Foot washing on Holy Thursday

[Annabelle_Marie]

Would you please share with us the documentation allowing for the communal washing of the feet? Unless the USCCB has a document bearing the recognitio from the Holy See, I do not think that they would support something that goes against what the rubrics mandate.

GLAD to see you got around to what is essential the OP…instead of your own personal agenda.

Seriously…I was looking to see what people would say about that…the communal washing of the feet… and disappointed to see the discussion about men/women in the 12.

Next thing you know…we’ll be talking about girls as altar servers

 

[nannymar]

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.

Reading through all the answers on this thread,I think it has been established that men and women are allowed for the foot washing. In our parish we have had, for more then a few years, the Confirmation candidates are the ones chosen for the foot washing by our pastor. It moves right along and is incorporated well into the Liturgy for the evening.
We always seem to have the required twelve as well. They probably choose a few other youth to make the twelve if there are not twelve from the candidates for Confirmation.

 

[InspiritCarol]

There is no need for sarcasm. The rubrics specifically state that the ritual calls for 12 men. The Holy Father washes the feet of 12 men, priests, but, men just the same. The ritual, while unique to the Evening Mass of the Lord’s Supper, is not the Mass. These are two very different activities. Furthermore, the Chrism Mass is traditionally celebrated the morning of Holy Thursday because Holy Thursday and the priesthood have a specific connection.

Christ ordained these apostles as the first priests. However, in order to participate in the Sacrifice, they had to be ritually purified. It is this same ritual of “purification” that we see when the priest washes his hands during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. While there is the component of the servant involved here. That is one of the reasons why Jesus tells Peter that “not all are clean”, as Judas may have been externally purified, but, he was not ritually purified.

At the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we are just as present in the Upper Room, at Calvary and at the empty tomb as were the Apostles, the Blessed Mother and St. Mary Magdalene.

Just the same, we need to obey what the Roman Missal and the subsequent mandates issued by the Holy See mandate.

Ack. I’m not being sarcastic. It was a sincere question, and one I think we are not qualified to answer - well, *I’m *not anyway. Still, you do answer with: performance. Fine. If that’s what it is, then that’s what it is.

Your “ritual purification” interpretation is interesting, but it is not one I have *EVER *heard before. I suppose, if that is what the message is supposed to be, then we better get off our duffs and start getting the word out; starting with most of the priests out there.

Guess our next step is to track down the Bishops who don’t agree with you and start cleaning house. (That was only *mild *sarcasm.

 

[benedictgal]

Reading through all the answers on this thread,I think it has been established that men and women are allowed for the foot washing. In our parish we have had, for more then a few years, the Confirmation candidates are the ones chosen for the foot washing by our pastor. It moves right along and is incorporated well into the Liturgy for the evening.
We always seem to have the required twelve as well. They probably choose a few other youth to make the twelve if there are not twelve from the candidates for Confirmation.

Actually, it has not been established. The rubric specifically states 12 men. In Latin “viri” is the word for “men” and is not gender-neutral. We cannot twist and contort the rubrics to fit a well-meaning, but, ilicit act.

Even if an official from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments were to write something about this matter and reaffirming what is already in the books, I do not know if that would change the minds of the folks who support making an ilicit adjustment to the ritual. With all due respect, we do not have the right to change things on our own authority.

Furthermore, if a bishop wants to change something, he would need the recognitio from the Holy See in order to do this.

 

[InspiritCarol]

Because Jesus washed the 12 Apostles feet and they were men, Get it?

Ah. It’s a play…and the men are like acting the role of the 12 disciples. (not apostles BTW). *GOT *it. kk

Maybe we can get donkey and some straw to make it more authentic… oh wait, wrong Holy Day.

(*That *was sarcasm).

 

[InspiritCarol]

Actually, it has not been established. The rubric specifically states 12 men. In Latin “viri” is the word for “men” and is not gender-neutral. We cannot twist and contort the rubrics to fit a well-meaning, but, ilicit act.

Even if an official from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments were to write something about this matter and reaffirming what is already in the books, I do not know if that would change the minds of the folks who support making an ilicit adjustment to the ritual. With all due respect, we do not have the right to change things on our own authority.

Furthermore, if a bishop wants to change something, he would need the recognitio from the Holy See in order to do this.

Please, please please go and support me on this on the gender neutral thread because I am somehow an evil feminist for proproting this. Why does it have to be one way when it suits us, and another way when it does not?

 

[benedictgal]

Please, please please go and support me on this on the gender neutral thread because I am somehow an evil feminist for proproting this. Why does it have to be one way when it suits us, and another way when it does not?

Where is the thread?

 

[Phemie]

Phew!

