www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Things Worse Or Better Under Pope Francis?

Christ is Risen!!

There was a time when this issue of washing the feet of other than 12 men would have made me upset, too. But, sadly, this has been the case in parish churches I've been in for the past 40+ years. It was almost immediately after this rite within the Holy Thursday Liturgy became a regular occurence that the clamor to include women and children became more than parish priests could ignore. And with the idea that the Liturgy was a "living" thing that could and should constantly evolve it became the new norm. I have served on a parish liturgical committee for decades and when I bring up this point people look at me like I have too heads or just came out of a time warp. Bishops do the same thing in their cathedrals as far as I am able to ascertain. So for a Pope who has not spent his time in Rome to do what he may be acustomed to do is no surprise to me. I just wonder why we bother with having rubrics in the first place. Liturgy committees meet and the discussions often leave me thinking that each new year brings the idea that we have to construct our liturgies from scratch. When I ask about rubrics, it's, again, like I have two heads. So I wait for a time when I am speaking the same language as the others in an argument. After all, aren't rubrics just "guidelines" rather than "rules"?

Bob

"I have served on a parish liturgical committee for decades."
That's a new one on me. I guess I never thought about it. What does that entail? Is it something where you decide things like times and who will serve? Or is it something like you decide what goes into a service?

Forgive my ignorance.

Chadrook, this is commonplace is most Latin parishes. We serve UGCC Vespers in a Latin parish in another town once a month as a mission outreach, and I interface with the "liturgy minister" who is the head of the parish liturgical committee on times for our Vespers, getting into the sanctuary, etc. rather than the actual parish priest.

Got it. I was thinking the worst. It is just another way of disseminating information.

1.2B Catholics worldwide on seven continents... It will ALWAYS be easy to find something to scoff at. That will never ever change.

Well, I know in Ruthenian tradition it's usually 12 Altar Servers that have the Rite of Washing of Feet on Holy Thursday usually, it's not even congregation or laity...so there's that extreme. But it seems like with society in faith this day in age, I suppose in the West anything can happen. Just so long as it's still 12 people at all, that's all that really matters to some Latin Rite clergy for that ritual.

Altar servers are usually laity, that is, not tonsured and, therefore not clerics. Also, what you describe, if done by a presbyter, is not prescribed and, therefore, probably a latinization. As I noted above in a previous post, the foot-washing rite is in the Ruthenian Archieratikon link [patronagechurch.com], that is, the bishop's ritual book. More generally: Foot washing [en.wikipedia.org].

A now-retired Ruthenian priest I spoke with recently confirmed that the rite is only done by the bishop but that this same priest, when he was a seminarian, had his foot washed by the bishop.

Ah, I see... Right, that explains why Holy and Great Thursday is usually done as a Hierarchical Divine Liturgy for the most part.

chadrook:

No, it's much more than that. It's been my experience that the actual shape of the Liturgyy is decided in these committees. They talk about "planning liturgies" as if there were no set liturgical books or rubrics. And it usually entails people breaking any and all rules that they don't agree with. It seems clergy have been trained to think they need to have one of these committees and that they need to listen to the folks who gravitate to them. There are always the feminists who are pushing for the inclusion of more women doing more things and it usually ends with lots of liturgical abuses if one follows the rubrics to the letter. And then there are bishops who have advocated for "living liturgy," whihc has become code for doing one's own thing. So you get things like lay people ladling out the Precious Blood into cups from one large chalice and not worrying about spilling it or pouring the excess consecrated Precious Blood down the sacrarium after Liturgy rather than consuming it.

There is also a member who will decide what hymns are to be sung and who usually is in the business of making sure that they are "inclusivized" as far as feminsit language goes.

I could go on, but that's my experience in the trenches. I was asked to be on some of these committees simply to provide a balance and it's been a lonely spot.

Bob

Now that is refreshing. I always felt it was peculiar having to make it through all the gate keepers just to ask a question. Unless it was a small parish, then there was only the secretary. I always felt that the priest was a little to removed from the situation. I guess people will say there is to much to do in a larger parish but, I never thought that messing with the Liturgy was one of them.

Here endeth the lesson.

Your instincts are correct, chadrook. I know that priests can be busy, but there can be no good excuse I can imagine that means a parish priest cannot speak directly with his parishioners, no matter how big the community. This is especially the case with respect to liturgical matters. If the priest is not acting as the 'liturgical officer' in his parish, then he is simply not doing his job. His principal job. The only job that he can properly do that no one else can do.

I don't know how this culture will change, but where it exists it must change. Sorry for the second plug, but this is directly relevant:

http://priestofthechurch.wordpress.com/2013/04/03/priests-the-liturgy-and-responsibility/

Like

Like

What Pope has ever led or taken the Church into error?

I know several that have expressed heterodox opinions, but none I know of has ever declared their opinions to be the actual teaching of the Church universal.

Further, of those who have expressed such opinions, I'm not even aware that any portion of the Church followed such opinions for you to be able to claim that a Pope of Rome has ever led or taken the CHURCH into error.

Perhaps some Catholics need to be reminded that the Church AS A WHOLE, according to Catholic teaching, possesses infallibility. So no single Pope can ever lead the Church into error.

BLessings