OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 24, 2014, 05:42:20 PM *
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 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Differences between Catholic Mass & Orthodox Divine Liturgy  (Read 11814 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2010, 12:16:07 AM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

Is the one Sacrifice of Christ made present or not?  Roll Eyes
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #46 on: December 08, 2010, 09:09:39 PM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

You have no idea what you are talking about.  You speak in such absolutes and yet you are so wrong.  I have remained silent on so many of your uneducated claims in other posts but cannot on this one.  The belief that the Liturgy is a sacrifice is not only upheld by the Synod of Vlachernae in 1157, but is also a required dogma of the Church stated in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy.   Read St. Nicholas Cavasilas who does a wonderful job explaining how the Liturgy is a sacrifice.   Then come back and give an informed opinion.  

Saint Nicholas Cabasilas' Commentary on the Divine Liturgy is my preferred source also. And he says "the Lamb of God was sacrificed once only, for all time." "It is Christ himself, in his capacity as priest, who set apart the Body of the Lord, offered it up, took it to himself and consecrated it to God, and who sacrificed it."
"What does the priest say? 'Let us pray to the Lord for the sanctified offerings'; not that they may be sanctified (I have called them 'sanctified' to prevent you from thinking this) but that they may impart this sanctification to us. ...that they may fulfil in us their function, that they be not rendered powerless to produce this grace, as occasionally happened when our Savior was on earth- there were cities in which his almighty hand could work no miracles, because of their lack of faith."

What is sacrificed? Christ
Who performs the sacrifice? Christ
To whom is the sacrifice given to? Christ (the Trinity)
When did this sacrifice occur? no it did not happen last Sunday but 2,000 years ago

Bread and wine is NOT being sacrificed by us. We our NOT the executioners of Christ.

Allow me to introduce to you Alexander Schmemann who writes, "It can be said that in our time the life of the Church has become almost exclusively liturgical, has been reduced to worship and worship alone. "Love for the Church" has become a synonym for love of the church building and its worship." "Without equivocation and with a full awareness of the significance of my words, I define this situation as a profound liturgical crisis. Such an assertion will undoubtedly cause surprise and indignation among many people."
"The Christian religion is not only a doctrine...it is a public action or deed." The liturgy is "the expression of the life of Church, as the action by which she is eternally realized."

The liturgy is not a mystical practice satisfying the psychological and socialogical needs of a cultic society rich in symbolism and ceremony. The liturgy is an experience of love and unity. An experience of communion with God.

The cultic sacrifice ceremony has no place in the liturgy; for Christ has already risen from the dead. What do you possibly have to sacrifice that can compare with the resurrection?
« Last Edit: December 08, 2010, 09:14:51 PM by Dart » Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #47 on: December 08, 2010, 09:23:07 PM »

The life of Christ which we as priests strive to emulate was a life of sacrifice. A life of service. How do you serve your brethren? What sacrifice are you making to help others? Do you honestly believe going to church on Sunday is sufficient sacrifice to save your soul?

The only thing which you have, the only thing which God gave you and will never take back, is your free-will. We must sacrifice our will and live the will of God. Let God work through you to perform good works. To fulfil His will.

Replace pride and vanity with humility and love.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2010, 09:30:10 PM by Dart » Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #48 on: December 08, 2010, 09:59:36 PM »

If the liturgy were a sacrifice as you say, then you should be able to make this sacrifice by yourself like Abraham sacrificing Issac. You are not able to experience the liturgy alone. The liturgy is unity and love. It would be ridiculous to unite to yourself or to express love to yourself that is why it must be done in communion with the Church.

Can you make a sacrifice on your own? Yes. Can the liturgy occur with only one person? No.

Think about it within your heart.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2010, 10:01:43 PM by Dart » Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #49 on: December 09, 2010, 01:46:36 AM »

Of course we cannot represent the Sacrifice of Christ in the Holy Liturgy by ourselves if this is not the format He Himself provided for.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #50 on: December 09, 2010, 08:50:00 AM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

Is the one Sacrifice of Christ made present or not?  Roll Eyes

In what sense is sacrifice made present? If we look at the root words of sacrifice, we find that sacrifice means to make holy. What is made holy? It is we the elect, the called people of God, who ask to be made holy. Who seek communion with God. In this sense the Church, becomes the body of Christ and is made holy. We the people in unity and love join the Church, the bride, to be received by His grace for the bridegroom.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2010, 08:51:28 AM by Dart » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #51 on: December 09, 2010, 02:48:56 PM »

Dart,
Looks like you have departed from the teachings of your own church on this matter.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,662


WWW
« Reply #52 on: December 09, 2010, 03:30:43 PM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

Is the one Sacrifice of Christ made present or not?  Roll Eyes

In what sense is sacrifice made present? If we look at the root words of sacrifice, we find that sacrifice means to make holy.

