Pope Francis washes feet

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike30
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
I do not disagree with you. I was addressing a poster who seemed to insinuate that Jesus didn’t wash women’s feet out of regard for societal rules. Whatever the reason for His choice, I sincerely doubt it was peer pressure that dictated.

I am not second-guessing our Holy Father. I am truly not qualified.

(Edited to remove a random icon next to the message title.)
 
I can’t believe the comments I am reading on the internet from faithful Catholics about this issue! The Pope is making people step out of their comfort zone,that is for sure. I believe Jesus did the same thing! Jesus was teaching his disciples something by washing their feet, teaching them to be servants to one another.

I’ve been watching both men and women getting their feet washed on Holy Thursday for years and years at various churches. Can you imagine the young people who had their feet washed by the Pope today? - Christians, non-Christians, boys, girls, all sinners, and look how he showed them he loved them. Isn’t that what makes a Christian stand out from the crowd…how they love?

Praying that the Holy Spirit moves in the hearts of those young people who had their feet washed by Christ’s representative.
 
There are several threads on this, so I don’t remember where I said this. I’ll repeat it here. When I first heard about the last minute change in plans, I admit that I was a little perplexed and even uncomfortable. Then I remembered what our Holy Father Francis taught us by his example and word. I mean the big Francis, not the pope. This is getting confusing for us. LOL

Anyway, I digress. He taught us that if one felt that something were wrong with a papal act, etc and it was not a sin, then whatever was wrong was in us, not in the Pontiff. His logic was quite true. The Pontiff is not bound by laws. Rather, it is he who binds and unbinds. Francis knew this. The Pontiff is a better Pontiff when he listens to his heart rather than man. Francis lived in an era where the monarchies of Europe had great influence over popes. the best popes were those who did what they felt needed to be done, not what others advised them to do. We Franciscans can never forget this.

When Francis arrived in Rome with 10 other brothers, he took with him the first draft of our holy rule. He did not know that there was a canon which prohibited new rules. Any new order had to adopt one of the existing rules and simply add statutes to accommodate it to its mission. For example, St. Dominic took the Rule of St. Augustine and he wrote constitutions to address those points that Augustine does not address. The same was true for the founders of the Servites.

Pope Innocent III was drawn to Brother Francis of Assisi. Despite the fact that there was a law in place, a law which his predecessor had enacted and which Pope Innocent would impose on St. Dominic a year later, he bypassed the law and approved the Rule of St. Francis.

The cardinals were opposed to this decision. Probably other people as well, especially the wealthy and the very poor. Francis challenged the wealthy by his way of life. But he also rejected what the poor aspired to have. If a vote had been taken, the Franciscan family would not be around today or we would look like Augustinians, Benedictines, Basilians, Carthusians or Carmelites, since these were the religious rules available for adoption.

I remembered this story, our story, the story of the Franciscan family. Because of one pope’s courage to do something completely out of sync with the rules, the largest religious family was born into the Church, a religious family that would save the Church from implosion.

This led me to think about what Francis taught in word and action. I suddenly understood why Francis never second-guessed a pope. He knew that his order existed because a pope broke the rules. It appeared that way. In reality, the one who makes the rule can dispense with it.

This led me to ask myself if the pope were looking at this from another perspective. I though about a room. If you stand on one side watching the action of Holy Thursday, you would see the Apostles’ feet being washed. You would interpret it as an apostolic act. You would be correct.

However, if you stood behind the Apostles and looked in the direction that they were looking, you would see what they saw. They would see Jesus doing diakonia. They saw the eternal Son of God on his knees as a slave before his master washing his feet. The were looking at Isaiah’s suffering servant about to begin his passion.

I thought to myself, that the Holy Father is probably seeing this gesture not from Jesus’ point of view, but from the point of view of the Apostles. In that case, the focus is on Christ, not on the Apostles. One sees Christ’s service or Diakonia.

Tonight, I watched a clip that EWTN put out from the mass. To my amazement, this is what I saw. The Holy Father is wearing the stole of the deacon as he washes the feet of the inmates.

It is easy to forget that every bishop possesses the fullness of the priesthood or the fullness of Holy Orders. That is, he is deacon, presbyter and bishop. Watching him wearing the deacon’s stole as he washes the feet confirmed my suspicion. If you understand Italian, you will notice that his homily focuses on Christ the servant. It’s done in typical Jesuit pedegogy, which is actually very good for young people and for people like me who are not too bright. 😃
 
I can’t believe the comments I am reading on the internet from faithful Catholics about this issue! The Pope is making people step out of their comfort zone,that is for sure.
I want to make it clear that I am loyal to the Pope because he is the Pope. The only reason I am having difficulty is because I fear that to wash the feet of others besides Catholic men during the Liturgy is an offense against Christ. If it is no offense against Christ then I do not oppose it. I only oppose that which is offensive to the Living God. If it is an offense against Him then I am horrified. If it is not then it does not matter to me. If it pleases God then it pleases me.

I also should say that for me this has nothing to do with comfort zones. Serving Jesus Christ is not really that comfortable much of the time.

I only struggle with this issue because I do not think it is morally right. I having nothing against the Pope (perish the thought!) and I have nothing against women, etc.
 
I want to make it clear that I am loyal to the Pope because he is the Pope. The only reason I am having difficulty is because I fear that to wash the feet of others besides Catholic men during the Liturgy is an offense against Christ. If it is no offense against Christ then I do not oppose it. I only oppose that which is offensive to the Living God. If it is an offense against Him then I am horrified. If it is not then it does not matter to me. If it pleases God then it pleases me.

I also should say that for me this has nothing to do with comfort zones. Serving Jesus Christ is not really that comfortable much of the time.

I only struggle with this issue because I do not think it is morally right. I having nothing against the Pope (perish the thought!) and I have nothing against women, etc.
You can rest easy. There is no moral issue here. The ritual itself is optional. That already tells us something. It’s not essential to the liturgy of Holy Thursday. The rubric is not a doctrine. It’s a liturgical law that any pope can change at any time or he can bypass it for his own reasons, without changing it. In any case, it’s a law, not a dogma.

Historically, yes Christ did wash the feet of men. Theologically, the act has two sides to the same coin. On the one side is the apostolic ministry on the other side is Christ’s diakonia. If one observes very closely, neither of those great truths are being violated here. In an ideal world, one would say that both should be emphasized in a liturgical celebration. I would concur with that.

However, the fact that the pope chooses to focus on Christ’s diakonia rather than the apostolic mission is not an evil. Actually, it’s very Ignatian and Franciscan. Both of these traditions are very near and dear to the Holy Father’s heart.

When focusing on Christ’s diakonia, the gender of the people whose feet are being washed becomes less important. Because Christ is servant to all, not just to males. Christ calls all to serve, not just males. There is nothing immoral in any of this.

For something to be immoral it has to be contrary to dogma or to revealed moral law. That’s not what’s happening here. Neither dogma nor revealed moral law are contradicted. The person of Christ is not mistreated in any way. The focus is on one aspect of Christ’s relationship with humanity. It may not be the focus that we would like, but there is nothing being said about Christ to which Christ would object.

As faithful Catholics, we must be very careful not to create moral laws that don’t exist and worse yet, impose them on others. Such a mindset is risky. We can quickly become our own magisterium. We don’t want to go there.
 
You can rest easy. There is no moral issue here. The ritual itself is optional. That already tells us something. It’s not essential to the liturgy of Holy Thursday. The rubric is not a doctrine. It’s a liturgical law that any pope can change at any time or he can bypass it for his own reasons, without changing it. In any case, it’s a law, not a dogma.

Historically, yes Christ did wash the feet of men. Theologically, the act has two sides to the same coin. On the one side is the apostolic ministry on the other side is Christ’s diakonia. If one observes very closely, neither of those great truths are being violated here. In an ideal world, one would say that both should be emphasized in a liturgical celebration. I would concur with that.

However, the fact that the pope chooses to focus on Christ’s diakonia rather than the apostolic mission is not an evil. Actually, it’s very Ignatian and Franciscan. Both of these traditions are very near and dear to the Holy Father’s heart.

When focusing on Christ’s diakonia, the gender of the people whose feet are being washed becomes less important. Because Christ is servant to all, not just to males. Christ calls all to serve, not just males. There is nothing immoral in any of this.

For something to be immoral it has to be contrary to dogma or to revealed moral law. That’s not what’s happening here. Neither dogma nor revealed moral law are contradicted. The person of Christ is not mistreated in any way. The focus is on one aspect of Christ’s relationship with humanity. It may not be the focus that we would like, but there is nothing being said about Christ to which Christ would object.

