www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Presanctified liturgy-communion wine

What is the teaching of the Church regarding whether the unconsecrated wine used in the Presanctified liturgy becomes consecrated when mixed with the consecrated bread?
The bread itself is the Body (and Blood) of Christ. Is it not mixed with wine to soften it and make it more palatable, since it has dried up from the previous Sunday?

The Rubrics require it be consumed exactly the same as if it is.

I've had it explained to me by one of the moderators of this forum that the wine used in the Pre-Sanctified Liturgy becomes consecrated; it becomes the Precious Blood, through its contact with the particles of the Lamb.

A telling directive is in the Ruthenian Ordo, sections 246-47. The priest drops the IC particle into the cup (with the wine) as in the Divine Liturgy, but the priest and deacon communicate only from the Lamb, not the cup.

But this a late rubric introduced under latinization into the Slav books. This is an instance where the Greek books contain the older form, which is to communicate just as at Divine Liturgy.

Is this properly characterized as a "latinization"? Why only the "Slav books"?

What does the just promulgated RDL Pesanctified have?

Yes, the rubric was introduced some time after St. Peter Mohila who in his Euchologion commented: "But when you are drinking from the Cup or are giving it to the deacon, you should say nothing, for the Cup contains but ordinary wine and not the Master's Blood; it is used only for ceremonial reasons, as for the rinsing of the mouth."
Contradicting St. Simeon the Theologian wo stated: "Thus, that which is in the chalice at the Liturgy of the Presanctified is consecrated not by the calling down of the Holy Spirit and the sealing, but by the sharing and union with the life creating Bread, which is in truth the Body of Christ in union with the blood."

Because only the Slavs underwent a period of Latinization, with a leading hierarch (St. Peter Mohila) introducing Latinized theology and rubrics into the books

I could not say.

The above quotes are from Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church by Nicholas Uspensky translated and edited by Fr. Paul Lazor. I highly recommend this book.

I questioned the label "latinization" since it conveys to me something that is alien to the tradition, a development that is not suitable to the tradition. A western influence is not per se, automatically, a "latinization" by that criterion.

Note that St. Peter Mohila does not actually change the rubric but gives an explanation that points to why the rubric is superfluous or why its being dropped would reinforce his teaching. To the extent that this was accepted in Slav usage in general (as stated) also could be interpreted as a legitimate development and clarification of the intended theology. Application of the term "latinization" then should not be a prejudiced appraisal resulting from xenophobia; rather openness to good theology should be allowed and simply acknowledged, whatever the source.

What then is the true theology, St. Peter's or St. Simeon's, since they give different explanations with different results? I would note too that the rubric where the priest and deacon drink from the cup is in itself neutral; that they do not (while the people do) is, as I see it, the rubric denoting an underlying theology. This goes to answering the initial question:


Thanks for the reference.

I have not seen the RDL Presanctified liturgicon but expected that it would be used today for the service. Is it available anywhere online? If it follows the Ruthenian Ordo and Služebnik, and it indicates that the priest and deacon do not drink from the cup, is this a "latinization" that should be or should have been expunged from the liturgy?

Forgive my simplistic view, but isn't the "saved" lamb dipped prior to drying? so both elements are present from the beginning. Adding more wine would be like adding more water...no?

I'm not aware of that usage.

I don't have a problem with that idea.

Of course, this is because the wine in the cup has never touched the presanctified Lamb at this point, so the clergyman who will consume the gifts after Liturgy cannot drink of the "regular" wine in the cup. I think the OPs question is whether the Lamb sanctifies the wine after they have mingled in the cup, correct?

That is the original question. The directive of the Ruthenian Recension Ordo and the rubrics in the Služebnik do not have the priest and deacon receiving from the cup after the comingling as they would during a Chrysostom or Basil Divine Liturgy. At the Presanctified liturgy according to the Ruthenian Recension they do not receive from the cup but the people do.

I believe it's called intinction.

A few years ago the following was posted by the now Bp Jerome. Sory that it is a bit lengthy but it is worth the read for those with an interest:


From Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church by Nicholas Uspensky (pp. 147-151)

In the "Order of the Proskomedia" (of an unnamed Patriarch of Constantinople) [11th century], we read:

On the last Sunday, that of Cheesefare Week, at the celebration of the full liturgy, the holy breads are prepared in a greater than usual number. After communion they are preserved in a special tabernacle until Friday. The holy blood is not added to them, for on each of the fasting days, at the celebration of the Liturgy of the Presanctified, the chalice, into which the bread-previously consecrated, elevated, and broken-is placed, is prepared, and sanctified. And what would be the need of mingling together the holy blood and the divine bread? For the Liturgy of the Presanctified is celebrated only for the sake of the sanctification of the chalice.

Perhaps the Patriarch, by saying, ".at the celebration of the Liturgy of the Presanctified, the chalice, into which the bread-previously consecrated, elevated, and broken-is placed," and ".the Liturgy of the Presanctified is celebrated only for the sake of the sanctification of the chalice," had in mind several prayers or a particular prayer used for the sanctification of the chalice. Or perhaps he had in mind the sanctification of the chalice by placing into it of a portion of the presanctified lamb-such being the more frequent practice of the Greeks. Thus, in the "Report to the Emperor of the Ecumenical Patriarch Michael" we read:

According to holy tradition and teaching, the presanctified breads are consecrated on each of the Sundays of the holy days which we devote to the Fast. From the holy breads consecrated in this way, which are perfect, life-creating, and filled with every divine grace, a quantity determined by need and circumstance is set aside. To these breads, which are recognized as and truly are the very life-creating Body of our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ, not a drop of the divine blood is added; they are set aside without any sprinkling of the holy blood. And each day of the Fast, when the full liturgy is not celebrated, they are transferred from the chapel of the prothesis to the altar table in the sanctuary. No sacramental or consecratory prayers are said over them; the priest merely prays that he be made worthy of being a partaker of the holy mysteries set forth. Just before holy communion takes place, the deacons touch the holy chalices standing there (on the altar table) and invite the priest not to "Fill, master," as at the full Liturgy, but to "Bless, master." At the reply of the priest, "Blessed is our God, always.," the holy bread which had been presanctified and made perfect earlier is placed into the mystical chalice, and the wine contained in it is transformed into the holy blood of our Lord and is recognized as having been changed.

Leo Allatius cites the curious observations of an anonymous author regarding the celebration of the Liturgy of the presanctified. The author writes:

In many places I have observed how some priests, as they prepare to set aside the presanctified gifts for keeping, sprinkle them by means of the spoon with the Lord's blood and preserve them in that way, while others do nothing of the sort. Which practice is better? For us, as we try to compare spiritual things with spiritual, neither practice appears to be a deviation from the truth. Some, in their effort to preserve a certain portion of the presanctified and invisibly transformed blood, accomplish this through the sprinkling of the breads. Others, deeming that the use of the bread already transformed into the body of Christ is sufficient to change into the Lord's blood the wine with which it is united during communion-and by this means to sanctify those who partake of the mysteries-do nothing of the sort. They are content to reserve only the presanctified breads. Such is the situation as it appears to us. Since we observe, however, that the Great Church follows the second practice, we, too, should follow it as being far more accurate.

Constantine Harmenopoulos says that the anonymous author is John the Blessed, while Prof. I. Karabinov says that he is John, the bishop of Cythera, who died at the beginning of the thirteenth century. The anonymous author preferred the second practice because it was followed in the Great Church, i.e., the Church of St Sophia of Constantinople. The same order for communion is found in the previously mentioned "Order of the Proskomedia" of an unknown Patriarch of the eleventh century. It seems, therefore, that this practice is older than the custom of reserving and communing of the intincted presanctified bread. The church of Constantinople must have retained this practice even into the fourteenth century, otherwise Harmenopoulos would not have added the following scholion to the "Divine and Sacred Rules":

There is no need to sprinkle the presanctified gifts with the Lord's blood by means of a spoon in order to keep them for future use (so insists the blessed John very sternly), and in the Great Church we do not observe such a practice.

Apparently the custom of intincting the presanctified bread became the common observance in the fifteenth century. Symeon of Thessalonia, nevertheless, explains this practice only with such references as "in order to preserve the order of communion.and to be able to commune more people." He goes on to underscore the fact that ".that which is in the chalice at the liturgy of the presanctified is consecrated not by the calling down and the sealing of the Holy Spirit, but by contact and union with the Life-giving bread which, in truth, is the Body of Christ united with blood." To the question, "Is anything added to the presanctified gifts through the prayers?", Symeon answered:

"Nothing is added to the most holy presanctified gifts through the prayers said over them because these are perfect gifts. This is shown by the very prayers said at the presanctified liturgy. They are supplicatory and intercessory on our behalf. Through the dread mysteries of the body and blood of the only-begotten Son, the Father inclines mercifully towards us; by them we are prepared for a worthy entrance into fellowship with Christ.into the sacred chalice, wine and water are poured without the recitation of any prayer, so that, following the fractioning of the divine bread and after the particle lying upwards is placed into the chalice in the usual way, the contents of the chalice are consecrated by the particle. Then the priest, following the usual liturgical order, can himself communicate from both the bread and the chalice and can give communion to those in need of it: to the clergy in the sanctuary-in the customary way, and to the laity-by means of the spoon. And if we desire to give communion in the holy mysteries to someone outside the liturgy, we do it in the following way: taking a particle from the bread which has been reserved for this purpose, we place it into wine mixed with water-or frequently we use the dry, life-creating bread by itself, as being united with the blood. Here, however, at the liturgy of the presanctified gifts, as has been said, we do this (the placing of a particle of the holy bread into the chalice) in order to observe the (usual) order for communion, and because of the need to communicate a greater number of people. Thus, that which is in the chalice at the liturgy of the presanctified is consecrated not by calling down of the Holy Spirit and the sealing, but by the sharing and union with the life-creating bread, which is in truth the body of Christ in union with the blood."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 13th century Sluzhebnik online at one of the MP sites does include the entire Presanctified Liturgy, and after "The Presanctified Holy Things are for the Holy", it gives the rubric "and everything as normal". There is nothing about "not drinking from the chalice".

In that regard, it agrees with the Greek books; with the Romanian Liturgicon; with the Old Rite Sluzhebnik; with the pre-Niconian Kievan Sluzhebnik of Peter Moghila and with the early Serbian printed Sluzhebnik that was, for a time, online.

The only other source I have found that agrees with the rubrics in the modern Slavonic
editions, is the Roman Missal (of Trent).

Therefore, the circumstantial evidence certainly suggests that somewhere along the line,
in the 17th or 18th centuries, someone inserted that rubric (ie to partake of the Cup at Presanctified) based on the directions of the Roman Missal and the Council of Trent.


In Christ
Fr. John R. Shaw (now Bp Jerome of Manhattan)