Feast of the Assumption

[FrDavid96]

This makes sense – thanks for the reference.

Thanks for saying that. I think I’ve given myself a headache on my last few posts!

 

[RatioFides]

There is no question that the Mass of the Assumption is “allowed” or “licit” on Saturday night…in fact it is THE licit Mass to be celebrated at that time. The Solemnity surpresses the Sunday (thus when it lands on a Sunday, the Ordinary Time Sunday is not celebrated). Therefore the Assumption is celebrated from the Vigil/1st Vespers until the following midnight. (That is why every Liturgy of the Hours ordo will tell you to celebrate 2nd Vespers of the Assumption on Saturday evening.) So the Sunday Mass on Saturday night is technically the illicit one. I say technically because, as others have pointed out, there is a lot of confusion here, so a pastor can say the Sunday Mass on Sat because there is a pastoral reason for it. However, most bishops require the Sunday Mass on Sat, and of course they have the authority to decide in such matters.

But really…how hard is this? Just say the Mass of the Assumption on Saturday night and when the people who show up for that Mass do so, just tell them, “This fulfills your Sunday obligation.” And this is the real reason that the bishops did the “now it is, now it isn’t” rule for Holy Days- because of the “going the evening before” practice of many people. It’s not hard for people to figure out “I have to go to Mass on Saturday and then again on Sunday” or “I have to go to Mass on Sunday and then again on Monday” if the Mass for that day is ON that day (which used to mean, that morning). The evening before stuff has made it confusing and now this effort to “simplify” has made it even more confusing.

 

[centurionguard]

Right. Abrogated, not transferred. So, yes, that’s not “exactly” what’s happening this year. Thanks for catching that.

It does happen with regard to some other Holy Days though; sometimes the obligation is transferred, but the celebration is not; sometimes both are transferred (like Ascension).

Father David;
But; should the Holy Feast of the Assumption fall on a Sunday it would normally be commemorated as a Solemnity in any countries Catholic diocese ? Or would the Bishop still have the discretionary option of Abrogating the Feast of the Assumption falling on a Sunday ?

Another Feast day much less noted than the significance of the Assumption which comes to mind for a moment is the Feast of Saint Blaise given special recognition on February 3, not only with a feast day, but with a unique ceremony that parallels the practice of anointing the sick. In this case, it is blessing the throats of those with throat disorders and anyone who wishes to avoid getting such a malady (or something related to the throat, even the words one speaks; see Psalm 5:10). The blessing is usually done by priests (though deacons may also serve) and it is considered a sacramental of the Church. One Uncle of mine from the province of Quebec I met while I was a Sacristan told me he hadn’t seen that Feast day commemoration in over 40 years before Vatican II after I had given him a tour through the entire church I showed him the Saint Blaise candles.

I was just making particular mention of this because of so many beautiful Feast Days in the Church that are no longer commemorated in Canada.

 

[RatioFides]

Father David;
But; should the Holy Feast of the Assumption fall on a Sunday it would normally be commemorated as a Solemnity in any countries Catholic diocese ? Or would the Bishop still have the discretionary option of Abrogating the Feast of the Assumption falling on a Sunday ?

Technically the bishop could abrogate the solemnity, but it would never happen because logically there is absolutly no reason to do it. The liturgical law is the norm and there wouldn’t be any reason to go against it.

For St Blaise, if it’s popular, there is no reason not to attach it to the preceding Sunday.
That’s a good example of “lex orandi, lex credenti” the law of prayer is the law of belief: After the revision of the Roman calendar St Blaise was made optional (with St. Ansgar as another option). Blaise doesn’t even need to be commemorated if the priest wishes. But the blessing is still popular so he almost always is commemorated, to the detriment of poor St Ansgar, who’s Mass is usually never said.

 

[centurionguard]

centurionguard;5577579:

Father David;
But; should the Holy Feast of the Assumption fall on a Sunday it would normally be commemorated as a Solemnity in any countries Catholic diocese ? Or would the Bishop still have the discretionary option of Abrogating the Feast of the Assumption falling on a Sunday ?

Technically the bishop could abrogate the solemnity, but it would never happen because logically there is absolutly no reason to do it. The liturgical law is the norm and there wouldn’t be any reason to go against it.

For St Blaise, if it’s popular, there is no reason not to attach it to the preceding Sunday.
That’s a good example of “lex orandi, lex credenti” the law of prayer is the law of belief: After the revision of the Roman calendar St Blaise was made optional (with St. Ansgar as another option). Blaise doesn’t even need to be commemorated if the priest wishes. But the blessing is still popular so he almost always is commemorated, to the detriment of poor St Ansgar, who’s Mass is usually never said.

For St Blaise, if it’s popular, there is no reason not to attach it to the preceding Sunday.

The Feast of Saint Blaise rarely falls on a Sunday and if so being it is automatically abrogated.

Blaise doesn’t even need to be commemorated if the priest wishes.

If the priest chooses to follow the Mass Ordo in the Lectionary the way he’s supposed to, why should he whimsically omit such a beautiful sacramental opportunity available to the Faithful. I have great respect and honor for our beloved priests and bishops. But some of their "outrageous self-righteous actions peeve me off. Watered down Sacraments of every sort happen everyday. Omission of Prayers in the Mass not out of of lack of forgetfulness. But because some priest dispose their burdened duties to know-it-all Catholic laity who are placed in officiating direction of the Liturgy of the Word and even procuring New Mass prayers in how the Sacrifice of the Eucharist in the Mass is said. Most laity though wouldn’t notice even if you threw a shoe at them. “Go Alone To Get Alone” seems like the New Age slogan in the Catholic Church today. Nothing personal; and my sincere apologies for getting all railed up in this. But some things that happen in the Church put a painful arrow straight through my heart. I certainly was brought up to be a shut up “Go Alone To Get Alone” Catholic just because everything that happens in (“today’s”) liturgy of the Catholic Church is hunky-dory.

Let’s take today’s Mass for example in my parish. The Penitential Rite at the opening prayer of the Mass was completely omitted.

 

[FrDavid96]

Father David;
But; should the Holy Feast of the Assumption fall on a Sunday it would normally be commemorated as a Solemnity in any countries Catholic diocese ? Or would the Bishop still have the discretionary option of Abrogating the Feast of the Assumption falling on a Sunday ?

With all due deference and respect to the bishop’s office and ministry, it’s not within the competence of any diocesan bishop to abrogate the Feast of the Assumption. Only the Holy See can do that (if the conference of bishops requests it). So to answer the question, no the bishop could not abrogate that feast even if it does fall on a Sunday.

Please understand what I’m trying to say in the other posts. The bishop cannot change the fact that the Assumption is on Sat. Aug. 15 (or “was” this year). He is certainly competent to require that the feast be celebrated in his diocese on Sunday (as the bishop of Trenton has apparently done). But requiring the *celebration of * the feast on Sunday doesn’t change the fact that the feast day itself is still Aug. 15. In other words, he can add the Sunday celebration, but he can’t change Saturday (although he can dispense from anything on Saturday if there’s a need, and he can mandate parish liturgical schedules in any way that he finds pastorally appropriate).

He can’t change the fact that Saturday is the Assumption any more than he can change the fact that it’s the 15th of the month by virtue of the fact that it’s the day between the 14th and 16th.

I truly hope I’m explaining that in a way that makes sense.

Another Feast day much less noted than the significance of the Assumption which comes to mind for a moment is the Feast of Saint Blaise given special recognition on February 3, not only with a feast day, but with a unique ceremony that parallels the practice of anointing the sick. In this case, it is blessing the throats of those with throat disorders and anyone who wishes to avoid getting such a malady (or something related to the throat, even the words one speaks; see Psalm 5:10). The blessing is usually done by priests (though deacons may also serve) and it is considered a sacramental of the Church. One Uncle of mine from the province of Quebec I met while I was a Sacristan told me he hadn’t seen that Feast day commemoration in over 40 years before Vatican II after I had given him a tour through the entire church I showed him the Saint Blaise candles.

I was just making particular mention of this because of so many beautiful Feast Days in the Church that are no longer commemorated in Canada.

The blessing of throats on St Blaise day is one of my own favorites (you can bet it’s done in my parishes )

 

[RatioFides]

If the priest chooses to follow the Mass Ordo in the Lectionary the way he’s supposed to, why should he whimsically omit such a beautiful sacramental opportunity available to the Faithful

If the priest chooses to follow the Mass Ordo…the way he is supposed to…then he can ommit St Blase. It’s an optional memorial, therefore he has the option. He doesn’t if it’s St Ignatius or St Dominic or St Clare. They are obligatory. Also, the Ordo is the Ordo- it’s not in the Lectionary. Now all the other complaints, leaving out that penitental rite, omitting prayers, etc…yes, THAT’S not following “the way he’s supposed to.” That’s abuse.

The bishop is the supreme legislator of a diocese. If he wants to abrogate the Assumption he technically can. But he would need a reason (it can’t be because he feels like it) and there isn’t any legitamate reason why he would. If he actually did, he would be overruled by Rome.

 

[centurionguard]

If the priest chooses to follow the Mass Ordo in the Lectionary the way he’s supposed to, why should he whimsically omit such a beautiful sacramental opportunity available to the Faithful

If the priest chooses to follow the Mass Ordo…the way he is supposed to…then he can omit St Blase. It’s an optional memorial, therefore he has the option. He doesn’t if it’s St Ignatius or St Dominic or St Clare. They are obligatory. Also, the Ordo is the Ordo- it’s not in the Lectionary. Now all the other complaints, leaving out that penitental rite, omitting prayers, etc…yes, THAT’S not following “the way he’s supposed to.” That’s abuse.

The bishop is the supreme legislator of a diocese. If he wants to abrogate the Assumption he technically can. But he would need a reason (it can’t be because he feels like it) and there isn’t any legitamate reason why he would. If he actually did, he would be overruled by Rome.

I never made any conclusion saying a priest could omit the Feast of Saint Blaise.
You make it seem so non-essential like a Savoir-Faire commemoration.
Unless of course if your one of those individuals who thinks the Church gets wrapped up in excessive sentimentality’s with (“Sacramental’s”)

 

[pnewton]

As much as I love the Feast of the Assumption, I was very pleased that my priest stuck with Ordinary time all Masses, including the Sunday Vigil. I had to change my music selection at the last minute to compliment the homily, but it was worth it. I have a very special place in my heart for John 6, as that was the first reason for my becoming Catholic. It was great to hear the priest launch into such a solid, unflinching defense of both the Real Presence and the Holiness of the Mass this weekend. I look forward to his completion of this series next week.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Let’s take today’s Mass for example in my parish. The Penitential Rite at the opening prayer of the Mass was completely omitted.

Seriously? The priest did the Sign of the Cross and then launched into the Gloria with nothing in between? I wonder how he could do that.

 

[FrDavid96]

If the priest chooses to follow the Mass Ordo in the Lectionary the way he’s supposed to, why should he whimsically omit such a beautiful sacramental opportunity available to the Faithful

If the priest chooses to follow the Mass Ordo…the way he is supposed to…then he can ommit St Blase. It’s an optional memorial, therefore he has the option. He doesn’t if it’s St Ignatius or St Dominic or St Clare. They are obligatory. Also, the Ordo is the Ordo- it’s not in the Lectionary. Now all the other complaints, leaving out that penitental rite, omitting prayers, etc…yes, THAT’S not following “the way he’s supposed to.” That’s abuse.

The bishop is the supreme legislator of a diocese. If he wants to abrogate the Assumption he technically can. But he would need a reason (it can’t be because he feels like it) and there isn’t any legitamate reason why he would. If he actually did, he would be overruled by Rome.

The bishop cannot abrogate the Assumption. If he tries, he’s already been overruled by Rome by canon 1246 vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P4N.HTM

This canon reserves “abrogating” or even moving the Assumption to the Holy See (which the Holy See will consider if the conference of bishops requests that).