www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Byzantine/Eastern Rosary

I notice a number of blogs referring to the Hail Mary. Sorry to belabor the point but if we translate accurately from the Greek or Old Church Slavonic the prayer reads: Virgin Theotokos, Hail Mary full-of-Grace! The Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of Your womb for You have borne the Savior of our souls.

It is true that some of the Eastern Sister Churches use a form nearer to that in use in the Latin Church but none of the Sister Churches of Constantinopolitan tradition does except by way of arrant and aberrant latinization!

Just once in an East-West dialogue I'd love to NOT see something to the effect of:
West: "How about this?"
East: "Well, yes, but of course the proper name is this."
West: "But isn't it the same thing?"
East: "No no no, you Thomist! It only looks the same. Please stop being so hegemonic!"
West: "I was just trying to start a discussion."
East: "That's your problem--you keep trying to ensnare us in Latin forms!"
West: "Discussion is Latin?"
East: "We prefer to call it para-discussion."

I hear ya! Personally, I'm not much interested in outward forms, but the essence of things. The essence of the different versions of the Hail Mary is identical, so it's not much of a concern to me personally.

On the other hand, there is a definite distinction between the Eastern devotion to the Sacred Heart of Christ, on the one hand, and the Latin devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, on the other. Ultimately, both forms worship the whole Christ (it should be well noted). The difference is, from what I perceive brother Alex to be saying, is that the Eastern concept is analogical, while the Latin concept is metaphysical. What I mean is that the Eastern devotion sees devotion to the "Heart of Christ" as devotion to Christ himself by way of analogy, whereas the Latin devotion sees devotion to the "Heart of Jesus" as devotion to Christ Himself based on the notion that each and every "part" of Christ is metaphysically the whole Christ. This definite distinction means one should not (respectfully) confuse the two. The Eastern devotion is, in this case, really distinct and unique in relation to the Latin devotion.

Blessings,
Marduk

Dear Brother Marduk,

I like the way you define the distinction!

Liturgically in the Byzantine tradition there is mention made of Christ's Wounded Side, His Precious Blood etc. but the prayer is always addressed to Christ Himself. We also kiss the edge of the Holy Chalice following Communion and, in doing so, we reverence the Wounded Side of Christ by which we are nourished in Holy Communion.

And just as we pray to the Cross, so too we can pray to the Wounds of Christ, for example, and, in so doing, we are praying to Christ Himself.

Also, the Latin Church, from what I've read in the past, actually forbids the depiction of the Heart of Christ alone (i.e. not part of Christ Himself), even though one may indeed see depictions of the Heart of Christ that way in Latin Catholic circles, and sanctuaries.

Father Walter Kern, a priest of Buffalo, who has written on devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, has said that the contemperary devotion addresses Christ directly, rather than "O Sacred Heart of Jesus . . ."

However, Fr Isidore Dolnytsky wrote an akathist to the Sacred Heart of Christ (which I'm almost finished translating into English for a dear friend - would you like me to post it here when I'm done?). The refrain of that akathist is "Rejoice, O Sacred Heart of Jesus . . ."

That same akathist was used by one parish of the newly formed Russian Catholic Church which promoted the devotion. Metropolitan Andrew Sheptytsky was personally very devoted to the Sacred Heart and actually dedicated the Russian Catholics to the Sacred Heart.

Alex

Yes, please post it!

Well, it's hard to make much of that reading it in a vacuum, without knowing what "this" and the other "this" are; but I agree with you that a lot of discussions are pretty futile (I spend a lot of time on a Catholic forum). Honestly, sometimes I'm not surprised that some Orthodox take a rather dim view of even the official dialogues.

2lungambassador shows his hand: notice how reasonable West is and how persnickety East is! Just what we needed right now: another 2lungbadassador (sic!).

Congratulations: you managed to be both boorish and sophomoric.

Guys, it is the Feast of the Dormition of the Most Holy Theotokos tomorrow.

Let's remember that.

Alex

Blessed Feast, Alex; and, to all on the Julian Calendar!

We, on the Gregorian/Revised Julian, respectively, are close to the Beheading...

Beheading is what I was concerned about when I posted yesterday . . .

Thank you for your kind wishes.

In Christ and the Most Holy Theotokos,

Alex

You're welcome! It sure beats being a self-regarding, self-righteous prig! To think: all this on a blog on the rosary/prayer rule of the Mother of God. May I once again invite our Latin and Latinophrone fellow-bloggers to respect the Eastern character of this site. Simply put: we do not care a whit what the Latin view is on anything. Go in peace, brothers, but GO!

Happy Feast-Day, Reverrend Father in Christ!

Alex

Well, I definitely care one-half (at least) of one whit.

Ehm, Father, I would like to ask the following...

Were you not originally Latin? Don't you teach at a Roman seminary? The website for the Archdiocese of New York refers to you as a monsignor.

Please, this is not meant in any way a criticism of you. I am just trying to reconcile your statement with your having been canonically Roman Catholic at one time.

It just makes it difficult for me to take your comment seriously.