I hope you escalated this matter… or at least fired off a few letters…

No, actually, I was a coward. Not only was I on the committee, I was also the parish secretary. Our bishop was our Pastor’s best friend dating back to the seminary thus also a student of the priest who yelled at me. Didn’t figure there was any satisfaction to be had from that quarter. And regardless of what Redemptionis Sacramentum says, it still seemed like tattling and didn’t feel right to complain.

 

[InspiritCarol]

Where is the thread?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=541176

 

[InspiritCarol]

No, actually, I was a coward. Not only was I on the committee, I was also the parish secretary. Our bishop was our Pastor’s best friend dating back to the seminary thus also a student of the priest who yelled at me. Didn’t figure there was any satisfaction to be had from that quarter. And regardless of what Redemptionis Sacramentum says, it still seemed like tattling and didn’t feel right to complain.

Oh my goodness, do I *know *what you’re talking about. We’re only human. I’m still seeing the fallout for not escalating either.

*Next *time I’ll do things differently. … And that’s why I’m such an advocator for voicing concerns in a productive, not destructive way: letters to people who are in charge; not viscious gossip or, heaven forbid, media.

I think the devil wants us to keep silent on important matters. That feeling of “tattling” is common.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Actually, it has not been established. The rubric specifically states 12 men. In Latin “viri” is the word for “men” and is not gender-neutral. We cannot twist and contort the rubrics to fit a well-meaning, but, ilicit act.

Even if an official from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments were to write something about this matter and reaffirming what is already in the books, I do not know if that would change the minds of the folks who support making an ilicit adjustment to the ritual. With all due respect, we do not have the right to change things on our own authority.

Furthermore, if a bishop wants to change something, he would need the recognitio from the Holy See in order to do this.

Who is going to let the USSB know that they are wrong? And need to change? I nominate you…

 

[FAB]

Would you please share with us the documentation allowing for the communal washing of the feet? Unless the USCCB has a document bearing the recognitio from the Holy See, I do not think that they would support something that goes against what the rubrics mandate.

According to my Archdiocese guidlines for the celebration of Hoy Thursday:

There is **no prescribed number **of individuals whose feet are washed. Participants may
be **women, youth and children **as well as men. The **community may take part **in the foot
washing presuming the liturgy is properly prepared. (BCL newsletter, Feb, 1987)

 

[NPC]

According to my Archdiocese guidlines for the celebration of Hoy Thursday:
There is no prescribed number of individuals whose feet are washed. Participants may
be women, youth and children as well as men. The community may take part in the foot
washing presuming the liturgy is properly prepared. (BCL newsletter, Feb, 1987)

Almost one year later the Congregation for Divine Worship issued “Paschales Solemnitatis”, which confirms that there is no prescribed number of persons whose feet are to be washed as all it says on the matter of the mandatum is:

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.” This tradition should be maintained, and its proper significance explained.

Twelve, however, is certainly the traditional number.

However, contrary to the BCL Newsletter, it confirms the traditional practice of selecting men, not women, youth or children. It also confirms what had also existed in the Sacramentary. Furthermore, the Sacramentary is clear that it is the priest who washes the feet, so if (as the BCL Newsletter states) the “community may take part in the foot washing”, then that (if it to be in accordance with the directives of the Congregation for Divine Worship) can only mean that the priest may wash the feet of every man in the congregation. Quite a preposterous idea, though, especially if there is a large congregation - surely the sign-value attached to twelve men having their feet washed ought to be sufficient on such a solemn evening as Holy Thursday…

…And I believe it would be sufficient if more priests and bishops heeded the final word that Paschales Solemnitatis gives on the subject of the mandatum, namely that the "tradition should be maintained, and its proper significance explained.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Almost one year later the Congregation for Divine Worship issued “Paschales Solemnitatis”, which confirms that there is no prescribed number of persons whose feet are to be washed as all it says on the matter of the mandatum is:

Twelve, however, is certainly the traditional number.

However, contrary to the BCL Newsletter, it confirms the traditional practice of selecting men, not women, youth or children. It also confirms what had also existed in the Sacramentary. Furthermore, the Sacramentary is clear that it is the priest who washes the feet, so if (as the BCL Newsletter states) the “community may take part in the foot washing”, then that (if it to be in accordance with the directives of the Congregation for Divine Worship) can only mean that the priest may wash the feet of every man in the congregation. Quite a preposterous idea, though, especially if there is a large congregation - surely the sign-value attached to twelve men having their feet washed ought to be sufficient on such a solemn evening as Holy Thursday…

…And I believe it would be sufficient if more priests and bishops heeded the final word that Paschales Solemnitatis gives on the subject of the mandatum, namely that the "tradition should be maintained, and its proper significance explained.

