Let's take some secular examples.
1) a prima ballerina decides that she will enhance the carefully crafted choreography of Swan Lake and just add some cutsie little steps here and there - at her pleasure.
2) a legal secretary decides that her boss' brief needs a bit of enhancement and throws in a few things she's learned at night school.
3) a sou chef takes the recipe of his master and tweaks it just a bit.
Pow! All heck would surely break out. Not just because the servant hadn't done what the master intended but also because the resulting chaos would affect everyone involved.
And so it is with the optional rite of Foot Washing - Mandatum (command) - on Holy Thursday. The rubrics are clear - men (viri) are to have their feet washed - twelve, if you want to follow Jesus' lead. Why twelve and why men, you might ask? Well, because a secondary function of our remembrance of that day (aside from the - very important - institution of the Eucharist!), is the institution of the priesthood, initiated with the twelve apostles. Can women become priests? Contrary to liberal wishes the answer has irrevocably been given by Pope John Paul II - never!
Canon lawyer, Dr. Edward Peters has written about it thoroughly and shares the wording of the rubric with us - along with emphasis of the Latin, in which it was written. The word man (viri) can only be interpreted one way, and it's not mankind (or humankind).As has been pointed out by Fr. Z,"let it be remembered that the Church’s legislation allows for the washing of the feet of only men. MEN = VIRI = MEN. Not manish women or any other critter. Even if some claim to have received permission to wash the feet of women, and even if the claims were true, those permissions would in no way change the law for the rest of the world. Period. Furthermore, I have never seen a letter or a copy of a letter from the Congregation in Rome granting such a permission. I doubt anyone else has either".
I'd rather just see this optional rite done away with altogether. Why oh why does the focus always have to be on 'us' (the people)? Holy Thursday is about the institution of the priesthood. It is about the institution of the Eucharist. And yet, here we are again. With our self congratulatory songs, choirs up front so that we may focus away from everything that we should be focusing on - Jesus, present to us as food at the foot of the cross! I'm so very frustrated and it takes away my right to worship in the way Mass was intended* (complete with thorough instructions). I've seen even babies' feet washed, mostly women's feet washed, and commemorative towels given out as 'door prizes' for those women and men who participated. I'm beyond frustrated by this lack of saying the black and doing the red!
Rant over...
May we all celebrate a holy, Holy Thursday! Happy Holy Week!
May we all celebrate a holy, Holy Thursday! Happy Holy Week!
 |
| The Last Supper - the reason for Holy Thursday! |
"It is the right of the Christian people themselves that their diocesan bishop should take care to prevent the occurrence of abuses in ecclesiastical discipline, especially as regards the ministry of the word, the celebration of the sacraments and sacramentals, the worship of God, and devotion to the saints (24)."
I guess Pope Francis doesn't agree with you. http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/28/17502522-pope-washes-feet-of-young-detainees-in-holy-thursday-ritual#.UVSVdmi2E6Y.facebook
ReplyDeleteIt's not I who wrote the rubrics, so Pope Francis is certainly not disagreeing with me. As was his practice as bishop, he has chosen to wash the feet of women. I surmised he would do so before it happened. All my post was doing was reporting the rubrics. Following them (or not) appears to be at the pleasure of each clergyman. This leads me to wonder, why have rubrics at all? Yes, I'm being facetious.
Delete"And yet, here we are again. With our self congratulatory songs, choirs up front so that we may focus away from everything that we should be focusing on - Jesus, present to us as food at the foot of the cross! I'm so very frustrated and it takes away my right to worship in the way Mass was intended. I've seen even babies' feet washed, mostly women's feet washed, and commemorative towels given out as 'door prizes' for those women and men who participated."
DeleteSounds to me that you're doing much more than "reporting the rubics." And no, I'm not being facetious.
All of the above can be found in the rubrics. We Catholics have rules dictating what is and is not acceptable and appropriate, whether it be music, Mass, optional rites, etc. Adding that the abuses also frustrate me is certainly my right. The right of the faithful to have access to the Mass as it was intended is actually something we are told that we have as well. Sadly, through our travels, my husband and I have been unwilling observers of many liberties taken. When these blatant abuses occur it detracts from our peace of mind greatly and therefore encroaches on our right to properly worship.
DeleteI don't question the awful amount of liturgical abuses in the church. I was just surprised by your statement, "All my post was doing was reporting the rubrics" since it clearly doesn't.
DeleteYour "report" doesn't quote one rubric or anything from the GIRM. Rather you're ranting about so many that don't follow them. There's a big difference.
What I meant by "Pope Francis doesn't agree with you" is this. Your opinion is that women's feet shouldn't be washed because the rubric indicates men's feet. By his actions, the Pontiff doesn't agree with your opinion (and also the rubric).
OK, Paul, you got me on semantics. As a blogger, I am hardly 'reporting' anything. I do, however, link to sources containing rubrics. It's still not accurate to say that Pope Francis doesn't agree with *me* - since I don't base this post on merely an opinion that *I* hold. That he disagrees or chooses to ignore the rubrics would be more accurate.
DeleteOf course, as the Vicar of Christ, he is in the position to change things. But I wish it would have been used as a teachable moment (maybe a bit of explanation about why he was doing this but that it wasn't an invitation for creativity by the clergy in general). I bemoan the fact that this will have appeared to be an OK to priests already inclined to disobedience.