 |
 |
>Common
explanation is that the forces of evil make a special effort to claim for their
own any space intended for sacred use, whether new or old.
And
so the older, the greater their effort? – particular if it has been ‘their’
space previously? Can anyone provide a textual reference to back up this explanation?
I’m not doubting it, it’s just that it would actually be a great
help to me.
Thanks
Best
wishes
Graham
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions
of medieval religious culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Stan Metheny
Sent: 01 April 2010 16:22
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [M-R] new priest in 1219
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval
religion and culture
Common
explanation is that the forces of evil make a special effort to claim for their
own any space intended for sacred use, whether new or old. The first part of
the rite is to completely cleanse the space/building of any remaining traces of
that.
BTW,
in addition to the salt and ashes, the Gregorian water also includes a small
bit of wine, symbolizing the blood of the Jewish Temple sacrifices of
purification/dedication. (Some commentators have linked the ashes to Temple
sacrifices as well.)
Stan
Metheny
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions
of medieval religious culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Graham Jones
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 9:57 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [M-R] new priest in 1219
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of
medieval religion and culture
Indeed, but why should a newly built church need to be exorcised
rather than simply blessed and asperged?
Graham
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions
of medieval religious culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Stan Metheny
Sent: 01 April 2010 14:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [M-R] new priest in 1219
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval
religion and culture
No.
On Ash Wednesday, the cross is signed only with ashes (from the burning of
palms from the prior year’s Palm Sunday).
The
Gregorian water mixture is not muddy. The bishop sprinkles salt and ashes
(cruciform) over the surface of a large pot of water, then it is blessed. The
amount of salt and ashes used is typically not enough to do more than—at
most—make the water a bit cloudy. He then sprinkles the exterior walls of
the building three times with this water.
The
rite of consecration of a church parallels somewhat the rite of baptism. Before
being consecrated, the building is ‘exorcised,’ much like the
exorcism used in the baptismal rite. Hence, the use of ashes is penitential, as
is the wearing of violet vestments in this first part of the rite, in the first
part of the rite of baptism, and in the rite of exorcism itself.
I’m
not aware of any connection with the building being previously used for some
other purpose, sacred or otherwise. The rite is the same for any building to be
consecrated.
Stan
Metheny
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions
of medieval religious culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Graham Jones
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 6:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [M-R] new priest in 1219
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of
medieval religion and culture
Isn’t it such a mixture with which the forehead is marked
with a cross on Ash Wednesday? And how does the bishop mark the sign of the
cross at the corners of the building being consecrated? If with this
‘muddy mixture’, does the penitential aspect of ashes have some
relevance in the case of the adoption for Christian worship of buildings
previously used for sacred purposes by members of other religious traditions?
Graham
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions
of medieval religious culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Cate Gunn
Sent: 01 April 2010 11:10
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [M-R] new priest in 1219
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval
religion and culture
On 31 Mar 2010, at 18:25, Henk wrote: