Ship of Fools: Introit censing

Thread: Introit censing 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=008519

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

I though that only the altar was censed at the beginning of mass.

Last night, I saw the gospel book, in the centre of the altar, censed with 3 crosses (like the oblations but without the circles), then the celebrant (a ‘flying bishop’)

(I would have done a MW Report on this but I vaguely kow nthe preacher, our suffragan bishop.)

Was this censing correct?

Is there a diagram online to show how to cense a free-standing altar? (Ritual Notes used to have an appendix with such a diagram)

Posted by keibat (# 5287) on :

There are diagrams in Fr Dennis Michno's excellent Priest's Handbook, which turn out to be available online here:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Po1Ocgw79DMC&pg=PT84&lpg=PT84&dq=michno+%2B+censing-the-altar&source=bl&ots=dGxB8uXVCT&si g=UkMsYZr7AMcPY9lTFvKMKvBIGF0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwievc2G3rnWAhVHvRoKHVfoAWcQ6AEIVTAJ#v=onepage&q=michno%20%2B%20censing-the -altar&f=false

In using Michno, one does sometimes need to be aware that he is referencing the situation in that Episcopal Church which no longer identifies itself as being 'of the USA' since it also operates in some other countries, such as Cuba, but is nonetheless very much a States-baed church; hence his refs to the Book of Common Prayer need to be recognized as referring to the 1979 liturgy of that ecclesial jurisdiction.

Posted by keibat (# 5287) on :

Sorry - got thrown by the 'witty' response page from the Ship about having to do the hokey-pokey between postings – and couldn't find how to delete the duplicate post.

Posted by JH (# 17310) on :

The celebrant is censed at the beginning of Mass at an Anglo-Catholic church where I sometimes serve.

He is also censed at the offertory in the usual way.

I have not come across the practice elsewhere and had been puzzled by it.

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

quote:
Originally posted by JH:
The celebrant is censed at the beginning of Mass at an Anglo-Catholic church where I sometimes serve.

He is also censed at the offertory in the usual way.

I have not come across the practice elsewhere and had been puzzled by it.

Sounds like our place. During the Introit chant, the sacred ministers cense the altar cross and high altar. The deacon and subdeacon then step down to the pavement at the epistle side and bow to the celebrant, the deacon censes the celebrant, and bow again. Then the ministers form a line at the Epistle horn.

At the Offertory, the gifts, altar cross, and high altar are censed, then the celebrant is censed in the same way as above. Then, this time the ministers line up at the center rather than the epistle horn. The thurifer continues the censing with the deacon, subdeacon, MC, servers, and then the faithful.

In a Solemn Requiem, incense "is not wanted until the Offertory," and only things, not people, are censed.

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :

quote:
Originally posted by JH:
The celebrant is censed at the beginning of Mass at an Anglo-Catholic church where I sometimes serve.

He is also censed at the offertory in the usual way.

I have not come across the practice elsewhere and had been puzzled by it.

Your mention of the censing of the celebrant at the beginning of Mass is traditional rite ceremonial and as such, was done immediately after the Gospel as well. A minority of anglo-catholic churches still do it that way. According to contemporary usage, the celebrant is only censed at the offertory and at no other point during the Mass.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Yes, that's how we normally do it. The altar is censed at the Introit, the Gospel Book at the Gospel Reading, etc. etc.

However - we do, in these Dark Days Of Interregnum, have the inestimable assistance of a retired priest of the Evangelical Persuasion! [Eek!]

Now, he is perfectly happy to wear a chasuble, and to swing the thurible at the Offertory, but, to give him a bit of relief, we no longer use incense as above if he is presiding, though it is usually brought in during the Entrance Hymn.

Purists may say that we should educate him duly, but, TBH, we are so glad to have him help us out (he preaches excellent little 5-minute homilies), that we have no problem in lightening his burden of Carflick ceremonial!

BTW, the Angelus is a bit out of his comfort zone as well, but he's quite happy to have whichever Reader is acting as liturgical Deacon to say it, after the final hymn, instead.

