I took issue with one person who commented:
"Seamas O Dalaigh says:
Father,
Of course it should be reversed. The sooner the better.
Cardinal Vingt-Trois’ observation makes sense. Everybody knows that little boys of a certain age do not wish to be involved in anything that includes little girls. Enter the little girls, exit fast the little boys.
There is a clear and obvious link between altar boys and vocations to the priesthood. Although the reasons for a drop in vocations are many and complex, serviettes can only have aggravated the problem.
In places where they exist what do serviettes wear? Alb and cincture? Soutanne and surplice? But these are men’s garments! Is it really wise to encourage little girls to dress as men?
(I wonder how many members of COW, sorry, WOC were once serviettes? Just a thought…)
James Daly?"
In one post (which was held for 'moderation') I called the user on it. In a follow up post to Fr. Z I said I expect my follow up post to be deleted as I wanted to be as full on candid with him as I could be. I, not for the first time, I might add, took him to task for permitting the inflammatory term 'serviettes' as applied to women servers. Frankly, it comes off as something bitchy gay queens say. I'm not saying the fellow who said it, IS one. I am saying, that to one who is familiar with gay culture, it sends my own gaydar off the map and comes off as bitchy, spiteful, mean and nasty.
Of course it should be reversed. The sooner the better.
Cardinal Vingt-Trois’ observation makes sense. Everybody knows that little boys of a certain age do not wish to be involved in anything that includes little girls. Enter the little girls, exit fast the little boys.
There is a clear and obvious link between altar boys and vocations to the priesthood. Although the reasons for a drop in vocations are many and complex, serviettes can only have aggravated the problem.
In places where they exist what do serviettes wear? Alb and cincture? Soutanne and surplice? But these are men’s garments! Is it really wise to encourage little girls to dress as men?
(I wonder how many members of COW, sorry, WOC were once serviettes? Just a thought…)
James Daly?"
In one post (which was held for 'moderation') I called the user on it. In a follow up post to Fr. Z I said I expect my follow up post to be deleted as I wanted to be as full on candid with him as I could be. I, not for the first time, I might add, took him to task for permitting the inflammatory term 'serviettes' as applied to women servers. Frankly, it comes off as something bitchy gay queens say. I'm not saying the fellow who said it, IS one. I am saying, that to one who is familiar with gay culture, it sends my own gaydar off the map and comes off as bitchy, spiteful, mean and nasty.
The upshot? Z deleted both my posts, and let the nasty 'serviette' business stand.
Not that I'm especially surprised... but for such a 'rock star' Fr. Z. can be an awful ass.
update: Here's what else passes for 'clever comment' on the blog - it's quite okay to make fun of girls who have physical problems. But I doubt if she was a 'he' 'giggles' would get smug approval.
From Papaefidelis:
"At my parish, there was a female server who walked like a T. Rex (I think she had physical problems), causing giggles in the nave during mass."
Just a girl. Okay to hurt her feelings.
update: Here's what else passes for 'clever comment' on the blog - it's quite okay to make fun of girls who have physical problems. But I doubt if she was a 'he' 'giggles' would get smug approval.
From Papaefidelis:
"At my parish, there was a female server who walked like a T. Rex (I think she had physical problems), causing giggles in the nave during mass."
Just a girl. Okay to hurt her feelings.
