www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Supposed differences in emphasis - yes or no?

Dear Reverend Father Pekarik,

Khrystos Razhdayetsia!

Well, I think I can PROVE that God is on the Old Calendar.

The Old, Julian Calendar was used from the very beginning, was it not?

And we know that God is Unchanging, right?



Alex

Bless me a sinner, Father Mark!

Yes, I love the Sunday Canon of the Resurrection and the "Cross-Resurrection" Canon that follows it!

What a wealth of spirituality focused, as it is, on the Resurrection of Christ. The Cross, nails etc. are mentioned and honoured as well.

I think the singing of "Christ is Risen" at the end of every funeral service should be made mandatory, and good for the Optina Fathers and St Seraphim of Sarov!

I love the tradition of holding a lit candle during the Mattins of the Resurrection where one raises it aloft each time "Christ is Risen" is sung!

I've also heard the Feast of the Nativity referred to as the "Winter Pascha" given all the Paschal symbolism of the Nativity icon.

Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,

Alex

Dear Alex:

On the contrary. . .

On the 8th day, after creating the Julian Calendar, He saw that it was not good, so He revised it.

Still, the revised Julian Calendar looked not that good, so He invented the Gregorian Calendar and saw that it was better!

AmdG

Dear Amado,

Heh, heh, heh . . .

As my uncle used to say, which Christmas has the most snow?

And the Christmas hawthorne of Glastonbury STILL flowers on January 6-7.

Joseph of Arimathea planted it, you know . . .

Alex

Hello:

Very few parishes celebrate the Liturgy of the Hours on Sunday, for various reasons:

1. As a Church we are still re-discovering the righ liturgical tradition of the Divine Office. You'll notice that the people in the Roman Church who even know there is a thing called "Liturgy of the Hours" doesn't outnumber by much the people who know that there are other Catholic Churches besides the Roman.

2. It is very strange for a Roman Parish to have "The Mass" on Sunday. My parish here in Westlake Village has five, plus one on the Vigil. Myparish back in Mexico had six, plus two on the Vigil. Before which one should we place the Morning Prayer?

3. The Liturgy of the Hours is not currently a big priority.

Well, that depends what do you understand for Resurrectional emphais.

The structure of the Roman Liturgy for a Sunday is always that of a Solemnity, and the reason for that is because it is the Lord's day, the celebration of the Resurrection.

Also, you have to understand that the Roman rite has a lot of flexibility built into it, so, for some things, it is really up to the priest to actually use them, but the Roman Missal includes Sunday Prefaces and other sections of the Eucharistic Prayers that can be used only on Sundays that are very "Resurrectional" indeed.

Well, my only Byzantine Paschal Vigil was two years go, in the Cathedral of St. Mary in Van Nuys.

In a nutchell I'd describe the celebration as a Divine Liturgy with two peculiarities:

1. It had a candle procession around the Church before it.

2. The various hymns and responses had a distinctive and explicit Resurrectional theme.

Perhaps the "regular" Sunday Byzantine Liturgy has enough Resurrectional themes already, and my Roman background made me expect something so augmented compared to the "regular" Byzantine Sunday as the Roman Paschal Vigil is compared to the "regular" Roman Sunday.

Perhaps the same thing works the other way around for the Season of Lent:

In the Roman Church, the Mass is celebrated during weekdays of Lent with very little changes from the Ordinary Time. The Liturgical color is purple (unless a feast outranks the weekday), there is no "Alleluia" or "Gloria", but that's about it.

In the Byzantine Church, the Divine Liturgy is not even celebrated, but the Liturgy of the Presanctified is served. And this is so different from the Divine Liturgy!

The chanting has a whole different "mood" to it, the psalms, the postrations, etc. all induce the thought of "stop, and take a good look at what's going on", that I find so appropriate for penitential times.

But if anything, this re-inforces my point:

The greatest celebration of the Resurrection I've attended to, is the Roman Paschal Vigil.

The most "penitential" liturgical celebration I've attended to is the Byzantine Liturgy of the Presanctified.

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Shalom,
Memo.

Dear Memo,

Again, I hope that we're not in a "dissing match" with respect to Rite or liturgical tradition on this subject!

The Latin Paschal Vigil is beautiful indeed and the "Exultate" haunting.

The Presanctified Liturgy is indeed supposed to be penitential as the Liturgy of St Gregory the Dialogist is the Vespers Service with Holy Communion, originally used from Monday to Friday of all the weeks of Lent when the Divine Liturgy of St John or St Basil cannot be used, and now used on Wednesdays and Fridays around six o'clock.

So I don't know about your point regarding "the other way around." It's already the way it should be.

Alex

Very few parishes celebrate the Liturgy of the Hours on Sunday, for various reasons:

1. As a Church we are still re-discovering the righ liturgical tradition of the Divine Office. You'll notice that the people in the Roman Church who even know there is a thing called "Liturgy of the Hours" doesn't outnumber by much the people who know that there are other Catholic Churches besides the Roman.

With all respect, are you really? I sometimes go to a local parish which, during Advent and Lent, has Lauds during their Saturday morning Holy Hour before Mass, but that's about it. I know that cathedrals sometimes have the Divine Office (the Cathedral in Albany, NY has Lauds and Vespers during the work week, but not on the weekends). But, in my admittedly limited experience, it's not all that big, and it rarely ever is incorporated into the Saturday Vigil and Sunday schedules. Furthermore, no one ever seems to preach about the Divine Office. Certainly this can be done somehow.

2. It is very strange for a Roman Parish to have "The Mass" on Sunday.

Point well taken.

My parish here in Westlake Village has five, plus one on the Vigil. Myparish back in Mexico had six, plus two on the Vigil. Before which one should we place the Morning Prayer?

Here's what I'd recommend as far as the Divine Office goes were one to incorporate it into a multiple-Mass schedule.

First Vespers before the first or only Vigil Mass on Saturday evening (I always found rubrics for certain Vigil Masses such as that for Christmas strange in that they say that the Vigil should be celebrated either before or after First Vespers, when it is Vespers that should introduce the feast, and after which that Mass should be celebrated).

Lauds before the principal morning Mass of Sunday (in the parishes I'm familiar with, that'd put Lauds somewhere before the 10:00am Mass).

Second Vespers preferably after the last Mass of Sunday, but before if necessary.

Of course, in parishes with noon Masses, Sext could be recited before or after. And the extended Office of Readings, with its Vigil Gospel (usually taken from the Resurrection Gospels) would be great to insert into the schedule for Saturday evening, if at all possible. But all this is more optional, whereas the others (First Vespers, Lauds, Second Vespers) are more important and should enjoy pride of place. And, if such is too much for the priests to take care of in addition to the regular schedule of Masses, is it not possible for lay people, properly trained in the execution of such Offices, to lead them themselves?

3. The Liturgy of the Hours is not currently a big priority.

And, in my opinion, it is not a big priority because:

1. Not too many know about it because it's not promoted enough (I recently ran into a bunch of trouble on a RC forum for saying that the Office was more important than the Rosary!).

2. It is not often made available in a parish's liturgical schedule.

3. It "doesn't count" towards one's Sunday obligation, and so what is the point?

Well, that depends what do you understand for Resurrectional emphais.

In the Syrian rite, for example, all the hymns of the Morning Service (Midnight, Matins, Terce, Sext) have the Resurrection as their theme. In fact, from Easter Sunday until the Sunday before the feast of the Holy Cross, the Morning Service is essentially the same as the one sung on Easter morning (from Holy Cross to Easter, it is a different service, but the emphasis is still the same). The effect I get when I go to these services is as if Easter just happened, and I am touched by that joy once more. Admittedly, I've often wondered why we do things this way, when Friday doesn't get its own observance of the Passion; does it not seem to be disconnected? But a) the liturgical texts for Sundays blend the whole thing in, and b) if one prays the daily Office, one will note the pre-eminence of Friday in our prayer...it is second only to Sunday.

The structure of the Roman Liturgy for a Sunday is always that of a Solemnity, and the reason for that is because it is the Lord's day, the celebration of the Resurrection.

I don't doubt this, but what I often find interesting is why, if this is the basis for making Sunday a solemnity, doesn't this always carry over into the Mass itself? Most people know that Jesus rose from the dead on Sunday, but I am not sure how many derive that message from the liturgical texts of the day. The only difference between a weekday Mass and a Sunday Mass is a Gloria and the Creed, basically.

Also, you have to understand that the Roman rite has a lot of flexibility built into it, so, for some things, it is really up to the priest to actually use them, but the Roman Missal includes Sunday Prefaces and other sections of the Eucharistic Prayers that can be used only on Sundays that are very "Resurrectional" indeed.

What sections of the Eucharistic Prayers can only be used on Sundays? I am not aware of these.

With regard to the prefaces, you are right. Some are quite nice. But many, to me, could be improved upon. Just last Sunday, when I went to Mass since I didn't get to go to my own parish, I remember thinking with regard to the preface used that it would be better to bring back the Preface of the Holy Trinity, and use that on Sundays (as I think they used to do before the reform of the Mass) rather than what they had used in that parish.

Well, my only Byzantine Paschal Vigil was two years go, in the Cathedral of St. Mary in Van Nuys.

You need to get out more.

But if anything, this re-inforces my point:

The greatest celebration of the Resurrection I've attended to, is the Roman Paschal Vigil.

I personally like our Syrian tradition in this regard. On Good Friday, the Cross, symbolising Christ, is "entombed" under the altar, and from that moment until Easter, no Liturgy may be served there (the Holy Saturday Liturgy is celebrated on a temporary altar set up in front of the veil). On Easter, there is an "Order of the Resurrection" after which the Cross comes out of the tomb and is draped in a scarlet cloth. The priest and deacons come out with lit candles (which the people are also holding), and the priest blesses the people thrice with the Cross while proclaiming the Resurrection amid the ringing of all the bells. After this is the Morning Service, and then during a certain point in the Liturgy, there is another service which is begun with a procession, then an hour of prayers and hymns, then some readings, the Gospel, and then the Service of the Cross (Zuhoyo). After the Liturgy concludes, everyone kisses the Cross draped in scarlet, the Gospel book, and then exchanges the peace with the deacons. You have to be there to understand, I guess...you need to get out more.

The reason I still attend a Roman Vigil before all this is because the local parishes go all out, what with the fire, the candles in the dark church, the Exultet (that hymn sends shivers down my spine), the readings, the Gloria with the bells, etc. There was a time when I thought it was all nice, but not as good as our services. To a certain extent, I still do. Then again, our services on Easter do not usually involve baptisms and what not; the local parishes have recently been baptising converts, babies, etc. during the Vigil, and that has made it all the more powerful for me. These days, I'm more prone to say that the Roman Vigil and our Easter services are about equal.

Would it be better to put this perceived difference in terms of Humanity and Divinity, instead of Passion and Resurrection?

I ask because many Western devotions, like the Sacred Heart, Christ Child, etc., to my (very limited) knowledge, don't seem to deal directly with the Passion but don't seem to have a counterpart in the East either. Is that so?

And if this difference exists, would anybody like to explain why it does?

I had the same thoughts, but now I think that this is a good discussion. An EXPOSITION rather than a COMPETITION on the topic.

Paul

Dear Manuel,

You've raised a very crucial point in this discussion!

Is the difference of emphasis on Passion in the West and Resurrection in the East a question of differential emphasis on Christ's Humanity vs. His Divinity?

Excellent!

I'll give my point of view on this issue that I've pondered since my Catholic high school years when my Latin priest-teachers first raised it with me.

My first introduction to the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus was through a book written by a (quite Latinized) Ukrainian Catholic priest, Fr. Zachar Zolotey (whose book is still in print) written in Germany, I believe.

In it, he wrote about the "Rosary to the Precious Blood of Christ," the "Meditation on the Five Wounds," Devotion to the Child Jesus, Corpus Christi Processions etc.

Clearly, and at first glance, these are all Western devotions that can be characterized by a strong focus on the Humanity of Christ.

The religious imagery associated with these devotions is the depiction of Christ as He would have looked in reality, while on earth etc.

The West's devotional attitude can be seen in the phrase in the Mass, "Christ, Who humbled Himself to share in our humanity."

The East, on the other hand, depicts Christ in its icons as Deified, transfigured etc.

The Icon is there to teach the truth that "In Him the fullness of Deity dwelt bodily."

My Latin teachers believed then that the East emphasizes Divinity over Humanity in Christ.

And I used to believe that too.

In fact, I've rejected the notion that we lose a sense of the full Humanity of Christ as a result of a consideration of His Divinity, as if one can emphasize His Humanity at one level, and then move to a consideration of His Divinity at another.

This borders dangerously close to classic Nestorianism that taught two Beings or "Prosopa" one Divine, the other Human, coexisting in Christ.

Christ's Humanity was never "not for a twinkling of the eye" as Oriental Orthodox put it separate from His Divinity.

To emphasize the "Human Jesus" is to suggest somehow that this is the case. The Person of Jesus is none Other than the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, God.

And Christ did not "lower" Himself when the Word of God took Flesh. Christ, in fact, raised us up to the level of Divinity in Theosis in the Incarnation.

The East does not somehow deny that God became Incarnate!

The Cross, the icons of the Unseen having become Seen in the Flesh, Holy Communion - all announce the Incarnation of God the Word and His salvation.

But what is emphasized is the truth of humanity's transfiguration and capability to participate in Theosis through Christ by the Spirit as a result of the Incarnation. The Divinity celebrated in icons does not obliterate Christ's Humanity - but it is a Humanity that is Deified and this takes nothing from our humanity - it makes our true humanity more evident.

Even in the depictions of the Passion, Eastern iconography shows the Word Incarnate suffering according to the Flesh. But He is the same Person Who announced that "no one takes My life - I have power to lay it down and I have power to take it up again."

Eastern Crucifixion icons show God Who suffers in the flesh but Who is still Master of the situation, as in the icon of the Cross of San Damiano.

The Crucifixion is as much an icon of Christ's Divinity and Divine compassion and condescension - as is His Resurrection.

The two events are intertwined and one makes no sense without the other.

Alex

Hello:

Yes, that last remark was cryptic. I apologize.

What I meant is that I find it a little ironic that the Roman Church, repudedly focusing on the Passion, has what I consider a more complete Resurrectional celebration, where the Byzantine Church, proud to focus on the Resurrection, has the most beautiful penitential celebration I've attended.

If the supposed difference in focus was so great, then shouldn't the great Resurrectional celebrations come from the Byzantine tradition and the great penitential celebrations from the Roman?

And I will take this chance to say it again:

The liturgical difference of our Churches is not only acceptable, it is desirable, a true blessing from God to be cherished and protected.

THAT is why the Church insists in keeping the Eastern traditions pure and faithful. Not because the Roman tradition is less, but because the liturgical diversity enriches us all.

The East has the duty to preserve its liturgical heritage for the benefit of the whole Body of Christ.

The West has EXACTLY the same duty for EXACTLY the same reason.

One is not better than the other.

Do you want to see who is "good"? Only God is good.

Shalom,
Memo.

Dear Memo,

Yes, of course!

But do you not admit that there are certain cultural forms of Catholic veneration of the Crucifixion that can be a bit "overboard" with their emphasis on the sufferings of Christ?

And I'm not just referring to the Passion processions, flagellants and those who let themselves be actually nailed to crosses.

But these are cultural forms, not representative of mainstream Latinity.

The matter of penance is something else.

The Eastern pentitential practices can be pretty hard on "Brother Ass" to borrow from St Francis!

But even here while it is expected that one will fast and pray and make prostrations during prescribed periods, such as Lent/Great Fast, there are other canons PROHIBITING fasting and mortification during festal times.

Even bishops who are monks and can never eat meat, may eat wonderful cheeses and fish on Pascha/Easter Sunday (that won't do it for me, I'm afraid!).

There is even an Eastern canon forbidding a spouse to refuse the other's request for sex during Easter Week!

And all this was designed to prevent one from getting the impression that the Church is against the body etc.

I told this story about the canon prohibiting a request for sex FROM ONE'S SPOUSE (some like to conveniently forget that) to my religion class one Saturday.

The boy in front turned to the girl next to him and said out loud, "Is Thursday good for you?"

Alex

Hello:

Slowly, but yes, we are.

More can be done, of course. Isn't that true about almost anything, though?

Sad, but true. And I don't need to say that I think you are right about that issue, do I?

But that is what I meant. The Sunday Mass has the structure of a Solemnity because it is the celebration of the Resurrection of the Lord.

"Don't ask what can your country do for you..."

The Resurrection is not only the cornerstone of our faith, it is also the lamp that should enlighten all our Christian life. The foundation of the building of holiness.

That may be one of the reasons why the proclamation of the Resurrection is not always all that explicit.

It is not that much talking about the Risen Christ, but rather talking about everthing, from the assumption of the Risen Christ.

And the two readings before the Gospel, and possibly the sparkling of water for the penitential rite, and possibly the solemn blessing at the end, and again, some sections of the Eucharistic prayer.

But again, most if this is up to the celebrant.

There are small variations. I don't have my resources here, but I will gather these for you. I promise.

Shalom,
Memo.

Hello:

I hope you are not saying you think these abuses are sanctioned by any Catholic Church, Eastern or Western.

Self-flagellation was fashionable centuries ago, but not any more. Self-crucifixion is prohibited.

Shalom,
Memo.

Dear Mor Ephrem Qathuliqa,

Anyone with a name like "Memo" is probably an expert at making notes to himself to remember his promises . . .

Alex