IJ

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2008/10/how-to-incense-freestanding-altar.html

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2008/10/how-to-incense-freestanding-altar.html

Is there something special about 22? If whoever is doing it only swings 21 times, adds in a 23rd swing or gets one of those movements in the wrong order, does it invalidate the Mass? Or does he (I assume it has to be he) have to go back and start again?

I'm relieved those sort of pernickety instructions aren't normally part of our tradition.

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2008/10/how-to-incense-freestanding-altar.html
Is there something special about 22? If whoever is doing it only swings 21 times, adds in a 23rd swing or gets one of those movements in the wrong order, does it invalidate the Mass? Or does he (I assume it has to be he) have to go back and start again?

I'm relieved those sort of pernickety instructions aren't normally part of our tradition.

Of course imperfectly following the instructions doesn't "invalidate the Mass." What's wrong with having a clearly described way to do something? Clarity seems helpful, not "pernickety," to me.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
Of course imperfectly following the instructions doesn't "invalidate the Mass." What's wrong with having a clearly described way to do something? Clarity seems helpful, not "pernickety," to me.

Not if it could encourage hawk-eyed people to watch the Mass and think, 'Father's doing it wrong because I know better'.
'They will know we are Christians by our disapproval'.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

A former churchwarden used to say that, whilst things should be done correctly if possible, it wasn't necessary to worry about mistakes too much. 'God won't mind, and the congregation won't notice', he said.

And, of course, the trick is to always make an error in the sanctuary look as though you meant to do it like that...

IJ

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

An MC recently told a friend of mine (who is left-handed) that he's censed the altar the wrong way round -i.e. clockwise.

I suggested that the whole mass should be revoked - say it all backwards, spit out the host etc.

I think that equals a Satanic mass.

[ 28. September 2017, 17:34: Message edited by: leo ]

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :

quote:
Originally posted by keibat:
Sorry - got thrown by the 'witty' response page from the Ship about having to do the hokey-pokey between postings – and couldn't find how to delete the duplicate post.

We hosts accept chocolate, you know?

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

So far, nobody has come to the defence of censing the gospel book as it lies on the altar during the introit.

Maybe the flying bishop thought it was the offertory asnd then realised it wasn't, so stopped after the 3 croses before the circles.

Or maybe he didn't know any better - after all, he was trained at Wycliffe Hall.

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
So far, nobody has come to the defence of censing the gospel book as it lies on the altar during the introit.

Maybe the flying bishop thought it was the offertory asnd then realised it wasn't, so stopped after the 3 croses before the circles.

Or maybe he didn't know any better - after all, he was trained at Wycliffe Hall.

It is not normal liturgical practice to cense the gospel book on the altar (or at all) during the introit. Should it occur, it must be a local variation.

Posted by keibat (# 5287) on :

Deare ZAppa:

quote:
quote:
Originally posted by keibat:
Sorry - got thrown by the 'witty' response page from the Ship about having to do the hokey-pokey between postings – and couldn't find how to delete the duplicate post.
We hosts accept chocolate, you know?

If I send you some virtual chocolate, will you tell me how to delete a duplicate virtual post?

Posted by The Scrumpmeister (# 5638) on :

Perhaps this might be a time to point out that C of E rites do not stipulate the times and manner of the censings, that all such rubrics are borrowed from elsewhere, and that there is therefore no absolute right or wrong in the matter.

While I see nothing wrong with this, it does seem to me to be perfectly plausible that one priest's source for such borrowings might not meet the expectations of another, of those of a particular congregation accustomed to another source.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:
Perhaps this might be a time to point out that C of E rites do not stipulate the times and manner of the censings, that all such rubrics are borrowed from elsewhere, and that there is therefore no absolute right or wrong in the matter.

But those of us who use incense regularly are likely to have the sort of ecclesiology that looks to Rome.

Posted by The Scrumpmeister (# 5638) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:
Perhaps this might be a time to point out that C of E rites do not stipulate the times and manner of the censings, that all such rubrics are borrowed from elsewhere, and that there is therefore no absolute right or wrong in the matter.
But those of us who use incense regularly are likely to have the sort of ecclesiology that looks to Rome.

I can think of numerous examples to the contrary. While you might not agree with them surely you must be aware of their existence.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

I think much of what is done in the C of E in the way of censing, and other ritchool, can be classed as 'local custom'.

Not that that is in itself a Bad Thing, of course, IMHO.

YMMV.

IJ

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:
Perhaps this might be a time to point out that C of E rites do not stipulate the times and manner of the censings, that all such rubrics are borrowed from elsewhere, and that there is therefore no absolute right or wrong in the matter.
But those of us who use incense regularly are likely to have the sort of ecclesiology that looks to Rome.
I can think of numerous examples to the contrary. While you might not agree with them surely you must be aware of their existence.

'Make it up as you go along'shows disobedience.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I think much of what is done in the C of E in the way of censing, and other ritchool, can be classed as 'local custom'.

Not that that is in itself a Bad Thing, of course, IMHO.

YMMV.

IJ

'Local cutom' doesn't seem 'catholic' by definition. And local 'usage' was superceded by Cranmer.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Ah well - you do it your way, and we'll do it ours. We can exchange views in Purgatory (the Real One, that is, not the thread!).

Given the state of the world, the heat around here, and the discomfort of this handbasket, I'm not going to lose too much sleep.

BTW, today's Father Visiting Priest did it all 'correctly', AFAIK!

IJ

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
'Local custom' doesn't seem 'catholic' by definition. And local 'usage' was superceded by Cranmer.

But if this is permitted at all in the CofE, it must be a 'thing indifferent' - in which case there can't be a right way or a wrong way.

Furthermore, there is no requirement in the CofE to cense at all. For centuries it was assumed to be forbidden. If it is allowed at all, there are no authoritative instructions as to how it is to be done. Therefore it is also impossible to condemn doing it the wrong way as disobedience.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Exactly.

IJ

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

'Local cutom' doesn't seem 'catholic' by definition...[/QB][/QUOTE]
Try telling that to the Milanese.

[ 08. October 2017, 19:56: Message edited by: Albertus ]

Posted by The Scrumpmeister (# 5638) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
'Local cutom' doesn't seem 'catholic' by definition.

What Enoch, Bishops Finger, and Albertus said.

I struggle to see a foundation for your assertion. There has always existed a plethora of rites and local uses of those rites within churches known as Catholic: universality and uniformity are not the same thing. Even within the post-schism western tradition, the variations on the Western rite were never entirely suppressed. Modern Rome affirms the use side by side of the Usus Antiquior and the Novus Ordo, and talks positively of their "mutual enrichment", which makes me wonder how someone looking to current Roman Catholic practice for a model of catholicity can then declare the practice of that same church to be uncatholic in the very next breath.

With that in mind, it doesn't seem to me to follow that an Anglican priest following the modern Roman censing custom is any more Catholic than one following Gallican, Milanese, or Ambrosian custom. Common Worship and the BCP are both silent on the matter of whether censings should take place at all.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:
[qb] Perhaps this might be a time to point out that C of E rites do not stipulate the times and manner of the censings, that all such rubrics are borrowed from elsewhere, and that there is therefore no absolute right or wrong in the matter.
But those of us who use incense regularly are likely to have the sort of ecclesiology that looks to Rome.
I can think of numerous examples to the contrary. While you might not agree with them surely you must be aware of their existence.
'Make it up as you go along'shows disobedience.

Disobedience to whom? I mean, given that clergy in the C of E presumably owe no obedience to Rome.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

Clergy who went to Rome with the Ordinariate had had a pretty free rein in the C of E from what you read. They followed the rules they wanted to follow and ignored others. Most would be finding Rome much stricter.

Back to the OP - woe betide the thurifer who loses count and carries out the censing requirements of post 24 at post 22 instead. A dim future both in the present and the hereafter for the miserable wretch.

[ 09. October 2017, 06:32: Message edited by: Gee D ]

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Indeed, with much Weeping, and Gnashing of Teeth, in the outer Darkness.

[Roll Eyes]

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Indeed, with much Weeping, and Gnashing of Teeth, in the outer Darkness.

Is that another name for Darlington, Dudley or Motherwell?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

No, Gillingham...

[Snigger]

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

Perhaps not the Garden-iest part of England, then?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Alas, no...

[Disappointed]

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:
[qb] Perhaps this might be a time to point out that C of E rites do not stipulate the times and manner of the censings, that all such rubrics are borrowed from elsewhere, and that there is therefore no absolute right or wrong in the matter.
But those of us who use incense regularly are likely to have the sort of ecclesiology that looks to Rome.
I can think of numerous examples to the contrary. While you might not agree with them surely you must be aware of their existence.
'Make it up as you go along'shows disobedience.
Disobedience to whom? I mean, given that clergy in the C of E presumably owe no obedience to Rome.

To the larger Western Church from whence we were torn.

Posted by Roman Cataholic (# 18736) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:
[qb] Perhaps this might be a time to point out that C of E rites do not stipulate the times and manner of the censings, that all such rubrics are borrowed from elsewhere, and that there is therefore no absolute right or wrong in the matter.
But those of us who use incense regularly are likely to have the sort of ecclesiology that looks to Rome.
I can think of numerous examples to the contrary. While you might not agree with them surely you must be aware of their existence.
'Make it up as you go along'shows disobedience.
Disobedience to whom? I mean, given that clergy in the C of E presumably owe no obedience to Rome.
To the larger Western Church from whence we were torn.

Are you Anti-Women Priests Leo?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

[Confused]

What's that got to do with how an altar should or should not be censed?

IJ

Posted by The Scrumpmeister (# 5638) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:

What's that got to do with how an altar should or should not be censed?

IJ

By leo's reasoning, everything.

If leo, as an Anglican ,maintains that obedience to Rome is the determining factor of how Anglican worshipping life ought to be ordered, then Roman Cataholic's question to leo seems very pertinent indeed.

Posted by Roman Cataholic (# 18736) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:

What's that got to do with how an altar should or should not be censed?

IJ
By leo's reasoning, everything.

If leo, as an Anglican ,maintains that obedience to Rome is the determining factor of how Anglican worshipping life ought to be ordered, then Roman Cataholic's question to leo seems very pertinent indeed.

Well done Scrumpmaster. Have a cookie.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Disobedience to whom? I mean, given that clergy in the C of E presumably owe no obedience to Rome.
To the larger Western Church from whence we were torn.

Well, if that’s the case, it’s disobedient to belong to the C of E to start with, I would think.

Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on :

Could a friendly host kindly fix the scroll lock on this thread, please?

And how about obedience to the wider Eastern Church, from whom Rome split originally?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

The Scrumpmeister, in a way, answered my rather rhetorical question. It was the whiff of deceased quadruped that got up my nostrils...

Amen to Robert's request to fix the scroll lock, BTW.

@Robert Armin - I just love being an Anglican - it's hearing that wonderful, tinkly sound of breaking Other Churches' rules... [Two face]

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Disobedience to whom? I mean, given that clergy in the C of E presumably owe no obedience to Rome.
To the larger Western Church from whence we were torn.
Well, if that’s the case, it’s disobedient to belong to the C of E to start with, I would think.

This.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Disobedience to whom? I mean, given that clergy in the C of E presumably owe no obedience to Rome.
To the larger Western Church from whence we were torn.
Well, if that’s the case, it’s disobedient to belong to the C of E to start with, I would think.

Not if praying and working for reunion

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

Is there such a thing as 'the western church'? Is the concept of any significance or value, or is it a distraction? There's 'tradition' but In what sense is there such a thing as 'the western church' as against the church universal?

And if the church universal is fragmented, do we try to see things as though in some 'mystic vision' way, it isn't really? Or is that a pretence, a delusion?

A lot of the trouble is that in answer to the question 'is Christ divided?' too many bits take the line either that 'no he isn't because we are the true body of Christ and everybody else is a wilful schismatic', or 'it's not quite as unequivocal as that but everything would be fine if the deluded brethren conformed to us'.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
the celebrant (a ‘flying bishop’)

Jusr discovered that he's also a freemason - maybe that explains it.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Just discovered that he's also a freemason - maybe that explains it.

At least if he were a woman, one could be assured she wouldn't be one.

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Could a friendly host kindly fix the scroll lock on this thread, please?

apologies ... that's one thing I've never understood on the Ship ... as a punter or host. And apologies for a two week delay in answering [Hot and Hormonal]

bloody university assignments [Help]

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0