|
|
|
 |
Donate Here By Secure Server
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
|
Posted on 04/09/2004 2:25:01 PM PDT by madprof98
About 70 men and women stood outside the Cathedral of Christ the King in Buckhead on Thursday to protest Archbishop John Donoghue's recent instructions that only men should be allowed to take part in the solemn rite of foot washing.
Donoghue sent a letter to parish priests last month telling them that men were to be selected for the ancient ritual, which takes place on Holy Thursday as Roman Catholic parishes observe the Last Supper of Jesus. Women and children have been included in the rite in metro Atlanta for years, but who can participate is ultimately up to the local bishop.
"This is not a women's issue, this is a justice issue," protest organizer Lalor Cadley told the demonstrators, some holding towels and basins that they later used for a foot-washing ceremony of their own in front of the cathedral.
Some church members obviously didn't agree with the protest, shaking their heads in disapproval as they made their way into the cathedral for evening Mass. At least one heckled the demonstrators.
"They are disobedient and disrespectful," said Coretta Alexander. "They care more about their cause than Christ."
Moments later, Donoghue had words for the protesters when he delivered the evening's homily to a packed house.
"Does it benefit us to make this a pretext for protest?" the archbishop asked. "Some would say yes, but I do not think so."
His words reflected the varied reaction to be found across metro Atlanta on Thursday, where some churches ignored the issue while others ignored Donoghue's edict.
At the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church, both in downtown Atlanta, men and woman took part in the foot-washing ceremony, although the ritual at Our Lady of Lourdes was held prior to the regular service.
"I'm glad that some priests in the archdiocese have backbone," said Shrine member Katie Bashor.
Many other churches simply dropped the ritual.
At Transfiguration Catholic Church in Marietta, where the foot-washing ceremony had been a tradition for years, eight women and four men carried towels up the aisle and placed them around the perimeter of the sanctuary. The congregation sang a meditative piece, after which the 12 returned and retrieved the towels. There was no actual foot-washing ceremony.
And at St. Joseph's Catholic Church in Marietta, where there was also no foot-washing ceremony, new converts — who will be formally joining the church during the Easter Vigil on Saturday — each received a bowl and a towel as a gift during the Holy Thursday Mass.
In Peachtree City, unlike last year, there was no ritual foot-washing at the children's Mass at Holy Trinity Church. In recent years, a dozen girls and boys have participated in the foot-washing in addition to acting as ushers and Scripture readers at the 4 p.m. Mass. The ritual's absence and sparse attendance — there were only about 150 worshippers — were the only noticeable differences from last year.
And then there were people like Joe O'Farrell, a member of the cathedral.
"I'm faithful to the pope and I'm faithful to the archbishop," O'Farrell said. "If you are a Catholic, you accept that there are rules. It's not a democracy."
|
|
|
|
|
Donate Here By Secure Server
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
|
Interesting......
Donoghue sparked this stuff by his unilateral action. He doesn't see it as something worthy of protest.
Well, it appears that many churches didn't either.
They chose to drop the ceremony.
At Transfiguration Catholic Church in Marietta, where the foot-washing ceremony had been a tradition for years, eight women and four men carried towels up the aisle and placed them around the perimeter of the sanctuary. The congregation sang a meditative piece, after which the 12 returned and retrieved the towels. There was no actual foot-washing ceremony.
If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by every pastor of the churches, into other new ones; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Sess. VII, "On the Sacraments in General", Can. XII)
3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority. (Sacrosanctum Concilium §22)
There was no washing of the feet ceremony, so it cannot be said that it was changed.
Also, the washing of the feet is optional, so it may be "removed."
A bishop acting unilaterally attests to his certitude. He probably underestimated the egalitarian ethic that has supplanted knowlege of Catholic tradition and scripture. Maybe the controversy could have been avoided with a timlier prohibition with an in depth explanation. Who would have known?
Someone may correct me if I'm mistaken, but Buckhead is an affluent part of Atlanta. Maybe those well-off Catholics resent the bishop being....well....a bishop.
A bishop acting unilaterally gets the kind of reaction Donoghue got. He can either learn from it, and consult his priests next time, or continue to have his authority undermined.
Donoghue should take the model of collegiality John Paul II uses. He can still impose his male-only directive, but at least the priests will have been consulted on the matter.
Consulting his priests wasn't really necessary. It was a no-brainer for him, really. The priests who have reacted in a negative way, are out of line, but that's what the bishop was really addressing any way.
Wanna bet he does so in the future?
Depends on when they took place. If they occurred before or after the Mass, they would not be prohibited.
A bishop acting unilaterally gets the kind of reaction Donoghue got. He can either learn from it, and consult his priests next time, or continue to have his authority undermined.
Donoghue should take the model of collegiality John Paul II uses. He can still impose his male-only directive, but at least the priests will have been consulted on the matter.
A question for you. Can the proper relationship between the priests of a diocese and the bishop really be compared to the relationship between the bishops and the Roman Pontiff? Lumen Gentium calls priests "assistants" and "helpers" to the bishop and says that "they are dependent on the bishops in the exercise of their power". This is certainly a different relationship than that between the Supreme Pontiff and the other bishops, who are vicars of Christ in their own right and not mere vicars of the Pontiff. St. Ignatius of Antioch says in the epistle to the Magnesians:
the bishop presiding after the likeness of God and the presbyters after the likeness of the council of the Apostles
Certainly there was no "model of collegiality" between God and the apostles!
Recognizing this, perhaps a more monarchical authority might be expected from the diocesan bishop over the presbyterate and diaconate as opposed to the relationship between the Pope and college of bishops? Really, in a case like this where the bishop is simply supporting the law of the Church, as opposed to enacting particular law or some other personal initiative, why should consulting the priests be necessary? There is, after all, nothing to discuss, as the Archbishop is simply reminding his priests of the existing directives, not changing anything.
Depends on when they took place. If they occurred before or after the Mass, they would not be prohibited.
True, but the article states that the ceremony at St. Joseph's took place during the Mass.
He's changing a practice that has been ongoing for over 20 years, and that is still ongoing in most dioceses around the country. All of a sudden, Donoghue decides to enforce something he hasn't enforced
If he wants to act unilaterally, and without explanation, he should not be surprised at this reaction.
If he wants to kill the washing of the feet ceremony in Atlanta, he couldn't do a better job of it if he issued another of his directives.
I would invite you to go to the Philadelphia Inquirer to read about the practice in Philadelphia.
Seems that Cardinal Bevilacqua got skewered in Pittsburgh when he tried to do what Donoghue has done. So, when he went to Philly, he insisted on 12 men at the Cathedral, but allowed the parishes to do as they wished. Rigali is continuing the practice.
Donoghue may win this battle, but there will be practices instituted such as putting 12 seats in the sanctuary, with six men and six empty chairs to represent the women who are not allowed.
If I wanted to take a stand against my priests, I'm not sure I'd do it over the washing of the feet.
If he wants to act unilaterally, and without explanation, he should not be surprised at this reaction.
The diocesan bishop has a right to be obeyed in his directives. Priests and deacons act only by his authority and he should be obeyed in all things except sin. St. Ignatius writes to the Ephesians:
So then it becometh you to run in harmony with the mind of the bishop; which thing also ye do. For your honourable presbytery, which is worthy of God, is attuned to the bishop, even as its strings to a lyre. Therefore in your concord and harmonious love Jesus Christ is sung. (4:1)
You speak as if the bishop ought to expect disobedience, but that is the exact opposite of the proper situation. The solution here would seem to be teaching priests to follow the bishop's directives, not changing the governmental style of the bishop.
Two firings bother Catholics
By JOHN BLAKE
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 04/07/04
Some Atlantans were disturbed — even horrified — by the news this week that their archdiocese has dismissed two people holding positions required by clergy sex abuse reforms.
Ann Price, the former coordinator of the archdiocese's victims assistance program, and Sally Horan, a child sex abuse specialist, said they were dismissed for criticizing archdiocesan reform efforts.
The dismissals leave Atlanta's archdiocese without any qualified personnel to handle child sex abuse claims and training — an apparent violation of reforms mandated by U.S. bishops.
"It's like the city of Atlanta deciding that they're not going to have a police chief," said Richard Higgins of St. Thomas Aquinas in Alpharetta. "It's just horrendous. These are children we're talking about."
Atlanta Archbishop John Donoghue declined to comment on the dismissals.
Grace Whitmore, a Duluth Catholic, said she was angered after hearing that the archdiocese had rejected a proposed daylong sensitivity workshop for priests because officials said it would take too long.
"For the past three years, the church has supposedly been dealing with this issue and for [the church] to say a daylong workshop is too much says to me, 'I don't care,' " Whitmore said.
The reaction comes as reforms on the national level have seemed to stall. Leaders of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops recently postponed adopting an annual independent audit to monitor compliance by dioceses.
The Washington Post reported that Catholic leaders decided to defer a decision on holding the audits until November. Bishops previously had said that they would hold reform audits each year.
Barbara Blaine, president of Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, said the bishops' decision demonstrates that they already are backing away from recent reforms. "In reality, every bishop is like a king," she said. "He has the right to do anything and he isn't accountable to anyone except the pope."
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.