Washing of the Feet: Women "apostles"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Larry1700
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back in the late 80’s, I remember attending a parish that had everyone wash everyone else’s feet. You basically got into line, like for Communion, if you wanted to participate. The person in front of you would wash your feet. Then you would wash the feet of the person behind you.

In my current diocese, the same priest is shared by multiple parishes. So we don’t have Holy Thursday celebrated at each parish— he stays at the bigger one. But he’ll get one man, one woman, and one child (can’t remember if he gets two children? a boy and a girl?) from each parish, and he washes those people’s feet.

So there’s a lot of diversity in how it gets celebrated-- or even who’s doing the washing-- although I don’t know specifically about the rubrics behind it all. But the ultimate message behind it is that of service to others.

With a quick glance at the USCCB–
In the United States, the participation of both men and women for the washing of feet ritual has taken place in many communities for a number of years. In February 1987, Bishop Joseph P. Delaney, then-Chairman of the NCCB Committee on the Liturgy, authorized the Secretariat for the Liturgy to respond to the issue of wider participation, especially in the context of the Roman Missal 's original rubric calling for participation by men only ( viri selecti ).

In its response, the Secretariat wrote 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 to be served,’ that all members of the Church must serve one another in love. The liturgy is always an act of ecclesial unity and Christian charity, of which the Holy Thursday foot washing rite is an eminent sign. All should obey the Lord’s new commandment to love one another with an abundance of love , especially at this most sacred time of the liturgical year when the Lord’s passion, death, and resurrection are remembered and celebrated in the powerful rites of the Triduum.” This original response from 1987 has found new expression in the decision of Pope Francis and its implementation beginning in 2016.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, I don’t ascribe to heresy either. But I was just saying in the news he has met with Pope Francis and been given an audience in the Vatican before, strictly speaking from a news standpoint of course.
 
I definitely did not like being put on the spot and have been apprehensive about attending Holy Thursday Mass
since then. Which is sad, as I said before, it was a favorite of mine.
 
I understand your point in your first paragraph, and agree with it. I see both sides, and at the time I made my original post I already thought similar things as you and others have said. Like I said, my opinion about this is subject to change. My current opinion is perhaps 60% on the side of men-only foot washing, and 40% on the side of men-and-women foot washing.
pnewton said:
Most of the time, political correctness and moral correctness coincide. We should always judge the former by the latter.
Click to expand...
As for this statement, however, I strongly disagree.
 
Last edited:
Take note of what Jesus said about serving. No where did Jesus say to serve only the Apostles. He gave them an example to follow. Sure, Jesus washed the Apostles feet, they were the ones there, but He was teaching them to serve one another, as in His entire flock. It would be contrary to Christ’s teachings to not serve the least of thee. It would be like saying His command to love one another was only for the elite, and it wasn’t. We know better. EVERYONE needs their feet washed. Jesus even allowed Mary, sister of Martha to wash and anoint His feet. An act of love is what serving is, it it’s certainly not a symbol of status or reserved for the hierarchy. Simply put, washing of the feet is not administering a Sacrament, it’s just an act of love.
 
I mean, yeah, but if the solution is to allow lay men then allowing lay women is no different. It no longer becomes about the priesthood.
 
Lea101 said:
I mean, yeah, but if the solution is to allow lay men then allowing lay women is no different. It no longer becomes about the priesthood.
Click to expand...
Yes, to me it lost the “priesthood” connection when it stopped - many, many years ago, when I was a tiny child probably - being just priests and deacons and seminarians and male altar servers up there and they started inviting all kinds of married lectors, custodians, Parish Council members, and Knights of Columbus to be part of it. None of those people were priests or deacons or on the path to be one. Furthermore if I remember right, the missalette description when I was a child stated that 12 men should be chosen from those who perform some service to the Church. It didn’t say get 12 priests, deacons, or people on the path to same.

I would imagine if you needed 12 priests, deacons or aspirants at every parish for this Mass, we simply wouldn’t be able to do the footwashing at most places because many churches wouldn’t have enough.

Once you allow the male lector or the male Parish Council member to participate, it doesn’t make sense to exclude the woman who is doing the same function.
 
Last edited:
I assume you disagree with the part that I think the two usually coincide, not that political correctness is primary over morality. It might make an interesting discussion, depending on definition of terms, that is, what exactly political correctness is.
 
Yes, I should have clarified, or not included the second sentence.

I agree that we should always judge politically correct speech and actions by the morality taught by Christ and His Church.

I disagree that political correctness and morality are usually the same thing or attempting to achieve the same goal.
 
I agree 100% with your comment. Jesus’ point was that we we should be servants to others. And though not explicitly stated in that story, I’m sure that He calls us to serve everyone, not just males. Therefore, I’m not 100% adamant about the male-only feet-washing.

As I stated elsewhere, I’m perhaps 60% on the side of male-only, simply because I primarily view it as a re-enactment of Jesus washing the (all-male) apostles’ feet.

Back to the analogy I used previously, I still enjoy watching the Cowboys, even though the “team” idea has been kind of diluted.
 
I use to be more focused on the re- enactment aspect of the feet washing. But this year I think I’m more focused on the message. Serving knows no gender. I’m far from a liberal Catholic, will never budge on priesthood or deacons. But feet washing, that’s just a message, and who among us would dare to think that our Blessed Mother did not deserve to have her feet washed. No, she had no sin, but just out of respect and love, just as Mary washed Christ’s feet.
 
I was told in school that Judas didn’t allow Jesus to wash his feet. I know Peter initial didn’t want his feet wash but relented, but my fifth grade teacher (a sister) told us that Judas didn’t allow his feet washed even after hearing why. She told us that it was his lack of humility that allowed the devil to lead him to betray Jesus. Was this incorrect?
 
Lea101 said:
In that case, shouldn’t it just be men who are about to become priests, rather than lay men?

Before they started washing the feet of women, random men were chosen. Or at least it was the case here.
Click to expand...
No, because the fact that it is to be 12 men indicates that they are to be symbolic of the 12 apostles. If there is no connection to the apostles and the priesthood and it is all just about service, then there is no reason to have 12 people; any number will do.

I don’t see the need to have it be seminarians; they aren’t being ordained on Holy Thursday evening anyway. Washing the feet of 12 men was always sufficient to impart the symbolism.
 
Last edited:
A lot of parishes don’t have a set number of 12. I attended a parish that had everyone in attendance that wanted to come up to wash their feet
 
Exactly. When done that way, it definitely erases or dilutes the connection to the institution of the priesthood on Holy Thursday, which I do think is a loss.
 
Last edited:
While it’s not a hill I’m going to die on, I think it’s unfortunate that a key part of this rite was changed and the symbolism eroded for reasons that strongly appear to be motivated by political correctness and a wish to appear more “inclusive.”
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
EnglishTeacher said:
No, because the fact that it is to be 12 men indicates that they are to be symbolic of the 12 apostles. If there is no connection to the apostles and the priesthood and it is all just about service, then there is no reason to have 12 people; any number will do.

I don’t see the need to have it be seminarians; they aren’t being ordained on Holy Thursday evening anyway. Washing the feet of 12 men was always sufficient to impart the symbolism.
Click to expand...
Well, why would it be about the priesthood if there are lay men? These lay men have the same role as lay women in their church. They aren’t ordained so we can’t throw in the arguments for male priests.

If the argument is just symbolism in its plainest form (I.e. Any 12 men to play the part), I honestly don’t think it’s a strong one. Since these guys would technically be nowhere near becoming a priest (or could even be one).
EnglishTeacher said:
strongly appear to be motivated by political correctness and a wish to appear more “inclusive.
Click to expand...
We can say this for virtually every effort our church has done to include women. I know being inclusive has negative connotations because of our culture today, but not every attempt of reaching out to women is bad.
 
To my knowledge there is no scriptural basis for saying Jesus didn’t wash Judas’ feet. In fact, St. John Chrysostom, a Doctor of the Church, has written specifically about Jesus washing Judas’ feet. See notes on John 13:2 at the below reference.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240170.htm

I think the Sister just sort of went off down her own track when she was teaching you kids. Speaking as one who had 12 years of Catholic school with a number of current and former Sisters as teachers, it sure wouldn’t be the first time.
 
When it comes to laypeople washing feet, you are supposed to be a king or lord, washing the feet of twelve elderly beggars, and giving them new shoes and socks and a bag of gold. (Or a queen washing the feet of twelve beggarwomen.) New shirts and other clothing, or a feast on Holy Thursday for all the poor, with table service provided by rich merchants and high government officials, are also traditional.

If you want to wash my feet, I want my new wardrobe and my bag of gold.

(Washing of the feet by people’s employers, by abbots of their novice monks, or by lady abbesses of their novice nuns, are also acceptable.)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top