 titled – ‘Vatican reveals how many priests defrocked since 2004’, the Vatican “defrocked 848 priests ” and “sanctioned 2,572 with lesser penalties.”There have been more than “3,400 cased of abuse reported to the Holy See since 2004.” Hence, my contention that women priests could reduce the incidence of child rape and molestation. Most studies I have read indicate that the incidence of sexually abusive women is significantly lower than among men. The annual rate of reported cases to the Vatican “has remained at a fairly constant 400 or so since 2010.” Women ordinations could greatly serve to reduce that number.
            As for the ‘myth’ of St. Brigid being made a priest (or bishop) by St. Patrick (some sources cite an unknown bishop or St. Mel) I can only cite the book ‘Brigid of the Gael’ by Conrad Bladey a “collection of historical hagiographical source material on St. Brigid” and a “sourcebook for classroom use”. I think there may be some truth to these different historical accounts. We may agree to disagree on that.
            Finally, our Holy Mother Mary was not only a teacher and Mother to our Lord, but a disciple too. Further, Mary Magdalene was named “Apostle of Apostles” by the early church and (as I mentioned to Manny in another post on this discussion board) the gospels cite Mary of Bethany as a disciple in Luke 10:38-42 , “sitting at the feet of Jesus” as a student of His teachings. Luke gives many examples of woman as disciples, if you choose to read my post to Manny. I agree, we are women to the very core of our spiritual beings. Maybe that is why Jesus revealed himself, after the resurrection, especially to His women followers. They did not doubt, nor deny Him. They stood with Him at the cross and annointed His Holy body at the tomb. Like Mary of Bethany, we do not have to be in the “kitchen” to serve the Lord for He said – “Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.” Jesus said “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples…”; women can be true disciples ie. priests. The peace of Christ to you.:)

          • AnneG

            There are lots of noteworthy women in our family of believers.
            They were disciples, small d, and belong to the priesthood of the faithful, small p. They never did and never will be priests in the Order of Melchizedek. Not gonna happen. Be content with what the Lord Has called you to.
            As for the St Brigid thing, lots of the stories are apocryphal at best and not approved by the Church. Any ordination of a woman is not valid, period, ever. That does not diminish our worth or ministry or usefulness to the Lord.
            I don’t mind being in the kitchen, even if you do, and I have plenty of letters after my name, btw. Serving is what the Lord wants us to do.
            You can go hang out with Hillary if you want. I’m not too good to bake cookies, wipe a kid’s dirty face or care for an old person because there I see Jesus.

    • guest

      Look at reason #1. Maybe they could be altar girls if they did a crappier job of it like the boys apparently do, if this reasoning is to be accepted as given.

      • SarahTX2

        Thank you, that’s my point. It doesn’t make sense.

        • AugustineThomas

          The real reason is that the point of altar serving is to consider and prepare for the priesthood. It makes no more sense for the girls to serve than it does for boys to go to retreats to consider becoming nuns.

    • fredx2

      To say that this is “marginalization of girls at that parish” indicates that you only understand things in a political way, not in a religious way. We are a church here, not a political organization. The two are quite different. yet people keep thinking that political ideas must govern the church.

      • SarahTX2

        No, sir, that’s another excuse, another version of “the Catholic Church is not a democracy.” As I’ve written above, that mantra does not make sense. The importance and essence of women is not a political matter. It shouldn’t be a religious matter either. It’s human nature. Are they really supposed to tell their daughters that they can’t be altar servers because they would be better at it than boys?

        • AugustineThomas

          There supposed to tell their daughters that if being laypeople and mothers isn’t enough, they should become nuns. Look at what the Benedictines of Mary, Queen of Apostles have done with their lives as nuns. Imagine if they had been taught by their parents to complain and weaken the Church with mindless rebelliousness.

        • AnneG

          Sarah, you are implying that only service on the altar is valuable? That is clericalism. We dealt with that in the 16th and 17th centuries, but it seems to be back.

  • Luis Gutierrez

    I hope the “mass mob” is prudent and respectful and loving, but some form of mass protestation is certainly appropriate. This is not just about boys and girls, or men and women. This is about confusing people with the notion that the male-only priesthood is a matter of faith. It is not. Out faith is that the Church is “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic,” but not necessarily “male-apostolic.” Sooner or later, the Church will have to decide if a patriarchal priesthood, in imitation of the patriarchal norms in Jewish, Greek, and Roman societies, is for the glory of God and the good of souls as the patriarchal culture fades. In the mean time, being an altar server is a lay ministry. Why should the girls be excluded?

    • JohnnyVoxx

      You speak with such authority for one who is so profoundly ignorant. Perhaps you should spend some time in prayer and study and ask Jesus Christ why He chose men to be His Apostles or why He only “sent” men forward to re-present the Last Supper.

      • Luis Gutierrez

        I may be ignorant, but this is a sign of hope:

        “The way in which Jesus Himself regarded women, in a context that was far less favorable than our own, casts a powerful light illuminating a road that takes us far, on which we have traveled only a short distance. It is a road we must travel with more creativity and boldness.”

        http://www.news.va/en/news/general-audience-the-complementarity-between-man-a

        • fredx2

          And this was said by the man who says “Women priests are not possible. That door has been closed:”

          • Luis Gutierrez

            The door is provisionally closed but it is not dogmatically locked. No Pope has ever said that the door can never be reopened.

            “The reservation of the priesthood to males, as a sign of Christ the Spouse who gives himself in the Eucharist, is not a question open to discussion, but it can prove especially divisive if sacramental power is too closely identified with power in general.” (EG 104)

            Note that the statement is written in present tense, and says nothing about the future; and it good to know it is a question, not a dogma.

    • fredx2

      Dude – you need to read Ordenatio Sacerdotalis, and then the document that the CDF issued afterwards. I’m afraid the male only priesthood is a matter of faith. Do read up on our Catholic faith, and the sources of authority in the church. You will find that you are not your own Pope.

      • Luis Gutierrez

        Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is NOT a dogma of the Catholic faith. It was not published as an infallible dogma on 22 May 1994, and the CDF saying it is infallible afterwards does NOT make it infallible.

        • fredx2

          Dude – you are seriously confused.

          First, you ignore Ordenatio Sacerdotalis. You think you are a better theologian than the magisterium of the church. Second, you ignore the CDF’s formal recognition that ordenatio sacerdotalis must be adhered to by all Catholics as a matter of faith and morals. You just ignore their judgment – you believe your judgment is better.

          And you ignore JP II himself, who said that Ordenatio Sacerdotalis was infallible, in his ad limina address to the German bishops in 1999: Presumably, you are a better Pope than Popes, JP II, Benedict and Francis, who have all repeated the same things:

          Without doubt, the dignity of women is great and must be more and more appreciated! However, too little consideration is given to the difference between the human and civil rights of the person and his rights, duties and related functions in the Church. Precisely for this reason, some time ago, by virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren, I recalled “that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgement is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful” (Ordinatio sacerdotalis, n. 4).

          As the authentic Pastors of your Dioceses, you have the duty to reject contrary opinions put forward by individuals or organizations and to encourage that open and clear dialogue in truth and love which Mother Church must foster regarding the future of her daughters. Do not hesitate, then, to emphasize that the Magisterium of the Church has taken this decision not as an act of her own power, but in the knowledge of her duty to obey the will of the Lord of the Church herself.

          Therefore, the doctrine that the priesthood is reserved to men possesses, by virtue of the Church’s ordinary and universal Magisterium, that character of infallibility which Lumen gentium speaks of and to which I gave juridical form in the Motu Proprio Ad tuendam fidem: When the individual Bishops, “even though dispersed throughout the world but preserving among themselves and with Peter’s Successor the bond of communion, agree in their authoritative teaching on matters of faith and morals that a particular teaching is to be held definitively and absolutely, they infallibly proclaim the doctrine of Christ” (Lumen gentium, n. 25; cf. Ad tuendam fidem, n. 3).

          Of course, we should help those who cannot understand or accept the Church’s teaching to open their hearts and minds to the challenge that the faith poses to them. As authentic teachers of the Church who is mother and teacher, it must be one of our highest priorities to help and support the faith of our communities. Therefore, we should stop at nothing, if necessary, to dispel confusion and correct errors. So I invoke the gifts of the Holy Spirit on your efforts to give an authentic character based on Christian doctrine to the role of women – for the renewal of society and for the rediscovery of the Church’s true face.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was not proclaimed as a dogma of the faith. None of the above is an infallible definition of revealed truth. There is a difference between religious assent and the assent of faith. See CCC 892. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was not proclaimed in a “definitive manner.” The “definitive” teaching in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis refers to the past and the present (as of 22 May 1994). It cannot possibly refer to the future, since the document says nothing about what the Church can or cannot do in the future.

        • AnneG

          Luis, yeah, it was. You’ve listened to too many of the lefty loosies who want to do what they want to do. It is not possible to ordain a woman to the priesthood.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            Are you suggesting that the Church no longer has the power of the keys? This is not about what *we* want to do. This is about discerning what *Christ* wants to do in the Church of the 21st century. Do you really believe that Christ still wants to appoint 12 males to represent the patriarchs of the 12 tribes of Israel?

