Ship of Fools: Purple

Thread: Purple Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=030434

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :

We're coming into the Advent season with its purple colours which are meant to represent penitence, as in Lent, so I understand. I have also been told that purple represents spirituality, as well as royalty.

Sometimes purple altar frontals are used for funerals, and so I also associate purple with sadness. Am I mistaken?

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

This is why I much prefer blue for Advent -- so it doesn't seem like a "mini-Lent."

We use white for funerals to celebrate the Resurrection.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

I don't agree. Advent is a season of Preparation. So it is a sort of Lent. I suppose it ought really to be a time of fasting, but try that on one's family and wait for the flying plates.

Posted by Siegfried (# 29) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
This is why I much prefer blue for Advent -- so it doesn't seem like a "mini-Lent."

We use white for funerals to celebrate the Resurrection.

Deep blue is appropriate under Sarum.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

Blue is more appropriate. I have never been a fan of purple.

Posted by Wm Dewy (# 16712) on :

I think that "Sarum blue" for Advent is more a marketing scheme of vestment merchants than anything else. When I was a child, I recall thatblue was used for Marian feasts. Violet for Advent is good.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

Deep blue for Advent (with rose on the third Sunday), Black for funerals.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

We have white, for Easter and also weddings and funerals. Blue for Advent, a tapestry for all other times.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

We have purple for Advent and Lent. Rose for Rose Sunday would be very nice, but the cost could not be justified. It would be different were there a set handed down over decades. White of funerals (and of course Christmas, Easter and festivals - last Sunday being one.

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

My understanding is that historically, Advent Purple differed from Lent Purple in that it was a lighter shade. Eventually a lighter shade of purple was interpreted to be blue.

Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
My understanding is that historically, Advent Purple differed from Lent Purple in that it was a lighter shade. Eventually a lighter shade of purple was interpreted to be blue.

Indeed. In the Church the purple of Advent is sometimes trimmed or highlighted with gold.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Purple (with gold) for Sundays, except for Advent 3, when our beautiful rose-pink chasuble gets an outing. No matching dalmatic, though, so acting Deacon wears purple (looks awful agin the pink [Disappointed]

).

We also have a nice antique Sarum blue chasuble, which comes out on weekdays!

I.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

At our church instead of doing it with the vestments we do it with the Advent candles on the Advent wreath. Three purples and one pink one, like these. Originally we were working with four white ones, but then we got a rector who insisted that three purples and a pink were the right way to go.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Wm Dewy:
I think that "Sarum blue" for Advent is more a marketing scheme of vestment merchants than anything else. When I was a child, I recall thatblue was used for Marian feasts. Violet for Advent is good.

No - because churches that used blue for Advent used lenten array (unbleached linen) for lent - so NOT purple.

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

This article argues that Sarum Blue is not justified by the historical evidence.

My opinion is that if you want to distinguish the seasons of Advent and Lent with different colors, then fine (for you, I mean--I'm content with the Tridentine color scheme, including black for funerals). But to appeal to "Sarum Use" for your innovation just doesn't work, because it's pretty clear that different places within the provinces of Canterbury and York used different colors for Advent. Just admit that you're tinkering because you want to tinker.

Posted by Wm Dewy (# 16712) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
churches that used blue for Advent used lenten array (unbleached linen) for lent - so NOT purple.

Um, yes. Simply more anecdotal evidence that some parishes have been sold a bill of goods (and a couple bolts of cloth) by the merchants. [Biased]

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
This article argues that Sarum Blue is not justified by the historical evidence.

My opinion is that if you want to distinguish the seasons of Advent and Lent with different colors, then fine (for you, I mean--I'm content with the Tridentine color scheme, including black for funerals). But to appeal to "Sarum Use" for your innovation just doesn't work, because it's pretty clear that different places within the provinces of Canterbury and York used different colors for Advent. Just admit that you're tinkering because you want to tinker.

The article is probably right - St. Percy did invent the Bristish Museum Religion.

However, different cultures react to different colours differently. While white is a colour of joy in thr West, it's a colour or mourning in India.

I think blue strikes the right note of expectation in Advent and that unbleacheds linen is more penitential than purple.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Local Custom is a useful excuse..... [Big Grin]

Not only do we have the choice of purple or Sarum blue for Advent, but we also have a beautiful High Mass set for Marian festivals - in what I can best describe as Kingfisher or Azure blue! [Razz]

Posted by Emendator Liturgia (# 17245) on :

For us it is deep, deep blue for Advent - with a stylized Southern Cross in metallic silver. In lent we have frontal etc. in deep purple with a cross of nails and crown of thorns on the frontal and vestments.

and yes, we do have a High Mass set for Marian Festivals - glorious white with Marian blue trims and heavily embroidered with her monogram and lilies.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

The concept of preparation is intriguing. What are we preparing for? If the joy of Jesus's coming (1st or second) why wouldn't the appropriate color be one conveying joyful anticipation?

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
The concept of preparation is intriguing. What are we preparing for? If the joy of Jesus's coming (1st or second) why wouldn't the appropriate color be one conveying joyful anticipation?

That is what rose is for on the third Sunday.

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
My understanding is that historically, Advent Purple differed from Lent Purple in that it was a lighter shade. Eventually a lighter shade of purple was interpreted to be blue.

That's another canard floated by the church suppliers. At one point in the 1970s the liturgy committee of the bishops' conference even bought into it, and then blue started surfacing, too. Both notions were eventually put out to pasture. The traditional color is actually violet, rather than purple, and this is what the rubrics call for. There has been some attempt in recent decades to play down the penitential aspects of advent, but historically, while not as somber as lent, it was still a penitential period, which is why marriages were not celebrated. Penance services are a common feature of the season.

Posted by american piskie (# 593) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
The concept of preparation is intriguing. What are we preparing for? If the joy of Jesus's coming (1st or second) why wouldn't the appropriate color be one conveying joyful anticipation?
That is what rose is for on the third Sunday.

Fr Leslie Arnold of SS Mary & John Oxford used to put on the rose vestments on 17th December and keep them on until Christmas, on the grounds that the joyful anticipation wasn't just a brief flicker on Advent 3. But as well as the High Mass set he'd had cobbled up from materials bought in the street markets of Leeds (pink and dusky grey, "like the morning clouds"), he had several rather nice low mass sets.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

posted by Belle Ringer

quote:
The concept of preparation is intriguing. What are we preparing for? If the joy of Jesus's coming (1st or second) why wouldn't the appropriate color be one conveying joyful anticipation?

I'm amazed you ask that question. On one level Advent is a time of anticipation of the birth of the messiah. But if you look at messianic passages in the OT you'll see that the coming of the messiah is associated with the end of time and so there is also the theme of preparing for the last judgement. That is why the tradition is that Advent is a time of penitence when we make ourselves ready for the end time through fasting and prayer, confession and repentance. And since it is a time of penitence we wear appropriate colours to signify the season as such.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Belle Ringer
quote:
The concept of preparation is intriguing. What are we preparing for? If the joy of Jesus's coming (1st or second) why wouldn't the appropriate color be one conveying joyful anticipation?
I'm amazed you ask that question. On one level Advent is a time of anticipation of the birth of the messiah. But if you look at messianic passages in the OT you'll see that the coming of the messiah is associated with the end of time and so there is also the theme of preparing for the last judgement. That is why the tradition is that Advent is a time of penitence when we make ourselves ready for the end time through fasting and prayer, confession and repentance. And since it is a time of penitence we wear appropriate colours to signify the season as such.

While I agree with this, I'd add to it. In Advent we aren't preparing for Jesus's first coming, his birth. That has already happened. We are preparing to celebrate and enter into the mystery of the Incarnation. We prepare for that by self-examination, confession and repentance. And yes, traditionally, by fasting.

Posted by Knopwood (# 11596) on :

I'm not terribly fussed about the line between purple and dark blue, which I suspect might have been fuzzier before the advent [Biased]

of chemical dyes. There is a gorgeous antique (possibly Comper but I can't recall) blue set at St Martin-in-the-Fields in Toronto. Blue Advent vestments are definitely different from Marian blue. I perhaps wouldn't rush to acquire one if I were a cleric serving somewhere that didn't have them. And the rationale about it being penitential is a bit naff. Dark blue is an old English colour for requiems (and don't forget the Dies irae was originally an Advent sequence).

The Benedictines of Christminster (ROCOR Western Rite) use blue for Advent outwith Rose Sunday, as does St Ignatius of Antioch.

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

Blue might be a modern liturgical innovation, like proclaiming the Gospel from the middle of the Nave, but it can be argued that it's a good modern liturgical innovation. [Smile]

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

Yes - singing the gospel facing north east was very odd.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

Blue strikes me as a bit extravagant for only four Sundays, but I can see a certain sense in it.

What utterly sets my teeth on edge - I wish I was a holier person - is the C of E's affectation for red between All Saints and Advent with Christ the King the same colour (red) as for a non festal day in the ersatz season.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

In ye olde days we used the blue again for the 3 gesima Sundays.

Now that the C of E has brought these back in all but name, perhaps we could use them thus again.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

This year, we've used red for the soi-disant Kingdom Season, though using white for Christ the King. Advent purple tomorrow, of course, with maybe an outing for Sarum blue during the week.....

......and somehow I

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

This year, we've been in red for the soi-disant Kingdom Season, though using white for Christ the King. Advent purple tomorrow, of course, with maybe an outing for Sarum blue during the week.....

......though somehow I feel that it really doesn't matter all that much to the Lord who made Heaven and Earth, the Sea, and all that in them is.....

.......but it might to the Faithful Few (aka The Usual Suspects), in which case a brief explanation of the colours (and Local Usage) might be helpful.

I.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Humble apologies for cocked-up post......it's been a loooong day.......

I.

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
......though somehow I feel that it really doesn't matter all that much to the Lord who made Heaven and Earth, the Sea, and all that in them is.....

And here I was picturing all of the angels spending today decking out Heaven in the proper-colored hangings for Advent (and setting out the wreath, as well).

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
What utterly sets my teeth on edge - I wish I was a holier person - is the C of E's affectation for red between All Saints and Advent with Christ the King the same colour (red) as for a non festal day in the ersatz season.

It's a liturgical wank that certain pretentious elements of the self righteous set down under downunda have adopted with glee [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Maybe - but w**nking can be quite satisfying....(or so I am told),

I.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Yes - singing the gospel facing north east was very odd.

What!!? Who does/did that? That's pointing away from the congregation. Nobody would be able to hear.

quote:
Originally posted by Bishop's Finger:
......though somehow I feel that it really doesn't matter all that much to the Lord who made Heaven and Earth, the Sea, and all that in them is.....

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

IIRC, the Gospel was proclaimed facing north (not sure about north-east), coz that's where the heathens were..... [Paranoid]

Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on :

Entirely unpenitential magenta and gold does duty for such things in circles around here. Makes the eyes bleed. Would far rather have ink blue, which I believe is the right shade.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
IIRC, the Gospel was proclaimed facing north (not sure about north-east), coz that's where the heathens were.....

Were they marched in and sat there so that they could hear it - presumably in special pews marked 'heathen', 'unclean' or 'damned' just in case they didn't get the point? Or perhaps they were made to sit on the floor?

Leo have you ever actually seen this? Can you enlighten us?

[ 28. November 2015, 19:49: Message edited by: Enoch ]

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Blue strikes me as a bit extravagant for only four Sundays, but I can see a certain sense in it.

What utterly sets my teeth on edge - I wish I was a holier person - is the C of E's affectation for red between All Saints and Advent with Christ the King the same colour (red) as for a non festal day in the ersatz season.

Agreed. Sundays after Trinity run up until Advent.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Blue might be a modern liturgical innovation, like proclaiming the Gospel from the middle of the Nave, but it can be argued that it's a good modern liturgical innovation.

As a judge once said to my opponent, anything's arguable, but the point must be to ask if it is a good argument. What is the good argument for blue, unless you're in the business of selling vestments, frontals and so forth?

Enoch, the heathens lived in the north - Scandinavians, Russians, the Germanic tribes and so forth. It was also the source of icy winter blizzards. The Gospel was proclaimed facing north in the hope of educating them. OTOH, you could say that they lived in the south as well, with the heathen Nubians and so forth, as well as the origin of the hot dry winds which parched the cops and killed sheep. No-one seems to have tried this for some reason.

[ 28. November 2015, 20:52: Message edited by: Gee D ]

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

So I guess here in the U.S. we'd be aiming at those heathen Canadians...
[Razz]

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
... Enoch, the heathens lived in the north - Scandinavians, Russians, the Germanic tribes and so forth. It was also the source of icy winter blizzards. The Gospel was proclaimed facing north in the hope of educating them. OTOH, you could say that they lived in the south as well, with the heathen Nubians and so forth, as well as the origin of the hot dry winds which parched the cops and killed sheep. No-one seems to have tried this for some reason.

So it was only being proclaimed symbolically to an empty space, to heathens who weren't actually there to hear it?

There are times when I feel I have a blind spot when it comes to some sorts of symbolism. There are other times when I feel I've got a point.

It's very, very like the people I've mentioned on the Lord's Prayer thread who were preaching in an empty market place, who, indeed had chosen the emptiest and safest time to do so.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

It was purely symbolic, just as facing east for the Creed was and still is. It's a long way east from here to Jerusalem.

[ 29. November 2015, 08:58: Message edited by: Gee D ]

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
It was purely symbolic, just as facing east for the Creed was and still is. It's a long way east from here to Jerusalem.

But it's not Jerusalem that's being faced when the Creed is said. It's the East itself, where the sun rises and where (symbolically, at least) Christ is expected to return. It derives from the baptismal rite,when the renunciations were made facing west (toward the darkness of the setting sun) and then the Apostle's Creed was said facing east.

Whether the East is further away or closer than Jerusalem, or both simultaneously, I'll leave for others to consider.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
IIRC, the Gospel was proclaimed facing north (not sure about north-east), coz that's where the heathens were.....
Were they marched in and sat there so that they could hear it - presumably in special pews marked 'heathen', 'unclean' or 'damned' just in case they didn't get the point? Or perhaps they were made to sit on the floor?

Leo have you ever actually seen this? Can you enlighten us?

I remember reading that the Visigoths and similar pagans who were catechumens were seated on the north side of the church in some places, giving rise to the practice (also justified by Jeremiah 3.12). Jungmann writes that it was so that the deacon did not have to face the women's side of the congregation in the very early western church, an explanation which I have never heard before--- perhaps they just should have put the gospeller on a turntable (although that might excite some liturgical committees to an unimaginable level).

It is still the custom in some places (as it was in the ancient synagogue) that women and men sat separately, so this might be a better explanation than the northern pagan theme, although half a century ago it was put to me with great warmth by the late Archdeacon Bradley, a big fan of the Venerable Bede and that period.

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

Definitely purple, and the Kyries sung instead of the Gloria. Advent candles all in white.

I rather like Christmas Decorations in purple too, not sure what the purists would think of that!

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Leo have you ever actually seen this? Can you enlighten us?

Yes - always in my teens before the changes prompted by Vatican 2.

At a low mass, the book was moved during the gradual from south to north end and the priest said the gospel facing the book.

At a solemn mass, it was processed to to=he north end of the sanctuary.

As for audibilitty, that's why it was always sung at any mass other than a low mass.

As for the reasons/symbolism, others have already answered that.

Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
This is why I much prefer blue for Advent -- so it doesn't seem like a "mini-Lent."

We use white for funerals to celebrate the Resurrection.

But Advent IS a mini Lent. It is a penitential season and traditionally involves fasting in the run up to Christmas - it's why people eat fish on Christmas Eve.

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

Yes, the gospel at Solemn Mass was always sung facing north, usually inside, or in a small church, just outside the sanctuary. It still is in places where the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite is celebrated. It is not odd-looking, as usually the gospel procession is not that far from the altar, and it does not involve an unusual seating arrangements. See. http://youtu.be/bWmcbpXd_3Q

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Advent... traditionally involves fasting in the run up to Christmas - it's why people eat fish on Christmas Eve.

Never heard of eating fish Christmas Eve!

But I grew up low church in the Protestant Episcopal Church. In my youth we didn't have colored hangings, the only garment worn by clergy was black, year round. Fasting (giving up meat for fish) was scorned as "Catholic" (usually pronounced "Papish").

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

...don't tell me- when you were so poor you could only afford meat once a week, you always saved it for Friday... [Big Grin]

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Advent... traditionally involves fasting in the run up to Christmas - it's why people eat fish on Christmas Eve.
Never heard of eating fish Christmas Eve!

Me neither -- except my Swedish grandmother who had to have her herring on Christmas Eve (but at least it wasn't lutefisk!).

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :

It is traditional in many countries e.g. Oysters in France, eel in Italy, carp in Poland.

Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :

Cod in egg sauce popular in my circles. The tortiere came out at Revillon, after mass on Christmas Eve. Usually that was, in my youth, at 0130.

Posted by Knopwood (# 11596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

Fasting (giving up meat for fish) was scorned as "Catholic" (usually pronounced "Papish").

They can't have been reading their prayer books then!

Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on :

Surely everyone's heard of the Italian Feast of Seven Fishes? But yes, fish on Christmas Eve is extremely common and the norm in Catholic countries.

Now being used by food charities.

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Surely everyone's heard of the Italian Feast of Seven Fishes? But yes, fish on Christmas Eve is extremely common and the norm in Catholic countries.

Nope, this is a new one for me. But I never lived in a Catholic country. (The Catholic traditions in these parts are mostly Hispanic.)

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Surely everyone's heard of the Italian Feast of Seven Fishes? But yes, fish on Christmas Eve is extremely common and the norm in Catholic countries.

Now I am confused. Is eating fish "fasting" or "feasting"?

Anyway, I thought fasting means eating simple foods, common and inexpensive. Where I live the simple meals are vegetarian, like beans and rice, or rice and lentils, or a peanut butter sandwich.

Where I live, fish is a more special food than chicken or the cheaper cuts of beef than have to be ground or pounded or cooked for hours to be edible. The idea of fish as universally a common cheaply available food therefore a food for fasting is inconsistent with practical reality.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

In most of Central Europe the traditional Christmas dinner eaten on the evening of 24th December is completely meatless. In Poland it is called 'Wigilia'.The main course is by tradition carp.

Until about 30 years ago the Eve of Christmas was a fast day in the Catholic church and this has had enormous influence on the traditional form of the Christmas Eve dinner.

For almost every area in Europe apart from the British Isles the family meal for Christmas is held on the evening of 24th Dec.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

/slight tangent alert/

It was the American satirist/song writer Tom Lehrer who, many years ago (when introducing Vatican Rag) observed that there seemed to be some inconsistency in the RCC's rules, in that 'it was all right for a soldier to kill a man on a Friday, but a sin to eat him......'.

My own p-in-c (not an RC, but if the Pope says 'Jump!, he asks 'How high?') was recently rabbiting on about how and his wife had 'pigged out' (his words) on a cheap-and-cheerful pizza one Friday at our new local ASDA. He pointed out the fact that the pizza was meat-free, but got a bit antsy when I asked how this was in any way 'fasting' (given that his own stated reason for abstaining from meat on Fridays was to give honour to Our Lord and his sufferings on the cross....).

WTF is all this shite about?

I.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
/slight tangent alert/

. . .

My own p-in-c (not an RC, but if the Pope says 'Jump!, he asks 'How high?') was recently rabbiting on about how and his wife had 'pigged out' (his words) on a cheap-and-cheerful pizza one Friday at our new local ASDA. He pointed out the fact that the pizza was meat-free, but got a bit antsy when I asked how this was in any way 'fasting' (given that his own stated reason for abstaining from meat on Fridays was to give honour to Our Lord and his sufferings on the cross....).

WTF is all this shite about?

Reminds me somewhat of the church where I sang in the choir while in college. The Good Friday service was three hours long—technically, it was three separate services back-to-back, with some cushion between. Lunch was available in the parish hall throughout. Since it was Good Friday, the lunch was meatless. The main dish on offer was lobster bisque.

That always seemed to me to be missing the point somewhat, adhering to the letter of law while totally missing the spirit of the law.

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Knopwood:

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

Fasting (giving up meat for fish) was scorned as "Catholic" (usually pronounced "Papish").
They can't have been reading their prayer books then!

The Geneva-gown ghetto has never been any better at obeying the prayer book than the Anglo-Catholics have.

Although I will say that in my experience, A-Cs are more apt to add to what's in the BCP than to subtract from it.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

Nick Tamen posts:

quote:
The main dish on offer was lobster bisque.
That always seemed to me to be missing the point somewhat, adhering to the letter of law while totally missing the spirit of the law.

Not necessarily; the rector may have been aware that his choir contained several gourmands who were allergic to shellfish.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

Lytton Strachey in his picture of Cardinal Wiseman quotes one of Wiseman's colleagues who, after describing how HE sat down to a lunch containing 4 courses of fish, said that "There is a lobster salad side to the Cardinal".

Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Surely everyone's heard of the Italian Feast of Seven Fishes? But yes, fish on Christmas Eve is extremely common and the norm in Catholic countries.
Now I am confused. Is eating fish "fasting" or "feasting"?

Anyway, I thought fasting means eating simple foods, common and inexpensive. Where I live the simple meals are vegetarian, like beans and rice, or rice and lentils, or a peanut butter sandwich.

Where I live, fish is a more special food than chicken or the cheaper cuts of beef than have to be ground or pounded or cooked for hours to be edible. The idea of fish as universally a common cheaply available food therefore a food for fasting is inconsistent with practical reality.

Eating fish is fasting, but Christmas Eve is often the day many Europeans open their gifts and is the main day of Christmas so in this case it is part of a feast. I don't see the confusion.

Also of course fish isn't a requirement of Catholic fasting but going without meat is - I can't imagine that vegetarian food is particularly rare or expensive where you live, and that is a perfectly normal feature of Catholic fasting. Vintage recipe cards for Lenten dishes from Catholic areas often show dishes like macaroni cheese or vegetarian stuffed peppers.

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

A little clarification here, since we are speaking about RC disciplines in this tangent.

Fasting is going without food. It means having only one meal in the day, and two small snacks ("collations"), which together do not add up to a full meal. The only canonically required fasting days currently are Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. Others, however, can be recommended by the Pontiff or the bishops. Francis did so for peace in the Middle East in 2013. Sometimes bishops' conferences or individual bishops will do the same, for a specific cause. As has been mentioned here, the pre-Vatican II discipline included a greater number of fast days, one of which was the Vigil of Christmas, a.k.a. Christmas Eve.

Abstinence is the practice of not eating meat. This is canonically required on all Fridays of the year, except on solemnities, which are the highest-ranking feasts, that fall on a Friday. Two solemnities that are always on Fridays are Easter Friday and the Sacred Heart. Others may fall on a Friday. However, bishops' conferences may permit the substitution of another discipline in place of abstinence on Fridays outside of Lent. Some bishops' conferences specify which substitutions can be made: Not sure if this is still the case, but the French bishops directed Friday abstinence from meat, wine or cigarettes, at the choice of the individual. U.S. and Canadian bishops direct the individual to decide on the Friday practice outside of Lent--the instruction of which, sadly, has been neglected by many priests, leaving their parishioners thinking that only on Lenten Fridays is anything different done from the rest of the week. The English bishops for many years had a similar "choose it yourself" directive (though they listed some choices among the options), re-established the traditional year-round abstinence in 2011.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Thanks for the clarification, Ceremoniar. ISTM that abstaining from meat but pigging out on a non-meat pizza somehow misses the point.....though I'm still not sure exactly what the point of abstaining from meat actually is .

Whatever, this sort of thing should surely be a private matter between the person concerned and God, if it is part of their personal spirituality. Who was it who said we shouldn't parade our piety in front of others?

Apologies for prolonging the tangent.

Our Place was duly empurpled on Sunday, complete with Advent wreath (3xpurple candles, 1xpink, and 1xwhite).

I.

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I'm still not sure exactly what the point of abstaining from meat actually is .

Meats will thank you

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

In the olden days meat was something which could not easily be afforded or even obtained every day, at least for most people.

It made sense to give up something which was special on the day traditionally associated with the death of the Lord.

Nowadays this situation no longer obtains ,at least in the developed world .This is why the traditional practice of Catholics abstaining from meat on Fridays was dispensed with,at the time of Vatican 2.

Catholics were asked to choose their own penance on a Friday. No doubt some do , but centuries of thinking of no meat on a Friday, can not be changed to something else easily.

It was said to be a mortal sin to eat meat on a Friday and this idea was backed up often from the pulpit,almost as bad as missing Mass on a Sunday. Since Vatican 2 one rarely hears of mortal sin, sometimes one even rarely hears of sin and most people have completely forgotten what used to be a distinguishing mark of Catholics.

BF asks what is the point? Fair enough,it is just a trifle compared with recognising Jesus as out Lord and Saviour. One could equally ask, what is the point of using purple vestments during Advent or rose coloured vestments on the 3rd Sunday of Advent ? How far do these traditions advance the Kingdom of God on earth or prepare Christians for the Kingdom to come ?

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Thanks for the clarification, Ceremoniar. ISTM that abstaining from meat but pigging out on a non-meat pizza somehow misses the point.....though I'm still not sure exactly what the point of abstaining from meat actually is .

Whatever, this sort of thing should surely be a private matter between the person concerned and God, if it is part of their personal spirituality. Who was it who said we shouldn't parade our piety in front of others?

I would agree about feasting on non-meat on days of abstinence. Eating a ton of ice cream would be equally un-penitential for most--though not all, certainly. Those who follow the letter of the law to the exclusion of its spirit do so at their own risk.

The point of abstinence is sacrifice, since meat is a staple (if not the staple) of diets in much of the world. The lack of substance and sustenance is intended to serve a penitential purpose, through self-denial. Obviously, there is no small number of folks for whom abstinence from meat is no penance, such as vegetarians. They would be well-advised to abstain from something closer to their palate. But the Church's law is quite minimal, as it is intended to point people in the direction of sanctity through moderation, not actually accomplish it. Our Lord did give His Church the power to bind and loose, through Peter. So a minimal discipline is established, and people are asked to accept and practice it, in the name of fostering holiness, and uniting themselves with the Lord's practice in the desert. Should there be a truly extraordinary situation, a dispensation may be sought from one's confessor or pastor.

As for not parading piety, that's obviously a given. Nothing in the minimal discipline that the Church currently practices even remotely suggests doing so, and I am unclear as to how or why it is even mentioned here. People who fast or abstain should not be advertising it, or even bring it up, IMHO, unless specifically asked. Even then, the explanation should be brief, factual, and free of anything even remotely self-aggrandizing. I've never really noticed anyone do otherwise.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Thank you, Ceremoniar - very clearly explained.

The person I mentioned does tend to parade his Friday abstinence, perhaps thinking that it makes him look more holy. He is not a member of the RCC, so not bound even by the minimal (and very sensible-sounding) discipline you describe.

I.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
Yes, the gospel at Solemn Mass was always sung facing north, usually inside, or in a small church, just outside the sanctuary. It still is in places where the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite is celebrated. It is not odd-looking, as usually the gospel procession is not that far from the altar, and it does not involve an unusual seating arrangements. See. http://youtu.be/bWmcbpXd_3Q The gospel procession forms at 22:00 in.

Thank you for all those who've commented about this curious custom. 'One learns something new every day'. I have to admit though that the only sense in which it does not look odd is that since the whole service is in a tongue not understanded of the people, a thicko like me might not have realised when the service had got to at that point.

Incidentally, I happen to have a Catholic Sunday Missal from the 1940s. It has a parallel translation of everything that was then in Latin. It looks as though it covered the UK and Irish Republic. It gives the strong impression that the Gospel was normally said or sung (depending on whether a Low or High Mass) in English. The rubric says the gospel is read from the gospel (i.e. left) side but there's no suggestion it was read or sung facing in any other direction than the obvious one, i.e. towards the people who are supposed to be listening to it.

I'm CofE and have no experience of a pre-Vatican II Mass. So I suppose four questions about those days. Is there any Catholic shipmate old enough to remember?

1. Was the gospel normally in Latin or the vernacular?
2. Did this differ depending on whether you were in the British Isles or another Anglophone part of the world?
3. At an ordinary parish Mass, would it usually have been read or sung?
4. In which direction would the person reading or singing it have been facing?

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
In the olden days meat was something which could not easily be afforded or even obtained every day, at least for most people.

It made sense to give up something which was special on the day traditionally associated with the death of the Lord.

Nowadays this situation no longer obtains ,at least in the developed world .This is why the traditional practice of Catholics abstaining from meat on Fridays was dispensed with,at the time of Vatican 2.

Thank you for the history. Growing up in a "meat is the cheap food, fish is a special and rare treat" culture, I never understood why eating fish instead of meat was considered "fasting" (abstinence). Sounds like "eat simple foods on Fridays" would have communicated less confusingly.

I don't question the point of periodic abstinence or fasting; I question taking a locally reasonable custom and imposing it on all the world even where locally it doesn't make sense, such as "eat fish instead of meat on Fridays." That culture-bound proclamation confuses instead of clarifying the underlying message.

But several web pages say the RCC rule against meat still applies during lent, even for lands where fish is more expensive and less common than meat. Sounds like awareness that in some areas meat is cheaper and more common than fish isn't the full reason for removing the "avoid meat" rule.

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I don't question the point of periodic abstinence or fasting; I question taking a locally reasonable custom and imposing it on all the world even where locally it doesn't make sense, such as "eat fish instead of meat on Fridays." That culture-bound proclamation confuses instead of clarifying the underlying message.

You're forgetting the 11th Commandment: "Because that's the way we've always done it."

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Thank you for the history. Growing up in a "meat is the cheap food, fish is a special and rare treat" culture, I never understood why eating fish instead of meat was considered "fasting" (abstinence). Sounds like "eat simple foods on Fridays" would have communicated less confusingly.

Well indeed. To quote some doggerel I once heard,

quote:
The Church's rules on abstinence,
Most peculiar are.
She bids me Feast on sausage-meat
And Fast on caviare.

I would however take issue with the concept of meat as a 'staple'. It never was, and the idea that it might be is a feature almost unique to the developed world in the last few decades - and obviously completely unsustainable. Meat was to be avoided because it was a luxury, and I believe the Eastern rites are more explicit about forbidding other luxuries such as alcohol and dairy products as well.

Most of the people who were subject to the rule wouldn't even have noticed it, any more than the average Christian in Sub-Saharan African does today. Not very difficult to avoid eating meat when you mostly eat millet porridge every meal of your life...

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
... Meat was to be avoided because it was a luxury, and I believe the Eastern rites are more explicit about forbidding other luxuries such as alcohol and dairy products as well. ...

Orthodox shipmates will undoubtedly know a lot more than I do, but I understand the position to be that on a fast day, ( inter alia the whole of Lent and every Monday, Wednesday and Friday throughout the year) no animal products at all, not just no meat or fish, but no milk, cheese, butter, eggs etc, nothing cooked with fat, no oil and no wine.

I seem to remember hearing somewhere that the wine prohibition is specifically of wine, not alcohol, so that beer is OK.

On the other hand, fish without spines, such as shrimps or shellfish don't count as fish. Nor do snails. There's even a category of feasting fasting recipes (e.g. shrimps) for eating if a saint's day falls on a Monday, Wednesday or Friday.

Perhaps an Orthodox shipmate can also tell us how strictly in practice ordinary lay people in, say, Greece or the US, keep this.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I'm still not sure exactly what the point of abstaining from meat actually is .

Meats will thank you

I have a friend who abstains from meat during Lent (not even munching on a permitted sausage on Sundays or red-letter days) on the grounds that he is able to enter into a time when he does not derive his sustenance from the lives of other creatures.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

Enoch
in pre Vatican 2 days the Gospel would have been read IN LATIN in all Roman Catholic churches whether they were in UK,France,America,Africa or China or indeed anywhere in the world.

Most Masses would have been Low Masses without music. The priest would have faced the altar and the tabernacle (he would have had his back to the people and leading them towards God).

At Sunday Masses the Gospel (and the epistle) would usually be read in the vernacular also, generally from the pulpit at the same time as the priest was in the pulpit for the sermon.

At the principal Mass on a Sunday if it were celebrated as a Missa Cantata (Sung Mass) then the Gospel would be sung in Latin in the same way that it was read.

Only on the relatively rare occasions for ordinary Catholic parishes when High Mass was sung
(celebration with a deacon and sub deacon) would the Gospel be sung facing liturgical north (to help announce the Word of God to the unevangelised north when Christianity was already well developed in the south of Europe.

Enoch may have seen in a typical popular missal from the period of the 1940s that the Epistle and Gospel were often printed only in the vernacular.
This was not because they were read or sung in the vernacular,but simply because most people in the pews would not want to read the Gospel in Latin and it would save on printing costs.
On the other hand they might want to read in Latin both the Ordinary (mainly unchanging parts)
as well as the Latin forms of the Introit,Gradual,Offertory and Communion verses which might be sung by the choir at a Sung Mass.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

Thank you Forthview.

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

Remember that the Extraordinary Form continues to be celebrated regularly in many places, especially in the English, French and German-speaking worlds. I realize that this still quite a small number of venues, vis-a-vis the entire Catholic population of the world, but with the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and the Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest (and a few other orders) ordaining more and more priests each year, the number of traditional Latin Masses continues to grow. Several full-sized seminaries fuel this movement.

I'm not looking to open a discussion on the merits of this, or forecast its future appeal. I mention it only because its use is a normal, everyday function for those of us who attend such parishes and oratories. Many here speak of its use as something limited to the past, while there are many clerics and laymen who live it, along with associated devotions and catechesis, on an ongoing basis.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

Ceremoniar, I would hope not to be speak of the pre Vatican 2 Roman rite Mass, only as something of the past.

It was something extremely important to me when I was young and I am still happy to attend such a Mass from time to time.

Although people participated in a different way from nowadays at a standard type Novus Ordo Mass, they did participate FULLY in a devotional way, even although most people did not understand every word. They did know and appreciate what was going on.

The Mass, as I described it,was the only way of celebrating Mass,as far as Roman Rite Catholics were concerned.

It was very much the priest's Mass, as he said everything,even when the choir sang.

Nowadays both clergy and laity play their active part in the celebration.

In popular forms of the Roman Missal the Canon of the Mass was often given only in the vernacular,as it was recited silently(because it was so awe inspiring),so only those who knew Latin needed to have it in Latin.

If anyone has seen the new film 'Brooklyn' it starts with an Irish priest celebrating Mass reciting out loud the prayers of the Canon of the Mass. This would most certainly not have been the case before the 1960s

Posted by Emendator Liturgia (# 17245) on :

I mentioned some entries back that in 2014 we had commissioned a new set of Advent vestments in blue. If anyone would like to have a look of them you can find it here: Anglican Communities of Our Lady

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

Will many of you be using Rose vestments this Sunday?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Our Place will doubtless field our lovely rose chasuble - alas, no matching dalmatic/tunicle.

I.

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

We will.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

The two posts above from Forthview are very, very good. A fine explanation of the positive way the Tridentine mass worked without being sentimental or antiquarian.

I hope there will be some way to preserve them when this thread goes.

Posted by Baker (# 18458) on :

American Episcopalian checking in here. I worship at the cathedral church of my diocese.

We use Sarum Blue during Advent, unbleached linen during Lent.

Now I was raised Lutheran, conservative at that, and the church at which I was raised still uses purple for both Advent and Lent.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

Just for the record, I've never heard of blue in Advent in England in the last forty years.

I have a hazy recollection of blue at Exeter Cathedral some forty years ago, but I have never since come across Sarum colours.

Blue certainly isn't recommended in the C of E lectionary which sticks to purple.

Posted by georgiaboy (# 11294) on :

Here in the abbey church, the chasuble and dalmatic were a lovely soft rose (slightly edging toward lavender, perhaps), but the stoles for the con-celebrants were ROSE!! It was a striking shade, but extremely bold, and I'm glad that the chas and dal were not of the same fabric.
Excellent liturgy, though, complete with solemn opening of the Holy Door (we're so designated by the local archbishop).

About Holy Door(s), I'll probably start another thread.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Baker:
Now I was raised Lutheran, conservative at that, and the church at which I was raised still uses purple for both Advent and Lent.

Around here, blue seems to be the norm in ELCA congregations, and this resource at the ELCA website seems to present blue as preferred. Likewise, this page at the LCMS website also seems to presume blue is the preferred color, but I'm not as familiar with what local LCMS churches actually do.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

posted by venbede

quote:
Just for the record, I've never heard of blue in Advent in England in the last forty years.

Really? Well the place where I am has never used anything else, other than rose for Laetare; we keep purple for Lent.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

Live and learn.

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Live and learn.

I have only ever seen it in Westminster Abbey and St Mary's Primrose Hill.

Posted by Sarum Sleuth (# 162) on :

I have been in Romsey Abbey today and frontal and vestments were both blue. Several cathedrals still use blue, Derby changing to blue from purple last year. Incidentally, Westminster Abbey uses red for Advent; the blue comes out for royal occasions. St Margaret's next door however uses blue. So the practice is not as uncommon as all that.

SS

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :

In my curacy parish I discovered in a forgotten cupboard an electric blue stole and chazzie. Apparently my training vicar had been given it at the end of his first year because the parish was in a region that traditionally supported a team that wore that colour [Killing me]

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

quote:
Originally posted by Baker:
Now I was raised Lutheran, conservative at that, and the church at which I was raised still uses purple for both Advent and Lent.
Around here, blue seems to be the norm in ELCA congregations, and this resource at the ELCA website seems to present blue as preferred. Likewise, this page at the LCMS website also seems to presume blue is the preferred color, but I'm not as familiar with what local LCMS churches actually do.

My understanding is that the LCMS using blue for Advent only started up in the last 30 years or so. Many (including us) still use purple (though our host congregation uses blue).

Posted by Sacerdote (# 11627) on :

For some reason at Westminster Cathedral they always used to sing the Gospel facing about NW (liturgical NW that is.)I never knew why.
The ceremonies of Low Mass are derived from those of High Mass, so the Gospel is read facing the (liturgical) NE, ie as near North as possible, with the book on the altar, while the epistle is read facing east, as the subdeacon would do it at High Mass.
I'm not sure why the current Anglican fad of traipsing off down the centre aisle & usually directing the Gospel vaguely into the NW or SW corner of the church irritates me so, except that in practice it just doesn't work. The Gospel seems smothered down there. Better to my mind a shorter procession to a dignified raised ambo or lectern, if suitable worthily adorned, and facing the assembly.

Posted by Basilica (# 16965) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sacerdote:
I'm not sure why the current Anglican fad of traipsing off down the centre aisle & usually directing the Gospel vaguely into the NW or SW corner of the church irritates me so, except that in practice it just doesn't work. The Gospel seems smothered down there. Better to my mind a shorter procession to a dignified raised ambo or lectern, if suitable worthily adorned, and facing the assembly.

I've always assumed it comes from an entirely laudable desire to distinguish the Gospel reading from the others. In a Roman Catholic mass, the distinction is clearly made by music, candles, etc. These are frequently omitted in Anglican churches.

The other thing is that the ambo is not a feature of most Anglican churches.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Basilica:

The other thing is that the ambo is not a feature of most Anglican churches.

Large brass eagle lecterns are the ultimate MOTR piece of furniture.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0