• On Footwashing

    foot

    During tonight’s Maundy Thursday service at St Mary’s we don’t have a sermon. Well, not a spoken one anyway. In the middle of the service we set up some chairs and get out some bowls and wash feet. It isn’t so much that we don’t have a sermon is it more that the washing of feet is the sermon.

    It is something that puts some people off though it is only every an opt in thing. No-one coming tonight has to have their feet washed.

    It seems to me to be important to do it though and it is worth thinking about what’s going on.

    Most people who write about footwashing seem to make a big deal about it being about a reversal of power roles. There’s always news about whose feet that bigwig clergy are going to wash. The first time Pope Francis washed feet as pope, he included female feet in and that, rather bizarrely became the story.

    This year, there’s been a ruling from someone in the Vatican that washing women’s feet is not in fact a requirement. This seems to me to be making the story even more bizarre. Does anyone really believe that senior clerics are going to be led into temptation by the turn of a woman’s ankle? And in any case, is the implication of all this that no male cleric was ever attracted by a male foot?

    Notwithstanding that though, there is no doubt something about footwashing that is very intimate. To let someone wash your feet is a very close physical act.

    I find that when I do it, it is more about the intimacy and relationship between the washer and the washee as it is about any reversal of power roles.

    It is worth bearing in mind that the last supper only includes bread and wine in three of the four gospels. John’s gospel records footwashing rather than breadsharing.

    I always think at this time of the year about the kind of church that might have resulted if things were reversed and we shared bread and wine once a year and washed feet on the other days.

    The controversies of the church might look altogether different…

    Where is the best place to get towels of the correct liturgical colour sequence?
    Can a gay person wash the feet of a straight person?
    Are children holy enough to have clean feet?

    The invitation at St Mary’s is very much St Mary’s. Anyone is welcome to bring their feet for washing. Just as anyone is welcome to receive the bread and wine at the table.

    Oh, and by the way, the foot in the picture is a Muslim foot. Don’t forget that washing feet is a ritual that unites religious people across surprising boundaries.

5 responses to “The Primus’s Radio Interview about the Columba Declaration”

  1. Benj Avatar
    Benj

    I’m not sure Chillingworth gave a clear answer to Beattie’s question of what is wrong with the declaration beyond its discourtesy and rudeness. What does he mean when he says it is putting at risk the leadership of Christian faith communities at a critical moment in the ‘story of Scotland’?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      I can’t speak for Bishop David but my view is that this debacle (the discourtesy and rudeness and the rest) has had a serious knock on effect on the ecumenical life of Scotland. To put it bluntly, trusts and friendships that have been built up over years have been very sorely tested. I think that this risks poisoning ecumenical life in Scotland for a generation and I’d say that does seriously compromise the way in which church communities and leaders will be able to speak to Scotland.

  2. Richard Avatar
    Richard

    It also speaks volumes for the contempt with which the Church of Englandshire holds for the Scottish Episcopal Church.

    You struggle to see the shining truth through his words because his words lack honesty and integrity. Not that anyone in Englandshire really cares- most probably haven’t even heard of the Scottish Episcopal Church and if they have, it will be as an unknown backwater entity. To sweep aside the Scottish Episcopal Church must have taken breathtaking arrogance.

  3. Iain McLarty Avatar
    Iain McLarty

    I can totally understand the SEC concern about the CofE barging into territory that isn’t theirs. However, there are perhaps a few things to bear in mind about why a relationship between the CofS and CofE is important where that isn’t really relevant.

    The first is that the CofS has a presence in England. Having spent a few years in a CofE congregation in Denmark I witnessed first hand how important the Porvoo agreement was in that context for enabling local worship and mission and similarly it could be hugely beneficial for the CofS congregations in England to be able to develop more formal relationships with their local Anglican partners.

    Secondly, there are a number of areas where the CofS and CofE are already working together and developing closer relationship such as on training and fresh expressions. These are areas where the relationships have developed naturally due to the two churches dealing with similar areas of concern and where there should again be no encroaching on SEC ground.

    Thirdly, the CofS and CofE work closely together in ecumenical circles through both CTBI and the WCC where both are significant players. It does seem strange that these two churches don’t recognise each other when their place in the wider ecumenical scene is so closely linked. That is not to deny the SEC’s ecumenical importance.

    Obviously no one is denying that the way this became public has been badly handled but I struggle to see what more can be down than the very sincere apologies and frank criticisms of what happened which have been offered. In terms of what real issues there are, I have yet to see anyone pin down specific parts of the Columba agreement which are concerning to the SEC, with all the comments either much more vague or else being fears about issues (such as interchangeability of ministry) which are not actually part of the agreement. In my experience (through ACTS, WCC etc.) the relationship between the CofS and SEC is one of the strongest ecumenical relationships and it would be very sad if this was jeopardised because of miscommunication rather than substance.

  4. Jeremy Bates Avatar
    Jeremy Bates

    It’s not just Scotland. A lot of people are struggling to see truth in the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury these days.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Tales of the City #7

    The scene is the till in John Lewis Department Store, Glasgow. Household Department. Mr Johnny Loulou: Good morning, Sir. How can I help you today? Self:  Ah. Well, I wonder if it would be possible to give me a refund on something. Mr Loulou: Yes sir, what is it that you are returning? Self:  Well,…

  • What the Queen Said at Lambeth

    HM the Q was at Lambeth Palace visiting the AB of C the other day and had quite a lot to say about the church. I must admit that I found some of it quite surprising and not perhaps terribly well advised. Here at Lambeth Palace we should remind ourselves of the significant position of…

  • Rainbow wings

    I do like the fact that we have an angel with rainbow wings perched above the High Altar in St Mary’s. Just saying.

  • Have you no scriptural basis though?

    And so Mark comes back to me after the last two blog posts with another question. As there has been quite a lot of interest in the answers I’ve already given, I think I might as well carry on responding to his one-line versions of the big questions of faith. Most recently he has asked:…