          • AnneG

            The Church only has the authority to do what She has been given. Btw those keys are to the Kingdom. No, women will not ever be ordained. Just read above.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            And where is the Kingdom? Isn’t it close at hand? Never say never. Miracles can happen!

          • AnneG

            Never. Not going to happen. Will never happen. A woman is a woman to the depths of her soul and cannot be ordained to the priesthood.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            A woman is a woman, and a man is a man, but our common humanity goes even deeper. Consider this:

            “Corporality and sexuality are not completely identified. Although the human body in its normal constitution, bears within it the signs of sex and is by its nature male or female, the fact, however, that man is a “body” belongs to the structure of the personal subject more deeply than the fact that in his somatic constitution he is also male or female.”
            http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/jp2tb8.htm

            Never say never. Miracles do happen!

          • AnneG

            Luis, whoever you got this stuff from is wrong. But,
            You want priestesses? This is what you get.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            I try not to use the term “priestess” because it has a bad connotation by association with the pagan temple priestesses in antiquity; nor am I interested in insulting anyone. That said, what I am suggesting is that the Church must open the door for baptized women (especially nuns) to be ordained as PRIESTS of the New Law. If the door is opened, we are going to get some good ones!

          • usapan_lang

            Jesus and the apostles ordained “only” men. Who are you to redefine that teaching? The Church is not closing its doors for baptized women, it is these liberal ideology of ordaining women that closes the people’s mind from the truth of the sacred tradition.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            But should the Church remain frozen in an antiquated patriarchal ideology that is passing away? Patriarchal traditions are not intrinsic to sacred Tradition. Surely, only Church authority can change this choice (CCC 1598), but Church authority does have the authority to ordain women to the priesthood as soon as it is decided that doing so would be for the glory of God and the good of souls.

          • AnneG

            No, it has been stated above more than once that the Church cannot ordain women. No matter what. The Church is not modern, even when we have modernists. She is eternal.

          • Laureen

            It’s “passing away”? Says who, other than you?
            There’s none so deaf as he who will not hear….

          • usapan_lang

            The reason why the Church is still existing even after two thousand years is because it is very loyal to the very words of Christ and not bowing down from the ‘fad’ and the pressure of the culture. “Antiquated” as you put it is what makes the Church solid and authentic unlike the Christians who are their own popes that has multiplied for more than 40 thousand denominations claiming to be Christians.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            Are you suggesting we should stay in the patriarchal culture of Israel *before* the resurrection? Would this be what the risen Christ wants for the Church?

            There is a difference between passing “fads” and signs of the times. One such passing “fad” is the patriarchal culture that is very old but NOT intrinsic to the Catholic faith.

          • AnneG

            Luis, Where did that icon come from? It is very strange. The Panagia is not a priest.
            Can Not Happen. Where do you get your ideas?

          • Luis Gutierrez

            The Blessed Virgin Mary is more than a priest. Therefore, why is it that a baptized woman cannot be ordained to be a priest?

          • AnneG

            Different vocation. A woman cannot be ordained. Rome has spoken.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            Rome has not spoken infallibly on this yet. The Marian dimension of the Church precedes the Petrine dimension (CCC 773) so there is a connection.

          • AnneG

            The picture is of Katherine Jefferts Schori, presiding bishopess of the episcopal church and she is a priestess. Too bad if that isn’t pc enough for you.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            Again, I am not interested in insulting anyone, either within the Catholic Church or in other Christian churches (or, for that matter, in any other religious tradition). If you share a photo of a priest or bishop in another church, I prefer to share an image of the Virgin Mary. Are you familiar with Our Lady of La Salette? She looks like a bishop to me. In fact, she looks like much more than a bishop! See CCC 773, which teaches that the Marian dimension of the Church precedes the Petrine dimension. So there is a connection between the *unique* ministerial vocation of Mary and the ministerial vocation of ordained priests, don’t you think?

          • radiofreerome

            She looks a lot less like a vampire than Benedict XVI did.

          • Laureen

            There is not now, never has been, nor ever will be, a female priesthood in the Catholic Church.
            If you like the idea of that so much, the Episcopal “church” “ordains” all sorts of characters. As does the Methodist one.

          • Desert Sun Art

            Excuse me, but Christ, being God, is outside of space and time. He does not change in accordance with the world’s time and customs of the day. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. We arrogantly think that we are so advanced and know so much better than the “ignoramusus” of the first century. Oh please.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            God is always the same, but the Church is “work in progress.”

          • Laureen

            You sure about that? Are you referring to the Church headed by the Vicar of Christ? Can’t be.
            1 of the 3 chief reasons I have for being Catholic is bcz she is, far & away, the ONLY institution on earth who stands foursquare again this “world.” She, like her devout members, are IN this world, but not OF it. She will never “change with the times.” She will never be a “modern-day” Church. She & her members will always be hated by the “world,” always be criticized & castigated by those of this world.
            If that’s what you like & want, there’s PLENTY of Protester “church” communities that are very much in & OF this world, doing all sorts of things that are both un- & anti-Scriptural.
            You don’t find that in the One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church, founded by Christ on the Rock of St. Peter.

        • Desert Sun Art

          If you think you only have to believe the Dogmas of the Catholic Faith, then you are mistaken. There are only a handful of Dogmas, as in The Immaculate Conception, but there are many doctrines- all of which must be held by the faithful.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            Yes, but not with certainty of faith.

    • Bellfri

      Uh, Luis, I think all the apostles were male. If Jesus wanted female apostles, wouldn’t He have had them? His Mother for instance, Mary Magdalene….?

      • Luis Gutierrez

        The 12 male apostles represent the patriarchs of the 12 tribes of Israel. What really matters is that Jesus appointed humans to be his apostles. Mary is more than an apostle. After the resurrection, Mary Magdalene was sent as an “apostle to the apostles.” Would Jesus appoint only males today?

        • usapan_lang

          You and your own interpretation. You need to know what it means to be “ordained” stop interpreting the scripture according to your own folly. Read the “ACTS of the APOSTLES” and how they lay their hands as a sacrament to the future apostles and bishops. A succession was done after Judas died and it was Matthias. The Church never viewed Mary Magdalene as one of the 12 Apostles.

          • Luis Gutierrez

            My understanding of the sacrament of holy orders is based on the dogmatic definition on the institution of the priesthood by the Council of Trent, which does NOT mention a masculinity requirement:

            http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch23.htm

            Actually, the ordination of women to the priesthood follows from the apostolic decision to eliminate the requirement for male circumcision (Acts 15:28). Mary Magdalene was an “apostle to the apostles,” more than an apostle.

      • wildoakvirginia

        Uh, Bellfri, Mary M was the apostle’s apostle.

    • Laureen

      Read Kathy’s post. She explains this.
      I fully support male-only altar servers. I wish all parish priests would follow the pastors @ this one.
      Girls don’t belong @ the altar.

    • jgmitzen

      >Why should the girls be excluded?

      Because

      1) Some people have such a low tolerance for cognitive dissonance that they can’t even handle the thought that any member of their church could be wrong about anything, ever and must behave in a reactionary manner. Otherwise they might have to ask what else it might be wrong about and they secretly fear losing their faith. de Chardin wrote that “Only those who truly believe their faith dare to question it”.

      2) Some people are misogynists, like the Cardinal Burke who was quoted.

      3) Some people have a conspiratorial mindset and see in every action some sort of grand attempt to destroy their way of life that must be met with the fullest force they can muster. Hence this becomes some sort of tyrannical attempt to destroy the Church and something, something Nancy Pelosi.

  • Tom Harris

    No doubt it’s the Militant Gays who are unhappy with the teachings of Jesus against homosexual sex. Fortunately, there are tens of thousands of celibate gay Catholics who don’t mind being celibate for the sake of the kingdom. I personally know many! They struggle with it daily, but it’s a sacrifice they are willing to offer up for eternity in heaven. God love them too! No one said the price to enter heaven was easy! Stick to your guns Bishop. The whole church unites behind you!

    • IntellectOne

      How would you know that there are “thousands of celibate gays” . Because, any person that identifies themselves as homosexuals; they are not celibate.

      • fredx2

        Because they speak out quite regularly now. Because there is a growing movement within the homosexual community that advocates remaining celibate as the preferred way of dealing with their same sex attraction. See Eve Tushnet, etc.

        • Korou

          Reliable statistical source, please?

          • fredx2

            See Wesley Hill’s many articles. He is gay, and he estimates that about 50 percent of those in the gay lifestyle are open to the idea of celibacy, because they feel something very profound is lacking in the standard gay rights movement.
            See Eve Tushnets books and articles
            For Josh Gonnerman’s articles.
            For a similar vein, review the videos on youtube by Rosaria Butterfield, former lesbian feminism professor, who came to a thoughtful, complete change of course.
            There is even a name to this movement – it is called “”The New Homophiles” by some.
            The movement appears to be based on the recognition by many homosexuals that the “gay lifestyle” was not meeting the most basic human needs that people have, so they have begun searching in different directions – and they discovered that celibacy is a part of the answer.

          • Korou

            As I thought. You have no independent and reliable data, just individuals who support your views and have written about their thoughts. The closest thing you have to anything worth taking seriously is “expert” Wesley Hill has “estimates”. I bet he does!