The etymology of the word sacrifice is presented below:

No mention of holy here.

No mention of holy, here, either.

What is made holy? It is we the elect, the called people of God, who ask to be made holy. Who seek communion with God. In this sense the Church, becomes the body of Christ and is made holy. We the people in unity and love join the Church, the bride, to be received by His grace for the bridegroom.

I'm concurring with Papist in that the above is a departure from Orthodox Christian teaching.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2010, 03:31:36 PM by SolEX01 » Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #53 on: December 09, 2010, 05:32:37 PM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

Is the one Sacrifice of Christ made present or not?  Roll Eyes

In what sense is sacrifice made present? If we look at the root words of sacrifice, we find that sacrifice means to make holy.

The etymology of the word sacrifice is presented below:

No mention of holy here.

No mention of holy, here, either.

What is made holy? It is we the elect, the called people of God, who ask to be made holy. Who seek communion with God. In this sense the Church, becomes the body of Christ and is made holy. We the people in unity and love join the Church, the bride, to be received by His grace for the bridegroom.

I'm concurring with Papist in that the above is a departure from Orthodox Christian teaching.
Are you for real? Both sites give sacre or sacer and facere as the root words. Sacre means holy in latin and facere means to make. Did you not learn Latin in school?

As for your agreement with Roman Catholic theology, that is nothing new.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2010, 05:41:32 PM by Dart » Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #54 on: December 09, 2010, 05:39:16 PM »

Dart,
Looks like you have departed from the teachings of your own church on this matter.
I understand the Papal desire to focus on sin and atonement and your confusion with the Catholic teachings presented here and Orthodox teaching. The departure you mention is the departure of Orthodoxy in this section of the forum not a lack of alignment between me and my Church.

I would be happy to entertain any evidence to the contrary.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #55 on: December 09, 2010, 06:14:56 PM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

Is the one Sacrifice of Christ made present or not?  Roll Eyes

In what sense is sacrifice made present? If we look at the root words of sacrifice, we find that sacrifice means to make holy. What is made holy? It is we the elect, the called people of God, who ask to be made holy. Who seek communion with God. In this sense the Church, becomes the body of Christ and is made holy. We the people in unity and love join the Church, the bride, to be received by His grace for the bridegroom.

While I could argue with you on the basis of your definition of sacrifice, I don't understand what is the point in looking to the roots of the word rather than the meaning we are currently using. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrifice), the meaning of sacrifice is: "... the offering of food, objects or the lives of animals or people to the gods as an act of propitiation or worship."

The One Sacrifice on the Cross was Christ Himself in the flesh. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, His Body and Blood are made present in the Holy Liturgy, and so mystically is His Crucifixion.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #56 on: December 09, 2010, 06:40:57 PM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

Is the one Sacrifice of Christ made present or not?  Roll Eyes

In what sense is sacrifice made present? If we look at the root words of sacrifice, we find that sacrifice means to make holy. What is made holy? It is we the elect, the called people of God, who ask to be made holy. Who seek communion with God. In this sense the Church, becomes the body of Christ and is made holy. We the people in unity and love join the Church, the bride, to be received by His grace for the bridegroom.

While I could argue with you on the basis of your definition of sacrifice, I don't understand what is the point in looking to the roots of the word rather than the meaning we are currently using. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrifice), the meaning of sacrifice is: "... the offering of food, objects or the lives of animals or people to the gods as an act of propitiation or worship."

The One Sacrifice on the Cross was Christ Himself in the flesh. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, His Body and Blood are made present in the Holy Liturgy, and so mystically is His Crucifixion.


One line of thinking is that we (The Church) unite ourselves in love and marriage to Christ by submitting our will to Him and are thus made holy through Christ who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures.

Another line of thinking is that we must atone for sin by sacrificing something to the gods ie an act of propitiation.


You can choose whichever one you want to believe in. But only one is the Orthodox Faith.

Just out of curiosity do you ever offer food, objects or the lives of animals or people to the gods as an act of propitiation or worship in church or is the liturgy a glimpse of the union which is to come between the Church as bride and the Lamb of God. If you believe the bread and wine is a sacrifice to God then why do you eat it yourself?
« Last Edit: December 09, 2010, 07:06:39 PM by Dart » Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #57 on: December 09, 2010, 06:59:37 PM »

The sacrifice being referred to is the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and then His resurection. The Liturgy is not a sacrifice but merely our participation in Christ's sacrifice.

Is the one Sacrifice of Christ made present or not?  Roll Eyes

In what sense is sacrifice made present? If we look at the root words of sacrifice, we find that sacrifice means to make holy. What is made holy? It is we the elect, the called people of God, who ask to be made holy. Who seek communion with God. In this sense the Church, becomes the body of Christ and is made holy. We the people in unity and love join the Church, the bride, to be received by His grace for the bridegroom.

While I could argue with you on the basis of your definition of sacrifice, I don't understand what is the point in looking to the roots of the word rather than the meaning we are currently using. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrifice), the meaning of sacrifice is: "... the offering of food, objects or the lives of animals or people to the gods as an act of propitiation or worship."

The One Sacrifice on the Cross was Christ Himself in the flesh. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, His Body and Blood are made present in the Holy Liturgy, and so mystically is His Crucifixion.


One line of thinking is that we (The Church) unite ourselves in love and marriage to Christ by submitting our will to Him and are thus made holy through Christ who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures.

Another line of thinking is that we must atone for sin by sacrificing something to the gods ie an act of propitiation.


You can choose whichever one you want to believe in. But only one is the Orthodox Faith.

Just out of curiosity do you ever offer food, objects or the lives of animals or people to the gods as an act of propitiation or worship in church or is the liturgy a glimpse of the union which is to come between the Church as bride and the Lamb of God.

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #58 on: December 09, 2010, 07:08:26 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

Are you denying the marriage? And the two will become one flesh. The Church becoming the body of Christ.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2010, 07:13:02 PM by Dart » Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #59 on: December 09, 2010, 07:10:13 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

It seems you are offering a theology that leaves no real mystical meaning behind His Crucifixion.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,662


WWW
« Reply #60 on: December 09, 2010, 07:11:18 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

Did Christ ascend into Heaven?
Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #61 on: December 09, 2010, 07:25:46 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

It seems you are offering a theology that leaves no real mystical meaning behind His Crucifixion.

Schmemann writes, "Theology is above all explanation, "the search for words appropriate to the nature of God." I always associated the mystical with cults and magic. To worship in "spirit and truth" one must know the meaning of the worship. Please don't confuse this with the mystery of the sacraments. How is it that Jesus could be man and God at the same time? This is mystery. Or how can the bread and wine which to the senses is bread and wine be something different? This also is mystery.

However, through theology we can give specific words and meaning to this faith and experience of the Church.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2010, 07:26:24 PM by Dart » Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #62 on: December 09, 2010, 07:28:43 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

Did Christ ascend into Heaven?
Seriously? Go ask your priest.
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,662


WWW
« Reply #63 on: December 09, 2010, 07:41:28 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

Did Christ ascend into Heaven?
Seriously? Go ask your priest.

You really believe Christ was Crucified only as an offering to His Father?   Huh

If you believe that, then you have to believe Christ's Ascension into Heaven was the completion of the "failed" offering to God on the Cross.
Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #64 on: December 09, 2010, 07:58:13 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

Did Christ ascend into Heaven?
Seriously? Go ask your priest.

You really believe Christ was Crucified only as an offering to His Father?   Huh

If you believe that, then you have to believe Christ's Ascension into Heaven was the completion of the "failed" offering to God on the Cross.

Please don't be a fraud by corrupting my words.

Christ is God. "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”

Christ fulfilled the will of the Father, "Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done."
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,662


WWW
« Reply #65 on: December 09, 2010, 09:33:49 PM »

So then you are questioning the very reality of the Son giving up His flesh on the Cross as an offering to the Father?

He rose from the dead. The tomb was empty! He kept His flesh. He sacrificed His will.

Did Christ ascend into Heaven?
Seriously? Go ask your priest.

You really believe Christ was Crucified only as an offering to His Father?   Huh

If you believe that, then you have to believe Christ's Ascension into Heaven was the completion of the "failed" offering to God on the Cross.

Please don't be a fraud by corrupting my words.

Christ is God. "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”

So at the Crucifixion, Jesus sacrificed Himself to Himself based on the premise that those present at the Crucifixion were not gathered in his name.

Christ fulfilled the will of the Father, "Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done."

I have no idea what you believe.   Huh

Since I have no idea what you believe; I can't respond any further....
Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #66 on: December 09, 2010, 10:41:51 PM »

God, like Abraham, sacrificed His Son.
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Jesus sacrificed His will. "Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done."

The liturgy does not just concern itself with the crucifixion but the entire life, death, and resurrection of Christ.

The Roman Catholics fixate on the crucifixion, on sin, and the atonement of sin. Some say this is because Roman Catholic clergy wish to have power over the forgiveness of sin and receive payment in exchange for forgiveness.

The Orthodox Church on the other hand sees baptism as the moment when we share in Christ's death and resurrection. At baptism all our sins are forgiven. The Eucharist is for thanksgiving and communion.

"We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins"

I don't understand what is so dificult for you. The kiss of peace and the asking of forgiveness during the liturgy is between one another that we may approach the chalice and commune with God not that God forgive us.

Your ignorance makes me sad. I thought at first you were doing it on purpose but you really don't have any idea of what the Faith is. You don't even seem to have a grasp of the creed. It is simple in its saying, "We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins."
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #67 on: December 09, 2010, 11:19:05 PM »

The liturgy does not just concern itself with the crucifixion but the entire life, death, and resurrection of Christ.

Duh.

The Orthodox Church on the other hand sees baptism as the moment when we share in Christ's death and resurrection. At baptism all our sins are forgiven. The Eucharist is for thanksgiving and communion.

Just because the Crucifixion is also made present at Baptism doesn't mean it is not at Holy Communion.

The kiss of peace and the asking of forgiveness during the liturgy is between one another that we may approach the chalice and commune with God not that God forgive us.

You're acting as if forgiveness is not asked of God in the Liturgy.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,109


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #68 on: December 09, 2010, 11:35:55 PM »

I have no interest in this conversation at present.  However, seeing some comments about how to interpret the phrase, "One baptism for the remission of sins," my thought was:

"Hmmm.  What does one say about the standard formula for communion:

'The servant of God (N) receives the Body and Blood of Christ, for the remission of sins and life everlasting.'

I'm advocating not throwing the baby out with the bathwater."
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #69 on: December 12, 2010, 07:52:23 PM »

I have no interest in this conversation at present.  However, seeing some comments about how to interpret the phrase, "One baptism for the remission of sins," my thought was:

"Hmmm.  What does one say about the standard formula for communion:

'The servant of God (N) receives the Body and Blood of Christ, for the remission of sins and life everlasting.'

I'm advocating not throwing the baby out with the bathwater."
Thank goodness that you were here to tell me I can receive remission of sins by taking Communion. All these years I had been approaching the chalice only after confession and fasting, when in fact I could just take communion in a sinful condition and be forgiven. No need to argue with a Priest cause if you just do what they say and it is wrong we all know who burns for it.
Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #70 on: December 12, 2010, 07:58:21 PM »

The liturgy does not just concern itself with the crucifixion but the entire life, death, and resurrection of Christ.

Duh.

The Orthodox Church on the other hand sees baptism as the moment when we share in Christ's death and resurrection. At baptism all our sins are forgiven. The Eucharist is for thanksgiving and communion.

Just because the Crucifixion is also made present at Baptism doesn't mean it is not at Holy Communion.

The kiss of peace and the asking of forgiveness during the liturgy is between one another that we may approach the chalice and commune with God not that God forgive us.

You're acting as if forgiveness is not asked of God in the Liturgy.
Some ask for forgiveness all day everyday. If asking equates to the fulfilment of the Sacrament of Baptism/Confession then what is the purpose of having the Sacrament. We could just roll it all into one cracker. The church could charge more money for the multi-purpose crackers also.Great business concept.  Wink
Logged
BigMike617
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Carpatho Russian Orthodox
Posts: 2



« Reply #71 on: February 26, 2011, 07:28:37 PM »

Well yes I've heard lots of Roman priests call it a sacrifice and it is it's a bloodless sacrifice each christian church calls it differantly the Roman and Old Catholics call it the Mass or the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, THe Eastern and some Oriental Orthodox ie the Coptics call it the Divine Liturgy,The other Oriental churches call it differant the Syriacs call it Qurbano[Sacrifice],and Armenians Soorp Badarak, Protestants just usally call it a Communion Service
Logged
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #72 on: February 27, 2011, 09:51:15 PM »

Might as well tack on my question/comment to the end of this thread. I would appreciate a Romanian or Slavonic slant on this.

This is the consecration formula concerning the wine / precious blood.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/09/what-was-wrong-with-the-old-icel-translation/

Quote
All of you receive and drink from this: for this is the chalice of my Blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out abundantly on your behalf and on the behalf of multitudes for the remission of sins. Do this for my remembrance.

If you look at variants of the Latin Vulgate and the Old Latin, for Mat 26:28, Mark 14:24 and Luke 22:20 it reads  'fundetur' or 'effendetur' (will be poured out). Same goes for the Sarum variant of the Roman Canon. The underlying Greek of the bible is not in the future but can be translated in the present as it is in the KJV (ekcunnomenon / being shed) or the Book of Common Prayer, "is poured out".

If you ask me, I think the theological understanding of 'will be poured' is correct. The pouring out of blood doesn't take place at the Last Supper, but Good Friday. I would hazard to say, if you believe that the law of prayer established the law of belief, that this has always been the Roman Catholic understanding of what Jesus meant. This certainly fits in with the Johannine timeline of Calvary and the Jewish passover, i.e. the slaying of the lamb is Good Friday. In any case, the Roman Catholic mass was presented to the faithful in its catechetical materials as a mystical re-enactment of Calvary, more more than a simple memorial meal.

To get back to the translation questions, I present the Romanian text of Luke 22:20
http://www.intratext.com/IXT/RUM0001/

"Acest pahar este Legea cea nouă, întru Sângele Meu, care se varsă pentru voi."

varsa appears to be the "to form" of the verb, so I would hazard a quick guess on the last part, that it reads something like "which is to be poured out for you?"

How do the Russians handle this in their liturgy or the Elizabethan Slavonic? Do they lean towards the "to form" of pour, "is poured" of the Anglicans/KJV/BCP, or "will be poured" of the Roman Canon/Sarum Rite/Douay Rheims?

This is a two-part question, what does the Slavonic (or the Romanian) bible say as well as the Slavonic (or Romanian) liturgy.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2011, 09:56:03 PM by John Larocque » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #73 on: February 27, 2011, 10:33:17 PM »

Might as well tack on my question/comment to the end of this thread. I would appreciate a Romanian or Slavonic slant on this.

This is the consecration formula concerning the wine / precious blood.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/09/what-was-wrong-with-the-old-icel-translation/

Quote
All of you receive and drink from this: for this is the chalice of my Blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out abundantly on your behalf and on the behalf of multitudes for the remission of sins. Do this for my remembrance.

If you look at variants of the Latin Vulgate and the Old Latin, for Mat 26:28, Mark 14:24 and Luke 22:20 it reads  'fundetur' or 'effendetur' (will be poured out). Same goes for the Sarum variant of the Roman Canon. The underlying Greek of the bible is not in the future but can be translated in the present as it is in the KJV (ekcunnomenon / being shed) or the Book of Common Prayer, "is poured out".

If you ask me, I think the theological understanding of 'will be poured' is correct. The pouring out of blood doesn't take place at the Last Supper, but Good Friday. I would hazard to say, if you believe that the law of prayer established the law of belief, that this has always been the Roman Catholic understanding of what Jesus meant. This certainly fits in with the Johannine timeline of Calvary and the Jewish passover, i.e. the slaying of the lamb is Good Friday. In any case, the Roman Catholic mass was presented to the faithful in its catechetical materials as a mystical re-enactment of Calvary, more more than a simple memorial meal.

