www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology when does concecration take place ?

I believe I've this question before but because of my wording I think I was misunderstood.

In an EC or EO Divine Liturgy is the bread concectated ino the Most Precious Body and the wine concecrated into the Most Precious Blood separately and then the two Most Holy Gifts are co-mingle together ?

or

Is the bread mingled into the wine and then, the two are concecrated together to become the Most Precious Gifts ?

Brad

Glory to Jesus Christ!

In the Byzantine Liturgy, we really don't specify an exact moment when the change takes place. It just happens sometime during the Anaphora -- but since it's a mystery we don't say that it happens at one precise moment. However, once could surmise that the change takes place at the Epiclesis, since that is when the priest blesses the bread and prays "CHANGING them by Your Holy Spirit."

This is only my opinion, I guess. Perhaps one of our resident theologians can give his/her opinion on the matter.

--Mark Therrien

I belive the answer to your two part question is simply, yes.
I realize that this is probably not the answer you were looking for, but in reality it is most likely the most complete. If I may quote Fr. Alexander Schmemann in his book The Eucharist- "This is why the Holy Gifts themselves never became in the Orthodox East an object of special reverence, contemplation and adoration, and likewise an object of special theological "problematics": how, when, in what manner their change is accomplished. The Eucharist-and this means the changing of the holy gifts-is a mystery that cannot be revealed and explained in the catagories of "this world"-time, essence, causality, ect."

To quote Fr. Schmemann: "This is why the Holy Gifts themselves never became in the Orthodox East an object of special reverence, contemplation and adoration, and likewise an object of special theological "problematics":
Here's another quote from Fr. Schmemann:
The actual state of Orthodox theology must be characterized by two words: confusion and awakening.
Are we to believe that the Body & Blood of Our Lord is not to be: revered, adored, or contemplated by us mere creatures?
Reverence:
Then why have the (Orthodox) Body of Our Lord (kept in reserve) on the Holy Table?
Contemplation:
To what deleterious affect could contemplation on the Real Presence be?
Adoration:
Why, then do we and the Orthodox have the Benediction with the consecrated species after Holy Communion?
Perhaps the confusion part of the good father's quote could apply here.
We have an awesome gift no other Christians care to share in.
Why should we be so nonchalant about it?
Jesus/Eucharist/Real Presence/ no big deal...don't let that get in the way of all Christians getting together... I don't think so!

In my experience, pursuing this line of discussion leads nowhere. The West has evolved a tradition of adoration of the reserved Sacrament, as a form of devotion unto itself. The East reserves the Holy Gifts, certainly, but for the specific purpose of given them as Holy Communion, either to the sick and house-bound, or to the faithful assembled in church for the Divine Liturgy of Presanctified Gifts - and when the reserved Holy Gifts are used for this purpose, they are certainly treated with every mark of adoration. But we regard this adoration as directly and immediately related to the Holy Gifts as Holy Communion, not as somehow an end in itself. Adoration of the reserved Holy Gifts in a way that is not directly and immediately related to Holy Communion strikes us as pointless - like gazing through the window at the meat on display in a butcher shop, instead of going in, purchasing some of the meat, taking it home, preparing it and eating it.

However, to say that (and I just did) is apt to provoke thunderbolts from the West. Still, this is a Byzantine Catholic Forum, so I can at least express the Byzantine view of the matter.

We have no wish to disturb the Latins at their devotions; please do not disturb us at ours.

Incognitus

I am not sure what Father Michael is attempting to state here.

The Russian theologian Vladimir Lossky wrote that from the Byzantine Christian perspective Christ is not primarily shown in the Eucharist (for adoration) but that He is primarily given (via Super-Substantial Food and Drink). Reverence, adoration and contemplation all have their place in Eastern theology, but must never replace partaking.

Byzantines (Orthodox and Catholic) reserve the Eucharist for the sick (and, during the Fast, for distribution to the faithful at the Presanctified Liturgy). We do not do this primarily so that the Eucharist may be available for adoration. We do this primarily so that the Eucharistic Food and Drink may be given to the faithful.

Schmemann is really discussing a historical reality. The rise of Eucharistic Adoration in the West is a direct response to a Protestant denial to the Real Presence. The East never had that heresy so there was no corresponding rise of Eucharistic Adoration. Instead of becoming �an object of special reverence, contemplation and adoration� the Eucharist remains for us Byzantines what it has always been: Food and Drink. There is nothing un-Catholic about this whatsoever.

I think I may have opened a can of worms I did not intend to- perhaps if I had only used the second sentance of Fr. Schmemann's quote my point would have been sufficently made.
"The Eucharist-and this means the changing of the holy gifts-is a mystery that cannot be revealed and explained in the catagories of "this world"-time, essence, causality, ect."
I did not mean to imply that there is a careless attitude toward the Eucharist.

Jim

In the Litrugies of St. John Chrysostom and of St. Basil, they are consecrated seperately then cominglined in the Chalice. Then warm water, known as the zeon is added. I'm not sure how it is done in any of the Coptic or other Oriental Orth. liturgies.

David,

Glory to Jesus Christ!

You brought up an important point. The warm water, called zeon, is added to the chalice.

The current liturgicon has this in brackets, meaning it is optional to the local eparchy. The new liturgicon, which is expected to be promulgated soon, will remove the brackets and mandate this important part of the Divine Liturgy be done uniformly by all Ruthenian parishes.

The words of consecration are pronounced while bread (on the diskos) and wine (in the chalice) are apart. (The actual moment of consecration is a mystery and not identified at any particular moment; rather it simply occurs during the liturgy). The separation shows us the redeeming death of Our Lord and God Jesus Christ. The bishop, priest and deacon receive the Precious Body and Precious Blood separately, for we are to reflect on the sacrifice of Our Lord. This is quite an intense moment.

Then the Precious Body is placed into the chalice and brought together with the Precious Blood, bringing us to the Resurrected Body of Our Lord. By adding warmth (zeon), such as we find in our human bodies, the completely Resurrected Life of Christ is present at the Eucharist of the faithful. We truly celebrate the Resurrection at every Divine Liturgy, and restoring zeon in the liturgy will complete the fullness of the Eucharist for all our faithful.

Deacon El

Thanks David,
This is exactly the answer I was looking for.

Brad

I've never heard of any form of the Eucharist in which the bread and wine are first mixed together and then consecrated!

Incognitus

FYI:

The second part of this statement is correct, the first is not.

The feast of Corpus Christi was established in 1264 for the Latin Church as a response to the denial to the Real Presence. This actually pre-dates the Protestant Reformation by almost three centuries. By order of Pope Urban IV (1261-1264), the Office for the Feast of Corpus Christi was written by St. Thomas Aquinas. The well known hymns of Eucharistic adoration, Pange lingua, Tatum ergo, O salutaris hostia, are found as original compositions by St Thomas in this office.

Neither have I, but just wanted to be sure.

Yes and no.

It is correct to note that there was growth in the adoration of the Eucharist prior to the Protestant Reformation. I should have stated that clearly.

But the growth in Eucharistic Adoration AFTER the Protestant Reformation was exponential when compared to the rate of growth of this devotion BEFORE the Protestant Reformation. It was �part-n-parcel� of the counter-reformation.

This dicussion brings another question to my mind. What is the proper way of regarding the Eucharist outside of communion in an Eastern Church? Surely not disregard? I have witness a wide variety. Some bow whenever they pass the Holy Table, some just shuffle by, maybe quickly making the sign of the cross. Is any reverence due to the Eucharist outside the context of Holy Communion? Surely the solid gold tabernacle we keep the reserved Eucharist for the sick in is a sign of reverence. I guess I'm just confused.

More important than these outward gestures I mention is inward reverence and regard. Am I not to worship the Eucharistic Lord in my heart even while I am not receiving communion? Maybe that is an alien idea to the Eastern Church. I'm sure I have no idea.