[madprof98]

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution featured this on page 1 of the local news section and is clearly taking great delight in it. This is the first news I'd heard of it, and I expect it will cause quite a stir in our parish (where, for years, everyone has taken part in the ceremony on Holy Thursday). I was curious what others would think about it.

[Support Free Republic]

---

Somewhere...there is another young liberal couple just waiting for THEIR chance. Support Free Republic and dash their hopes!
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[GirlShortstop]

Priests, parishioners and theologians said they were puzzled and angry over the decision to exclude women and children.

Wow.  Talk about ignorance.. how on earth cold they be puzzled or angry over what Jesus Christ himself did?!

God Bless Archbishop John Donoghue.

[narses]

The Rev. John Kieran, pastor of St. Pius X Catholic Church in Conyers, said he will cancel foot washing on Thursday. "I just respectfully disagree with him," Kieran said.

The Feminization of the AmChurch has taken hold. Ordained priests (in 'union' with Rome) refuse the orders of their Bishop and instead embrace feminism. St Pius X must be soooo proud of Fr. John. /sarcasm off/

[netmilsmom]

Is this more of the people taking "The DiVinci Code" as fact?

According to the Bible, Christ washed the feet of twelve men. Men! Not women or children, men. Oh geez, I can't take it.

[NYer]

I was curious what others would think about it.

It is as it was.

[Desdemona]

He's doing his job. Good for him.

[hilaryrhymeswithrich]

I am at St. Bendan's in Cumming, GA and I'm sure that our priest will ignore the Bishop. As a woman, however, I am not offended at all. Those are the rules as they stand coming out of Rome. It is not a cafeteria where we pick and choose. I don't even like seeing the girl alter servers...even though I have daughters.

I feel like I knew the rules when I embraced Catholicism as an adult by choosing to raise my children this way. If I didn't like the rules, I was, and am, free to find a place that fits me better. I am irritated when people say they think we should "loosen/open up". What about the people in the pews that are okay with the rules??? Are we to change because someone doesn't like what we have accepted?

[Gumdrop]

I do not take particular aversion to this directive from the Bishop. AS a woman, I suppose I should be offended. Actually, the entire scene could be reproduced as it was at the Last Supper with the priest washing the feet of 12 men, and then each man, in turn, doing what the Master told them to do - become servants - by washing the feet of 3 or 4 parishioners who could be men, women and children. I think that would be a very could depiction of the event and the outcome of the servanthood of Jesus's disciples. I don't know why this thought came to me as I have never thought about it before. But all in all, I think it would be a logical step in including everyone in the process without changing the actual depiction of the original event.

[Gumdrop]

I do not take particular aversion to this directive from the Bishop. AS a woman, I suppose I should be offended. Actually, the entire scene could be reproduced as it was at the Last Supper with the priest washing the feet of 12 men, and then each man, in turn, doing what the Master told them to do - become servants - by washing the feet of 3 or 4 parishioners who could be men, women and children. I think that would be a very good depiction of the event and the outcome of the servanthood of Jesus's disciples. I don't know why this thought came to me as I have never thought about it before. But all in all, I think it would be a logical step in including everyone in the process without changing the actual depiction of the original event.

[Atheist2Theist]

As Roman Catholics worldwide move into a week to focus their hearts on the suffering of Christ, Atlanta Catholics are being divided over the ancient ritual of the washing of feet. On March 19, Archbishop John Donoghue sent a letter to parish priests telling them that only men should be chosen for the solemn rite of foot washing, which takes place on Holy Thursday as parishes observe the Last Supper of Jesus. Women and children have been included in the rite for years, but Donoghue's letter specifically states that 12 men should be selected to represent the priesthood. Priests, parishioners and theologians said they were puzzled and angry over the decision to exclude women and children.

Puzzled and angry? That probably also explains the feelings of those throughout the years that saw this coed-foot washing ceremony knowing that it was a violation of the GIRM. I know that I was when I saw this happen.

