Foot washing on Holy Thursday

[miniquedoes]

For the past couple of years, during the Holy Thursday Mass chairs are set up down the middle aisle. Right after the priest washes the feet of 12 people everyone is invited to go to a station and have another person wash their feet. I am on a liturgy team and asked if we could eliminate this from the Mass this year because it distracts from the Liturgy and real meaning of Holy Thursday (last year it took about 20 min right in the middle of Mass). Some commented that many people like it and look forward to it. One said that the year before her mother had washed her feet so it became a sign of forgiveness. I kept saying the the Mass should be focused on Jesus and not on ourselves. The priest himself said that he knew it wasn’t in the rubrics but washing feet helps others understand The team decided to do the same thing again this year and I feel so disappointed. I just feel that I’m the only one who cares about a properly celebrated Mass sometimes Any advice?

 

[Love_Divine]

It’'s my understanding the Church does not permit the washng of anyone else’s feet. It’s only 12 men, not women, and not children. What your priest is doing is an abuse. Knowing this I’d make one last attempt to talk the priest out of and explain why (it’s an abuse) and then write the bishop.

 

[Spirithound]

Any advice?

1. Pray
2. Inform the bishop. The pastor is aware that it is against the rubrics, and yet he is still allowing the committee to call the shots.
3. Don’t step down from the committee.

 

[InspiritCarol]

From: usccb.org/liturgy/q&a/general/feet.shtml
That’s the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops official website.

1. Because the gospel of the mandatum read on Holy Thursday also depicts Jesus as the “Teacher and Lord” who humbly serves his disciples by performing this extraordinary gesture which goes beyond the laws of hospitality,2 the element of humble service has accentuated the celebration of the foot washing rite in the United States over the last decade or more. In this regard, it has become customary in many places 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. Thus, in the United States, a variation in the rite developed in which not only charity is signified but also humble service.
2. While this variation may differ from the rubric of the Sacramentary which mentions only men (“viri selecti”), it may nevertheless be said that the intention to emphasize service along with charity in the celebration of the rite is an understandable way of accentuating the evangelical command of the Lord, “who came to serve and not to be served,” that all members of the Church must serve one another in love.

It has been my experience that the form the foot washing takes generally comes from the Presiding priest. It is certainly never done without his tacit approval.

Out here, it’s like pulling teeth to get 12 men to volunteer. We have ended up just asking before the service begins in order to fill in the gaps. Not good.

I just came across the interesting point that we do not know how many of the deciples’ feet Jesus washed.
Still, you should bring it up with your priest and the liturgical director. At the very least they should be made aware that the “performance layout” is disruptive …

 

[TheMc]

OP,

I would recommend that you talk to your pastor about this.

From: usccb.org/liturgy/q&a/general/feet.shtml
That’s the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops official website.

1. Because the gospel of the mandatum read on Holy Thursday also depicts Jesus as the “Teacher and Lord” who humbly serves his disciples by performing this extraordinary gesture which goes beyond the laws of hospitality,2 the element of humble service has accentuated the celebration of the foot washing rite in the United States over the last decade or more. In this regard, it has become customary in many places 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. Thus, in the United States, a variation in the rite developed in which not only charity is signified but also humble service.
2. While this variation may differ from the rubric of the Sacramentary which mentions only men (“viri selecti”), it may nevertheless be said that the intention to emphasize service along with charity in the celebration of the rite is an understandable way of accentuating the evangelical command of the Lord, “who came to serve and not to be served,” that all members of the Church must serve one another in love.

I’ve heard about questionable stuff coming from the USCCB before, but to me, it sure seems like they are saying:

“Here’s what the missal says, but here’s what we do, even though it’s wrong, in the name of service and charity.”

Has the Holy See granted the USCCB to modify this rubric? I’m assuming they didn’t. I see nowhere in the article by the USCCB that the vatican authorized this straying from the rubrics.

Disobeying the rubrics does not show a spirit of service and charity. Rather, it shows the opposite: pride and arrogance.

 

[laszlo]

Disobeying the rubrics does not show a spirit of service and charity. Rather, it shows the opposite: pride and arrogance.

Please read carefully the first verses of Matt 12

[2] And the Pharisees seeing them, said to him: Behold thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days. But he said to them:

You have the right to ask a question from the Apostolic See about the decision of the USCCB, and if you get answer you may publish it in a blog or forums like this. Criticize them on your own is abuse, very serious abuse, one of the worst ‘spirit of Vatican II’, far away from the intentions of the bishops of the XXI Ecumenical council.

 

[NPC]

OP,

I would recommend that you talk to your pastor about this.

I’ve heard about questionable stuff coming from the USCCB before, but to me, it sure seems like they are saying:

“Here’s what the missal says, but here’s what we do, even though it’s wrong, in the name of service and charity.”

Has the Holy See granted the USCCB to modify this rubric? I’m assuming they didn’t. I see nowhere in the article by the USCCB that the vatican authorized this straying from the rubrics.

Disobeying the rubrics does not show a spirit of service and charity. Rather, it shows the opposite: pride and arrogance.

I would have my doubts too that the USCCB has gotten permission from the Holy See to modify the rubric with regard to the washing of feet. It is openly admitted that the variation in question differs from the rubric of the Sacramentary but it may be said that so and so…An open acknowledgement that this “variation” is not what is laid down in the liturgical books. The USCCB realises that the Sacramentary mentions only “viri selecti”, so why does it presume to be in a position to promote rubrics which are blatantly contrary to the Sacramentary?

With regard to the O.P., I think it is most regrettable that the parish priest went with what the liturgy team thought rather than what he knew to be right. I’m not totally opposed to committees in parishes - I mean, not every priest is an accountant so one can not argue with him seeking advice on financial matters, for example - however, the committees should be there to advise, but the parish priest should feel free to make the final decision. The committees should advise on matters, yes, but good, beautiful, sacred liturgy is not a “majority wins” matter: the parish priest makes the final decision - according to canon law, such councils and committees only have a consultative vote. Regrettably, in my experience, many persons who are on these committees should really not be there at all. The bottom line, however, is that this matter should not even have been brought up for discussion - there is no room for discussion: what was being decided, it seems to me, is “will we follow the rubrics or will we do our own thing”. Indeed, if the priest made it known that he knew what he was asking went against the rubrics, the committee should have concluded that it would be best to follow the priest’s judgement on this matter…I’m sure a few egos were suitably boosted by such a wonderfully democratic vote.

The parish priest is the governor of the liturgy in his parish, no matter how many “liturgy directors” he has. Therefore, I would suggest that you charitably voice your concerns to him. If you feel you must, you can show him what the proper rubrics are, only from the point of view of reinforcing the correct way to conduct the mandatum: after all, he already knows what the rubrics are, and is most likely just afraid of upsetting some know-it-alls on the liturgy committee. Let him know that he would have your full support if he did things by the book! I suppose it depends on how well you know the priest in question - that might dictate what you are comfortable saying to him, and in what way you might say it. If the priest continues to allow himself to be undermined by the committee on this matter, the bishop should be the next step.

I would also agree with Spirithound about staying on the committee - such outcomes as you have experienced can be discouraging, but you will only give the dissenters the upper-hand if you step down. Perhaps you could encourage some like-minded friends to join the committee as vacancies arise!

 

[puzzleannie]

ForThe priest himself said that he knew it wasn’t in the rubrics but washing feet helps others understand The team decided to do the same thing again this year and I feel so disappointed. I just feel that I’m the only one who cares about a properly celebrated Mass sometimes Any advice?

quite frankly if this was my parish I would bail, not because of this one abuse, but because “the team voted”. What team? The priest is the liturgist. If he does not assert his authority over the Mass it’s over. My guess is you have lots of other war stories you could share with us. It bespeaks a horizontal view of what Mass is about that I presume infects everything about liturgy in the parish and I doubt you will be able to last much longer. time to start parish shopping

 

[TheMc]

quite frankly if this was my parish I would bail, not because of this one abuse, but because “the team voted”. What team? The priest is the liturgist. If he does not assert his authority over the Mass it’s over. My guess is you have lots of other war stories you could share with us. It bespeaks a horizontal view of what Mass is about that I presume infects everything about liturgy in the parish and I doubt you will be able to last much longer. time to start parish shopping

OP,

I’ll echo Spirithound. If you at all can, please stay at your parish, and stay on the “liturgy board”. It will only give the liberals more leverage if you leave altogether.

 

[TheMc]

Please read carefully the first verses of Matt 12

[2] And the Pharisees seeing them, said to him: Behold thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days. But he said to them:

You have the right to ask a question from the Apostolic See about the decision of the USCCB, and if you get answer you may publish it in a blog or forums like this. Criticize them on your own is abuse, very serious abuse, one of the worst ‘spirit of Vatican II’, far away from the intentions of the bishops of the XXI Ecumenical council.

I’m not understanding the point you are attempting to make with Matt 12. Would you mind explaining? Your statments about “criticizing” the usccb seem to say the USCCB is infallible. Guess what: It’s not.

I am not saying the USCCB is evil, or that they are trying to lead us in the wrong direction (although they have done some questionable things in the past), but what I am saying is that I simply have serious doubts that they received permission to modify this rubric. They even allude to that fact in their article.

**Note:If someone has proof(s) that Rome said they could change it, than speak up! But I’m pretty sure they didn’t. **

This is what they don’t say:
“According to the american adaptations of the Roman Missal, Men and women may have their feet washed.”

What they do say:
"The missal say only men, but … well… most people broke the rules in the past, so now we think you should too, because of the spirit of “love” and “charity” we have.

Wake up and smell the incense!!! Our obligation to charity does not dispense us from obedience!! It is not “uncharitable” not to wash women’s feet, it is simply obedient. If the women have a problem with that, they should take a good long look at their supposed “active participation”.

It is extremely saddening to see things like this coming from our bishops, essentially telling us to defy the missal.

 

[puzzleannie]

OP,

I’ll echo Spirithound. If you at all can, please stay at your parish, and stay on the “liturgy board”. It will only give the liberals more leverage if you leave altogether.

that may be true in many cases, but it seems in this case he has no influence whatever, and the priest has caved. When conditions in the parish become a danger to one’s own faith and diligent participation in liturgy, then it is time to move. I was saying what I would do. I simply can no longer remain in a parish that plays games with liturgy and stay sane. OP will have to decide himself.

 

[InspiritCarol]

quite frankly if this was my parish I would bail, not because of this one abuse, but because “the team voted”. What team? The priest is the liturgist. If he does not assert his authority over the Mass it’s over. My guess is you have lots of other war stories you could share with us. It bespeaks a horizontal view of what Mass is about that I presume infects everything about liturgy in the parish and I doubt you will be able to last much longer. time to start parish shopping

Agreed. There’s nothing uglier than a committee run parish. Why? Because the loud voices and the pushy people rule. Who is listening for the Holy Spirit when others are bullying their opinion into matters they have no place being. All the fallacies are allowed to control the matter at hand; in this case the emotional appeal.

Also, it is contrary to what it means to be Catholic.

Still, I suppose it’s possible the priest is ambivalent about this one matter. It does seem to have wiggle room. My point is, perhaps abandoning the church to the loud minority is not the best first course of action. Even as the millionth course of action, isn’t it better to stick it out and be a warrior? I mean, stand up for those who either don’t know any better or are too afraid to speak up?

 

[benedictgal]

Here is what Paschalis Sollemnitatis says:

1. The washing of the feet of **chosen men **which, according to tradition, is performed on this day, represents the service and charity of Christ, who came “not to be served, but to serve.” [58] This tradition should be maintained, and its proper significance explained.

If the OP lives in the Diocese of Tyler, their bishop has effectively laid down some serious norms for his see:

XI. On Holy Thursday does the priest have to wash the feet of 12 men?
15. The main celebrant is to wash the feet of men (adult males). Generally 12 men are selected, but the ritual does not require 12 (may be adjusted for example to accommodate a small space). In the context of the Holy Thursday liturgy, the ritual of washing the feet of men suggests that strong connection between Christ’s washing His Apostles’ feet and the institution of the Eucharist and Holy Orders. Christ chose on this occasion the twelve men he had chosen to be Apostles. We must conclude, then, that the ritual is intimately connected to the priesthood and the institution of the Eucharist. Its symbolism cannot be reduced to a general theme of service to the whole Church. Therefore, the priest should wash the feet of a select group of men only. Other types of “washing”, i.e. washing of hands or members of the congregation washing each other’s feet is not allowed. (Decree Concerning the “Washing of the Feet” Ritual of the Holy Thursday, Alvaro Corrada, S.J., Bishop of Tyler, March 10, 2010) Full text can be found at dioceseoftyler.org/documents/WashingoftheFeet031810.pdf

Here is one bishop who truly gets it. I had the privilege of meeting a sizeable contingent from the Diocese of Tyler two months ago. Tyler is a blessed diocese, indeed!

 

[Cristiano]

This is the perfect scenario to “vote with your feet”.
I just refuse to participate in this kind of activities unless it brings an evident disruption to the ceremony and/or too much attention to my actions.

 

[barb_finnegan]

Here is what Paschalis Sollemnitatis says:

If the OP lives in the Diocese of Tyler, their bishop has effectively laid down some serious norms for his see:

Here is one bishop who truly gets it. I had the privilege of meeting a sizeable contingent from the Diocese of Tyler two months ago. Tyler is a blessed diocese, indeed!

Kudos to the Bishop of Tyler!

The washing of the feet is always a ‘sticking point’ on Holy Thursday. I had my feet washed a couple of times when I used to go to the OF Mass, but now I go to the EF Mass exclusively. So this is not done there.

 

[miniquedoes]

Thank you for all the advice. The only reason I agreed to join the committee (I was invited by the priest) is because I wanted to try to correct the abuses I see in our church. The priest seems to be second in command to what the team decides to do. The problem is that the well intentioned people on the team have no idea about the rubrics. In this instance, the priest was arguing for keeping the general washing of the feet and said “but really it is up to you all.” I think that is why the committee voted for to keep it. I am starting to feel that I will make no difference and sometimes feel like going to another parish (where I can grow more spiritually). The thing that keeps me from leaving is all the friends I have made there

 

[benedictgal]

Thank you for all the advice. The only reason I agreed to join the committee (I was invited by the priest) is because I wanted to try to correct the abuses I see in our church. The priest seems to be second in command to what the team decides to do. The problem is that the well intentioned people on the team have no idea about the rubrics. In this instance, the priest was arguing for keeping the general washing of the feet and said “but really it is up to you all.” I think that is why the committee voted for to keep it. I am starting to feel that I will make no difference and sometimes feel like going to another parish (where I can grow more spiritually). The thing that keeps me from leaving is all the friends I have made there

The next step is to inform your bishop. I would not cite Tyler as an example, although I would use some of what their bishop said as a means for stating the point.

It is sad that there are some parishes that see Holy Week as some free form exercise in experimentation and creativity.

