Holy Thursday: Washing of the feet

  • Thread starter Thread starter Califman831
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Credo111 said:
Sorry, Mark, but says who? Is this your personal interpretation? I see nothing in the footnotes or anywhere else in the Holy See’s document to support your claim.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid you have to understand that paragraph in the context of the entire document, and also in the broader context of the way Vatican documents talk about things and deal with issues. Since you are scrambling to find something, anything, dealing with the issue of men in the Holy Thursday ritual, you find this, see the word “men,” and assume that the point of writing it must have been to reinforce that it is only men whose feet are traditionally washed and issue a smackdown to anyone who thought otherwise. In reality, to figure out what “tradition” is being discussed one must look at the wider backdrop of parishes ignoring the rite altogether, parishes substituting other things like hand-washing for it, and so on; and also at the fact that this is a document intended to name and describe all the major ceremonies of Holy Week, generally in broad outlines. On your theory, the CDW decided that in the course of a document covering the entirety of Holy Week and containing very few specific corrections about abuses, they would devote an entire paragraph to the issue of washing women’s feet, and yet do it so vaguely as not even to say that that’s what they were talking about nor to say anything concrete and prohibitory like “He must not wash the feet of women or children.” Indeed, if your interpretation were the right one, the absolute blandness and timidity of this “correction” would be as sure a sign as anything that nobody in the Vatican cares, nor expects anyone else to care. (Fortunately, your interpretation is clearly not the right one.)
It was one exception granted specifically to the archdiocese of Boston. It was not an exception granted to every diocese in the United States, and the fact that bishops see fit to interpret it that way is very sloppy reasoning indeed.
Click to expand...
Why? Is Boston somehow qualitatively different from any other diocese in the United States. Isn’t the right conclusion to be drawn really that this is not a very important issue, and although the Vatican does not want to go to the effort or embarrassment of changing the printed rubric, it clearly does not care very much one way or the other?
First, it’s not the “USCCB’s statement”; it is the idiosyncratic (and wrong) interpretation of ONE bishop, posted in a newsletter, of all things. To claim it is official USCCB policy to allow footwashing of females is to give the impression that all the bishops have discussed it at length and formally voted on it. Not the case.
Click to expand...
Which part of the interpretation is wrong, exactly? Please quote the exact words and explain the way in which they’re wrong, and we’ll see if you’re interpreting it rightly or wrongly.
 
Credo111 said:
First, it’s not the “USCCB’s statement”; it is the idiosyncratic (and wrong) interpretation of ONE bishop, posted in a newsletter, of all things. To claim it is official USCCB policy to allow footwashing of females is to give the impression that all the bishops have discussed it at length and formally voted on it. Not the case.

Christine
Click to expand...
Well…it’s on the USCCB’s official website…so what does that imply? That they don’t know that it’s there?
 
Jegudiel said:
This comes up every year! It’s actually a few days late this year. Yet another discussion about Paschales Solemnitatis. **Bottom line, follow your local ordinary! ** Some (such Boston’s Cardinal Sean O’Malley) as have received permission directly from the Holy See to wash women’s feet on Holy Thursday. I strongly suspect his brother bishops in the USA can use that to gauge the Holy See’s approval.
Click to expand...
Am I wrong on this? I thought I heard sometime last year according to the USCCB that this last Holy Thursday would be the first time woman would be allowed to be washed. I am really against woman having their feet washed. I felt so bad for Father because a Confirmation class was chosen as the recipients and there were several young woman with short skirts (in my opinion) and bare legs. I just wished it wouldn’t happened. I was really embarassed for him.:signofcross:
 
garyo49 said:
Am I wrong on this? I thought I heard sometime last year according to the USCCB that this last Holy Thursday would be the first time woman would be allowed to be washed. I am really against woman having their feet washed. I felt so bad for Father because a Confirmation class was chosen as the recipients and there were several young woman with short skirts (in my opinion) and bare legs. I just wished it wouldn’t happened. I was really embarassed for him.:signofcross:
Click to expand...
Well…short skirts is a whole other issue…kind of like plunging necklines when receiving communion…especially when you bow…yikes! A good reminder about modesty would be well place in the bulletin or homily.
 
MarkThompson said:
…and issue a smackdown to anyone who thought otherwise.
Click to expand...
“Smackdown”? And here I thought I was just trying to get to the truth of the matter.
In reality, to figure out what “tradition” is being discussed one must look at the wider backdrop of parishes ignoring the rite altogether, parishes substituting other things like hand-washing for it, and so on; and also at the fact that this is a document intended to name and describe all the major ceremonies of Holy Week, generally in broad outlines…etc.
Click to expand...
Again, says who? If the document says “men”, it means “men”–and that interpretation, besides, is the only one that is consistent with years of tradition, long before this modern innovation permitting women to be part of the ceremony.
Is Boston somehow qualitatively different from any other diocese in the United States. Isn’t the right conclusion to be drawn really that this is not a very important issue, and although the Vatican does not want to go to the effort or embarrassment of changing the printed rubric, it clearly does not care very much one way or the other?
Click to expand...
Ah–so in your world, permission from the Holy See for a practice given to ONLY ONE diocese means automatic permission for ALL dioceses? Strange reasoning indeed.

If it’s all right with you, I’m going to stick with both tradition and the Holy See’s official take on the mandatum, rather than draw wideranging conclusions from one bishop’s interpretation issued in a newsletter.
Christine
 
Annabelle_Marie said:
Well…it’s on the USCCB’s official website…so what does that imply? That they don’t know that it’s there?
Click to expand...
The issue was never officially debated or voted on by the body of U.S. bishops. So what it implies is that the webmaster–with the approval of the head of the USCCB–posted one bishop’s unofficial interpretation printed in a newsletter. It carries no official weight whatsoever, and cannot contradict anything mandated by the Holy See.
 
Credo111 said:
The issue was never officially debated or voted on by the body of U.S. bishops. So what it implies is that the webmaster–with the approval of the head of the USCCB–posted one bishop’s unofficial interpretation printed in a newsletter. It carries no official weight whatsoever, and cannot contradict anything mandated by the Holy See.
Click to expand...
Wrong. It is listed on the USCCB’s website as a liturgical resource and at the bottom says “This is the latest statement of this Secretariat on the question. No subsequent legislation or instructions have necessitated a modification in the statement.” In addition, several Bishops allow it in their diocese. So are you saying that I should ignore everything listed as a resource on the USCCB’s website? That I should ignore our Bishop and listen only to your interpretation?

I suspect that the Holy See knows full well what is going on with the USCCB’s website. I think that they do not see it as some do here and certainly not important enough to put their foot down over it - pun intended.

Even Pope Pius XII who reinstituted the rite states that:

“Where the washing of feet, to show the Lord’s commandment about fraternal charity, is performed in a Church according to the rubrics of the restored Ordo of Holy Week, the faithful should be instructed on the profound meaning of this sacred rite and should be taught that it is only proper that they should abound in works of Christian charity on this day.”

No where does he state that this is the institution of the priesthood as some have here on this thread.

Again…if you are saying that we shouldn’t obey/listen to our Bishops…then what about when it comes to the HHS mandate or religious freedom…or abortion/contraception. After all if we can not trust them with something that is an optional rite…how can we trust them with anything…including ordaining priests…:rolleyes:
 
Annabelle_Marie said:
So are you saying that I should ignore everything listed as a resource on the USCCB’s website? That I should ignore our Bishop and listen only to your interpretation?
Click to expand...
How did you draw this conclusion from my short statement above? The Bishop’s interpretation on foot washing was not a point officially debated, discussed, or voted on by the body of US bishops. That is a fact. It is also a fact that no practice of any US diocese can contradict what is mandated by the Holy See. That is not the same as saying “ignore your bishop & everything the USCCB says,” which I NEVER said and never would say. Please do not put words in my mouth.

Your quotation of Pope Pius XII does not in any way support your position that women should be allowed in the foot washing. Every papal statement must be taken together with tradition, and not separated and used as some proof text for your agenda. If he does not speak explicitly of washing men’s feet here, the Holy See has spoken of it elsewhere. All of it must be taken together, and none of it can contradict the other.
Again…if you are saying that we shouldn’t obey/listen to our Bishops…:
Click to expand...
Again, don’t put words in my mouth. I never said this. It is the BISHOPS who should be obeying the Holy See on the matter of foot washing. If they do not, then they cause scandal and confusion–as exhibited by your own post.
Christine
 
Only 339 days until next Holy Thursday. Think we’ll get it settled by then? :rolleyes:
 
Credo111 said:
How did you draw this conclusion from my short statement above? The Bishop’s interpretation on foot washing was not a point officially debated, discussed, or voted on by the body of US bishops. That is a fact. It is also a fact that no practice of any US diocese can contradict what is mandated by the Holy See. That is not the same as saying “ignore your bishop & everything the USCCB says,” which I NEVER said and never would say. Please do not put words in my mouth.

Your quotation of Pope Pius XII does not in any way support your position that women should be allowed in the foot washing. Every papal statement must be taken together with tradition, and not separated and used as some proof text for your agenda. If he does not speak explicitly of washing men’s feet here, the Holy See has spoken of it elsewhere. All of it must be taken together, and none of it can contradict the other.

Again, don’t put words in my mouth. I never said this. It is the BISHOPS who should be obeying the Holy See on the matter of foot washing. If they do not, then they cause scandal and confusion–as exhibited by your own post.
Christine
Click to expand...
When they list it as a liturgical resource then it is NOT some random posting by them…so then yes that is what you are saying…
 
JRRTFAN said:
This is the Mass of the Lord’s supper where he institued the Holy Eucharist and the Priesthood. The Rite calls for 12 men having feet washed by the priest. Men only and only 12, not the cavalcade we will see tonight. It’s about the sacramental priesthood, not about feelgood.
Click to expand...
We just got the Diocesan news paper yesterday. Featured on page 1 was a photo of a parish pastor washing the feet of the 12 men picked to represent the apostles. EMTs had to be rushed to my home to revive me after being exposed to this horror.

At least 2 places in the world the rite was done correctly, the Vatican and a parish in Florida.
 
JRRTFAN said:
We just got the Diocesan news paper yesterday. Featured on page 1 was a photo of a parish pastor washing the feet of the 12 men picked to represent the apostles. EMTs had to be rushed to my home to revive me after being exposed to this horror.

At least 2 places in the world the rite was done correctly, the Vatican and a parish in Florida.
Click to expand...
And a parish in Wisconsin. I was one of the 12.
 
JRRTFAN said:
We just got the Diocesan news paper yesterday. Featured on page 1 was a photo of a parish pastor washing the feet of the 12 men picked to represent the apostles. EMTs had to be rushed to my home to revive me after being exposed to this horror.

At least 2 places in the world the rite was done correctly, the Vatican and a parish in Florida.
Click to expand...
Excellent news!
Christine
 
Annabelle_Marie said:
When they list it as a liturgical resource then it is NOT some random posting by them…so then yes that is what you are saying…
Click to expand...
Because they are wrong. They admit it themselves. But the point of the matter: they are wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
 
superamazingman said:
Because they are wrong. They admit it themselves. But the point of the matter: they are wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Click to expand...
Well…I haven’t seen anything from the USCCB saying they are wrong…nor from my Bishop saying it is wrong. That is who I follow…not every CAF’er who thinks that they “know”. So until then I will continue to get my feet washed if asked…and have peace with it.

Peace to you.
 
Annabelle_Marie said:
Well…I haven’t seen anything from the USCCB saying they are wrong…nor from my Bishop saying it is wrong. That is who I follow…not every CAF’er who thinks that they “know”. So until then I will continue to get my feet washed if asked…and have peace with it.

Peace to you.
Click to expand...
I’m assuming you follow your bishop on other matters as well. For instance as to when Holy Days of Obligation are observed in your particular diocese compared to perhaps another diocese in the world. So I don’t understand the problem with you doing so in the case of foot washing too. Don’t get me wrong. I see you do. But why wouldn’t you follow your bishop if you are a faithfully practicing Catholic in regards to that as well?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top