www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology When John Paul II speaks, what parts are Byzantines supposed to adopt?

I have several Roman Catholic friends who speak of enhancing their devotional life with the recent additions to the Holy Rosary by His Holiness. They are puzzled that I don't usually pray the Rosary. It is not part of my religious tradition, though many Byzantines would say it should be. I use Akathists, etc.

Last Sunday, Thomas Sunday, was also Divine Mercy Sunday for western Catholics. Again, the question came up of why we don't observe it. Again, I said it's not necessarily regarded as directed toward Catholics of the Ruthenian tradition.

So, my question has to do with how to explain that, even though His Holiness offers wonderful challenges to the Latin west, it does not necessarily follow that Eastern Catholics need to adopt them.

I refer them to "Orientale Lumen", but they are still confused. Any suggestions?

Dear Jim,

There are also Roman Catholics who don't pray the Rosary!

The Rule of the Mother of God is popular on Mt. Athos where Monks make a prostration at each Byzantine "Hail Mary."

It is also popular in Russian monasteries and especially among the spiritual children of St Seraphim of Sarov, who loved to pray the 150 Hail Mary's daily. St Seraphim Zvezdinsky (+1937) also prayed the Psalter of the Mother of God ("Rosary" is a term disliked even by many historic promoters of this devotion in the West).

There are many ways to say this prayer. And we can develop our own sets of "Mysteries" to meditate on.

In presenting his "Mysteries of Light," His Holiness deliberately intended to emphasize aspects of the Life of Christ that are important to Eastern Christians.

This is nicely contained in a booklet of meditations published by the Paulines (whose founder, Fr. Alberione, was beatified on Sunday last).

You can also refer your friends to the site of St Elias Ukie Catholic Church in Brampton where there is the rather brilliant Vatican (you read correctly: "Vatican") document on Eatern liturgical issues.

There is a section in there about western devotions in the lives of the Eastern Churches etc.

If that doesn't convince them, threaten them with excommunication!

The Pope has nine titles and corresponding roles in the Latin Church, beginning with "Bishop of Rome."

We are connected to him only by way of his universal pontificate, as "First among Equals" in the entire Church. He is not our Patriarch entrusted with the responsibility for the liturgy and devotions, among other things, as he is for the RC's.

Alex

I, too, was wondering how the Divine Mercy devotion and "Divine Mercy Sunday" affected Eastern Catholics. Our RC pastor explained that (at least in our archdiocese--not sure about elsewhere) Divine Mercy Sunday is not liturgical (we celebrated the "Second Sunday of Easter" at Mass), but that there were paraliturgical devotions that RCs were encouraged to participate in.

The Divine Mercy Chaplet, which utilizes the Rosary, is a prayer form which would appear to have appeal both for RCs and Eastern Catholics: The prayer "For the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world" seems to me to be reminiscent of the Jesus Prayer, and the Chaplet concludes with: "Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy on us and on the whole world."

Martin

Dear Martin,

Again, the Pope established the liturgical "Divine Mercy Sunday" as Patriarch of the West.

For us Easterners, Sunday has been the day of the celebration of Divine mercy for about two thousand years already!

Alex

Dear Alex:

You said:

The Feast of Divine Mercy (which was initially granted to the nation of Poland and which has been celebrated within Vatican City) was granted to the Universal Church by Pope John Paul II on the occasion of the canonization of Sr. Faustina on 30 April 2000.

It's up to Particular Churches to celebrate the Feast on Sunday after Easter or not; but the Holy Father intended/intends its celebration by all!

Unless, of course, the "Universal Church" refers ONLY to the Latin Church?

AmdG

Dear Amado,

The term "universal" can indeed refer to the Latin Church alone in the sense of "Universal Latin Church."

For example, and as Fr. Holweck explains, feasts of local saints in the Latin Church may be promoted to feasts in the universal Latin calendar - but not to Eastern Churches.

In the same way, the Russian Church has both local saints and saints honoured by the universal Russian Church, throughout Russia and around the world.

When St Josaphat was canonized in 1875, his feast was limited ONLY to the Eastern Catholic Churches throughout the world.

It was only in 1888 that his feast was extended to the Latin Church.

The devotion to the Divine Blood and Water that flowed from the Wounded Side of Christ is very highly venerated in Eastern liturgical devotion, especially the "Octoechos."

The Divine Mercy is intrinsically characteristic to all Eastern devotion, at every turn, and is integral to it.

We have always venerated the icon of the All-Merciful Saviour - I have it in my avatar, have a look .

The Jesus Prayer is the constant request for the Holy Oil of Divine Mercy on us to heal and enlighten us.

There is nothing in the Divine Mercy that is new to ages-old Eastern Christian liturgical practice.

Except that our devotion has always been firmly rooted in the liturgy. The Canons of the Sunday Matins in the East sing out the Divine Mercy, the Wounded Side of Christ, His condescension to us to save us etc.

The Papal establishment of Divine Mercy Sunday is the elevation of a private revelation to liturgical status.

Again, as with the Immaculate Conception et al., the West has come late with something we've always believed and celebrated.

The Pope, finally, has no authority to legislate new liturgical days for the East.

When Russians came into communion with Rome, they asked not to celebrate the Feasts of the Sacred Heart, Corpus Christi and some others.

Their arguments against adopting these Latin feasts were like those above.

Rome heeded and these feasts were not imposed on them.

"Nec plus, nec minus, nec aliter."

I would refer you to the Vatican document of January 6, 1996 that is on the website of St Elias' Church in Brampton.

It is a brilliant explication of Eastern tradition and ritual in this same vein.

The current Pope is steeped in Eastern theology and liturgiology.

I would challenge you on your statement that the Pope intends for the East to celebrate "Divine Mercy Sunday."

Alex

quote by Alex:

The term "universal" can indeed refer to the Latin Church alone in the sense of "Universal Latin Church."
************************************************
Alex,

I don't agree. The Universal Church is all the baptized.

Paul

Dear Paul,

It depends on how you use that term and "Universal Latin Church" is perfectly legitimate.

"Universal Church" is everybody, of course.

But there are Particular Churches, such as the Latin Church, that are on every continent and so are "universal."

Any other questions?

Alex

Dear Alex,

I've never seen it used that way. I am open to good discussion. Show me. :p

Understand where I'm coming from. I wouldn't
change your venerable church's name.

Paul

Dear Paul,

No problem, Big Guy!

But the Latin Church is truly universal, in and of itself, as a Particular Church.

And it's not the first Church to appropriate the "universal" title.

The Patriarch of Constantinople, in the time of St John the Merciful, adopted the title "Ecumenical" which means rather the same thing.

Alexandria referred to its Primate as the "Ecumenical Archbishop" as well.

And when Moscow adopted the "Third Rome" designation, it was also affirming its universal character as the Russian Church.

As a matter of fact, the different coloured domes on the Church of the Holy Protection in Moscow, wrongly called "St Basil's," built under Tsar Ivan the Terrible, represent the continents of the world - part of the original universal vision of the Russian Church.

This is part of that whole principle of subsidiarity, the last wrung of the ecclesial ladder, so to speak, before we get to the truly "universal" Church, the Church of God present wholly in every place, in accordance with the original Eucharistic model of the Church, the true meaning of "Catholic."

Alex

The Latin Church is simply that vast portion of the Catholic body which obeys the Latin patriarch, which submits to the pope, not only in papal, but also in patriarchal matters.

--The Catholic Encyclopedia

Dear Alex,

Your examples of "ecuemenical" are interesting, but I don't think they apply to the Latin Church.

IMHO I think you are using a Sociological term instead of church terminology. In a sociological way I can see describing the Latin Church as universal in scope. No problem with that.

"Churchese" doesn't use the term universal for the Latin Patriarchate.

Happy Bright Week,

Paul

Dear Paul,

You are probably right about that.

When the Pope speaks as Patriarch of the West on matters liturgical and otherwise internal, what he says has application in ALL the parishes of the Latin Catholic Church around the world. But I've seen "universal" used to describe such.

The term "Ecumenical" is truly Eastern and we ourselves apply it to the Pope himself when we commemorate him in the liturgy as the "Holy Ecumenical Pontiff, John Paul, Pope of Rome."

Here the term denotes his universal role as the Petrine Minister.

Alex

Dear Alex,

So, when can one be sure when the Pope is speaking as "Patriarch of the West," or in his capacity as "First Among Equals?" (I was going to say "Universal Pontiff," but that would be too confusing!)

Should there be some kind of signal system implemented, such as, "Today, in my capacity as Metropolitan of the Roman Province, I...."

(I ask only semi-facetiously.)

Martin

Or, to paraphrase Bill Clinton: "Define 'universal.'"

Dear Alex and Paul:

As envisioned by the Holy Father in this intance, i.e., the celebration of the Feast of Divine Mercy, I believe the "Universal Church" connotes the "Catholic Church" as it is currently consituted.

This may fall short of both of your conception but reality points to the above connotation as it did, in my opinion, in early Church history when St. Cyril of Jerusalem defined the "Catholic Church" in 350 A.D. in this manner, refining the previous definitions advanced by St. Ignatius of Antioch (110 A.D.) and St. Cyprian of Carthage (253 A.D.):

Just my thoughts.


AmdG