OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 02, 2014, 03:15:15 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Epiclesis  (Read 2578 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Specs
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 31


« on: November 22, 2007, 02:50:54 PM »

I wasn’t sure whether this should go in “liturgy” or here…and I ultimately chose here, because I might post a follow up question that will be linked to the question of the Roman Catholic texts. Sorry if it is the wrong forum.

1. What importance is the Epiclesis for the bread and wine to become the Body and Blood  according to Orthodoxy?  The general explanation I’ve read is that it is one cohesive whole with the anaphora and a moment cannot be pinpointed so reverence is made at the end. But the epiclesis is a necessary component of the anaphora. Is there any inaccuracy or clarification or expansion to this?

2. What shape does this epiclesis have to take? Does it have to be an explicit request for the descent of the Third Person for conversion? Can it be a simple request to bless the Gifts?  What are the implications, if any, of using the words “show”, “manifest”, “prove” instead of (rather than simply in addition to) “make” or “consecrate” in the epiclesis?

3. Can an Anaphora which has (i) epiclesis but no Insitution narrative (ii) Institution Narrative but no epiclesis ever be admitted as sufficient?
Logged
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2007, 03:11:15 PM »

I wasn’t sure whether this should go in “liturgy” or here…and I ultimately chose here, because I might post a follow up question that will be linked to the question of the Roman Catholic texts. Sorry if it is the wrong forum.

1. What importance is the Epiclesis for the bread and wine to become the Body and Blood  according to Orthodoxy?  The general explanation I’ve read is that it is one cohesive whole with the anaphora and a moment cannot be pinpointed so reverence is made at the end. But the epiclesis is a necessary component of the anaphora. Is there any inaccuracy or clarification or expansion to this?

2. What shape does this epiclesis have to take? Does it have to be an explicit request for the descent of the Third Person for conversion? Can it be a simple request to bless the Gifts?  What are the implications, if any, of using the words “show”, “manifest”, “prove” instead of (rather than simply in addition to) “make” or “consecrate” in the epiclesis?

3. Can an Anaphora which has (i) epiclesis but no Insitution narrative (ii) Institution Narrative but no epiclesis ever be admitted as sufficient?

This article was absconded from another website:

""Priest to Priest:

At the Divine Liturgy we pray that Holy Spirit would come down "upon us and upon these gifts" - the offered bread and wine - so that we may and they may become "truly the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ". This is perhaps the most dramatic and important of all our epicletic prayers. We call upon the Holy Spirit to come and to transform our self-offering by His divine power and grace. His presence sanctifies the gifts offered, and those who offer the gifts, and unites us through them to Christ and to one another. He establishes and nourishes us as the Body of Christ, as the enduring and creative presence of the Lord in this world,healing and restoring, forgiving and reconciling. Our life as priests and pastors is ultimately a life of epiclesis, a continual calling down the Holy Spirit upon us and others and the world around us. As both supplicants and agents of sanctity, we stand with our armsopen in prayer, in a posture of humility and receptivity,longing to have renewed in us the presence of the Holy Spirit,longing to experience the gifts and fruits of the Holy Spirit in our lives and in the communion of love and thanksgiving we share with one another in our communities. Every authentic pastoral accomplishment is by and in the Holy Spirit. Come and abide in us!Let us pray for one another.

Archpriest Andrew MorbeyDepartment of Pastoral Life and Ministry""

So, there isnt any one particular time that the Bread and Wine are changed but we do know that it does happen and is completed at the Great Amen, Amen, Amen.

Logged
rakovsky
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,218



WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2010, 01:07:57 AM »

Do you believe this? The Roman Catholic Church has pinpointed a moment in the liturgy when the transformation happens, but the eastern Catholics subject to Rome's theology claim they don't have to accept this.

 Huh Huh Huh

Quote
Moment of Consecration: When does transubstantiation take place in the Divine Liturgy?

