F
Francoist
Guest
If done respectfully then that is allowed, is it not?
- Status
S
shelby_sun
Guest
Absolutely,but what are your reasons why it should not be changed at this time in the world we live in? What harm is it doing?
F
Francoist
Guest
My point is that if there is significance in the washing of 12 pairs of feet, it is because the feet Jesus washed were His disciples. He had many women among His followers, but He did not wash their feet. Why?
If foot washing is only a sign of service, then why not wash 100 pairs of feet? Or only 10? Or 5 or 20? Why 12? And if 12, then why not 12 as the Church has always done? If 12, then why not “picked men” as the rubrics state?
And I will ask one more question of you… do you think that the Church can or should ordain women?
F
Fr_P
Guest
My understanding is that the current rubric is that it doesn’t matter how many peoples feet you wash, but they must be men.
Whenever a Pope does something liturgical my first question is “Did he intend to change the rubrics of the universal Church?” After all we are supposed to be the Roman Rite, in that we do what they do in Rome!
We live in confusing times.
D
dshix
Guest
Disclaimer: Please understand that the post quoted in response to this thread is wholly intended in jest, and nothing serious is intended by it.I love our new Pope (as much as I love our Pope Emeritus) and I love that the media seems to delight in informing us of his every move, however, as I hope that he washes his feet daily, do we really need to be told of this…andwhat other daily activities may be deemed news-worthy?
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Be careful all. A similar thread was closed earlier today
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Because none of them were there. And, as the women never abandoned him, it is possible that their feet didn’t need washing (ie, they didn’t need to be taught humility, as they were already humble).
O
OraLabora
Guest
But, He did say, as read in today’s gospel:
One could take the narrow view, that He by “one another” he meant only the Apostles, or you can take the broad view, that He meant those in the community that they serve. The latter would make more sense if Jesus was sending out the Apostles as “servants”, that is, that they show humility by washing the feet of those beneath them.
He is sending out his newly instituted pastors on a mission to serve their communities. When Jesus instituted the Eucharist, he didn’t tell the Apostles to just distribute the Eucharist among themselves, but he didn’t specifically say to give the Eucharist to everyone. He was speaking to those who were there, but clearly they read it as to mean that they were to bring the Eucharist to all Christians, not just among the Apostles themselves. Nor did he invite the entire village to the Last Supper; the washing of the feet was for the exact same group of his closest followers, but if one infers that the washing of the feet was only to be done among this select few, then one must similarly draw the conclusion that the Eucharist was not for everyone.
Clearly there’s a parallel in both cases; while He was speaking to his Apostles, He meant for them to carry out His actions for everyone, not just among themselves, for both the washing of the feet and the Eucharist. You could almost say He was instituting the ministry of service (the diaconate) and of the priesthood.
At least that’s what a theological simpleton like myself sees. I think there’s danger to be trapped by the Devil if we try and analyze the Holy Father’s gestures too much. I think we have to accept them at face value, a very humble, but extremely significant, gesture (in this case, I think, against clericalism).
J
John2007
Guest
This event is another daily surprise from the Holy Father that has invoked strong feelings amount some of the faithful. As was noted, one thread on this site was closed for violation of forum rules.
Some have objected because the feet were not attached to Priests but were, in some instances, attached to girls and even to one Muslim. This breaks with tradition.
A theme in the early days of Francis’ pontificate has for the Church not to be turned in on itself but to flow out to the the people at the edges of faith or even at the edges of humanity. In that respect these days read a little like the Gospels. The Pope is, in a matter of speaking, the maker of tradition. But the newness of these ablutions seem to reflect on someone else who sought out the marginalized and was criticized by the establishment for it.
Since I didn’t wash any prisoner’s feet today, I won’t criticize anyone who did.
John
Some have objected because the feet were not attached to Priests but were, in some instances, attached to girls and even to one Muslim. This breaks with tradition.
A theme in the early days of Francis’ pontificate has for the Church not to be turned in on itself but to flow out to the the people at the edges of faith or even at the edges of humanity. In that respect these days read a little like the Gospels. The Pope is, in a matter of speaking, the maker of tradition. But the newness of these ablutions seem to reflect on someone else who sought out the marginalized and was criticized by the establishment for it.
Since I didn’t wash any prisoner’s feet today, I won’t criticize anyone who did.
John
E
engdlyzp
Guest
I don’t think it has been answered. Why wash their feet? What is the meaning? I really don’t understand why.
S
shelby_sun
Guest
And I will ask one more question of you… do you think that the Church can or should ordain women?
I have heard from several people that that would be heresy. My belief is that married deacons should be the first to be ordained priests, but I feel whatever needs to be done to keep our church going should be done.
I have heard from several people that that would be heresy. My belief is that married deacons should be the first to be ordained priests, but I feel whatever needs to be done to keep our church going should be done.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
In the 1st century, people did not wear shoes or if they did, they were most likely open sandles made of leather. Roads were dusty, dirty and filled with human and animal waste. It was custom to wash one’s feet when one arrived at someone’s home after a journey, and the lowliest of the servants usually got the job.
Think about it, would you want to clean someone’s dirty feet?
I know it would take me w-a-y out of my “comfort zone”!
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
F
Francoist
Guest
Yes, to say that women should be ordained for any reason is heresy. Women ontologically cannot be ordained.
If you want to do what needs to be done to keep the Church going, why embrace things that are novelties from the past several decades? The Church hasn’t been this bad off since 311. Why not embrace the ways under which the Church has flourished down through the ages? I think that the Church flourishes not when she tries to “get with the times” but when she is a sign of contradiction against the City of Man. She has opposed pagans, Arians, warlords, despots… and always won. Why change anything?
E
engdlyzp
Guest
I still don’t see why he would choose to wash them? It must mean something, I just don’t see it though.In the 1st century, people did not wear shoes or if they did, they were most likely open sandles made of leather. Roads were dusty, dirty and filled with human and animal waste. It was custom to wash one’s feet when one arrived at someone’s home after a journey, and the lowliest of the servants usually got the job.
Think about it, would you want to clean someone’s dirty feet?
I know it would take me w-a-y out of my “comfort zone”!
The most I can think of is that he is wanting to show that he is not above anyone and we are all equal. If that’s the case, there could be other ways to show it. I really don’t see why he wants to wash anyone feet.
T
thewanderer
Guest
Or just that he is the servant to all people… I take it thats why he goes to a prison to whash the feet of the prisoners, to show that he, in following Christ, is the servant of servants, will lead by humility and love.
It might not be what you or I would have done, or would have liked to have been the message coming from the Pope, but it is not a bad message.
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
I don’t think there was anybody at the Last Supper BUT the Apostles for Him to wash their feet. Scripture seems to indicate they were the only ones in attendance, and they apparently arranged for and prepared the meal.
Perhaps it is as simple as that…who knows? It is not a matter of dogma, so it is a tradition and discipline and rubric that can be changed. But we have to wait and see and not second guess the Pope.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
It would indeed be heresy. . .do you think that it is more important to 'keep the Church going" (whatever that means) or to keep teaching Truth (which is what the Church was instituted to do?)
I mean, let’s say that the ‘gay marriage’ thing passes and that the government decides that any gay person has a legal ‘right’ to marry in any church they choose. The government then tells the US bishops, “right now your churches are not taxed. If you do not agree to hold gay marriages in your churches you will be violating US law and we will remove your tax exempt status”.
NOW, a lot of good is done by Catholic bishops, dioceses, and institutions. If the Church loses its tax exempt status, a lot of institutions will have to cut services, many will have to go out of service, churches and schools will close, thousands will lose jobs and services, and more thousands will leave the Church for its ‘stand’.
Now, is it more important to ‘keep the Church functioning’ by having the gay marriages in the Church, OR is it more important to maintain the 'traditional" teaching of the Church even though it would mean great sacrifice and the Church not ‘growing’ numbers wise but perhaps shrinking drastically?
NB: Sorry if this seems ‘tangential’ but it is related to the concept that the foot washing rite had 12 men to represent the 12 apostles that started it.
I will be glad to start a separate thread and will link back to this post, in order NOT to derail this specific thread here which is on Pope Francis washing feet.
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
What does the topic of ordaining women have to do with the subject at hand???
Start a new thread if you want to discuss that. That’s how threads get closed.
D
Dom_Desiderius
Guest
For fear that I may potentially receive an infraction I can only say that…
The symbolism of the washing the feet of anyone regardless of gender or faith that they adhere to is very powerful symbol in an age when egalitarianism, individualism and ever changing technology are promoted so strongly.
Powerful messages these are. Woe to anyone who doubts they carry powerful symbols.
The historical roles and boundaries also carry symbols that have served us well for millenia, but now we are in a new age where the fashion is for them to have less value.
As for myself, I will dwell and meditate on the old age and the wisdom of the past.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Herrade de Lansberg, “Crucifixion” from her Hortus deliciarum, Alsace, 1185-95
The symbolism of the washing the feet of anyone regardless of gender or faith that they adhere to is very powerful symbol in an age when egalitarianism, individualism and ever changing technology are promoted so strongly.
Powerful messages these are. Woe to anyone who doubts they carry powerful symbols.
The historical roles and boundaries also carry symbols that have served us well for millenia, but now we are in a new age where the fashion is for them to have less value.
As for myself, I will dwell and meditate on the old age and the wisdom of the past.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Herrade de Lansberg, “Crucifixion” from her Hortus deliciarum, Alsace, 1185-95
- Status