As faithful Catholics, we must be very careful not to create moral laws that don’t exist and worse yet, impose them on others. Such a mindset is risky. We can quickly become our own magisterium. We don’t want to go there.
Thank you for your kind and considerate response. I will meditate upon it during Good Friday.
 
Thats a good question. To be very technical, the only ones whose feet Jesus did wash were those of his closest followers and no one else.

That is probably not insignificant.
It is also probably not insignificant that of the twelve, Christ knew that one of them would betray him.
 
To me, there’s a big difference between puzzling over something a Pope does – not understanding it, wondering what the background/justification is – on the one hand, and on the other, saying “The Pope is wrong, I know better.”
 
Tonight, I watched a clip that EWTN put out from the mass. To my amazement, this is what I saw. The Holy Father is wearing the stole of the deacon as he washes the feet of the inmates.
That whole video moved me to tears. Thank you for sharing this. The deacon’s stole, his obvious kindness, the kind smile he had for each inmate after washing their feet… I just don’t know what to say.
 
I have no issue with the choice of the Holy Father to do what he wished at this Mass. To me, he is showing that he is here to serve and not be served, and also that Jesus did many things for many people during His ministry without once saying I only came for 1 group, he came for many: the poor, sinners, criminals, marginalized, women, pagans, etc.
 
There is no issue per se. The Pope is the Pope. I do not doubt for one second that he had the best of intentions in doing as he did.

The only problem is that of perception. It works both ways. The actions themselves were clear but the reason behind is ambiguous. And the fact that the actions, however good the intention may have been, would NOT have been permitted to any other bishop or priest, sends a ‘perceptual message’ that the Pope does not think the rules are correct (in which case one might have expected him to CHANGE said rules before ‘ignoring’ them), and thus, they don’t have to follow that rule either. Which will quickly lead to 'we don’t need to follow any rule we don’t like.'

God knows the last 40 years of liturgy have been experimental horrors for many. We were just hearing in the last Pontificate that we need to abide by liturgy. Now the PERCEPTION will be that Benedict was ‘focusing on the unessential’ and the whole circus will, for MANY (not all), start again (or continue ramped up). Where I am, for example, the priests already tweak the liturgy in many ways. I hate to think what will happen now, here. . .
 
I can’t believe the comments I am reading on the internet from faithful Catholics about this issue! The Pope is making people step out of their comfort zone,that is for sure. I believe Jesus did the same thing! Jesus was teaching his disciples something by washing their feet, teaching them to be servants to one another.

I’ve been watching both men and women getting their feet washed on Holy Thursday for years and years at various churches. Can you imagine the young people who had their feet washed by the Pope today? - Christians, non-Christians, boys, girls, all sinners, and look how he showed them he loved them. Isn’t that what makes a Christian stand out from the crowd…how they love?

Praying that the Holy Spirit moves in the hearts of those young people who had their feet washed by Christ’s representative.
Yes, that is what makes a Christian stand out…how they love. Everyone. Poor, rich, black, white, old, Muslim, young, sinners…everyone.

I love this Pope’s message in that he washed the feet of Muslim and female prisoners. Awesome. I like the direction he is going in, it’s clear he is truly inspired by the Holy Spirit.

👍
 
That whole video moved me to tears. Thank you for sharing this. The deacon’s stole, his obvious kindness, the kind smile he had for each inmate after washing their feet… I just don’t know what to say.
I thought he was going in that direction and the deacon stole confirmed it.
There is no issue per se. The Pope is the Pope. I do not doubt for one second that he had the best of intentions in doing as he did.

The only problem is that of perception. It works both ways. The actions themselves were clear but the reason behind is ambiguous. And the fact that the actions, however good the intention may have been, would NOT have been permitted to any other bishop or priest, sends a ‘perceptual message’ that the Pope does not think the rules are correct (in which case one might have expected him to CHANGE said rules before ‘ignoring’ them), and thus, they don’t have to follow that rule either. Which will quickly lead to 'we don’t need to follow any rule we don’t like.'

God knows the last 40 years of liturgy have been experimental horrors for many. We were just hearing in the last Pontificate that we need to abide by liturgy. Now the PERCEPTION will be that Benedict was ‘focusing on the unessential’ and the whole circus will, for MANY (not all), start again (or continue ramped up). Where I am, for example, the priests already tweak the liturgy in many ways. I hate to think what will happen now, here. . .
I’ve heard other lay people say this. But what’s interesting is that among us, that’s not the impression we got at all. We know that we’re not allowed to do everything the pope does. We also know who is and who is not the exception to the rule. For example, we know that popes have often bypassed the law in favor of something they wanted to accomplish. There are many many precedents in the history of the Church and they’re on issues of greater importance.

Those of us who are either diocesan priests or who are in religious orders already know the score. Then there are those who for whatever reason they feel is justified are going to go around the rubrics, regardless of what the pope does. I don’t think that the laity’s concerns are warranted. Everyone knows that this is Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s tradition.
 
Yes, that is what makes a Christian stand out…how they love. Everyone. Poor, rich, black, white, old, Muslim, young, sinners…everyone.

I love this Pope’s message in that he washed the feet of Muslim and female prisoners. Awesome. I like the direction he is going in, it’s clear he is truly inspired by the Holy Spirit.

👍
People seem to be forgetting that Pope John XXIII, John Paul II and Benedict XVI also bypassed Canon Law because of the great love that they had for the people to whom they ministered. Their gestures of love were not always so overt, but they were there. I remember Pope Benedict giving communion to several Protestants.
 
This led me to ask myself if the pope were looking at this from another perspective. I though about a room. If you stand on one side watching the action of Holy Thursday, you would see the Apostles’ feet being washed. You would interpret it as an apostolic act. You would be correct.

However, if you stood behind the Apostles and looked in the direction that they were looking, you would see what they saw. They would see Jesus doing diakonia. They saw the eternal Son of God on his knees as a slave before his master washing his feet. The were looking at Isaiah’s suffering servant about to begin his passion.

I thought to myself, that the Holy Father is probably seeing this gesture not from Jesus’ point of view, but from the point of view of the Apostles. In that case, the focus is on Christ, not on the Apostles. One sees Christ’s service or Diakonia.

Tonight, I watched a clip that EWTN put out from the mass. To my amazement, this is what I saw. The Holy Father is wearing the stole of the deacon as he washes the feet of the inmates.
His stole is over his left shoulder, and leaves his right arm free for service.

Threads have been opened where people ask “What happens at a Mass without a deacon?” and my reply is always that there is no such thing. Every priest is a deacon. Every bishop is a deacon. The homily last night at my parish was about exactly that.

The lowly deacon looses his name when he becomes a deacon. He goes from being known as Bob or Tom or Jose to being known as “The Deacon”. He looses his identity and becomes a servant.

People forget that the Pope is a deacon. He was ordained into service before he ever became a priest. Most priests will tell you that 90% of their day is spent exercising their ministry as a deacon rather than as a priest.

-Tim-
 
His stole is over his left shoulder, and leaves his right arm free for service.

Threads have been opened where people ask “What happens at a Mass without a deacon?” and my reply is always that there is no such thing. Every priest is a deacon. Every bishop is a deacon. The homily last night at my parish was about exactly that.

The lowly deacon looses his name when he becomes a deacon. He goes from being known as Bob or Tom or Jose to being known as “The Deacon”. He looses his identity and becomes a servant.

People forget that the Pope is a deacon. He was ordained into service before he ever became a priest. Most priests will tell you that 90% of their day is spent exercising their ministry as a deacon rather than as a priest.

-Tim-
I don’t know if it’s a dismissive attitude among the lay faithful and the secular clergy or if it’s just a lack of proper education. The two forgotten vocations are the deacon and the religious brother.

When they are present, everyone is polite and helpful. But when it’s time to think of the Church, service and to pray for vocations, these two groups of men are off the radar. I think it was very good of the Holy Father to put the deacon back on the radar.

It is good that he’s putting religious life front and center as well. Many wonder about his simplicity which borders on austerity, because they forget that he is both priest and consecrated religious. The latter is a vocation to live under the cross.
 
From your wording you seem to be questioning the Pope’s decision. Why did you even bring up that Jesus only washed the feet of his closest followers who were all men. I guess I missed your point.
I brought it up because it is what Jesus did. He washed the feet of His closest disciples and no one else. I do not think that was insignificant and I believe that it had some meaning and relevance. I am not going to speculate as to what that meaning was, but Jesus typically did things that meant something, even if that meaning wasn’t clear at the time.

What from that one statement made it seem like I was questioning the Popes motives?.

To go even deeper, many people here have appeared to equate my statement has having to do with washing womens feet. I never even mentioned that. I did find it interesting however that the Holy Father included non Christians in the ritual.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top