Vigil of the Rant
It is that time of year again depending on what diocese you live in. Tonight if the Vigil of the Ascension Rant for Catholic bloggers living in diocese that have moved Ascension Thursday to Sunday.
Fr. Erik Richtseig has a good natured rant on the subject which I totally agree with. The Apostles didn't meet in the upper room for six days and so this Holy Day of Obligation math doesn't quite work out. I think that bishops who have decided this for their diocese should have to annually explain why this is too much of an imposition on Ash Wednesday. I would love to hear the argument why this is a good idea when on a non-Holy Day of Obligation like Ash Wednesday people seem to come out of the woodwork to get to Mass. Besides I totally hate the idea of a Holy Day of Obligation being seen as a imposition in the first place.
It is also annoying that in a universal Church I will watch the Pope on TV tomorrow celebrating the Ascension while I will have to wait for Sunday and of course in the Liturgy of the Hours you have to branch off from the normal course of readings for a little detour.
Known as 
Oh how I love the Extraordinary Form! The canonical obligation for everybody may be moved to Sunday but the Feast for traddies remains on the Thursday! (Canon law is pretty clear that liturgical law is whatever the liturgical books say it is, and the Calendar is in the Missal not the Code!) So tomorrow I shall not rant, instead I'll go to the Mass for Feast of the Ascension! (Well to be honest my poor fiancée already had to listen to me rant about our supine bishops, signs of contradiction etc.etc.)
My diocese (Paterson) has not caved to the pressure yet, I was just at our Vigil Mass. I think most of NJ has kept it on Thursday, but I know we are one of few to do so. Just keep the Holy Days an obligation and no one will have to wonder each year whether or not they need to go so as not to commit a sin.
Eamonn,
I don't believe this is the case. Fr. Z published a response from Ecclesia Dei to the effect that where holy days have been transfered they are to be observed on that day whether in the ordinary or extraordinary rite. If this were not the case, I know what I would be doing tomorrow. (Here is the Z post http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/04/uk-coordination-of-liturgical-calendars/ )
Jeff-
Hush up! Don't give the mitred ones any ideas about Ash Wednesday!
I am lucky. The local abbey has decided to celebrate Ascension on both Thursday and Sunday, since our Bishop has moved it. How that for confusing?
I am so happy that my diocese hasn't transferred the Holy Days of Obligation.
In the Byzantine Rite, our Feast of the Ascension is on Thursday.
One year, I missed out on Ascension day mass because where I went to college it was moved, but I went home for the weekend (to the Omaha Diocese) where it has not been moved.
Fortunately tomorrow I will be attending mass in the extraordinary form which has been running for 5 weeks on Tuesday mornings. Now that Father and the servers are more comfortable it will get the chance to hit "prime-time".
Actually, I think this is one of the big problems with the return of the Tridentine Liturgy. It creates a situation in the universal Church where some people are operating off of a different calendar than others. I totally hate the idea.
Whether one is using the 1962 Missal or the NO, everyone ought to be following the same calendar. It just is a total mess to have it otherwise.
Let me clarify my previous post.
I am not against the 1962 Missal being an option for people. I am against only the mess it creates with the calendar.
When I said "one of the problems with the return of the Tridentine Liturgy," I may have given the wrong impression.
Actually, Shane, I would say that the Novus Ordo created the mess with the calendar, not the other way around. But you are right - for those of us who don't have daily access to the MEF, the hopping back and forth is disconcerting.
The Charlotte and Raleigh NC Dioceses moved the feast to Sunday, but I'm praying the Ascension office today. I may do it again on Sunday, or I may just stick with the MEF calendar except for Mass -- I guess I'll figure it out on Sunday!
In the Diocese of Allentown, PA, where live, Ascension Thursday is celebrated today as a holy day of obligation. My pastor has four Masses between the Wednesday vigil and today at his two churches. Changing the day to Sunday because many people just don't attend Mass doesn't really make sense. Since when did it become a hardship for Catholics to attend two Masses in the same week? There are times when a holy day of obligation (like the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception) lands on a Saturday or Monday, the bishops remove the obligation (Again, when did we become so weak in our faith that making a Catholic go to Mass two days in a row is a burden?), but my pastor will still celebrate Mass that day for anyone who will come, which includes me.
Ascension Thursday is still on Thursday in the Diocese of Providence...I don't think the Sunday option has anything to do with the rite used. It seems like an option offered to dioceses or parishes whose bishop feels they need it for practical reasons. Maybe in some of those locations where celebrants are being shared among parishes moving the day is seen as better than having one or two churches in a deanery celebrate on Thursday?
I sympathize with the confused among you who will be recognizing Thursday on Sunday. My poor brain is getting too old for some of these options. I wouldn't know what day it was for at least a week if Thursday became Sunday all of a sudden! :) But then, Saturday night being Sunday has always messed me up, too. Pray for the calendar-challenged!
"t creates a situation in the universal Church where some people are operating off of a different calendar than others. I totally hate the idea."
Um... I think there's a good deal more difference in calendar between the various Eastern rites which use the Eastern computation of Easter, and the Latin Rite, than between EF and OF Catholics. Similarly, the Ambrosian Rite in Milan has a different calendar for some things, as does the Braga Rite in Portugal (IIRC). The Universal Church is big enough for more than one calendar.
And a good thing too, because otherwise Catholics living on other planets would have a rough time of it. This provides a good precedent for our space colonies and alien converts. :)
I understand the issue of Eastern rites, and I also understand why someone who is in favor of the 1962 Litury would say the NO messed up the calendar.
My basic point is that the Roman rite ought to have one calendar, as opposed to two, whether that means junking the old calendar or the new one.
Our diocese naturally moved the feast. Golly, some years we just cancel Holy Days of Obligation even when they are NOT to be cancelled--it is a burden for priests I was told.
I had to go to the other parish today which is named St. Joseph (my former parish). Father did show up for Mass but he said they already 'did' St. Joseph so we would not be offering Mass for St. Joseph the Worker. He blasted though Mass so fast that I could not keep up in the missal. Consecration is a no genuflection but he gave some long dissertation at the "Behold the Lamb of God'. Reminds me of why I left that parish--I left Mass sad so often. And our dying diocese does not seem to like to honor Our Lady or the Saints--one reason why we are dying.
Lord, help us! Have mercy! Please grant us holy priests and bishops.
Just wandering.. is there a similar rant for Corpus Christi? One year I celebrated it twice, once on Thursday in Rome, and again on Sunday here in the US.
The Lord ascended 43 days after Easter...
Let's be honest, better tee times are available during the week day and are cheaper...
Here'a a new excuse I hadn't heard before about moving holy days.
"People weren't giving the holy day enough attention and importance so we moved it to Sunday"
???!!!
sigh
Now I guess they're called the Holy Days of Convenience....