Concerning the moment of "transubstantiation," Eastern Catholic theology does not narrow in exclusively on the words of institution as being the moment of consecration. The Eastern Church Fathers taught that the Eucharist mysteriously becomes the body and blood of Christ sometime during the anaphora (Eucharistic prayer). Eastern Catholics have traditionally placed a great emphasis on the epiclesis, which is the moment in which the Holy Spirit is called down upon the gifts to transform them into the Body and Blood of Christ. In the great Eatern Liturgies, which we still use, the epiclesis comes after the words of institution.

This difference in no way ruptures our communion with the Latin Church. Rather, it highlights what is distinctive about Eastern Christian theology: a heavy emphasis on mystery. We choose to believe that Christ manifests himself in the Eucharist at some (unspecified) time during the Eucharistic prayer. Narrowing in on an exact moment of consecration is not the Eastern style. Rather, we see the coming of Christ in the Eucharist as being a great mystery which we are unable to comprehend.
http://www.east2west.org/Liturgy&Sacrament.htm


Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2010, 12:07:02 PM »

Do you believe this? The Roman Catholic Church has pinpointed a moment in the liturgy when the transformation happens, but the eastern Catholics subject to Rome's theology claim they don't have to accept this.

 Huh Huh Huh

Quote
Moment of Consecration: When does transubstantiation take place in the Divine Liturgy?

Concerning the moment of "transubstantiation," Eastern Catholic theology does not narrow in exclusively on the words of institution as being the moment of consecration. The Eastern Church Fathers taught that the Eucharist mysteriously becomes the body and blood of Christ sometime during the anaphora (Eucharistic prayer). Eastern Catholics have traditionally placed a great emphasis on the epiclesis, which is the moment in which the Holy Spirit is called down upon the gifts to transform them into the Body and Blood of Christ. In the great Eatern Liturgies, which we still use, the epiclesis comes after the words of institution.

This difference in no way ruptures our communion with the Latin Church. Rather, it highlights what is distinctive about Eastern Christian theology: a heavy emphasis on mystery. We choose to believe that Christ manifests himself in the Eucharist at some (unspecified) time during the Eucharistic prayer. Narrowing in on an exact moment of consecration is not the Eastern style. Rather, we see the coming of Christ in the Eucharist as being a great mystery which we are unable to comprehend.
http://www.east2west.org/Liturgy&Sacrament.htm

This is something of a myth concerning the Catholic Church...per usual. 

The fact of the matter is that there is no formal teaching on the part of the Catholic Church pinpointing THE moment of Consecration.  What is said in the discussion of liturgical theology is that:  IN THE LATIN RITE...the words of institution are the bare minimum for the completion of the sacramental act...IF ONE MUST PINPOINT a single moment that would be the moment.  HOWEVER...the entire eucharistic canon gives integrity to the parts and makes it ONE INTEGRAL WHOLE AND COMPLETE.

So these kinds of discussion are worthless and misleading and sometimes silly in the extreme.  I don't think you all are being silly because clearly you do not know.  But at some point, as adults, we are responsible for going to the horses mouth to find out what is what about things we can only guess about, before we guess so badly that we do harm where there is no fault.

M.
Logged

Altar Server
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian(as of 12/18/10)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 836


Most Holy Theotokos Save Us!


« Reply #4 on: October 19, 2010, 07:57:40 AM »

According to post conciliar liturgists the entire Eucharistic cannon is consecratory.
Logged

"Come ye take light from The Light that is never overtaken by night and glorify the Christ, who is risen from the dead"
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #5 on: October 19, 2010, 11:32:49 AM »

I agree with Mary.

[looking up uneasily for impending lightning bolts ]

Cheesy
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2010, 12:45:17 PM »

According to post conciliar liturgists the entire Eucharistic canon is consecratory.

What I wrote about the integrity of the Eucharistic canon, I paraphrased directly from St. Thomas Aquinas, so that understanding of liturgy is a tad bit older than the Second Vatican Council.

