OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 31, 2014, 02:24:50 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Liturgical Unity,rather than Theological Unity?  (Read 2071 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,359


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: 534


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: 2,359


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: 10,175


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: 2,359


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: 2,359


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: 2,359


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 0.099 seconds with 43 queries.