          • Bellfri

            Korou, the reason there is not a lot of emphasis on a “cure” for the homosexual is that too many in this society want to make the life style acceptable. As abortion, it never will be by all in society and it is unfair to those who want to be helped to deny them that opportunity.

          • Korou

            Actually, gay therapy was very popular for a while in conservative religious circles. What stopped it was the mounting evidence that (a) it didn’t work and (b) was extremely cruel.

          • usapan_lang

            Now, now Korou, where is your “mounting” evidence? Extremely cruel? says you!

          • Korou

            Well, I think the American Psychological Association can be trusted when they conducted a 2-year study into ex-gay movements of all kinds and found that none of them were effective in the slightest when it came to changing sexual orientations. Sad to say there were generally a great many other effects involved, including depression, suicide and serious psychological damage of other kinds.
            So no, it’s not “says me”. It’s “says the experts in psychology.”

          • jgmitzen

            There’s an Onion article that declares that ex-gay therapy is very successful in preventing homosexual acts right up to the suicide of the patient. I have a feeling people here would embrace that as both a real article and a good thing if it were true.

          • Korou

            While I’m sure that they would see the suicide as a bad thing – and, to be fair, for genuinely humanitarian reasons, not just because suicide is “a sin” – I doubt that this would budge their views on how gay people should be persecuted.
            Not that they like to admit that it’s persecution. Oh no! Love the sinner, hate the sin, don’t you know.

          • usapan_lang

            Well here’s a news for you on studies please read and get the link at the bottom:

            Some statistics about the Homosexual lifestyle:

            • One study reports 70% of homosexuals admitting to having sex only one time with over 50% of their partners (3).

            • One study reports that the average homosexual has between 20 and 106 partners per year (6). The average heterosexual has 8 partners in a lifetime.

            • Many homosexual sexual encounters occur while drunk, high on drugs, or in an orgy setting (7).

            • Many homosexuals don’t pay heed to warnings of their lifestyles: “Knowledge of health guidelines was quite high, but this knowledge had no relation to sexual behavior” (16).

            • Homosexuals got homosexuality removed from the list of mental illnesses in the early 70s by storming the annual American Psychiatric Association (APA) conference on successive years. “Guerrilla theater tactics and more straight-forward shouting matches characterized their presence” (2). Since homosexuality has been removed from the APA list of mental illnesses, so has pedophilia (except when the adult feels “subjective distress”) (27).

            • Homosexuals account for 3-4% of all gonorrhea cases, 60% of all syphilis cases, and 17% of all hospital admissions (other than for STDs) in the United States (5). They make up only 1-2% of the population.

            • Homosexuals live unhealthy lifestyles, and have historically accounted for the bulk of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B, the “gay bowel syndrome” (which attacks the intestinal tract), tuberculosis and cytomegalovirus (27).

            • 73% of psychiatrists say homosexuals are less happy than the average person, and of those psychiatrists, 70% say that the unhappiness is NOT due to social stigmatization (13).

            • 25-33% of homosexuals and lesbians are alcoholics (11).

            • Of homosexuals questioned in one study reports that 43% admit to 500 or more partners in a lifetime, 28% admit to 1000 or more in a lifetime, and of these people, 79% say that half of those partners are total strangers, and 70% of those sexual contacts are one night stands (or, as one homosexual admits in the film “The Castro”, one minute stands) (3). Also, it is a favorite past-time of many homosexuals to go to “cruisy areas” and have anonymous sex.

            • 78% of homosexuals are affected by STDs (20).

            • The Los Angeles Police says, “30,000 sexually abused children in Los Angeles were victims of homosexuals” (10).

            • 50% of suicides can be attributed to homosexuals (10).

            • It takes approximately $300,000 to take care of each AIDS victim, so thanks to the promiscuous lifestyle of homosexuals, medical insurance rates have been skyrocketing for all of us(10).

            http://www.freedomoutpost.com/2014/01/intolerance-homosexual-agenda/

          • Korou

            It would be nice if you were to admit that you were wrong about gay “reparative therapy” being harmful and ineffective.
            On the next and unrelated point, is homosexuality unhealthy? Most of the people saying that it is seem to be right-wing Christians of one type or another. Hardly trustworthy sources.
            Take a look at these two instead:
            http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/oct/19/gay-men-promiscuous-myth
            “There is only a one percentage point difference between heterosexuals
            and homosexuals in their promiscuity: 98% of gay people have had 20 or
            fewer sexual partners; 99% of straight people have had the same number.
            Tellingly, OkCupid found that it is just 2% of gay people that are
            having 23% of the total reported gay sex.”
            and
            “For the first time we have a statistical glimpse into an unreported truth: that your average gay person’s sex life is every bit as dreary and unremarkable as a heterosexual’s. But that a tiny proportion of themare freakishly promiscuous. Sex, it would seem, is distributed as unevenly as money.
            And yet, that is not the narrative we have been fed. The idea of the rampaging predatory homosexual is so ingrained in the western psyche as to inform not only fear, hatred and abuse but also policy and laws.”

            Also: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.html

            “Some psychologists and psychiatrists still hold negative personal attitudes toward homosexuality. However, empirical evidence and professional norms do not support the idea that homosexuality is a form of mental illness or is inherently linked to psychopathology.”

            And: http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051012/study-same-sex-parents-raise-well-adjusted-kids

            “”The vast consensus of all the studies shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are heterosexual in every way,” she tells WebMD. “In some ways children of same-sex parents actually may have advantages over other family structures.”

          • jgmitzen

            The evidence is the APA and other groups that declared that it didn’t work. States are banning it now, at least for minors.

          • wildoakvirginia

            oh, you could be right, so priests are now living the new gay lifestyle.

      • Mike Blackadder

        You can certainly be celibate while having same sex attraction (ie. homosexual). You’re just plain wrong.

        • IntellectOne

          But, if you are celibate, why identify yourself as homosexual?

          • Korou

            Because you have attractions towards members of the same sex.

          • Laureen

            Then you say you are/have, “same-sex attracted/-ion,” if you have decided against sexual contact, not “homosexual,” which indicates that you’re sexually active.

          • Marge Simpson

            Actually, homosexual means someone who is attracted to those of the same sex. It does not mean they are sexually active. “Homosexual” and “having same-sex attraction” are the same.

          • Korou

            Thank you, Marge.

          • Laureen

            For what?
            Pray tell. (Especially after reading my above reply to her, which I encourage you to do…)

          • Korou

            Reading the first one, it’s nothing more than a collection of the same collection of Catholic “truths” about homosexuality.
            Interestingly, though, it doesn’t contradict Marge or me. A person who is attracted to other persons of the same sex is homosexual, whether or not they act on their feelings.
            I don’t think I’ll bother reading the other two. If they do have any good points to make, perhaps you’d like to summarise them.

          • Laureen

            Let me analogize the question, then:
            Imagine someone you know has just gotten a new job where s/he MUST walk past a jewelry store to get to his/her employer. Can’t avoid it. Has to do it.

            Imagine further s/he ambles past the store’s windows daily, pausing to admire the baubles on display, continues on, & finds him/herself flooded w/desire to return later to burglarize the business to steal those gems s/he REALLY wants, but can’t afford to pay for. S/he finds him/herself thinking a LOT about this. Can’t afford to buy them, & unable to get idea of owning them off the mind.

            Eventually concludes that it’s not worth what it’d cost him/her to have those gems w/o paying for them. Yet, still finds him/herself thinking unabated about having them.

            Is this individual a thief? A criminal?

          • Korou

            No. The person in your analogy is a kleptomaniac, whether or not they act on their urges. Just as a person attracted exclusively to the same sex is homosexual, whether or not they act on their feelings.

          • Laureen

            Wrong again.
            Someone who’s “attracted” to things s/he can’t afford, & only considers stealing them–whatever it is, or its dollar value–& succeeds in resisting that urge, is NOT a thief–even less a klepto (someone who steals habitually) And you know this.

            Someone who’s merely ATTRACTED to some sin–like homosexuality (participating in homosexual acts), or adultery (a married person having sex outside of the marriage [since 2 s-s people cannot be married, it follows that they can’t commit adultery, so this doesn’t apply to people in s-s relationships]) or avarice (above paragraph) does NOT make someone a sinner (as in a homosexual, an adulterer, or a thief–who IS a criminal IF s/he acts on his/her urge to steal.)

            Name a law enforcement agency whose officers will arrest someone for THINKING about stealing a car…right, CAN’T DO IT; there isn’t one.

          • Korou

            Goodbye, Laureen.

          • Laureen

            You are wrong.
            There is a huge difference between those who recognize that they’re inclined toward/attracted to other people of their sex, & those who act on those attractions/inclinations.

            The first is called people with same-sex attraction, & the other is called (active) homosexual persons..
            It is not a sin to be attracted to members of your own sex. But–
            It IS gravely, mortally sinful to act on that attraction/inclination toward, & become homosexual. There’s a fat distinction between homosexual inclinations, & homosexual acts, which you don’t make, but should.

            The difference between them is not minor or insignificant.
            The Church certainly recognizes these differences–these distinctions are where I got them from:
            http://catholicherald.com/stories/Same-sex-attractions-The-Churchs-pastoral-response,13998
            In reading this, please take note of the word “a,” in the 10th paragraph, 2nd sentence. It makes a difference.

