Among the many beautiful traditions of Christmastide, I think the Solemn Proclamation of the Nativity stands out. Yes, I know the some of the specific number of years in the announcement may not be scientifically accurate, but it sets the whole Mystery firmly in history. I'm sure many of you incorporate the Proclamation in your midnight celebrations, but in case there are some who haven't included it, here's the text we use at our parish. Our practice is to chant it at the beginning of the Mass, and then we process the image of the Christ Child to the creche.
The twenty-fifth day of December.
In the year five-thousand one-hundred and ninety-nine from the creation of the world, when in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth;
In the year two-thousand nine-hundred and fifty-seven from the flood;
In the year two-thousand and fifty-one from the birth of Abraham;
In the year one-thousand five-hundred and ten from the going forth of the people of Israel out of Egypt under Moses;
In the year one-thousand and thirty-two from the anointing of David as king;
In the sixty-fifth week according to the prophecy of Daniel;
In the one-hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad;
In the year seven-hundred and fifty-two from the foundation of the city of Rome;
In the forty-second year of the reign of the Emperor Octavian Augustus;
In the sixth age of the world, while the whole earth was at peace —
JESUS CHRIST,
Eternal God and the Son of the eternal Father, willing to consecrate the world by His gracious coming, having been conceived of the Holy Ghost, and the nine months of His conception being now accomplished, was born in Bethlehem of Judah of the Virgin Mary, made man.The Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.
Here's a recording of it by Fr. Samuel Weber. Although the text differs slightly, if you're unfamiliar with it, it gives you an idea of the chant tone.
Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!
I was not aware of this tradition before. The text is beautiful – spine tingling, even.
You're right about the dates, though. For each person touched by the idea of Christ's birth being rooted in history, there will be others who see the exact dating of the world's creation as utter nonsense; for those people, rather than rooting Christ's birth in history, the proclamation would root Christ's birth completely outside of history. I wonder whether there is any solution. Is there another way of wording such a proclamation?
I believe the modern Roman text says something like "innumerable ages since the creation of the world."
The science (so called) of the earth's age is of no consequence. Perfect knowledge of which cannot save a man's soul. This is a beautiful tradition to keep. Many thanks.
Venerable Mary of Agreda mentioned the 5199 as well as the Roman Martyrologies. Blessed Anne Catharine Emmerich says 3998 however she also mentions that their were different ways of computing the years. Velikovsky writes about the changes of the length of the year. So it is possible that both are correct. The 3998 years BC being based on the 365.24 calendar and the 5199 years on actual revolutions round the sun. Of course if you are an evolutionist you will prefer the tacky modernist inspired new version. until a week ago i had never heard of this 5199 and now here it is again.
Here's the updated version, approved by the USCCB:
Today, the twenty–fifth day of December,
unknown ages from the time when God created the heavens and the earth
and then formed man and woman in his own image.
Several thousand years after the flood,
when God made the rainbow shine forth
as a sign of the covenant.
Twenty–one centuries from the time of Abraham and Sarah;
thirteen centuries after Moses led the people of Israel
out of Egypt.
Eleven hundred years from the time of Ruth and the Judges;
one thousand years from the anointing of David as king;
in the sixty–fifth week according to the prophecy of Daniel.
In the one hundred and ninety–fourth Olympiad;
the seven hundred and fifty–second year from the foundation
of the city of Rome.
The forty–second year of the reign of Octavian Augustus;
the whole world being at peace,
Jesus Christ, eternal God and Son of the eternal Father,
desiring to sanctify the world by his most merciful coming,
being conceived by the Holy Spirit,
and nine months having passed since his conception,
was born in Bethlehem of Judea of the Virgin Mary.
Today is the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh.
Is it more accurate because of its vagueness? Yes.
Is it as beautiful and poetic as the more traditional version? Probably not.
Could it be more poetic without being less accurate? Surely.
Sure, the "updated" version is more vague and thus more "scientifically exact" – but it still mentions the Great Flood, an event that supposedly never happened. So what is won with the new version?
Thank you for posting this special treat for all of us.
