www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Proskomedia and the Faithful in the New Divine Liturgy

Did I miss the Proskomedia in the new online book? I did a quick once through and didn't see it. If it's not there, I suppose someone might say it's not there because the book only gives the people's parts.

And I would maintain that's exactly the whole problem. The Proskomedia has become clericalized in our Church. In most parishes the people have no part in it. Rarely are they invited to bake the prosphora. Neither can they present a loaf already prepared by someone else. So, why should the people observe and join in silent prayer as the priest prays the proskomedia?

Our people barely have any idea of what the proskomedia is all about. If they did, they'd be shocked at the liberties that are taken with it in most parishes. Pre-cut particles, loaves with no seals, "lambs" that are already divided...The real tradition is so beautiful. Why do we allow this latinization to continue?

As far as catechizing our people in the beauty of our authentic proskomedia tradition, the new Divine Liturgy books apparently demonstrate a missed opportunity.

Why is there resistance to restoring authentic prosphora traditions in our Church?

Nec

This sounds like a pastoral issue. It wouldn't be taken up with a revision of the liturgical text. You have a valid concern, but I believe you are addressing it in the wrong way.

What happens at your parish?

If the departure from tradition was not so clear-cut, I could understand the objection. Maybe I'm just letting some frustration show, but this has been discussed several times on the Forum with little response from the supporters of the new Liturgy.

It may be that some don't realize how great our deviation from tradition is in most of our parishes with regards to the preparation of prosphora before Liturgy.

Wouldn't it make sense to have included this as part of our liturgical renewal? I'm beginning to think that idea of a restoral of prosphora traditions is not on the horizon for our Church.

Some info on prosphora traditions from these links:

The Proskomidia or Office of Preparation [saintelias.com]

Prosphora Particles of Commemoration [saintelias.com]

Proskomedia Service Video (Quicktime Required) [stgeorgegreenville.org]

...now you know the rest of the story..good day!

U-C

I have never seen a liturgicon/service book that omitted the Rite of Preparation. This would be a first in my exposure. It is important for the laity to be aware of this celebration proceeding even as they are themselves doing Orthros, or third hour or whatever

What is this omission telling us about the liturgical practices of the Pittsburgh Metropolia?

I just cannot believe that this means what I am afraid it might mean. Are pre-cuts still a common practice? This is 2007, not 1929, one would think that kind of chicanery was all over by now.

Michael

Most people's books I have seen do not have the Proskomedia in them and that is probably just a cost/space issue.

But as to the practice yes pre-cuts are still the predominate practice, at least around Pittsburgh. However, precuts do not mean the Proskomedia is skipped. I am not saying it doesn't ever happen but I myself have never seen a priest using pre-cuts just skip the Proskomedia.

Nec,

What happens at your parish?

Wondering: Sorry, I just saw your post. Pre-cuts are used. At least we use a seal now. We didn't for many years.

Father Deacon Lance: You're probably right that it's primarily a cost/space issue. If the rite of proskomedia had more importance in the liturgical life of our Church it could very well have been there. That it isn't there and no one is asking about it reflects the problem we have in our Church, IMO. I wonder if any of the editions that are being prepared for the Faithful will contain it? I hope so. But, even if that did happen most of our people would probably skip over it because it's been so de-emphasized in our liturgical catechesis.

So, if the rite is rarely omitted (and I've never seen it omitted) then why do we continue to pretend to do the cuttings prescribed in the rubics? I suppose it saves some time. I hope I don't offend but it appears to be a mockery of the rubics and destroys its rich symbolism.

Why not just do it properly?

Nec,

Why don't you approach your priest and (politely) ask him why he chooses to do it that way? If he's going to do it anyway, why not suggest he do it immediately preceding Liturgy?

"I wonder if any of the editions that are being prepared for the Faithful will contain it?"

The Byzantine Book of Prayer has it, as far as I know it is still availbale from Byzantine Seminary Press and Light and Life.

I did. He implemented some changes. More people prepare the prosphora in our parish and we now use a seal. However, he still wants pieces cut up beforehand. I'm not one to argue and I live with it. I'm glad to see some change, however small.

I think for our Church to change will take action by the Liturgical commission.

BTW, if one wants to see what things look like when pre-cuts are used check this link. [clarionherald.org] Compare it with the pictures earlier in this thread. We've destroyed the rich symbolism of the "one loaf" (the "Lamb") for convenience sake. None of the Orthodox do this and most I've ever talked to are scandalized by our practice. Or, if they're not scandalized, I get a "well, that figures!" type of response.

This is the reason we still don't have antidoron at the end of every Liturgy (not to be confused with mirovanije) in most parishes because we don't follow the prosphora traditions. When you follow the prosphora traditions you end up with a lot of bread that is not consecrated. So, besides its symbolism, having antidoron is a practical matter.

"The Byzantine Book of Prayer has it, as far as I know it is still availbale from Byzantine Seminary Press and Light and Life."

I hope it's included in the new versions. But, what I really pray for is for catechesis for our people so that they can embrace the tradition. Wouldn't involving the Faithful even more in the Liturgy be a good thing?

I disagree. I believe it takes two things.

1. Most importantly, leaders who are true to the faith and traditions of the church. They cannot lead others to that which they do not have. Ultimately, I believe this is the Metropolitan's job. He can write a letter putting and end to the practice without calling a commission to do so. Next, it is the fellow bishops' jobs. Next, it is the priest's jobs. They are currently able to do the full proskomedia, so they share some responsibility in doing so. They are in the unique position of leading the parish to the Truth, and they have a responsibility to guide them, and to do it with love and charity.

2. It is also the responsibility of the laity to educate themselves about the faith and its traditions and to teach their children, visitors, guests, and catechumens. This is made harder in the face of clergy who do not fully teach the faith, but it does not abrogate the responsibility of the faithful. If the church was crying out for proskomedia, then it would be putting forth clergy who cared to do it.

Neither of these involve liturgical commissions which review and revise text. While it wouldn't hurt for it to be in the book, if things continued like they are now it also wouldn't help.

Wondering. In principle, I agree with you. However, everything is being coordinated to provide liturgical catechesis to the Faithful now. This has been a lost opportunity to end this latinization and restore our tradition.

I found a larger picture of an example of the precuts in use in most of our parishes here. Compare that with the traditional arrangement called for in our liturgical books here. [saintelias.com] I mean no disrespect to the Eucharist that is celebrated in our parishes that use pre-cuts. It is still the Body and Blood of our Lord. It just seems to fly in the face of all the encouragement for us to return to our roots and faithfully observe our own traditions. How has this been missed in this time of liturgical renewal?

I've been amazed at the responses I've received from various quarters in defense of the use of pre-cuts. One priest told a friend of mine that pre-cuts was an authentic Ruthenian custom and distributing antidoron was an Orthodox thing. Another priest told me that we don't need to distribute antidoron (and therefore don't need prosphora loaves) since we have frequent communion. When I inquired of a deacon what the practice was in his parish (and I asked this very respectfully) he explained that the priest was quite taxed already and it would be an undue burden to not use pre-cuts. (I had to wonder about this considering different Orthodox priests I've known who might hsve been envious of our one hour Divine Liturgies but they still celebrate a full proskomedia and distribute antidoron at the End of Liturgy.) Another deacon told me that the real motivation behind using pre-cuts was an aversion to cutting the "lamb" after consecration--they were afraid to cause crumbs as it was cut. If this is true (and I have my reservations about this), couldn't this be clarified just as we have learned that following our tradition about adding Zeon is not improper?

The problem as I see it is there's been a failure to teach the Faithful the beauty of our tradition.