Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope's foot-wash a final straw for traditionalists
Yahoo ^ | 3/29/13 | NICOLE WINFIELD

Posted on 03/29/2013 8:31:16 PM PDT by OKRA2012

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis has won over many hearts and minds with his simple style and focus on serving the world's poorest, but he has devastated traditionalist Catholics who adored his predecessor, Benedict XVI, for restoring much of the traditional pomp to the papacy.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; General Discusssion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-115 next last

1 posted on 03/29/2013 8:31:16 PM PDT by OKRA2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

This traditionalist Catholic thought is was very moving.......


2 posted on 03/29/2013 8:32:36 PM PDT by basil (basil, 2ASisters.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: basil

I did not write the article.

But, the headline is rather sensational.


4 posted on 03/29/2013 8:34:26 PM PDT by OKRA2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

He washed someones feet?


5 posted on 03/29/2013 8:35:40 PM PDT by BigCinBigD (...Was that okay?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

I realize that-—but I was giving my opinion of the foot washing.


6 posted on 03/29/2013 8:38:14 PM PDT by basil (basil, 2ASisters.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

The liberals continue to propagate their own images of traditionalist values. Their minds would explode if they realized that the pro marriage march was right after the soup kitchen preparation, and before meal time atthe homeless shelter.

We must be aghast at a pope following God’s teachings.


7 posted on 03/29/2013 8:38:21 PM PDT by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

It is kinda early for the final straw. I didn’t even hear about the other straws.
I wonder if the Pope uses a straw?


8 posted on 03/29/2013 8:44:14 PM PDT by ThomasThomas (Normal isn't normal anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThomasThomas

Lol.


9 posted on 03/29/2013 8:45:08 PM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kingu

From the article:

“Francis’ decision to disregard church law and wash the feet of two girls - a Serbian Muslim and an Italian Catholic - during a Holy Thursday ritual has become something of the final straw, evidence that Francis has little or no interest in one of the key priorities of Benedict’s papacy: reviving the pre-Vatican II traditions of the Catholic Church.”


10 posted on 03/29/2013 8:46:39 PM PDT by Innovative ("Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

Leftists really are desperate to believe, and have everyone else believe, that conservativism/traditionalism is crumbling all over - wife tells me the local priest washed a bunch of feet, both male and female, at the service last night - didn’t seem to set off any alarms around here at all......


11 posted on 03/29/2013 8:47:00 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThomasThomas
I didn’t even hear about the other straws.

Apparently, one of the other straws was the New Pope (versus Pope Classic or Diet Pope I guess) refused to live in the luxury apartment that the Pope is given but instead, lives in the regular dorms with the regular priests.

I thought the 'traditionalists' were Conservative but it seems more and more they are closer to elitists and possible quasi-monarchists.

12 posted on 03/29/2013 8:47:02 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012
I'm not a Catholic, but this article seems totally whacked.

The Pope is supposed to wear fancy clothing and engage in ostentatious displays of wealth?? This what Vatican II was about?? This is traditionalism??

They now see a humble Pope, washing people's feet, avoiding senseless display, actively serving others, and they turn up their nose?? Oh! That's not what the church is all about! Heavens!!

Who writes this stuff?

13 posted on 03/29/2013 8:47:22 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The ballot box is a sham. Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

WWJD?


14 posted on 03/29/2013 8:48:35 PM PDT by IrishPennant (All warfare is based on deception.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
The Pope is supposed to wear fancy clothing and engage in ostentatious displays of wealth?? This what Vatican II was about??

Just the opposite really. The more I've been reading it, Vatican II is more open while traditionalists were more elitists (such as calling for a return to the Latin mass and condemning any deviance from that mass).

In the Anglican church, there is a similar schism with the "High" church and "Low" church. The High church is the elitist church that focuses on tradition to every jot and tittle. The "Low" church is more down to earth with the people. We still use The Book of Common Prayer but we are much more casual in service letting the Spirit guide, if you will. (not in an irreverent way of course).

This Pope seems to be somewhere between Pope John Paul II (Vatican II) and Benedict (Traditionalist).

15 posted on 03/29/2013 8:52:05 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: IrishPennant

Wash feet.


16 posted on 03/29/2013 8:52:32 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (3% of the population perpetrates >50% of homicides...but gun control advocates blame metal boxes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
I'm with you. To expect the media to get the significance of the Pope's humble act is to expect music from swine. The servant-hearted priest washing the feet of the poor is about as traditional as a Christian can get.
17 posted on 03/29/2013 8:53:20 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
The Pope is supposed to wear fancy clothing and engage in ostentatious displays of wealth?? This what Vatican II was about?? This is traditionalism??

Sounds like they want the Holy Roman Empire back.

18 posted on 03/29/2013 8:54:56 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Intolerant in NJ
Leftists really are desperate to believe, and have everyone else believe, that conservativism/traditionalism is crumbling all over...

I suspect part of this ridiculous article is the desire among left-wing nutbags to imagine that everything good and humble is "liberal" and everything mean and hateful is "conservative". So, when they see the new pope doing something humble and which obviously most would respect, the left-wing nutbags have to believe that this act violates the "traditionalists" (dog whistle for "conservative" eheh). Of course, the Biblical reference would escape them completely, but anybody who spent ten minutes reading the Bible would understand what inspired Francis.
19 posted on 03/29/2013 8:55:38 PM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

I am a traditionalist Catholic. He is my Pope.


20 posted on 03/29/2013 8:56:33 PM PDT by Ouchthatonehurt ("When you're going through hell, keep going." - Sir Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IrishPennant
What DID Jesus do?

Washed feet.

And He turned water into wine and fed the multitudes. Some of us, even though not Catholic, try to live up to those things.

Cooks have a role model.

/johnny

21 posted on 03/29/2013 8:56:39 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: basil

Jonathan Brandmeier liked him. ( BTW he sounds the same as he did in the 80’s, but now he’s on WGN. ) He was in fine form, I guess Wednesday morning, when he did a bit with fake “Lollapalooza leak” band names, which was hilarious, along with comments on the Pope’s foot washings. He’s a traditional RC, and declared he liked the new Pope, and made approving comments on this upcoming ( at the time ) event. He did throw in a bit where he imitated one of the kids confiding, “I stole his wallet,” opining that hell would have to be made deeper and hotter to receive the perpetrator of such an act.


22 posted on 03/29/2013 8:58:04 PM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

I’m waiting to see what Ann Barnhardt says. she has been having a hissyfit over the new pope not being a traditionalist, High-Mass type. She had a post the other day where she was freaking out he didn’t genuflect correctly.

http://barnhardt.biz/


23 posted on 03/29/2013 9:10:10 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012
“Virtually everything he has done since being elected pope, every gesture, every decision, has rankled traditionalists in one way or another.”

This is a dishonest article written to attack the Catholic Church and give the impression that there is severe, irreconcilable conflict when in fact there are only small disagreements or no disagreement at all.

No one that I have heard of is “rankled by every gesture and every decision” of Pope Francis. The media coverage of the Catholic Church and the new Pope has without exception been negative, inaccurate and dishonest.

24 posted on 03/29/2013 9:10:17 PM PDT by detective
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012
From the article:

But, in characteristic form, he added: "What liberals forget in their present crowing is that even as Francis makes himself — and the church — more popular by projecting (a) compassionate image, he will simultaneously make it harder for them to criticize him when he reaffirms the doctrinal points they want him to overturn."

Not sure what to make of the new Pope's slightly transgressive acts of humble piety. Is he sucking up to liberal critics or is he playing a deeper game? Personally, I hope he has a Machiavellian streak as the traditionalist commenter quoted above seems to assert. Or, even better, I hope this is sincere at the deepest level and that he holds traditional understandings of Church doctrine with equal sincerity, to the chagrin of his current liberal cheerleaders.

25 posted on 03/29/2013 9:13:07 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

Grasping for straws and trying to create conflict. There has been some controversy - which I’ve read about - over whether women should participate in the foot-washing, but I don’t actually know anyone who objects, and believe me, I know very traditional Catholics.


26 posted on 03/29/2013 9:13:21 PM PDT by Hilda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
"Is he sucking up to liberal critics or is he playing a deeper game?"

He's neither sucking up nor playing a game.
27 posted on 03/29/2013 9:17:12 PM PDT by Hilda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
Just the opposite really. The more I've been reading it, Vatican II is more open while traditionalists were more elitists (such as calling for a return to the Latin mass and condemning any deviance from that mass).

Elitist? That is odd. In our parish (very untraditional Vatican II church) the priest likes to change the words to the prayers to things he thinks are "relevant," as I am sure he feels the Spirit moves him. And does that mean that we get to change our responses if we feel similarly moved? Nope, anything but. We still have to say what we are told to say, but he can change his parts. Why? Because he is the priest. That is elitism. When he says things like "Happy are we who are called to this loving banquet of the Lord" just try saying "Oh, God, thank you for giving me this opportunity to partake of this beautiful meal of love and peace in your house of worship that we now stand in which doesn't expect us to be sectarian in any way before each other, who are really more than just friends and neighbors but really connected by a deep abiding love in your person" and find out how you are different than the clergy. That, my friend, is the very spirit and definition of elitism.

Doing things as demonstrated by tradition protects all of us from thinking we are God's oracle for deciding what others get to say. When we celebrate the Mass the way the Church has approved for generations we participate in something bigger than us. Tradition is the cure for elitism.

28 posted on 03/29/2013 9:21:58 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cothrige
Tradition is the cure for elitism.

In the past I would have agreed but I'm seeing, especially lately, that it has become its own elitism. Look at the link I posted several posts up. This is a person most here respect but has gone off the deep end criticizing everything this new Pope does, even the way he genuflects.

29 posted on 03/29/2013 9:25:19 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

he has devastated traditionalist Catholics who adored his predecessor, Benedict XVI, for restoring much of the traditional pomp to the papacy.
***Humility has a way of showing ‘pomp’ to be spiritually worthless.


30 posted on 03/29/2013 9:28:09 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

he has devastated traditionalist Catholics who adored his predecessor, Benedict XVI, for restoring much of the traditional pomp to the papacy.
***Humility has a way of showing ‘pomp’ to be spiritually worthless.


31 posted on 03/29/2013 9:29:49 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cothrige
"Oh, God, thank you for giving me this opportunity to partake of this beautiful meal of love and peace in your house of worship that we now stand in which doesn't expect us to be sectarian in any way before each other, who are really more than just friends and neighbors but really connected by a deep abiding love in your person"

LOL -- are you serious?

You might as well be going to some non-aligned protestant offshoot church with a santuary in a shopping mall if your priest has the latitude to pull this kind of shenanigan.

32 posted on 03/29/2013 9:32:51 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick

santuary = sanctuary


33 posted on 03/29/2013 9:34:46 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012

Well for the record, this Protestant loves the new Pope, and the previous two.


34 posted on 03/29/2013 9:55:38 PM PDT by Free Vulcan (Vote Republican! You can vote Democrat when you're dead...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Well, you are pointing out one person who says some silly things but that doesn’t somehow undo tradition or traditionalism. Just look at the loony crap spewed everyday by anti-traditionalists about the SSPX and tell me what they prove about the other position? Just consider all the conservatives who say ridiculous and painfully stupid things regarding politics. Should we accept that because they do that we should become liberals? Tradition does not belong to traditionalists, they just love it, and their failings do not mean that tradition is at fault. Ours is a revealed religion and if we accept that tradition is unnecessary then we can just throw the whole thing out. After all, everything we believe about the Bible is just more tradition.


35 posted on 03/29/2013 10:09:41 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick

LOL, no that was my tongue-in-cheek example of the possible response when the priest says things not in the liturgy. If you said this you would be seriously asked to be quiet or shown the door. And yet the priests can, and regularly do, say whatever they want regardless of whether it is in the texts and nobody asks them to leave. Why the different standard for them? That is the height of clericalism, a very specific form of elitism, and we should reject it.


36 posted on 03/29/2013 10:12:24 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
I’m waiting to see what Ann Barnhardt says. she has been having a hissyfit over the new pope not being a traditionalist, High-Mass type. She had a post the other day where she was freaking out he didn’t genuflect correctly.

Actually, she was freaking that he didn't genuflect at all. She makes her case for why. I don't know what to think about it.

As for the feet-washing thing, I bet she doesn't have a problem with that at all. And she's about as "traditionalist" as you get.
37 posted on 03/29/2013 10:12:31 PM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cothrige

Okay, good, lol. But I can see where maybe the priest gets some latitude because he’s entrusted with some authority — which of course entails some accountability — that the laity doesn’t have. So it seems like maybe a give and take.


