Women at the washing of the feet?

[Richie_Nelson]

This is terrible spatting.

Welcome to CAF

 

[Cabin4]

This must be what was meant by “put on the armor of God”!

 

[James0235]

This must be what was meant by “put on the armor of God”!

Things do tend to get heated in here at times. I guess you could call it zealousness.

The armor of God is for spiritual warfare. And to defend the Church (and her Liturgy) against attacks from outside and from within is to defend the body and the bride of Christ.

You are certainly correct that Jesus died today. He died for His bride. I think he would want us to defend her.

James

 

[Cabin4]

And we are asked to be kind even in defense. Peace to you.

 

[Linnyo]

Nope. I am typically not easily wound up.

You are basically saying that a Liturgical abuse is no big deal. I am merely pointing out that according to the Catholic Church it is a huge deal. The Church says that abuses distort the Catholic faith. And when a Mass contains Liturgical abuses then it become a “falsification of Catholic Liturgy.”

Believe what you want. But your opinions are contrary to what the Church teaches on the issue.

James

Having looked up the definition of abuse
**1. **To use wrongly or improperly; misuse: abuse alcohol; abuse a privilege.
**2. **To hurt or injure by maltreatment; ill-use.
**3. **To force sexual activity on; rape or molest.
**4. **To assail with contemptuous, coarse, or insulting words; revile.
**5. **Obsolete To deceive or trick.

I can only presume that you consider the first definition. But the idea of abuse is that ‘it causes harm’ I think some of you are too willing to shout ‘abuse’ at every little thing you see going on in the Church today when in actual fact, there are fewer abuses than you’d like to admit. This is defined as nitpicking!

 

[MrS]

absolutely it does. I actually prefer and cherish many of the traditional ways and I’m sad when they are changed. Washing the feet of only men however isn’t one of those things.

cafeteria is open

 

[Linnyo]

cafeteria is open

That’s just a little judgemental, isn’t it? It fits in well with the whole thread I suppose!

 

[MrS]

Having looked up the definition of abuse
**1. **To use wrongly or improperly; misuse: abuse alcohol; abuse a privilege.
**2. **To hurt or injure by maltreatment; ill-use.
**3. **To force sexual activity on; rape or molest.
**4. **To assail with contemptuous, coarse, or insulting words; revile.
**5. **Obsolete To deceive or trick.

I can only presume that you consider the first definition. But the idea of abuse is that ‘it causes harm’ I think some of you are too willing to shout ‘abuse’ at every little thing you see going on in the Church today when in actual fact, there are fewer abuses than you’d like to admit. This is defined as nitpicking!

Perhaps.

The other side of the coin is that when an abuse occurs, too often nothing is done about it. When the laity is “corrected”, many respond through their checkbook. So to satisfy the pewsitters, the ordinary, or the pastor, deem the abuse a new “norm”.

Too many of these “norms” have, in fact, done harm. When the theology of the Church is “altered” by giving new meaning to words, actions, postures etc… the fact is that the theology is altered. How can that not be harmful?

The end result is that many Catholics are “dumbed down” into thinking and saying it is no big deal. That is often even sadder than the abuse/norm itself.

Benedict XVI will probably be proven right. That the Church is going to become smaller but stronger.

Smaller because the “I don’t care” crowd, and the “It’s no big deal” crowd will leave for another more “friendly” denomination, or just quit altogether.

Stronger because the “More of Him, less of me” crowd will reap the graces of the sacraments.

.

 

[MrS]

Originally Posted by fnz2thrght forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
absolutely it does. I actually prefer and cherish many of the traditional ways and I’m sad when they are changed. Washing the feet of only men however isn’t one of those things.

That’s just a little judgemental, isn’t it? It fits in well with the whole thread I suppose!

Absolutely. The poster has indicated in a number of posts that he/she will determine what is meant by the traditions. He/she will pick and choose… yep, that is judgmental.

 

[fnz2thrght]

Originally Posted by fnz2thrght forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
absolutely it does. I actually prefer and cherish many of the traditional ways and I’m sad when they are changed. Washing the feet of only men however isn’t one of those things.

