Washing Female's Feet on Holy Thursday?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nota_Bene
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Catholic Dude:
NB,
Sorry if I said something incorrect. I dont really understand what you were getting at at that last post. I read your opening statements and that AskAnAp link and it seems as if it is discouraged in the Last Supper account as well as in the rubrics. I honestly dont see where you got hung up on what I said.
Click to expand...
Excellent. I hope I was not too strident in my reply. Pax Christi.
 
Nota Bene:
My parish announced that it would wash women’s as well as men’s feet at the Holy Thursday Mass. That seemed like a liturgical abuse to me so I consulted the current Sacramentary and here is what it says:

"Depending on pastoral circumstances, the washing of feet follows the homily.

The men who have been chosen are led by the ministers to chairs prepared in a suitable place. Then the priest (removing his chasuble if necessary) goes to each man. With the help of the ministers, he pours water over each one’s feet and dries them."

Seems as though it would be a hardcore liturgical abuse to wash women’s feet as part of the Mass on Holy Thursday. Is this just another example of PCism/sexist/feminism pressures being placed ahead of what the Church* actually* instructs?

So what gives? Are parishes that wash the feet of women during the Mass committing a liturgical abuse? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Rome had also responded to that same question several years ago and said that the Latin states that only males, representing the twelve Apostles, are to have their feet washed.
 
As a woman I wouldn’t feel comfortable having my feet washed by the priest just from a position of modesty. The parish I belonged to before I moved used to wash women’s feet and I just felt uncomfortable watching it. I don’t know if my new parish does it because this will be my first Holy Thursday at this parish. I hope they don’t though.
 
40.png
Scarlet:
As a woman I wouldn’t feel comfortable having my feet washed by the priest just from a position of modesty. The parish I belonged to before I moved used to wash women’s feet and I just felt uncomfortable watching it. I don’t know if my new parish does it because this will be my first Holy Thursday at this parish. I hope they don’t though.
Click to expand...
I would hope that no one would feel comfortable having their foot washed under those circumstances. It’s a deeply, almost harshly humbling experience – for both the bishop/priest and the foot-owner…
 
Nota Bene:
I would hope that no one would feel comfortable having their foot washed under those circumstances. It’s a deeply, almost harshly humbling experience – for both the bishop/priest and the foot-owner…
Click to expand...
Yes, of course you are right. But there is a distinct comfort/discomfort level that a man might feel verses what a woman might feel. At least I believe there is coming from my perspective.

In Christ,
Scarlet
 
As far as liturgical abuse or anything, isn’t is the washing the disciples’ feet? I thought Jesus had women disciples too. I mean if the scripture listed everyone who had their feet washed by Jesus then I can understand where it might not be right. And I thought Jesus taught and treated women as equals to men. As for the modesty standpoint, maybe not the best idea. That’s just kinda what I think.
 
Br. Rich SFO:
Rome had also responded to that same question several years ago and said that the Latin states that only males, representing the twelve Apostles, are to have their feet washed.
Click to expand...
Yes. Chosen Men is what the Latin text refers to.

The USCCB refer to widespread abuse and disobedience as ‘custom’. Which means nothing. We are supposed to follow the text and the Tradition of the Church and not that of Amchurch heretics.

I’m just about done with all the disobedience. If they don’t want to drive the faithful to the SSPX or East…they better return to Rome.
 
posted by Catholic Dude
I hear you loud and clear. I was scared when I saw this where I go last year. I didnt know what to think. Its like a few people a forcing non traditional images/practices down our throats. Its not fair to the people who just want to take time out of their day for such a special mass. I blame the priests who dont do something as well as the women who volunteer themselves. This is wrong.
Click to expand...
A call goes out for men and women to volunteer for a special ceremony. A woman answers the call of her parish. And she is to blame? Are you telling me I have to go a do a search to see if my pastor is following everything the way he’s supposed to do? Not everyone has the time, inclination or suspicion of abuse. And yet you blame the women who volunteer trying to do an act of service?

Put the blame where it belongs. On the priest.

Respectfully,
a sometimes ignorant but willing to be taught follower,
Maria
 
Nota Bene:
That is a very practical point indeed. On top of that, foot fetishes are by no means super-rare, and I’m sure some priests are afflicted with this condition…
Click to expand...
I agree that it should be men but this is a terrible reason. I am sure that there are some priests that are turned on by men’s feet. This is not a reason to get ride of the washing of feet entirely.
 
40.png
Arwen037:
I thought Jesus had women disciples too.
…but not
Click to expand...
women apostles. While the apostles are certainly disciples, are the apostles not to whom the scriptures specifically refer in the context of the Last Supper?
Click to expand...
 
Nota Bene:
You’re wrong. The USCCB does not have the authority to change the Missal without formal approval from the Vatican.

I’m just curious if this is considered a “liturgical abuse” or not?
Click to expand...
I thought it was traditional to say “men” in grammar when mankind is meant. II thought this understanding was why so many people say there is no need to use inclusive language when referring to groups groups, because we all know that every one is inferred as God’s people. Yeah, the grammar use is an arhcaic practice, but so are most things in the Church. I don’t think it is liturgical abuse.
 
40.png
Arwen037:
As far as liturgical abuse or anything, isn’t is the washing the disciples’ feet? I thought Jesus had women disciples too. I mean if the scripture listed everyone who had their feet washed by Jesus then I can understand where it might not be right. And I thought Jesus taught and treated women as equals to men. As for the modesty standpoint, maybe not the best idea. That’s just kinda what I think.
Click to expand...
Follow the Church. More specifically, follow the Sacramentary.
 
40.png
MariaG:
A call goes out for men and women to volunteer for a special ceremony. A woman answers the call of her parish. And she is to blame? Are you telling me I have to go a do a search to see if my pastor is following everything the way he’s supposed to do? Not everyone has the time, inclination or suspicion of abuse. And yet you blame the women who volunteer trying to do an act of service?

Put the blame where it belongs. On the priest.

Respectfully,
a sometimes ignorant but willing to be taught follower,
Maria
Click to expand...
IF said women knew what the Sacramentary actually said, she would be gravely wrong if she were to volunteer to have her feet washed…
 
40.png
serendipity:
I thought it was traditional to say “men” in grammar when mankind is meant. II thought this understanding was why so many people say there is no need to use inclusive language when referring to groups groups, because we all know that every one is inferred as God’s people. Yeah, the grammar use is an arhcaic practice, but so are most things in the Church. I don’t think it is liturgical abuse.
Click to expand...
No.

This is not a passage from Sacred Scripture. It’s a rubric from the Sacramentary.

Want to dig a bit deeper? It was the 12 Apostles who had their feet washed by Jesus Christ. All 12 were male…
 
40.png
serendipity:
I thought it was traditional to say “men” in grammar when mankind is meant. II thought this understanding was why so many people say there is no need to use inclusive language when referring to groups groups, because we all know that every one is inferred as God’s people. Yeah, the grammar use is an arhcaic practice, but so are most things in the Church. I don’t think it is liturgical abuse.
Click to expand...
You’d be correct if the latin word was ‘homo’ but it is the term that means chosen men (refering to male’s). There is no confusion. Its an abuse and an act of disobedience by the priests and bishops of Amchurch.

Elsewhere in the mass and liturgical rubrics where man (‘homo’) is used it can refer to all men (homo-sapiens to biologists and homo-economicas to economists).
 
Nota Bene:
My parish announced that it would wash women’s as well as men’s feet at the Holy Thursday Mass. That seemed like a liturgical abuse to me so I consulted the current Sacramentary and here is what it says:
All the hoopla about washing women’s feet (tongue in cheek)😉 .
My old parish solved that problem years ago.
So as not to offend anyone, they substituted the washing of the feet with the washing of the hands. Everyone in church would go to the front of the church and dip their hands in a glass bowl of water and then dry them. I think it was suppossed to symbolize 1) the sense of community and 2) that we are all guilty of Jesus’ death.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Kielbasi:
I don’t think that the answer you received was slithering and wimpy at all.

It was traditionally long winded as you’ll often hear in responses but the question was answered pretty directly, even if you personally disagree with their answer.

In other words,** foot washing of women is just fine on Holy Thursday**.
Click to expand...
Your personal opinions matter to no one but yourself.
Where’s your proof from the Church?
 
We have done it both ways in our parish. More recently it has been all men. One time the youth group was chosen as in Confirmation they are called to action and to be soldiers for Christ. That year there were boys and girls. I like the statement about there being women disciples. The first disciple was a women. Mary our Mother.

Have a holy Lent,
Deacon Tony
 
40.png
katherine2:
hardcore liturgical abuse? hardly.

many, rather conservative types, have no trouble insisting that the word “man” elsewhere in the liturgy means males and females.

Of course, this whole issue is avoided with the hardcore traditionalists who reject the modern liturgical innovations and have no foot fashing at all.
Click to expand...
Katherine,

The latin term ‘homo’ does in fact, refer to all humanity. Therefore ‘conservatives’ would be correct to insist such if the latin (which is the definitive language) uses the word ‘homo’

The latin term ‘viri’ can only refer to males. And since the latin is definitive, only males may be invited.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top