Moving The Ascension

[Mercy me]

I wish that they would keep holy days of obligagtion on their proper day. However, i will follow my bishop whom God called to shepherd me.

[peach_cube]

My diocese (Altoona) kept it on the 17th. To me Holy Days of Obligation are something that should not be shifted to the nearest sunday as it gets rid of a little Catholic tradition. It is also confusing when some diocese move it and others do not. This makes it seem that these holy days are not that significant.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1276540' date='May 18 2007, 12:41 PM']I see this move (a move already made by the Latin bishops on the Pacific coast) as another sign of the continuing disintegration of the Roman liturgy.

I am so happy that I am Eastern Catholic.[/quote]
you're [b]always [/b]so happy to be Eastern! I have a friend who just got his official Rite change papers back from Rome. He crossed the Bosporous on me.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='White Knight' post='1276324' date='May 18 2007, 12:58 AM']moving the Ascension to the nearest Sunday is to rise the Holy Mass Attendance,[/quote]

But now what are we going to do to get Mass attendance to rise on Sundays in the first place?

[Mercy me]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1277149' date='May 18 2007, 10:59 PM']But now what are we going to do to get Mass attendance to rise on Sundays in the first place?[/quote]

What? Insert logic into this decision.

[Tony]

my gripe with the whole thing is my Parish doesn't have a Mass on Thursdays, this Ascension inclided. I am not trying to critique the bishops on rather if the feast should be moved or not, but was any movement to try to encourage Parishes to have an optional Mass?

[bonoducchi]

[quote name='Tony' post='1277157' date='May 18 2007, 11:06 PM']my gripe with the whole thing is my Parish doesn't have a Mass on Thursdays, this Ascension inclided. I am not trying to critique the bishops on rather if the feast should be moved or not, but was any movement to try to encourage Parishes to have an optional Mass?[/quote]

Having an "optional" Mass (I assume you mean a Mass of the Solemnity of the Ascension) on Thursday duplicates the feast, which is something that the Roman rite generally avoids. If it is transferred, its transferred. If it is on Thursday, it is on Thursday.

Your concern about daily Mass is a different matter altogether. Do they offer any public prayer, ie. Liturgy of the Hours or a communion service, or at least some devotional prayer?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='VaticanIILiturgist' post='1277168' date='May 18 2007, 10:18 PM']Having an "optional" Mass (I assume you mean a Mass of the Solemnity of the Ascension) on Thursday duplicates the feast, which is something that the Roman rite generally avoids. If it is transferred, its transferred. If it is on Thursday, it is on Thursday.

Your concern about daily Mass is a different matter altogether. Do they offer any public prayer, ie. Liturgy of the Hours or a communion service, or at least some devotional prayer?[/quote]

At one of the more orthodox Novus Ordo parishes in my area there is a Mass for Ascension on Ascension Thursday and on Sunday.

And I think it is a bad idea because, like Holy Thursday, Ascension is a feast that should be on a Thursday because it occured forty days after Easter which is a Sunday.

[Tony]

[quote name='VaticanIILiturgist' post='1277168' date='May 19 2007, 12:18 AM']Having an "optional" Mass (I assume you mean a Mass of the Solemnity of the Ascension) on Thursday duplicates the feast, which is something that the Roman rite generally avoids. If it is transferred, its transferred. If it is on Thursday, it is on Thursday.

Your concern about daily Mass is a different matter altogether. Do they offer any public prayer, ie. Liturgy of the Hours or a communion service, or at least some devotional prayer?[/quote]

they do have a Communion Service. about a year or so ago, they cut down on a few Masses when we were only down to 1 priest (we had 2 for the longest time)

[bonoducchi]

[quote name='Tony' post='1277194' date='May 19 2007, 12:00 AM']they do have a Communion Service. about a year or so ago, they cut down on a few Masses when we were only down to 1 priest (we had 2 for the longest time)[/quote]

You might suggest the celebration of lauds in lieu of the communion serivce (or celebrate lauds with communion). The rite for communion celebrations in absence of a priest was recently revised to make it less "Mass-like" and I think the Church did a commendable job in shaping good public prayer for God's people who live with insufficient clergy.

[mortify]

Apotheon, I read some Greek orthodox parishes actually vote whether to have the old or new calendar, this type of stuff is going on everywhere. Right now the Greeks have it better than the Latins, but in time there will be no distinction.

[journeyman]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1276557' date='May 18 2007, 10:56 AM']Celebrating Ascension Thursday on Sunday destroys the only liturgical novena common to both East and West. That said, it also destroys the liturgical cycle, which is supposed to sanctify time, and not simply reduce worship to Sundays for the sake of convenience.[/quote]

Can you expand a trifle on the "liturgical novena common to both" concept? I know the Eastern and Western calendars don't match up exactly, but am not familiar enough with the differences to follow. If Easter is celebrated on a different date in East and West, then 40 days after Easter will also fall on a different date.

I agree with the idea that the liturgical cycle is supposed to sanctify time - Even I can see Easter + 40 = Ascension, since 40 is not divisible by 7, it couldn't ever "be" on a Sunday . . . but I'm also aware that many of the dates assigned by the Church to its feasts, memorials and days may or may not correspond to their original (or customary since Trent) date

Unless there are huge divisions of opinion, a discussion of sanctifying time probably is better located over in Transmundane

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='journeyman' post='1277470' date='May 19 2007, 12:49 PM']Can you expand a trifle on the "liturgical novena common to both" concept? I know the Eastern and Western calendars don't match up exactly, but am not familiar enough with the differences to follow. If Easter is celebrated on a different date in East and West, then 40 days after Easter will also fall on a different date.

I agree with the idea that the liturgical cycle is supposed to sanctify time - Even I can see Easter + 40 = Ascension, since 40 is not divisible by 7, it couldn't ever "be" on a Sunday . . . but I'm also aware that many of the dates assigned by the Church to its feasts, memorials and days may or may not correspond to their original (or customary since Trent) date

Unless there are huge divisions of opinion, a discussion of sanctifying time probably is better located over in Transmundane[/quote]

Most Eastern Catholic Churches now celebrate Easter on the same day as the Latin Church celebrates it.

[Aloysius]

And either way, the tradition is that all novenas come from the very first novena prayed by the Apostles in the Upper Room, when they locked themselves in and prayed for 9 days before Pentecost Sunday. I do believe a 9 day period between Ascension and Pentecost is common to East and West in memory of this.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1277279' date='May 19 2007, 12:11 AM']Apotheon, I read some Greek orthodox parishes actually vote whether to have the old or new calendar, this type of stuff is going on everywhere. Right now the Greeks have it better than the Latins, but in time there will be no distinction.[/quote]
The "Old Calendar" versus the "New Calendar" issue in Orthodoxy has nothing to do with transferring feasts from weekdays to Sundays; instead, it concerns the use of the Julian as opposed to the Gregorian calendar. The Eastern Orthodox Churches would never destroy the liturgical cycle for the sake of convenience.