www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Aliturgical days in the Great Fast

Admin,

I have no problem with Paschal Matins at night and in fact favor it. As you said it is a night service, in fact it is meant to start at night and climax as the sunrises. Unfortunately the only parishes that have sunrise services on Pascha are our Protestant brethren. I too am against the Vesperal St. Basil/Paschal Matins combo. Although I still am against Vespers in the morning. I think having Vesperal St. Basil's at 4:00 or after and Paschal Matins
at 7:00 or later. I think a good compromise would be to have Vesperal St. Basil's and then schedule Paschal Matins for 1/2 hour later. That way those who wanted to attend both wouldn't have to make two trips those who only want to attend one still have that option.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Combinations of services are common, but only in certain order.....

Vespers & Matins & 1st Hour

Great Compline & Matins

Vespers & Liturgy

3rd Hour & Liturgy

But, it is my understanding that whatever the combination, when liturgy is included, liturgy is always the ending, the last combined service. Eg. the service ends with communion, what could follow?

So the idea of having Vespers & Liturgy & Matins as one service, is the wrong order. An innovation, which is more in keeping with the tradition would be to have Vespers and Matins ending with the Divine Liturgy. Never Vespers & Liturgy & Matins. Divine Liturgy is always the summit, the end, the climax of the service, for which a vigil (Vepsers & Matins) is a suitable preparation?

You may be pleasantly surprised to find out that having Paschal Matins at 5 or 6 AM is common Galician/Western Ukrainian practice.

Also, Polish Roman Catholics will have an early sunrise Mass on Easter, with an outdoor procession with the Blessed Sacrament before the Mass. I wonder where they got the idea such an idea!

Dave

Admin,

What order would you follow for this Liturgy? Would be just be a "regular" Liturgy (three antiphons, etc.)? Would it include anything for Great Friday?

Dave

Nicholas,

The grouping of services together was a monastic innovation to facilitate their labor. The only combining of services the Typikon itself commands is the joining of Vespers and Vigil and Matins for Sundays and Vespers and Liturgy for Christmas, Theophany, Annunciation and Pascha.

The Vesperal Liturgies of Christmas, Theophany, and Pascha are celebrated in additon to the regular morning Liturgies to add extra solemnity to these Greatest of the Great Feasts. One can see a similarity between these Liturgies and the Latin Midnight Mass for Christmas and Vigil Mass for Pascha. You will also notice these are the only Feasts that have Royal Hours and Great Compline.

The order of Vesperal Liturgy, celebrated in morning or evening, followed by Paschal Matins is in accord with the Byzantine tradition. The idead that Liturgy must be last is rationalization after the fact, nor is it correct because Sext could porperly be celebrated after it and None, often prefixed to Vespers, is the last service of the liturgical day.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Deacon Lance,

On the eve of Christmas the Liturgy celebrated has its own propers, not the same as the ones for Christmas day. Similarly for Pascha. These combinations are somewhat different in this regard than Annunciation on a weekday of Lent. Annunciation on Saturday or Sunday is not celebrated with Vespers, it is celebrated in the morning. These other celebrations on the eve of the feast are indicated to be joined to Vespers.

T

Not a rationalization at all. It is profoundly theological, and is rooted in the fact that the Divine Liturgy, and the reception of holy communion, profoundly changes the character of the day. The Hours (as important as they are), are an extension of the Divine Liturgy, sanctifying the hours of the day (read the instruction to the new breviary in the Latin Rite).

The Saturday night vigil was the Church at prayer, from the evening before until the early morning, and this culminated in the Eucharist. The Hours we have, find their origin in the Church vigil, and still have this character. Hours, Matins, Vespers can be celebrated before the Liturgy, but never afterwards. The idea of adding Matins to the end of a Vespers-Liturgy on Saturday night, is a mistake.

We have entered the Holy Week of the Passion of our Lord, which should end with the singing at the Paschal Stichera, �Let us forgive everything because of the resurrection.� I hope that all of us can come through this week with this spirit of forgiveness and unity in our faith in our Lord�s resurrection.

Having said this, I must make some observations about Administrator�s views about liturgical service. Not wanting to misquote anyone, he does seem to argue for what one might call the �received tradition,� and likewise has mentioned the principle that we should not change anything unless all the Orthodox do so. I see some problems with this. It�s nice to enunciate general principles which sound reasonable, but �general� principles should not become �inflexible� and �unyielding� principles. I happily note that Administrator does recognize the midnight to midnight nature of the Lenten texts, but then says that the festive cycle goes from sunset to sunset. This is �generally� so, but there is also a tendency to extend the celebration of Great Feasts to the evening of the calendar day (midnight to midnight) itself. This is so with Vespers on the evenings of Great Feasts: e.g. Pascha - the Great Prokeimenon, and likewise, Christmas, Theophany, the Exaltation of the Cross, Pentecost, Ascension, Transfiguration, all of which use stichera from the feast itself plus a Great Prokeimenon on the evening of the Feast itself. This is normal for human beings - we like feasts! It is, therefore, too rigid to say that on March 25 at sunset it becomes March 26. This evening Divine Liturgy is that of Annunciation and not the Synaxis of the Archangel Gabriel (which commemoration is dropped anyhow).

I�ve seen too often the result of a too rigid application of principles - the priest who celebrated the Divine Liturgy on Friday evening during the Great Fast because it was Saturday, or the cantor I knew who refused to celebrate Feasts of our Lord on Sunday, as the Typicon wisely prescribes, because Sunday is the day of resurrection, which mystery should predominate. The central mystery of the Church is the Paschal mystery - we pass through death to resurrection - and this is the theme of every feast of our Lord. Thus Melito of Sardis sees the Paschal mystery as comprising everything from the Incarnation to the Resurrection. Nor should we be so rigid on the Annunciation, which, in every typicon - not my personal opinion - at all times is always celebrated (from Monday to Friday) on the evening of the day itself. To assume a morning Liturgy as normative for Annunciation (except on Saturday or Sunday) has no evidence in the typicon history.

Holy Thursday is a separate feast - the �tradition� here is that the Liturgy is celebrated in the evening, because according to the Gospels, the Lord revealed the mystery of the eucharist to the apostles at supper. It is true that this has often been transferred to the morning. On this point, Administrator and I are diametrically opposed, and I am not aiming here to �convert� him, but it is an important tradition of the Church that this mystery be celebrated in the evening, and the move to the morning is more like a deterioration of tradition rather than a �received tradition.� Not everything that happens in Liturgy is right. If we start saying that the sky is yellow, then we can do this for 40 years or 400 years, but it will still be blue. Vespers is an evening sacrifice of praise and we can call it a morning service for 40 years or 400 years or 4000 years but it will still be an evening service, from the very texts itself. My point is that a contrary practice does not nullify the authentic tradition, and just calling something �tradition� because we do it makes it a �tradition.� There must be an underlying solid reason. Our Lord condemned the Pharisees for substituting human �traditions� for divine tradition. I don�t want to get that dramatic here, but my view - which I am sure Administrator will not share - is that Vesper services should remain in the evening. Even before the Vatican II Council, the Roman Church realized that its Holy Week services were out of kilter and reformed them (in the 1950's). Would that we had the same wisdom and courage.

Another problem is the conformity with all the Orthodox tradition. I embrace the need for an ecumenical spirit, but I do think our Church has the right to exist and act for the pastoral needs of its people. Reasonable Orthodox willing to dialog will see the reason of this, and the more conservative groups who do not accept any reason whatsoever for the existence of �Uniate� churches will condemn us no matter what we do. Likerwise, to assume that we Ruthenians have no real understanding of what we are doing is more than a bit unfair. When the Administrator says �We in the Ruthenian Church, who are only beginning to restore what we have lost ... � I must ask him to clarify. Is the �received tradition� not the real �received tradition� and is only now beginning to be restored, or are we beginning to restore Holy Week according to more authentic principles than our �received tradition,� which should read �received practices.�

The Orthodox Churches, in fact, are more conservative about Good Friday Vespers than Vespers with the Liturgy for Thursday and Saturday. They at least kept the Good Friday Vespers in the afternoon, while putting the Holy Saturday Matins in the evening. I think our �received tradition� of having the Good Friday Vespers in the evening is better. This is simply the preferred practice, and it is here the Annunciation Liturgy should be celebrated. By the way, one should not confuse the burial procession at Good Friday Vespers with the procession at Holy Saturday Matins, they are different processions with different meanings. The Good Friday procession identifies us with Joseph, Nicodemus and the women who buried Christ in the new tomb, the Holy Saturday procession celebrates Christ�s victory over death - the shroud is carried during the singing of �Holy God - holy and Mighty - holy and Immortal!� The procession, by the way, only shows up very late in the Typica. The �Sabbas Typicon� does not mention it. Newer typicons, then, put the procession after the Divine Liturgy when the Annunciation comes on Good Friday, Orthodox as well as Catholic.

I don�t have time to rehash all the problems with the Paschal Vigil Liturgy and the Paschal Orthros. Suffice it to say the ideal would be to have the Paschal Vigil Liturgy at sunset, and Paschal Orthros at midnight. It is only at the Paschal Vigil Liturgy that the Resurrection Gospel is read! It is a beautiful Liturgy, carrying us from the darkness into the light of the resurrection, while the Paschal Orthros tries to re-create the experience of the women who discovered the empty tomb �before the dawn.�

A final word. The coincidence of Annunciation with Good Friday is not �weird.� but instead a return to complete normality. Note that Melito sees the Paschal mystery from the incarnation to the resurrection. The patristic tradition was that our Lord, being perfect, died on the same day he was conceived. The dating of the Annunciation, then, depends on the tradition that the date our Lord died was actually March 25! This last occurred on the Julian calendar in 1972, and on the Gregorian calendar in 1932. It cannot occur on the combined New-Old calendar arrangement.

May all of you have a joyful Pascha!

Another problem is the conformity with all the Orthodox tradition. I embrace the need for an ecumenical spirit, but I do think our Church has the right to exist and act for the pastoral needs of its people. Reasonable Orthodox willing to dialog will see the reason of this, and the more conservative groups who do not accept any reason whatsoever for the existence of �Uniate� churches will condemn us no matter what we do.

I'm not commenting on the questions of this thread but only commenting on the principle here mentioned by Father David.

Do we embrace the Orthodox tradition because we are ecumenical or because it is our tradition?

Should we follow our tradition to avoid criticism by the Orthodox? If that would be the reason that would be very sad. Should we not follow our tradition because it is our tradition?

It is not our calling to go our own way or to start a reform in the Orthodox tradition. We need to disabuse ourselves of the notion that because the Western Church has seen major reforms we need to unilaterally begin reforms in our Church. Any reforms in our Church should be done in concert with the rest of our tradition. Impatience (never a virtue) should not be a reason to start reforms unilaterally.

Father, bless!

Thank you for your post, much of which I find reasonable and well reasoned, even if I find myself in respectful disagreement with you.

I believe part of the reason that there has been so much comment and disquiet in our Church on the new book and rubrics for the Annunciation falling on Good Friday has been just this tone of its application.

For those who have not seen the book, I quote from its first page, which may be considered "a too rigid application of principles"?

Nick


From the first page of the new book:

"At the direction of the Council of Hierarchs of the Byzantine Metropolitan Church Sui Iuris of Pittsburgh, U.S.A., the text of this booklet has been prepared by the Metropolitan Liturgical Commission and the music by the Metropolitan Music Commission. It is the official text for use when Great and Holy Friday falls on March 25, the feast of the Annunciation, on which day Vespers with the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is to be celebrated no earlier than 3:00 p.m.

"This text and music has been approved by the Council of Hierarchs and promulgated by Metropolitan Basil Schott in accordance with the Sacred Canons. No other text is to be used on this occasion in the churches of the Byzantine Metropolitan Church Sui Iuris of Pittsburgh, U.S.A.

Nicholas:

The Council of Hierarchs is the liturgical authority for the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia. This authority is very plain in the Canons.
What is the difficulty with them excercising that authority?

That's not rigidity--that's what Saint Paul calls doing things "decently and in order."

"Where the bishop is, there is Christ."
St. Ignatius of Antioch

Prof. J. Michael Thompson
Byzantine Catholic Seminary
Pittsburgh, PA

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Deacon Lance:
--- snip ---
The Vesperal Liturgies of Christmas, Theophany, and Pascha are celebrated in additon to the regular morning Liturgies to add extra solemnity to these Greatest of the Great Feasts. One can see a similarity between these Liturgies and the Latin Midnight Mass for Christmas and Vigil Mass for Pascha.
--- end quoted post ---

No! They are quite dissimilar: The Latin Midnight Mass allowed one to receive Commumion with a minimal of fasting. The Byzantine Great Saturday Vespers Liturgy is the latest of the year (finishing at the second hour of the night, according to the Typicon), so that one has to fast all day in order to commune. And, that Vespers Liturgy is followed by a minimal meal, aftyer which total fasting resumes until after the Pascal Liturgy, but there was no more fasting after the old Latin Easter Midnight Mass.
And analogously for Nativity and Theopany.

Photius, Reader

Dear Professor,

The Hierarch is the competent authority, the canons are clear. You are quite right.

The authority is given to him, by Christ, to faithfully teach the Gospel, and to be the guardian of the Church's sacred Tradition. When he does so, there is good order, and the whole Church gives thanks.

Hierarchs (and the commissions they appoint) are not infallible, and can and do make mistakes. Then there is disorder, and confusion among the faithful.

Authority of Hierarchs in the Church is exercised "in" the Church, not "over" the Church. This is precisely the point on which the Orthodox and Catholic Churches are divided, the question of the exercise of authority. The bishop stands in the Church, and with the Church, as teacher, pastor, judge and father.

Yes, the Hierarchs have liturgical authority, but in the Eastern Churches, it is a deep conviction among all the faithful, that they too have responsibility for the liturgy. They too are its guardians and protectors, and the 'sense of the faithful' is also divinely appointed and can be Spirit filled.

This deep 'sense of the faithful' has protected the Eastern Churches from the kinds of autocratic and authoritarian reforms and innovations, that have caused so much pain and suffering in the Western Churches (Catholic and Protestant). The whole faithful are appointed guardians of this treasure, and have as sacred an obligation to faithfully hand on what they have received.

In the Eastern Churches, there can be no 'Vatican II' style reform, or imposition from above, as if the faithful have no ownership of their Liturgy, or have no understanding of their tradition. Would an attempt by the Eastern Catholic Churches to undertake a 'Vatican II' style reform, suggest that a Latin view of authority, rather than an Orthodox view of authority, is at work?

You may have brought us to the real point. As Nec Aliter has hinted, is the issue really about evening Divine Liturgies or rubrics during Great Week? ...or is it more fundamental? Is it about the Byzantine Catholic Church being Eastern Orthodox Christians at prayer, or Western Catholics at eastern forms of prayer?

What divides the Eastern Catholics from the Eastern Orthodox, is this theology of "authority" and the way "authority" is exercised in the Catholic Church, more than questions about the doctrines about purgatory or the immaculate conception. Appeals such as yours to "authority", are convenient, and they cause me to examine my conscience.

The Hierarch is called to teach the Gospel of Christ, and be a faithful guardian of the tradition of the Church. That is how he exercises his lawful and divinely appointed authority. If he should teach any other gospel, or abandon the Church's tradition, then great harm is done. It is not enough to appeal to "authority". You must appeal to the Gospel, and to the Church's tradition as well, because they form a single unity.

Appeal to all three, and I will be convinced, and you will have won the argument. If you cannot, and this liturgical exercise is an innovation, then we have a problem.

Nick

"Appeal to all three, and I will be convinced, and you will have won the argument. If you cannot, and this liturgical exercise is an innovation, then we have a problem."

Setting up one's self as judge over one's father in God is as un-Orthodox as one can get. This isn't about anything but the kind of personal choice that is mentioned in the last line of the Book of Judges: "And there was no king in Israel, and every man did according to his own conscience."

I find the reference to the "10th hour before noon" interesting, as it would seem to refer to a system of hours other than the traditional one. The Lenten Triodion of Mother Mary and Bishop Kallistos Ware indicates that, according to the typikon, the service of Vespers on Great and Holy Friday is celebrated at the tenth hour (which is proceeds to identify explicitly as 4 PM), then notes that the vespers is often anticipated. In the same place, it mentions the case of Annunciation and a Divine Liturgy following Vespers, but says nothing about making sure such a celebration is held in the morning.

So the Metropolitan named a time in accordance with the typikon (in fact, allowing celebration an hour earlier), the latter according to an unimpeachable modern Orthodox source. The only remaining question is whether the "received tradition" should override - not some liturgist's "sense of when the service should be celebrated" - but the Typikon.

So, out of curiousity (I can't get to it from here) - does Mikita really use a different system of hours, in which the tenth hour is before noon? And if so, exactly what time is that?

Yours in Christ, with prayers for peace in the whole world, and especially here,

Jeff Mierzejewski