The few sources I have found on the matter date the octave of Pentecost to around the 800s. Before that, the Sunday of Pentecost coincided with the seasonal ember days, so, given the Baptismal and creation-based character of the feast, it seemed reasonable to extend it over the ember days to each the whole week.
Some of the language in today's collect hints that the ember Mass pre-dates a certain dispute of language....
Mentes nostras, quǽsumus, Dómine, Paráclitus, qui a te procédit, illúminet: et indúcat in omnem, sicut tuus promísit Fílius, veritátem.... Per Dominum nostrum....
I don't get it. Is the "dispute of language" the single vs. double procession question?
ReplyDeleteYep.
DeleteHmm. I don't think I really agree. Are you guys thinking that, if this had been composed after the beginning of the Filioque debate, the author would've certainly included an "and the Son"-type phrase?
Delete(Also, sorry about the anonymity here, apparently you need to create some kind of profile for your name to show up...?)
-Tom Smith
(Sorry for the profile weirdness. The Unknown comment was me, in case that wasn't clear.)
DeleteMaybe he would've. Pope Leo III, while recognizing the doctrine, didn't want it sung in the Creed. After the Schism there would be more of an impetus to include the mention of double procession (e.g. "Procedenti ab Utroque compar sit laudatio.").
DeleteThe collect also appears in the short series of prayers to be said before Mass by the celebrant.
ReplyDelete