38 posted on 03/29/2013 10:18:38 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: mnehring; OKRA2012

The press is obviously enjoying this and trying to focus on conflicts on the mistaken impression that Pope Francis is a liberal. He’s not; his liturgical style is different from Benedict’s, but otherwise his message is exactly the same. He just has a different way of communicating it.

That said, some of the self-proclaimed “traditionalists” (who weren’t happy with Benedict, either, because he didn’t go far enough, in their opinion) are just plain ugly and are revealing themselves to be people who don’t care at all about Our Lord or the Faith, but only about ritual practices and appearances. They have a narrow, hostile view of the world, and are the very embodiment of the modern Pharisee. I have been disgusted at some of the things I have read on “traditionalist” blogs.

And believe me, the press is loving it.

I think Pope Francis is wonderful; he’s not particularly interested in liturgy, but so what? I was in Rome for Palm Sunday and I actually saw him celebrate Mass in St Peter’s Square. He does it very correctly and you can tell he loves God and wants everybody else to love Him too. His homily was wonderful and then after the Mass he was driven around the square, getting out to walk every so often, and you could really sense the love and joy.

The other thing, of course, was that by the end of his time, poor Pope Benedict was so worn out and frail after years of dealing with the hostility of the world and even people inside the Church that he wasn’t even capable physically of doing the kind of things Pope Francis is doing. I think some of the traditionalists had gotten used to having a Pope who wasn’t going to challenge their view of the world. Francis is challenging them to get back to the basics of Faith and evangelization, and they don’t like it one bit. None of us like to have our assumptions challenged. But in reading the blogs, I have seen a lot of people who are actually hearing this as a kind of wake up call and are reexamining their own priorities and hearing the message in a whole new way. Which is exactly what Pope Francis wants...


39 posted on 03/29/2013 10:28:24 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick

Yes, I can see what you are saying, but I think your understanding misses some key elements of the situation. Consider this. He does have authority (because that is our tradition) but not to change words in the Mass (which isn’t our tradition). And, what accountability does he have in this? If we changed the words of the Mass, which we don’t have the authority to do, we would be held accountable. No doubt. But, when he does that, which he has no more authority to do than I do, what happens. Nothing. Nothing at all. No accountability whatsoever. And, that is why it is a good example of the elitism inherent in non-traditional approaches to liturgy.


40 posted on 03/29/2013 10:32:12 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: basil
does anyone think that the SCM and the pop lightweights would like nothing better than to divide Catholics even more?.....

nothing is out of their realm to criticize...

41 posted on 03/29/2013 10:35:17 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

OMG - possible quasi-monarchists!!!


42 posted on 03/29/2013 10:35:54 PM PDT by stuartcr ("I have habits that are older than the people telling me they're bad for me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
You might as well be going to some non-aligned protestant offshoot church with a santuary in a shopping mall if your priest has the latitude to pull this kind of shenanigan.

That's what I'm attracted to...A place where the preacher prays from his heart instead of repeating some mindless, repetitious phrase that is engrained in his head...

43 posted on 03/29/2013 10:36:35 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: cothrige

Okay, I think I see your point.


44 posted on 03/29/2013 10:45:36 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

Yeah, I was attracted to that too, then I gave up on that.

It’s complex, I guess.


45 posted on 03/29/2013 10:50:31 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012
Movie: Shoes of the Fisherman

In the movie, the new Pope, IIRC, actually acted out in a Christian way, and gave away the wealth of the church to the needy.

The bureaucracy of the church...was astonished. And it resisted the new direction.

It upset the entire established order. But...but...you can't do that? Oh, yes, I can. And I am obligated to. And you do so, too.

An old movie. I think it was Anthony Quinn?

I remember very little of it, more's the pity.

46 posted on 03/29/2013 10:55:11 PM PDT by sauron ("Truth is hate to those who hate Truth" --unknown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OKRA2012
Have we entered an age of a new gnosticism?
Posted on 29 March 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

There is an adage: Qui bene distinguit, bene docet, that is, someone who makes distinctions well, teaches well.

Distinguished canonist Ed Peters makes good distinctions about the Holy Father’s disregard for the Church’s duly promulgated law when he chose to wash the feet of women on Holy Thursday. My emphases and comments.

