This topic consistently orientates itself to sociological and emotive concerns. In addition, the fact the symbolism and tradition derived from a culture in the East may make it more challenging to be widely understood.I certainly have thoughts, but …
There are different explanations for why one group or another should or shouldn’t have their feet washed. Much of it will depend on what a person holds as the reason Christ washed the disciples feet. How the teaching is understood will also depend on how one traces the liturgical roots and apply contemporary vs current cultural norms.
Long and short, I doubt it will matter what people think. Anyone that speaks against one practice will be castigated by someone else who upholds it. Some will also be held as being in opposition to the current pontiff if they mention a previous pontiff that held an opposing view point.
I’d be interested in hearing arguments for and against from a theological standpoint, but too often it goes beyond theology into sociological concerns. In which case I probably won’t be subscribed long enough to hear some of the insights some might have.
I would certainly agree; some argument make it difficult to tell if a sociological bias is the principle starting place with theology fit to the bias. I have tried looking for a good theological history of various practices from both Eastern and Western Churches, but even the recent scholarship tend to take on a sociological bent. Most of the theology seems to flow from one of two camps, but I cannot find any concise history that actually traces the two thoughts side by side through history.This topic consistently orientates itself to sociological and emotive concerns. In addition, the fact the symbolism and tradition derived from a culture in the East may make it more challenging to be widely understood.
If you want to discuss the symbolism…it would make sense to me if it were a part of the Ordination Masses for priests and Deacons.
Well stated.
Something I would never dispute.
I could see that. It would cover both aspects of humble service and the link to purification before ordination as seen when Moses washes Aaron and his sons.
The Triduum liturgies were not put back int he Church calendar until 1955 and was a part of the reforms of Vatican II.Something I would never dispute.
That being said it is not a theological argument in of itself. There is no question that Christ provides an example of radical humility, but Christ often spoke on multiple levels. Did Christ wash the apostles feet purely as an example of service or did his statements to Simon Peter indicate a deeper meaning? Since the Washing of the Feet also is only present in the Gospel of John, how do we understand Christ’s actions in the context of the main theme of that Gospel with regard to Christ as the Divine Son that shows us the Father? Also why did Christ do this right before the institution of the Eucharist and the Priesthood? How closely are they linked and in what ways?
In other words, if we only see it as a lesson in humility have we disassociated it from other meanings as well? That doesn’t mean it is incorrect, but it could be like listening to a symphonic piece and only hearing the melody or the string section. Even if the melody is beautiful in of itself it does not have the same depth or texture as the full work.
I could see that. It would cover both aspects of humble service and the link to purification before ordination as seen when Moses washes Aaron and his sons.
Really what I am interested in is how the Church has understood the Washing of the Feet through her history. Have we seen an ebb and flow between an emphasis on different aspects of His actions and have we ever seen an emphasis on multiple meanings and if so when?
I know many members of CAF are better read than I am in different areas of Church History so it would be useful to have something more than the polemics that often float around current practices. Most focus purely on one aspect or the other without thought that it likely isn’t an “either/or” but rather a “both/and” type of thing.
).I do know that the Triduum was not observed fro a great while in the Church.pianistclare, thanks for the info. I have read both the USCCB article and Cardinal Sarah’s instructions where he says that the “innovation” would be introduced starting last year, but I had been looking for specific writings from the Church Fathers or a more in depth historical review on the nature of the changes and perhaps why the changes were made. I will look through Archbishop Roche’s commentary to see if I can glean additional insight. Either way thanks for providing more information.
Enjoy yourselves here as I will start my Lenten fast from CAF early. If I do not return after Easter, it has been a pleasure (even when we’ve vehemently disagreed