Ash Wednesday/Lent >Pagan origins, against Christ's command.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

So, from looking into the Ash Wednesday issue, it seems that EO practice Lent, but not Ash Wednesday. Why not?

SU, the following post was your answer. Pope Gregory was the patriarch of the western church, not the eastern church. The practices of the Latin rite were not normative throughout Christendom, and were never intended to be. There's no reason why the Eastern Orthodox would practice the imposition of the ashes if it was established as a Latin rite by the Latin patriarch.

I'd be curious to hear from one of the Eastern Rite Catholics to see if they do Ash Wednesday even today.

I already pointed out Ash Wednesday came about in 601 when Pope Gregory declared Sundays to be feasts, thus putting them outside of Lent (not counted as one of the 40 days) and changing the beginning to Wednesday.

 

[Erose]

I'd be curious to hear from one of the Eastern Rite Catholics to see if they do Ash Wednesday even today.

It depends upon what liturgical rite and calendar they are following. Not all follow the same rites and calendars. They have their own calendar and traditions. All Catholic Churches share the same Easter though.

 

[Kristos]

It depends upon what liturgical rite and calendar they are following. Not all follow the same rites and calendars. They have their own calendar and traditions. All Catholic Churches share the same Easter though.

Same within EO. Western Rite Orthodox do celebrate Ash Wednesday. Quite simply the Eastern and Western practices surrounding Lent developed slightly differently - many of these differences were discussed in another thread on Lent. I wouldn't say either is better, just different. They have different emphases, so in way they could be considered complementary because the foundation is the same.

And for the record, I admire someone willing to wear the ashes through the day. I think in most cases, this takes more courage than pride. The open ridicule I've seen here only solidifies my feeling.

 

[simonthezealot]

Athanasius c350ad was shown to originate (first mention) the Wednesday start of a 40 day period sans Sabbaths to easter sunday. Gregory may have wanted Rome to line up with that.

Still, however, there is no reference to an ASH Wednesday.

Aelfric in the 11th century was the first known record of it, i've been waiting for others to show anything before this..To no avail.

 

[simonthezealot]

To make that parallel you'd actually have to demonstrate the carnival is integral to whatever Norse parallel you're failing to point to for Ash Wednesday, and that just as Ash Wednesday doesn't go back further than a thousand years, carnival goes back a thousand years to that particular Norse practice.

But I imagine you can't do this, either. You promised a demonstration of your case yesterday and have yet to deliver.

No actually I recall reading about augustine being very frustrated with the frivolous actions of the people leading up to the days of fasting...So in an action sense the carnival celebrations are deeply entrenched in the tradition.
Point taken.
Though I am not sure when it became a more generalized-widely accepted practice, i'll have to do some research..

 

[Dorothea]

nm

 

[Standing Up]

SU, the following post was your answer. Pope Gregory was the patriarch of the western church, not the eastern church. The practices of the Latin rite were not normative throughout Christendom, and were never intended to be. There's no reason why the Eastern Orthodox would practice the imposition of the ashes if it was established as a Latin rite by the Latin patriarch.

I'd be curious to hear from one of the Eastern Rite Catholics to see if they do Ash Wednesday even today.

Per the quote before from Nicea about Lent, I'd suggest they did try to norm the practice. As well Schaff and you seem to assume the ash Wednesday of today began with Gregory. But what does Gregory actually say? Arguing against this is the idea that East/West were united and did follow one observance (a 40-day Lenten period), but since the East usually? does not have an ash Wed, though the West does, it suggests the ASH Wed part started subsequent to the 1054 split, which aligns back to the OP.

SO, EO and RC both have a 40 day Lent, right? But RC has an ASH Wed, while EO does not. (typically speaking) So, again, this common observance (Lent) may source to Gregory. But ASH Wed per se would only source to after 1054.

IOW, if Schaff and you are right, then ASH Wed would be practiced by both EO/RC since it sources to Gregory prior to the split.

Schaff:
"The Easter festival proper was preceded by a forty days’ season of repentance and fasting, called Quadragesima, at least as early as the year 325; for the council of Nice presupposes the existence of this season.733 This fast was an imitation of the forty days’ fasting of Jesus in the wilderness, which itself was put in typical connection with the forty days’ fasting of Moses734 and Elijah,735 and the forty years’ wandering of Israel through the desert. At first a free-will act, it gradually assumed the character of a fixed custom and ordinance of the church. Respecting the length of the season much difference prevailed, until Gregory I. (590–604) fixed the Wednesday of the sixth week before Easter, Ash Wednesday as it is called,736 as the beginning of it. On this day the priests and the people sprinkled themselves with dust and ashes, in token of their perishableness and their repentance, with the words: “Remember, O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust thou must return; repent, that thou mayest inherit eternal life.”
NPNF2-02. Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

 

[Standing Up]

The practice of using ashes for the penitent on the first day of Lent started at a much later date.

When? With Gregory or post 1054?

 

[Mary of Bethany]

Per the quote before from Nicea about Lent, I'd suggest they did try to norm the practice. As well Schaff and you seem to assume the ash Wednesday of today began with Gregory. But what does Gregory actually say? Arguing against this is the idea that East/West were united and did follow one observance (a 40-day Lenten period), but since the East usually? does not have an ash Wed, though the West does, it suggests the ASH Wed part started subsequent to the 1054 split, which aligns back to the OP.

SO, EO and RC both have a 40 day Lent, right? But RC has an ASH Wed, while EO does not. (typically speaking) So, again, this common observance (Lent) may source to Gregory. But ASH Wed per se would only source to after 1054.

IOW, if Schaff and you are right, then ASH Wed would be practiced by both EO/RC since it sources to Gregory prior to the split.

Schaff:
"The Easter festival proper was preceded by a forty days’ season of repentance and fasting, called Quadragesima, at least as early as the year 325; for the council of Nice presupposes the existence of this season.733 This fast was an imitation of the forty days’ fasting of Jesus in the wilderness, which itself was put in typical connection with the forty days’ fasting of Moses734 and Elijah,735 and the forty years’ wandering of Israel through the desert. At first a free-will act, it gradually assumed the character of a fixed custom and ordinance of the church. Respecting the length of the season much difference prevailed, until Gregory I. (590–604) fixed the Wednesday of the sixth week before Easter, Ash Wednesday as it is called,736 as the beginning of it. On this day the priests and the people sprinkled themselves with dust and ashes, in token of their perishableness and their repentance, with the words: “Remember, O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust thou must return; repent, that thou mayest inherit eternal life.”
NPNF2-02. Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

I don't believe it necessarily means that Ash Wednesday developed later. It could have been the practice in the West before the schism, but not in the East. If St Gregory did establish the practice, it was for his diocese only.

Orthodox lent ("the Great Fast") begins on Sunday evening (liturgically the beginning of Monday) 49 days before Pascha, with Forgiveness Vespers in which we each ask (and in turn, grant) forgiveness of everyone else, one-on-one.

The Western Rite parishes do observe Ash Wednesday, as far as I know, since they follow a more western praxis within the Orthodox faith.

Mary

 

[MoreCoffee]

Do we know, yet, if Ash Wednesday and Lent are greater than pagan origins against Christ's command?

 

[prodromos]

Do we know, yet, if Ash Wednesday and Lent are greater than pagan origins against Christ's command?

I thought most of us agreed that the OP was correct in the title of the thread, if nothing else

 

[prodromos]

Per the quote before from Nicea about Lent, I'd suggest they did try to norm the practice. As well Schaff and you seem to assume the ash Wednesday of today began with Gregory. But what does Gregory actually say? Arguing against this is the idea that East/West were united and did follow one observance (a 40-day Lenten period), but since the East usually? does not have an ash Wed, though the West does, it suggests the ASH Wed part started subsequent to the 1054 split, which aligns back to the OP.

It is pretty clear that the practices in the East and the West were different long before 1054.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I thought most of us agreed that the OP was correct in the title of the thread, if nothing else

I know but it seemed needful to remind all what we are talking about

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Per the quote before from Nicea about Lent, I'd suggest they did try to norm the practice. As well Schaff and you seem to assume the ash Wednesday of today began with Gregory. But what does Gregory actually say? Arguing against this is the idea that East/West were united and did follow one observance (a 40-day Lenten period), but since the East usually? does not have an ash Wed, though the West does, it suggests the ASH Wed part started subsequent to the 1054 split, which aligns back to the OP.

SO, EO and RC both have a 40 day Lent, right? But RC has an ASH Wed, while EO does not. (typically speaking) So, again, this common observance (Lent) may source to Gregory. But ASH Wed per se would only source to after 1054.

IOW, if Schaff and you are right, then ASH Wed would be practiced by both EO/RC since it sources to Gregory prior to the split.

Schaff:
"The Easter festival proper was preceded by a forty days’ season of repentance and fasting, called Quadragesima, at least as early as the year 325; for the council of Nice presupposes the existence of this season.733 This fast was an imitation of the forty days’ fasting of Jesus in the wilderness, which itself was put in typical connection with the forty days’ fasting of Moses734 and Elijah,735 and the forty years’ wandering of Israel through the desert. At first a free-will act, it gradually assumed the character of a fixed custom and ordinance of the church. Respecting the length of the season much difference prevailed, until Gregory I. (590–604) fixed the Wednesday of the sixth week before Easter, Ash Wednesday as it is called,736 as the beginning of it. On this day the priests and the people sprinkled themselves with dust and ashes, in token of their perishableness and their repentance, with the words: “Remember, O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust thou must return; repent, that thou mayest inherit eternal life.”
NPNF2-02. Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

I said if. If the imposition of the ashes began with Gregory. If it began there, there's no reason it would be present in the east as well as the west. If.

And just because some people tried to regularize practice across the Christian world doesn't mean it always worked. The Roman church (literally, the churches in Rome and its immediate diocese) practiced double post-baptismal chrismation, whereas everyone else, east and west, practiced two. By the time of the great schism, Rome had succeeded in getting everyone in the west to add the second chrismation, but had not succeeded in getting anyone in the East to adopt its practice.

So there's a good example, firmly established, of a western liturgical practice that Rome not only could have, but did try to impose universally, but only managed to do so in the west.

 

[SolomonVII]

When? With Gregory or post 1054?

History of Lent


https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=262


Ash Wednesday - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the Middle Ages (at least by the time of the eighth century), those who were about to die were laid on the ground on top of sackcloth sprinkled with ashes. The priest would bless the dying person with holy water, saying, "Remember that thou art dust and to dust thou shalt return." After the sprinkling, the priest asked, "Art thou content with sackcloth and ashes in testimony of thy penance before the Lord in the day of judgment?" To which the dying person replied, "I am content." In all of these examples, the symbolism of mourning, mortality and penance is clear.

Eventually, the use of ashes was adapted to mark the beginning of Lent, the 40-day preparation period (not including Sundays) for Easter. The ritual for the "Day of Ashes" is found in the earliest editions of the Gregorian Sacramentary, which dates at least to the eighth century. About the year 1000, an Anglo-Saxon priest named Aelfric preached: "We read in the books, both in the Old Law and in the New, that the men who repented of their sins bestrewed themselves with ashes and clothed their bodies with sackcloth. Now let us do this little at the beginning of our Lent that we strew ashes upon our heads to signify that we ought to repent of our sins during the Lenten fast." As an aside, Aelfric reinforced his point by then telling of a man who refused to go to Church on Ash Wednesday and receive ashes; the man was killed a few days later in a boar hunt. Since this time, the Church has used ashes to mark the beginning of the penitential season of Lent, when we remember our mortality and mourn for our sins.​

 

[prodromos]

I need to research this. Would like to see that it is true, and that the roots of that word don't then go back to the goddess.

Would the symbols added to Easter not still be associated with the goddess? If that is right, it would seem an attempt to paganize a Christian celebration instead.

I happened to come across the following article which I thought you might appreciate.
Is the Name "Easter" of Pagan Origin? - Answers in Genesis

 

[~Anastasia~]

I happened to come across the following article which I thought you might appreciate.
Is the Name "Easter" of Pagan Origin? - Answers in Genesis

Thanks for the link.

 

[Lukaris]

This is an obviously long thread so I will go back to the beginning. I wonder how following the call of the prophet Joel is pagan in origin?
Joel 1:13-14

King James Version (KJV)

13 Gird yourselves, and lament, ye priests: howl, ye ministers of the altar: come, lie all night in sackcloth, ye ministers of my God: for the meat offering and the drink offering is withholden from the house of your God.
14 Sanctify ye a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the elders and all the inhabitants of the land into the house of the Lord your God, and cry unto the Lord,



I guess drawing from "pagan" sources is the real motive (yeah right) & somehow a Bible passage is used to conceal the real motive (yeah right).

Lastly all of the inspiration drawn from the fasting of Moses & then of our Lord for 40 days must have some "pagan" source (yeah right).

 

[Root of Jesse]

This is an obviously long thread so I will go back to the beginning. I wonder how following the call of the prophet Joel is pagan in origin?
Joel 1:13-14

King James Version (KJV)

13 Gird yourselves, and lament, ye priests: howl, ye ministers of the altar: come, lie all night in sackcloth, ye ministers of my God: for the meat offering and the drink offering is withholden from the house of your God.
14 Sanctify ye a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the elders and all the inhabitants of the land into the house of the Lord your God, and cry unto the Lord,



I guess drawing from "pagan" sources is the real motive (yeah right) & somehow a Bible passage is used to conceal the real motive (yeah right).

Lastly all of the inspiration drawn from the fasting of Moses & then of our Lord for 40 days must have some "pagan" source (yeah right).

YES!

 

[Kristos]

This is an obviously long thread so I will go back to the beginning. I wonder how following the call of the prophet Joel is pagan in origin?
Joel 1:13-14

King James Version (KJV)

13 Gird yourselves, and lament, ye priests: howl, ye ministers of the altar: come, lie all night in sackcloth, ye ministers of my God: for the meat offering and the drink offering is withholden from the house of your God.
14 Sanctify ye a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the elders and all the inhabitants of the land into the house of the Lord your God, and cry unto the Lord,



I guess drawing from "pagan" sources is the real motive (yeah right) & somehow a Bible passage is used to conceal the real motive (yeah right).

Lastly all of the inspiration drawn from the fasting of Moses & then of our Lord for 40 days must have some "pagan" source (yeah right).

Remember some people don't have the luxury of reading Joel every year, the week before Lent