Retrospectives on the Mandatum rite controversies March 29, 2013

It’s a very big Church and there are many issues competing for the pope’s attention. Let me address just that issue I know something about, namely, ecclesiastical law, and try to talk sensibly about it. I’ll leave to finer minds the task of situating legal concerns in the wider ecclesial context.

For starters, perhaps Fr. Lombardi was misquoted or taken out of context when he apparently said, “the pope’s decision [to wash the feet of women on Holy Thursday] was ‘absolutely licit’ for a rite that is not a church sacrament.” That remark is confusing because it implies that liceity is a concept that applies only to sacraments; but of course, liceity is an assessment of any action’s consistency with applicable law (canon, liturgical, sacramental, etc). One would never limit questions of Mass liceity to, say, the matter used for the Eucharist or the words of institution (that is, the sacrament at Mass) [NB] as if all other rubrics were merely optional. No one understands liceity so narrowly, [ehem... I think some people do.] and so, as I say, we are probably dealing with an incomplete answer.

In any case, I think some conclusions can be drawn about the foot-washing incident already.

[Here is an obvious point that must be made to help liberals sober up a little.] 1. If liturgical law permitted the washing of women’s feet at the Mass of the Lord’s Supper, [then] no one would have noticed the pope’s doing it. What was newsworthy (apparently, massively newsworthy) is that, precisely because liturgical law does not authorize it, the pope’s performance of the action was huge news.

2. I and many others have long been open to revising the Mandatum rite so as to permit the washing of women’s feet [I am not among them. However, Peters is making a different point...] although I understand that strong symbolic elements are in play and I might be under-appreciating arguments for the retention of the rite as promulgated by Rome. I take no position on that larger issue, it being ultimately a question for experts in other disciplines. My focus is on the law as issued by Rome (c. 838).

[We get to the crux of the canonical issue...] 3. Few people seem able to articulate when a pope is bound by canon law (e.g., when canon law legislates matters of divine or natural law) and when he may ignore it (e.g., c. 378 § 1 on determining the suitability of candidates for the episcopate or appointing an excessive number of papal electors contrary to UDG 33). Those are not hard cases. Most Church laws, however, fall between these two poles and require careful thinking lest confusion for—nay, dissension among—the faithful arise. Exactly as happened here. [In spades!] Now, even in that discussion, the question is not usually whether the pope is bound to comply with the law (he probably is not so bound), but rather [pay attention...], how he can act contrary to the law without implying, especially for others who remain bound by the law but who might well find it equally inconvenient, that inconvenient laws may simply be ignored because, well, because the pope did it. [That, ladies and gents, is the problem. Liberals are going to claim that because of what Francis did, they can do whatever they wish. Indeed, they will claim that others who uphold the clearly written law are wrong to up hold the law. They will, like gnostics, appeal to some vague super-principle which trumps all law (and reason).]

4. A pope’s ignoring of a law is not an abrogation of the law but, especially where his action reverberated around the world, it seems to render the law moot. [moot - "doubtful, theoretical, meaningless, debatable"] For the sake of good order, then [Peters' own recommendation...], the Mandatum rubrics should be modified to permit the washing of women’s feet or, perhaps upon the advice of Scriptural and theological experts, the symbolism of apostolic ministry asserted by some to be contained in the rite should be articulated and the rule reiterated. What is not good is to leave a crystal clear law on the books but show no intention of expecting anyone to follow it. That damages the effectiveness of law across the board.

Get that last point?

What is not good is to leave a crystal clear law on the books but show no intention of expecting anyone to follow it. That damages the effectiveness of law across the board.

This is a huge problem.

Liberals such as Michael Sean Winters, who does not in this matter seem to make distinctions at all, think that Peters and I are “obsessively focused on whether or not a bishop or priest can/should wash the feet of women during the Mandatum Rite in the Mass of the Lord’s Supper”. He is wrong. That’s just your usual liberal misappropriation of the situation.

Peters and I are actually concerned about the good order of the Church. A canonist and a man in Holy Orders ought to be. Winters, on the other hand, writes for the paper of record for dissenters and antinomians.

What this foot washing issue does is reveal how vast the gulf is now that divides those who maintain that order, law and reason are necessary in the Church and society and those who, like gnostics who possess secret powers of interpretation of even more secret teachings, apply super-principles which trump lesser matters such as reason, law and order.