Some years ago, as a result of reading an essay by an astronomer, published by Hillsdale College, I had occasion to research the classical datings with the aid of a classical chronology. The datings of the Olympiad and Urbs Conditae correspond to the year 2 BC. The anomaly is the regnal year of Augustus. Tracking it back, we see that the Martyrology assumes the accession of Augustus upon the Ides of March, in immediate succession to the Divine Julius. This, the Romans themselves did not do.
I repeat myself: the astronomer calculated that the Nativity was in the year 2 BC. The Martyrology confirms this.
Recently, I read an essay reminding us that God has no grandchildren. As Christians, we are sons and daughters of the marriage of Christ with His Church. So, we celebrate our father's birthday, the Father of the Poor.
Benton
Rejection of "young earth" creationism was part and parcel of my leaving fundamentalism. I would like to do a brief survey on here of the generally prevailing views amongst Anglican Catholics…? The evidence for creation is to me indisputable, the evidence is equally indisputable which points to a very very old creation… So, I'm an "Old Earth" creationist personally.
Not that it matters what I think…things are as they are and have been as they have been, and will be what they will be regardless of my opinion of the matter….
"Old earth creationist" is a very good way of putting it.
Well I'm not an never have been an Anglican (though I joined the Catholic Church from Protestantism), and I too am an "Old Earth Creationist" as you so delicately put it. Certainly when fellow Catholics question this outlook of mine, I try to point them to the fact that the "Big Bang" theory of the universe's origins was originally proposed by a priest and the scientific community initially rejected it because they felt it was "too creationist".
Also, for what it's worth (because of the conversation upthread), I actually think the more accurate proclamation text has the potential to be also more poetic than the traditional one. I happen to prefer Fr. Matkin's "innumerable ages from the creation of the world" to "in the year five-thousand one-hundred and ninety-nine from the creation of the world", but maybe that's just me.
I'm not a "creationist" in the usual sense. I believe God created the Heavens and the Earth, but I don't believe He is threatened or outwitted by the various permutations of the theory of evolution. God can do what He wills as and when He wills it, and if He wills it through quantum mechanics, primordial soup and all the rest of it, then that's fine by me. It's rather like the Incarnation in that way.
I thought the "innumerable ages" was part of the official, i.e. from Rome, post-Vatican II proclamation. I support the new form over the old form because too many people in the pews will say, "That's NOT so!" No reason to make Catholic credibility any worse than it already is, frankly. I'm less wild about "Ruth and the judges" and other add-ons to satisfy feminist currents of thought in the church, but I would be hard pressed to say that such add-ons are "wrong."
I have no problems with evolution as such, never had. As for certain theories of evolution that would deny the existence of, say, what the Greeks called "the unmoved mover" – - that's bad metaphysics, not science.
Thank You for posting the written as well as the audio!
We have been chanting this beautiful proclamation in our little chapel for many years. Upon it's completion we reserve a good space for silence. The impact is tremendous on all.
Pax in Terra!
For those who have never heard of the tradition, the reason is that it derives from the monasteries. Part of the Office of Matins (i.e., in the contemporary Liturgy of the Hours, the Office of Readings) is a reading from the entry for the Roman Martyrology, which details all of the saints commemorated on the day (a much longer list than you'll find on a church calendar). This Office, of course, was read in the depths of the night by the monks. But for those celebrating the Mass at Midnight, the Office is displaced on this night, but the proclamation is retained in many places before the Mass begins.
For those who would like the text Fr. Phillips posted with the music, I have posted it to my web site with the traditional tone and the prophecy tone.
Sorry, the link above doesn't seem to work. It should go to:
http://homepage.mac.com/appleblossom/xmas_vig_proc.pdf
I was mentioning to Fr LaMarre another old, old tradition going back to the early Church: the solemn proclamation of the date of Easter, usually done at Epiphany. That, too, Fr LaMarre has done for years in chapel.
As I say, this is one of the oldest traditions of the Church. It should be revived. Fr Weber, do you have the text and music somewhere in your treasure-store?
Benton
There is an official version of Epiphany Proclamation on the USCCB website. I'm glad to have seen this tradition increasingly coming back into our parishes. Now, if we can only get the blessing of Epiphany water and chalk back in our parishes – - which was not much of an Anglican custom, except, crucially (and definitively?) at Holy Trinity, Reading, under Brian Brindley.