            Here’s another resource from the Church, that, if you will notice, distinguishes between homosexuality & same-sex attraction–there’s also a number of links here:
            http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/homosexuality/

            I found this piece I found highly informative as to the distinctions the Church makes betw homosexuality & same-sex attraction:
            http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/same-sex-attraction-and-the-catholic-church

          • jgmitzen

            So there’s no such thing as a heterosexual virgin? You’re redefining vocabulary here.

          • Laureen

            Nowhere in my post did I state that virginity is restricted to heteros.
            Any person who has never had sex IS a virgin–whether s/he identifies as homo- or hetero-sexual..
            The topic of my post is the distinctions betw “same-sex attraction” & “homosexuality.” Not the definition of virginity.
            Does that clear things up for you?

      • elvira

        Because there are thousands of celibate straight people, so why wouldn’t there be?

        • Laureen

          There’s probably as many or more same-sex attracted people who are celibate, as there are straights who aren’t sexually active.

      • jgmitzen

        And everyone who identifies as heterosexual isn’t celibate?

        • Laureen

          Heterosexuals can be celibate no differently than anybody else.
          The answer to your question is a definite NO.
          Everyone who identifies as heterosexual is either sexually active or not.
          Same goes for homosexuals. They’re sexually active, or they’re not.

          • Marge Simpson

            “Same goes for homosexuals. They’re sexually active,or they’re not.”
            In your reply to my post, you said homosexual means sexually active. Your above quote is correct. It is not a sin to BE a homosexual, but it is a sin for a homosexual to be sexually active, just as it is a sin for a heterosexual to be sexually active outside of marriage (marriage being between a man and a woman).

      • radiofreerome

        IntellectNone, you’re completely off base.

      • usapan_lang

        Then how do you know that all homosexuals that identify themselves as such are not celibate?

    • jmstalk

      Yes we all have habitual sins we have to give up. Bravo to the celibate gays who strive to honor Christ.

      • jgmitzen

        Loving someone isn’t a “habitual sin”.

        • radiofreerome

          Indeed loving someone isn’t habitual sin. Calling love a “sin” is evil and filthy-minded. That is precisely what the Church does when it calls homosexual orientation a tendency toward moral evil.

          • usapan_lang

            No, you misconstrue the meaning of love. Stop claiming love in the name of sex and lust. Love is not a feeling or emotional high.

          • radiofreerome

            Stop whoring Christ to your personal hatreds. Homosexuals are just as capable of selfless love, agape, as anyone else.

          • Susan

            Not if they are perpetrating a vile, irrational act on another human being, which mocks God’s Design of the human body and removes Purpose and Dignity. The homosexual behaviors are vile and disordered—warped and sick. They are an abomination, as the Bible states, and the ethics which Christianity promotes never allows stripping oneself or others of dignity and worth.

          • Susan

            Homosexual orientation is caused by child abuse and neglect so it is morally evil. It is a learned behavior like all other behaviors. It can be controlled—although the sex instinct is harder to control for males. Lusting—getting arousals is NOT Love—Love is sacrifice ONLY. To “think” you can unite to another human being by sodomizing them is pure mental illness, and the warped desires are intrinsically disordered—like I say—from child abuse which warps the desires and reality of a child.

            By glorifying sodomy or trying to normalize such irrationality, a dehumanizing and vile vice, which mocks God’s Design of the human body, is evil. It is an abomination. There is no rationalization of the normalized pagan practice where pederasty existed like in Afghanistan with the harem boys today— a lifestyle which always uses the boys in vile ways, since the boys were abused and fixated at a young age in the vile behavior.

            The violated Afghani harem boys grow up to lust after males, boys and goats, and hate and mutilate women (The Other–true diversity which takes maturity). They would say they “Love” the boys, like the pederast John Maynard Keynes stated when he was castrating little boys for his homosexual orgies. The sexist homosexual cultures are pure evil and vile and dehumanizing to everyone involved.

            That desire is surely vile and evil. To equate it with “Love” is just sick.

          • radiofreerome

            Susan, perhaps your father raped you, but mine didn’t rape me. The love I know is all sacrifice. Sex is not involved. Hence, I call it agape. You Catholics burned gays to death if they had sex. You were more ruthless than Muslims and Jews in the way you treated homosexuals. Your personal hatred borders on the murderous.

    • Jim H

      “No doubt it’s the Militant Gays who are unhappy with the teachings of Jesus against homosexual sex.”

      Jesus never said a word about homosexual sex, Show me one verse in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John where he even mentions it.

    • jgmitzen

      Jesus never taught anything against homosexual sex.

      >Fortunately, there are tens of thousands of celibate gay Catholics who

      >don’t mind being celibate for the sake of the kingdom.

      Oh I’m sure they “don’t mind” just like Islamic women “don’t mind” being told they can’t drive or that they have to dress like Jawas. How convenient for your conscience that they “don’t mind”!

      > but it’s a sacrifice they are willing to offer up for eternity

      How convenient it’s a sacrifice YOU aren’t being told to make!

      >God love them too!

      Enough to make them that way and then tell them to be alone and miserable forever?

      It’s sad how many people have to be compelled to suffer anguish because your cognitive dissonance can’t cope with the idea that your religion might have made a mistake in the Middle Ages.

      • radiofreerome

        Saying Jesus taught something about homosexual sex is like saying the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor. It’s insane, but why stop a fanatic when he’s on a roll.

    • wildoakvirginia

      no, the whole church does not unite behind him, ergo this conversation.

      • usapan_lang

        yes the whole Church (those who remain loyal to the teachings) are truly behind the Bishop and will support him to the end. We (the people) are the true Church. We will remain to be the pit in the stomachs of the heretics! It is time, the sleeping giant is awake.

    • Jim H

      “Stick to your guns Bishop. The whole church unites behind you!”

      According to PRRI, that simply isn’t true. 60% of American Catholics support marriage equality. That means the majority stands against him.

      http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/04/22/3649935/poll-american-muslims-supportive-sex-marriage-white-evangelical-christians/

  • I suggest people listen to this series “Good or Evil – Who Decides”
    Who decides what is good or evil? The state? Society? The individual?
    Join Dr. Raymond De Souza as he teaches about the Natural Law and the
    Magisterium of the Catholic Church

    13. Ordination of Women
    Is the Priesthood a human right, or a calling? Apologist and author Dr. Raymond De
    Souza discusses the ordination of women and why it is not in line with the mind
    of Christ. http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/seriessearchprog.asp?seriesID=7080&T1

    • IntellectOne

      For the Protestants it is not a problem,; for them to say that it is okay for a women minister, because they do not believe in the ‘Real Presents of Jesus Christ. That is exactly why they will never have the ‘Fullness of the Faith’.
      Any Catholic that thinks there should be women priests are not Catholic. They are, sad to say, Heretics. If you think there should be women priests, do not present yourselves at Holy Communion. Because , with that kind of mindset, you are no different than Judas of Iscariot. He did not believe in the ‘Real Presents’ of Jesus Christ even to the end..

  • guest

    We can’t have altar girls because “girls generally do a better job.” There you have it. Mediocrity is the order of the day, as usual.

    • Korou

      Exactly. I can’t believe he said that!

    • AugustineThomas

      I think that was a mistake and he was just trying to head off the perpetually offended who would say he is misogynistic and just putting down girls. The best altar serving I’ve seen has been without exception at EF Masses where all who serve are male.

  • Yasmin Patel

    In the end Catholics will decide what Catholicism is. Maybe you will be the one to leave, dave.

    • Iris

      That is where you are incorrect Yasmin; since the Catholic Church was established by Christ himself, in the end Christ will decide what Catholicism is, not humans calling themselves Catholic.

      • Bob Miller

        Christ did not found the Catholic Church, an institution as we know it today, but the Church with the missions to celebrate His presence and to spread the Gospel. The Church is not the Kingdom of God but hopefully leads us to it. To deify the church as being more than what it is misrepresents the tradition we have received down through the ages.

        • danno2281

          Bob, the Church is both the Body of Christ (Col. 1, 24) and the bride of Christ,(Eph 5, 23) a visible entity (Mt, 18,17), the pillar and foundation of truth. (1Tim. 3,15)

        • AnneG

          Yeah, he did, Bob. “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”
          John Henry Newman

    • Iacomus

      Not so! In the end the King shall return to hand His Kingdom over to our Father. (cf. Rev.22)
      Marana tha!

    • AnneG

      Yasmin, doesn’t belong to us, we belong to Jesus Christ as does His Church.

  • Dan

    I tried sending a spiritual bouquet, but I keep getting an error message.

    • Pandora17

      me, too…..

  • I see nothing wrong with altar girls. There are theological reasons why women can’t be priests. There are no theological reasons why girls can’t be altar girls. The default then should be to equality.

    • fredx2

      Except having altar girls has devalued the whole altar boy thing. Now they have to wear those ridiculous unisex sacks instead of the neat looking altar boy uniforms. You are right in theory, wrong in practice. The simple truth is that less boys seek to be altar boys if it is a girl thing.

      • Dan13

        Then the problem is with the boys and their parents, not with the girls.

        • AugustineThomas

          And the end result is that we have a mass shortage of priests in the West, weakening the Faith here and in the places from which we import them.

          • Dan13

            The decrease of vocations was happening before the pope officially permitted altar girls.

