Washing Female's Feet on Holy Thursday?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nota_Bene
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Kielbasi:
And I’d say they have credibility in their stance as just about every single member of the USCCB was appointed by the current pope.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter who appointed the USCCB. Changes in liturgical matters that are not specifically granted to the national synods or the local Ordinary require Vatican approval.

This rubric was not delegated, so changes to it must be approved by Rome first.

Such a practice has not had universal usage for 30 years, so it does not have the force of particular law (unlike some other potential cases).

Archbishop O’Malley has submitted a dubium to the Vatican on this issue and is waiting a reply.

Untill then, the rubric remains in force.
 
Deacon Tony560:
I like the statement about there being women disciples.
Click to expand...
40.png
msproule:
…but not 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...
 
posted by Nota Bene
IF said women knew what the Sacramentary actually said, she would be gravely wrong if she were to volunteer to have her feet washed…
Click to expand...
Yes, IF…

If I hadn’t stumbled onto this thread, I would not have known. As a revert/convert, I also tend to seek more than many others I know. I doubt more than 2 women in my church know it would be gravely wrong to volunteer for the feet washing. And I count myself as one of the 2.

So once again, place the blame where it belongs, on the priest not the women who innocently volunteer.

And while it would be wrong for a woman to volunteer if she knew, the blame still rests squarely on the priest. He should politely decline and state the reasons why. Sin on the woman’s behalf if she knows, but the Blame should be 100% on the priest for not following through with his leadership role and allowing it to happen. JMHO.

Your sister in Christ,
Maria
 
40.png
littlepaddle:
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...
Just the substitution of one nasty liturgical abuse for another. Nothing was “solved” with this action.

In fact, it brings to mind the washing of Pontius Pilate’s hands…
Great symbolism…not.
Click to expand...
 
Once again I must agree with Nota Bene. Pontius Pilate washed his hands to demonstrate his lack of culpability.
If I recall, Jesus washed the feet of His apostles as a sign of His servitude. The symbolism there had nothing to do with guilt. So to substitute one for the other makes absolutely no sense at all.
 
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...
Jesus only washed the feet of the twelve apostles. That is what this represents. They must all be men because the apostles were all men. It is a rememberance of a historical event.
 
Nota Bene:
Just the substitution of one nasty liturgical abuse for another. Nothing was “solved” with this action.

In fact, it brings to mind the washing of Pontius Pilate’s hands…
Great symbolism…not.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%. It makes no sense to wash the hands.
 
Maria G,

Im back.
Ok, I do see what you are saying about the blame on the Priest. If someone doesnt know than they are not at fault, i.e. you. At the same time a Priest might not know that women shouldnt be up there and his guilt would be diminished. I pretty much said what I said based on what I have seen. I, as well as many others see some women as forcing their way into where they are not intended to be. If I may speak for some priests, they are afraid of feminists destroying their good name and disrupting Church life so they say nothing. Maybe its just where I live, but when there are overwhelmingly more women “volunteering” for EM, Ashes, Feet, Altar, etc this bothers me. It is a slippery slope.
Go and read Karls E-letter today, this slope has been going on since the 60’s.

Im not a woman hater or anything like that, so to all those who are reaching for the tar and feathers dont bother.
 
I’ve never seen the Latin version of the story, so I can’t account for what that says, but I just looked at my bible (to make sure I wasn’t mistaken) and it says “After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe *them *with the towel where with he was girded.” I see disciples there, not Apostles. But like I said, I can’t account for the Latin (or Greek for that manner) version. So that may say something differant due to translation.
 
40.png
Arwen037:
I’ve never seen the Latin version of the story, so I can’t account for what that says, but I just looked at my bible (to make sure I wasn’t mistaken) and it says “After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe *them *with the towel where with he was girded.” I see disciples there, not Apostles. But like I said, I can’t account for the Latin (or Greek for that manner) version. So that may say something differant due to translation.
Click to expand...
Interesting point. In the Latin, the word is disciplorum (not apostolorum cf. Mt 10:2). In my Textus Receptus Greek NT, the word is mathetes (not apostolos). What’s more, John only uses *apostolus/apostolos *(Latin/Greek) one time in his entire Gospel, and that’s further down in the same chapter… 13:16.

That said, if Sacred Tradition holds that it was only the 12 Apostles whose feet were washed, that’s good enough for me.
 
posted by Catholic Dude
Click to expand...
Maria G,
Click to expand...
Im back.
Ok, I do see what you are saying about the blame on the Priest. If someone doesnt know than they are not at fault, i.e. you. At the same time a Priest might not know that women shouldnt be up there and his guilt would be diminished. I pretty much said what I said based on what I have seen. I, as well as many others see some women as forcing their way into where they are not intended to be. If I may speak for some priests, they are afraid of feminists destroying their good name and disrupting Church life so they say nothing. Maybe its just where I live, but when there are overwhelmingly more women “volunteering” for EM, Ashes, Feet, Altar, etc this bothers me. It is a slippery slope.
Go and read Karls E-letter today, this slope has been going on since the 60’s.
Click to expand...
Im not a woman hater or anything like that, so to all those who are reaching for the tar and feathers dont bother.
Click to expand...
It is too bad that some priests are afraid to speak up. I pray that God will not judge them too harshly.

And if it means anything to you, I never thought you were a woman hater, just a little too free at passing out blame!

Your sister in Christ,
Maria
 
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...
Yes, it is an illicit celebration of the liturgy. The rubrics call for men to be chosen.
 
I recommend the following article…

PATHS TO ROME: WASHING OF FEET ON HOLY THURSDAY
by Fr. Jerry Pokorsky
adoremus.org/97-03_pokorsky.htm

Then I recommend you write to your pastor and bishop explaining that it is your hope that they follow the rubrics.

“This is not Fr. Brad’s liturgy! It is the liturgy of the Catholic Church.”
– Fr. Brad, Pastor, St. Patrick’s Catholic Church, Colorado Springs, CO
 
Very interesting post … especially since our priest made a point to mention this topic in his recent weekend homily. As part of the “Year of the Eucharist” he clarified for us the reverence we owe to Christ in His Real Presence (genuflecting before the tabernacle, quiet before and after Mass respecting both Christ and those who wish to worship Him …). Father ended his homily by recalling what he had said at one of his first homilies to us–he promised to abide by The Catechism of the Catholic Church and the GIRM. He also admitted that in washing the feet of women (and men) on Holy Thurs, he had not been true to that promise–and some parishioners had reminded him of that.

After prayer and consideration, he said he would forego the practice until and unless there was an official pronouncement on whether women should be included. That includes dropping the washing altogether this year if a pronouncement doesn’t come out beforehand.

BTW, a few years ago, I accepted the invitation to have my feet washed. Afterwards I was told (and confirmed through research) that it was inappropriate. Then I discovered that in our diocese (yes, it’s liberal), this practice is not only “allowed”, it’s encouraged. Confused? You bet.

Thank God, our priest is willing to pray and obey!:yup:
 
40.png
JFlats:
Very interesting post … especially since our priest made a point to mention this topic in his recent weekend homily. As part of the “Year of the Eucharist” he clarified for us the reverence we owe to Christ in His Real Presence (genuflecting before the tabernacle, quiet before and after Mass respecting both Christ and those who wish to worship Him …). Father ended his homily by recalling what he had said at one of his first homilies to us–he promised to abide by The Catechism of the Catholic Church and the GIRM. He also admitted that in washing the feet of women (and men) on Holy Thurs, he had not been true to that promise–and some parishioners had reminded him of that.

After prayer and consideration, he said he would forego the practice until and unless there was an official pronouncement on whether women should be included. That includes dropping the washing altogether this year if a pronouncement doesn’t come out beforehand.

BTW, a few years ago, I accepted the invitation to have my feet washed. Afterwards I was told (and confirmed through research) that it was inappropriate. Then I discovered that in our diocese (yes, it’s liberal), this practice is not only “allowed”, it’s encouraged. Confused? You bet.

Thank God, our priest is willing to pray and obey!:yup:
Click to expand...
Your priest sounds like a real mensch. Thanks be to God.
 
I quote a portion of the USCCB reply that Nota Bene presented.
Thus, in the United States, a variation in the rite developed in which not only charity is signified but also humble service.
*]While this variation may differ from the rubric of the Sacramentary which mentions only men (“viri selecti”),…
Click to expand...
I prefer to stick with the rubrics and avoid “variations”.
 
I quote a portion of the USCCB reply that Nota Bene presented.
Click to expand...
Quote:
Thus, in the United States, a variation in the rite developed in which not only charity is signified but also humble service.*]While this variation may differ from the rubric of the Sacramentary which mentions only men (“viri selecti”),…
Click to expand...
I prefer to stick with the rubrics and avoid “variations”.
Click to expand...
The whole document is very interesting reading. I mentioned this a while ago in a differnt thread but the wording of this letter is most unusual. It never says that this “variation” has been approved either by the Vatican or by the USCCB. It is more of a theological and pastoral explanation of how this practice might have developed. It reads almost like a background piece rather than an instructional document. Hmmmm.
 
40.png
kmktexas:
The whole document is very interesting reading. I mentioned this a while ago in a differnt thread but the wording of this letter is most unusual. It never says that this “variation” has been approved either by the Vatican or by the USCCB. It is more of a theological and pastoral explanation of how this practice might have developed. It reads almost like a background piece rather than an instructional document. Hmmmm.
Click to expand...
The bishop that released this must be one gutless individual…
 
I’m bumping this thread to page one.

As a poster’s parish has laity washing laity’s feet on Holy Thursday.

The rubrics are clear that the washer is the priest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top