Silly question about "Liturgical" Dates

[SMHW]

I don’t mean *dates *as in going out on a date to a liturgical event.

But I have been hearing such things as, “This will likely happen by Easter of 2013,” or, “We should see that by Advent of 2011.”

Well, “Easter of 2013” I can understand. But whenever someone says “Advent of wxyz” I am never sure if they mean the Advent that falls at the end of the calendar year xxxx or if they mean the Advent at the beginning of the liturgical year that primarily falls in calendar year wxyz+1. However when it comes to Christmas I think of the calendar year.

In MY mind I tend to think of Advent as belonging to following calendar year rather than the calendar year in which it falls. Is there an official liturgical way of ennumerating Church years?

 

[Phemie]

I don’t mean *dates *as in going out on a date to a liturgical event.

But I have been hearing such things as, “This will likely happen by Easter of 2013,” or, “We should see that by Advent of 2011.”

Well, “Easter of 2013” I can understand. But whenever someone says “Advent of wxyz” I am never sure if they mean the Advent that falls at the end of the calendar year xxxx or if they mean the Advent at the beginning of the liturgical year that primarily falls in calendar year wxyz+1. However when it comes to Christmas I think of the calendar year.

In MY mind I tend to think of Advent as belonging to following calendar year rather than the calendar year in which it falls. Is there an official liturgical way of ennumerating Church years?

Advent starts the liturgical year and Christmas follows it, both occurring in the same calendar year. So Christmas 2009 will be preceded by Advent 2009. The liturgical year itself is 2009-2010.

 

[EasterJoy]

I don’t mean *dates *as in going out on a date to a liturgical event.

But I have been hearing such things as, “This will likely happen by Easter of 2013,” or, “We should see that by Advent of 2011.”

Well, “Easter of 2013” I can understand. But whenever someone says “Advent of wxyz” I am never sure if they mean the Advent that falls at the end of the calendar year xxxx or if they mean the Advent at the beginning of the liturgical year that primarily falls in calendar year wxyz+1. However when it comes to Christmas I think of the calendar year.

In MY mind I tend to think of Advent as belonging to following calendar year rather than the calendar year in which it falls. Is there an official liturgical way of ennumerating Church years?

I can see what you mean. Advent heads up the liturgical year, so it seems a sort of an anchor point. Since any one liturgical calendar always falls within two different calendar years, however, those are generally denoted with both years: 2009/2010, for instance. The individual liturgical seasons, however, fall within single years. Nobody puts in two years for a season that falls within a single calendar year. It’s not worth the trouble.

Because Christmas is fixed on December 25, Advent never crosses from one calendar year to another. Therefore, it is denoted by the single calendar year that it falls on. On the Sunday after next, we will enter Advent 2009, which will end at Christmas 2009. It would not be practical to call these Advent and Christmas 2010 just because it falls in the same liturgical year as Easter 2010. We don’t call them Advent and Christmas 2009/2010 because it is unnecessary–none of the coming Advent season and just the tail-end of the coming Christmas season will fall in 2010. It would just wind up with a lot of mistakes being made. And even though the Christmas season does cross calendar years, you just don’t hear of people speaking of “Christmas season 2009/2010”. The season belongs to the feast day it starts on, I suppose.

If you think of Advent as “belonging” to Christmas, rather than belonging as the kick-off date for a larger single liturgical year, though, then you’ll have it straight.

Does that make sense?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I can see what you mean. Advent heads up the liturgical year, so it seems a sort of an anchor point. Since any one liturgical calendar always falls within two different calendar years, however, those are generally denoted with both years: 2009/2010, for instance. The individual liturgical seasons, however, fall within single years. Nobody puts in two years for a season that falls within a single calendar year. It’s not worth the trouble.

Because Christmas is fixed on December 25, Advent never crosses from one calendar year to another. Therefore, it is denoted by the single calendar year that it falls on. On the Sunday after next, we will enter Advent 2009, which will end at Christmas 2009. It would not be practical to call these Advent and Christmas 2010 just because it falls in the same liturgical year as Easter 2010. We don’t call them Advent and Christmas 2009/2010 because it is unnecessary–none of the coming Advent season and just the tail-end of the coming Christmas season will fall in 2010. It would just wind up with a lot of mistakes being made. And even though the Christmas season does cross calendar years, you just don’t hear of people speaking of “Christmas season 2009/2010”. The season belongs to the feast day it starts on, I suppose.

If you think of Advent as “belonging” to Christmas, rather than belonging as the kick-off date for a larger single liturgical year, though, then you’ll have it straight.

Does that make sense?

I never think of Christmas as only Dec. 25th, for me it’s always the Season of Christmas.

 

[SMHW]

.
.
.
Because Christmas is fixed on December 25, Advent never crosses from one calendar year to another. Therefore, it is denoted by the single calendar year that it falls on. On the Sunday after next, we will enter Advent 2009, which will end at Christmas 2009. It would not be practical to call these Advent and Christmas 2010 just because it falls in the same liturgical year as Easter 2010. We don’t call them Advent and Christmas 2009/2010 because it is unnecessary–none of the coming Advent season and just the tail-end of the coming Christmas season will fall in 2010. It would just wind up with a lot of mistakes being made. And even though the Christmas season does cross calendar years, you just don’t hear of people speaking of “Christmas season 2009/2010”. The season belongs to the feast day it starts on, I suppose.
.
.
.
Does that make sense?

Well, I’ve always been able to figure out what people mean …eventually.

I guess the thing that confuses me is that I make use of several annual liturgical publications and naturally they start with Advent. And these publications usually have a year on the cover. They don’t say 2009/2010; they just say 2010. So I’ve gotten in the habit of thinking of Advent as as belonging the soon-to-begin calendar year.

Can I blame this on OCP and Liturgical Press?

 

[tee_eff_em]

I can see what you mean. Advent heads up the liturgical year, so it seems a sort of an anchor point. Since any one liturgical calendar always falls within two different calendar years, however, those are generally denoted with both years:

2009/2010

, for instance. The individual liturgical seasons, however, fall within single years. Nobody puts in two years for a season that falls within a single calendar year. It’s not worth the trouble.

I have never seen a calendar so denoted? See for instance the calendars at the USCCB site.

Because Christmas is fixed on December 25, Advent never crosses from one calendar year to another. Therefore, it is denoted by the single calendar year that it falls on. On the Sunday after next, we will enter Advent 2009, which will end at Christmas 2009. It would not be practical to call these Advent and Christmas 2010 just because it falls in the same liturgical year as Easter 2010.

I disagree – In my experience, when someone refers to *Advent MHTO *he means the Advent that falls in the secular year *MHTO *- 1.

Christmas, I suppose because it is a secular holiday as well as a liturgical date, generally gets denoted by its secular year.

I would say: We are about to enter Advent 2010, which will prepare us for Christmas 2009.

:twocents:
tee
armchair liturgical calendar nerd

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I have never seen a calendar so denoted? See for instance the calendars at the USCCB site.

I disagree – In my experience, when someone refers to *Advent MHTO *he means the Advent that falls in the secular year *MHTO *- 1.

Christmas, I suppose because it is a secular holiday as well as a liturgical date, generally gets denoted by its secular year.

I would say: We are about to enter Advent 2010, which will prepare us for Christmas 2009.

:twocents:
tee
armchair liturgical calendar nerd

This is Advent 2009.

 

[Phemie]

I disagree – In my experience, when someone refers to *Advent MHTO *he means the Advent that falls in the secular year *MHTO *- 1.

Christmas, I suppose because it is a secular holiday as well as a liturgical date, generally gets denoted by its secular year.

I would say: We are about to enter Advent 2010, which will prepare us for Christmas 2009.

:twocents:
tee
armchair liturgical calendar nerd

I can’t say that I’ve ever thought of Advent outside the calendar year in which it falls. To me it makes absolutely no sense to denote something by the year 2010 which falls in the year 2009. My new Sunday Missal reads 2009-2010.

 

[PacoG]

Advent starts the liturgical year and Christmas follows it, both occurring in the same calendar year. So Christmas 2009 will be preceded by Advent 2009. The liturgical year itself is 2009-2010.

It’s basically the same concept as the Fiscal Year beginning September 1 or the Legal Year beginning on the First Monday in October. You can see the Catholic Church’s influence everywhere.

 

[rpp]

**I don’t mean *dates ***as in going out on a date to a liturgical event.

But I have been hearing such things as, “This will likely happen by Easter of 2013,” or, “We should see that by Advent of 2011.”

Well, “Easter of 2013” I can understand. But whenever someone says “Advent of wxyz” I am never sure if they mean the Advent that falls at the end of the calendar year xxxx or if they mean the Advent at the beginning of the liturgical year that primarily falls in calendar year wxyz+1. However when it comes to Christmas I think of the calendar year.

In MY mind I tend to think of Advent as belonging to following calendar year rather than the calendar year in which it falls. Is there an official liturgical way of ennumerating Church years?

Referring to the text I put in bold…

I am so disappointed.

 

[Phemie]

The ORDO I have in hand says Liturgical Calendar 2008-2009. I think I can safely assume that the new one that’s coming will say Liturgical Calendar 2009-2010.

2008-2009 is written in 5 separate places in the first 5 pages and again after the Pastoral Notes.