www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Huge Chalices

I've noticed in pictures of some Russian hierarchical Divine liturgies, the presence of massive chalices (must be a two feet tall, more or less) on the altar. These are examples:

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/gallery/image64_13284.htm

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/gallery/image65_7667.htm

What are these and how are these used? I don't think that the hierarchs receive communion from these!

Unlike other Local Orthodox Churches, the Russian Church takes a bit too literally the notion that one may only consecrate the contents of one Chalice - then, if there are to be a great many communicants, a silver liturgical "ladle", usually gold-plated, is used to transfer some of the Precious Blood into other, normal-sized Chalices for the administration of Holy Communion. On really great occasions this somewhat complicated procedure necessitates the use of a vastly over-sized "main Chalice", as we see illustrated in these beautiful photographs.

The Greeks and others are not so scrupulous in the matter; if they expect many to Holy Communion, they will simply put a suitable amount of wine in a suitable number of chalices (with a few drops of water in each, of course), and carry them all in the Great Entrance, taking care to set each one directly on the �ntimension. Comes time for Holy Communion, they will pour some of the Zeon into each Chalice, break the Lamb (notice that both pictures also show a large-sized Lamb) appropriately so as to have a sufficient number of Particles for the Communion of both clergy and faithful, and supply each Chalice to the Priest who is to distribute Holy Communion from that Chalice with a Communion cloth and a Spoon. Much less cumbersome in the long run.

Actually, if one wanted to be all that scrupulous, a "better" solution might be to consecrate the Precious Blood in one large silver flagon, and pour the Precious Blood directly from the flagon into the Chalices. But that, I suppose, is too easy.

Fr. Serge

Won't using a silver liturgical ladle cause some spillage, especially when it comes to taking the Blood out of a massive chalice? Not being provocative here, just asking.

I suppose that it is possible. However, I've seen it done many times at Hierarchal Liturgies and it is done very, very carefully and I've not seen a single drop spilled ever. I must say that Orthodox seem to be much more careful of profaning the Body and Blood of Christ than do typical Roman Catholics in America. This is my own observation. I'm sure it's different in the Philippines and elsewhere in the Catholic world.

Fr David Straut

This Chalice is nearly as big as a Baptismal Font! I do see problems handling this Chalice, though I suppose that the Patriarchal Russian priests have figured it all out.

Fr David Straut

As one who has a very bad back and a lifting restriction, may I ask how one goes about lifting one of these chalices for the time when the Liturgy has the celebrant sing out "Thine Own of Thine Own . . ." at the same time lifting the large diskos?

BOB

I have served twice at UGCC Divine Liturgies where this was done. And it was indeed done slowly, carefully, and respectfully. I will say this is not a universal practice in the UGCC; for example when the Patriarch came to Philadelphia numerous chalices were prepared.

[Linked Image]

Bob, perhaps there should be a weght-lifting requirement during the diaconal testing process?

Big enough for ya??

[Linked Image]


Alexandr

I've used unusually large chalices before (you should see the one St. Innocent brought from Russia!), and it is not a problem.

Having served both ways myself, I prefer to consecrate the Precious Blood in as many chalices as are needed - although I too have never seen anyone spill the Precious Blood whilst using the above-described ladle. Still, why take risks?

I've never seen anyone at all use the flagon! I have one that would probably do if I had it gold-plated (it's made of sterling silver, and I've never used it for anything at all), but I don't wish to be that innovative.

I remember at, of all places, the World Council of Churches in Vancouver, there was a "pan-Orthodox" Divine Liturgy of sorts, with an amazing number of chalices on the Holy Table - the Russian clergy were quite annoyed. Later, everyone became annoyed: it was obvious to anyone that Iakovos, without announcing anything, had prepared a sufficient quantity of the Holy Gifts to communicate all comers. What actually happened is that each priest did as he pleased, so whether non-Orthodox did or did not manage to receive Communion depended purely on which queue he joined! [No, I am NOT making this up! There are reliable witnesses to prove it] You can imagine how most of the Orthodox felt (including the priests who considered that they had been pressured into communicating people whom they would not normally have communicated), and how other people felt when they were refused Communion while they could see for themselves that one queue over anybody and everybody was communicated.

To make it even crazier, this all took place a hundred yards or so from the Pacific Ocean, in lovely summer weather. Iakovos could easily have decided to replace the Divine Liturgy - which was bound to cause controversy - with a solemn Blessing of Waters and some young Greek men poised to retrieve the Cross. Would have made a wonderful impression, and no offense to anyone. After all, Iakovos was "Exarch of the Oceans Atlantic and Pacific", so it might have been appropriate!

Father Serge

If you watch last year's Divine Liturgy celebrating the union of ROC and ROCOR, you will see a huge chalice and diskos used.

Go to http://212.111.66.210/trans/ and then click on the link: Архив трансляции 4/17 мая 2007 года

You will see the huge chalice and diskos during the Great Entrance beginning at 2:32:40.

At 2:56:40, you'll see the two deacons ready to lift the chalice and diskos for the singing of "Thine own of thine..."

This reminds me of an episode of "Small People in a Big World"!!!

[Linked Image]

I knew some people who had something like that in college. It was used for "other" purposes though.

What happened to one bread, one cup? Is this common in the Eastern Catholic churches? We're not permitted to do this at all!

X. B!
C. I. X!

Why? The spirit of the law is lost with this exaggeration to keep the letter. What is the alternative if a big cup is not available? Multiple altars for tandem consecrations per Liturgy? Multiple temples otherwise empty for a one a day spiritual vitamin? Almost like a lost chapter from GULLIVER�S TRAVELS. If there was to be a Divine Liturgy at Yankee Stadium how many gallon cup would you suggest? Would a truck in the Entrance be acceptable? Putting a moratorium on the number of participants at a Eucharist would be more realistic. Yah, limit the number who can worship... or was that already done "Two or three".

Don�t say I�m irreverent nor complain President Bush manipulates executive powers. Honestly WWJD? (what would Jesus do?)

Whose "we"?

I am guessing you are not Greek? As Father alluded:

For the members of the Russian Church:

Where/how does one store such an extraordinary large chalice and diskos? and how/where does purification take place?

Another thought which came to mind - Instead of using a ladle, has the creation of a spigoted or spouted chalice been considered?

X. B.
C. I. X!
My recent thought is what does one use for a lance, a lance?

P. S.
What to use for the air (vale)? The Good Friday plachanytcha (shroud)?

Wish it were different in my country, but alas, no.

Prester John writes:


Obedience is an important virtue, and nowhere else so much as in matters concerning the Eucharist. So by all means do as the Bishop requires. And please respect those who also do as their Bishops direct, even though this may result in a different practice.

Christ is Risen!

Fr. Serge

Now you why the Russian Church only has either basso-profundo deacons or tenors. After carrying around a chalice like that, I would think the deacon would be a tenor for a while until after the hernia operation. Also no one in the photo has a lean girth. Maybe if one has to take the sacraments like that on a regular basis, one's girth would be expanded.

SS

You never spoke a truer word

And I believe that the clergy present could be described traditionally as ' healthy '

Also, I hope no deacon is driving for a few hours after doing the ablutions on that chalice!

mmmmmmmmmmmmmm now there you have a very very good point

A blessed chain saw with a three-bar cross on it? Can you imagine being in the congregation during proskomedie when you hear the holy chain saw being revved up? It might put a tad bit of a damper on that prayerful moment.

Is it real or Photo Shop?

X.B.! B.B.!

Ung

Definitely the real thing

Having some knowledge of the Bishops involved, I would say that Archbishop Kyrill of San Francisco (the Hierarch on the extreme right) is a thin man.

Fr David Straut (of wide Archpriestly girth)

These ecclesiastical extravaganzas tend to have a small army of deacons, so I believe that there are plenty deacons to consume the Holy Gifts and purify the Chalices.

By the way, I heard that Clergy in Russia aren't permitted to drive. Too many automotive fatalities with crazy Russian drivers. The holy canons forbid a clergyman to serve if he has caused a death.

Fr David Straut (who only occasionaly is given a driver and usually has to take risks)

"Archpriestly girth" is actually an expression in Russian! Haven't heard it in years, but you've brought back memories - Christ is Risen!

Fr. Serge

Dear Fr Serge,

Truly, He is risen!

I hope that you have had a joyful Pascha and Bright Week.

Fr David

Hello all....

I don't know if this is off topic or not, but considering some folks talking about Chalice(s) being placed on the Holy Table as "one chalice".

I have seen in some Orthodox Churches that have only ONE chalice on the Holy Table and the rest of them on the Prothesis Table and when it comes to time for Communion, the priests would go over there and bring the rest of the Chalices to the Holy Table. I have not seen any pourings from the Chalice that's already on the Holy Table, so it is as if the other Chalices are already prepared before, and apparently it was consecrated at the same time as the one Chalice already on the Holy Table?

Does what I'm saying make senses?

Anyway...has anyone seen anything like that and if so or not, what are your thoughts on that.

Thanks,

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

The Secret Squirrel has good points. We all know if they did use a blessed chain saw it would be made by John Deere.

Does John Deere actually produce anything as small as a chain saw ?

Yep. http://www.deere.com/en_US/ProductCatalog/HO/series/ho_chain_saws_series.html

Oh Deere!

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

WOW - I always associated them with HUGE Agricultural machnery which towered over our car and caravan

Deere Folks,

What do you think of my question above?

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

Dear SPDundas,

I'm pretty sure no Orthodox would consider the contents of Chalices left on the Prothesis Table during the Anaphora consecrated as the Blood of Christ.

In Antiochian (and I assume Greek) churches Chalices containing unconsecrated wine are sometinmes brought to the Holy Table before the people's Communion and a small amount of the Consecrated Wine (i.e. the Blood of Christ) is added to the unconsecrated wine in each of the Chalices. The way I've seen this done is pouring the Blood of Christ directly from the main Chalice into each of the unconsecrated Chalices -without the use of the special ladle the Russians use - and this is considered to consecrate the entire contents of these extra Chalices into the Blood of Christ. Also a portion of the Lamb is placed into each of these extra Chalices at the fraction.

Fr David Straut

Fr. Straut,

You are right on target on guessing it was Antiochian that I was referring about...I forgot to mention which Church.

That's very interesting concept...hmmm. Thanks for your explanation.

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

Interesting. This was also practiced in the Western Rites until medieval times.

In the original 1570 Roman Missal down to the eighteenth century, there was a rubric which stated that, after receiving holy communion, the faithful are to drink unconsecrated wine. While this is not the same as drinking wine admixtured with a little of the Blood, I can see a linear succession between both practices.

Amazing how, at one time, the Eastern and Western rites were so much more similar than they are now.

Mikhaylo asks:


Apart from mis-spellings, this question is not foolish. It seems that the Shroud (Epitaphios, Plashchanytsia, or whichever language you like) evolved from the Aer, and relatively recently at that.

(that's "Serge recent," you understand!).

Fr. Serge

I'll confirm that the practice Fr. David mentions--the pouring of a small amount of the Precious Blood into a chalice of unconsecrated wine and water--is done in Greek churches as well.

If I remember correctly, this was also done at the consecration of Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow, at least as far as I could tell from the video. So, it may be done in other Orthodox countries as well in extraordinary circumstances.

Many in the Orthodox world ascribe to the idea of "contact consecration" when it comes to liquids: that a small amount of the Precious Blood, or holy water, or holy oil, can consecrate a larger amount of the same liquid (wine, water and oil, respectively). This is why clergy of this "Greek" school of throught will consider the wine at the Presanctified Liturgy to be the Blood of Christ (although some may contend that the Lamb is actually what consecrates the chalice, and not the small amount of the Precious Blood that is *on* the Lamb). Most Slav clergy view the wine at Presanctified Liturgy as the *means* for distributing the Lamb, but not as being consecrated.

Dave

Apparently, the Serbs also use one big chalice, or is this just an optical illusion?

http://manastir-lepavina.org/novosti/index.php/weblog/detaljnije/o_prieivanju_na_vaskrs/

I also seem to recall reading that when the Greeks went to the Council of Florence, the Latins were astonished at the size of the chalices they brought along... reputedly, the Greek chalices were thrice the size of the Latin ones (now, Latin chalices can be very small...)

From the looks of that chalice, I'd say it's of Russian provenance - and beautiful.

Fr. Serge

Now that is indeed a beautiful Chalice.

I can think of a little Church that could do with one that size for use at times.

Some Latins still use the practice of intinction, where the Precious Blood is put into a small chalice and the Host is then dipped into the wine and both species are given for Communion.

I've only ever seen it done in the Anthracite Coal Region of Eastern PA, however. Never anywhere else in the country. Then again, the Coal Region still have 40 Hours Devotions and the priests there even know what a Humeral Veil is!

I've seen intinction done here in CT a bit as well. I know some priests who do it in their parishes to prevent communion by hand.

The practice of drinking unconsecrated wine or water after receiving the Holy Mysteries is common in the Syriac/Malankara Church as well, although more common to Orthodox than Catholics.

domilsean:

Christ is Risen!! Indeed He is Risen!!

We used to do it here in Central PA until our current bishop arrived and felt that the use of the Common Cup gave a "greater sign value." I had donated an intinction set to my parish as a memorial for my family members at that time. It's been sitting on a shelf for over 20 years now. It had a little cup in the center and the hosts rested in a circular area around it. With a lid, it could be stored int he tabernacle after the little cup was taken out to be abluted.

In Christ,

BOB

I'm now having visions of a "mother ship" chalice, either as a stand with a central cup and more detachable cups fashioned, or as sectional wedges that fasten as a single chalice for consecration . . .

Also, it's my understanding that tinctured hosts are actually forbidden in the RC church.

hawk

Intinction is not forbidden in the Roman (Latin) Catholic liturgy - [i]Self intinction[/i] is what is forbidden. The preceding quote and this subsequent one is found in one of the latest instructions pertaining to the (Latin Church) liturgy, Redemptionis Sacramentum#104 and #103, respectively :


This means that a person receives the host from the Priest/Deacon/EMHC and then takes that host to the chalice and dips It in the chalice on his own. This is a form of self-communication, which is reserved to priests alone (let alone the possible liturgical abuses).

Also, as posters have pointed out, intinction would prohibit Communion in the hand. If only!

However, as intinction in the Latin Church would risk the danger of spilling or dropping the Precious Blood on the floor, what would be a necessity would be communion (chin) patens which sadly have fallen out of use in many places. Or, like I experienced in Mexico, a cloth was held under the communicants' chins by servers or ushers, so that nothing of the sacred species would fall on the floor.

Jon:

Christ is Risen!! Indeed He is Risen!!

I've administered Holy Communion with an intinction set and nothing of the kind happens if one is in no hurry. We were taught to dip the Host and gently tap it on the side of the cup to make sure that there was no Precious Blood that might drip as the Host was placed on the tongue of the communicant. The minister is supposed to move the entire intinction set close enough that any "drips" are caught in the set itself.

The problem as I see it is the idea that Holy Communion must be a race to see who can have his line finished first. The whole idea of having additonal ministers from the laity was to allow for the reverent distribution of the Holy Mysteries. Speed makes for mistakes, irreverence, and possible loss of the Host or Precious Blood.

In Christ,

BOB

As Fr. Serge pointed out above, not just Eastern Catholics, but also the Greek Orthodox.

Dn. Robert

Ahh. Thanks.

hawk

X. B!
C. I. X!
�What happened to one bread, one cup? Is this common�� quote

EVOLUTION. There is a considerable difference in parish territory from when one walked a half hour to church and to now as we drive a half hour. When one walked only the fit were expected. Today we should have handy cap accessibility welcoming all. With the �new� priest shortage they must accommodate larger numbers and service broader territories, and not only in miles but relevance. One church building today may accommodate several old time parishes. That includes a schedule so people can fit their worship schedule into their schedule of day care of children and the elderly plus all the other responsibilities that make up life today. That should include a schedule of different languages accommodation including salt and pepper mixes, style of delivery and ethnic custom usage. Now! I didn�t say extremes just SENSITIVITY. �My way or the highway� is not pastoral it is vanity. �One bread one cup� sounds like the motto for a club not parish. WWJD?

I think that this thread is moving beyond the initial question. It seems to me that there is an undercurrent of criticism developing over whether the use of one chalice versus multiple chalices is the "real way" to do things. We tend to become a bit unchristian when a simple question moves to arguments over whose practice is most Orthodox/orthodox and whose is closest to what Tradition calls for.

Let's refrain from arguing over this point.

I found the pictures of the large chalices fascinating and the reason to be reasonable from the point of view of those using them. Let's leave it there.

In Christ Who called us to focus on Him in the Eucharist, not on arguing over how we get Him to the believers physically,

BOB

And not just the Greeks, either. I was recently at a Serbian celebration where several chalices were consecrated, and have been similarly been at Ukrainian Orthodox liturgies where this was done.

Wow! those chalices are huge and so beautiful.

I wonder what the size of the original altar bread was? The Lamb looks like it is at least four inches tall. Somewhere, there must be a huge seal.

And how does the priest serve Holy Communion or even pour from them? I only ask because as a member of the laity, I cannot imagine how it is done. The curtain during the communion of the clergy is closed except at Pascha, and then we members of the choir sing the Pascha canons so we do not get to see what goes on.

Maybe it must all remain a mystery.

I will be satisfied with that answer too.

Dear Elizabeth Maria,

As to the Lamb: the Prosphoron need not be much larger than the Lamb you see on the Discos. Russians typically just shave off the sides of the main Prosphoron to make it into a square Lamb and then shave off the bottom of the Lamb in one thin piece before "sacrificing" the Lamb, i.e. cutting it crosswise on the bottom so it can later be broken into four pieces.

I have never been present at a Liturgy with a Chalice quite that large, but I have been to Liturgies with a Chalice too large to commune the Clergy. In those cases a sacred ladle is used to carefully transfer the contents of the large Chalice into two or more smaller chalices. The Clergy all commune from one Chalice, and then that Chalice and the others are brought out for the Communion of the people.

The problem I see with such a huge Chalice as displayed in the photgraphs is the logistics of moving it in the Great Entrance, getting all the way up there to tranfer the contents into small Chalices, and actually purifying it after Communion. I'm glad I'm in a small parish!

Fr David Straut

Christ is Risen!

Just returned from Athens, and can report that a few of the church-supply houses in Athens are stocking jumbo-sized chalices, mostly for Russian parishes. Incidentally, the prices in Athens have gone through the roof.

Fr. Serge

Dear Father,

Father Bless!

Could you please give us some websites from which we can browse to look at the Holy Chalices?

I have an inlaw who is a seminarian.

Respectfully in Christ,
Elizabeth

I'll check and see if I can find some web-sites for the purpose.

Fr. Serge