So, in time of persecution of the Church, we can take the Holy Gifts and administer them to ourselves without a Priest or Deacon. And your point is?
Which other Canon?
Errr, in "time of persecution" why can't we still use the Spoon or lift the ciborum to our mouth? You are being literal. to "take in hand" means to "take responsibility for", to "do it off your own back". The point St. Basil is giving Economia for is that you don't need either permission or administration from from the Deacon or Priest to Commune if they are not present during a time of persecution.
Really? Please name one of the "many" other compilations of the Canons.
Just a cotton-pickin' minute. Firstly, no one follows the 101st Canon of Trullo no matter what your interpretation is. In the Greek Church, the Communicant holds the Communion cloth under their chin- so how are they supposed to "cross their hands" in accordance with the Canon?
And secondly, the whole point of the examples which the Pedalion gives are to explain the Canon, and for centuries, the Church understood the 101st Canon to mean that Communion is to be received in the hand as exemplified clearly by St. John Damascenes epitome. Now, you are saying that the Church was erroneous in interpreting the 101st Canon of Trullo in this way for centuries....
So, given this magnificent discovery of yours, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask you to defend and prove it.
You miss the important detail: "in his own hand." This is stated as if it is not a normal practice, hint
Oh, if only you would not be so selective in your application of logic! One "in the hand" means one thing, and the next means another! No wonder what I am saying is not making sense to you!
John Scholasticus, Balsamon (who gave the favorable interpretation), and Matthew Blasteres all wrote compilations long
before the Pedalion, and they are only a handful. As I have said, the Pedalion is one man's
compilation, and interpretation. Don't make it out to be more.
Plese don't make blanket staements about how "no one follow the canon" just because your parish, or the entire Ecumenical Patriarchate (whichever is the case here), treats the canon as unimportant. They are still in full force, unless another Ecumenical Council says otherwise (isn't that what you always say?) My parish does in fact follow it: tonsured members assist the priest by holding the cloth under the chin of the communicants, while they remain crossed the entire time, and receive the Eucharist in the mouth. In fact, I had never known anyone didn't follow this canon, that would make them uncanonical...
You have yet to prove that this is the position of the Church for any
length of time.
How many more saints will it take to convince you that one person's compilation of the canons might just not be infalliable? 5? 10? 100? What is this elusive "proof" you are after? Or are you ever going to be convinced by the Church? The Pedalion is only one
interpretation, written in the 18th century
, open your eyes to the rest of patristic tradition!
(I will be out for about 2 days. Going to bed, then heading for an all night lamb roast for our parish's feast day, Ss. Constantine and Helen. The actual feast is after Liturgy, so I will be gone quite some time. So, don't think I've forgotten the thread!)