www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West RE: Western Rite Orthodoxy

On another Forum entirely, an Orthodox priest mentioned that Eucharistic Adoration was put forth as the only Veneration and Icon that was allowed by an Iconoclastic Council in the East before the 7th EC.

Anyone have a better reference?

Dear Dr Eric,

Yes, indeed, the Orthodox Church has ALWAYS affirmed the Adoration of the Most Holy Eucharist - but ONLY within the context of the Divine Liturgy - not in extra-liturgical devotions.

That iconoclastic council did say a number of Orthodox things, including the affirmation of the veneration and direct invocation of the Saints!

Alex

Dr. Alex,

I believe the priest's point was that only Eucharistic Adoration was allowed, extra-liturgically. And that Icons were idols.

Thank God for St. John of Damascus!

[Linked Image]

I was under the impression that Eucharistic Adoration was instituted after the local Latin Council of Lyons.

Dear Orthodox Pyrohy,

What is the attitude of Western Rite Orthodox to Pyrohy?

Fr. Serge

I can only tell you what I have heard, from a Serbian monk, and the promise that others know the history as well, is that part of the reason that extraliturgical Eucharistic adoration has been so thoroughly scrubbed from Orthodoxy is this historic replacement of Adoration for Icons, in some places, during that horrid time of purgation in the east.

But this remains hearsay for I cannot site a text for you.

M.

Dear Friends,

The Adoration of Christ in the Eucharist is part and parcel of Orthodox liturgical piety WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF the Divine Liturgy alone.

When answering Protestant charges during the Reformation period, there was one Orthodox Confession that made this point clear.

Eucharistic Adoration as is done in the West does not obtain in Orthodoxy.

In the EC tradition, such Eucharistic Adoration is popular. Pat. Joseph Slipyj did a Holy Hour before the Eucharist in the Church of St Neil at Rome daily.

Personally speaking, there is nothing wrong with it and a lot that is right with it!

Alex

Yes, but please note that he went to a RC church for this and did not institute it in any of the Ukrainian churches in Rome.

Why then would there be at least an oral record of extraliturgical adoration in the east, I wonder?

Mary

I'd like to thank Fr. Serge for proving every assertion I made about his debating techniques. All over the place, except on the topic he raised: whether there were any difference between Western Rite Orthodoxy and "Uniatism."

IF the Western Rite Orthodox were genuinely comparable to "Uniatism":

--The U.S. government would have brought some pressure to bear in encouraging Roman Catholics to join Orthodoxy.
--The Orthodox Church's missionary order would have emphasized [newadvent.org] the "political advantages which must accrue to the...(Roman) Church from union with (Orthodoxy)."
--Some RCC bishops would have agreed to take RCC flocks into communion with Orthodoxy.
--The Orthodox Church would have allowed them to continue their tradition of enforced clerical celibacy (but later curtailed this outside their home country).
--The Orthodox Church would have promised these RCs, at their request [ewtn.com], the right to maintain their full Mass and sacraments "eternally the same and unchangeable."
--The Western Rite would then call themselves, "Roman Catholics in communion with Orthodoxy."
--Despite this promise, before long their churches would be adorned with iconostases; they'd chant Akathists and Moliebens as their paraliturgical services; and the Byzantine form of sacraments would replace Western ones.

Since Fr. Serge issued the horse laugh that there was any distinction, the burden of proof should be on him to demonstrate that alleged similarity, not on me to disprove it.

But I have. There's certainly no profit in the discussion (nor any challenge).

-------
Western Orthodoxy Blog [westernorthodox.blogspot.com]

Curiously, it has not led there in the case of the WRO. The Orthodox Church said, in order to be truly Orthodox, you must accept Orthodox theology and praxis: it laid out a very few, understandable elements it felt necessary to that end. There has not been a single addition since 1958. Maybe that's another difference between "Uniates" and Western Rite Orthodox: "Uniates" were promised their services would be left untouched from their Orthodox form but ultimately ended up with spoken Mass, no iconostasis, Roman forms of confession, and the Rosary; WRO were asked to make a very few changes at the inception (not even all these were required for those who joined ROCOR), and no further changes occurred. Of the two, I'd take the latter.

-------
Western Orthodoxy Blog [westernorthodox.blogspot.com]

The Melkites have a service for Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament [westernorthodox.blogspot.com].

-------
Western Orthodoxy Blog [westernorthodox.blogspot.com]

I would recommend obtaining a copy of Pere Louis Bouyer's Liturgical Piety, published by the University of Nore Dame Press in 1955.

If I may attempt to summarize what I see are his main points on this topic...

The issue with Eucharistic Exposition and Adoration is not so much the act itself even separate from its liturgical context, but the shift it represented (as developed in the Baroque period) away from a focus on the Sacrifical Action of Christ in and through the Church's Divine Liturgy, and towards an almost exclusive focus on His Divine Presence in the sacramental Mystery. This resulted in the decidely distorted development in which adoration outside of the Mass was viewed popularly as the height of individual and corporate worship, rather than the Mass itself.

To my mind, there is nothing untoward in an Eastern Christian adoring Christ present in the Holy Gifts outside of the context of Divine Liturgy, so long as it is (as Bouyer points out) seen as a way to prepare for Divine Liturgy, rather than a replacement for or something that even supercedes Divine Liturgy.

I will only point out in fairness to the West that the East has also had its share of exaggeration in its own liturgical and devotional developments. For an interesting read on this, see Hugh Wybrew's The Orthodox Liturgy and focus on the development of the Great Entrance over the centuries.

At the same time, I find it interesting that Exposition seemed to grow in popularity at around the same time that naturalism in (should I simply refer to it as religious art?) Western iconography was at its zenith. To me such naturalism lead organically to Reformation iconoclasm (which at its root was a fundamental denial of the sacramental character of the icon). Would it not follow somehow that the growth of Exposition in popular devotion satisfied the need for a far more sacramental iconography that was not being met during the era in question?

I am not saying, of course, that the Eucharistic Gifts are "iconographical"...

God bless,

Gordo

Some of Father Bouyer's books from his Notre Dame period are available from Servant Publications in Michigan. Good luck finding this one!

Fr. Serge

Bless Master!

Ahh...but I know where there is a secret stash!

Gordo

PS: Are you enjoying your chocolates?