I am greatly saddened by the virtual obrogation of Ascension Thursday. It messes with the timetable of the Liturgical Year (so much for the symbolism of 40 days), and mucks up Sunday Masses in the usus antiquor. For instance, the External Solemnity of the Ascension on Sunday completely steps on the Sunday within the Octave of the Ascension. In the current landscape, those Sunday’s propers will never be read again.
I am especially saddened because my very own Bishop Sheridan scheduled the yearly priests retreat for this week. So, for those of us who attend the TLM, there is no possible way for us to attend Mass on Ascension Thursday at our TLM parish, if only out of devotion (the obligation to do so has been relegated to the dustbin).
Dr. Alcuin Reid writes about the transferrence of Holy Days to Sunday in ‘Another obstacle to unity’ :
However, whilst these may be concerns, there are others to be taken into account.
The first is that those who worship according to the usus antiquior are most often deeply attached not only to the form of the rite but to the riches of the whole liturgical year. They would usually make the effort to be at Mass on the “extra” days whether it was strictly of obligation or not. By all means let the bishops remove the “weekday” obligation if they think it unduly onerous. But this does not necessitate their insistence on the transfer of the liturgical celebration of the feasts in the older use. For the transfer impoverishes the liturgical ‘diet’ that will now be on offer. What Mass will the priest say on the Thursday before Ascension “Sunday,” as in the more ancient use a “votive” Mass of the Ascension is simply not possible? It would in any case be ludicrous to extinguish the paschal candle after the Gospel on Thursday symbolising the departure of our Lord’s resurrected body only to do so again on Sunday! Are we to have two Epiphanies? Are the feasts of All Saints, Sts Peter and Paul and the Assumption to be repeated on a Sunday or a Monday after their observance the previous day? And what of their proper vigil days that are integral to the older use? What offices are to be celebrated? Then there is the issue of the occlusion of the liturgical texts of the Sundays that the transferred feasts will displace. Alas this “clarification” serves to deprive the faithful of some of the very liturgical heritage Pope Benedict sought to protect.
The second is that the liturgical life of the Catholic Church has always borne witness to unity in diversity, but not uniformity. Eastern and Western Catholic rites have utterly different calendars. Different uses of the Roman rite have had significant variations even, in the case of Religious Orders, in the same cities. The Ambrosian rite of Milan had no Ash Wednesday. Yes, it may seem a bit untidy to have some celebrating Epiphany on one day and some others a few days later, but there is surely no sin in it? After all, the calendar of the more ancient use, last issued in 1962, celebrates many feasts on different days from that of that of the modern use, and not without good reason. It must be said plainly that there is no overriding liturgical reason that these feasts cannot be celebrated on their original days in the usus antiquior.
This repeated meddling with the TLM is growing more and more suscpicious. I will get to that later.
James