 

[NPC]

Thank you for all the advice. The only reason I agreed to join the committee (I was invited by the priest) is because I wanted to try to correct the abuses I see in our church. The priest seems to be second in command to what the team decides to do. The problem is that the well intentioned people on the team have no idea about the rubrics. In this instance, the priest was arguing for keeping the general washing of the feet and said “but really it is up to you all.” I think that is why the committee voted for to keep it. I am starting to feel that I will make no difference and sometimes feel like going to another parish (where I can grow more spiritually). The thing that keeps me from leaving is all the friends I have made there

This is very regrettable that the priest is so obviously and consciously playing second-fiddle to the committee. Unfortunately it seems to be the case in many parishes that the same group of people dominate the various committees, many of whom are voting on personal whims rather than correct liturgical practice. However, ultimately it comes back to the priest - as we all know, the priest is supposed to have the final say no matter what the committee votes for, so an incompetent committee (or members of said committee) is, in effect, a peripheral problem since the priest is the governor of the liturgy in his own parish.

If there is no way that you can discuss this with the priest, given his blatant deference to the committee, it is time to go to the bishop. I would really hope that this won’t spell the end of your time at the parish, and I would reiterate my hope that, if at all possible, you and other like-minded parishioners could remain on the committee and eventually put the dissenters in their place! Perhaps in time a motion could be put forward to abolish the committee and give full authority on matters liturgical back to the priest You are right, however, that you must consider your spiritual welfare, but I hope you won’t have to move to another parish for this - you shouldn’t have to.

 

[japhy]

This sort of thing can take place at a para-liturgical celebration. It shouldn’t take place during the Holy Thursday Mass, but it can take place before or after it.

 

[InspiritCarol]

I’m not understanding the point you are attempting to make with Matt 12. Would you mind explaining? Your statments about “criticizing” the usccb seem to say the USCCB is infallible. Guess what: It’s not.

I am not saying the USCCB is evil, or that they are trying to lead us in the wrong direction (although they have done some questionable things in the past), but what I am saying is that I simply have serious doubts that they received permission to modify this rubric. They even allude to that fact in their article.

**Note:If someone has proof(s) that Rome said they could change it, than speak up! But I’m pretty sure they didn’t. **

This is what they don’t say:
“According to the american adaptations of the Roman Missal, Men and women may have their feet washed.”

What they do say:
"The missal say only men, but … well… most people broke the rules in the past, so now we think you should too, because of the spirit of “love” and “charity” we have.

Wake up and smell the incense!!! Our obligation to charity does not dispense us from obedience!! It is not “uncharitable” not to wash women’s feet, it is simply obedient. If the women have a problem with that, they should take a good long look at their supposed “active participation”.

It is extremely saddening to see things like this coming from our bishops, essentially telling us to defy the missal.

Boy, I sure could have used your help on the gender neutralizing thread. I was flayed because I tried to say “vir” means men of the male gender.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=541176&page=4

Here’s a sample:
InspiritCarol:

I am not quite sure I understand your problem. The rigid, literal reading of words such as “men” or “brethren” to always mean male persons exclusively was an artificial construct of the radical feminist movement. When I was growing up, before radical feminism reared its ugly head, the common understanding was that these words carried both meanings and you chose the one most appropriate. I have never felt in the least bit “excluded” by the words “men” or “brethren” or similar in a Biblical/liturgical context. Or in any other.

But you clearly have a problem, because you have arrived at a completely erroneous conclusion.

This is really not as simple an issue as some of you make it out to be.

I’m very confused: I’m a radical feminist because it makes sense for vir to mean men of the male gender (how stupid that I even have to say that), but here you’re some kind of radical mass killer-feminazi if you do broaden the term “men” to *include *women.

It’s fascinating to me that this discussion should lean so heavily against the Priest/Pastor being allowed to wash women’s feet; wasn’t anyone paying attention to this Sunday’s gospel reading? What does it mean to be a servent? Is the Priest a servent to men only? Guess so. That’s fine, but let’s be clear so we know just where our religion stands. Hmm?

Ah but *some *Bishops see the problem with this. Is it then a good idea to imply their corruption on open sites like this? Without even going to them? How is that helping anyone?