Washing hands instead of feet on Holy Thursday? (was: Washington of ha da instradare of fertile...)
  • In my community the Triduum is celebrated in the Chapel of our retired members. Foot washing on Holy Thursday is a problem. Is there any concession for washing the hands instead of the feet?
  • No, but the foot washing is optional, so just leave it out. It wasn't added to the Mass until 1955 anyway, so you'd be in continuity with centuries of tradition.
    Thanked by 2CCooze rschi123
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,901
    And, lest we forget, the washing of the hands has a very different connotation in the context of the Triduum from the washing of the feet. It would be better to wash footwear (on the foot) if the licit option of omitting the rite is not something anyone would consider in that community.

    PS: If a moderator can correct the caption of this thread, it might be helpful. (I suspect it should be "Washing hands instead of feet on Holy Thursday?")
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,445
    PS: If a moderator can correct the caption of this thread, it might be helpful. (I suspect it should be "Washing hands instead of feet on Holy Thursday?")


    I like it the way it is.
  • I recommend omitting the rite.

    I second the recommendation that the title be fixed. I had absolutely no idea what I was going to see when I clicked on it -- but somehow I clicked on it anyway.

    And finally, as a matter of historical interest, in England the custom of having royalty wash the feet of selected men existed in the Tudor period. I'm still trying to figure out if it was conducted with the aid of the Church, inside the Church, outside the Church building or something else.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • I oppose fixing the title. I would not have clicked on it if not for the interesting title.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,131
    I compromised.
    Thanked by 1Liam
  • To me the title is nonsense.
    Does it mean something?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,131
    No; it appears to have been garbled typing or imperfect speech recognition.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • Drat!
    I thought it might have been a clever bon mot.
    Thanked by 1JL
  • in England the custom of having royalty wash the feet of selected men existed in the Tudor period. I'm still trying to figure out if it was conducted with the aid of the Church, inside the Church, outside the Church building or something else.


    It was part of the Royal Maundy Service, which happens to this day but without the washing. There is some information on the service here, on the Monarchy's website. Wikipedia also has quite a lot to say on the subject.
  • Looks like Italian autocorrect.
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • Footwashing before 1955 was a separate service in cathedrals, monasteries and at royal courts (the Catholic Encyclopedia mentions specifically the Courts of Spain and Austria; the latter had washing of the feet of men by the Emperor and the washing of the feet of women by the Empress).
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    Handwashing?
    Oh, yes, please let us do that!

    And make sure the washers know they can wander down the aisles
    hunting for the person they want, and coax them repeatedly
    to a distant washing station.

    But invite anyone to stay for Adoration until midnight?
    Are you serious??!!
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CharlesW
  • Of course, EFT, one could simply wash one's hands of the problem, right? The rite is optional, after all.
    Thanked by 2CCooze tomjaw
  • Just a reminder of this absolute legend of a thread.

    Washington of ha da instradare of fertile in Holy Thursday?"

    Happy Sunday!
  • “Washington of ha da instradare of fertile in Holy Thursday?"

    Artificial intelligence: Just like the real thing, only not.
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • Simon Peter saith to him: Lord, not only my feet, but also my hands and my head

    we are not told that our Lord then proceeded to wash Peter's hands.
    I agree with previous. It's optional; either perform the rite as laid down by the Church, or leave it out.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,927
    My pastor decided that it had become so politicized it would be better to leave it out. It is optional.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,697
    The thing is: the rite is the rite.

    That rite consists of washing men’s feet “in persona apostles”.

    If people don’t want to do the rite as it is, it is better not to maim it and turn it into something it isn’t. To make ahistorical adaptations (deformations) to the rite seems grossly inappropriate, IMHO.

    Let us do it as it has been received. Not another way to suit our own whims or agendas.
  • GerardH
    Posts: 404
    That rite consists of washing men’s feet “in persona apostles”.


    I disagree somewhat with this statement. The recent change in rubrics indicates that the feet of anyone may be washed, not just men. The Mandatum wouldn't have been performed in mediaeval convents if this was about a re-presentation of the foot-washing performed by Christ. Rather, this is taking up the command noted in what used to be the Communio for this Mass (and has now been moved to second antiphon during the Mandatum):

    "The Lord Jesus, after eating supper with his disciples,
    washed their feet and said to them:
    Do you know what I, your Lord and Master, have done for you?
    I have given you an example, that you should do likewise.


    Thanked by 2a_f_hawkins Liam
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,697
    The recent change in rubrics indicates that the feet of anyone may be washed, not just men.
    The rubrics used to specifically refer to “viri” (men). The recent change is an innovation and not how the rite was received after a millennia of clear tradition.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,901
    Well, fwiw, the innovation was including it within the Mass of the Lord's Supper (first time in 1956). It was its own ritual long before that, and used in many different contexts that were not limited to clerics washing men's feet. Tweaking the innovation not very long after its introduction is not messing with a millennia of clear liturgical tradition.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,697
    fair enough.
  • GerardH
    Posts: 404
    It was its own ritual long before that, and used in many different contexts that were not limited to clerics washing men's feet.

    This exactly.

    However, I think we can all agree it never included hands (or Washington of ha da).