Mary
Logged

Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,039



WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2010, 12:54:21 PM »

Roman Rite of the Catholic Church
Main article: Eucharist (Catholic Church)
The Words of Institution of the Roman Rite Mass are here presented in the 1973 English translation of the Roman Missal in the form given in the following  text. The distinction here made by bolding is not found in the Missal.

Take this, all of you, and eat it:
this is my body which will be given up for you.
Take this, all of you, and drink from it:
this is the cup of my blood,
the blood of the new and everlasting covenant.
It will be shed for you and for many
so that sins may be forgiven.
Do this in memory of me.

From the time of Peter Lombard on, the prevailing theology of the Catholic Church considered the eight words in bold above to be on their own the necessary and sufficient "sacramental form" of the Eucharist. Pope Benedict XII's Decree for the Armenians, issued after the Council of Florence, declared: "The words of the Savior, by which He instituted this sacrament, are the form of this sacrament; for the priest speaking in the person of Christ effects this sacrament. For by the power of the very words the substance of the bread is changed into the body of Christ, and the substance of the wine into the blood".[2] The Decree did not limit the words to the eight in bold, but was popularly taken to mean that, on their own, they are all that is needed for effecting the sacrament.[3] The Decree also declared that the matter of ordination was the giving to the ordinand of objects connected with their ministry,[4] an idea now discarded and even then contradicted by the Catholic Church's recognition of the validity of ordinations in Churches that had no such ceremony in their rite of ordination.[3]

The theological opinion about the necessity and sufficiency of pronouncing certain parts of the Words of Institution (the eight words bolded in the English translation given above) is not included in, for instance, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, published in definitive form in 1997. On 17 January 2001 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith declared that the Holy Qurbana of Addai and Mari, a probably second-century anaphora in which the Words of Institution are not spoken, "can be considered valid."[5] The Guidelines for Admission to the Eucharist between the Chaldean Church and the Assyrian Church of the East issued by the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity in agreement with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Congregation for the Oriental Churches on 20 July 2001 say that "the words of the institution of the Eucharist are in fact present in the anaphora of Addai and Mari, not in the form of a coherent narration and in a literal way but in a euchological and disseminated manner, that is to say they are integrated in the prayers of thanksgiving, praise and intercession which follow." These prayers in fact speaks of "the commemoration of the Body and Blood of your Christ, which we offer to you on the pure and holy altar, as you have taught us in his life-giving Gospel."[6]

It has therefore been argued that it is the prayer as a whole, not some isolated words within it, that is efficacious in the sacrament, and that the Words of Institution that Jesus himself spoke at his Last Supper are consecratory at every Eucharist,[3] whether they are repeated or only implied, in accordance with the teaching of Saint John Chrysostom: "That saying, 'This is my body', once uttered, from that time to the present day, and even until Christ's coming, makes the sacrifice complete at every table in the churches."[7]

While thus accepting as valid the Anaphora of Addai and Mari even when the Words of Institution are not explicitly spoken, the document of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity "warmly invites" an Assyrian minister celebrating the Eucharist when Chaldean Christians are particiipating to insert the Words of Institution in that circumstance, as permitted by the Assyrian Church itself.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Words_of_Institution
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2010, 01:40:15 PM »

I agree with Mary.

[looking up uneasily for impending lightning bolts ]

Cheesy

 laugh laugh laugh laugh
Logged

Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,039



WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2010, 03:02:54 PM »

The total conversion of the substance of bread is expressed clearly in the words of Institution: "This is my body". These words form, not a theoretical, but a practical proposition, whose essence consists in this, that the objective identity between subject and predicate is effected and verified only after the words have all been uttered, not unlike the pronouncement of a king to a subaltern: "You are a major", or, "You are a captain", which would immediately cause the promotion of the officer to a higher command. When, therefore, He Who is All Truth and All Power said of the bread: "This is my body", the bread became, through the utterance of these words, the Body of Christ; consequently, on the completion of the sentence the substance of bread was no longer present, but the Body of Christ under the outward appearance of bread. Hence the bread must have become the Body of Christ, i.e. the former must have been converted into the latter. The words of Institution were at the same time the words of Transubstantiation. Indeed the actual manner in which the absence of the bread and the presence of the Body of Christ is effected, is not read into the words of Institution but strictly and exegetically deduced from them.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm

Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
rakovsky
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,218



WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2010, 05:45:13 PM »

The total conversion of the substance of bread is expressed clearly in the words of Institution: "This is my body". These words form, not a theoretical, but a practical proposition, whose essence consists in this, that the objective identity between subject and predicate is effected and verified only after the words have all been uttered, not unlike the pronouncement of a king to a subaltern: "You are a major", or, "You are a captain", which would immediately cause the promotion of the officer to a higher command.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm

OK, so Eastern Catholics who submitted to the Pope of Rome agreed to accept Roman Catholic doctrines when they disagree with their own. But when it comes to the Words of Institution, Eastern Catholics like Maria and Theistgal still hold the theological view of the Orthodox church they came from that doesn't officially pinpoint some moments of the transformation?

« Last Edit: October 19, 2010, 05:46:45 PM by rakovsky » Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,891


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #11 on: October 19, 2010, 06:04:32 PM »

OK, so Eastern Catholics who submitted to the Pope of Rome agreed to accept Roman Catholic doctrines when they disagree with their own. But when it comes to the Words of Institution, Eastern Catholics like Maria and Theistgal still hold the theological view of the Orthodox church they came from that doesn't officially pinpoint some moments of the transformation?

Yes, among others.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,891


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #12 on: October 19, 2010, 06:10:29 PM »

The Catechism of the Catholic Church on the Epiclesis:

The Holy Spirit makes present the mystery of Christ

1104 Christian liturgy not only recalls the events that saved us but actualizes them, makes them present. The Paschal mystery of Christ is celebrated, not repeated. It is the celebrations that are repeated, and in each celebration there is an outpouring of the Holy Spirit that makes the unique mystery present.

1105 The Epiclesis ("invocation upon") is the intercession in which the priest begs the Father to send the Holy Spirit, the Sanctifier, so that the offerings may become the body and blood of Christ and that the faithful by receiving them, may themselves become a living offering to God.23

1106 Together with the anamnesis, the epiclesis is at the heart of each sacramental celebration, most especially of the Eucharist:


You ask how the bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the wine . . . the Blood of Christ I shall tell you: the Holy Spirit comes upon them and accomplishes what surpasses every word and thought. . . . Let it be enough for you to understand that it is by the Holy Spirit, just as it was of the Holy Virgin and by the Holy Spirit that the Lord, through and in himself, took flesh.24
1107 The Holy Spirit's transforming power in the liturgy hastens the coming of the kingdom and the consummation of the mystery of salvation. While we wait in hope he causes us really to anticipate the fullness of communion with the Holy Trinity. Sent by the Father who hears the epiclesis of the Church, the Spirit gives life to those who accept him and is, even now, the "guarantee" of their inheritance.25

The communion of the Holy Spirit

1108 In every liturgical action the Holy Spirit is sent in order to bring us into communion with Christ and so to form his Body. The Holy Spirit is like the sap of the Father's vine which bears fruit on its branches.26 The most intimate cooperation of the Holy Spirit and the Church is achieved in the liturgy. The Spirit who is the Spirit of communion, abides indefectibly in the Church. For this reason the Church is the great sacrament of divine communion which gathers God's scattered children together. Communion with the Holy Trinity and fraternal communion are inseparably the fruit of the Spirit in the liturgy.27

1109 The epiclesis is also a prayer for the full effect of the assembly's communion with the mystery of Christ. "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit"28 have to remain with us always and bear fruit beyond the Eucharistic celebration. The Church therefore asks the Father to send the Holy Spirit to make the lives of the faithful a living sacrifice to God by their spiritual transformation into the image of Christ, by concern for the Church's unity, and by taking part in her mission through the witness and service of charity.

