« Last post by NicholasMyra on Yesterday at 07:45:28 PM »
Evil is the state when God is not present.
But God is present where evil is. His presence even harms the evil.
Evil is the state when God is not present.
I'd like to think that there's a lot going on that isn't... that.Yeah from time to time someone denies the Incarnation because it conflicts with Porphyry
AFAIK, the Liturgy of St. James is only celebrated by the Church of Jerusalem on his name day (Oct. 23 Old Calendar) and by maybe a handful of monasteries on Mt. Athos (are there any others). My priest today, during his homily, mentioned the idea of celebrating the Liturgy of St. James on his name day whenever it coincides with a Sunday, but such a thing, I would imagine, would probably require a bishop's approval, maybe even the Patriarch's; I don't know. So whose permission would be needed? I can't imagine that any parish that simply wants to just opts to use it on a Sunday.
The celebration of the Liturgy of St. James within the EO tradition should be first blessed by the diocesan hierarch. It's not just the text that needs to be approved; there are questions of rubrics involved, too. It is a Liturgy best celebrated with more than 1 priest, and certainly with advance notice. We celebrated it each year at HC/HC when I was there.
I would not recommend attempting to celebrate it when the feast falls on a Sunday (as it did this year on the RJC).
On this point I am not quite convinced all of the rubrics reflect the St. James liturgy in every form in which it was used; there are several divergent texts, although Archimandrite Ephrem has one of the better ones. I feel like the Liturgy of St. James should be made available in a form like that of Ss. Basil, Mark or Peter, with the unusual liturgy of the catechumens and versus populum aspects removed, so in a sense, the main thing the laity would notice about the liturgy would be the use of Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silent instead of the usual thrice holy hymn.
In this manner, the ancient anaphora could be substituted for that of St. Basil on Holy Saturday of the priest desired and the bishop approved, with no variation that might confuse the laity.
I will confess my perspective is shaped by the Oriental Orthodox tradition, wherein the Syriac, Coptic and Ethiopian Rites have anaphorae and other components like fraction prayers or husoye which are interchangeable and usually selectable by the priest (this used to be the case in the Armenian Rite as well). But the fact is, there was an enforced Byzantinization in the Eastern Orthodox church, wherein the local uses of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria amd Georgia were replaced by Constantinopolitan usages, and then another round of this occurred with the Nikonian reforms in the Russian church, which caused a permanent schism. I don't think any good was accomplished by this (or by similiar events in, for example, the Armenian or Roman churches). Exact liturgical standardization is overrated; what is important is that each liturgy agrees on the essentials, and in this respect the anaphora of St. James, setting aside some of the unsual rubrics, such as the one manuacript with the ridiculously long litany of saints, has those features, being according to tradition the prototype for tje St. Basil liturgy.
Within each Divine Liturgy in current use by the EO (St. John's, St. Basil's, not including St. Gregory's which has no Anaphora), there are multiple prayers that are tied to that specific tradition, not just the Anaphora. Beginning with the prayers at the litanies after the Gospel, through and including the prayers after Holy Communion, are different between the two services; hence, swapping in one prayer or two would disrupt the pattern and natural connectivity of the remaining liturgical prayers. Inserting some of the key prayers from the Liturgy of St. James may be possible, but there are more to work with, and not enough slots to fit them in. The variant hymns would need to be accounted for. And I'm not sure that the unusual format can be discarded altogether; while I've appreciated the differences seen between the various manuscripts available, and being naturally disposed toward simplicity myself, I don't think it's helpful for us at this point to leave the application of one set of rubrics or another to the discretion of individual parishes. At some point the Hierarchs need to decide, and it would be best if that was done either via local Synods or through larger Councils.
I told my neighbor about my fall Spinach crop which by mistake was actually Sesame, and she bought I think Broccoli and Brussell Sprouts enough for both of us. The Broccoli I think is surviving, however the Brussel Sprouts are being eaten by something, like a gnat.
You gotta strain the gnat, bro, that's Bible 101.
Just a question out of the blue, huh?So did you find the spouselol! My only question is if people have something good and spiritual they can share and recommend (reading or listening) from an Orthodox perspective. So this topic might never end. If a new book or podcast came out that you think is food for thought on the subject, post it here. Preferably from those who are married or guided married folks.
If you liked it, you would have put a ring on it.
I would think 'adiafthoros' means "unseduced" ('aftharsi' means "incorrupt"). I sometimes wonder if the translators into English have tended to be overly delicate. Obviously so in cases such as St. Paul's "deprepuced" as "circumcised." But also possibly even in the case if 'theotokos' as "God-bearer" rather than, say, "God-bred."I read that 'diafthoros' means 'corrupt'? Thus 'adiafthoros' is incorrupt?