T
tee_eff_em
Guest
[elided]
teeWhether this is the best way to address the matter is a debate better left to another thread.
[elided]
teeWhether this is the best way to address the matter is a debate better left to another thread.
More accurate other words would be ‘Let the bishop exercise the authority which is his’.In other words ‘Let the bishop just do what he likes’ …
Resistance is futile - you WILL be assimilated! :hypno:I’d rather just obey and not question - everything is calmer and more peaceful that way.
As I said, holy days have NEVER been all exactly the same all round the world - EVERY region and country has now and has always had some that were peculiar to themselves.Same result …Confused Catholics around the world !
Every Catholic board I’m on had the same threads yesterday ‘Help, is it a Holy Day or not!’ and quite a few MISSED MASS unintentially because they thought their bishop had moved it to Sunday…
What a mess, what a mess…Why not keep it simple: same rule EVERYWHERE! No problems! Sorry, but this is one I will not back down on. I know nobody will agree with me, but common sense would say it’s so much easier to have it the same all through the Church…
Anna x
The answer is convenience.Yes, but Lil: if God is God and He’s the SAME everywhere…why isn’t Ascension Day the same EVERYWHERE!
Anna x
How convenient!My understanding is: “Convenience” is not the primary reason for translation of feasts. Rather, the bishops realize that people are not fulfilling their obligations on midweek holy days, and so translate feasts to Sunday, when people will more likely fulfill their obligation, thus removing an occassion of sin.
Whether this is the best way to address the matter is a debate better left to another thread.
tee
I repeat: It is the same rule everywhere.Same result …Confused Catholics around the world !
Every Catholic board I’m on had the same threads yesterday ‘Help, is it a Holy Day or not!’ and quite a few MISSED MASS unintentially because they thought their bishop had moved it to Sunday…
What a mess, what a mess…Why not keep it simple: same rule EVERYWHERE! No problems! Sorry, but this is one I will not back down on. I know nobody will agree with me, but common sense would say it’s so much easier to have it the same all through the Church…
Anna x
It’s much easier in Canada. The CCCB has dumped all the holy days of obligation except two: Jan 1 and Dec 25.I repeat: It is the same rule everywhere.
Apparently those people MISSED MASS last Sunday as well – Or their parishes are remarkably more careless than mine and every other I have exerperienced. Every parish I’ve ever been a member of has ANNOUNCED upcoming holy days and Mass times. Every parish bulletin I’ve ever seen has listed the celebrations for the entire week upcoming including the following Sunday.
WHY DIDN’T THESE PEOPLE PAY ATTENTION!? WHY DID THEY WAIT UNTIL YESTERDAY TO ASK!? WHY DID THEY ASK (APPARENTLY) ILL-INFORMED PEOPLE ON MESSAGE BOARDS INSTEAD OF PICKING UP THE PHONE AND CALLING THEIR LOCAL PARISHES?
tee
I take exception to that ‘tone’, if you don’t mind. Yes, you have a point, but Ascension Day is not some obscure local feast, it IS worldwide and as such I believe the same rules should apply worldwide. If it was St Lawrence Day or St Patricks Day, it would indded be up to the local bishop, because it’s a local feast!your sainted godmother
It’s easy in the US too.It’s much easier in Canada. The CCCB has dumped all the holy days of obligation except two: Jan 1 and Dec 25.
What bothers me about moving the holy days of obligation to Sunday is that the importance and impact of them seems to be lost. People don’t really think about the feast day anymore, since they have no requirement to attend Mass. They just go on Sunday as always, and don’t even realize that the actual feast day was a few days earlier. They are going to be there anyway on Sunday, so let’s make it easy and just move all the major feasts to Sunday. That’s how it seems. We only have two feast days left that have not been moved to Sunday.It’s easy in the US too.
PAY ATTENTION. It’s not like your pastor or bishop keeps it a secret or something! ("Hmmm, think I’ll tell everyone that Ascension is translated to Sunday, but secretly I’ll keep it on Thursday. Mwuah-ha-ha-ha…")
tee
We have truly become pathetic in this area. It may seem now as the opposite extreme, but nevertheless, in the 15th century there were yearly between 40-50 feasts requiring attendance at mass (there was local variation then, too). (source: The Stripping of the Altars, Eamon Duffy, 1992, p.42)What bothers me about moving the holy days of obligation to Sunday is that the importance and impact of them seems to be lost. People don’t really think about the feast day anymore, since they have no requirement to attend Mass. They just go on Sunday as always, and don’t even realize that the actual feast day was a few days earlier. They are going to be there anyway on Sunday, so let’s make it easy and just move all the major feasts to Sunday. That’s how it seems. We only have two feast days left that have not been moved to Sunday.
That is my understanding also. But with that reasoning, can’t the other HOO, including Christmas, be moved to Sunday as well? (I’m definitely opposed to that idea, by the way.)Rather, the bishops realize that people are not fulfilling their obligations on midweek holy days, and so translate feasts to Sunday, when people will more likely fulfill their obligation, thus removing an occassion of sin.
The rubrics and kalendar of the current missal consider it to be Eastertide until Pentecost, so the rubrics direct that paschal candle burn until the arrival of the Spirit on that day. In the old rite, the rubrics specify that the candle is to be extinguished after the gospel on Ascension Day.We have truly become pathetic in this area. It may seem now as the opposite extreme, but nevertheless, in the 15th century there were yearly between 40-50 feasts requiring attendance at mass (there was local variation then, too). (source: The Stripping of the Altars, Eamon Duffy, 1992, p.42)
Regarding Ascension Thursday, I saw something last night at the indult TLM that I gather is no longer done at the N.O. mass on this feast: the extinguishing of the paschal candle. This candle, representing the light of the risen Christ, burned by ancient tradition until the commemoration of His departure to join the Father, thus coinciding with His risen presence on Earth. This seems fittingly symbolic. Now (at least at my local N.O. mass) it is extinguished at Pentecost. Is this change another case of “let’s do it when they’ll be here”?
Yep, it was done at indult last night. Fitting…gave me a sense of the loss and sadness that the Apostles must have felt.Regarding Ascension Thursday, I saw something last night at the indult TLM that I gather is no longer done at the N.O. mass on this feast: the extinguishing of the paschal candle. This candle, representing the light of the risen Christ, burned by ancient tradition until the commemoration of His departure to join the Father, thus coinciding with His risen presence on Earth. …
Pentecost is considered part of Eastertide in the old calendar as well, so that does not explain the change. It is also my understanding that the change was made well after the introduction of the N.O. mass.The rubrics and kalendar of the current missal consider it to be Eastertide until Pentecost, so the rubrics direct that paschal candle burn until the arrival of the Spirit on that day. In the old rite, the rubrics specify that the candle is to be extinguished after the gospel on Ascension Day.
It is but the 1962 missal divides Eastertide into 3: *tempus Paschatis * until the Vigil of the Ascension, tempus Ascensionis until the vigil of Pentecost and the Octave of Pentecost. The NO does not have such distinctions.Pentecost is considered part of Eastertide in the old calendar as well, so that does not explain the change. It is also my understanding that the change was made well after the introduction of the N.O. mass.