www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Ukrainian Catholic omophorion

What is the origin, background and evolution of the small omophor? Is it specifically mentioned in any Archieratikon? Is it specifically noted in the Ruthenian Recension Archieratikon?

As per the evolution of the small omophorion I can offer little more than conjecture. Traditionally, the bishop is vested in the small omophorion at the end of the Great Entrance, just prior to the start of the Anaphora. It is less cumbersome and less likely to get in the way duriung anaphora, ordinations, etc. I do not have the Ruthenian books so I cannot speak to that issue either. I did serve as a subdeacon at St. Vladimir's Seminary for 3 years, which follows the Russian books on the hierarchical liturgy. So, at very least, the small omophor would be sanctified by the antiquity of its use.

Thanks for this information. I've asked in order to try to get beyond conjecture. Tradition is often what we are doing because it is, of course, correct; antiquity is what took place prior to one's lifetime.

Exactly,and I took that to be your meaning. I did dig around in my little 'library' and unfortunatly I still cannot cite you to a good print source. Just trying to reassure that this wasn't 'make it up as you go along liturgy!'

The small omoforion was simply the great omoforion folded in half. Somewhere in my files, I have a photocopy of an engraving of St. Mark of Ephesus depicted wearing the omoforion exactly in this manner. A contemporary example of this would be Bishop John of Caracas (ROCOR):

[Linked Image]

Since he is well-versed in Old Rite practices, I will presume that this is done by Old Rite hierarchs.

Dn. David

If I get a chance, I'll ask my friend who is a member of the Church of the Nativity in Erie if he remembers what Bishop Daniel, of blessed memory, did. I know that from all of the pictures he did not wear the Sakkos as for the omophor I do not know because all pictures show him wearing the Great Omophor.



Some information I found from Orthodoxwiki [orthodoxwiki.org]:

It's interesting that the Greek style of the bishop on the left in Deacon David's example has the two halves parallel to each other while the Russian style is longer and crossed in the middle. In the following link the two omophoria on the left are Russian (Patriarch Alexei in the middle) while the bishop on the right is Antiochian with a more Greek-style small omophorion: http://www.antiochian.org/assets/asset.php?type=image&id=6885

Re: Chtec's post. Yes, that makes sense (the photo is helpful as well)

The small omophorion is not mentioned in the Ruthenian Archieratikon published in Rome in 1973 (1975) by the Congregation for the Eastern Churches.

Neither are there any rubrics [directions] for the omophorion to be removed for example at the reading of the gospel. The omophorion goes on at the vesting and appears not to be removed until after the Divine Liturgy when the bishop divests.

However, some of the UGC bishops make use of the small omophorion and in regards to it follow the practice of their Orthodox brethren.

So it's roughly half the length?



Mark of Ephesus

Died June 3, 1444 (age 52) Constantinople

Canonized 1734, Constantinople by Patriarch Seraphim of Constantinople
link [en.wikipedia.org]

So, 15th or 18th century; but when was the engraving made?

Thank you for this information.

That is understandable. My own opinion: Why not keep it simple and embrace our own (Ruthenian Recension) liturgical patrimony?

Here is a scan of the engraving of St. Mark:

[Linked Image]

Sadly, I forgot to write down the title of the book from which I copied it; I think it was a book about the Council of Florence.

Regardless, the folded omoforion is clearly visible.

Dn. David

This clearly shows the omophorion worn as "folded in half." There is still the question of when the engraving was made to determine the witness to the usage. He is designated as O Agios which would be no earlier than 1734 if one goes by the date of his canonization which was referenced in a previous post.

BUT isn't the present small omophorion just one piece?

Everybody seems to be working under the assumption that there was uniformity in the design, cut and wearing of vestments prior to the 19th century. Big assumption. While there may have been a consensus about the general appearance of vestments, given the absence of patterns, the range of sewing skill among seamstresses, and the types of materials available, wide variations can be seen not only between Churches, but between regions within Churches. Look in any museum catalogue and you'll see plenty of examples.

Not everybody; my presumption is just the opposite:


There is some historical evidence of how the omophorion looked and how it was worn. The evolution of the small omophorion from the great -- that's what I'm being told, and that as a convenience along with its incorporation into the ritual of the liturgy -- and its stylization, from the form in the engraving to the present, is the present focus of my inquiry.