Posted on 03/30/2013 10:44:48 AM PDT by Salvation
It was surprising but not surprising when the Holy See announced that Pope Francis had chosen to celebrate this year's Mass of the Lord's Supper not in one of the papal basilicas of Rome but, instead, in its juvenile prison. That's precisely the kind of gesture that we have come to expect from the new pope in the short time we've been getting to know him. It's not traditional, but it's humble and evangelistic. And it corresponds to Jesus' remarks that, when we visit those in prison, we are spiritually visiting him (Matthew 25:36-40). It's also in keeping with things he's done before, such as holding the service in a maternity hospital in Buenos Aires in 2005. 4. If he can do this, can others? Technically speaking, no. If a pope judges that, due to the particular circumstances of a papal celebration, an exception should be made, that does not create a legal precedent allowing others to do so. Already, the Congregation for Divine Worship has, apparently, indicated privately that a bishop can wash women's feet if he feels a pastoral exception should be made. At least, that's what Cardinal O'Malley indicated he was told when he asked them about the subject (see here for more info). 51. The washing of the feet of chosen men which, according to tradition, is performed on this day, represents the service and charity of Christ, who came "not to be served, but to serve." This tradition should be maintained, and its proper significance explained. This indicates that we should understand that this rite "represents the service and charity of Christ"--
How Should We Understand Pope Francis Washing Women's Feet?
This Year's Mass of the Lord's Supper
Questions
1. What do the Church's liturgical documents say about footwashing?
2. How does Pope Francis's decision relate to this?
3. Can Pope Francis just do things that aren't provided for in the law?
5. What should we expect in the future?
6. How should we understand the rite in light of Pope Francis's action?
I don't agree. Jesus specifically said that the apostles were to do this for others; He didn't say just for other men. This was to show that they are to be servants, not masters.
This wasn't the same as Jesus sending the Apostles out on the Great Commission, to preach the Gospel, and consecrate the bread and wine to become His Body and Blood. THAT was the institution of the priesthood, and for that he did choose just men.
I think the tricky thing would be giving time, rather than money (or better yet, both). I get lazy and think it easier for me to give money rather than my time
An interesting view on this can be found at:
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/03/have-we-entered-an-age-of-a-new-gnosticism/
You sound remarkably like a Pharisee
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.