The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Galumph, Leon_C, Rocco, Hvizsgyak, P.W.
5,984 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 456 guests, and 39 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,389
Posts416,722
Members5,984
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
T
Tim Offline OP
Greco-Kat
Member
OP Offline
Greco-Kat
Member
T
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
I gather from my limited experience that there are differences of practice among Catholics of the Byzantine liturgical tradition, between Byzantine Catholics (Ukrainian, Ruthenian, Melkite, Romanian) and their Orthodox counterparts, and, possibly, among the Orthodox, with regard to services for the dead. Could anyone help clarify the nature and extent of these differences, and the reason(s) for them?

To be more specific, within each jurisdiction:

1) What is the practice with respect to Last Anointing (when, where, how and by whom)?
2) What service(s) is/are conducted at the funeral home (or the home of the deceased)before the body is brought to church? Is this service what Slavic Byzantines call a "Panakhyda"? If not, of what does it consist?
3) If the body of the deceased is brought to church, what service(s) is/are conducted there?
4) Does the funeral service at the church include a Divine Liturgy or does it consist only of what Slavic Byzantines call a 'full' "Parastas"?
5) If both a Divine Liturgy and a Parastas are celebrated at the church, are they separate services or are they combined in some way? If so, how?
6) What service is celebrated at the graveside?
7) What service is celebrated, and where, when the body of the deceased is to be buried at sea or cremated?
8) What service is celebrated on the third, ninth and fortieth day after the funeral?
9) To what extent is the practice of each Church governed by formal rules? To what extent does that practice in North America differ from the practice followed by the "Mother Church"? To what extent does practice in North America differ from parish to parish and/or from diocese to diocese?

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Great question, Tim. I can offer some insight from the perspective of the Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church.

This is the usual proceeding for a lay person in good standing.

It is common first to have Parastas, also known as the Great Panachida (or Panakhyda, as you've spelled it), rendered at the funeral home during one of the scheduled viewings. This is a prayerful memorial service, and is quite moving. Faithful from other Christian traditions in attendance often comment on the beauty and reverence of this service.

The body is taken to the church on the day of interment for celebration of a Divine Liturgy for the Deceased. This is a “standard” Divine Liturgy for the most part, with special litanies and hymnody for the intention and commemoration of the deceased soul. A homily reflecting on the memory of the departed soul and emphasizing our beliefs with respect to the eternal reward of God’s kingdom are customarily given at this time.

The interment service at the cemetery is relatively brief, as final blessings and prayers are offered just before final burial.

Panachida is a memorial service, shorter in length than Parastas as was inferred above, and commonly used for remembrance of the deceased after burial. We Byzantines believe that we are called to pray for the deceased regularly, and this is the formal means by which we do so in the church community. Panachida can be recited as a separate service at any time, and it is customary to have the first Panachida for a recently deceased soul on the fortieth day following their death. If Panachida is intentioned on a Sunday, it is customarily recited at the end of the Divine Liturgy, just before the final blessing at dismissal, so all in attendance participate.

Last edited by Curious Joe; 12/18/11 12:49 AM.
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
T
Tim Offline OP
Greco-Kat
Member
OP Offline
Greco-Kat
Member
T
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
By way of clarification of my original post:

My questions reflect, in part, the different practices I have observed in UGC parishes in the US on the day of burial: 1) A Divine Liturgy, perhaps with a Panakhyda afterwards. 2) A Parastas, without a Divine Liturgy (which the UGC pastor explained was the only "correct" practice). 3) A combining of the Parastas and the Divine Liturgy into a single service, in which the Parastas seemed to replace the Liturgy of the Word.

I gather from my reading of Byzantine Daily Worship, that the Melkite practice may be that of alternative #2, above and that the Orthodox practice, at least as of the date of the Hapgood Service Book, may have been the same.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
D
DMD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
ACROD historically follows the practice outlined by Curious Joe . Some have a 'truncated' Parastas following the Liturgy, others a simple Panachida (i.e. a Trisagion for the Greeks and Arabs.) Can't speak for all of them however. Our local UOCUSA parish usually has a funeral Liturgy, although the OCA does not. So again the "Orthodox" answer to your initial question is that usually, resounding --- 'Well, it depends....'

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Likes: 4
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Likes: 4
Little different in the Russian custom. Normally, there is no funeral home viewing. The body is kept in the rear of the Church, or narthex, to use western terminology. A headband (with the Trisagion printed on it) is placed on the forehead of the departed. There the Psalter is continuously read over the body for 3 days. The evening before the burial, the Parastas is served over the body. On the morning of the 3rd day, The body of the dead person is carried -- feet first -- into the church for the burial service and set in the center of the nave -- facing the altar. The coffin is opened and an icon of Christ or the patron Saint is placed in the hands of the departed. The hand-cross is placed in the coffin near the head of the departed. Candles are distributed to the worshipers who, receiving the light from the priest, hold them lit throughout the service until near the end. Essentially, this is the Matins service, with the canon and other hymns closely resembling those of Great Saturday Matins - Christ's burial.

After the Dismissal and "Memory Eternal," friends come to say a last good-bye to the departed. They may kiss the hand-cross which is set on the side of the coffin or the icon placed in the hands of the departed. The closest relatives should be given an opportunity to spend several minutes with the departed alone. Then the coffin is closed and carried out from the church to the hearse. The choir sings the Trisagion, and the bells are rung slowly.

The funeral cortege proceeds to the cemetery where a short grave-side service of entombment is sung by the priest.

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
To clarify my answer a bit, in line with the ACROD practice as explained by DMD, our Funeral Divine Liturgy does begin with a truncated Parastas. This is true even if a full, separate Parastas is recited at the funeral home.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
D
DMD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Interestingly, in the east, i.e. Eastern PA and New Jersey the truncated Parastas was chanted at the end of the Liturgy. In the Pittsburgh area at the beginning. Is this still the case? In ACROD it remains the case to some extent.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by Tim
... 2) A Parastas, without a Divine Liturgy (which the UGC pastor explained was the only "correct" practice).
Father should consider a more Orthodox understanding of priorities and theology:
Quote
The ecclesial identity, consequently, in its historical realization is eucharistic. This explains why the Church has bound every one of her acts to the eucharist, which has as its object man̓s transcendence of his biological hypostasis and his becoming an authentic person, like those acts which we call “sacraments.” The sacraments when not united with the eucharist are a blessing and confirmation which is given to nature as biological hypostasis. United, however, with the eucharist, they become not a blessing and confirmation of the biological hypostasis, but a rendering of it transcendent and eschatological.”61
[emphasis added]

The footnote 61 uses marriage as an illustration:
Quote
61 On the fact that the sacraments were all formerly linked with the eucharist see P. Trembelas,... The theological significance of this liturgical fact is immense. For example it would be a mistake to regard marriage as a simple confirmation and blessing of a biological fact. Linked with the eucharist it becomes a reminder that although the newly married couple have been blessed in order to create their own family, nevertheless the ultimate and essential network of relationships which constitutes their hypostasis is not the family but the Church as expressed in the eucharistic assembly. This eschatological transcendence of the biological hypostasis is also conveyed by the "crowning" of the bride and groom, but is lost essentially and existentially from the moment the rite of marriage is separate from the eucharist.
[emphasis added]

- John D. Zizioulas, Being as Communion (Crestwood: St.Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1993), page 61.

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
But that's not really on point, is it? Neither east nor west considers funerals a sacrament as far as I know. (And it's hard to see how they could, since sacraments are for the living.)

Last edited by JBenedict; 12/20/11 04:38 PM. Reason: amplification
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Originally Posted by DMD
Interestingly, in the east, i.e. Eastern PA and New Jersey the truncated Parastas was chanted at the end of the Liturgy. In the Pittsburgh area at the beginning. Is this still the case? In ACROD it remains the case to some extent.

DMD - That's an interesting observation, as I hail from that area (Eastern PA / NJ) and have never experienced that approach.

In all the funerals DLs I have attended in this area (including one yesterday), indeed within the Eparchy of Passaic in general, the truncated Parastas is at the beginning of the funeral DL. This follows from a service book, first published in 1977 by the Byzantine Seminary Press. It is entitled "The Office of Christian Burial with Divine Liturgy". This book is still widely used, despite not having been updated to incorporate the revised translations of the RDL promulgated in 2007. Most clergy and cantors these days adapt by chanting the new settings where appropriate.

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Indeed, the sacraments are for the living. In a funeral homily recently given by a very respected priest, he noted that we celebrate the DL in memory of the deceased just before burial as a reminder to the living (and grieving) in attendance of the promise of salvation given by Christ, realized at our death, but obtained through a sacramental life in the Church during our time on Earth.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by JBenedict
But that's not really on point, is it? Neither east nor west considers funerals a sacrament as far as I know. (And it's hard to see how they could, since sacraments are for the living.)
It is. I specifically included, with emphasis added:
Quote
The ecclesial identity, consequently, in its historical realization is eucharistic. This explains why the Church has bound every one of her acts to the eucharist, which has as its object man̓s transcendence of his biological hypostasis and his becoming an authentic person, like those acts which we call “sacraments.” The sacraments when not united with the eucharist are a blessing and confirmation which is given to nature as biological hypostasis. United, however, with the eucharist, they become not a blessing and confirmation of the biological hypostasis, but a rendering of it transcendent and eschatological.”61
[emphasis added]

Note:

"bound every one of her act" -- ever one not some

"like those acts which we call “sacraments.”" -- like those NOT only those; "sacraments" in quotes, i.e. the seven but even others of significance

"not a blessing and confirmation of the biological hypostasis, but a rendering of it transcendent and eschatological." -- our funeral rites certainly transcend the biological; they are fundamentally an eschatological event.

I do not consider a funeral/Christian burial a sacrament although some Orthodox theologians may. However, "that the sacraments were all formerly linked with the eucharist" as Zizioulas notes shows the seriousness of the separation that can happen and then become what is presumed the real way. To me, in the context of Zizioulas's eucharist theology, it only makes too much theological sense that a eucharistic community, the Church, would want to conduct the final rites for a fellow Christian within the same Eucharistic Assembly where Chriatian identity is perfected.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
T
Tim Offline OP
Greco-Kat
Member
OP Offline
Greco-Kat
Member
T
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
An interesting array of views and practices. It occurs to me that the UGC priest, whose views on the matter were rather summarily dismissed in one post, may have been trying to express his view that the undeniable "linkage" with the Eucharist did not mean that the connection had to be expressed/demonstrated either by substituting a Divine Liturgy for the Paraastas (or some other service) or by appending the Parastas to a celebration of the Divine Liturgy. Rather he may have been suggesting (as seems to be reflected in at least some of the service books)that the power and presence of the Eucharist extends/radiates throughout the liturgy of the Church.

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Tim - from my perspective, I shared thoughts on the common practice (for a lay person in good standing) of the Ruthenian Church, yet I did not find the observations of the quoted UGC priest to be at all inconsistent with my basic understanding. That is to say, I have also been told by reliable priests of our Rite that all that is required for a "proper" Office of Christian Burial would be Parastas and the Interment service. Priests and cantors carry around a complete volume entitled "Office of Christian Burial", which covers variants of the ritual for various purposes (e.g. funeral of a young 'uninitiated' child) that do not include elements of the Divine Liturgy.


Last edited by Curious Joe; 12/20/11 10:52 PM.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090
Likes: 15
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Global Moderator
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090
Likes: 15
The Melkites historically did not celebrate the Divine Liturgy in conjunction with the funeral service in the temple. However, in the US, likely as an effort to be in synch with Latins, they adopted the praxis. At the time when Archbishop Joseph, of blessed memory, first came to the US, he attempted to revert to the traditional Melkite praxis. It did not go well - three-fourths of a century of custom was not about to be easily put aside (there is, somewhere here, a discussion by Father Serge, of blessed memory, and myself of the resulting uproar).

It was, as I think I remarked at the time, the first and probably only occasion on which the Archbishop stepped back from his intent to eliminate what he perceived as latinization. So, the Divine Liturgy continued to be served.

Someone recently posted a comment suggesting that the more traditional practice was coming back into usage - but I can't remember who did so. I'd offer that, currently, there may be a mix of the two usages. As to the services at the funeral home, those have historically been served pretty much in line with what others have described - however, in the last decade, there has been a marked increase, at least at the Cathedral, of the body being waked at the temple, rather than at the funeral home. I haven't attended a funeral at any of our other parishes in quite some time, however, so I can't speak to whether this is also true elsewhere in the Eparchy.

Many years,

Neil


"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Administrator 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2023). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5