Absolutely. The poster has indicated in a number of posts that he/she will determine what is meant by the traditions. He/she will pick and choose… yep, that is judgmental.

Excuse me? How dare ANY of you long winded pseudo-intellectuals call me anything less than Catholic.

I’m quite disturbed and saddened that you all believe THIS is what the Catholic Church is all about.

 

[patg]

It’s not funny at all.

You are right, it is beyond funny and really sad that people work so much harder to exclude than they do to include. As I said, I am happy in a parish that includes all in the ceremony and would not attend one that didn’t.

Look to the Latin, and you will see the difference:

In the Creed: “Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de caelis. Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est.”

In the instructions regarding footwashing, the word is “viri”.

Two different words, same translation in English, but two different meanings:

homo/homines = man as in mankind (all of humanity–men, women, children)

vir/viri = man as in adult male human

He only washed the feet of Jewish men also - I assume all the men in your liturgy must be Jewish.

 

[fnz2thrght]

Nope. It gave one particular bishop an indult to do things differently. Can you provide documentation that the CDW has changed the law?

and in the midst of your long winded assumptions, and spouting of “facts” you’ve failed to even look at the obvious here - that I might be part of the Boston Archdiocese.

 

[A2SciTeach]

Fnz: This is what you wrote in another post: For me it’s usually the one time of year where we really reach back and do things very traditionally, very somber. Plus, there’s just something rewarding about going through Thursday then Friday and it just makes Saturday night seem so much more joyful. I always cry when the candlelight is passed through the church on Saturday. Obviously it’s meant to be symbolic but it’s just “the” perfect symbol. I* sit there (or rather stand there) and wonder why the entire world doesn’t see the light.

*I hope that tonight as the candles are lit throughout your church and you are reflecting in their glow, that you are thinking about **why **the world isn’t seeing the true and pure Light as it has existed eternally, in the deepest, purest meaning of the Word - as it is lived in the one, true Church.

Peace be with you, tonight and always.

 

[MrS]

You are right, it is beyond funny and really sad that people work so much harder to exclude than they do to include. As I said, I am happy in a parish that includes all in the ceremony and would not attend one that didn’t.

He only washed the feet of Jewish men also - I assume all the men in your liturgy must be Jewish.

Thus the thought process these past 40 years… include, include, include… (it no longer matters what you want to include, as long as it is your invention)

Then, when an attempt is made to return to the long traditions, instructions, disciplines, practices that have been uniquely Catholic for centuries (the reform of the reform), you cry exclude, exclude, exclude like some one was devalueing YOU.

Yep, beyond funny is right.

.

 

[fnz2thrght]

Fnz: This is what you wrote in another post: For me it’s usually the one time of year where we really reach back and do things very traditionally, very somber. Plus, there’s just something rewarding about going through Thursday then Friday and it just makes Saturday night seem so much more joyful. I always cry when the candlelight is passed through the church on Saturday. Obviously it’s meant to be symbolic but it’s just “the” perfect symbol. I* sit there (or rather stand there) and wonder why the entire world doesn’t see the light.

*I hope that tonight as the candles are lit throughout your church and you are reflecting in their glow, that you are thinking about **why **the world isn’t seeing the true and pure Light as it has existed eternally, in the deepest, purest meaning of the Word - as it is lived in the one, true Church.

Peace be with you, tonight and always.

Again, I take huge exception to those of you who are sitting in judgment of me. I was speaking of why people don’t see the Light of Christ, however He may present Himself to people. I suggest that you might be the ones who need to think about the Why’s. Why the fact that women having their feet washed is such a problem for you. Why you think that following the letter of the Law when that Law obviously wasn’t written in a time when it was even fathomable that women should have a place anywhere in Liturgy. Why you think that the Catholic Church, cannot and should not ever change while still remaining One True Church, and why, in the name of the Lord, so many of you will sit and judge.

Seems many of you are missing the entire “Why” of the Catholic Church.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all who attempted to have a fruitful discussion.