So in reality the significance of it has more to do with Christ coming to serve and not be served, which is what the priest does when he takes off his chasable (?). It seems to not be as much a EXACT representation of the 12 apostles.

If the USSB says that it can be men AND women…that seems to me to be who we follow. If the Pope wanted it changed…I’m sure he could put pressure on them.

Listen…I’m just trying to practice my faith to the best of my ability…I don’t want to be some sort of Cannon Law or rubics super human.

At our parish it is the canidates/catechumans who fill 8 of the 12 spots. My husband and I are two of those. I consider it an honor to be able to be there. If there are people attending that are in a huff because 6 out of 8 of us are women…well too bad. Then there should be more men in our class.

 

[benedictgal]

According to my Archdiocese guidlines for the celebration of Hoy Thursday:

Paschalis Sollemnitatis, which was promulgated in 1988, is the prevailing authority here. Furthermore, the rubrics for the Roman Missal specifically state men. Thus, since the CDWDS is the highest authority (acting in the name of and with the authority of the Holy Father), its ruling is what stands.

 

[benedictgal]

So in reality the significance of it has more to do with Christ coming to serve and not be served, which is what the priest does when he takes off his chasable (?). It seems to not be as much a EXACT representation of the 12 apostles.

If the USSB says that it can be men AND women…that seems to me to be who we follow. If the Pope wanted it changed…I’m sure he could put pressure on them.

Listen…I’m just trying to practice my faith to the best of my ability…I don’t want to be some sort of Cannon Law or rubics super human.

At our parish it is the canidates/catechumans who fill 8 of the 12 spots. My husband and I are two of those. I consider it an honor to be able to be there. If there are people attending that are in a huff because 6 out of 8 of us are women…well too bad. Then there should be more men in our class.

Actually, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, as I noted in my previous post, acts in the name of and with the authority of the Holy Father, thus, since PS was promulgated under the reign of the Venerable John Paul II, this can be viewed as a mandate coming directly from the Supreme Pontiff.

The information that FAB quoted is outdated and PS supercedes it. In fact, as I stated in the previous post, even the 2002 edition of the Roman Missal states that the ritual calls for men. It is in the rubrics.

It is not an issue of people “being in a huff”; it is more along the lines of obedience to the Holy See. We cannot pick and choose what we want to do in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Doing so compromises the liturgical integrity of the Holy Sacrifice.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Actually, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, as I noted in my previous post, acts in the name of and with the authority of the Holy Father, thus, since PS was promulgated under the reign of the Venerable John Paul II, this can be viewed as a mandate coming directly from the Supreme Pontiff.

The information that FAB quoted is outdated and PS supercedes it. In fact, as I stated in the previous post, even the 2002 edition of the Roman Missal states that the ritual calls for men. It is in the rubrics.

It is not an issue of people “being in a huff”; it is more along the lines of obedience to the Holy See. We cannot pick and choose what we want to do in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Doing so compromises the liturgical integrity of the Holy Sacrifice.

Excuse me…but part of the reason for being Catholic is that I don’t have to try and sort through all this…regaramole…I’m not a lawyer for crying out loud. I have the Church to follow. Here in the US…the easiest thing to do is pull up the USCCB and see what they say about it. And they say the same thing that was quoted. They go to the intent or significance of the action. So…the USCCB allows men/women…my diocese does…and my parish does. That is enough for me. I have no desire to go making a stink based off your interpretation…I don’t know you…I do know and trust the USCCB.

 

[benedictgal]

Excuse me…but part of the reason for being Catholic is that I don’t have to try and sort through all this…regaramole…I’m not a lawyer for crying out loud. I have the Church to follow. Here in the US…the easiest thing to do is pull up the USCCB and see what they say about it. And they say the same thing that was quoted. They go to the intent or significance of the action. So…the USCCB allows men/women…my diocese does…and my parish does. That is enough for me. I have no desire to go making a stink based off your interpretation…I don’t know you…I do know and trust the USCCB.

If the USCCB wants to allow women in the washing of the feet ritual, then, it has to put this up for a vote before the Latin Rite bishops. Two-thirds of them have to vote for this adaptation to the Roman Missal and then it goes to Rome where the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has the final say. At the end of the day, the final decision comes from Rome.

 

[miniquedoes]

I do hope that we can show charity to each other I understand that there are people who don’t mind both genders having their feet washed while others are for the ritual including only men. I will say that I do prefer to see only men because I feel like I’m taken back to that time in the upper room. The USCCB have allowed both genders to participate so to argue about it doesn’t solve anything. The question however was about the participation of all those in the congregation having their feet washed. Does anybody have similar events (hand washing/ foot washing for all) occur at their parishes?

 

[miniquedoes]

double post sorry