Don't panic, I know, I know, I lighted all four candles, but it isn't even Advent yet, let alone the 4th week of Advent!
Advent wreathes are one good thing the Lutherans in Germany have given to the Christian world, although I wonder if the Eastern Orthodox and the Eastern Rites use them at home or in church?
I remember the advent wreathe in my parish when I was growing up and in pre-Vatican II times. It was placed by Mary's side altar and without ceremony (or in pre-Vatican II times, the lighting of the altar candles was a ceremony) and the candle or candles were lit prior to Mass.
Today, many parishes have elaborate Liturgies of the Blessing and lighting of the Advent wreathe. Some do it as a prelude to the Mass which is okay. Others, illicitly do it by omitting the Penitential Act. Some parishes have families actually carried the candle in procession at the beginning of Mass and place it in the wreathe and a prayer is said by the one member of the family who can read well publicly, or not read well publicly. I think that is a bit too fussy for a Lutheran product, no?
Some wreathes have a center "Christ" candle which is lit only at Christmas and the other candles removed, a kind a homage to the Easter Candle and of course illicit in the Catholic liturgy.
I think the Catholic Book of Blessings, as dismal as that book is and its blessings are, foresees the blessing of anything during Mass to take place during the Universal Prayer.
To bless the Advent Wreathe at that time seems a bit anti-climatic. If I do the blessing of the wreathe, I would do it at the Universal Prayer at our first Mass of the weekend only, which would be Saturday night at 5 pm. At all other Masses it would be lighted at the time the altar candles are. Our OF tradition, of course, does the lighting of the candles unceremoniously before Mass and usually by an usher. O the humanity of it all!
My parish has had the Christ Candle tradition but this year I banned it. Am I too dictatorial, a kind of liturgical terrorist?
You EFers and OFers, what does your parish do with the Lutheran Advent Wreathe and in EF parishes is it encouraged for home use, after all it isn't Catholic or is it? And you Easterners, what do you do with the Lutheran concept as nice as it is?
43 comments:
At our chapel, there is an advent wreath in the sanctuary next to the pulpit. Our family has candles at home without a wreath.
I will bless the Advent candles as part of the entrance procession, stopping to do so as I enter. Following the blessing, I will reverence then incense the altar and proceed to the chair to begin mass.
We will do this at each of the four masses here.
The advent wreath will be blessed at saturday evening at 6pm. At all other times fir sundays only the candles lit before mass begins.
Thoughif i had my way i would put it in the bin
We Easterner don't do this at all. You may however see the root of Jesse though
Bee here:
I don't like the Advent wreath concept. It is meaningless to me, at home or in church.
We have it at St. John Cantius because the Novus Ordo is celebrated at two of the four Sunday Masses. At the TLM typically it is lit but no other acknowledgement of it is made.
I find any ceremony around it a bit contrived. I have no problem understanding and praying the four Sundays of Advent without a visual aid. I think the objects themselves, the wreath and candles, gain a status and importance that are not warranted.
Basically, I think it is a distraction.
God bless.
Bee
Bee,
It takes a non-cleric to see the truth! Congrats.
Distracted . . . by candles at Mass.
Better never attend a Tenebrae service.....
Bee here: Suc
Dear, dear Anonymous at Nov. 28, 2019 at 11:15 am.
Reading your comments will put me on the escalator to heaven. Thank you.
God bless.
Bee
But claiming the good work is the sin of presumption. You've just lost the grace! Better luck next time.
Cheers!
Bee
Having done their best to destroy the Church's genuine liturgy, the progressives have had to invent pseudo-liturgies. Anonymous's 'Tenebrae service' is a case in point - you can bet your bottom dollar it has little to do with the Office of Matins and Lauds on the last three days of Holy Week.
Incipit Lamentatio Jeremiae Prophetae. ALEPH. Quomodo sedet sola civitas plena populo: facta est quasi vidua domina Gentium: princeps provinciarum facta est sub tributo.
Now that's liturgical, although I doubt if Anonymous has ever sung it in choir.
Anonymous K at 9:17,
I see you are still clericalism on steroids and not a gentlemen but still a little weasel. Congrats on your perfect track record.
There is no requirement to have an Advent Wreath. But people seem to like it. We use votive candles, so they get lit once. Each year I waver over to do the blessing, which is also not required. Con: it's unnecessary and not a particularly attractive blessing (few of them are in the current, abominable "Book of Blessings"); pro: it gives some sense of what the wreath is for, and it models the good practice of blessing things.
No, my dear. Putting up with distractions in a spirit of mortification is what will
put and keep you on the escalator to heaven. Distractions can serve a good purpose you know.
"No, my dear. Putting up with distractions in a spirit of mortification is what will
put and keep you on the escalator to heaven. Distractions can serve a good purpose you know.'
My dear, when you trumpet how holy you are because of "distractions," when you let everyone know that you're holier than others because of how much "suffering" you endure, when you turn standard liturgical accoutrements into distractions, you've pretty much thrown away any benefit you might have had from the experience.
Can you imagine how some here would erupt with condemnations if someone said, "I am distracted by lacy albs" or "I am distracted by elaborate brocade fabrics," or "I am distracted by the incense."?
Well, I certainly can. What's sauce for the goose, you know...
Martin, I use this blessing:
"ADVENT WREATH BLESSING
Priest:
My brothers and sisters, today as we begin the season of Advent we open our hearts to God's love and prepare to welcome Christ into our lives and homes. These candles remind us that Jesus Christ came to conquer the darkness of sin and to lead us into the light of his glorious kingdom.
(Light Candle I)
Lord our God,
we praise you for your Son, Jesus Christ:
he is Emmanuel, the hope of the peoples,
he is the wisdom that teaches and guides us,
he is the Savior of every nation.
Lord God,
let your blessing come upon us as we light the candles of this wreath.
May the wreath and its light be a sign of Christ's promise to bring us salvation.
May he come quickly and not delay.
We ask this through Christ our Lord.
R. Amen.
The first candle is lighted."
Very simple and direct, not at all abominable.
Anonymous @ 12:20 PM
Read "Story of a Soul" and move on to reading about other saintly lives. Distractions and irritations are those things which, when accepted in the right way, help lead one to holiness. For me, I don't consider anything associated with a valid liturgy to be a distraction. That's just me. But for those who do, offer it up and pray to overcome that which bothers you.
Postscript to prior comment:
I was going to do the blessing of the wreath on Saturday evening; however, one altar server was late, and the other didn't show up, so we had to find a sub. That meant no chance to explain things ahead of time, so I opted not to do the blessing.
And, by the way, the reason I say the "Book of Blessings" is abominable is, first, the texts themselves are limp and pedestrian, especially when compared to the old Ritual. Those old prayers are vigorous; they are redolent of the struggle against evil in this world, and thus it actually matters whether objects and people get blessed.
But, second -- and even more importantly -- the old ritual made crystal clear that things really were being blessed. The current wretched book, in most cases, never includes any actual blessing. Lots of talk (lots and lots) about this and that -- but language such as, "Bless this wreath" or "Bless this water" is forgotten.
Note well: the prayer cited by Father K above: at no point does the priest say anything about actually blessing anything!
It reeks of Rahner: the world is already blessed -- so who needs to bless it? Hence "blessings" are just reminders, they don't actually change anything. Thankfully, that's not what we believe, even though that's the idea that runs through so many of the texts in the Book of Wishes -- er, I mean, Blessings.
I went to the EF this morning and there was no Advent Wreath. I did not miss it because when I was a boy, the Advent Wreath was something we did at home with our family. However, I did enjoy the beautiful First Sunday of Advent Propers, something the vast majority of Catholics who attend the OF will be deprived of this Sunday!
Martin says: "Note well: the prayer cited by Father K above: at no point does the priest say anything about actually blessing anything!"
The prayer of Blessing to which he referred: "Lord God, let your blessing come upon us as we light the candles of this wreath."
Fr Fox's criticism of the 'Book of Blessings' is echoed by many priests, including those who are not overtly 'traditionalist'. It reflects a different, and more recent, theology concerning blessings which would seem to be at odds with the more traditional understanding.
He is of course at liberty to use the older Roman Ritual, not only for blessings, which are sacramentals, but also in the administration of the sacraments.
Kavanaugh,
Father Fox points out that the prayers do not say "I bless you or this" unless you have suddenly fallen in love with the hortatory subjunctive
Most blessings, at least those I am aware of, in the ritual books do not say "I bless you or this."
For example, among the Prayers Over the Place of Committal. #2 "O God, by whose mercy the faithful departed find rest, bless this grave, and send your holy angel to watch over it.
God blesses.
#4 "In a spirit of repentance we earnestly ask you (God) to look upon this grave and bless it,..."
God blesses.
And at the end of mass, we say, "May Almighty God bless you, the Father..."
God blesses.
"Lord, let your blessing come upon this wreath..." is an actual blessing of a thing.
Fr K.
You didn't say 'Let your blessing come upon this wreath'; you said 'Let your blessing come upon us as we light the candles of this wreath.'
Not the same thing at all. Like your buddy and probable alter ego 'Anonymous' you have a cavalier attitude towards linguistic accuracy.