To get back to the translation questions, I present the Romanian text of Luke 22:20
http://www.intratext.com/IXT/RUM0001/

"Acest pahar este Legea cea nouă, întru Sângele Meu, care se varsă pentru voi."

varsa appears to be the "to form" of the verb, so I would hazard a quick guess on the last part, that it reads something like "which is to be poured out for you?"
No, it's the present "is poured out."

How do the Russians handle this in their liturgy or the Elizabethan Slavonic? Do they lean towards the "to form" of pour, "is poured" of the Anglicans/KJV/BCP, or "will be poured" of the Roman Canon/Sarum Rite/Douay Rheims?

This is a two-part question, what does the Slavonic (or the Romanian) bible say as well as the Slavonic (or Romanian) liturgy.
In the Romanian Liturgy it is "Beţi dintru acesta toţi, acesta este Sângele Meu, al Legii celei noi, Care pentru voi şi pentru mulţi se varsă, spre iertarea păcatelor," also in the present.
http://www.biserica.org/Publicatii/Rugaciuni/Liturghier/Liturghia/index.html
« Last Edit: February 27, 2011, 10:33:55 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #74 on: February 27, 2011, 10:45:22 PM »

If you ask me, I think the theological understanding of 'will be poured' is correct. The pouring out of blood doesn't take place at the Last Supper, but Good Friday. I would hazard to say, if you believe that the law of prayer established the law of belief, that this has always been the Roman Catholic understanding of what Jesus meant. This certainly fits in with the Johannine timeline of Calvary and the Jewish passover, i.e. the slaying of the lamb is Good Friday. In any case, the Roman Catholic mass was presented to the faithful in its catechetical materials as a mystical re-enactment of Calvary, more more than a simple memorial meal.

Do you consider the present "is poured" to be theologically incorrect?
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #75 on: February 27, 2011, 10:46:11 PM »

No, not at all.

« Last Edit: February 27, 2011, 10:46:58 PM by John Larocque » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #76 on: February 28, 2011, 12:55:46 PM »

If you ask me, I think the theological understanding of 'will be poured' is correct. The pouring out of blood doesn't take place at the Last Supper, but Good Friday. I would hazard to say, if you believe that the law of prayer established the law of belief, that this has always been the Roman Catholic understanding of what Jesus meant. This certainly fits in with the Johannine timeline of Calvary and the Jewish passover, i.e. the slaying of the lamb is Good Friday. In any case, the Roman Catholic mass was presented to the faithful in its catechetical materials as a mystical re-enactment of Calvary, more more than a simple memorial meal.

Do you consider the present "is poured" to be theologically incorrect?
It sounds more correct, as it demonstrates that the sacrifice of Christ is being made present.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #77 on: February 28, 2011, 05:32:27 PM »

Right.  It is more correct in the present for two reasons, one already stated, that it is being made present.  But the other reason is that his blood was not just shed on Friday morning/afternoon.  There is an important theological concept here.   That before His blood was "taken" from Him to take the life out of Him, it was given by Him to give life to the world.   Before the blood was forceably extracted from Him in the morning of that day by whips, blows, a crowning and crucifixion, it was already voluntarily given up by Him on the evening (eve) of that day first as drink for the faithful in the chalice, and then again at Gethsemane in prayerful mediation for the world.  This shows that the blood that flowed the following morning was not taken from Him by force against His will, but offered voluntarily.   It also shows that being "saved by the blood of Christ" is first and foremost found in the Chalice in which it was poured out first.   That blood and water poured out of His side on Friday showed that it was the same blood that was poured out in the mixed cup the evening prior. 
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #78 on: February 28, 2011, 05:37:00 PM »

One different that you will notice right off between the two liturgies is the Orthodox emphasis on chanting throughout. Often the gospel/epistle readings are even chanted. I must admit, after getting used to this type of liturgical approach, the western one can seem strikingly bare and minimalistic in comparison.
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,949



« Reply #79 on: February 28, 2011, 05:46:57 PM »

Often the gospel/epistle readings are even chanted. I must admit, after getting used to this type of liturgical approach, the western one can seem strikingly bare and minimalistic in comparison.

Often? I've assumed that both gospel and epistle is always chanted throughout the East. Am I mistaken?

I agree for the latter part. It's too bad that the West has pretty much neglected their own tradition of chanting everything.
Logged

Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #80 on: February 28, 2011, 05:52:54 PM »

Often the gospel/epistle readings are even chanted. I must admit, after getting used to this type of liturgical approach, the western one can seem strikingly bare and minimalistic in comparison.

Often? I've assumed that both gospel and epistle is always chanted throughout the East. Am I mistaken?

I agree for the latter part. It's too bad that the West has pretty much neglected their own tradition of chanting everything.

No I don't think you're mistaken. The exceptions that I have encountered are when they have a special person read the epistle, for example, a person who does not normally do so and is not familiar with the style. Otherwise, we chant the epistle and the gospel without exception.
Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #81 on: February 28, 2011, 06:56:38 PM »

It's too bad that the West has pretty much neglected their own tradition of chanting everything.

This is unfortunate.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #82 on: February 28, 2011, 07:03:08 PM »

Western Rite Orthodox chant everything  Grin
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,109


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #83 on: March 01, 2011, 12:29:30 AM »

(Apparently I've missed a few posts in this thread since I last visited it.)

I have no interest in this conversation at present.  However, seeing some comments about how to interpret the phrase, "One baptism for the remission of sins," my thought was:

"Hmmm.  What does one say about the standard formula for communion:

'The servant of God (N) receives the Body and Blood of Christ, for the remission of sins and life everlasting.'

I'm advocating not throwing the baby out with the bathwater."

Thank goodness that you were here to tell me I can receive remission of sins by taking Communion. All these years I had been approaching the chalice only after confession and fasting, when in fact I could just take communion in a sinful condition and be forgiven. No need to argue with a Priest cause if you just do what they say and it is wrong we all know who burns for it.

LOL.  In one post, you advocate, "Seriously? Go ask your priest." when you encounter a question you consider beneath you (even though it was a simple question, it was leading the conversation into another direction), but when a priest asks a question, you decide to dress him down and flog him for it.  How mature.  I posited a question which was germane to the conversation I referenced; you decided that my post was some sort of instruction or condemnation or some other thing that deserved to be mocked.  You provide what you consider to be spiritual counsel, and then turn around and become a verbal abuser.  It's not a wonder, then, why no one takes your positions all that seriously.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #84 on: March 01, 2011, 03:43:32 AM »

Western Rite Orthodox chant everything  Grin

Hmm not the parish I visited, perhaps there is flexibility to this rule...
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,611



« Reply #85 on: March 01, 2011, 09:07:28 AM »

Western Rite Orthodox chant everything  Grin

Old Believers chant their coffee hour.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #86 on: March 01, 2011, 04:29:37 PM »

Western Rite Orthodox chant everything  Grin

Old Believers chant their coffee hour.

This was funny. I love Old Believers.

We (OCA) chant everything.

I HOPE I haven't stumbled into another Western vs. Eastern Rite site.

One thing about time and its relationship to liturgy: I always experience and view the liturgy as extra-temporal, if one might use such an ugly expression. It is ongoing. It is not linear, but rather multi-dimensional. I can't speak to the finer points of Greek (or Romanian!) grammar, but that is how I experience the liturgy itself, and that is the crucial difference for me between the experience of the Roman Rite and the liturgies of Eastern Orthodoxy.
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,949



« Reply #87 on: March 01, 2011, 04:36:51 PM »

Western Rite Orthodox chant everything  Grin

Old Believers chant their coffee hour.

 Grin Grin Grin

Priceless!
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian(as of 12/18/10)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 978


Holy Father Seraphim, Pray to God for us!


« Reply #88 on: March 17, 2011, 09:21:59 AM »

Western Rite Orthodox chant everything  Grin

Old Believers chant their coffee hour.
LOL  Grin Grin Grin
« Last Edit: March 17, 2011, 09:22:33 AM by Altar Server » Logged

All my hope I place in you, O Mother of God, keep me under your protection!
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #89 on: March 17, 2011, 09:12:05 PM »

One thing about time and its relationship to liturgy: I always experience and view the liturgy as extra-temporal, if one might use such an ugly expression. It is ongoing. It is not linear, but rather multi-dimensional. I can't speak to the finer points of Greek (or Romanian!) grammar, but that is how I experience the liturgy itself, and that is the crucial difference for me between the experience of the Roman Rite and the liturgies of Eastern Orthodoxy.

I quite thoroughly agree.
Logged
Tags: anaphora oblation anemnesis sacrifice 
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   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 0.171 seconds with 71 queries.