tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1951481887669777591.post129045338334573631..comments2023-06-08T09:34:39.076-04:00Comments on The Magdalene Sisters: A Response to Women and the ChurchAgatha Magdalenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05224221846886335490noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1951481887669777591.post-14438570490462834742010-04-28T09:39:56.480-04:002010-04-28T09:39:56.480-04:00I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Aglialoro...I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Aglialoro's account of a feminized Church. He may exaggerate, he may not have chosen the best terms, but he IS onto something. For my part, what is irksome is not seeing women serving at the liturgy or elsewhere in the life of the Church. I get irked when I see a large number of female ministers, whose attitude is not of reverence but almost of protest, being followed about by a handful of uninspiring male ministers who seem to have only a mild sense of what they should be doing. (And, for the record, I can think of a parish where I routinely see this.) That's a very uninspiring vision, where the men are not donating, the women not receiving and the liturgy has become a glorified Kiwanis meeting.<br /><br />In contrast, my own parish (St. Mary's, College Station, TX) is quite different. There are routinely large numbers of female ministers. (A Sunday mass frequently requires a dozen extraordinary ministers, in addition to the priest and deacon. And that's not counting lectors, cantors, etc. It's packed every weekend.) But the attitude of the women serving is very Magdalene-esque, a reverential reception of the mysteries of Our Lord. Likewise, there is something proper to the bearing of the men who serve: confident, solemn, disciplined.<br /><br />Yes, many parishes have been feminized and sissified, and men don't want to come for that reason. But the number of women in the pews or at the altar is a red herring; the problem is much deeper and more subtle than that.<br /><br /><br />Likewise, a second point of clarification: I think you're quite right that men can be sensitive and pastoral, and need to receive such sensitivity as well. But, again, Aglialoro's onto something, even if he might have articulated it better. There is a time for men to be pastoral, quiet, reflective. But I think there's also something particularly masculine about some aspects of the Church's life that have been neglected. <br /><br />I think of Ambrose telling Emperor Valentinian in the 4th century that Christians are good citizens and do everything the emperor asks politically, but... "in a matter of faith, BISHOPS JUDGE EMPERORS, not emperors bishops." Oh, somebody just got put in his place! Perhaps I speak only for myself, but I think men get particularly excited about that sort of thing, but how often is it preached from the ambo?<br /><br />Or Shamgar killing 600 Philistines with an OXGOAD?!? (Judges 3:31) Why doesn't that story get told more often?<br /><br />Or even, I might add, Maximilian Kolbe's self-sacrifice, willfully embracing death (and the hope of the resurrection!) for the sake of another. That's heroism. That's the kind of thing that can trump the NFL on a Sunday.<br /><br />The problem is not genuine pastoral sensitivity. The problem is "pastoral sensitivity" which is simply emasculated Christianity operating as a front for a dying kind of bland 1970s feminism. Who wants that?Aaron Lindermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15992073027586818751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1951481887669777591.post-72458256176966849432010-04-27T14:17:00.594-04:002010-04-27T14:17:00.594-04:00Interesting post - I agree with most of what is be...Interesting post - I agree with most of what is being said here, but just wanted to make one point re: female altar servers, eucharistic ministers, etc. My understanding is that historically these roles were supposed to be filled either by other priests or by deacons; in the absence of these, non-ordained men or boys (preferably those already in some stage of discernment of the priestly vocation) could fill these roles. But they were still seen as extensions of the priestly activity during Mass - "acolyte" is one of the Minor Orders (as is lector, incidentally). Now clearly in most places its been a long time since we thought of altar servers and eucharistic ministers in this way, which is part of the reason why JPII allowed altar girls in the 90s. But I do think that there is a good argument to be made that allowing women and girls to fill these formerly priestly roles has contributed to a further weakening of our understanding of who the priest is and what he is doing during the liturgy. The actions of the altar servers are still in a sense priestly, even though they don't need to be done by a priest for a valid Mass.<br /><br />On a related note, I think the push for women's ordination, while it *definitely* involves a lack of understanding of femininity, has more to do with a deeper misunderstanding of the nature of the priesthood.Catherine Harmonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14565220318976913341noreply@blogger.com