Pentecost Vigil

[Hare]

In my parish we have always used the Vigil Mass of Pentecost on the Saturday evening. Our Diocesan Ordo (Southwark) says that this should be used, but that only one OT reading is necessary.

However, what I read here http://www.salfordliturgy.org/pentecostb.htm seems to contradict this.

Help please!!

[musicus]

I think the Salford site is imaginatively suggesting that you could use all four of the alternative First Readings, along the lines of the sequence of OT readings at the Easter Vigil, but I don't think this is what is intended for normal use. I only have a Sunday Missal to hand, but it clearly sets out four alternative First Readings, followed by one clearly-marked Second Reading (i.e. not Fifth). Admittedly, the rubric before the First Reading is ambiguous: Any of these readings from the Old Testament may be chosen (and not Any one of...).

The Salford piece also points out the potential confusion between the Vigil Mass and a Saturday evening 'first Mass of Sunday'. However, by conflating these two points, I think it rather muddles them. This second point is clearer if we omit the bit about all four First Readings:

There can be some confusion over the Pentecost 'Vigil Mass' (Lectionary Volume I p 596). If you normally have a Saturday night Mass (First Mass of Sunday) then for the Saturday night before Pentecost you should use the Readings for 'Mass during the Day' (Lectionary Volume I p 601?). The 'Vigil Mass' is an optional Mass of Saturday Night (not of the Sunday). [snip] If you have no Saturday night Mass, you may consider having the Pentecost Vigil as a preparation for this feast, which ranks second only to Easter. If you do have a regular Saturday night Mass, lit would be difficult to celebrate the Pentecost Vigil. [My emphasis]

So I reckon that [1] the compilers of the Lectionary seem to have intended that there should normally be only one First Reading at the Pentecost Vigil Mass, and [2] the Pentecost Vigil Mass cannot do duty as the first Mass of Pentecost Sunday; if you want that, you should celebrate the Mass of Pentecost Sunday.

[quaeritor]

the rubric before the First Reading is ambiguous: Any of these readings from the Old Testament may be chosen (and not Any one of...).

Actually, no - "Any" is always singular - had the text read "Any of the readings is acceptable" to write "Any of the readings are acceptable" would have been clearly wrong . . .

but . . .

I do accept that a language develops and shifts, and rigourously maintaining the singularity of "any" makes for some very awkward expressions - how do you correctly say "Are there any questions" when you clearly do not want to limit the questioning opportunity to only one person?

Hmmm . . .

[mcb]

Actually, no - "Any" is always singular - had the text read "Any of the readings is acceptable" to write "Any of the readings are acceptable" would have been clearly wrong . . .

What authority says that any has to be singular? The claim doesn't look correct to me. And the evidence is out there - any answers are gets 25,600 Google hits (compared with 7,500 for any answer is); any problems are gets 23,100 (any problem is - 19,600). And so on. It looks as though the world's English speakers don't know the rules of their own language.

[contrabordun]

A quick check of "any" in Fowler rev Gower doesn't address the question either way, but one of his examples in another context is "Have you any bananas"? "Yes we have some bananas" which suggests he thought it could be plural.

"None" is, or ought to be, always singular.

[mcb]

The definition of "ought to be" is problematic. Often these prescriptive rules were conjured out of nowhere by self-appointed custodians of linguistic etiquette in the eighteenth century, on the grounds that English grammar didn't have enough rules. Singular none is somewhere up there with the split infinitive in this regard, and again the figures suggest that the 'rule' is invalid - Google says there is none so blind gets 12,600 hits, while there are none so blind gets 35,300.

[Hare]

I'm surprised that Mr Bear has not implored a return to topic........... ? !

[musicus]

I'm surprised that Mr Bear has not implored a return to topic........... ? !

It had crossed my mind. However, perhaps my reply to your question left nothing else to add

[contrabordun]

But "none" is a contraction of "no one"

[mcb]

Nah. Etymologically Old English nan was formed from ne 'not' and an 'one', but in OE it could be used in the plural - it's attested in the writings of Alfred the Great. It's not a contraction in the sense that don't is a contraction of do not. Etymology aside, the meaning of none is more like not any than not one. And any, we've perhaps established above, can be plural as well as singular.

There's a good brief discussion here, and a fuller discussion in Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, which you can get to via Google books.

[quaeritor]

It looks as though the world's English speakers don't know the rules of their own language.

No surprise there! - Looks as though it includes me too - my success rate when being dogmatic in this forum is not high!

Maybe I should stick to asking questions.

Q

(The clue's in the name.)

[Reginald]

Apparently the revised editio typica of the 2002 Missal has an extended form of the Liturgy of the Word, after the fashion of the Easter Vigil. Perhaps Salford were simply suggesting a practice that will be normative when we finally get our new translation.

[musicus]

Fascinating! Thank you, Reginald; not least for getting us back on topic.

[Gabriel]

To amplify Reginald's post.

In the recently reprinted 3rd edition of Latin Roman Missal there is a Pentecost Vigil included as an appendix. In a similar way to the Easter Vigil it allows for a succession of OT readings followed by psalm and prayers - i.e. all the readings provided in the Lectionary. I think it was first available in the material published by the Holy See as preparatory for the Millennium.

[FrGareth]

My Lectionary Vol I (2001 reprint of the 1982 study edition) DOES clearly use the words "Any one of the following readings..." on p. 596.

The rubric in the Roman Missal (England, Wales etc) on p. 280 Pentecost Vigil says "This Mass is celebrated on Saturday evening before of after Evening Prayer I of Pentecost"; since the other Mass is clearly called "Mass During the Day" I have interpreted it as meaning that my regular parish Saturday Vigil Mass should use the texts and readings of the Pentecost Vigil - in the same way that my Christmas Eve evening Mass uses the Vigil Mass of Christmas.