23 Cf. Rom 12:1.
24 St. John Damascene, De fide orth 4, 13: PG 94, 1145A.
25 Cf. Eph 1:14; 2 Cor 1:22.
26 Cf. Jn 15:1-17; Gal 5:22.
27 Cf. 1 Jn 1:3-7.
28 2 Cor 13:13.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s1c1a1.htm#III
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,699



« Reply #13 on: October 19, 2010, 06:14:57 PM »

I think this whole thing is rather pointless. If you are a Catholic and believe that either the words of institution or the entire anaphora constitutes the sacrament, that is mighty fine. If you are Orthodox and believe that the Epiklesis is critical, that is also mighty fine. Why, because we all believe in the real presence, no matter how that is explained. May I remind fellow Orthodox that even after the Epiklesis there is this prayer: "Deacon/Priest: For the precious Gifts offered and consecrated, let us pray to the Lord... Deacon/Priest: That our loving God who has received them at His holy, heavenly, and spiritual altar as an offering of spiritual fragrance, may in return send upon us divine grace and the gift of the Holy Spirit, let us pray to the Lord."

Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #14 on: October 19, 2010, 06:19:00 PM »

I think this whole thing is rather pointless. If you are a Catholic and believe that either the words of institution or the entire anaphora constitutes the sacrament, that is mighty fine. If you are Orthodox and believe that the Epiklesis is critical, that is also mighty fine. Why, because we all believe in the real presence, no matter how that is explained. May I remind fellow Orthodox that even after the Epiklesis there is this prayer: "Deacon/Priest: For the precious Gifts offered and consecrated, let us pray to the Lord... Deacon/Priest: That our loving God who has received them at His holy, heavenly, and spiritual altar as an offering of spiritual fragrance, may in return send upon us divine grace and the gift of the Holy Spirit, let us pray to the Lord."


I like this post.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,039



WWW
« Reply #15 on: October 19, 2010, 06:21:56 PM »

The Catechism of the Catholic Church on the Epiclesis:

The Holy Spirit makes present the mystery of Christ

1104 Christian liturgy not only recalls the events that saved us but actualizes them, makes them present. The Paschal mystery of Christ is celebrated, not repeated. It is the celebrations that are repeated, and in each celebration there is an outpouring of the Holy Spirit that makes the unique mystery present.

1105 The Epiclesis ("invocation upon") is the intercession in which the priest begs the Father to send the Holy Spirit, the Sanctifier, so that the offerings may become the body and blood of Christ and that the faithful by receiving them, may themselves become a living offering to God.23

1106 Together with the anamnesis, the epiclesis is at the heart of each sacramental celebration, most especially of the Eucharist:


You ask how the bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the wine . . . the Blood of Christ I shall tell you: the Holy Spirit comes upon them and accomplishes what surpasses every word and thought. . . . Let it be enough for you to understand that it is by the Holy Spirit, just as it was of the Holy Virgin and by the Holy Spirit that the Lord, through and in himself, took flesh.24
1107 The Holy Spirit's transforming power in the liturgy hastens the coming of the kingdom and the consummation of the mystery of salvation. While we wait in hope he causes us really to anticipate the fullness of communion with the Holy Trinity. Sent by the Father who hears the epiclesis of the Church, the Spirit gives life to those who accept him and is, even now, the "guarantee" of their inheritance.25

The communion of the Holy Spirit

1108 In every liturgical action the Holy Spirit is sent in order to bring us into communion with Christ and so to form his Body. The Holy Spirit is like the sap of the Father's vine which bears fruit on its branches.26 The most intimate cooperation of the Holy Spirit and the Church is achieved in the liturgy. The Spirit who is the Spirit of communion, abides indefectibly in the Church. For this reason the Church is the great sacrament of divine communion which gathers God's scattered children together. Communion with the Holy Trinity and fraternal communion are inseparably the fruit of the Spirit in the liturgy.27

1109 The epiclesis is also a prayer for the full effect of the assembly's communion with the mystery of Christ. "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit"28 have to remain with us always and bear fruit beyond the Eucharistic celebration. The Church therefore asks the Father to send the Holy Spirit to make the lives of the faithful a living sacrifice to God by their spiritual transformation into the image of Christ, by concern for the Church's unity, and by taking part in her mission through the witness and service of charity.

23 Cf. Rom 12:1.
24 St. John Damascene, De fide orth 4, 13: PG 94, 1145A.
25 Cf. Eph 1:14; 2 Cor 1:22.
26 Cf. Jn 15:1-17; Gal 5:22.
27 Cf. 1 Jn 1:3-7.
28 2 Cor 13:13.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s1c1a1.htm#III


So you agree that, according to the Cathecism of the Roman Church, all affirmations that it is at the moment of the Words of Institution that the transubstantion occurs is, at best, a pious opinion, and that those who afirm it categorically, accusing of heresy or schism those who hold a different opinion are themselves at risk of being judged by God by the excessive harshness of their judgment upon others?
« Last Edit: October 19, 2010, 06:24:55 PM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,891


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #16 on: October 19, 2010, 08:32:51 PM »

Since the Roman Rite has two Epiclesis in its Anaphora and one occurs before the Institution Narrative, I believe they can affirm in the Roman Liturgy transubstantiation occurs at that time.  In the Eastern Litrugies the Epiclesis comes after the Institution Narrative (the Anaphoras of Mar Addai and Mari and St. Peter III have no explicit Institution Narratives) and we can affirm the change occurs at that time.   Both are correct in context.  What say you about Orthodox who insert the Byzantine Epiclesis into the Roman Anaphora, thereby judging this ancient Anaphora, used by the Orthodox West centuries before the schism, as deficient?
« Last Edit: October 19, 2010, 08:44:39 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,699



« Reply #17 on: October 19, 2010, 09:32:37 PM »

Since the Roman Rite has two Epiclesis in its Anaphora and one occurs before the Institution Narrative, I believe they can affirm in the Roman Liturgy transubstantiation occurs at that time.  In the Eastern Litrugies the Epiclesis comes after the Institution Narrative (the Anaphoras of Mar Addai and Mari and St. Peter III have no explicit Institution Narratives) and we can affirm the change occurs at that time.   Both are correct in context.  What say you about Orthodox who insert the Byzantine Epiclesis into the Roman Anaphora, thereby judging this ancient Anaphora, used by the Orthodox West centuries before the schism, as deficient?

If you are referring to the Eastern Orthodox Western Rite Liturgies, I do not believe that the insertion of the Epiklesis signified anything more than solidifying the Orthodoxy of the Western Rite folks. Imagine how they could be viewed if this small addition had not occurred. What difference does it make anyway?
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
rakovsky
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,218



WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 19, 2010, 10:28:06 PM »

I think this whole thing is rather pointless. If you are a Catholic and believe that either the words of institution or the entire anaphora constitutes the sacrament, that is mighty fine. If you are Orthodox and believe that the Epiklesis is critical, that is also mighty fine. Why, because we all believe in the real presence, no matter how that is explained. May I remind fellow Orthodox that even after the Epiklesis there is this prayer: "Deacon/Priest: For the precious Gifts offered and consecrated, let us pray to the Lord... Deacon/Priest: That our loving God who has received them at His holy, heavenly, and spiritual altar as an offering of spiritual fragrance, may in return send upon us divine grace and the gift of the Holy Spirit, let us pray to the Lord."



It's pointless for the reasons you mentioned. The Orthodox position is that it is a mystery and it does not have an official doctrine pinpointing the position.

The Roman Catholic official doctrine as Fabio points out does make an official point of it.
accusing of heresy or schism those who hold a different opinion ... the excessive harshness of their judgment upon others

Yet Byzantine Catholicism, which claims it surrenders its Orthodoxy to Roman Catholicism on all points of theology has in fact kept the Orthodox view.

« Last Edit: October 19, 2010, 10:32:35 PM by rakovsky » Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,891


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #19 on: October 19, 2010, 10:28:19 PM »

If you are referring to the Eastern Orthodox Western Rite Liturgies, I do not believe that the insertion of the Epiklesis signified anything more than solidifying the Orthodoxy of the Western Rite folks. Imagine how they could be viewed if this small addition had not occurred. What difference does it make anyway?

Considering the big stink many Easterners, Orthodox and Catholic, make of the Latinization of the Eastern Rites I would say quite a bit.  Does the Liturgy as prayed by St. Leo the Great, St. Gregory Dialogos, and others need its Orthodoxy solidified?  This is simply Byzantine chauvinism at its worst, more so because St Maximos the Confessor and St. Simeon the Theologion already spoke to this matter way back when, i.e the Roman Anaphora was ancient and had its own form of Epiclesis.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,891


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #20 on: October 19, 2010, 10:32:48 PM »

The Roman Catholic official doctrine as Fabio points out does make an official point of it.

The relevant portion of the Catholic Catechism I posted proves the opposite.  In all the Orthodox-Catholic dialogues I have never seen this brought up as an issue.  That the SSPX and their like feel differently isn't something we can control.

Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2010, 12:24:56 PM »

The Roman Catholic official doctrine as Fabio points out does make an official point of it.

The relevant portion of the Catholic Catechism I posted proves the opposite.  In all the Orthodox-Catholic dialogues I have never seen this brought up as an issue.  That the SSPX and their like feel differently isn't something we can control.


Is there any statement that some claim is the Catholic Church solidifying the western view?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 20, 2010, 02:25:39 PM »

I think this whole thing is rather pointless. If you are a Catholic and believe that either the words of institution or the entire anaphora constitutes the sacrament, that is mighty fine. If you are Orthodox and believe that the Epiklesis is critical, that is also mighty fine. Why, because we all believe in the real presence, no matter how that is explained. May I remind fellow Orthodox that even after the Epiklesis there is this prayer: "Deacon/Priest: For the precious Gifts offered and consecrated, let us pray to the Lord... Deacon/Priest: That our loving God who has received them at His holy, heavenly, and spiritual altar as an offering of spiritual fragrance, may in return send upon us divine grace and the gift of the Holy Spirit, let us pray to the Lord."



It's pointless for the reasons you mentioned. The Orthodox position is that it is a mystery and it does not have an official doctrine pinpointing the position.

The Roman Catholic official doctrine as Fabio points out does make an official point of it.
accusing of heresy or schism those who hold a different opinion ... the excessive harshness of their judgment upon others

Yet Byzantine Catholicism, which claims it surrenders its Orthodoxy to Roman Catholicism on all points of theology has in fact kept the Orthodox view.

Apparently you have not been reading the notes in this thread. 

The position I presented was that of the Latin rite.

Mary
Logged

Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,699



« Reply #23 on: October 20, 2010, 02:37:38 PM »

If you are referring to the Eastern Orthodox Western Rite Liturgies, I do not believe that the insertion of the Epiklesis signified anything more than solidifying the Orthodoxy of the Western Rite folks. Imagine how they could be viewed if this small addition had not occurred. What difference does it make anyway?

Considering the big stink many Easterners, Orthodox and Catholic, make of the Latinization of the Eastern Rites I would say quite a bit.  Does the Liturgy as prayed by St. Leo the Great, St. Gregory Dialogos, and others need its Orthodoxy solidified?  This is simply Byzantine chauvinism at its worst, more so because St Maximos the Confessor and St. Simeon the Theologion already spoke to this matter way back when, i.e the Roman Anaphora was ancient and had its own form of Epiclesis.

I guess I hinted too much. Let me say it plainly: as a matter of both uniform practice and perception, I believe that the addition of the Epiklesis solidified the Orthodoxy of those mainly Anglican churches that wished to join the Orthodox Church.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Tags: epiclesis 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.111 seconds with 52 queries.