Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match!

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion for anyone who adheres to the Extraordinary form of the mass and any issues related to the practices of Eastern Rite Catholicism.

Saint Athanasius is counted as one of the four Great Doctors of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Athanasius

Mar 28th 2013 new

(Quote) Lynea-297530 said: It is BOTH a canonical issue and a theological one, because he is making a theological statement ...
(Quote) Lynea-297530 said:

It is BOTH a canonical issue and a theological one, because he is making a theological statement by disobeying canon law (actually, a few statements at that). Maundy Thursday is the celebration of TWO (2) Sacraments of the Church: The institution of the Holy Eucharist, and the institution of the priesthood.

--hide--


You make an important point Lynea. Thank you.

LOCKED
Mar 28th 2013 new

(Quote) Roystan-340472 said: Ah, the weasibility of words or, more to the point, the difference between word...
(Quote) Roystan-340472 said:



Ah, the weasibility of words or, more to the point, the difference between words and meaning.



The words are probably true enough, I suppose. There probably is no formal written commandment in Scripture or Tradition that says specifically a pope must not disregard the formal laws of the Church because if there were, a sanction would have to be applied to the pope to prevent him from doing so. This flies in the face of the accepted notion that the Pontiff is Supreme. You can't apply a sanction to a Supreme because that would make him not supreme. You can't fire the guy or declare him mentally incompetent. You can only declare him dead but that's only reporting the existence of a fact that was created by God, as opposed to you yourself creating the fact of terminating his employment.



However, if the Holy Church, the Body of Christ in every location of the material universe, makes a law, surely it's God's law until, in its privilege
to bind and loose, the Holy Church changes it. So, if someone says that Francis is disregarding a church law, surely that someone is saying that Francis is being disobedient to a general understanding held by both God and Church that the Church represents God’s will to anyone who may be living in any location of the material universe. A general understanding is not a directive but it is meant to be directive. If Francis is disregarding
a church law, he must be in a state of disobedience to God’s will. Big thing to say! Especially when you're saying it (and where is your charism to say these things, my dear, hmmmmm?)



How should you express your concern about something the Pope has done? Is he ‘wrong’? Can the Vicar (stand-in, deputy) of Christ be ‘wrong’? Was the Holy Spirit deliberately influencing two-thirds of 115 good and wise men to pick a dud for some long-term strategic reason maybe? Anyway, how do you deliberately influence two-thirds of 115 good and wise men to pick a dud without, in some sense, clouding their minds or
playing some trick on them - in other words, treating them as tools rather than as images of God in their own right? Would the Holy Spirit do that?



I guess you express your concern by using words that state what the Pope has done in this or that case and then using words that wonder about how that accords with your understanding of what the Church is about. "The Pope is probably correct but I'm puzzled ...." To do otherwise is to imply that the Holy Spirit influenced a conclave of men with intentions to do the right thing to do the opposite, which seems to be a calumny against the Holy Spirit, or that the majority of men in the conclave acted stupidly or corruptly, ie., outside the wishes of the Holy Spirit, which seems to be a calumny against, at least, most of the conclave.

But what some may consider to be a precious pussyfooting about with words in a Republic founded on the stout Protestant principle of I-have-the-truth-in-me is only because the Pope isn’t a creature of an electorate (not even the conclave that elected him) who can scold him when he doesn’t do what they want, but a creation of the Holy Spirit.



How, in a robust democratic environment, do you critique the actions of a creation of the Holy Spirit?




--hide--

....."But what some may consider to be a precious pussyfooting about with words in a Republic founded on the stout Protestant principle of I-have-the-truth-in-me is only because the Pope isn’t a creature of an electorate (not even the conclave that elected him) who can scold him when he doesn’t do what they want, but a creation of the Holy Spirit. How, in a robust democratic environment, do you critique the actions of a creation of the Holy Spirit? "


Precisely!


“When the church does not emerge from itself to evangelize, it becomes self-referential and therefore becomes sick. ... The evils that, over time, occur in ecclesiastical institutions have their root in self-referentiality, a kind of theological narcissism.”



LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new

(Quote) Bernard-2709 said: A nice gesture on the Pope's part,but the Apostles (who were men) were Priest's and Bisho...
(Quote) Bernard-2709 said:

A nice gesture on the Pope's part,but the Apostles (who were men) were Priest's and Bishops. Having a female in this instance just doesn' fit IMO.