"The men who have been chosen are led by the ministers to chairs prepared in a suitable place. Then the priest ... goes to each man. With the help of ministers, he pours water over each one's feet and dries them" (Sacramentary, p. 136).

As has been pointed out constantly the Latin word for man (meaning male), vir, was used in the Latin original. The ritual washing of the feet was restored by Pope Pius XII in 1955 and put into the Sacramentary at that time. Symbolically this ritual was in relationship to the Gospels where Jesus washes the feet of the Apostles to show that we are to serve in humility. This is quite ironic because those who have decided on their own to change the rubrics to be more inclusive are the opposite of serving in humility.

The washing of the feet of chosen men which, according to tradition, is performed on this day [Holy Thursday], 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. (Congregation for Divine Worship, "Preparing and Celebrating the Paschal Feasts," January 16, 1988.)

The Rev. John Kieran, pastor of St. Pius X Catholic Church in Conyers, said he will cancel foot washing on Thursday. "I just respectfully disagree with him," Kieran said.

That is respectfully disagreeing? I would hate to see outright disobedience. Besides he is not just disagreeing with hie Bishop, which is bad enough, he is also clearly violating the church's liturgical law.

Many priests were reluctant to talk about the archbishop's letter, because they are bound by a vow of obedience to follow his orders. That vow generally prohibits their openly criticizing the archbishop. Many said privately, however, that they were saddened by the decision and were questioning whether to abandon the ritual or ignore Donoghue's order.Some Catholic laypeople Friday were less guarded. "It's like they're just trying to come up with something else that women can't do," said Danny Ingram, a parishioner at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Atlanta. "The whole thing is about service to one another, and it's not just about service to men." Donoghue's letter comes at a time when the Roman Catholic Church is still recovering from a clergy sex abuse scandal and the secretive way it handled the complaints. Many leaders have called for the church to be more open in an effort to promote healing.

Oh that's right out of the playbook for disobedience. Disagree with something the Church says, simply remind people about the clergy sex abuse scandal; that will fix them.

Now things will become really clear since we now have a statement from a spokeswoman for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

...A Spokeswoman for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said Donoghue is within his rights to limit the ritual to men. The decision is left up to individual bishops, although the overwhelming majority of American bishops allow women's feet to be washed."In many areas, the custom is to wash the feet of both men and women, " said Sister Mary Ann Walsh. "I've been in parishes where they even wash hands."

Okay my last statement was a delayed April's Fools gag. Those speaking for the USCCB usually are less than clear when speaking on liturgical abuses. This is no surprise considering that the USCCB is also befuddled on this issue. The liturgy committee issued the following statement on February 16, 1987:

... it has become customary in many places [in the United States] to invite both men and women to be participants in this rite in recognition of the service that should be given by all the faithful to the church and to the world ... in the United States, a variation in the rite developed in which not only charity is signified but also humble service.

As a Adoremus Bulletin on this subject asks "Did the committee sanction a liturgical abuse?"

The fathers of the Second Vatican Council clearly stated that "...no other person, not even a priest, may add, remove, change anything in the liturgy on his own authority" [Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, no. 23]. Furthermore, according to Church law the Vatican must confirm liturgical legislation approved by the various national conferences of bishops. It is "the prerogative of the Apostolic See to regulate the sacred liturgy of the universal Church, to publish liturgical books and review their vernacular translations, and to be watchful that liturgical regulations are everywhere faithfully observed" [Canon 838.2].

..."I'm sorry he's done that," said Gerald Noonan of Atlanta, a former priest who founded the Center for Ethics at the Georgia Tech business school. "Women have been second-class citizens for so long."

In this article they did not interview one person who agreed with what the Bishop said, but instead found an ex-priest - not exactly the most reliable expert.

Said Kathleen Pruitt of Bremen, who attends several different Catholic churches: "A shepherd who cares only for the rams won't have a flock for very long."

Now some might say "Big deal, so what if some women's feet get washed." This goes with all the posts recently on why some people get so angry over liturgical abuses. These abuses don't happen in a vacuum. They are an outward indicator of the culture of disobedience in the Church.

"He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and he who is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much.

I have found through my limited experience that those churches that play fast and loose with liturgical laws also play fast and loose with the moral laws. If you are willingly disobedient in small matters it doesn't take you much farther to be disobedient in larger matters. If you can decide for yourself how the universal liturgy is conducted in your local parish then what else can you decide since you know better. I don't believe that if all liturgical abuses stopped tomorrow that everything is instantly cured. This culture of disobedience has been a cancerous growth that will not come out easily. Why should the congregation listen to the priest when he talks about obedience to God's laws in his homilies, but is disobedient to the Church in the liturgy?

[sinkspur]

"the washing of feet should be explained to the faithful as the representation of "Christ's linkage of the institution of the Eucharist to the establishment of the ordained priesthood."

Except the 12 men are not priests, they're laymen.

If Donoghue wants his statement above to stand, he should require that only men in orders get their feet washed. It makes no sense to wash the feet of any layman.

If I were in one of these parishes, that had washed the feet of men, women and children for years, I would not disobey the bishop; I would simply cancel the ceremony, and explain why. It is not required as part of the Maundy Thursday liturgy in any case.

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

thank you for post.

any email/snail mail address for us to show support for Bishop?

[Coleus]

This is what I found so Far:

The GIRM does NOT address Foot Washing on Holy Thursday

USCCB Committee on the Liturgy
Holy Thursday Mandatum
#4 & 5 allows a back door to allow women

John 13

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Two generations have been raised with a different understanding of the Faith. With the culprits at the helm, why should anyone be surprised by the outrage?

[thegreatbeast]

"If he's trying to respond to the crisis, he's going about it in the wrong way," said Sally Vance-Trembath, a theology professor at the University of San Francisco, a Jesuit university. "If reflects the pattern of responses to the crisis, a sort of batten-down-the hatches mentality, when what people need is to open them up." I'll bet anybody dollars to donuts that this woman is a bona fide heretic. How could it be otherwise for a woman theology professor at a Jesuit school in San Francisco. Think she believes in ordaining women? Barring homosexuals from ordination?

People should shut up and obey their bishop! He needn't explain himself! Is your boss obligated to explain himself to you? Are you at liberty to take issue with your superior in the press?

Grow up, the Church isn't a democracy where we all get to have a vote! You are in or you are out; you believe or you don't.

[Coleus]

And I bet the bishop doesn't break canon law and allow Group Absolutions during Lenten penance services as many pastors are now doing in their parishes.

[Diva]

because they are bound by a vow of obedience to follow his orders. That vow generally prohibits their openly criticizing the archbishop. Many said privately, however, that they were saddened by the decision and were questioning whether to abandon the ritual or ignore Donoghue's order.

Thus, breaking their vow of obedience!

[TotusTuus]

Donoghue wrote that the washing of feet should be explained to the faithful as the representation of "Christ's linkage of the institution of the Eucharist to the establishment of the ordained priesthood." He wrote that "twelve men" should be chosen to take the part of Jesus' Apostles during the rite.

Which is precisely why this optional rite exists in the liturgy of the Church. Which is why the rubrics call for, and always have called for, the use of twelve men (vir).

"It's like they're just trying to come up with something else that women can't do," said Danny Ingram, a parishioner at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Atlanta. "The whole thing is about service to one another, and it's not just about service to men."

Incorrect Mr. Ingram. See the good Bishop's statement above for what this particular liturgical act is meant to represent.

Sure, both men and women in the Church are called to serve God by, inter alia, serving His creatures, particularly our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ as well as all mankind. This is clearly shown and lived out in the full context of the liturgy of Christ's Church. You seem to have lost sight of the forest for the trees concerning this liturgical action. Why do you think it is called "Maundy Thursday" to begin with?