Kavanaugh,
I accept Father Fox's interpretation, not yours. To refresh your recollections, this is what he said:
"But, second -- and even more importantly -- the old ritual made crystal clear that things really were being blessed. The current wretched book, in most cases, never includes any actual blessing. Lots of talk (lots and lots) about this and that -- but language such as, "Bless this wreath" or "Bless this water" is forgotten."
You really should learn to say Mass in Latin, it would enhance your linguistic skills and sharpen your mind.
John - Yes, John, my error. I should have just copied and pasted.
I would suggest that "Let your blessing come upon us" is an actual blessing of a thing - the thing being us.
If the Latin Mass is responsible for the state of your mind, TJM, the world would do well to stay as far from it as possible.
Anonymous K,
If the OF is responsible for the state of your mind, Anonymous K, the world would do well to stay as far from it as possible.
Fr Mike, that's the problem, anyone can ask for that kind of blessing, it isn't necessarily priestly and of course at Holy Mass, to ask God to let His blessing come upn us is redundant as a priest normally gives a final blessing at the end of Mass using the proper formula that a bishop, priest or deacon would use.
The best thing to do is to omit it altogether at Mass. Let someone else lead a para-liturgy and use that blessing; nuns would love doing it!
Some phrases from the Book of Blessings:
"O God,...Shower your blessings in this family gathered here in your name."
"We ask you to bestow on this family and this home the riches of your + blessing."
"Father of holiness, you willed the cross of your Son to be the source of all blessings, the font of grace. Bless these crosses..."
"Send down your blessings on these your servants, who so generously devote themselves to helping others."
"May God bless you with every heavenly blessing and give you a safe journey;..."
"May God, the Father of goodness, who commanded us to help one another as brothers and sisters, bless this new building with his presence..."
"Bless this boat, its equipment, and all who use it."
"We ask your blessing as we prepare to place these seeds (seedlings) in the earth."
"By this blessing + accept these bells into your service."
In almost all cases where a specific blessing - "+" - is not indicated, the rite ends, "May almighty God bless you/you all, the Father, and the Son +, and the Holy Spirit."
Allan, yes, anyone can ask for a blessing. However, I was under the impression that we were discussing blessings given by priests.
During mass - or immediately before hand as part of the entrance procession as I practice it - I don't see the blessing of the Advent wreath/candles being given by someone other than the priest, do you?
'Most blessings ... do not say "I bless you or this."'
No-one here has suggested that a priest, when 'blessing' something, does so in his own name, using the first person singular, present indicative active 'benedico'.
Most common is the imperative 'benedic', addressed, of course, to God.
'I would suggest that "let your blessing come upon us" is an actual blessing of a thing - the thing being us.'
Nice try, but it won't wash. The Ritual makes a clear distinction between persons and inanimate objects.
When we say the (non-liturgical) grace before meals we invoke God's blessing on us and on the food he has provided: 'Nos benedic Domine et haec tua dona quae de tua largitate sumus sumpturi.'
Liturgical blessings are performed in the name and with the authority of the Church and are reserved to those in sacerdotal Orders. This does not include deacons.
Given how the blessing is written, a lay person in the absence of a priest or deacon could use this exact same blessing either in a para liturgy or a home blessing of the wreathe.
So yes, progressive priests would readily delegate this blessing to a pastoral assistant, pastoral council member, etc as a prelude to Mass, or during Mass, hence the corruption of not actually having a prayer of blessing with the actual blessing by the priest with the sign of the cross over the object being blessed.
"No-one here has suggested that a priest, when 'blessing' something, does so in his own name, using the first person singular, present indicative active 'benedico'."
Indeed, some-one here made precisely that suggestion.
"TJM said...
Kavanaugh,
Father Fox points out that the prayers do not say "I bless you or this" unless you have suddenly fallen in love with the hortatory subjunctive
December 2, 2019 at 9:43 AM"
"Given how the blessing is written, a lay person in the absence of a priest or deacon could use this exact same blessing either in a para liturgy or a home blessing of the wreathe."
In the absence of a priest or deacon, anyone can do just about anything.
The situation presented, however, was within the context of the celebration of mass, which, to my knowledge, does not happen in the absence of a priest.
In cases of necessity a priest can and does delegate many things to a pastoral assistant, parish council member, or other person. This does not apply, as you must be aware, to the celebration of mass.
Hence, your hypothetical, while satisfying your penchant for red herring phantasy, doesn't obtain in the circumstances being discussed.
To clear up a point:
A cleric (bishop, priest or deacon) never blesses in his own name; but a cleric has the power and authority to bless, by virtue of the sacrament of Holy Orders; and in blessing, something happens, something is consecrated. Hence the customary use of the imperative: bless. It is true that not all blessings use the imperative, as in: "May almighty God bless you..."
Note also that it is traditional that in giving a blessing, the cleric makes the sign of the cross (I am not an expert on blessings, so I can imagine there are exceptions).
The Book of "Blessings" does not succeed in completely extirpating all explicit blessings; some remain in the book. But quite a lot -- most, I think -- of the so-called blessings involve no explicit blessing of anything. Of course, one might reasonably say that if the cleric intends to bless, then that blessing text gets the job done. But I would add that when clergy spend their lives working with such poor texts, one wonders if their intention to bless in the sense of actually consecrating something survives?
I use the newer ritual when imparting a blessing in Mass, because it is not permitted to mix the new and the old; and the new book does have some good ideas that are not represented in the old ritual. Oh, how I look forward to the day the "Book of Blessings" is revamped to become what it promises to be!
Fr Kavanaugh
I know you have little time for TJM, but he actually said 'the prayers do not say "I bless you or this"'. Note the negative.
Were I inclined to be charitable I would attribute the error on your part to carelessness and/or poor reading comprehension.
However, you have a track record of deliberately and mendaciously distorting others' words in order to score cheap points, and attributing opinions and attitudes to others which they do not hold, and which cannot be reasonably inferred from what they have written.
I love the word Mendacious! I think I first heard it used in the play/movie/book "Cat on a hot tin roof" and it was used in such a southern way that it fits the one you accuse like a cat on a hot tin roof!
John Nolan,
Our pal Kavanaugh is "clericalism on steroids." He simply can't help himself
John - I am aware of what TJM said. "Father Fox points out that the prayers do not say "I bless you or this" unless you have suddenly fallen in love with the hortatory subjunctive"
He said it as a complaint, that those words were not to be found, and that they should be there.
You may conclude that his meaning was otherwise. If that is the case, I would suggest you are wrong.
Fr Fox comments that it is 'not permitted to mix the new and the old'. This is not strictly true; the Novus Ordo itself is an eclectic mix of old and new elements. For the blessings in the Missal (candles, ashes, palms) they should be appropriate to the rite being used, but most blessings are in the Rituale and not in the Missal, so cannot be said to be part of Mass.
There is another consideration. The OF and EF are 'different forms of the one Roman Rite' according to Benedict XVI. So, although mixing of rites is illicit, if we accept Benedict's legal fiction we can introduce elements of the EF into the OF. This is what has happened in the Ordinariate Missal, and indeed is becoming more commonplace elsewhere.
It can't happen the other way round, since the rubrics of the EF are exact and prescriptive. Those in the Novus Ordo are descriptive and allow for considerable variation.
John Nolan:
If more elements of the older tradition find their way into the ordinary form of the Mass and sacraments and other rituals, I will be very happy. But I grew up in a time when so many priests took it upon themselves to re-work the the rubrics as they saw fit. I do not want to emulate them. So I await these things coming down a more licit path.
Fr Fox
That's understandable, but you will be waiting a long time. 'Elements of the older tradition' won't mysteriously find their way into the Novus Ordo; they have to be put there as a result of choice, and choice is almost a defining feature of Paul VI's Mass.
The Solemn Mass I shall attend tomorrow will be in the new Rite, but, as on every Sunday, will take the following form. All the choices are entirely licit.
a) It is sung in Latin, with the traditional orientation (ad apsidem). The three Scripture readings and the Bidding Prayers are in English.
b) The celebrant is assisted by two sacred ministers who take the roles of deacon and 'subdeacon'.
c) The Mass is preceded by the Asperges in its older form, with the traditional versicles, responses and oratio.
d) The first option for the Penitential Act is invariably used. Although the opening and concluding rites are at the chair, the sedilia are arranged traditionally (not in front of the altar or tabernacle, and not facing the people).
e) The Gregorian Propers from the 1974 Graduale Romanum (Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Communio) are used.
f) The Roman Canon is invariably used, recited audibly and following the Novus Ordo rubrics.
g) There is a simple chant setting of the Agnus Dei at the Fraction; the polyphonic Agnus is sung during the people's Communion.
h) Communion is kneeling at the rail, in one kind only.
i) There is a recessional hymn, but the congregation 'say or sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them'. This includes the responses, the Confiteor, the Credo and the Pater Noster.
The first reading is done by a lay person, but there are no EMHC and service at the altar is reserved to males.
In a sense, the most traditional element in this form of Mass is the fact that although the Propers change, the Ordinary by and large does not.
Post a Comment