      • Frankly that’s such nonsense. If you want more boys as altar boys, then inspire them. What are boys supposed to crumble because girls are competing with them? Give me a break. If that’s the case then what are boys supposed to do in the business world? Crumble to competing women? That’s just an excuse, and a lousy one at that.

        • fredx2

          It doesn’t matter if you don’t like the rationale – if it is happening, it is happening.

          • And it would happen either way. Boys are not being inspired. That’s the problem. Forcing a handful to be altar boys is meaningless.

        • AnneG

          Gosh, Manny, boys don’t crumble when girls are around. But, they do lean against the wall, horse around with each other.
          I don’t really like altar girls and I don’t like the unisex sacks either.

          • What unisex sacks? At my parish they wear something that resembles what the priest is wearing.

          • Dan13

            Again, then it is a problem with them and their parents. Not the girls.We can’t blame reverent girls for the misbehavior of boys.

          • AnneG

            It is a problem with rolls.

      • Devalued? I don’t see it. What unisex sacks? At my parish they wear the same sort of garment the priest wears.

    • Jack Napier

      “The default then should be to equality.”

      Nope. Incorrect. Please try again. This time, please think instead of feel.

      • First off, why do you need to be so rude? Perhaps a little Christian humility will do you good. If you’re going to be rude, please don’t reply to my comments again. Second, there was no feeling in my response. It was purely based values. Third, who died and made you Pope? The Popes and Bishops have allowed altar girls, so you please try again.

        • Jack Napier

          The Popes and Bishops also foisted Novus Ordo Masses, liturgical dance, and other delightful “innovations” on us. Look where that got us.

  • jmstalk

    Brave souls.

    A local parish pastor made a similar decision to train boys only as alter servers. It did not even amount to a blip on the radar around here in Ohio.

  • Living Water

    Gay people given special class status, –why? No more is required of them than of straight unmarried people.

    • Surely there is a difference between failing at what is allowed and being banned from even trying? Also, straight people are told from year dot that what they feel for the other sex can be holy and become a sacrament, gay folks on the other hand, are taught by the Catholic church to see their feelings as a desire for something depraved. It does lead to a very different upbringing, I’ll vouch for it.

      • Desert Sun Art

        It is not only the Catholic Church-and it does not see it as depraved, but disordered- up until the last few decades, it was considered a disorder by most in the medical, social, and psychological fields. Why? Common sense as to the nature of sexuality. Today, we have lost our desire for reason, logic, and common sense, and base everything on our emotions.

        • It does, as per the catechism: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, the church… bla bla bla’

        • You note, truly, that the medical, social and psychological professions do not consider it a disorder anymore, are they therefore all wrong and the Catholic Church the only one to see common sense? They made decisions based on decades of practice, you know. The church does so on ‘natural law,’ Aristotle does not common sense make and has been dead a long, long time.

          • IntellectOne

            Everybody has their cross to bare. Each and every person has a different cross, shaped the same, but different.
            Jesus Christ said,”Either you are with Him or against Him”
            We know that He stands with the Church which is the Truth., The Way and the Life.

        • Dee

          Actuall the decision to remove homosexuality as a disorder from the DSM4 by the American Psychological Association is the only time documented when the decision was not based on current research but simply popular vote. Very little research is allowed to be published on the true consequences of homosexuality lifestyles and its origins, precisely because of the political terrorism.

          • Jim H

            You know not whereof you speak.
            All disorders in the DSM’s are added or removed based on votes by committees. I believe currently, decisions about which new conditions to admit are made by 15 to 20 committees appointed by the APA, each concerned with a particular category of mental illness (mood disorders, for example, or anxiety disorders).

            Regarding the lack of research. It was Evelyn Hooker’s groundbreaking research that exploded the notion that homosexuality was a mental illness, ultimately removing it from the DSM.

            http://www.apa.org/monitor/2011/02/myth-buster.aspx

          • jgmitzen

            I tend to judge the rightness or wrongness of positions, particularly ones about which I don’t know much or can’t understand, on which side appears to have facts, figures and authoritative sources (and which just yells “Shut up!” Bill O’Reilly style). It’s interesting to see a 100% sweep regarding which side has the facts on their side here.

          • jgmitzen

            >Very little research is allowed to be published on the true
            >consequences
            of homosexuality lifestyles and its origins,
            >precisely because of the
            political terrorism.

            Sigh. Source please? Rick Santorum, for the record, is not a source. There is no secret cabal concealing the true cause of homosexuality. How twisted some people make things just to not have to admit they’re wrong.

        • jgmitzen

          And Pluto was once considered a planet, too. Science, unlike religion, gets updated when new information arises and corrects itself. Religion, like most posters here, doubles down instead, hence the most vile forms of hatred and discrimination being uttered by people who know it’s wrong but are too afraid to face the thought of their religion being wrong about anything (and what might happen if they re-examined the rest of their beliefs as a consequence). Hence, they make people feel terrible about themselves to make themselves feel better, a truly reprehensible action.

  • Liberty

    I love it!

  • Susan

    Isn’t it interesting that the homofascists are allowed to erase Natural Law (Common Sense-Logic-Reason-Biology in the children and public schools and NOW Catholic schools) and promote Vice and vile use of the human body and claim it is “Good”.

    The Wisdom in the Bible ceases to amaze me—-that man will call Evil, Good and Good, Evil.

    Interesting how Truth is not allowed in Washington DC anymore or the public square since they banned Jesus from the public square and public schools—and now even the Catholic schools (LOL). Fascism and unconstitutional to promote Vice in a “justice system” based on Natural Law, Reason, Science and God’s Laws—-for the Marxist pagan and Satanism where Vice is Virtue and dehumanizing irrational acts are glorified.

    The Leftists are managing to take Right Reason out of Just Law—and imposing their irrational Marxist ideology which is antithetical to the Constitution and Freedom and Truth/God. Just pure INSANITY where Up is Down and Vice is Virtue and making little children ignorant of Natural Law (Science, Reason and Logic).

    • jgmitzen

      >Isn’t it interesting that the homofascists are allowed to erase Natural
      Law
      >(Common Sense-Logic-Reason-Biology in the children and public
      schools
      >and NOW Catholic schools) and promote Vice and vile use of the
      human
      >body and claim it is “Good”.

      Rick Santorum, is that you?

      • Susan

        No—but Truth has a Ring to it and God is Truth. You do know the Revelations of God which defined our “Justice” System for thousands of years in the West, don’t you????? We didn’t adopt paganism or the Afghani harem boy ethics, did we????? Wasn’t sodomy a felony for thousands of years for a reason?

        • Korou

          And what was that reason?

          • Susan

            Because sodomy is a vice; it is an irrational, dehumanizing use of the human body which strips dignity from human beings which removes Purpose and Reason (that which makes us above animal). All vice uses humans as a Means to an End (Marxism). Christians aren’t supposed to do that which is dehumanizing–and is why it was Christian ideology only which made the natural institution of slavery and pederasty “Evil”. The religious jews made pederasty “Evil” before the Christians, although the Ba’al worshippers were sodomites and used the children on their altars.

            All Justice (virtue) Systems have to promote only “public virtue” (Montesquieu). And the “Virtue” system of Western Civilization was formed by the Christian Worldview. The Ten Commandments (Revelation) was put onto the Supreme Court and all our “justice” buildings. and listed in all public schools (recommended by Ben Franklin)—until the Supreme Court banned Christ and God of the Bible from the public schools and the public square, so Satanism and paganism and atheism were the only allowed “faiths” to be promoted in public schools and the public square. Traditions and Reason/History would not be transmitted to the next generation (on purpose). so a New utopian idea of Marx could be posited in the mushy little brains through the indoctrination and conditioning system of Prussian schooling.

            The “kill God’ group took charge to “Progress” us into the Future—-John Dewey signed his Humanist Manifesto I to create a “new” religion (godless one)……..a .document to literally destroy the minds (critical thinking) of American children (reinvent a new Worldview and erase Classical Education and Wisdom of the Ages (history)—and create an ethics system which really was regression back into Ba’al Worship or paganism or tribalism–take your pick.

            Dewey’s ideology had been written about in Pluto’s Republic thousands of years ago, of course, so he really wasn’t so “progressive” after all.

          • Korou

            Combing through famous names to support your own outraged sense of “yuck” isn’t much of an argument.
            Homosexual love is no less natural than heterosexual love. It’s rarer – so what? – and it doesn’t produce children – so what? – and that’s all.
            You tell me how homosexuality harms anyone and I’ll consider that there may be something wrong with it.

  • Susan

    Girl “altar boys” is Marxist gender theory—to make males/females interchangeable to destroy the Natural Family (all biological connections) and natural instincts in boys and girls. It is all about emasculating boys who need to have “boy” things and associate with boy clubs, boy only sports teams, etc, to mature normally and feel the dignity and awe needed to appreciate the “Other” (true diversity). Gender theory of Marxism was forced onto schools to destroy moral formation and Reason in children. It will intentionally destroy Virtue and blur Good and Evil. It sexualizes children during Latency when innocence is essential for moral formation. It blurs all differences so children are confused about their “roles” which Marxists need to obliterate to destroy all Natural instincts in girls and boys (so girls will kill their own genetic offspring and hate males and boys will be feminized–emasculated and narcissists and lust only after males like the little Afghanis harem boys).

    It is all to collapse Western Civ and Christianity—the ideas which created the Age of Reason and the most profound, free, creative, individualistic cultures in the history of man. Collectives can’t have Individual Natural Rights from God (Christian Ethics)—they want the State to be god so they can herd, coral and kill the useless eaters. Christianity wouldn’t allow it so Christianity has to be destroyed for the elite sodomites.

    • LOL, western civilization has done a good enough job of collapsing even before they went to girl altar servers. Marxism, collectivism, sodomites? What does that have to do with altar servers? With all due respect that is just over the top.

      • Susan

        The Marxists planned to “kill God” in the 1800s. Fichte devised the Prussian school system in 1810 to destroy Reason and Free Will in children (fill them with lies and corrupt their understanding of Truth/Reality with absurd use of the body, which removes Purpose (Reason) from everything. Up is Down, Slavery is Freedom and Vice is Virtue.

        Destroy Virtue in children and you collapse civil society—the Cultural Marxists knew that in 1930 and they targeted all the institutions (Marched through the Institutions) to destroy Reason and Logic (Natural Law Theory–basis of the Catholic Canon and Constitution of the USA). Destroy Reason (Natural Law)—and you have idiots like the Ferguson group—easily controlled by a master with the inability for any profound thought.

        It is radical egalitarianism (Marxism). It is to embed the ideas into young children that boys and girls are exactly the same (scientific lies)—no difference, so they believe they are interchangeable. Boys and girls have Roles destroyed-to destroy the ideas of patriarchy and hierarchy and destroy maternal instincts and emasculate males—so culture collapses. Marxism is to destroy the Natural Family and biological connections (which homosexual marriage does). Babies become a Means to an End–like slavery—to be denied their Natural parent—they can be bought and sold which is pure evil and denies their Natural Rights.

        All animals have hierarchy and roles and when you destroy Natural instincts in the children—they will be inefficient (take three women firefighters to do the work of one male–etc)…..and culture collapses.

        Sex Ed is a Marxist invention–to sexualize children when innocence is essential for normal sexual identity formation so it doesn’t warp their perceptions in childhood of themselves or others. All Sex Ed does is remove morality from the sex act and makes children see others as sex objects. It destroys the mystery and wonder which is important for dignity and maturity in man. Sex Ed was put into schools through neo-Freudian curricula in the 50s…..Sex Ed was put into even Catholic curricula (against the Catholic Canon) in 1970 by the homofascists who infiltrated the CC that Fr. Oko’s report commissioned by the Vatican reported on….in “Homoheresy”.

        Homosexuality is a learned, immoral behavior–as all behaviors are learned and habituated……just ask the harem boys in Afghanistan and the 100% homosexual culture over there who are groomed to hate and mutilate women.

        Ideas matter and children are particularly vulnerable and my father would have killed any adult who put homosexual ideas into my three brothers’ minds like they do regularly in public schools today to normalize the behavior and flip 3000 years of ethics back to the pagan, Afghani satanic ethics where there is no Purpose in anything—Might makes Right.

        • Susan, I agree with most of that, but as to the subject at hand, you’re over intellectualizing. Altar girls will not bring the collapse of western civilization.

          • Victor

            Manny! Manny! Manny!… Don’t blame Susan for not sticking to the subject at hand… actually we gods were thing king… “I” mean thinking just the same thing as YA… why is everyone getting off topic? Are they reading too much these days?….we’re talking about Altar girls here… are we not?…. As far as we alien gods are concerned, “IT” is the fault of this so called Victor and his so called 10% Jesus body cells that YA keep welcoming to YAR blog… Listen Man, “I” mean Manny….we did everything to try and help his ancestors who wanted Victor to be a priest….yes we did!… they wanted Victor to be a priest and we supported that fact! YES WE DID!….but wouldn’t YA know “IT”…. Victor fault, “I” mean fought US (usual sinners) “I” mean us gods all the way…. as a matter of fact, Victor even stole from his church so that the Saints would stay away from him… To top “IT” all, Victor stole our wo man, “I” mean our GAIL WIND…NO, NO, we gods meant to say, our women from us and NOW won’t let go of her even after 45 years… “I” hear YA Man, what good can a person see in such a woman…. Truth is Man, Victor just enjoys insulting us gods… Don’t tell any body’s DNA cells but the reason there is Altar girls in churches nowadays is because of Victor… well he had “IT” coming cause he hates woman and told us that he would only allow boys so we gods made sure that he never got a boy… OH YA! OH YA!. he’ll tell YA that’s because he kept his eyes on the pattern while making luvs… Actually, back then in the seventies Victor only had four girls and then we gods created a super woman in 1980… actually his wife did and Victor was just the spurm, “I” mean sperm donor…. We gods tried to make a men… “I” mean amens on his wedding night in 1970 and told him that he had to be a priest and to give us back our woman but wouldn’t YA know “IT”… against our will, he had premarital sex with her… Hey Man… we gods say that there’s absolutely nothing wrong with girl altar boys and gay marriages these days… it’s all Victor’s fault that nuns, “I” mean that none of his girls were altar girls and………………………………………………………………….and…………………………………….and…

            END YA SAY sinner vic? DON’T BE LIKE THAT! BE NICE NOW!

            Go figure Catholics NOW these days. lol 🙂

            God Bless Peace

          • Peace be with you Victor. 🙂

  • Bob Miller

    The description of the gathering of protesters being a “mass mob” implies a group of people out of control without a focus to their demonstration. This is clearly not the case here. The faithful are correct in expecting bishops and priests to be accountable to the larger church, which includes the laity. The Gospels include a number of instances where our Lord took a stand against those in power in religious institutions of his day and no where does he exempt his apostles from his teaching. The Sermon on the Mount is a good example of this.

    • kathyschiffer

      Bob, I’m not sure you understand the point. A “Mass Mob” (the movement is big in my town, too) is a group of supportive Catholics–NOT protesters–who come together to attend Mass at a particular support, to offer their prayer and financial support. In Detroit, the movement helps some of the most beautiful old churches which suffer from dwindling Catholic populations.

      • Bob Miller

        Kathy,
        I’m originally from San Francisco and attended a small Italian (now Hispanic) Catholic parish there…so I support the effort of those who are demonstrating to keep their churches and schools open. These represent the soul of the community, and many have deep roots in the ethnic neighborhoods which built them. The archdiocese needs to discover new ways of providing faith communities with pastoral, spiritual, and administrative leadership. Our tradition has understood these charisms as vested only on male Pastors. I suspect we in the church are experiencing a shortage of vision, but not a shortage of opportunities for mission and certainly not on a shortage of those willing to commit their lives to service. Traditional Canon Law comes from a world where the worshiping community has been focused on the priest, and that is the only model it knows. In essence, our vision of the church is too small. What is it that gets in the way of affirming the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of married and single persons, equally valid in men and in women, wherever He is encountered?

        • IntellectOne

          The servant cannot teach better than the Master. Jesus Christ Is the Master. He is the same today, as yesterday, and will be tomorrow. There does not need to be a “new way”. The Catholics better learn what has already been fully revealed to them by Jesus Christ Himself. Jesus ‘Chose’ His Apostles (Friends) to build His Church and that is who He will listen to. He let Judas of Iscariot leave because he was a heretic just like these 100 prominent heretical people that are going against the Archbishop Cordiliene and Father Joseph Illo.
          .

  • Máire Ní Bhroin

    Young men and women should be allowed to serve together on the altar and one day there will be female priests. If one sees that in America alone there was 6.5 billion dollars paid to victims of ‘homosexual’ child abuse. Does that means that countless numbers of male children ie. altar boys were abused by ‘celibate’ priests? Are they worried that girls on the altar will speak up more about sexual interference by priests?Is that part of the ‘code of silence’ in the all boys club?Does anyone believe that Jesus and His Mother Mary would approve of this abusive situation? If half the priests were female, just by virtue of this inclusion, it should lesson the sexual abuse of children by 50%. Surely, the Catholic church would be better off reducing child harm because, to me, one more child abused is one too many! It is a great irony that if a priest or bishop shows common sense or discernment and advocates for woman priests, the Catholic church will excommunicate them; yet, not the pedophilic ‘celibate’ priests who are destroying God’s church. The wind of the Holy Spirit needs to heal this church and burying the problem and marginalizing women is not the solution.

    • I know we agree on the subject of girl altar servers, but let me vehemently disagree on female priests, future or present. There are theological reasons for the male priesthood and that can never change.

