Holy Thursday

[MarkInOregon]

In investigating whether woman should be allowed to have their feet washed on Holy Thursday–I am not sure how to reconcile two pieces of information.

The rubric for Holy Thursday reads that “The men who have been chosen (viri selecti)”

But the USCCB in the latest statement of the secretariat seems to indicate that it is o.k. to wash the feet of both men and woman for the following reasons:

1. When the practice was restored in 1955 by Pope Pius XII the traditional significance of the rite was stated by the Sacred Congregation of Rites as: “where the washing of feet, to show the Lord’s commandment about fraternal charity, is performed…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”
2. “the principal and traditional meaning of the Holy Thursday mandatum,…,is the biblical injunction of Christian charity:Christs disciples are to love one another”
3. “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 extra ordinary gesture…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.”

Continued…

 

[KCT]

At my mom’s parish (Rochester, NY diocese!) the priest doesn’t wash feet. He lets the parish council do it! And they wash the feet of both men and women. —KCT

 

[MarkInOregon]

Continued from post 1…

1. “while this variation may differ from the rubric…which mentions only men…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 be served’, that all members of the Church must serve one another in love”

Question(s)

So from those who can respond in a spirit of love and civil discourse, I would like some feedback on whether this means it is approved for woman, in the United States, to be included in the foot washing on Holy Thursday and:

a. What is going on when Christ is washing the apostles feet? Is this part of or does it have anything to do with their odination as priest (which would be an argument against woman participating) or is it Christ only modeling to his apostles how they, as priests, should serve the faithful ( in which case the inclusion of women would seem to be o.k.–as our priest would then be modeling Christs behavior and message to us–the faithful)?,

b. It it is part of the ordination and so only men–how does that square with the statements in #1 above specifically “…the faithful…should be taught that it is only proper that they should abound in works of Christian charity on this day” which sounds inclusive?, and

c. What does “viri selecti” really mean as used in the 1955 restored Ordo? I’m know Latin expert. Is this a specific term as used here to really mean “men” only–or can it interpreted in a generic sense to mean people–as we often find men or him used, in English, to mean both men and women?

Now what I am not interested in seeing or want in response to my questions are responses stating this is some liberal or feminist plot or agenda–those statements are too simple and are destructive to dialog and show little critical thought. I want and need legitimate reasons–like the rubric states men and means men and no variation has been granted and that approval is required–and cites.

I need something that I can take to a liturgy committee and not grand conspiracy theories from those who believe women has no role in the Church or at Mass–as I think Christ clearly shows a role for women in serving–even if it is not in the role of an ordained minister.

I want our parishes Holy Thursday service to be correct, and I want our liturgy committee to be able to defend and explain what we do and why as that is the best way to promote unity.

Thank you in advance,
Mark

 

[otm]

MarkInOregon:

Continued from post 1…

1. “while this variation may differ from the rubric…which mentions only men…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 be served’, that all members of the Church must serve one another in love”

Question(s)

So from those who can respond in a spirit of love and civil discourse, I would like some feedback on whether this means it is approved for woman, in the United States, to be included in the foot washing on Holy Thursday and:

a. What is going on when Christ is washing the apostles feet? Is this part of or does it have anything to do with their odination as priest (which would be an argument against woman participating) or is it Christ only modeling to his apostles how they, as priests, should serve the faithful ( in which case the inclusion of women would seem to be o.k.–as our priest would then be modeling Christs behavior and message to us–the faithful)?,

b. It it is part of the ordination and so only men–how does that square with the statements in #1 above specifically “…the faithful…should be taught that it is only proper that they should abound in works of Christian charity on this day” which sounds inclusive?, and

c. What does “viri selecti” really mean as used in the 1955 restored Ordo? I’m know Latin expert. Is this a specific term as used here to really mean “men” only–or can it interpreted in a generic sense to mean people–as we often find men or him used, in English, to mean both men and women?

Now what I am not interested in seeing or want in response to my questions are responses stating this is some liberal or feminist plot or agenda–those statements are too simple and are destructive to dialog and show little critical thought. I want and need legitimate reasons–like the rubric states men and means men and no variation has been granted and that approval is required–and cites.

I need something that I can take to a liturgy committee and not grand conspiracy theories from those who believe women has no role in the Church or at Mass–as I think Christ clearly shows a role for women in serving–even if it is not in the role of an ordained minister.

I want our parishes Holy Thursday service to be correct, and I want our liturgy committee to be able to defend and explain what we do and why as that is the best way to promote unity.

Thank you in advance,
Mark

I suspect that it will make a difference whether you are east or west of the Cascades. Vlazny has his hands full with the lawsuits for prior sexual abuse and the bankruptcy (the notice just went out for any one else abused to file). Vasa has more time. I don’t recall if Vasa has made any statements on the issue. and I suspect that it is an issue that few of the bishops feel is in need of addressing. Attempting to consecrate rice cakes for a celiac would probably take precedence.

It would make sense, if the bishop was to wash anyone’s feet, that he have 12 priests there and wash their feet. Short of that, while it is symbolic of Christ washing the Apostles’ feet, it is also symbolic of servanthood; perhaps even more so to have the priest wash a woman’s feet as that seems so contra-culture. And if Christ was anything, he was contra-culture. Just some thoughts.