Holy Thursday: Washing of the feet

[triumphguy]

When I was a young altar boy back in Manchester, England I remember waiting outside the sacristy and having the job to ring the bell for mass to start.

I was looking at my new Timex for the exact second that the hour started. My parish priest, an ex middleweight boxer and a very wise man said,

“Son, the only thing worse than starting mass late is starting on time. Wait a few minutes”

There was a lot of wisdom in that.

He was basically saying that you can be legalistic, or you can be pastoral. Wait for the faithful who struggled to get here on time to get in their pew and get settled and don’t rush them.

He was also implying that waiting too long for people to get so comfortable they think the priest isn’t coming isn’t good either.

The Rubrics says virii, the Cardinal and Bishops (with a nod from Rome) say that washing womens’ feet is OK.

I’m sure the USCCB has thought about this issue and come to the right conclusion.

Sure there are “legalistic” reasons why they are wrong, but there are pastoral reasons why their decision is valid.

I enjoy Voris too, and watch every video he puts out, but he’s not the Pope, nor is he my Bishop. He gives great food for thought, but his opinions do not come with an imprimatur.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

“Son, the only thing worse than starting mass late is starting on time. Wait a few minutes”

There was a lot of wisdom in that.

He was basically saying that you can be legalistic, or you can be pastoral. Wait for the faithful who struggled to get here on time to get in their pew and get settled and don’t rush them.

I disagree. The priest I work for doesn’t wait on latecomers (including servers and choir), and I agree. Why? Because no matter what time Mass is at, there will be people who come late. Change the official time of Mass to begin ten minutes later and guess what? People will still come in late. At another church I’ve worked at, the priest routinely begins Mass five to ten minutes late. Do most of the people now arrive five to ten minutes before Mass begins because of that? No. They just come later. I usually see the servers walking in the door a few minutes AFTER Mass is supposed to have started. Sure, there will always be times when there are people who truly had some sort of problem and struggled to make it on time, but I find that most people are late (or almost late) just because it’s a habit with them. Can’t give an extra five minutes for church! I bet they won’t be late to the Cubs game though!

 

[SaintJ]

Last night I went to a parish i never went to before with my friend whom I’m trying to bring into the Church. This was her first mass. Could use use help to links or whatever to help me show her this path, but that’s the topic of another forum thread.

Anyway, the priest said that all were allowed to wash each-other’s feet, and most of everyone in the parish did so. I didn’t do so because I’ve read about the tradition of it, and saw Mr. Voris’s commentary on it. I didn’t do it, and mention to my friend why we shouldn’t do it.
So it took about 30+ min for all that to take place before the litrugy was able to continue.

I’m not sure if I should send an email or something to the priest at that parish or not since it is not the parish I attend, or even if I should make a big deal of it…

 

[triumphguy]

I disagree. The priest I work for doesn’t wait on latecomers (including servers and choir), and I agree. Why? Because no matter what time Mass is at, there will be people who come late. Change the official time of Mass to begin ten minutes later and guess what? People will still come in late. At another church I’ve worked at, the priest routinely begins Mass five to ten minutes late. Do most of the people now arrive five to ten minutes before Mass begins because of that? No. They just come later. I usually see the servers walking in the door a few minutes AFTER Mass is supposed to have started. Sure, there will always be times when there are people who truly had some sort of problem and struggled to make it on time, but I find that most people are late (or almost late) just because it’s a habit with them. Can’t give an extra five minutes for church! I bet they won’t be late to the Cubs game though!

You can be right if you like.

 

[Ron_Obvious]

At the mass last night at our church, the priest came up to some men individually (I was one of them) and asked us if we would be willing to have our feet washed. This was done about ten minutes before mass started. When it was all said and done twelve men had their feet washed. Better than last year, where the priest just asked for volunteers when the time for washing came, and a lot more than twelve got out of the pew and headed to the front (women and children included). This year it was more ordered.

 

[Califman831]

Just finished the procession through town. We carried a young boy on a wooden cross made of 4x4 beams. The boy had the guts to stand the cold all the way to the church. He was shivering with just a rag covering his hip area. His dad applied homemade theatrical blood.

One of the attendees got in trouble with father. He was carrying a sign that said "America cultura de la muerte’. I emailed him earlier and told him it was in bad taste since the crowd was mostly latin american. The person carrying the sign was anglo, and normally carries a sign with the english translation of the message “America Culture of Death”.

I was going to take pictures of the event as I did last year, but when I got there I found out the camera was missing its memory card. When we got to the church father said some words and then the people took turn kissing the cross.

here are some pics from last year’s procession

picasaweb.google.com/107106491446674224051/ProcessionFavorites

If I remember correctly the church had days when catholic girls were blessed, but may have been done away with during the last 40 or 50 years. Older Forum members may fill us in. Or we could create new ones like say on the marian holy days.

 

[violetandgandal]

I went to a POORLY attended Holy Thursday Mass last evening. What do people have to do that’s so important that they can’t make time to participate in Holy Week? The three altar servers were girls, both readers were women, and all the people getting their feet washed were either women or children. WHERE ARE ALL THE MEN?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Last time I checked the Vatican was in authority over me and the american bishops. Jesus put Peter in charge of the church. I did not disobey the holy see, I followed through. Now on ur part the conversation will be some thing like …Hey Jesus why didnt u wash the feet of the women…

Well its over til next year.

Our priests all promise authority to their Bishop…no? You did not disobey the Holy See…or what you THOUGHT the Holy See has to say. There is a difference. What if I thought that because the Holy See allows altar girls…that ALL of them should be altar girls…and refused to attend Mass because of that. How is that different? It is what you think…apparently you think the Bishops have no say…and yet that is who our priests promise obedience to.

I noticed something last night…and the more I think about it I notice this. Our priest has no problem with altar girls however last night I noticed that only altar boys…and last Holy Thursday and Easter Vigil the same way…and every week on Benediction…only a man helps him…which sometimes is hard to get one that is there…if no man is there then Fr. does it himself. Also totally fine. Doesn’t bother me in the least…because I trust this shepard…

No…my conversation with Jesus would be…it was so nice to be at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass…and really good to spend time with you in adoration afterwards…

Honestly sometimes it feels like Catholics now adays would be the ones blaming Jesus for healing on the sabbath…

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I went to a POORLY attended Holy Thursday Mass last evening. What do people have to do that’s so important that they can’t make time to participate in Holy Week? The three altar servers were girls, both readers were women, and all the people getting their feet washed were either women or children. WHERE ARE ALL THE MEN?

That is sad…but unfortunetly I’m sure somehow the women were to blame…

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

As St.Francis told the laity of his day, “I command you to obey your bishop, whether he is a saint or the worse sinner in the world, so that through your example of humility and obedience, you may convert the world to Christ.”

 

[Godric2]

I went to a POORLY attended Holy Thursday Mass last evening. What do people have to do that’s so important that they can’t make time to participate in Holy Week? The three altar servers were girls, both readers were women, and all the people getting their feet washed were either women or children. WHERE ARE ALL THE MEN?

I thought that the Holy See said that those who have their feet washed have to be male, or has that changed?

Armenian feetwashing

 

[Califman831]

Our priests all promise authority to their Bishop…no? You did not disobey the Holy See…or what you THOUGHT the Holy See has to say. There is a difference. What if I thought that because the Holy See allows altar girls…that ALL of them should be altar girls…and refused to attend Mass because of that. How is that different? It is what you think…apparently you think the Bishops have no say…and yet that is who our priests promise obedience to.
…

Yes, priests make a promises to a bishop, the bishop of rome that is. Here is a segment from such an oath.

---

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.
…

sorry that there is no mention of the usccb being the head of the church.

 

[MarkThompson]

sorry that there is no mention of the usccb being the head of the church.

Great point. Likewise, there’s no mention of the three Plenary Councils of Baltimore as being the head of the Church either, so it looks like we can also safely discount and ignore their acts and pronouncements, like the Baltimore Catechism, as being worse than useless. Good to know.

 

[jwinch2]

Great point. Likewise, there’s no mention of the three Plenary Councils of Baltimore as being the head of the Church either, so it looks like we can also safely discount and ignore their acts and pronouncements, like the Baltimore Catechism, as being worse than useless. Good to know.

Did those plenary councils and the Baltimore Catechism teach something contrary to the Holy See’s stated position? If not, then your analogy is not particularly accurate.

 

[MarkThompson]

Did those plenary councils and the Baltimore Catechism teach something contrary to the Holy See’s stated position? If not, then your analogy is not particularly accurate.

Not to my knowledge – nor, to my knowledge, has the USCCB.

 

[Phemie]

Yes, priests make a promises to a bishop, the bishop of rome that is. Here is a segment from such an oath.

---

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

This oath is no longer required although some swear it voluntarily.

 

[celticcrusader]

Last night I went to a parish i never went to before with my friend whom I’m trying to bring into the Church. This was her first mass. Could use use help to links or whatever to help me show her this path, but that’s the topic of another forum thread.

Anyway, the priest said that all were allowed to wash each-other’s feet, and most of everyone in the parish did so. I didn’t do so because I’ve read about the tradition of it, and saw Mr. Voris’s commentary on it. I didn’t do it, and mention to my friend why we shouldn’t do it.
So it took about 30+ min for all that to take place before the litrugy was able to continue.

I’m not sure if I should send an email or something to the priest at that parish or not since it is not the parish I attend, or even if I should make a big deal of it…

I have sent E-Mails to my Bishop , and my Parish Priest and a Priest in the next Parish and it would put me in shock if I ever got a reply, sometimes I wonder if the Bishop or Priests see the E-Mails or maybe the office help hits the delete button any send the E- Mail you will feel better knowing you tried. Now for the first part of your question , Dr. Scott Hahn has some great reading on the subject of the Mass his web site is , www.scotthahn.com

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Yes, priests make a promises to a bishop, the bishop of rome that is. Here is a segment from such an oath.

---

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.
…

sorry that there is no mention of the usccb being the head of the church.

Again…your priest promises obedience to his Bishop. You even wrote said Bishop and they said they got clarification from Rome…which coincidently matches what the USCCB says…and yet you don’t think that is good enough. You might realize that their are conversations/clarifications that you might not know anything about? Or is your interpretation infallible? And no comment on the quote above from St. Francis?

 

[Califman831]

Again…your priest promises obedience to his Bishop. You even wrote said Bishop and they said they got clarification from Rome…which coincidently matches what the USCCB says…and yet you don’t think that is good enough. You might realize that their are conversations/clarifications that you might not know anything about? Or is your interpretation infallible? And no comment on the quote above from St. Francis?

no my local bishop’s office said they got permission from usccb. I asked for vatican documents, but they did not provide any. A usccb claims that bishops would routinely ask for an exemption for the women, but such communications were “private”. Now my question is if it was routinely asked, why didnt the vatican issue a public statement stating that women were to be included. This certainly would have eliminated a lot of paper work and confusion on the practice of washing feet. The Vatican could have simply issued a memo clarifying the whole mess. Rather they issued the 1988 document which says that the practice is for men. its been 24 years without further clarification. Are we to assume that the Vatican couldn’t issue a simple statement in all that time. I’ll even take a youtube clip showing the pope washing the feet of women on holy thursday.

 

[TrueLight]

By the way…Holy Thursday Mass tonight…wonderful! Packed! During the week it was that I was going to have my feet washed…and then no…which I was fine with…and then I got a last minute call because someone couldn’t make it. There was a pretty even mixture of both…I had to keep one of the RCIA candidates calm because they were embarrassed…. He lived through it.

Adoration afterwards was truly wonderful…the best night all year for a Holy hour!

I know in the evangelical church where the congregration would wash each other’s feet, the women would get beautiful pedicures with nice nail designs for their feet washings.

So you would have lots of bright red or hot pink toes being washed.

Is it the same in the Catholic Church?