      • Máire Ní Bhroin

        Hi Manny! It is nice that we can agree on female altar servers. I am sure we will probably have to agree to disagree on woman as priests but, it is great to have the freedom to discuss this issue.Jesus said-“If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples & you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” Therefore, women who follow His word are his disciples.I realize that Jesus chose 12 men symbolizing the 12 tribes of Israel, I believe. He also had women followers or disciples, such as Mary Magdalene, whom I believe Hippolytus, bishop of Rome (c.170-235) gave the title “Apostola Apostolorum” (apostle to the apostles) a tradition which that our now Saint, Pope John Paul II recognized, if I am not mistaken. Mary of Bethany is another disciple ” sitting at the feet of Jesus” her Master and Teacher.(Luke 10:38-42) When her sister Martha complained that Mary was not helping her in the kitchen Jesus said-“Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”The gospel of Luke recognizes Jesus ‘ women disciples multiple times. Further, women were at Jesus’ crucifixion (Luke 23:27,49), women annoint His body Luke (55-56), women found the tomb empty (Luke 24:1-3), women were told first by the angels that Jesus had risen (Luke vs. 4-8) and women were the first to tell the other disciples the ‘good news’ (Luke vs. 9-11)! I cannot believe that this is not significant to Jesus’ ministry after His miraculous ressurection and a foreshadowing of a future with women playing an active role as ministers ie. priests in the Church. Not to mention St.Paul’s reference to Phoebe ” a deacon of the church” and “the benefactor of many people, including me.” in Romans 16:1-2 and Priscilla in Roman 16:3-4 as a “coworker of Christ Jesus.” The peace of Christ to you.:)

        • AnneG

          There are lots of noteworthy women in our family of believers.
          They were disciples, small d, and belong to the priesthood of the faithful, small p. They never did and never will be priests in the Order of Melchizedek. Not gonna happen. Be content with what the Lord Has called you to.

          • Máire Ní Bhroin

            Dear Anne, I am content with what the Lord has called me to, thank you. I do not feel called to be a priest but, for the sake of the church I love and for those women who do hear the calling of the ‘priesthood of the faithful’ I pray for the Holy Spirit to work a miracle in this regard, for all the reasons I mentioned to you in my earlier post and more. Women priests will be a Godsend when the number of males who hear the call to priesthood are in such decline. I would never say ‘never’.The Lord works in mysterious ways! God bless!:)

          • AnneG

            They are not hearing a call. You can get “called” to be a Baptist, Methodist or Presbyterian minister. Not a Catholic priest. The Church calls and confirms vocations. Not going to happen.

          • Máire Ní Bhroin

            I beg to disagree Anne, with all due respect. Do you or I know the omniscient plan of God? Our parents and grandparents could surely not forsee the changes that have occurred in the Catholic church over the years. I am sure they would say that the mass would always be in Latin. When the Latin mass ended, new altars were built and the priests turned and faced the congregation and performed and sang the mass in their language. People were astounded at the movement of the Holy Spirit within the church. My grandparents and parents never dreamt of a day when girls would be allowed to serve on the altar or think they would see nuns remove their habits and live outside convents, yet all of this has come to pass. My grandparents never knew a divorced Catholic; yet, now Catholics are divorced, annulled and remarried in the church. Our beloved, new Pope Francis, is a good example of how the Holy Spirit has brought change to this church. Let’s agree to disagree on this topic Anne. Peace!:)

          • kathyschiffer
        • Those are good examples of faithful women, and it leads one to say women have an important role in the church, but they are not priests. First of all there were many disciples, not just twelve. We are all diciples of Jesus Christ today, here now. There were twelve apostles then and Jesus chose them to be men. And no one seems to ever mention why they were men. The priesthood was and is a contimuum from the Judaism priesthood defined in the old testament as male and in the line of Aaron and his sons. I think it’s in Deuteronomy. And that was based on the ancient priesthood of Malchezedeck, which was male. No we have to disagree here Marie. The priesthood is theologically defined as male and cannot change if the Bible and the Catholic Magisterium means anything.

          • Máire Ní Bhroin

            Dear Manny, One thing I do know is that hearts, minds and institutions can change in the blink of an eye. Look at Vatican II! Could my grandparents forsee lay men and women delivering the host to parishioners, just as a priest does? If they were told such a thing would someday occur they would surely think it beyond belief. If you look at my post to Anne W, there are other examples of major changes in the way things are done in the church today. They would seem inconceivable just 70 years ago.When Pope Francis said that it is possible that an atheist or nonbeliever could go to heaven, if they were good and charitable ie. like a Samaritan, people a few generations ago would have been shocked. Jesus was a radical who did include and teach woman. That is in the bible. This was not done in Orthodox Jewish religion nor in their patriarchal society.He totally broke with tradition in that regard.I have already mentioned to you the different women disciples who demonstrated the greater role Jesus had for them. At one time tradition dictated that only men were artists, doctors, teachers ,lawyers, judges etc. but, over time, people realized women were ready for these roles. I believe someday women will be priests and it will be just as transforming as when Jesus broke the chain of tradition and orthodoxy to teach and lead woman as His new disciples. Shall we agree to disagree on this topic for now? Have a good evening & God bless!:)

          • Good God. Perhaps I ought to reassess this whole altar girl thing because there are people like you that will cause another protestant reformation. You don’t understand what can change and what cannot in the Catholic Church. Vatican II did not change any dogma. There will never be female priests because male priest is dogma. Learn to live with it. Or if you want to be a protestant you are free to do so.

          • Máire Ní Bhroin

            I am of the opinion that this is not at all like the protestant reformation. I want this church to survive, grow and heal from the scourge of child abuse. If Jesus, Paul and other disciples trained female disciples then, that is a documented part of the history of the early Christian church. Jesus clearly broke with His Jewish religious tradition to teach women disciples. That was equivalent to treating women equally and certainly unheard of back then. In our century, the number of males who are hearing the call to priesthood are dwindling drastically. Females who are hearing this call now and wanting to fill the role of priest, are a positive solution. Peace!

          • As I said earlier, a disciple is not a priest nor even an Apostle, and certain dogma is fixed. I don’t wish to deny you hope on this but I think it’s better to work for practical improvements. God bless you, you seem like a nice lady. Peace!

    • AnneG

      Máire, Bless your heart. Your logic is really flawed. First, there were children abused by priests. Relatively few, as it turns out. The Church and bishops believed secular psychology and some of these guys were allowed and facilitated in this behavior. That is over. Every year, every priest, deacon, sister, lay volunteer and anybody who has contact with children has to take training and we all know we have a responsibility to protect children. Ere was a much larger problem of pederastry, with active homosexuals targeting mainly boys. That has been dealt with.
      If you want to protect children you better remove them from public schools, oh, and from homes where they live with men not their fathers. #2 and #1 places children are abused. Btw, lots of those are abused by female teachers!
      Finally, no, there will be no women priestesses in the Catholic Church. Cannot happen.
      You people must be hanging around with way too many of e womynpriest crown.

      • Korou

        That’s right, all over now. Nothing to see. In fact, nothing much ever happened at all.
        Denial. Or, possibly, just lies.
        It wasn’t just the problem of children being abused by priests, although that was horrific. The real problem was the systemic covering up of such abuse, at all levels right up to Pope Benedict himself, who knew about abusing priests and took action to make sure they did not leave their jobs and were not reported or transferred.

        • kathyschiffer

          That is absolutely not true, Korou. I will not permit you to use my blog to spread lies about the Holy Father.

          By the way, I have a couple of other messages for you: You, unlike most people who comment, are not registered. Therefore, it’s not possible to bring up your comments easily. If there are 200 comments and your latest post is SOMEWHERE in the list, I may or may not ever see it. I’m sure it’s a problem for others, too, so I’d suggest you sign up wherever you’re supposed to do that.

          Also, I do not work for you. If you say (as you did recently) “Ah hah! You didn’t answer my question…”, that may very well be because I have other things to do. And I already know from experience that you will not listen to me anyway, as your mind is made up.

          • Korou

            Interesting.
            First, and nicest. Thank you for your suggestion. I will consider it.
            There. That was nice.

            Second: I don’t take kindly to being called a liar. But then, what can I do about it? If I post evidence about Benedict’s past you will no doubt delete the comment. I’ll leave it at that, then. The evidence is easy enough to find for those who are interested.

            Third: You’ve mistaken me. It’s not that my mind is made up and impossible to change. I’m quite happy to change my mind if presented with convincing evidence.

            But you can’t do that, can you? The Church has already told you what to think. You have to believe that homosexuality is a sin, that abortion is murder and that contraception is against the will of God, because you’ve been told to believe that. Therefore, any arguments you offer in support of your views are nothing more than rationalisations – because if they were disproved you would still not change your mind.

    • IntellectOne

      More married men abuse children than a priest. Are you saying that Jesus Christ was wrong for being celibate? He is the High Priest and the Roman Catholic priests are In Persona Christ at Mass and in The Confessional.
      To belong totally to Jesus Christ (giving all your love) is to be celibate.
      There are no marriages in Heaven..

      • Máire Ní Bhroin

        Dear Intellect One, I am rather shocked that you would leap to the conclusion that I would think that Jesus ‘was wrong to be celibate’ because as you say -‘more married men abuse children than a priest.’ That is not a logical argument and a total misrepresentation of anything I’ve said.I am also not sure why you are suggesting that I am saying priests should not be celibate. I said that if all priests were keeping their celibacy vow, as our Lord did, there would be no cases of child abuse.Whenever a priest abuses a child, ipso facto, they are breaking their vow of celibacy. The annual average of 400 new cases a year reported to the Vatican, could be reduced to zero, if these priests were truly celibate. Wouldn’t that be wonderful!
        Finally, with regard to your ‘no marriage in heaven’ comment , Jesus said he was the ‘bridegroom’ did He not? Therefore, I do not totally dismiss the concept of marriage in heaven, as you do. I hope I have clarified your misunderstanding of any of my previous comments.Peace!:)

    • Jack Napier

      The Episcopal Church welcomes you.

