www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology have a question

I forgot to mention the the Liturgical Instruction for Applying the Eastern Code directs that the zeon is to be reintroduced where it has fallen out of use as well as the restoration of other Eastern Practices.

Many small abuses exist here and there. They are done out of ignorance, laziness or disobedience. In any case they need to be corrected. There are others that I am not sure are that big of a deal. Is it an abuse to use a purificator instead of a sponge? While it does not have the same symbolism it serves the same purpose. Some of the minor, though still illicit, abuses I have observed at one time or another in the Byzantine Church are:

Omitting incense all together.

Use of the Latin Pall instead of the small veils.

Use of the Latin Paten instead of the Diskos.

Use of bells at the Words of Institution.

Elevation of the Chalice and Diskos at the Words of Institution.

Keeping the Antimension under the altar cloths and using the eliton alone on top of the altar.

In Christ,
Lance

Dear Lance,

Thanks for the clear and accurate answers. I laud you also on the methodology and suggest that others would use the same methodology
In regards to the "Ruthenian Recension" , we should first refer to the liturgical texts published by the Vatican Polygot Press as these are the official texts. Then we should refer to the "Ordo Celebrationis". After this we should refer to the current "Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches" which sets forth the general law for all the Eastern Catholic Churches. Then we should look at the "Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches". This text also has the weight of general law for all the Eastern Catholic Churches. We should then refer to the current particular laws either of the Church "sui iuris" or of an individual eparchy. Note that the law must be current and not been abrogated by a more recent law.

It is fundamental to bear in mind that particular law is not to contradict the general law. The "Instruction for Applying..." states in No. 67: "The rite of Zeon (the suplemental addition of hot water in the cup before Communion), present in the Churches coming from the Constantinopolitan branch and unfortunately forsaken in some Greek Catholic Churches, should be recovered. The same applies for other numerous celebrative elements if they have fallen into disuse."

Thus, no Byzantine Catholic Church or hierarch can prohibit the rite of Zeon. Where it is not in use, it is to be restored. This restoration of course should be accompanied by catechesis appropriate to the parishioners.

Again thanks!

>>>

Yes, that's right, and we're darn proud of it, too! The farther we get from our immigrant roots, the better. That way,
nobody in our churches will know what is supposed to be done or how to do it. Then we will have truly "arrived."<<<

It might be noted that there is an official Typicon, and the Typicon prescribes just how liturgies are to be celebrated during the Paschal season. Looking at the Typicon, which is published at the back of Eastern Catholic Life, one can see that the Paschal troparion and other elements of Paschal celebration are maintained from Pascha through Ascension, at which point we transition to pre-Pentacost. Any parish which deviates from the Typicon is not in conformance with Church useage or Tradition, and is, moreover, acting contrary both to the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, the Vatican II Decree on Ecumenism, the 1996 Liturgical Instruction of the Eastern Congregation, the 1944 Ordo Celebrationis, and the 1944 Liturgicon of the Ruthenian Recension.

As Father Nicholas of Holy Resurrection Monastery stated quite forcefully at the Orientale Lumen V Conference, the Typicon is, and must be, the definitive guide to the liturgical tradition of the Ruthenian Church, and deviations from the Typicon are contrary both to that Tradition and to the entire raison d'etre of the Ruthenian Church. He placed the blame for any such deviations squarly on the backs of our hierarchs, who either tolerate them, or are in fact the source of them--particularly (not that we're naming names here) the imposition of a single abbreviated liturgy upon all parishes and monastic houses within the territory of an eparchy, regardless of whether this is either consistent with the Typicon or the desires and mandate of the parish/monasteries in question. I wonder to whom the Holy Hegumen could have been referring?

Last time I checked, the Typikon of the Ruthenian Catholic Church was the Cerkovnyj typikon by Canon Aleksander Mykyta, 1901. Is there a decree revoking it of which I'm not aware?

I beleive that the erection of the diocese(s) in the US and their subsequent elevation to a metropolitan province rendered those documents 'obsolete' until replaced by appropriate canonical canons. Thus, if there is no 'synodical' document to replace the Old County document, there is NO document here in the US or Canada to supplant it, and the 'seat is vacant' to appropriate another term. One may 'refer' to these European documents as canonical, but the true application of canonical discipline relies SOLELY upon the explicit mandates of a bishop of a diocese. Were this NOT true, then the liturgical mandates of the official 1950's liturgical texts would be in-force nationwide in this country, including Van Nuys, Parma, Pittsburgh and Passaic.. And, as we all clearly know, this is far from the truth. I think the same is true of other 'canonical' mandates.

So,once again I chant:

Education! Education! Education!

Blessings, y'all!

<<Last time I checked, the Typikon of the Ruthenian Catholic Church was the Cerkovnyj typikon by Canon Aleksander Mykyta, 1901. Is there a decree revoking it of which I'm not aware?>>

My understanding is that the ORDO CELEBRATIONIS (original in Latin and Slavonic; there is an Edition with the Latin translated into English), releasd in the Early 50's comprises the liturgical norms of the Ruthenian-Carpathian Church.

But the Ordo is not a Typikon...

In my all-but-meaningless opinion, where the Typikon does not conflict with the Ordo Celebrationis or the Liturgical Instruction, it should be adhered to faithfully, otherwise we will become an amalgam of all sorts of Byzantine usage and lose all that is unique to our tradition.

Otherwise, why not just be Melkite or Ukrainian? If we're not "Ruthenian" anymore either ethnically or liturgically, why do we need to exist?

The "Ordo Celebrationis" is in effect except where certain sections have been abrogated by the Code Canons for the Eastern Catholic Churches and more specifically by the "Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions..."e.g. priests are forbidden to vest and serve as deacons. The "Ordo Celebrationis" permitted this. Under the "Ordo" the zeon was optional in some regions. The "Instruction" says it should be recovered, i.e not optional.

The "Ordo Celebrationis" is for all those who follow the Ruthenian Recension, e.g. Ukrainians and Byzantine Catholics. Others Slavs in union with Rome follow the "Vulgate Usage", e.g. Russians and Bulgarians.

The "Ordo Celebrationis" is to elucidate the liturgical texts printed by the Vatican Polygot Press. It provides more detailed rubrics than the liturgical texts. But when there appears to be a conflict between the liturgical text and the "Ordo Celebrationis" there is no clear answer as which has the greater authority.

Among the "official liturgical texts" of the Ruthenian recension, a typicon has not as yet been published. One clear reason for this circumstance is that a complete set of liturgical texts for the Ruthenian recension has not as yet been published. While the typicon does address the fixed or ordinary portions of the liturgical services, its special focus is on the interchangable sections or propers. The bulk of the propers has not as yet been published and so it would be difficult to publish a typicon to cover the Ruthenian recension at present.

The result of course is a certain amount of liturgical uncertainty. Much good would come if the entire set of liturgical books for the Ruthenian recension were published and the hierarchs and clergy and faithful followed them.

Please join in prayers for this to take place.

David, Protodeacon