OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 06:32:34 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 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Liturgical Unity,rather than Theological Unity?  (Read 2060 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
DennyB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 228


Moving Toward Orthodoxy


« on: July 29, 2012, 03:02:46 AM »

Isn't Liturgical unity a much better route for union , rather than a unity through reason and debate? That is why I think unification is a more obtainable goal,especially when I consider Eastern Rite Catholics. 
Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,971


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2012, 03:12:24 AM »

Problem is, theology is all wrapped up in the liturgy, and the liturgy is all wrapped up in theology.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
DennyB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 228


Moving Toward Orthodoxy


« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2012, 03:19:39 AM »

Problem is, theology is all wrapped up in the liturgy, and the liturgy is all wrapped up in theology.

Maybe I worded it wrongly, I merely meant seeking theological unity through a common liturgy,rather than through debating and lecturing each other?? Isn't it through the liturgy that God unifies us? That is why I mentioned the Eastern Catholics, they have a common liturgy,so to speak,with Eastern Churches,and many of them are more easily convinced of Eastern thought and practice,than their Western counterparts.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2012, 03:23:07 AM by DennyB » Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2012, 04:18:14 AM »

Nope. I feel much closer with a traditionalist Catholics who sticks faithfully with Catholicism than an Eastern Catholic who doesn't believe what Old Rome teaches but still maintains communion with her. The first attitude is much closer to Orthodoxy.
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 #4 on: July 29, 2012, 05:41:56 AM »

Isn't Liturgical unity a much better route for union , rather than a unity through reason and debate? That is why I think unification is a more obtainable goal,especially when I consider Eastern Rite Catholics. 
Hasn't worked for them, or the Anglicans.
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
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,155


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2012, 06:09:00 AM »

Quote
That is why I mentioned the Eastern Catholics, they have a common liturgy,so to speak,with Eastern Churches,and many of them are more easily convinced of Eastern thought and practice,than their Western counterparts.

No, the Eastern Catholics don't have a common liturgy with us. Their Divine Liturgy might be almost identical, but you're forgetting their Vespers and Matins are often different in content to ours, such as their feast of the Conception by St Anna of the Mother of God, which has hymnography in it which proclaims the Immaculate Conception. There is no such hymnography in any Orthodox menaion, because the IC is not Orthodox doctrine.

 NicholasMyra is dead right. Lex orandi, lex credendi.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2012, 06:09:48 AM by LBK » Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2012, 03:12:15 PM »

Even if the liturgy were exactly the same, the grace of the Holy Spirit comes on those confessing the faith of the Church, the faith of the Apostles. Faith is theology. Bad theology is bad faith.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2012, 03:24:28 PM »

Absolutely not. The Church has NEVER maintained liturgical "unity." We've always had a plethora of liturgies and other rites. The unity of the Eastern Orthodox Church with the Byzantine rite is an historical anomaly.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,402


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2012, 04:52:07 PM »

No, proper Orthodox practice comes from having the proper Orthodox Faith, NOT vice versa.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #9 on: July 29, 2012, 05:40:21 PM »

Isn't Liturgical unity a much better route for union , rather than a unity through reason and debate? That is why I think unification is a more obtainable goal,especially when I consider Eastern Rite Catholics.  

Interesting question.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2012, 05:53:21 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #10 on: July 29, 2012, 06:01:23 PM »

No it isn't, OP. Why would it be? Is it all about praxis, or is praxis somehow to be divorced from theology?
Logged

William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #11 on: July 29, 2012, 06:03:23 PM »

Absolutely not. The Church has NEVER maintained liturgical "unity." We've always had a plethora of liturgies and other rites. The unity of the Eastern Orthodox Church with the Byzantine rite is an historical anomaly.

An anomaly which has occurred for about 50% of the church's existence?
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #12 on: July 29, 2012, 06:56:48 PM »

Isn't Liturgical unity a much better route for union , rather than a unity through reason and debate?

Orthodoxy has had liturgical diversity for the majority of its existence, and while the diversity isn't that great, in mot cases, still does to a small extent within different eastern rite parishes depending on local custom and tradition. I can go to the Antiochian church here and here different antiphons in the beginning of the liturgy than in my own OCA church. There's differences from parish to parish even within a local diocese on what prayers  are read aloud vs silent, who says the "amen"s to what, and other small things. We also have three different eastern rite liturgies (St John, St Basil, and St James less commonly) that are used and we have (although a minority of parishes) a number of western rite parishes using a small handful of different liturgies under at least two different jurisdictions that I'm aware of. We're called to be united in a common faith, not a common liturgy, even though there is a common basic structure to our different liturgical traditions with common elements. So while right faith will produce right practice, there has been multiple ways of properly expressing the Orthodox faith for just about all of our history. Even in the west, liturgical unity wasn't imposed in the Roman Catholic Church until the 16th century, which even then just codified what was being used in Rome and made it a universal standard for those in commmunion with Rome, which still excludes the Eastern Rite(s) Catholics and the use of an Anglican liturgy which Rome has had for use but seldom allowed for a period of some time (I don't know how long off the top of my head) before the large ingress of Anglo-Catholics and the formation of their new ordinariate.

There's nothing wrong with liturgical diversity as long as the same truth is being proclaimed and put into practice. This is our history, not a "what if", but a "what is". If anything, the imposition of strict liturgical unity might be a source of division within Orthodoxy or continued division where it already exists.

Just a few thoughts.
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2012, 03:38:02 AM »

An anomaly which has occurred for about 50% of the church's existence?

When?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
DennyB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 228


Moving Toward Orthodoxy


« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2012, 05:07:26 AM »

The reason I address this,is that I remember hearing a podcast involving an interview of an Eastern Catholic priest,and He was saying that their liturgy,or liturgies were the same as that of Eastern Churches. The only difference being that they submit to the Pope, and that for many Eastern Catholics even this is questionable,and they were discussing possible unification.
Logged
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,155


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2012, 06:11:00 AM »

The reason I address this,is that I remember hearing a podcast involving an interview of an Eastern Catholic priest,and He was saying that their liturgy,or liturgies were the same as that of Eastern Churches. The only difference being that they submit to the Pope, and that for many Eastern Catholics even this is questionable,and they were discussing possible unification.

The problem is that this EC priest is telling the truth, but not the whole truth. See post #5 above.
Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,619



« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2012, 07:31:53 AM »

Absolutely not. The Church has NEVER maintained liturgical "unity." We've always had a plethora of liturgies and other rites. The unity of the Eastern Orthodox Church with the Byzantine rite is an historical anomaly.

An anomaly which has occurred for about 50% of the church's existence?

Perhaps he means anomaly in the sense of an accident or coincidence.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2012, 07:32:12 AM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,487


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2012, 04:35:42 PM »

No, proper Orthodox practice comes from having the proper Orthodox Faith, NOT vice versa.
^ This.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2012, 04:38:06 PM »

The reason I address this,is that I remember hearing a podcast involving an interview of an Eastern Catholic priest,and He was saying that their liturgy,or liturgies were the same as that of Eastern Churches. The only difference being that they submit to the Pope, and that for many Eastern Catholics even this is questionable,and they were discussing possible unification.

The problem is that this EC priest is telling the truth, but not the whole truth. See post #5 above.

I agree with LBK.  Also agree with Isa's #4. 
Logged
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2012, 05:06:36 PM »

Absolutely not. The Church has NEVER maintained liturgical "unity." We've always had a plethora of liturgies and other rites. The unity of the Eastern Orthodox Church with the Byzantine rite is an historical anomaly.

An anomaly which has occurred for about 50% of the church's existence?

Perhaps he means anomaly in the sense of an accident or coincidence.

Essentially, yes. The fact that the Byzantine rite has been the sole rite in the Eastern Orthodox Church says nothing about the Orthodoxy of other rites, especially the pre-schism rites of both East and West. The dominance of a single rite came about due to politics and schism, and not theological issues with the other rites. Also, no other Christian communion (Catholic or Oriental Orthodox) has ever been dominated by a single rite. Though, one can argue about the suppressing of western rites by the Latins, other rites (such as that practiced by the Melkites and Marionites of Antioch) have always maintained communion with Rome, which continues to allow more and more Eastern rites, and has also become friendlier towards other Western rites, such as the recent allowance of the Anglican rite. I believe there are also small pockets of others such as the Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites that have been given more freedom than in the past.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Dominika
Serbian/Polish
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of Poland
Posts: 1,027


St. Luke, pray for us!


WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 02, 2012, 06:53:58 AM »

Firstly, liturgical diversity is a richness of the Orthodox Church. It doesn't matter if I attend Liturgy in Poland, Serbia, if it's byzantine, Coptic or Armenian - I feel it's Orthodox, the basis is the same.

Secondly, the liturgical rite comes out from the theology, Liturgy illustrates the teaching of the Church. That's why Eastern Catholic Liturgy seems to be similar to the Orthodox one (and what Roman Catholics like to claim, especially if they see somebody who is interested in Eastern spirituality and they're afraid this person could convert into Orthodox Church), but in reality it is not. Latinizations, abbreviations, generally not maintained some traditions such as All-night vigil (or Vespers or Matins) etc. I know people who have attended Orthodox and Greek Catholic Liturgy; they were in agreement that they were different, in Greek Catholic church they felt almost like in Roman one. Sometimes I read also some forums of Polish Roman Catholic traditionalists. On the one hand, they appreciate byzantine Liturgy. But on the other hand, they would like to introduce such things as receiving Holy Communion in the kneeling position what's inappropriate in the Eastern Liturgy
Logged

Pray for persecuted Christians, especially in Serbian Kosovo and Raška, Egypt and Syria
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #21 on: August 02, 2012, 10:18:23 AM »

Hi Dominika. I notice you said that receiving Holy Communion in the kneeling position is inappropriate in the Eastern Liturgy ... is it permissible in WRO? (I just ask out of ignorance, since I don't have much experience with WRO.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 02, 2012, 10:23:56 AM »

How would it be possible to receive Blood while kneeling?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
jmbejdl
Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Church of Romania
Posts: 1,480


Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava


« Reply #23 on: August 02, 2012, 10:30:09 AM »

How would it be possible to receive Blood while kneeling?

Well back in my Protestant days I used to receive both Body and Blood whilst kneeling - it's not hard.

James
Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #24 on: August 02, 2012, 10:42:27 AM »

How would it be possible to receive Blood while kneeling?

Is that an issue?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #25 on: August 02, 2012, 10:48:03 AM »

How would it be possible to receive Blood while kneeling?

On a spoon.  Wink
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #26 on: August 02, 2012, 10:50:24 AM »

How would it be possible to receive Blood while kneeling?

1.  Approach reverently
2.  If inclined to do so, bow deeply
3.  Kneel on right knee (or left if one cannot kneel on the right), or on both especially at an altar rail
4.  Say "Amen" after the Priest/Deacon/Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist (if necessary) presents the Chalice saying, "The Blood of Christ"
5.  Take Chalice and drink a small amount
6.  Cross yourself
7.  Rise
8.  Return to pew

Easy peasey  Wink!  Looks complicated but isn't.

« Last Edit: August 02, 2012, 10:53:03 AM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #27 on: August 02, 2012, 08:21:15 PM »

In the Antiochian Western Rite, we kneel for the reception of both Body and Blood.
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #28 on: August 02, 2012, 08:25:25 PM »



That seems awfully risky. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to distribute it by intinction?
Logged

sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,402


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #29 on: August 02, 2012, 09:48:47 PM »

/snip

That seems awfully risky. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to distribute it by intinction?
What's wrong with using a spoon?
Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,619



« Reply #30 on: August 02, 2012, 09:53:41 PM »

/snip

That seems awfully risky. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to distribute it by intinction?
What's wrong with using a spoon?
They're not using a spoon in the picture.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #31 on: August 02, 2012, 09:53:59 PM »

A spoon is just as risky as putting the chalice directly to the lips, if not more so. Intinction is certainly done in the West.
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #32 on: August 02, 2012, 09:58:04 PM »

In the Antiochian Western Rite, we kneel for the reception of both Body and Blood.
Yep and served with a spoon.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,155


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #33 on: August 02, 2012, 10:53:50 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #34 on: August 03, 2012, 01:13:39 AM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2012, 01:22:32 AM by Sleeper » Logged
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,155


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #35 on: August 03, 2012, 03:00:50 AM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #36 on: August 03, 2012, 05:32:35 AM »

That seems awfully risky. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to distribute it by intinction?
Why would drinking from a cup be risky? I have been doing it several times a day for most of my life and haven't lost an eye yet.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #37 on: August 03, 2012, 05:34:38 AM »

Hi Dominika. I notice you said that receiving Holy Communion in the kneeling position is inappropriate in the Eastern Liturgy ... is it permissible in WRO? (I just ask out of ignorance, since I don't have much experience with WRO.)

In the Antiochian Western Rite, we kneel for the reception of both Body and Blood.

Interesting, thanks Sleeper. (Incidentally, I don't think I ever knew that you were WRO.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #38 on: August 03, 2012, 05:36:59 AM »

Isn't Liturgical unity a much better route for union , rather than a unity through reason and debate? That is why I think unification is a more obtainable goal,especially when I consider Eastern Rite Catholics. 
What do you mean by "Liturgical unity"? The whole point of the Liturgy is the Eucharist. Where the Body and Blood of Christ are not shared, there can be no unity.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Dominika
Serbian/Polish
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of Poland
Posts: 1,027


St. Luke, pray for us!


WWW
« Reply #39 on: August 03, 2012, 08:04:10 AM »

http://www.galeria.bazylianie.pl/#/content/07/02/19720515/28-277-Resizer-800RW9.jpg - here you have photos that show receiving the Holy Eucharist by spoon in a Greek Catholic church in Warsaw in 70'. As for me, it looks so strange for byzantine rite and there is a risk that some pieces of the Christ's Body and Blood can just fall on the ground.

The things are different with Latin rites: there is no spoon so it's much easier and safer to receive the Eucharist while kneeling, so if our WRO brothers do it, there is no issue.  Both positions, kneeling and standing symbolize respect, but I just think that receiving Eucharist with kneeling is strange and risky for byzantine rite.
Logged

Pray for persecuted Christians, especially in Serbian Kosovo and Raška, Egypt and Syria
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #40 on: August 03, 2012, 10:03:53 AM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

I don't doubt you are correct that a canon somewhere forbids this, but it seems odd to me that our lips and digestive system can receive the actual Blood of Christ, but we cannot touch the thing holding it. Is it because our hands have not fasted? Smiley Did not St Thomas stick his hand into the very side of our Lord?

At any rate, I agree it's better safe than sorry and deep respect needs to be shown toward all holy objects.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #41 on: August 03, 2012, 10:30:34 AM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

First of all, how do you figure the chalice is being "grabbed", rather than reverently received?  I don't think you can assume that from the photo at all.

And secondly, just because what's shown in the photo isn't the practice at *your* church does not make it wrong.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,402


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #42 on: August 03, 2012, 12:06:39 PM »

there is a risk that some pieces of the Christ's Body and Blood can just fall on the ground.
At our church we alway hold a piece of cloth under the spoon so that doesn't happen.
Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #43 on: August 03, 2012, 12:52:52 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

Is the chalice holier than the Eucharist, because I hear some priests even let parishioners put it in their mouths, and with the bishop's knowledge!
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #44 on: August 03, 2012, 01:20:26 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

I don't doubt you are correct that a canon somewhere forbids this, but it seems odd to me that our lips and digestive system can receive the actual Blood of Christ, but we cannot touch the thing holding it. Is it because our hands have not fasted? Smiley Did not St Thomas stick his hand into the very side of our Lord?

At any rate, I agree it's better safe than sorry and deep respect needs to be shown toward all holy objects.