--hide--
She is a human being, a member of the Mystical Body of Christ, isn't she???

LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new

(Quote) Roystan-340472 said: (Quote) James-17080 said: Peters writes:"
(Quote) Roystan-340472 said:

Quote:
James-17080 said:


Peters writes:

"By disregarding his own law in this matter, Francis violates, of course, no divine directive,




Ah, the weasibility of words or, more to the point, the difference between words and meaning.



The words are probably true enough, I suppose. There probably is no formal written commandment in Scripture or Tradition that says specifically a pope must not disregard the formal laws of the Church because if there were, a sanction would have to be applied to the pope to prevent him from doing so. This flies in the face of the accepted notion that the Pontiff is Supreme. You can't apply a sanction to a Supreme because that would make him not supreme. You can't fire the guy or declare him mentally incompetent. You can only declare him dead but that's only reporting the existence of a fact that was created by God, as opposed to you yourself creating the fact of terminating his employment.



However, if the Holy Church, the Body of Christ in every location of the material universe, makes a law, surely it's God's law until, in its privilege
to bind and loose, the Holy Church changes it. So, if someone says that Francis is disregarding a church law, surely that someone is saying that Francis is being disobedient to a general understanding held by both God and Church that the Church represents God’s will to anyone who may be living in any location of the material universe. A general understanding is not a directive but it is meant to be directive. If Francis is disregarding
a church law, he must be in a state of disobedience to God’s will. Big thing to say! Especially when you're saying it (and where is your charism to say these things, my dear, hmmmmm?)



How should you express your concern about something the Pope has done? Is he ‘wrong’? Can the Vicar (stand-in, deputy) of Christ be ‘wrong’? Was the Holy Spirit deliberately influencing two-thirds of 115 good and wise men to pick a dud for some long-term strategic reason maybe? Anyway, how do you deliberately influence two-thirds of 115 good and wise men to pick a dud without, in some sense, clouding their minds or
playing some trick on them - in other words, treating them as tools rather than as images of God in their own right? Would the Holy Spirit do that?



I guess you express your concern by using words that state what the Pope has done in this or that case and then using words that wonder about how that accords with your understanding of what the Church is about. "The Pope is probably correct but I'm puzzled ...." To do otherwise is to imply that the Holy Spirit influenced a conclave of men with intentions to do the right thing to do the opposite, which seems to be a calumny against the Holy Spirit, or that the majority of men in the conclave acted stupidly or corruptly, ie., outside the wishes of the Holy Spirit, which seems to be a calumny against, at least, most of the conclave.

But what some may consider to be a precious pussyfooting about with words in a Republic founded on the stout Protestant principle of I-have-the-truth-in-me is only because the Pope isn’t a creature of an electorate (not even the conclave that elected him) who can scold him when he doesn’t do what they want, but a creation of the Holy Spirit.



How, in a robust democratic environment, do you critique the actions of a creation of the Holy Spirit?




--hide--


Roystan, I am no longer young in any sense of the word, nor am I anybody's dear. Not even my eyes have retained their youth.

You admit the words are true enough. That's good to know. Have "duds", to use your terminology, been picked before? Most certainly. Stephen VI, Sergius III, and Alexander VI come to mind. Their crimes, both civil and moral, were terrible indeed, and there is no need to review them here. What did Francis do? He washed a woman's feet. And this is what you are all so exercised about?

As for your last paragraph, it's a nice rhetorical fluorish, but honestly, what does it mean?

James ☺

LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new

(Quote) Gabor-19025 said: This "kind gesture" by the Pope is starting to give purported prophesies like the fo...
(Quote) Gabor-19025 said:


This "kind gesture" by the Pope is starting to give purported prophesies like the following legs :

"But soon, all will see the subtle acts and the sly gestures of those false imposters who preside over My Throne in Rome, for they amount to sacrilege."

--hide--

What is that from, pray tell?

LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new

Its a bit of a stretch to think this is going to lead to women priests. Pope John Paul II under infallibility made it quite clear it weren't going to happen.

I'm no fan of women having their feet washed at this service, but the girls were kids. Children. I think Pope Francis' symbol of humility and openness far outweighs any perceieved offence by not washing the feet of just men.

As for bad examples? There's already plenty of priests disobeying canon law and doctrine. I've never been at a service where it was just men who were only washed, and adults at that.

The ship might have sailed on this tradition a long ways back, at least in my country.

Therefore I'm going to take a cautious "wait and see" attitude.

LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new
(Quote) Naomi-698107 said: Its a bit of a stretch to think this is going to lead to women priests. Pope John Paul II under infallibility m...
(Quote) Naomi-698107 said:

Its a bit of a stretch to think this is going to lead to women priests. Pope John Paul II under infallibility made it quite clear it weren't going to happen.



I'm no fan of women having their feet washed at this service, but the girls were kids. Children. I think Pope Francis' symbol of humility and openness far outweighs any perceieved offence by not washing the feet of just men.



As for bad examples? There's already plenty of priests disobeying canon law and doctrine. I've never been at a service where it was just men who were only washed, and adults at that.



The ship might have sailed on this tradition a long ways back, at least in my country.



Therefore I'm going to take a cautious "wait and see" attitude.

--hide--


u wouildnt believe some of the freaky stuff going on in some us catholic churches in the late 80s and 90s.its been cleaned up a lot......but there were women running communion services,priests presiding over gay commitment ceremonies etc etc etc
LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new

(Quote) Bernard-2709 said: "A girl among the 12 inmates whose feet will be w...
(Quote) Bernard-2709 said: "A girl among the 12 inmates whose feet will be washed by the Pope"
"Pope Francis, who often prefers to call himself "bishop of Rome" for the little ones, those who suffer, and the poor, will celebrate today the rite of the washing of the feet in the juvenile penitentiary of Casal del Marmo. Among the twelve young inmates whose feet he will wash will also be a girl, perhaps two. "In Buenos Aires, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio also admitted girls to the rite. And we proposed today a female presence. In the Vatican, after some resistance, they accepted it," said Father Gaetano Greco, the chaplain of the facility, where the Pontiff will arrive this afternoon."

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com


Original story from La Repubblica:(Italian) www.repubblica.it


--hide--
Yikes. Such an uproar over this, as if there's aren't more important issues to be resolved in the Church than this. By criticizing the Pope's actions, we are fortifying the opinions of other faiths that Catholics just don't have it together; that the Church is disintegrating; and so on. Our criticism is helping those who would do us harm.

The Vatican has allowed the inclusion of women at the pastoral discretion of a bishop. The Pope is the Bishop of Rome. He was free to exercise his discretion. Some link the washing of feet ritual with the apostolic ministry. But, the ritual is primarily a sign of service to others. If you recall, Jesus Himself caused an uproar over some of His actions -- mainly healing people on the Sabbath. The point He was trying to make was that there is a greater good involved, as compared to the rules of the time. Isn't that what Pope Francis showed by his actions?

The USCCB has acknowledged and accepted the inclusion of women in the washing of feet ritual. Their interpretation is that the act is one of humility and service.Obviously this applies only to the US, but is an indication that the rule is outdated.

What's interesting is that the washing of feet isn't required by the rubrics. It appears that the rule has been in existence for some time, but hasn't been strictly followed, even by the Vatican. Although Church rules are supposed to be in a higher level, we can perhaps compare it's laws with those of governments -- many are outdated, and not enforced.

A question to ponder: Do the rubrics exist to serve the Gospels, or do the Gospels exist to serve the rubrics? Which accomplishes the greater good?

LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new

(Quote) Tom-112790 said: u wouildnt believe some of the freaky stuff going on in some us catholic churches in the late 80s ...
(Quote) Tom-112790 said:

u wouildnt believe some of the freaky stuff going on in some us catholic churches in the late 80s and 90s.its been cleaned up a lot......but there were women running communion services,priests presiding over gay commitment ceremonies etc etc etc
--hide--
Tom - that may or may not be true, but it would seem to be more appropriate as a separate topic in a new thread.

LOCKED
Mar 29th 2013 new
(Quote) Ray-566531 said: Tom - that may or may not be true, but it would seem to be more appropriate as a separate topic in a new thread. ...
(Quote) Ray-566531 said:

Tom - that may or may not be true, but it would seem to be more appropriate as a separate topic in a new thread.

--hide--


oh its true..because i saw it. i went to mass(-i had just converted.this was in the late 80s) one day at noon...and a woman was presiding over a communion ceremony--that was the noon mass. BUT--I was replying to the young lady and her post before me.

Actually--I dont have a big problem w the priest washing the feet of the girls.It made me slightly uncomfortable.....but thats all. He could end up being a great pope.lets wait and see.
LOCKED
Posts 31 - 40 of 200