Talk:Maundy (foot washing)

message: I would certainly welcome someone from a Catholic tradition reviewing the accuracy of the comments in that section of the feet washing article. Rlvaughn 22:14, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Applicability and Inclusivity of Various Groups 

message: Good Lord! (no pun intended) Can't we call it "Maundy"??  In several articles where the concept appears it has to be piped as that from "Foot washing".  Also, "foot washing" outside of the specific Christian religious context simply means "washing of the feet" where as "Maundy" refers to the historical event which is the subject of this article.  Why was it not named "Maundy" to begin with??  Is that not a specific and common name for it?  And is it not much more specific (and therefore much more helpful) than the simple and vague (and therefore less helpful) "foot washing"??  Was there a discussion somewhere where this was considered and the decision to go with "foot washing" won the debate?  KDS4444 (talk) 20:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying we can't call the article "Maundy", but only high-brow Anabaptists are familiar with the term "Maundy Thursday", and virtually none would recognize "Maundy" as meaning the act of feetwashing. Sondra.kinsey (talk) 22:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:   Interesting.  I myself am of low-brow Presbyterian background and yet have heard the term "Maundy Thursday" many times...  but never knew exactly what it meant.  I am not sure that "few would recognize it" is a valid reason for not naming it "Maundy" in light of the much greater WP:PRECISION that Maundy has.  We already have a disambig page titled Maundy, and would need to move this article over it and create a couple of hat notes, but that is no real barrier.  Given that we are talking about a specific foot washing, "Maundy" comes as an equally specific title (i.e., as precise as necessary) whereas the act of foot washing has taken place all over the world and throughout time for lots of reasons).  If I have convinced you of this (?) I can attempt to perform the page move myself— but let me know, as I do not wish to, er, step on anyone's... toes!  KDS4444 (talk) 23:50, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  After some consideration, I've decided I'm opposed to renaming to "Maundy". I appreciation precision in naming, but am hesitant to name a major religious practice something unfamiliar to most of the practitioners. It's as if scholars had a name for "cross" that wouldn't be confused with crosshairs or crossing a bridge, but Christians had never heard this term. Other opinions? Sondra.kinsey (talk) 13:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, hm...  Let me think. I am not 100% sure I understand your comparison, but let me know if this responds to it correctly: scholars (and lots of other people) have a specific term for the cross displaying the body of Christ when used as a symbol— the Crucifix— but we also have an article on cross which is the more generalized term for objects shaped like that (but without the Christ).  Crucifix also happens to be a fairly widely known term, though I would argue not as well known as "cross".  As another example, Holy Communion redirects to Eucharist, as does Bread and Wine and Lord's supper: "eucharist" is a more recondite term for the specific sacrament, compared to "bread and wine" (which are basically a pair of comestibles) and "lord's supper" (many an English lord had many a supper, but we are not talking about them, we are talking about the eucharist, which is more specific).  I am not saying that we should use the title which is "most obscure", but rather "most precise" for this specific foot washing moment.  I know, for example, that the washing of feet was done as a routine act of hospitality for thousands of years in the Middle East prior to the arrival of Jesus, and this Internet article discusses how foot washing was used throughout Palestine around the time of Christ for the same purpose (hospitality).  If this article was about the hospitable act of foot washing, then I would have no problem with it...  But it is about the specific lesson taught by Jesus to the apostles about providing service to others, and that is more than just foot washing!  Let me know if that makes any sense to you.  KDS4444 (talk) 09:04, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Again, I value precision in naming. I wish each religious practice had a universally agreed upon and unambiguous name. Unfortunate, that is not the case. It seems there's two issues here: 1) The term feet washing can refer to other practices beyond the Christian ritual. 2) What shall we call the Christian ritual?. To resolve the first issue, if I thought it were notable enough, I would support creating a new article of "feet washing", and move this to "feet washing (Christian ritual)". However, I think the greater issue is the second one. I don't think it's appropriate for us as encyclopedia editors to change the name of practice in order to avoid ambiguity. I have grown more convinced the more I've thought about it. Sondra.kinsey (talk) 17:05, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough, I am dropping the idea.  Nice to have interacted with you over it, however!  Thanks for being willing to consider and discuss.  KDS4444 (talk) 11:00, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maundy 

message: I think this article is better than "start" class.  If others agree, let's get it changed.  --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 01:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classification 

message: the article should link to the word "ablution", and should say more clearly "in the Christian context" or reference that foot washing has ritual meaning outside of Christianity, rather than seeming to say that foot washing is exclusively Christian. Also, I would think the distinction should be drawn early and often between foot washing as ritual hygiene and foot washing as ritual symbolism or obeisance. 96.224.34.168 (talk) 20:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ablution 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Foot washing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130408063002/http://www.oswaldsobrino.com/2013/03/pope-foot-washing-of-females-yes-that.html to http://www.oswaldsobrino.com/2013/03/pope-foot-washing-of-females-yes-that.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031213181034/http://www.panthercreekchurch.org/foot_washing.htm to http://www.panthercreekchurch.org/foot_washing.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070329142622/http://www.catholicexchange.com/node/59798 to http://www.catholicexchange.com/node/59798
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070630160917/http://66.208.11.17/resources/2007%20Holy%20Thurs%201.jpg to http://66.208.11.17/resources/2007%20Holy%20Thurs%201.jpg
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:06, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I added: "Another word for the ceremony, nipter, derives from the Greek word for a basin." Someone removed it as uncited. See e.g. Chambers Dictionary 1908. Equinox ◑ 22:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nipter 

message: Article lacks required sources; much of it reads like original research. Bluepenciltime (talk) 20:52, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It is moderately well-sourced; none of it reads like OR to me - more like EB 1911. Johnbod (talk) 21:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources, original research 

message: It lacks also NPOV, without including theological reasons why other Christians don’t practice foot-washing. ~~ Bluepenciltime (talk) 20:52, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Phooey! They don't, and one can easily see that the reasons many/most Protestants don't is not likely to be exactly theological. It's hardly a failure of NPOV to cover what doesn't happen.  Johnbod (talk) 21:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I'm not sure why the article was moved as foot washing is the :WP:COMMONNAME. Maundy is an archaic name and used only in the term :Maundy Thursday, more commonly referred to as Holy Thursday today. There should have been a move discussion and the :Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity should have been advised of the discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:42, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally agree with the move performed by User:Valoem as this article refers to the Christian rite of footwashing, not washing one's feet in general. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 07:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure which name I'd favour, but the undiscussed move was wrong & should be reverted. A proper WP:RM discussion should be done. See discussions higher up the page. Johnbod (talk) 12:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footwashing is the common name, not maundy 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians!
The second half of the section "Background", beginning with the sentence "The foot washing, described in the thirteenth chapter of the Gospel of John, is concerned with the Latin title of Servus servorum dei", cites no sources (other than the Bible itself) and thus reads a lot like OR. Also, most of it does not seem to have any relevance at all to the specific topic of the article. I therefore move that these paragraphs be deleted. Nikolaj1905 (talk) 09:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant information