Washing Feet at Wedding

I didn't like the promise ring being returned at the wedding. None of my business. If they were to return it to her parents, I think it should be done in private. Really, it only led to a lot of discussions at the reception about their wedding night and honeymoon. That was inappropriate, IMO, and could have been avoided if they kept this tidbit between close family.

Why? It's something for them to be proud of. And wedding nights are ALWAYS talked about at receptions, regardless of the status of the couple involved.

I'm thinking those involved felt it was very appropriate. Their wedding, their decision. I've seen a lot more inappropriate things at weddings and receptions.
 
Why? It's something for them to be proud of. And wedding nights are ALWAYS talked about at receptions, regardless of the status of the couple involved.

I'm thinking those involved felt it was very appropriate. Their wedding, their decision. I've seen a lot more inappropriate things at weddings and receptions.

I agree. Weddings are all about symbolism and the foot washing and promise rings are obviously very important symbols to them. Saving your first kiss for your wedding day is unusual, but sweet. Some people can't believe you would marry someone without seeing if you are sexually compatible, but some people save that for their wedding nights, too.

Conservative, yes. Primitive, no.
 
It was in an Episcopal church, but definitely not an Episcopal ceremony. I'm not sure what religion they practice other than they are "Christian". They are both missionaries who spend a lot of time in Israel. From my understanding, they are praying for the fall of Israel because somewhere in Revelation it says that when Israel falls a second time, we will all be raised to Heaven. Yet, in the meantime, they are helping the children there. To me, it's counterintuitive, but I'm not here to judge.

What do I know? I'm Catholic.... we don't actively read the Bible. :rolleyes1

Defiantly NOT an Episcopal tradition. I am Catholic but my best friend growing up was Episcopalian, her dad was the Minister and I spent quite a bit of time at their church. It isn't all that different from the Catholic church (it is actually an off shoot of the Catholic Church). My GUESS is the feet washing thing has more to do with their call to missionary work. I have had this ritual performed in some religious retreats I have been on and it is a symbol of the work you do for others in that context. Actually, feet washing is part of the Holy Thursday Mass in the Catholic Church too.
 

I guess she wasn't wearing panty hose? :lmao:

Seriously, I've never heard of it, but we are not christian. I do agree that "subservience" has a bad connotation.
 
I'm in the "that sounds romantic" camp. Waiting for marriage still exists- wasn't it expected just a few decades ago? Foot washing is pretty common from where I'm from. But then again, we have the most churches per capita in the US :rotfl2:

First kiss at the altar? Again, I've heard of it, but not my thing. I've learned so much about what I want/need/cannot stand from the different guys I've been with. At the same time, I only kiss that I'm serious about, so my number is relatively low.

I'm sure they had a very.. interesting.. honeymoon!
 
Reminds me of an episode of "True Life" when a young couple got married and revealed that they had waited until their wedding to share their first kiss. I think it was more of a "we don't want to get carried away so let's just not do it" type of thing though.

Anyway, that's all I've ever heard of before and even that is rare. The meaning behind the foot washing sounds sweet... I just wouldn't do it myself.
 
That is totally bizarre! Both the frist kiss AND the feet washing---I HATE feet so that would gross me out LOL...



That is NOT an Episcopal thing--I am not episcopal now but went to that church when I was little and my mom still goes for the past 60 years and she has never even heard of such a thing!

Born,baptised, raised, confirmed, married Episcopalian. I can tell you that the church I know would allow this foot washing as part of a ceremony as it is not pagan or anti-religious in any way. The return of the ring and a 'first kiss' as representitive would be ok too. We DO all represent the 'first' kiss in our wedding ceremonies. "XXX, you may now kiss your bride." I guess folks don't realize where that comes from, eh? Yep, it's to represent the 'first kiss.' I don't find either of these events fundamentalist or primitive. In fact, I think it sounds charming. Now, if it had been just the woman washing the man's feet...that would have made my neck hairs stand up, lol!
 
I've heard of feet washing, but never at a wedding. I've been to weddings where they waited to kiss. Promise rings are also something I see pretty frequently. I've never seen it given back to the parents though. Most of the people I know weren't given the ring by their parents. I don't think people talking about my "status" at my reception is a good reason to kiss or have sex before marriage. I also don't think it's a good reason to not do something that is meaningful to me and my future spouse, i.e. the promise ring part of the ceremony.

What's so wrong about coming into a marriage without baggage? I also don't understand why saying at the altar that they are called to serve each other is so controversial.

I think all of the elements mentioned by the OP were sweet. I hope they really enjoyed their day, and of course the rest of their marriage.

If I were to walk into that wedding without any prior information, I would know without question that they were evangelical Christians. Yeah, I'm a Christian, and yeah I'm one of the evangelical variety.

Their views on Israel are something I have not heard before. A lot of the Christians I know are very concerned with the preservation of Israel and the Jewish people. Edit: Not to imply that the couple doesn't want to help preserve the people. Which they seem to be actively doing.
 
I've heard of feet washing, but never at a wedding. I've been to weddings where they waited to kiss. Promise rings are also something I see pretty frequently. I've never seen it given back to the parents though. Most of the people I know weren't given the ring by their parents. I don't think people talking about my "status" at my reception is a good reason to kiss or have sex before marriage. I also don't think it's a good reason to not do something that is meaningful to me and my future spouse, i.e. the promise ring part of the ceremony.

What's so wrong about coming into a marriage without baggage? I also don't understand why saying at the altar that they are called to serve each other is so controversial.

I think all of the elements mentioned by the OP were sweet. I hope they really enjoyed their day, and of course the rest of their marriage.

If I were to walk into that wedding without any prior information, I would know without question that they were evangelical Christians. Yeah, I'm a Christian, and yeah I'm one of the evangelical variety.


I wonder if it was a purity ring and not a promise ring? Around here a promise ring is given from a boyfriend to a girl friend saying some day I will ask you to marry me type deal...usually when they don't have enough money to buy an engagement ring. A purity ring is a vow made to your parents that you won't have sex before you are married.
 
I wonder if it was a purity ring and not a promise ring? Around here a promise ring is given from a boyfriend to a girl friend saying some day I will ask you to marry me type deal...usually when they don't have enough money to buy an engagement ring. A purity ring is a vow made to your parents that you won't have sex before you are married.

The terms are used interchangeably around here. The "promise" is that you will stay pure just like a purity ring. I'm sure that there are some that do give it for the reason you stated, but I haven't met them.

Oh, wait I do know some people that do that, but it's normally about waiting till they're out of college to get married.

The terms are still very commonly used interchangeably. And I know many who are single and bought their own purity/promise ring and it was NOT a promise to their parents.
 
Footwashing is a very old-fashioned church tradition, and I've never heard of it as a part of a wedding. I'd think it'd be hard to pull it off if the bride's dress includes a train.

Google Maundy Thursday for a full explaination, but here's what I can tell you:

In "Bible days", it was considered proper for a host to wash his guests' feet when they entered his house. After all, they lived in what we today call the Middle East, so walking from place to place made their feet dusty. They all wore sandals. People would've kept appropriate washing vessels and a stool near the door. Wealthy people added oils to the water for footwashing, which would've been very welcome in such a dry climate. Washing a person's feet was a sign of friendship and welcome.

However, the job of washing guests' feet fell to the lowest servant in the house. It wasn't something that the master of the house was expected to do himself.

At the Last Supper, only days before His death, when Jesus took his disciples into the Upper Room and they were together for the last time, He Himself bent down on His knees and washed the feet of every disciple.

Peter -- the disciple who often put his foot into his mouth, the disciple to whom many of us can relate -- initially balked when Jesus Himself knelt before him, saying that the Lord shouldn't take such lowly tasks upon Himself. Jesus told him that if He didn't wash his feet, Peter would not "belong" to him. In typical Peter style, he begged Jesus to wash not only his feet but also his hands and his head -- meaning that he wanted every part of himself to belong to Jesus.

Jesus explained that He did this to show that He had come not to be a king in the traditional sense, but that He had come to serve mankind. Obviously, the foot-washing was symbolic of His servanthood. You know, those who are first shall be last, and those who are last shall be first. What you do unto the least of My people, you do unto Me. The meek shall inherit the earth, etc.

When He was done with the foot washing, He urged them to think of themselves as servants to one another (and to the wider world) and to wash one another's feet -- again, a job that belonged to the lowest servant -- as a sign that they were to serve others. It meant that they were not to think of themselves as special and privledged because they'd been the chosen twelve; rather, they were not to hesitate to take any humble job upon themselves -- helping the poor, going among the sick, doing any menial labor that presented itself.

Today some churches hold a Maundy Thursday service the evening before Good Friday. At these services church members literally wash one another's feet as a symbol of their willingness to serve others.

Churches that consider themselves "progressive" tend to look down on this practice as old-fashioned. For example, in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, one character is insulted as he's described as a "foot-washin' Baptist".

Personally, foot washing isn't necessary in the same way it was back in "Bible days" because we don't walk long distances through the desert, but I think our society would be a whole lot better if more of us DID think of ourselves as servants to one another, and the world'd be a better place if we didn't all have so much pride.
 
Footwashing is a very old-fashioned church tradition, and I've never heard of it as a part of a wedding. I'd think it'd be hard to pull it off if the bride's dress includes a train.

Google Maundy Thursday for a full explaination, but here's what I can tell you:

In "Bible days", it was considered proper for a host to wash his guests' feet when they entered his house. After all, they lived in what we today call the Middle East, so walking from place to place made their feet dusty. They all wore sandals. People would've kept appropriate washing vessels and a stool near the door. Wealthy people added oils to the water for footwashing, which would've been very welcome in such a dry climate. Washing a person's feet was a sign of friendship and welcome.

However, the job of washing guests' feet fell to the lowest servant in the house. It wasn't something that the master of the house was expected to do himself.

At the Last Supper, only days before His death, when Jesus took his disciples into the Upper Room and they were together for the last time, He Himself bent down on His knees and washed the feet of every disciple.

Peter -- the disciple who often put his foot into his mouth, the disciple to whom many of us can relate -- initially balked when Jesus Himself knelt before him, saying that the Lord shouldn't take such lowly tasks upon Himself. Jesus told him that if He didn't wash his feet, Peter would not "belong" to him. In typical Peter style, he begged Jesus to wash not only his feet but also his hands and his head -- meaning that he wanted every part of himself to belong to Jesus.

Jesus explained that He did this to show that He had come not to be a king in the traditional sense, but that He had come to serve mankind. Obviously, the foot-washing was symbolic of His servanthood. You know, those who are first shall be last, and those who are last shall be first. What you do unto the least of My people, you do unto Me. The meek shall inherit the earth, etc.

When He was done with the foot washing, He urged them to think of themselves as servants to one another (and to the wider world) and to wash one another's feet -- again, a job that belonged to the lowest servant -- as a sign that they were to serve others. It meant that they were not to think of themselves as special and privledged because they'd been the chosen twelve; rather, they were not to hesitate to take any humble job upon themselves -- helping the poor, going among the sick, doing any menial labor that presented itself.

Today some churches hold a Maundy Thursday service the evening before Good Friday. At these services church members literally wash one another's feet as a symbol of their willingness to serve others.

Churches that consider themselves "progressive" tend to look down on this practice as old-fashioned. For example, in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, one character is insulted as he's described as a "foot-washin' Baptist".

Personally, foot washing isn't necessary in the same way it was back in "Bible days" because we don't walk long distances through the desert, but I think our society would be a whole lot better if more of us DID think of ourselves as servants to one another, and the world'd be a better place if we didn't all have so much pride.

Thanks for that, I was going to write it out myself but couldn't word it quite right. Some religions advocate having "the heart of a servant," and the idea of becoming a servant to your spouse is not degrading or demeaning at all in that sense. It has nothing to do with not remaining true to yourself or agreeing with everything your partner says. My relationship's "staying power" has nothing to do with kissing or sex. It has to do with our mutual commitment to each other, to love, respect, and yes serve each other.
 
This is the type of information that I was pursuing. I DO believe that it was to show respect for an equal partnership... the minister just called it subservience. I think the word has negative connotations.
Yes, that has a negative connotation, but people tend to hone in on that one detail about women being subserviant to their husbands. If you read the whole passage, the Bible gives a whole lot of instructions and responsibilities to husbands as well. Cherry-picking one verse never gives a full understanding.

Honestly, women get the good end of that deal -- if you read the whole passage. People today tend to see "submitting" as a sign of weakness, or worse, they think it means women are to act like slaves to lazy husbands with an attitude of entitlemen.

The passage actually says that men are required to "love their wives as Christ loved the Church". That means Agape love, total love, total commitment, putting her first. So that means always considering her needs before your own. Always making sure she's happy and cared for. It means maing sure she has food before you do. It means she has time to rest and relax, even if you yourself are tired. And the passage includes instructions about men being humble, not taking advantage of their position as head of the family, and -- I can't remember the exact words -- not driving wives and children to irritation by claiming special priviledges. Also, men are specifically charged to act as spiritual heads of the household, and they are responsible for the spiritual health of their household.

So any man who demands that his wife act as a servant to him should read those scriptures. Really, his part is harder.

The same passage instructs children to obey their parents, and the same passage tells slaves to submit happily and be loyal to their masters (which I think today can be generalized to mean employees to their bosses).

Really, if both partners are working hard to make the other one happy and aren't "keeping score" about who does what, things are going to work out.
 
Yes, that has a negative connotation, but people tend to hone in on that one detail about women being subserviant to their husbands. If you read the whole passage, the Bible gives a whole lot of instructions and responsibilities to husbands as well. Cherry-picking one verse never gives a full understanding.

Honestly, women get the good end of that deal -- if you read the whole passage. People today tend to see "submitting" as a sign of weakness, or worse, they think it means women are to act like slaves to lazy husbands with an attitude of entitlemen.

The passage actually says that men are required to "love their wives as Christ loved the Church". That means Agape love, total love, total commitment, putting her first. So that means always considering her needs before your own. Always making sure she's happy and cared for. It means maing sure she has food before you do. It means she has time to rest and relax, even if you yourself are tired. And the passage includes instructions about men being humble, not taking advantage of their position as head of the family, and -- I can't remember the exact words -- not driving wives and children to irritation by claiming special priviledges. Also, men are specifically charged to act as spiritual heads of the household, and they are responsible for the spiritual health of their household.

So any man who demands that his wife act as a servant to him should read those scriptures. Really, his part is harder.

The same passage instructs children to obey their parents, and the same passage tells slaves to submit happily and be loyal to their masters (which I think today can be generalized to mean employees to their bosses).

Really, if both partners are working hard to make the other one happy and aren't "keeping score" about who does what, things are going to work out.

Thank you for your last few posts. So many people see Christian wedding vows are something horrible and demeaning to women, where the exact opposite is true. I think you explained it beautifully.
 
Thanks for that, I was going to write it out myself but couldn't word it quite right. Some religions advocate having "the heart of a servant," and the idea of becoming a servant to your spouse is not degrading or demeaning at all in that sense. It has nothing to do with not remaining true to yourself or agreeing with everything your partner says. My relationship's "staying power" has nothing to do with kissing or sex. It has to do with our mutual commitment to each other, to love, respect, and yes serve each other.
I agree. Putting the other person first, taking care of his or her needs, and having the heart of a servant -- those things equal "staying power".

In another thread I was just writing about having had some surgery recently. Oh, my, was my husband a servant to me during the week that followed. I was very "out of it" when he brought me home from the hospital, but I was aware that after he laid me in bed, he literally ran to get me a drink and then literally ran to the car to go fill my prescription for pain pills. He's a bit squeamish about bodily functions, but he was right there helping me to the bathroom, changing my bandage, putting a stool in the shower and washing my hair for me, cooking me plates of food and then not being angry when I ate only a few bites.

How can I not be grateful to have someone who takes such good care of me? How can I not be willing to overlook his little flaws ('cause I certainly have them too) when he behaves so lovingly?
 
The explanations of the feet washing and the wedding vows were excellent! I knew DISers would know things that I don't and would explain them to me.

As for the promise/purity ring, the minister called it a promise ring and said that she was returning it because the promised had been fulfilled, she had "remained pure until her wedding day."

I've also heard of promise rings being given as "pre-engagement" rings, so I think the term must be interchangeable around here.
 
The explanations of the feet washing and the wedding vows were excellent! I knew DISers would know things that I don't and would explain them to me.

As for the promise/purity ring, the minister called it a promise ring and said that she was returning it because the promised had been fulfilled, she had "remained pure until her wedding day."

I've also heard of promise rings being given as "pre-engagement" rings, so I think the term must be interchangeable around here.
I've heard of parents giving their dating-age daughter a Purity ring as a symbol that she ought to stop and think before following the crowd and getting into sexual activity before marriage. They're also called True Love Waits rings, which was a program lots of churches were using a few years ago -- but I haven't heard anyone use that phrase lately. I think this whole ring-thing was popular about a decade ago, but I don't hear much about it these days.

A promise ring, in my mind, is something that a 15-year old boy buys at Kmart for his girlfriend. It's about the same as wearing a boy's high school ring, and it just means, "we're a couple".
 
I've heard of parents giving their dating-age daughter a Purity ring as a symbol that she ought to stop and think before following the crowd and getting into sexual activity before marriage. They're also called True Love Waits rings, which was a program lots of churches were using a few years ago -- but I haven't heard anyone use that phrase lately. I think this whole ring-thing was popular about a decade ago, but I don't hear much about it these days.

A promise ring, in my mind, is something that a 15-year old boy buys at Kmart for his girlfriend. It's about the same as wearing a boy's high school ring, and it just means, "we're a couple".

A decade ago is when the bride's parents gave her that ring.
 












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE


New Posts





DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top Bottom