Thread: Ash Wednesday and S Valentine's Day Board: Ecclesiantics / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=008547
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
These two commemorations fall on the same day this year. While the liturgical commemoration can be easily managed, the martyr's collect taking second place, if at all, what pastoral advice is being offered by clerical shipmates who are trying to reconcile the penitential and abstinent nature of Ash Wednesday with the romantic focus of married parishioners using the martyr's feast as a means of supporting their married life?
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
God loves us, even though we are dust and ashes?
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
Valentine's Day isn't on the liturgical calendar no matter when it falls. February 14 is normally the Feast Day of Saints Cyril and Methodius (pre-empted by Ash Wednesday this year of course).
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Valentine's Day isn't on the liturgical calendar no matter when it falls. February 14 is normally the Feast Day of Saints Cyril and Methodius (pre-empted by Ash Wednesday this year of course).
Page ix of the Canadian BCP, "Valentine, Bishop and Martyr."
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Valentine's Day isn't on the liturgical calendar no matter when it falls. February 14 is normally the Feast Day of Saints Cyril and Methodius (pre-empted by Ash Wednesday this year of course).
Page ix of the Canadian BCP, "Valentine, Bishop and Martyr."
Sorry, I should have specified the Episcopal Church, USA.
Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on
:
In the Church of England, Cyril and Methodius is listed as a lesser Festival, and Valentine as a commemoration. The Rules to Order the Christian Year provide that quote:
When a Lesser Festival falls on a Principal Feast or Holy Day, on a Festival, on a Sunday, or on weekdays between Palm Sunday and the Second Sunday of Easter, its celebration is normally omitted for that year
Commemorations are not required to be observed at all quote:
Commemorations, which are listed in the Calendar, are made by a mention in prayers of intercession and thanksgiving. They are not provided with Collect, Psalm and Readings, and do not replace the usual weekday provision at either the Holy Communion or Morning and Evening Prayer.
The minister may be selective in the Commemorations that are made.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
. . . what pastoral advice is being offered by clerical shipmates who are trying to reconcile the penitential and abstinent nature of Ash Wednesday with the romantic focus of married parishioners using the martyr's feast as a means of supporting their married life?
Only married couples?
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Simple: advise the faithful (in every sense of the word) to take out the wife/girlfriend/boyfriend to mark St Valentine on the 13th.
There is the added bonus that, since 13th February is Mistress Day, taking out the other half is added proof that you aren't indulging in some extra-marital hanky-panky.
Toodle-pip!
Posted by kingsfold (# 1726) on
:
Ah yes... We had a couple request that they have their wedding on Valentine's Day this year....
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Did you agree to their request?
They could get married in the afternoon, and come back to Mass in the evening to repent...
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
IJ
Posted by kingsfold (# 1726) on
:
They're getting married - yes.
On Feb 14th - No. It's happening on 13th Feb.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
O, well - they can repent at leisure, then...
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
IJ
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
Reminds me of the very old joke about a couple of newlyweds on their honeymoon (back when "marital relations" were forbidden during Lent). The wife is getting frisky, but her husband tells her they can't make love because it's Lent. "Lent?" she cries, "To whom, and for how long?"
I'll get me coat...
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
But Sundays in Lent don't count - and don't forget that the fourth is Refreshment Sunday, aka Mothering Sunday...
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Simple: advise the faithful (in every sense of the word) to take out the wife/girlfriend/boyfriend to mark St Valentine on the 13th.
There is the added bonus that, since 13th February is Mistress Day, taking out the other half is added proof that you aren't indulging in some extra-marital hanky-panky.
Toodle-pip!
I'd never heard of Mistress Day. My wife is a florist, and every year, she has at least a few men who will come in to the shop and request two bouquets to be sent to two different addresses, but always for delivery on the 14th. (I'm not the cheating type, but even if I were, I can't imagine (a) being that blatant, or (b) trusting the florist not to feel bad for the two women and "accidentally" switching the cards.)
Incidentally, because the florist wife will be working from God knows how early to God knows how late, I'm having to skip singing on Ash Wednesday evening, as there will be no one else around to take care of the kid that night. I'm not entirely happy about it, but at least it won't happen again for eleven years.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
God forbid me for suggesting it, and please don't rush to burn me at the stake, but.....
......is there not perhaps a case for not only Ashing on Ash Wednesday, but also as part of the penitential rite on the first Sunday in Lent?
With the best will in the world. you're not going to get all the Faithful Few in Church on either the Wednesday or the Sunday, so why not 'double up'?
I'll get me hair-shirt on the way out.
IJ
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
WTF? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
God forgive me, I meant...
IJ
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
We get the added joy of celebrating Vietnamese New Year on the same day. How's that for a mix up?
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Mix-up indeed!
Do the Vietnamese humbly repent them of their sins of omission and commission during the past year? I can feel a liturgy (or, at the very least, a sermon) coming on!
IJ
Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
O, well - they can repent at leisure, then...
IJ
Or maybe re-Lent at pleasure!
(I'll get me coat then ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Well spotted - I hadn't noticed that rather delightful spoonerism!
IJ
Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
God forbid me for suggesting it, and please don't rush to burn me at the stake, but.....
......is there not perhaps a case for not only Ashing on Ash Wednesday, but also as part of the penitential rite on the first Sunday in Lent?
With the best will in the world. you're not going to get all the Faithful Few in Church on either the Wednesday or the Sunday, so why not 'double up'?
I'll get me hair-shirt on the way out.
IJ
The SEC's new experimental liturgy for Ash Wednesday commends its use on any day up to and including the first Sunday in Lent if it is not possible on Ash Wednesday. It also makes provision for the rite to be administered in the context of a service of the word if there is no Eucharist celebrated in that period. Which leads me back to my annual question: does the rite need to be led by a priest?
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
While the liturgical commemoration can be easily managed, the martyr's collect taking second place
Only ONE collect per mass.
Posted by BabyWombat (# 18552) on
:
I see no conflict. To celebrate that I love, and am loved, seems a perfect framework for entering that deeper reflection that is Lent. Even to attend Ash Wednesday services and then go out for a romantic dinner may provide that slightly dissonant tone that can hieghten awareness for other dissonance in my life.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Well that sorts out what to do for Lent this year. This is obviously the perfect opportunity to preach on 1 Cor 7:5, (here, to avoid copyright issues, from the WEB translation). Could anything be more appropriate?:-
quote:
3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection owed her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife doesn’t have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise also the husband doesn’t have authority over his own body, but the wife.
5 Don’t deprive one another, unless it is by consent for a season, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer, and may be together again, that Satan doesn’t tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
While the liturgical commemoration can be easily managed, the martyr's collect taking second place
Only ONE collect per mass.
From the work of the Blessèd Percy:
The Prayer Book gives no rule as to the collects being of an uneven number (which was not a universal custom); but it orders a second collect for Lent and Advent, and three for Good Friday; a memorial may no doubt be also added when there is a concurrence of festivals, or some special object of prayer, and one of the collects at the end of the Communion Service may be said ‘after the collects either of Morning or Evening Prayer, Communion, or Litany, by the discretion of the Minister.’
Posted by Fuzzipeg (# 10107) on
:
And Good Friday is April Fools Day.......
Posted by Stejjie (# 13941) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
And Good Friday is April Fools Day.......
Actually, it's Easter Sunday, not Good Friday. I'm sure there's some interesting preaching possibilities in it, though...
Posted by kingsfold (# 1726) on
:
Never mind the preaching, you'd not get that far...
V: Christ is Risen
R: He is Risen indeed, Alleluia!
V: Ha, April Fool!
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
While the liturgical commemoration can be easily managed, the martyr's collect taking second place
Only ONE collect per mass.
From the work of the Blessèd Percy:
The Prayer Book gives no rule as to the collects being of an uneven number (which was not a universal custom); but it orders a second collect for Lent and Advent, and three for Good Friday; a memorial may no doubt be also added when there is a concurrence of festivals, or some special object of prayer, and one of the collects at the end of the Communion Service may be said ‘after the collects either of Morning or Evening Prayer, Communion, or Litany, by the discretion of the Minister.’
Most of us have moved in since Dearmer.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Leo, I've heard the 'one' collect argument before, but can't remember where. Does it come from anywhere with any actual authority behind it? Or is it just one of those foibles that some particular self appointed expert has had a bee in their (I suspect 'his') bonnet at some time and which proves an opportunity to feel reassuringly superior when somebody else doesn't follow it?
It can't be binding as it's in conflict with the 1662 BCP, which mandates at least two at some Services of Holy Communion, and up to four at Morning and Evening Prayer.
Common Worship expresses a preference for only one, but does not go further than that. It also includes in one place rather an obscure note about inserting a second one and if so how and where to put it.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
My authority is ther Churchj of Rome - the oratio ad collectam = the prayer of the gathering. Either you are gathered or you aren't - you don't need to gather twice.
Any commemmorations belong in the intercessions/Prayer of the Faithful.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
Ah Leo you should have been clearer, so that we would have known that you were calling from the Land of GIRM. Among the Dearmerites one has been listening to a plurality of collects for ... well... far too long to mention. Still, I have one friend who was required to stand in front of his father on Saturday morning recite the next day's collect by heart, or there would be no pocket money for him.
One of the few I know who allows liturgical principles to affect her private life has transferred the commemoration of the martyr to the Friday following, doing so on the liturgical authority appropriated by redheads when they please.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
I can see that might be an authority if one is of what has been described as 'the Roman obedience'. However, that doesn't apply if one is isn't, whether CofE, Orthodox, CinW, Amos Starkadder's Church of the Quivering Brethren or whatever.
To each of us, the discipline and rules that govern us. I really do not think it's wholesome to be looking over our shoulders to see if somebody else has a rule that is different from ours, either so that we can use it as an excuse for letting ourselves off the hook, or so that we can feel superior to the rest of our own communion who are not true cognoscenti. If we think it's really so important that their rules are better than ours, we should be joining them. If we don't think we should be joining them, then we shouldn't take the line that some of their rules ought to be binding on us, or that members of our own communion are wrong or less up to scratch by following our own rules rather than theirs.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
The 'rule' about only one collect is obviously doesn't have the force of canon law in the C of E. But Common Worship has endorsed the liturgical principle behind it, that the point of the opening/gathering prayer or collect is to 'collect' or gather the prayers of the individuals who have gathered as the worshipping community. If you agree with that principle it makes no sense to have more than one 'collect'.
There are other understandings of the function of the collect, and if you don't see it in the above way it might well make sense to have more than one on some occasions.
It's not worth getting pedantic about either way. But the way we pray the liturgy ought to be directed by an understanding of its principles and not solely by legalism.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I can see that might be an authority if one is of what has been described as 'the Roman obedience'. ..... I really do not think it's wholesome to be looking over our shoulders to see if somebody else has a rule that is different from ours.... If we don't think we should be joining them,
The C of E inherited its sacraments and orders from Rome. Liturgical revision was prompted by Rome. Hopefully, we shall reconnect with our mother ship eventrually.
Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on
:
Ash Wednesday coinciding with St. Valentine's Day this year, hasn't happened since 1945. This year's date of Easter is Sunday 1st April (absit omen!} and that has not happened since 1956.
My information tells me that the date of Easter was/will be 1st April in 1923, 1934, 1945, 1956*, 2018, 2029,2040* and 2108*. So, there are only eight occurrences in almost two centuries! It can be seen that after a gap of eleven years apart, two or three times in succession, this particular date of Easter does not occur again for several decades!
The years marked with the asterisk (*) are/were leap years, when it is Shrove Tuesday that coincides with St. Valentine's Day, making 15th February the date of Ash Wednesday.
I leave this information with you as of interest to ponder.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I can see that might be an authority if one is of what has been described as 'the Roman obedience'. ..... I really do not think it's wholesome to be looking over our shoulders to see if somebody else has a rule that is different from ours.... If we don't think we should be joining them,
The C of E inherited its sacraments and orders from Rome. Liturgical revision was prompted by Rome. Hopefully, we shall reconnect with our mother ship eventrually.
While disagreeing with Leo on the particular, I sympathize with him on this general point. Even so, we need to take note that Rome is no longer so inclined to liturgical uniformity, and concessions for the usus antiquor and for the Anglican use would suggest that, should reconnexion transpire someday, we might be in a position where we can enjoy one, or many, collects.
Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on
:
Will we not get Ash Wednesday on the 14th Feb in 2024 when a 31st March Easter coincides with a leap year?
Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Will we not get Ash Wednesday on the 14th Feb in 2024 when a 31st March Easter coincides with a leap year?
I see what you are getting at and good thinking and as far as I can see, you are right! I could have made this part of my consideration if I had thought of it.
But that does not alter my main point about the rarity of the incidence of Ash Wednesday coinciding with St. Valentine's Day, since 31st March (leap year or non-leap year) as the date of Easter, is just as infrequent as being on 1st April.
As I indicated, the same date of Easter (governing Ash Wednesday's date) has a way of occurring briefly eleven (possibly 5 or 6) years apart a few times and then may not occur again until some 60 years later.
[ 13. February 2018, 16:37: Message edited by: Ecclesiastical Flip-flop ]
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0