The new gnostics (liberals) call upon “fairness” and feelings. There can be no valid response possible by argument or reason or precedent.

For a long time I have argued that we need a level of liturgical celebration which brings about an encounter with the transcendent, which cuts beyond our (by now) useless linear arguments. People today can’t follow a linear argument. You get to the end and they conclude, “That might be true for you…”. Now, however, we may be seeing more clearly, in reactions to what Francis is doing (not necessarily in what Francis is doing), the exaltation of the golden calf of immanence.

Have we entered an age of a new gnosticism, wherein only those who feel a certain way are the true authoritative interpreters?

Can. 838 §1 The ordering and guidance of the sacred liturgy depends solely upon the authority of the Church, namely, that of the Apostolic See and, as provided by law, that of the diocesan Bishop.

"The men who have been chosen are led by the ministers to seats prepared in a suitable place. Then the Priest (removing his chasuble if necessary) goes to each one, and, with the help of the ministers, pours water over each one’s feet and then dries them."(emphasis added)

Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursday

47 posted on 03/29/2013 10:57:10 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro can't pass E-verify)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius
I think some of the traditionalists had gotten used to having a Pope who wasn’t going to challenge their view of the world. Francis is challenging them to get back to the basics of Faith and evangelization, and they don’t like it one bit. None of us like to have our assumptions challenged.

You seem to posit the pope's challenge versus tradition, and I can't imagine what that means. How is the Gospel message and evangelizing somehow anti-tradition? Traditional liturgy is every bit as much a part of "the basics of Faith" as any other actions are. I don't think traditionalists are upset at having such assumptions challenged, since they don't reject such things in the first place, but rather are likely just nervous given the conditions which they have existed under for many years.

We really must try to at least consider how life has been for these people and why they feel as they do now. Charity compels us in this. We must consider that the Mass they love was the Mass of the Church and the saints for hundreds and hundreds of years, and much of it for even longer. It is not an evil thing, but a beautiful one. And yet they saw it suppressed for decades by unsympathetic bishops and cardinals without any real explanation or regard for the history of the Mass itself. And then, after all those years, they were allowed to celebrate it again, but often hundreds of miles from their homes and only once or twice a month. And now, after inching ahead under the last pope they see a pope elected from among that hostile unsympathetic group of cardinals. Can you really blame them for being jumpy? I don't. I understand very well why they are watching every move of the pope and looking for hints about what is coming. His actions likely don't bode anything in regard to how you worship, but they might in the case of people like traditionalists. Their situation is very different from mine and likely yours, and we all do well to remember that.

48 posted on 03/29/2013 11:03:41 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
This is a person most here respect

You have a unique definition for the words most and respect.

Most Catholics here think that Ann Barnhardt is a certifiable nut.

49 posted on 03/29/2013 11:04:10 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro can't pass E-verify)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy; basil; kingu; ThomasThomas; OKRA2012
I can't complain that Nicole Winfield/AP made this all up --- it's not like it's a fabricated, whole-cloth lie --- but it's so weirdly overblown.

Since when, EVER, did AP care about what a couple of Catholic blogs (and mainly one, Rorate Caeli) were saying about the Bishop of Rome? I mean, there are (rapidly calculating) 41,009 Catholic blogs --- or maybe that's 42,778 plus or minus 10,000 --- anyway, lots, and AP picks up on, maybe, TWO that are busting negative on the Pope?

It's just embarrassing to see how AP cranks up the Media Narrative Machine to parlay this microscopic kerfuffle into a freakin' schism.

That's no to deny that Liturgy is important. I'll put my bonafides right out there: I'm a foundng member of our parish Schola Cantorum and I am very ardently, personally committed to the restoration of the beautiful Latin Liturgy, right here in Upper East Tennessee. I think it is one of the keys to the sacred continuity and universality which is Christ's enduring gift to His Bride.

Having said that: give me a break, Associated Press. You don't know a zuccheto from a zucchini. The whole thing is useful to you because it's a way to foment factionalism. Respectfully, Miz Winfield: Butt Out.

And to all y'all, from us elitists in Upper East Tennessee: Christus Resurrexit and I don't mean maybe, Alleluia.

50 posted on 03/29/2013 11:06:15 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Vidi aquam egredientem de templo, a latere dextro, alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-115 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson