franciscanheart Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 2 were non-Catholics. 2 were women. (I think?)Two were women. Two were Muslims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Two were women. Two were Muslims. that's what i said/meant. :| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franciscanheart Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 that's what i said/meant. :| :| whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/how-should-we-understand-pope-francis-washing-womens-feet/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappo Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/03/what-is-pope-francis-really-saying/#comments I enjoyed Fr. Z's take on it from very traditionally minded liturgical perspective. While Fr. Z might cringe at some of the changes, I think he's doing a swell job at setting aside his liturgical opinions and look for what Pope Francis is really trying to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 "The pope does not need anybody's permission to make exceptions to how ecclesiastical law relates to him. He is canon law's ultimate legislator, interpreter, and executor." - Jimmy Akin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 That would follow if the rite was merely a matter of ecclesiastical law, but it is not about "law"; instead, it is about Tradition (i.e., it is about commemorating what Christ did in instituting priestly service within the Church). That said, if the pope can alter tradition, he can change anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 That would follow if the rite was merely a matter of ecclesiastical law, but it is not about "law"; instead, it is about Tradition (i.e., it is about commemorating what Christ did in instituting priestly service within the Church). That said, if the pope can alter tradition, he can change anything. I would say that tradition serves men, men don't serve tradition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 I would say that tradition serves men, men don't serve tradition. The Tradition of the Church comes from Christ the Lord Himself, and no one but the Lord is free to alter it. Christians are called to fidelity to what Christ left, we are not free to manipulate it to fit our own personal interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 The Tradition of the Church comes from Christ the Lord Himself, and no one but the Lord is free to alter it. Christians are called to fidelity to what Christ left, we are not free to manipulate it to fit our own personal interests. If the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and guided by the Holy Spirit in matters of faith and morals, I would argue that he can indeed change tradition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 If the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and guided by the Holy Spirit in matters of faith and morals, I would argue that he can indeed change tradition. That is the ultramontanist position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 That is the ultramontanist position. If Jesus granted St. Peter the power to bind and loose things on Earth and in Heaven, and the Pope is the successor of Peter and is granted the same authority per the words of Jesus, I don't see how anyone could say that he doesn't have the authority to change tradition. He is subject to no Earthly authority and only to God. The same God who gave him the authority to bind and loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 If Jesus granted St. Peter the power to bind and loose things on Earth and in Heaven, and the Pope is the successor of Peter and is granted the same authority per the words of Jesus, I don't see how anyone could say that he doesn't have the authority to change tradition. He is subject to no Earthly authority and only to God. The same God who gave him the authority to bind and loose. Does the pope as a successor of St. Peter receive new revelations? Can the pope as a successor of St. Peter declare that Christ is not - as Tradition affirms - God made man? Is the pope as a successor of St. Peter bound by anything other than his own opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 Does the pope as a successor of St. Peter receive new revelations? Can the pope as a successor of St. Peter declare that Christ is not - as Tradition affirms - God made man? Is the pope as a successor of St. Peter bound by anything other than his own opinion? He can't if he is empowered by God to be guided in faith and morals. That's the definition of infallibility. Of course, I know you don't believe in that (which is why I continually try to figure out why you bother trying to be in communion with the Catholic Church if you don't actually believe a lot of what it believes… but that's between you and God.) I hardly think washing women's feet is destroying the faith. I don't recall Jesus saying "I swear to my Father that if you even dare wash anyone but men's feet I will personally come down here and smack some bros." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts