www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Prosphora traditions vs. pre-cut loaf

A follow-up post. Re: the prayer in the Russian and Greek texts for the Liturgy after the people sing, "We have seen the true light..."

I was visiting an Antiochian Orthodox parish's webpage and it apparently is used in the Antiochian text as well:

http://www.saintandrew.net/liturgy_chrysostom.htm

Now the Melkite version on this site does not have it:

http://www.holycrossmelkitechurch.org/ECPA/Worship/John.html

Is it perhaps just an omission from the web text? I had always thought the Melkite and Antiochian Orthodox recensions were practically identical. Anyone know?

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

I believe they (the Antiochean & Melkite) recensions are the same - although the Melkites have also have a recently (in Church terms) re-edited version of the Liturgy which is VERY abbreviated. They can "get through" Divine Liturgy in less than an hour!

So the omission could be part of their "low mass" form of the Divine Liturgy.

A blessing upon them, but I couldn't live with it.

Herb

Dear Friends,
Christ is born! Glorify Him!
When I celebrate the Sunday Divine Liturgy at each of my parishes, I always cut the particles from five prophora.
Due to the number of communicants, I always cut additional particles from the five loaves in order to have enough. (I use admittedly smaller loaves.) Whatever is left over goes into the Antidoron. (I also have a large loaf cut for Antidoron because we have a large number of people in attendance.)
I have never used pre-cut particles and I never will.
Peace in Christ,
Fr. Vladimir

When I served in an OCA parish, the priest asked me to order a poster of the proskomedia prayers. I think it was available from Light-N-Life, but it might have come from Brookline. Anyhow, it was the Greek Orthodox version of proskomedia, along with a picture of the seal, and instructions for what to do when throughout proskomedia. The priest wanted it as a memory jogger, and thought it would help visiting priests when he was away. It required fairly bright light in order to be read, however.

BTW, the pew liturgy books in the OCA (depending on whether the parish follows OCA recommended materials) also include the proskomedia prayers, which helps the parishioners, I think, even though they don't participate directly.

Byzantine Daily Worship (Melkite) and the Byzantine Book of Prayer (Ruthenian) both have the texts for the Proskomidia as well.

Still awaiting a reply from anyone familiar with the Melkite liturgy on that prayer "O Lord, wash away with your precious blood..." as to if it is taken by them.

Just wondering. The texts for the Melkite, Ruthenian and Ukrainian Catholic liturgies appear not to have it. Some possible explanations:

1) It is a later insertion in the Liturgy. This doesn't seem possible since the Melkite Church entered communion with Rome in the early 1700's. That would be a very late insertion indeed.

2) I've come across one Greek text which states "if there are no communicants expected" that prayer is to be taken before Communion. Perhaps this is something that got lost somehow when frequent Communion began in our Churches?

3) This prayer was suppressed much like the rite of Zeon was suppressed. Perhaps somehow the idea of putting unconsecrated bread into the Precious Blood was considered improper?

4) The use of pre-cut prosphora made it impractical to figure out which particles were not consecrated and which ones weren't.

I don't know the answer. These guesses can't all be right. If our Churches have lost this tradition, though, shouldn't we consider restoring it?

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Lance,

I have heard this over and over for years but I have never seen this substantiated by any academic. Since the BCC does not apparently keep any other noticeable pre-Nikonian usages in vestments, liturgical gestures, most of the language (the "Izhe" being an exception), and liturgy as a whole, why would this have survived?

Can you tell me which scholars are of the opinion you cite above? I will truly appreciate it.

I hope to see you again before I go back to school, surgery went well and I am feeling fine, just encumbered a bit.

Tony

Further, if memory does not fail me, the official text out of Rome uses the Nikonian "Izhe."

Check your sluzhebniki guys.

I received one reply that suggested the suppression of the "Wash away, O Lord, the sins..." prayer in Eastern Catholic liturgies might have been connected to the prohibition of the use of the sponge (the sponge is mentioned in connection with this prayer). I have a vague recollection of reading about this prohibition (early 18th century?)--anyone else know about this? Has the prohibition of the use of the sponge been officially lifted? I doubt it's considered a real problem anymore, however.

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

If memory does not fail me the sponge was suppressed at the Synod of Zamość along with other normal Byzantine usages.

I presume that this was abrogated but you will still find that many BC priests do not use the sponge.

Tony - you are correct. The Synod of Zamosc essentially did away with the sponge among a host of other established liturgical traditions.

I bought a priest friend two sponges I ordered from Greece and he uses them all the time now. When a Ruthenian bishop who will remain unnamed came to this priest's parish he flipped the sponge out of his way like a dirty rag.

In the OCA Liturgikon, the deacon recites the prayer 'Wash away, O Lord, the sins of all those remembered here, by Thy precious Blood; through the prayers of Thy saints" before the priest turns towards the people with the chalice to intone "O God, save Thy people and bless Thine inheritance."

Also, not mentioned previously, the deacon recites "Having seen the Resurrection of Christ", "Shine, shine O New Jerusalem" and "O Christ! Great and Most Holy Pascha" etc. while he holds the diskos over the chalice immediately before placing the remaining particles from the diskos into the chalice and reciting "Wash away, O Lord..."

In terms of Slavonic texts, the Mohylian and Kyivan texts of the Sluzhebnik in the early 1600s are explicit about including these prayers. Other Orthodox sluzhebniks from before, during, and after this period do not include this specific rubric or text.

Do you know which Orthodox sluzhebniks do not include this text and rubric? A Ruthenian Greek Catholic once told me that the Mohylan texts are to be considered the most pristine for Ruthenian usage.

Dear Fr. Vladimir,

It is clear from the rubrics that all communion is from the Lamb and not from the commemorative particles, even for Catholics, as Lance points out above. Given that, in order to accomodate a greater number of communicants a larger Lamb is required, speaking strictly from a rubrical position.

With respect,

Tony

Tony,

Arranz, Taft, Mateos, and Petras (as far as I know)and more importantly the Commission that produced the 1942 Ruthenian Liturgicon.

From the Circular of the Eastern Congregation to Ruthenian Ordinaries, Prot. #1219/28, Rome, Sept. 10, 1941:

"1. In the first place, the existance of a distinct Ruthenian Recension has been established. This Recension is older than the recension commonly called the vulgate (i.e. Russian), because the Ruthenian books had not been corrected (as the vulgate books were) on the basis of the Greek Editions printed at the beginning of the 17th century. The Ruthenian Recension, then, inasmuch as it reflects older texts, deserves to be preferred" (Ordo Celebrationis, an English Translation Pg 112).

Now the Eastern Congregation may have many failings but its scholarship was never one of them and the Orthodox have relied on them for the correction of their own books. I assume had they not established that we had an authentic Recension they would have required us to use the Vulgate.

In Christ,
Lance

PS email when you feel well enough to go out

Tony wrote:

Actually, my take on all this is that:

1) Eastern Catholics (Melkite, most Ukrainian, and Ruthenians) have lost the prayer ("Wash away, O Lord...") and the practice of putting the unconsecrated particles into the Chalice after the Communion of the people. Apparently this was suppressed in such a way to affect even the Melkite Liturgy.

2) That most Eastern Catholic priests consider these commemorative pieces to be consecrated along with the Lamb and these are served to the faithful along with the pieces from the Lamb or other pre-cut pieces.

3) I don't believe any of this has to do with an original Ruthenian recension. I'm open to evidence to the contrary...but that it's in all Byzantine Orthodox texts and missing in all Eastern Catholic texts (including the Melkite) seems to indicate that it was suppressed.

Perhaps I'm speaking prematurely here. This is more of a "hunch" and I can't say this is proven. I'd welcome other info that would show why the Melkite, Ruthenian & Ukrainian recensions do not have this prayer.

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com