www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Concelebration

We have a guest priest coming into our parish and he plans to concelebrate at Sundays D/L. He comes from the latin rite and I am looking for a source where to lookup the additional things to note for a concelebrant in the byzantine rite.

Some general remarks would also be helpful.

The concelebrant follows the direction of the principal celebrant.

When there is no deacon at the DL, I've seen the principal celebrant delegate the litanies and incensations to the concelebrant. I've also seen the concelebrant pray by way of chant part of the anaphora. In any case, the principal celebrant directs the concelebrant.

Father John, Christ is Risen!
Since you are a Byzantine Catholic Deacon answering a question posed by a Byzantine Catholic, it is clear to me that you exactly what you are talking about and have answered the question.

But, that aside, I'd like to make a tangential comment and ask another, more fundamental question, which I had intended to eventually ask on this forum, and, indeed, is one of the reasons I joined this forum.

My comment is, that in all my travel over the decades, I have never seen more than one priest and one deacon stand in front of the Holy Table in and Orthodox service; the additional priests stand on the south and north sides facing north and south. I suspect the difference in custom has to do with concelebration:

Concelebration is totally unknown in the Orthodox Church; excepting for the Anointing of the Sick and Ordination of a Bishop, only one priest ever administers a Sacrament.

I assume that the Byzantine Catholic practice of concelebration is a latinization because I don't know how else to explain something that is sternly condemned in the Orthodox Church.

Does anyone here know when, how, and why concelbration came to occur among Byzantine Catholics?

Photius, Reader

I am not certain that I understand this...in the Orthodox Church, visiting clergy frequently concelebrate, and I have often seen multiple priests administering Holy Communion (to multiple lines) in the Orthodox Church. Therefore, I must be misunderstanding what you are saying.

Gaudior, looking for clarification

Photius,

in my respose to Torsten I made no reference to where concelebrating priests stand, but yes they would stand on the north and south sides of the Holy Table. In the case where there is no deacon, the priest intones the litanies, etc, from the Holy Table. When a deacon serves the liturgy, any delegation by the principal celebrant to the concelebrating priest refers primarily to the chanted presbyteral prayers/anaphora. I don't know what you envisioned.

I do have to laugh, when you posted that concelebration is a latinization. Concelebration in the Latin Church was unknown until after Vatican II. Though I do not have the citation on hand at this mooment, in developing the ritual for concelebration the Latin Church looked to the Eastern Churches.

I've always used the term "concelebration" to refer to one or more priests standing to the south and north of the Holy Table, reading the prayers to themselves (as I think it specifies in the Sluzhebnik), chanting a vozhlas when appointed, participating in the Entrances, and, if no deacon is serving, doing other liturgical actions (e.g. censing) as needed.

Do you use a different term for this?

I think that the Greek term for such an occurance is "sylleitourgia" or something close to that; I don't know of a better equivalent term than "concelebration."

D.

Dear Photius,
Christ is Risen! You write that "Concelebration is totally unknown in the Orthodox Church". My much-loved brother, that is A Bit Much. The corresponding term in Church-Slavonic and in Russian is "sosluzhenie"; people seldom concoct words for some concept which is totally unknown to them. Uspensky wrote an interesting article - or perhaps more than one - on the question of the join recitation of the Institution Narrative by clergy in the Russian Church. So let's not go overboard.

It would be more accurate - and a trifle more calm - to remark that the rather rigid definition of "concelebration" that the Greek-Catholics tend to use is taken from the Thomist understanding of the matter (which may explain why Greek-Catholics are often reluctant to translate the priest's request of the deacon "remember me, my brother and concelebrant" accurately).

To offer you a bit of consolation, I once nearly fainted on hearing a Greek-Catholic bishop of one of the Slav Churches use the horrid neologism "kontselebrovaty"! Linguistic murder, and capable of provoking violence (since I am afraid of lunatics, I didn't respond at all to that unword).

And it is not unreasonable to add that the "mob concelebrations", to borrow Father Robert Taft's excellent term, are unquestionably a neo-Latinization.

fraternally in the Risen Lord,

Incognitus

Hey Incognitus!
Doesn't take much to rattle your cage, does it? [rattelovach vash kage - po Slavatske]
Yak Biskup hoche conselebraute, nay veen conselebrautuye!
Hokay, che ne hokay?

Excessive "mob concelebrations" are, well, excessive , but the occasional Divine Liturgy at which there are more vested clergy than actually needed seems acceptable, such as at a clergy retreat:

[Linked Image]

Or, at a pilgrimage:

[Linked Image]

Or, in a gigantic cathedral:

[Linked Image]

But I suppose these aren't mob-concelebrations per se, since these occasions almost demand a large number of vested clergy, and since all the clergy present at this event are not fully vested and concelebrating.

Dave

In reply to Photius, I believe that he is somewhat correct, only he has worded his post in an incorrect manner. There is only one principal celebrant that actually would be the consecrator of the Eucharist in the Divine Liturgy. The others would not be reading the Eucharisitic prayers. But, in all books that I have, the other priests are referred to as "concelebrants". Even if there are multiple chalices, the amnos (lamb) comes from the one consecrated Eucharist. This is the current Orthodox practice, and the litugikons that I have go back to the 1880s, when the Great Church updated the Liturgikon. Prior to that, there may be some differences. I would be interested if anyone would be able to note it.

This differs from the western tradiion were all the concelebrating priests would be also consecrators of the Eucharist, by the hand raised in blessing and the recitation of the words of institutuion. This I know through witnessing several liturgies while travelling.

In the Risen Christ,
Father Anthony+

Christos Voskrese!

Dear Photius, I believe according to Bulgakov ( the Greeks may follow another practice) the first "additional priest" in order of rank is always to the right (on the southern side of the Altar) of the Priest. I personally have been at a ROCOR DL with three priests present at the altar. But I honestly don't remember if all three pronounced the narrative or not, and if my memory serves me correctly they did not.

Incognitus has already well spoken to what the linguistic equivalent is in the sluzhebniki and typikon and has brought up what I was also going to mention, i.e. Uspensky and others have spoken to the issue of a corporate reciting of the words of institution. This is not historically an unknown practice in the Russian Church.

All of the priestly Old Rite DLs I have attended have been only with one priest, so I cannot attest to the pre-Nikonian practice. Out of curiosity I am going to ask my Old Believer priest friend what their practice is.

Father John, Christ is Risen!

I misunderstood "The concelebrant follows the direction of the principal celebrant." As meaning that the concelebrant faces east.

In the Orthodox Church, only one priest says the Anaphora ...

There is a semantic confusion that now has me laughing ... referring to some Catholic sources, what we (Orthodox) do is called "ceremonial concelebration" and what you (Catholics) do is called "actual concelebration"; it is to the latter that I referred as "concelebration", and this is forbidden in the Orthodox Church.

In the Latin Rite, before Vatican II, "actual concelebration" was done at ordinations of bishops and presbyters. You seem to practice "actual concelebration" whenever more than one priest serves, which is why I though this may be a latinization.

Cross reference my forthcoming reply to Gaudior to resolve ambiguity further, and to ensure that I'm accurate in what I'm assuming, and that you understand what Orthodox do and don't do.

If so, then they did not look to the Orthodox Church (as in those of us in Communion with Constantinople and who use the Byzantine Rite), but to some other Eastern Churches.

Photius, Reader

I am not certain that I understand this...in the Orthodox Church, visiting clergy frequently concelebrate, and I have often seen multiple priests administering Holy Communion (to multiple lines) in the Orthodox Church. Therefore, I must be misunderstanding what you are saying.

Gaudior, looking for clarification [/QUOTE]

Gaudior, Christ is Risen!
What I meant is that, in the Orthodox Church, only one priest actually performs a Sacrament (other than the two exceptions noted), which in the case of the Eucharist means that only one priest invokes the Holy Spirit to sanctify the Gifts. Any number of priests and deacons may distribute communion (or in the case of the rarely performed Liturgy of Saint James, a priest gives the Holy Bread, and a deacon gives the Holy Blood), but only one priest performs the actions and prayers that affect the Sanctification of the Gifts.

The Catholics, contrariwise, have all concelebrating priests recite the Eucharist Prayer and all the priests say "Take, eat ..." and "Take, drink ..." out loud together! I don't know what they do about the Epiclesis, but since this is not, by Latin theology, when the Gifts change, I don't suppose that that's all that significant. Sometimes, each priest has his own chalice and bread ... perhaps a knowledgeable Catholic could elucidate on this.

Photius, Reader

Attention Chtets,
CHRIST IS RISEN! Interesting pictures; thanks for posting them. The value is uneven - a huge cathedral can accommodate more concelebrants than a small chapel, obviously. But seeing rank on rank of vested clergy standing in the nave while the "more important" concelebrants are in the Altar is ridiculous and offensive, no matter who is doing it or where. I suppose I can think of one far-fetched exception: if a hierarch is receiving a large number of clergy (without ordaining them again) from some hitherto-schismatic group the hierarch must present each such cleric with the appropriate vestments, and it is just conceivable that the number of the clergy to be received would exceed the available space within the altar.

Incognitus

I agree and, as far as I know, all the clergy in the photos entered and stood in the Altar.

However, at the consecration of Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow (pics of which I couldn't find online), they did have myriads of fully vested bishops and priests standing in the nave. This seems acceptable to me for such an extraordinary and joyous circumstance, but not as the norm.

D