|
1 members (1 invisible),
514
guests, and
119
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,521
Posts417,614
Members6,170
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,941
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,941 |
A fairly obvious borrowing from the Gospel of Luke; it is the gesture of the Publican when praying the same words. "And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. "
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 976
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 976 |
Jeff, There are likely many instances in which the practice as it is differs from that of the official texts. But, I don't think the people are imitating the priest here but rather doing what they have been taught, most likely in religious education. I don't think people in the nave of the church could see the priest striking his breast. At the prayer in the old Latin Rite (I don't know the name, probably the confiteor as you mention) the people also strike their breast at "mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa." T Originally posted by ByzKat:
Of course not - but attend. Fifty years after our bishop asked for, and was denied, permission for the PRIEST to strike his breast thrice rather than bow at "O God, be merciful to me, a sinner", etc., I still see priests doing this in some places - a fairly obvious borrowing from the Tridentine practice at the Confiteor. I have had trained, "old school" cantors insist that this is our Rite, and that a bow at this point is WRONG. The people's devotional actions may vary widely, but if they are in imitation of our priests', then they should be in accord with our own Rite - hence my question about the places where our old practice differed from the official books.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 856
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 856 |
I agree in a sense, but let's stick to the priest/cantor issues, then. If the bishops promulgated the official Ruthenian books that Nick was calling for, without the "local adaptations" requested by our bishops, many of which were Latinizations - would Nick, Kapusta and company support them, even if they differed from the "old Slavonic High Mass" of the 1950's?
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674 |
Originally posted by ByzKat:
If the bishops promulgated the official Ruthenian books that Nick was calling for, without the "local adaptations" requested by our bishops, many of which were Latinizations - would Nick, Kapusta and company support them, even if they differed from the "old Slavonic High Mass" of the 1950's?
Jeff Yes. 100%.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 17
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 17 |
Jeff,
I wasn�t born in the 1950s so I can�t say how much the liturgy then was like the official liturgy in the books published by Rome. I would have to say yes because the Bishop Pataki liturgy is horrible.
I do know that the liturgy used to be the same whenever we went to my cousin�s Orthodox Church and it was the same in the Ukrainian Catholic Church we attended a few times. Now we are different from them. Why?
Kapusta
|
|
|
|
|