Quite right. As a point of information, there is no canon that "forbids this," i.e. touching the chalice. There *is*, however, an ecumenical canon that requires the faithful to receive the Eucharist via their own hand. The reality is that communion on a spoon of both species together via intinction (the current Eastern Orthodox practice) is, at best, a practice introduced in the 8th century, probably later. This is one area where the Romans have preserved the older tradition.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #45 on: August 03, 2012, 01:35:21 PM »

Isn't Liturgical unity a much better route for union , rather than a unity through reason and debate? That is why I think unification is a more obtainable goal,especially when I consider Eastern Rite Catholics. 

Diversity of rite is actually an important thing, since it illustrates powerfully and very tangibly the historical reality that unity never meant uniformity. This was as true of theology as it was of liturgy.

At this point, there is no reason to believe unification is an achievable goal. However, Orthodox theology has far more in common with Benedict XVI's theological program than it did with any recent Pope's. And that comes not from liturgy but from Benedict's emphasis on a return to the true catholicity of patristic theology, East and West.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #46 on: August 03, 2012, 01:52:48 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

I don't doubt you are correct that a canon somewhere forbids this, but it seems odd to me that our lips and digestive system can receive the actual Blood of Christ, but we cannot touch the thing holding it. Is it because our hands have not fasted? Smiley Did not St Thomas stick his hand into the very side of our Lord?

At any rate, I agree it's better safe than sorry and deep respect needs to be shown toward all holy objects.

Quite right. As a point of information, there is no canon that "forbids this," i.e. touching the chalice. There *is*, however, an ecumenical canon that requires the faithful to receive the Eucharist via their own hand. The reality is that communion on a spoon of both species together via intinction (the current Eastern Orthodox practice) is, at best, a practice introduced in the 8th century, probably later. This is one area where the Romans have preserved the older tradition.

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't know that.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #47 on: August 03, 2012, 02:01:39 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

First of all, how do you figure the chalice is being "grabbed", rather than reverently received?  I don't think you can assume that from the photo at all.

And secondly, just because what's shown in the photo isn't the practice at *your* church does not make it wrong.

Grabbed does not imply an internal disposition, I was merely noting the manner in which the chalice is touched. Both hands around the base as opposed to a few fingers underneath. Helping guide the chalice to your lips is different than essentially giving yourself the wine by taking hold of the cup as pictured. Whether its a sign of reverence or not is a different matter.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #48 on: August 03, 2012, 02:25:45 PM »

That seems awfully risky. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to distribute it by intinction?
Why would drinking from a cup be risky? I have been doing it several times a day for most of my life and haven't lost an eye yet.
There is a risk of the Precious Blood spilling.
Logged
Tikhon29605
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 532


May I become Thy Tabernacle through Communion.


« Reply #49 on: August 03, 2012, 03:36:43 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

I don't doubt you are correct that a canon somewhere forbids this, but it seems odd to me that our lips and digestive system can receive the actual Blood of Christ, but we cannot touch the thing holding it. Is it because our hands have not fasted? Smiley Did not St Thomas stick his hand into the very side of our Lord?

At any rate, I agree it's better safe than sorry and deep respect needs to be shown toward all holy objects.

Quite right. As a point of information, there is no canon that "forbids this," i.e. touching the chalice. There *is*, however, an ecumenical canon that requires the faithful to receive the Eucharist via their own hand. The reality is that communion on a spoon of both species together via intinction (the current Eastern Orthodox practice) is, at best, a practice introduced in the 8th century, probably later. This is one area where the Romans have preserved the older tradition.

I've heard that line of reasoning before, but I don't believe it. Why does the Communion Spoon have to be such a late practice?  If it was only introduced in the 8th century, then why do the Coptic and other Oriental Orthodox churches also use the communion spoon?  From what I have been able to learn, the Coptic Church is very, very conservative liturgically and greatly resists innovations.  Since the Coptic Church and Constantinople broke off relations with each pther by 451 A.D., I highly doubt the conservative Coptics would adopted a "Byzantine innovation" like the Communion Spoon if it had not already by their tradition by that point.  I have read some liturgical scholarship that suggests the Church of Milan (St. Ambrose and friends) used a Communion Spoon in its very early years and got this idea from the Eastern Churches.

I would be interested in more scholarly studies on the history of the Communion Spoon. I find it very fascinating.
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #50 on: August 03, 2012, 03:56:00 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

I don't doubt you are correct that a canon somewhere forbids this, but it seems odd to me that our lips and digestive system can receive the actual Blood of Christ, but we cannot touch the thing holding it. Is it because our hands have not fasted? Smiley Did not St Thomas stick his hand into the very side of our Lord?

At any rate, I agree it's better safe than sorry and deep respect needs to be shown toward all holy objects.

Quite right. As a point of information, there is no canon that "forbids this," i.e. touching the chalice. There *is*, however, an ecumenical canon that requires the faithful to receive the Eucharist via their own hand. The reality is that communion on a spoon of both species together via intinction (the current Eastern Orthodox practice) is, at best, a practice introduced in the 8th century, probably later. This is one area where the Romans have preserved the older tradition.

I've heard that line of reasoning before, but I don't believe it. Why does the Communion Spoon have to be such a late practice?  If it was only introduced in the 8th century, then why do the Coptic and other Oriental Orthodox churches also use the communion spoon?  From what I have been able to learn, the Coptic Church is very, very conservative liturgically and greatly resists innovations.  Since the Coptic Church and Constantinople broke off relations with each pther by 451 A.D., I highly doubt the conservative Coptics would adopted a "Byzantine innovation" like the Communion Spoon if it had not already by their tradition by that point.  I have read some liturgical scholarship that suggests the Church of Milan (St. Ambrose and friends) used a Communion Spoon in its very early years and got this idea from the Eastern Churches.

I would be interested in more scholarly studies on the history of the Communion Spoon. I find it very fascinating.

Coptic liturgy has undergone plenty of evolution, including in this matter. A. 'Abdallah dates it to the 15th century in his study published in Cairo as part of Studia Orientalia Christiana, Aegyptiaca.

Over the last 1,000 years, there has been cross-pollination among OO, EO, and RC rites (just as there has been in theology).
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #51 on: August 03, 2012, 03:58:18 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Unfortunately our polemic and political differences are also codified within some of the prayers and commemorations of sometimes anathematized Saints (for example in Ethiopian tradition the divide goes so far as have a liturgy specifically for Saint Dioscoros), so that Liturgical unity is about as hard a gamble as theological Sad

However, at the point where we and the priests pray for the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church and for the martyrs, at this point in my heart I also pray earnestly for Reunion and in the Spirit acknowledge our Orthodox sister churches as sisters, albeit sometimes separated by grief or gripe, but sisters all the same.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #52 on: August 03, 2012, 03:58:28 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

First of all, how do you figure the chalice is being "grabbed", rather than reverently received?  I don't think you can assume that from the photo at all.

And secondly, just because what's shown in the photo isn't the practice at *your* church does not make it wrong.

Grabbed does not imply an internal disposition, I was merely noting the manner in which the chalice is touched. Both hands around the base as opposed to a few fingers underneath. Helping guide the chalice to your lips is different than essentially giving yourself the wine by taking hold of the cup as pictured. Whether its a sign of reverence or not is a different matter.

If we're considering here *Catholic* practice for the reception of Holy Communion, it's only right that we should look at what the norms are for the Roman/Latin Catholic Church.  

The following is from the G.I.R.M. (General Instruction of the Roman Missal), the official "how-to" book of the Holy Mass:

41. Holy Communion under the form of bread is offered to the communicant with the words "The Body of Christ." The communicant may choose whether to receive the Body of Christ in the hand or on the tongue. When receiving in the hand, the communicant should be guided by the words of St. Cyril of Jerusalem: "When you approach, take care not to do so with your hand stretched out and your fingers open or apart, but rather place your left hand as a throne beneath your right, as befits one who is about to receive the King. Then receive him, taking care that nothing is lost." (51)

42. Among the ways of ministering the Precious Blood as prescribed by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, Communion from the chalice is generally the preferred form in the Latin Church, provided that it can be carried out properly according to the norms and without any risk of even apparent irreverence toward the Blood of Christ. (52)

43. The chalice is offered to the communicant with the words "The Blood of Christ," to which the communicant responds, "Amen."

44. The chalice may never be left on the altar or another place to be picked up by the communicant for self-communication (except in the case of concelebrating bishops or priests), nor may the chalice be passed from one communicant to another. There shall always be a minister of the chalice.

45. After each communicant has received the Blood of Christ, the minister carefully wipes both sides of the rim of the chalice with a purificator. This action is a matter of both reverence and hygiene. For the same reason, the minister turns the chalice slightly after each communicant has received the Precious Blood.

46. It is the choice of the communicant, not the minister, to receive from the chalice .

http://old.usccb.org/romanmissal/girm-norms-en.shtml/girm-texts.shtml

That Latin Catholic praxis is different from Orthodox praxis here is obvious.  But we're talking about "praxis" rather than "dogma".  Just because Latin praxis is different from Orthodox or Eastern Catholic praxis doesn't make one "right" and the other "wrong".  They are just different.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #53 on: August 03, 2012, 04:50:49 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

I don't doubt you are correct that a canon somewhere forbids this, but it seems odd to me that our lips and digestive system can receive the actual Blood of Christ, but we cannot touch the thing holding it. Is it because our hands have not fasted? Smiley Did not St Thomas stick his hand into the very side of our Lord?

At any rate, I agree it's better safe than sorry and deep respect needs to be shown toward all holy objects.

Quite right. As a point of information, there is no canon that "forbids this," i.e. touching the chalice. There *is*, however, an ecumenical canon that requires the faithful to receive the Eucharist via their own hand. The reality is that communion on a spoon of both species together via intinction (the current Eastern Orthodox practice) is, at best, a practice introduced in the 8th century, probably later. This is one area where the Romans have preserved the older tradition.

I've heard that line of reasoning before, but I don't believe it. Why does the Communion Spoon have to be such a late practice?  If it was only introduced in the 8th century, then why do the Coptic and other Oriental Orthodox churches also use the communion spoon?  From what I have been able to learn, the Coptic Church is very, very conservative liturgically and greatly resists innovations.  Since the Coptic Church and Constantinople broke off relations with each pther by 451 A.D., I highly doubt the conservative Coptics would adopted a "Byzantine innovation" like the Communion Spoon if it had not already by their tradition by that point.  I have read some liturgical scholarship that suggests the Church of Milan (St. Ambrose and friends) used a Communion Spoon in its very early years and got this idea from the Eastern Churches.

I would be interested in more scholarly studies on the history of the Communion Spoon. I find it very fascinating.

Coptic liturgy has undergone plenty of evolution, including in this matter. A. 'Abdallah dates it to the 15th century in his study published in Cairo as part of Studia Orientalia Christiana, Aegyptiaca.

Over the last 1,000 years, there has been cross-pollination among OO, EO, and RC rites (just as there has been in theology).

I should add that Assyrian and apparently some OO churches still do give communion under separate species and in the hand, at least on certain occasions.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,402


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #54 on: August 03, 2012, 05:03:33 PM »



Orthodox laymen are not allowed to touch or hold the chalice, other than to venerate its base after having communed in those traditions where this exists. Only ordained clergy are permitted to handle the holy vessels (chalice and paten).

It is common practice for some amongst Western Orthodox to help guide the chalice to your lips when you commune. Certainly not a grabbing of it, as shown in this photo, but under the base.

It still doesn't make it right.

I don't doubt you are correct that a canon somewhere forbids this, but it seems odd to me that our lips and digestive system can receive the actual Blood of Christ, but we cannot touch the thing holding it. Is it because our hands have not fasted? Smiley Did not St Thomas stick his hand into the very side of our Lord?

At any rate, I agree it's better safe than sorry and deep respect needs to be shown toward all holy objects.

Quite right. As a point of information, there is no canon that "forbids this," i.e. touching the chalice. There *is*, however, an ecumenical canon that requires the faithful to receive the Eucharist via their own hand. The reality is that communion on a spoon of both species together via intinction (the current Eastern Orthodox practice) is, at best, a practice introduced in the 8th century, probably later. This is one area where the Romans have preserved the older tradition.

I've heard that line of reasoning before, but I don't believe it. Why does the Communion Spoon have to be such a late practice?  If it was only introduced in the 8th century, then why do the Coptic and other Oriental Orthodox churches also use the communion spoon?  From what I have been able to learn, the Coptic Church is very, very conservative liturgically and greatly resists innovations.  Since the Coptic Church and Constantinople broke off relations with each pther by 451 A.D., I highly doubt the conservative Coptics would adopted a "Byzantine innovation" like the Communion Spoon if it had not already by their tradition by that point.  I have read some liturgical scholarship that suggests the Church of Milan (St. Ambrose and friends) used a Communion Spoon in its very early years and got this idea from the Eastern Churches.

I would be interested in more scholarly studies on the history of the Communion Spoon. I find it very fascinating.

Coptic liturgy has undergone plenty of evolution, including in this matter. A. 'Abdallah dates it to the 15th century in his study published in Cairo as part of Studia Orientalia Christiana, Aegyptiaca.

Over the last 1,000 years, there has been cross-pollination among OO, EO, and RC rites (just as there has been in theology).

I should add that Assyrian and apparently some OO churches still do give communion under separate species and in the hand, at least on certain occasions.
How does the EO Church typically commune?
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #55 on: August 03, 2012, 05:12:57 PM »

Clergy still receive according to ancient custom, bread in hand and then wine from the chalice. Lay people receive both species (bread and wine) mixed together in the chalice and delivered to the mouth on a spoon held by the priest.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #56 on: August 04, 2012, 12:29:12 AM »

Clergy still receive according to ancient custom, bread in hand and then wine from the chalice. Lay people receive both species (bread and wine) mixed together in the chalice and delivered to the mouth on a spoon held by the priest.

Is this also how it's done when the Liturgy of St. James is served, as I'm under the impression the rubrics still call for (whether or not followed I have no clue) communion in the hand?
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,402


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #57 on: August 04, 2012, 07:56:57 AM »

Clergy still receive according to ancient custom, bread in hand and then wine from the chalice. Lay people receive both species (bread and wine) mixed together in the chalice and delivered to the mouth on a spoon held by the priest.
That's how sometimes we do it in the West Syrian tradition as well. Though usually the priest pours the Blood over the Body inside the Diskos to mix and then places them in the laity's mouth by hand.
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #58 on: August 04, 2012, 09:11:17 AM »

Clergy still receive according to ancient custom, bread in hand and then wine from the chalice. Lay people receive both species (bread and wine) mixed together in the chalice and delivered to the mouth on a spoon held by the priest.

Is this also how it's done when the Liturgy of St. James is served, as I'm under the impression the rubrics still call for (whether or not followed I have no clue) communion in the hand?

The rubrics do, yes, and there are certainly individual EO churches that do that nowadays, but I'm not sure how widespread the practice really is.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #59 on: August 04, 2012, 09:24:26 AM »

That seems awfully risky. Wouldn't it be easier and safer to distribute it by intinction?
Why would drinking from a cup be risky? I have been doing it several times a day for most of my life and haven't lost an eye yet.
There is a risk of the Precious Blood spilling.
Well, I suppose we could always try administering it by IV infusion, but most people in the world tend to drink fluids from a cup.

Clergy still receive according to ancient custom, bread in hand and then wine from the chalice. Lay people receive both species (bread and wine) mixed together in the chalice and delivered to the mouth on a spoon held by the priest.

Is this also how it's done when the Liturgy of St. James is served, as I'm under the impression the rubrics still call for (whether or not followed I have no clue) communion in the hand?

The rubrics do, yes, and there are certainly individual EO churches that do that nowadays, but I'm not sure how widespread the practice really is.
There is an unbroken tradition of celebrating the Liturgy of St. James on the Island of Zakynthos on October 23rd each year.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #60 on: August 04, 2012, 10:01:17 AM »

Communion by spoon is actually prohibited by the canons. The reason for it was that some thought silver and gold utencils were holier than the human hand, and so its introduction for practical reasons among the Orthodox was not in violation of it. However, the use of a spoon is certainly in no way better.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 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 0.216 seconds with 88 queries.