      • Máire Ní Bhroin

        Thanks very kindly for the welcome! I think we should all welcome one another as Christian brothers and sisters and that ecumenical outreach is crucial. We are all doing our best to imitate the Lord.Peace!

  • AnneG

    Don’t call names. It is uncharitable, a bad witness and he has an immortal soul Jesus died for.

  • barthomew

    It is cruel to exclude girls from being servers when the Universal Church allows them. Recall that St. Mary Magdalene is called “the Apostle to the Apostles” by the Catholic Church. It’s analogous to being called Pope or Primate.

    • Jack Napier

      “Cruel?”

      …were you listening to the good Father’s point of view, or are you just knee-jerking your way through the comments?

      • barthomew

        Girls can in principle aspire to be like Mary Magdalene. It is cruel to shut down one symbolic support for that aspiration by not allowing them to be servers. It also shuts off a chance for boys to develop a mature approach to the other gender that does not require exclusion of females as a needed ingredient for affirmation of male dignity. For too much of history and for too many cultures, the fact that males cannot bear children has led them, according to historians and anthropologists, to try to find something they could do that females could not do.

        • Jack Napier

          Yeah, because if it wasn’t for the sanctuary of a Catholic church, boys wouldn’t come into any contact whatsoever with these strange and mysterious “girls” of which you speak. They would thus be utterly deprived of a critical, character-forming opportunity to develop a “mature” approach to these odd creatures. The next thing you know, those boys’ll be “manspreading” all over the place and tellin’ those broads to get ’em coffee and their dry-cleaning.

          • barthomew

            The point is not to think one has to do what has been mistakenly done so often in history: make an activity exclusively masculine in order to give males a sense of unique gender accomplishment; and to exclude females from some activity of which they are perfectly capable, including Mary Magdalene.

          • Jack Napier

            The concept of a vocation to the priesthood is not a matter of “gender accomplishment.” It is a sacrament of God for the purpose of continuing His Church on earth. That He designated men for this role is His prerogative, not yours.

            You confuse Mary Magdalene’s worthy role and contribution to the early Church with the idea of encouraging young men to hear and respond to their unique calling to serve God as His priests. Going all “SJW” because a priest chooses to encourage vocations at the earliest age possible is a reflection of selfishness on your part, not “injustice” on the part of the Church.

          • barthomew

            It is good that neither Jesus nor Mary Magdalene thought they were being selfish when Jesus made her what later saints call the Apostle to the Apostles. At least you won’t also unjustifiably impute bad motives to them and engage in worthless ad hominem argument.

          • Jack Napier

            Your dog-on-bone approach to Mary Magdelene as some kind of proof of “gender equality” for holy orders is unfortunate. Try these two minutes from Bishop Robert Barron for a bit of a change of perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuT8yTakq54

          • barthomew

            I prefer the theological giants who call her Apostle to the Apostles and who avoid derogatory language about people with whom they are in dialogue.

          • Jack Napier

            I’m pretty sure those same theological giants are in 100% agreement regarding the issue of women’s ordination, thus leaving us where we started.

          • barthomew

            For example, theological giant St. Thomas Aquinas too uncritically accepted the idea of Aristotle that women are inferior.
            When Spanish biologists discovered a few centuries later that both males and females contribute to reproduction of humans–because of not just the sperm but the ovum–they hid this from society for a time because they knew it meant that males and females are equal. Theological giants before that discovery did not have that part of the truth over which to cogitate, either because it had not been discovered or because it was hidden from them. We are more advanced in that regard.

          • Jack Napier

            AND YET, Jesus Christ himself, He who is both fully human and fully divine, chose 12 flawed, stubborn, and knuckle-headed men to lead His church. 12 fully human, fully flawed men.

            If you’re suggesting that Christ Himself was unaware of the science of sperm and ovum, if you’re suggesting that Christ Himself was somehow duped into accepting some kind of “patriarchal oppression,” then I would suggest you get on your knees and take it up with Him directly.

            Or, you might consider the possibility that, in choosing these 12 knuckleheads, that the Lord just might have known what He was doing, and that there is a deeper truth at play here than the narrow gender assumptions of the 21st century social justice warrior.

            You might also spend some time contemplating the impact of heroic women on the church, not just Mary Magdelene, but modern women such as Mother Angelica and Mother Theresa, and consider how God uses all parts of His church for His greater good.

          • barthomew

            It was Jesus who was the primary one acting to make Mary Magdalene the Apostle to the Apostles (which is also a good title for the pope).
            The gender assumptions of the 21 century are generally wider, not narrower than those of the people of previous human history.
            A common interpretation of the story of Martha and Mary is that it was intended to rein in early women ministers who had been acting in the spirit of Jesus.
            And the Roman Empire in its own way gave great status to women among its upper classes. The Church thought it had to choose between emphasizing women as with the upper classes or go with the poor and the lower classes, and move women down in rank as the story of Martha and Mary in some ways implies.
            Over the centuries, as Fr. James Burtchaell outlined, the Church’s trajectory regarding women, slaves and race, and the poor, etc. as being an appropriation over time of more and more dignity for the various groups. And as Gregory Baum outlined, there has been in the 20th century black liberation, women’s liberation, and economic or liberationist (Third World) liberation. All have their blind spots, Baum noted. Black tended to leave out women. Women tended to leave out the poor. Liberation theologians tended to leave out blacks and Natives or Native Americans. We all have room to grow.

          • Jack Napier

            It was Jesus who was the primary one acting to make Mary Magdalene the Apostle to the Apostles (which is also a good title for the pope).

            Except that it’s not his title. Your wishful projection makes it neither so or right.

            The gender assumptions of the 21 century are generally wider, not narrower than those of the people of previous human history.

            Except when it comes to considering the role of male and female as spelled out by God the Father, revealed in Genesis and reinforced in the person of Christ. We have our playbook for salvation, and it includes roles for both women AND men.

          • barthomew

            Yes, at one time, resurrection from the dead was a wishful projection. It became so and is right.
            It was Blessed Julian of Norwich who spelled out so well that God is both Father and Mother, and that Jesus can be called also our Mother (one could add Sister), and the Catholic Catechism notes the connection of the Holy Spirit not only with the Earth and other religions calling their god Mother and thus God as immanent, whereas the sky-god has some resemblance to God the Father and God as transcendent. Note that since males are especially attracted to females, the image of God as feminine, and ministry as done by the feminine or one’s Mother is especially attractive and meaningful, and that since females are especially attracted to males, the image of God as masculine, and ministry as done by the masculine or one’s Father is especially attractive and meaningful.

  • Laureen

    Thank you, Kathy, for another great post.
    Soon as I’m done w/this, I will go to the site & Fb & add my 2 cents’ worth to the discussion.
    I fully support parish pastors anywhere who will not have girls as altar servers. Boys only belong there.

  • FemaleForPresident

    I am a female and I left the RCC because they would not allow women to be Priests.
    I am giving my country ONE LAST CHANCE.
    I demand we have a woman President. Hillary for President.
    How about it gang. If we can’t have a female President in 2016, let us stage revolts. It is the American way. We have to demand female politicians or start nonviolent protests or even more.

    • Sheeshus. You could at least try to stay on topic instead of just doing a spam shill.

    • Jack Napier

      “ONE LAST CHANCE?”

      Does this mean you’ll leave for Switzerland if she loses?

      Please?

  • John

    It’s not the feminization of the Catholic Church that is the reason for the shrinking of the flock, but the narrow views of Priests like Father Illo, say all you like about the Star community which you know nothing about, with out them this parish would have been long ago sold and converted to condos.

  • steve6904

    The USCCB states the the policy of using altar girls is supposed to be implemented consistently diocese wide – obviously so you don’t cater to a few old “Tridentines” who have female issues disguised as “holy nostalgia”. That diocese wide implementation was done before Cordileone ever showed up.

    Both Cordileone and Illo are out of bounds on this “experiment”.

  • wildoakvirginia

    For all of you out there that think those that don’t agree with Illo should leave the church, I challenge you to leave. 13 years of catholic school in san francisco, 13 years of catholic school in san francisco for my mom and dad, 13 years catholic schools for nieces and nephews and you know what? Our experience of catholicism has been to include all. To obey the commandment jesus left us to love god and love each other. to do good to the less fortunate. not to judge unless you want to be judged as harshly. to be the best you can be. to respect women and accept equality. to respect all as gods creation. You think excluding young women from the altar, handing out inappropriate materials to children is the catholic way, i tell you to all leave our inclusive and welcoming church.

  • Dianne Balzer

    Would Vivian Dudro please explain her connection to Star of the Sea Parish, or for that matter the city of San Francisco

  • wildoakvirginia

    Each dioceses is a corporation with the bishop as the CEO. The dioceses receive tax benefits from the state and the dioceses takes them from the state. If the church is truly as many of you indicate, separate from the state, then stop taking benefits from the state. If the church continues to take benefits, then the church is obligated to live to the standards of the state. So encourage your bishops to give up their tax free status, and go your merry way. BTW, this whole conversation is centered around a penis and a vagina. Where to put one, where to restrict one, which one is to serve to the glory of the Lord. Perhaps if the church could back away from the penis v vagina and concentrate on real issues (like not showering the homeless with cold water) perhaps the church could gain some credibility. I find it sad that the call to exclude is way louder than the call to include.