Pope Francis Washed The Feet Of 12 Young Detainees

[GregorMendel]

Your thoughts? :)

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/03/28/pope-frances-washes-feet/2028595/

 

Pope Francis washes feet of young detainees in ritual

 

Nicole Winfield, AP, 2:24pm EDT March 28, 2013

 

 

 

ROME (AP) — Pope Francis washed the feet of a dozen inmates at a juvenile detention center in a Holy Thursday ritual that he celebrated for years as archbishop and is continuing now that he is pope. Two of the 12 were young women, an unusual choice given that the rite re-enacts Jesus' washing of the feet of his male disciples.

 

The Mass was held in the Casal del Marmo facility in Rome, where 46 young men and women currently are detained. Many of them are Gypsies or North African migrants, and the Vatican said the 12 selected for the rite weren't necessarily Catholic.

Because the inmates were mostly minors — the facility houses inmates aged 14-21 — the Vatican and Italian Justice Ministry limited media access inside. But Vatican Radio carried the Mass live, and Francis told the detainees that Jesus washed the feet of his disciples on the eve of his crucifixion in a gesture of love and service.

"If the Lord has washed his disciples' feet, you should do the same to one another," Francis said in his homily. "I have given you the example so that you may do the same."

As archbishop of Buenos Aires, the former Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio would celebrate the ritual foot-washing in jails, hospitals or hospices — part of his ministry to the poorest and most marginalized of society. It's a message that he is continuing now that he is pope, saying he wants a church "for the poor."

Previous popes would carry out the foot-washing ritual on Holy Thursday in Rome's grand St. John Lateran basilica and the 12 people chosen for the ritual were priests to represent the 12 disciples.

That Francis would include women in this re-enactment is symbolically noteworthy given the Vatican's prohibition on female priests.

 

Edited March 29, 2013 by dUSt

[Tufsoles]

I think that is a very beautiful gesture of our pontiff. I read it as he is washing the feet of sinners because we are all sinners.

[Papist]

I may not know the fullness of this story, but on the surface (I hate to say it) I find it problematic. I don't see it resembling the washing of the feet in scripture. Which I understand it as Jesus is giving example to the Apostles of how to be a humble servant of servants, which He was calling the Apostles to be.  That said, I am not going to go in a tizzy over this.

[Brother Adam]

Was this outside of Holy Thursday Mass? I have seen bishops, apart from Mass, as a gesture of solidarity wash the feet of the homeless and poor on Holy Thursday afternoon in inner city areas. There was no sense that this was "Jesus washing the feet of the 12" as there was no set number and it was not meant to be a liturgical action.

[dominicansoul]

I don't read secular media reports on the Pope anymore, because they are never objective.  The author always puts in his own flavor/opinion/jab. 

 

I'll stick to the Catholic news services...

 

 

That said, although the rubrics require that men's feet be washed on Holy Thursday Mass, the Holy See may give permission to wash women's feet.  I'm not so scandalized by that than I am by the last sentence of the article... (again, the "journalist" decided to interpret the Pope's actions for the reader...)

[Apotheoun]

As I said in another thread:

 

In the Byzantine tradition only men can participate in the rite of the Washing of Feet because the rite is connected to the institution of the priesthood. Moreover, the rite is only to be celebrated by a hegumen or archimandrite at a monastery, who washes the feet of twelve monks; or by a bishop, metropolitan, or patriarch at a Church, who washes the feet of twelve priests. To wash a woman's feet, that is, within the framework of the Byzantine liturgy for Great and Holy Thursday, would promote the false notion that women can be ordained to the priesthood.

 

Personally I think it would be better to simply suppress the Pedilavium Rite, rather than alter its sacramental significance. Outside of the liturgy for Holy Thursday the pope (or any bishop for that matter) can wash the feet of anyone he wants.

[Apotheoun]

I don't read secular media reports on the Pope anymore, because they are never objective.  The author always puts in his own flavor/opinion/jab. 

That is a good point. Perhaps the reporter is in error.

[Noel's angel]

Was this outside of Holy Thursday Mass? I have seen bishops, apart from Mass, as a gesture of solidarity wash the feet of the homeless and poor on Holy Thursday afternoon in inner city areas. There was no sense that this was "Jesus washing the feet of the 12" as there was no set number and it was not meant to be a liturgical action.

 

It was during Holy Thursday Mass.

 

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/03/28/pope-washes-young-offenders-feet-at-holy-thursday-mass/

 

A useful read, especially if you don't want a secular report.

 

There were also two Muslims.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Noel's angel

[Nihil Obstat]

Ed Peters has commentary on it:
 
 
 


Popes, like dads, don’t have a choice in the matter

March 28, 2013

Pope and dads set examples whether they want to or not. If I have dessert despite not having finished my supper, my kids do not experience that family rule as something presumably oriented to their welfare, but rather, as an imposition to be borne until they, too, are old enough to make and break the rules. Now, none will dispute that Pope Francis has, by washing the feet of women at his Holy Thursday Mass, set an example. The question is, what kind of example has he set?
As a matter of substance, I have long questioned the cogency of arguments that the Mandatum rite should be limited to adult males (a point lost on Michael Sean Winters in his recent nutty over a Mandatum-related post by Fr. Z that linked to my writings on the subject). But I have never doubted that liturgical law expressly limits participation in that rite to adult males, and I have consistently called on Catholics, clerics and laity alike, to observe this pontifically-promulgated law in service to the unity (dare I say, the catholicity) of liturgy (c. 837). Pope Francis’ action today renders these arguments moot. Not wrong, mind. Moot.
By disregarding his own law in this matter, Francis violates, of course, no divine directive, nor does he—to anticipate an obvious question—achieve the abrogation of a law which, as it happens, I would not mind seeing abrogated. What he does do, I fear, is set a questionable example at Supper time.
We’re not talking here about, say, eschewing papal apartments or limousines or fancy footwear. None of those matters were the objects of law, let alone of laws that bind countless others. (Personally, I find Francis’ actions in these areas inspiring although, granted, I do not have to deal with complications for others being caused by the pope’s simplicity).
Rather, re the Mandatum rite, we’re talking about a clear, unambiguous, reasonable (if not entirely compelling or suitable) liturgical provision, compliance with which has cost many faithful pastors undeserved ill-will from many quarters, and contempt for which has served mostly as a ‘sacrament of disregard’ for Roman rules on a variety of other matters. Today, whether he wanted to, or not, Francis set the Catholic world an example, about solidarity with outcasts, certainly, and about regard for liturgy.
A final thought: we live in antinomian times. One of the odd things about antinomianism (a condition that, by the way, does not always imply ill-will in its adherents though it usually implies a lack of understanding on their part) is that antinomianism makes reform of law not easier but harder: why bother undertaking the necessary but difficult reform of law when it’s easier simply to ignore it?
It’s a question with reverberations well beyond those of a foot-washing rite.


 

 

I am not sure whether or not I agree with him that a change to the current law is preferable, but as usual his assessment of the actual legal aspects is, as far as anyone can tell, rock solid.

[Apotheoun]

I am not sure whether or not I agree with him that a change to the current law is preferable, but as usual his assessment of the actual legal aspects is, as far as anyone can tell, rock solid.

Canon (κανών) law, which by the way should not be called law (νόμος) because the Holy Fathers never referred to it in that way, is meant to serve the theological tradition of the household of God. 

[Nihil Obstat]

Canon (κανών) law, which by the way should not be called law (νόμος) because the Holy Fathers never referred to it in that way, is meant to serve the theological tradition of the household of God. 

I agree.

[Apotheoun]

It was during Holy Thursday Mass.

 

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/03/28/pope-washes-young-offenders-feet-at-holy-thursday-mass/

 

A useful read, especially if you don't want a secular report.

Thanks for the link.

[Apotheoun]

There were also two Muslims.

That is odd. The Pedilavium Rite within the liturgy is not about being charitable per se; instead, it concerns the institution of the priesthood. That said, the pope can wash anyone's feet he wants outside of the liturgy. He can wash the feet of everyone in Rome outside of the liturgical celebration.   :smile3:

Edited March 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Lil Red]

http://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/popes-like-dads-dont-have-a-choice-in-the-matter

[Lil Red]

2 were non-Catholics. 2 were women. (I think?)