A spokeswoman for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said Donoghue is within his rights to limit the ritual to men. The decision is left up to individual bishops, although the overwhelming majority of American bishops allow women's feet to be washed.

WTF? The rubrics, aka liturgical law, limit the ritual to men. The only correct and obedient decision of the Bishops is whether or not the people under their respective Sees' are mature enough to allow this optional rite to occur. The overwhelming majority of American Bishops disobediently allow women's feet to be washed for "politically correct" liturgista reasons. Which is why I would not blame any of them to retire this otherwise lovely rite for a while until such a time comes that proper catechesis catches up to the people they shepherd. They undermine their own authority on this as well as so many other issues.

"In many areas, the custom is to wash the feet of both men and women, " said Sister Mary Ann Walsh.

Attempt to create Church liturgical law via the "custom" route. I've heard of you before Sister. Your games will eventually fail.

"He's just following what the Catholic Church teaches," said Andrew Sysco, who attends All Saints Church in Dunwoody. "He's just doing what he's supposed to be doing."

Hey, the AJ-C actually found someone who got it right! Thank You Mr. Sysco. You are correct!

[sneakers]

We just got a new bishop. I wish he'd do this. They are always in such a rage to do things that make them popular with the people, but not to do what is right according to the teachings and examples of Christ.

[dansangel]

God Bless Archbishop Donoghue for not caving in to the PC police.

Nowhere in Scripture does it mention that women were included at the table during the Last Supper.

Archbishop Donoghue and the parish we belong to have been two of the very few pluses living here in metro-Atlanta.

[Aliska]

I've been to only one mass, I think, where this was done. They called parishioners, women included, from what I was told by one of the women, and told them to be there.

I was glad they didn't call me because I wouldn't have been embarassed to have my feet washed by a priest.

I am, however, concerned about equality of women in the church, but just how equal I don't know. It's more about attitudes than positions with me.

They could skip this ritual and I'd never miss it. It had more meaning in ancient times than it would now anyway because we don't get our feet dirty getting to where we need to go like they did back then. It must have been some kind of custom which Jesus chose for an object lesson in service.

I'm not real clear, but didn't people back then usually wash their own feet?

[im26indenver]

If the church continues to live in legalism and ritual instead of grace our pews will remain empty and our priesthood with disappear. You would think empty seats in the churches and the seminaries woudl serve as a wake up call. Atlanta is another sign the church is focusing on little issues when there is so much larger things out there.

[Aquinasfan]

Women and children have been included in the rite for years, but Donoghue's letter specifically states that 12 men should be selected to represent the priesthood.

Would we have a man play the part of Mary?

[missyme]

Holy Thursday, or Maundy Thursday, is the Thursday before Easter. This year. 2004. it falls on 8th April.

On Holy Thursday morning in our Cathedral Church of St Mary the annual Chrism Mass is celebrated by the Bishop and priests of the Diocese.
TODAY IS MAUNDY THURSDAY:

On Holy Thursday evening we celebrate the Evening Mass of the Lord's Supper. During this Mass we remember in a special way the Last Supper of Christ, when he instituted the Eucharist. The first reading from the book of Exodus reminds us of the history of the Passover feast, and the next reading from St Paul's Letter reminds us of the meaning of the Eucharist:

[missyme]

Holy Thursday, or Maundy Thursday, is the Thursday before Easter. This year. 2004. it falls on 8th April.

On Holy Thursday morning in our Cathedral Church of St Mary the annual Chrism Mass is celebrated by the Bishop and priests of the Diocese.
TODAY IS MAUNDY THURSDAY:

On Holy Thursday evening we celebrate the Evening Mass of the Lord's Supper. During this Mass we remember in a special way the Last Supper of Christ, when he instituted the Eucharist. The first reading from the book of Exodus reminds us of the history of the Passover feast, and the next reading from St Paul's Letter reminds us of the meaning of the Eucharist: