How do they possibly get from here to there?
After the Pope washed women’s feet during the Holy Thursday mass, traditionalists have been howling, but they aren’t the only ones..
While traditionalists have been upset by the change (for my part I think washing women’s feet is fine, I just don’t care for disregarding the rubrics) Church progressives have been howling too. Or rather I should say crowing.
Look how the Telegraph reports on the actions of the Holy Father and how they interpret them.
The lede for their article says this “Pope Francis continued his gleeful abandonment of tradition by washing the feet of a young Muslim woman prisoner in an unprecedented twist on the Holy Thursday tradition. “
Gleeful abandonment of tradition? Wow. Honestly, even the Pope’s critics would not go so far as to say that. Gleeful abandonment of tradition, even with a small t, implies much more than a few liturgical changes. It implies changing Catholicism itself.
This ludicrous inference is confirmed in a Ruth Gledhill editorial entitled “Washing of girls’ feet ‘opens door to women priests” saying the action “raised hopes among liberals that he might one day relax the Roman Catholic Church’s ban on female ordination”.
Seriously? How do they get from here to there?
This is just another reason that it would have been better had the Pope changed the rubric first and issued some instructions about what the change means and what the change emphatically does not mean. Doing it this way, on the fly and in disregard of the rubrics, leaves the Pope’s actions open to misinterpretation and over-interpretation.
There is no way that the Pope’s actions have any bearing on female ordination, which will never happen. Because one thing you can count on, the Pope is still Catholic.
April 2, 2013 at 1:14 pm
There is a direct link between the washing of the Apostle's feet on Holy Thursday, and to their ordination, not just to the priesthood, but to the "Fullness of the priesthood" as Bishops. What Jesus did on Holy Thursday, and what he commanded to be done "in remembrance of me" was multi-layered, and had at least a threefold import. First of all, of course, he celebrated the Sacrament of the Eucharist. However the mystery of Holy Thursday goes deeper than just the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice. Jesus also specified by his mandatum that this sacrifice was to be repeated "in remembrance of me". In this way he simultaneously instituted in the Sacrament of Holy Orders, the ordination of the Apostles to the order of sacrificial priesthood which would be required if his disciples were to be able to obey his mandatum to "Do this in remembrance of me."
To maintain and continue the Sacrament of the Eucharist, however there is required a third layer to Jesus' action on Holy Thursday. Not only did he celebrate the Eucharistic Sacrifice, and not only did he institute twelve of his disciples into the order of sacrificial priesthood so that they would be authorized and commissioned to celebrate that same Eucharistic Sacrifice, but he also consecrated these same Apostles with the "Fullness of the priesthood", with the authority to ordain others to this same order of sacrificial priesthood, and further, with the authority and mission to spread the sacrament inaugurated by this mandatum by consecrating other Shephard/Overseers, other Bishops who would be able themselves to ordain other men to this same order of sacrificial priesthood. This was third layer – the "Fullness of the Priesthood" – to Jesus' action on Holy Thursday, which was necessary if the mandatum to "Do this in rememberance of me" was not to die with the Apostles themselves, or with those whom the Apostles themselves would ordain.
And it is precisely in this context that the washing of the Apostle's feet, not merely as random disciples who "happened to be there" a that first Eucharistic celebration, but *precisely* as those chosen to continue to "Do this in remembrance of me". What is the "This" to which Jesus' mandatum refers? It cannot be merely the Eucharistic celebration itself, because they could not do this once Jesus had been assumed into heaven with out ordination to the same order of sacrificial priesthood. It cannot, moreover, be merely their own ordination to this sacrificial priesthood, since that would only have allowed those 12 disciples to celebrate the Eucharistic sacrifice, but would not have provided for the spread of the practice to other locations and peoples. This would required that the mandatum also includes the ability to ordain others to this same order of sacrificial priesthood.
However if the mandatum was to also extend through *time* as well as space, this required that the Apostles be consecrated, not just with the authority to ordain other men (and commissioned with the task of doing so) but also that they be given the authority to consecrate other Shepherd/Overseers to continue this mandatum down through the centuries, who themselves had been consecrated to the "Fullness of the priesthood" with the authority and mandate to continue to ordain men to the same order of sacrificial priesthood, and to consecrate Bishops who could continue this mandatum down through the centuries. It is *precisely* this three-layered act which is included in the word "This" of Jesus' mandatum. And it is *precisely* in this context that Jesus' mandatum extends to the washing of the feet, not of random disciples, but of priests ordained to the same order of sacrificial priesthood. This is why the Pope has always washed the feet of not just 12 random disciples, but 12 *priests*.
April 2, 2013 at 1:21 pm
(…continued…) The Pope is the successor of Peter, and he is also the vicar of Christ, and thus in Christ's place, vicariously, he washes the feet of 12 *priests* just as Jesus himself did, and just as Jesus himself commanded that his Apostles do. This is why the washing of random people's (after all, can a muslim really be called a disciple of Christ?) feet by the Pope is not only a-traditional, but actually signals a breaking of the mandatum of Christ. At this point, once the mandatum has been broken, first by the Pope washing the feet of non-priests and further of non-disciples feet, and further of women's feet – who cannot, according to the Catholic faith even become priests potentially, then the intent is clear. Unless your feet are washed you have no part with me in this sacrificial priesthood, Jesus told Peter. The washing of Peter's feet, as head of the Apostles, was significant, because of the role he was to bear as priest, as apostle, and as head of the Apostolic college, the vicar of Christ. The washing of the feet of the Apostles is an integral part of the mandatum, which signifies that they whose feet are washed have a part in the sacrificial priesthood of Jesus, who gave them that mandatum. The washing of the feet of women, on Holy Thursday, by the Pope, Peter's Successor, and the Vicar of Christ, signals a breaking of that mandatum. And if the mandatum can be broken in one way by washing women's feet, it can be broken in any other way as well, including by ordaining those whose feet are washed to the same order of sacrificial priesthood, and to the office of Bishop, because all three layers are integral to the mandatum which Jesus gave to his Apostles. I wish this were not so, but it is so, and as such, those who dissent from the teaching of the Church regarding the appropriate subjects for Ordination to the same order of sacrificial priesthood inaugurated by our Lord on Holy Thursday do indeed have a clear signal from the Pope which supports their dissent. Actions have consequences. Those of use who believe in Liturgy have always said so – "Lex orendi, lex credendi, lex agendi" The Law of Prayer is the law of Belief is the law of Action. We must be prepared to admit that this is so, even today, and especially so when in the context of this most central of all of Jesus' actions – his institution of the Eucharist on the night of his betrayal. May Jesus' followers today not betray him again by breaking his solemn and Holy mandatum.
Mater Misericordiae, ora pro nobis!
April 2, 2013 at 2:32 pm
…and there are an awful lot of us in the Catholic world who were taught precisely as Abdiesus wrote. We are having a 1969 moment out here as everyone denies what we were taught about the Mandatum. I feel like my dad describes feeling in 1970 when the Mass changed. Suddenly things are shifting and it's vitally important for a lay person to be a liturgical expert so they can somehow explain to themselves why what they thought they knew about the simplest Catholic things is wrong.
April 2, 2013 at 3:14 pm
Even though the action taken by the Pope does NOT mean that women will be ordained as priests the fact is this action still violated Church Law and has has already been mentioned here caused a lot of confusion about not just what this ceremony signifies but whether or not a Pope can simply do whatever he wants with any liturgical action. Pope Benedict himself says NO when it comes to this he cannot do "whatever he wants"
April 2, 2013 at 3:22 pm
The UK Media seem to be much nicer about Pope Francis than they were about Benedict. I'm sure that will change though 🙂
April 2, 2013 at 3:23 pm
"gleeful abandonment" seems like a fair comment in the context.
April 2, 2013 at 3:36 pm
Perhaps they didn't read the pope's homily at the Chrism Mass where he said:
"Recently a group of priests from a European country issued a summons to disobedience, and at the same time gave concrete examples of the forms this disobedience might take, even to the point of disregarding definitive decisions of the Church’s Magisterium, such as the question of women’s ordination, for which Blessed Pope John Paul II stated irrevocably that the Church has received no authority from the Lord. Is disobedience a path of renewal for the Church?"
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2012/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20120405_messa-crismale_en.html
April 2, 2013 at 4:11 pm
Washing women's feet has nothing to do with ordination and it is ludicrous to suggest so, either from a liberal or conservative position. If you can't wash women's feet because Jesus only washed the apostles' feet then we should stop giving women holy communion as only the apostles received Communion.
April 2, 2013 at 4:12 pm
oops! That was from Pope Benedict…
April 2, 2013 at 6:21 pm
Washing feet outside of the Mandatum Rite of the Holy Thursday Mass is something entirely different. The Church law governs the former and not the latter. The laws of the Church should be obeyed – they exist to uphold the Deposit of the Faith.
April 2, 2013 at 6:30 pm
I am increasingly concerned that my only recourse is a form of anarchism. Secular politics led me to a form of it (private property anarchism, sometimes called anarcho-capitalism). Now I keep finding a similar nonsense. Anarcho-catholicism seems pretty convoluted, but I am tired of defending a tradition that doesn't really exist anymore, and a clergy that seems just as happy dropping everything to keep the women in the pews happy with a pseudo-christian feminist reading of everything.
What I am going to? Mass? Where is the eucharistic minister circus described in the liturgical literature? Is the priest even attempting catechisis/exegisis during his homily? How could Latin, a language foreign to practically everyone, help this obvious lack of understanding?
Sorry, I've digressed into some of the frustrations. Must stop before I get too specific.
April 2, 2013 at 6:32 pm
It seems to me the Deposit of Faith does not seem to matter to certain folks out there because they are all caught up in the "He Blessed a Handicapped Person" (I guess the other 2 did not)to he's the "people's Pope" kind of Emotional Sentimentalism is more attractive than the proper kind of worship and ritual or maybe even dare I say it TRUTH. This was the Pope Benedict's outlook and Francis should be following it because "Love without Truth is Empty. This is what is meant by the term "STRONG CATHOLIC IDENTITY and yes it does matter. We are NOT just another Social Service Agency We are the Church MILITANT and act it!
April 3, 2013 at 3:30 am
D Mac –
I'm not worried that the Pope is going to ordain women, I'm worried that he's keeping that movement alive for another Pontificate and I can't understand why. I'm also sad that yet another distinctly Catholic thing is gone. There are a finite number of them, you know.
April 3, 2013 at 4:04 am
Does this mean that only muslim girls can be ordained priests?