www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Question about the Great Entrance

Why is the Great Entrance (at least in my experience) associated with a lot of solemnity?
At this point the bread and wine are just that, bread and wine. I'm not complaining, but it seems that there is probably something symbolic that I'm missing-too bad I no longer have my copy of Casiblas or Wybrew anymore.

In Christ,

Michael

Michael,

Aside from the fact that the bread and wine are just that at this point, we can consider a number of symbolic reasons for the solemnity. First, the bread and wine will become the body and blood of Jesus. Second, the process recalls the triumphant entry of Jesus into Jerusalem. Third, this is the time when the general intentions for the Liturgy are made public: those for whom we pray, the deceased, the sick, other special intentions.

Edwerd, deacon and sinner

Slava Isusu Christu!

I was told by an Orthodox priest that the Divine Liturgy supernaturally makes present, by the Power of Holy Orders which the presbyter holds, the entire Mystery of Salvation from the Creation of the Universe to the Birth of Christ, his life, death, Resurrection, His Ascenscion all the way right down to His Return and Glorious Reign. So I would imagine that this whole question of "why such solemnity?" would be foreign to the Eastern mindset regarding the Divine Liturgy; since the Sacred Synaxis is a Supernatural Event uniting the Mystical Body of Christ with It's Head in His Life historically and supernally bringing the People of God into deeper energetic union with the Divine and Holy Trinity.

The Latin notion of the Consecration at the Institution Narrative is another foreign thing to the Eastern Christian since the Divine Liturgy does not just grant us an experience of His Passion and the fruits thereof, but the whole Life of Christ, the culmination being the reception of the Holy and Divine Mysteries. The Bread and Wine are changed by the Holy and Life-Creating Spirit at a time unknown to us, although some have said the epiclesis et al, but we know better, we just know that when we receive it we are receiving truly and substantially His Body and Blood and the whole fruits of His Divine Life. So, again when we approach the Holy Things, the Divine Liturgy, and we want to abbrieviate it because of the so-called irrelevant phrases and ektenias - that the Divine Liturgy is a Superantural Event which stops time and presents us the Events of Christ's Life in It's totality; we at that moment the priest says Blessed is the Kingdom... to the Dismissal in the Glory of the Supernatural Life of the Trinity, in His Kingdom, we are given the real and objective opportunity to participate in the uncreated divine Energies in the fulness of the Holy Spirit and transferred to the Temple of God in Heaven and made participators in the Worship of God with the Most Glorious Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary queen of Heaven, the Communion of the Saints, with the Choir of Angels and the good spirits. Dissecting the Divine Liturgy is blasphemy, abreviating it, for the purpose of removing so-called redundancies et al, is blasphemy; nothing should detract from our Worshiping Him with our best and with the best of the things of the created earth and with our time. This call to return to the Early Church is heresy, for it tells the Holy Spirit that He did not guide the Church, that it was governed and led by men alone. To becon to an earlier time in Church history as a model is to subscribe to the heresy of archiologicalism and the apostasy doctrine whereby the Church gradually was corrupted and fell away and now needs to be fixed by "experts"; or it stems from the lazyness and spiritual apathy of the age to find an easier path; when the Path of the Early Church and the Fathers was one of extreme Penance and Mortification, long Fasting, and deep and grand asceticism; which is something these "quoters" of the Early Church deliberately set aside to further their liberal and heretical agendas of so-called "reform," "restoration" and "modernization".

Sincerely in St. Basil the Great,


Robert

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: Robert Horwath ]

Michael --

Keep in mind that the holy gifts have alreeady been ritually prepared, prayed over, censed and veiled by the time of the Great Entrance. The process of sanctifying the holy gifts has already begun ... before the start of the public portion of the divine liturgy .... when the priest is at the altar of preparation. That process of sanctification comes to its culmination during the anaphora, but it begins on the altar of preparation, and it is therefore appropriate to reverence the holy gifts that are in the process of being sanctified.

Brendan

Dear Robert,

As always, you write so eloquently and well. You are a bit conversative, but since I am too, that's O.K. . . .(kidding, kidding).

Your final point about the early Church and going back to it is well taken.

There are liturgical reformers even in the Eastern Church who subscribe to the model that the Church began with short services and then moved into longer ones, adding all kinds of stuff that was developed by monks and other people "who had nothing better to do but pray."

History tells us this perspective is wrong.

The early liturgies of the Church were quite long (Clementine, James and others) and St Basil and then St John successively shortened them.

Even the word "liturgy" is contained in the Acts of the Apostles to describe their prayer services that were not done "spontaneously" and as they were moved.

Now that I am getting a little bit older, I appreciate the long prayers, fasts, in short, the "works" in terms of our spirituality.

The more we talk to our God, the more will we become disposed to hear Him when He speaks to us.

Alex

Slava Isusu Christu!

Dear Alex,

I appreciate your comments. The process of fully becoming Eastern takes time. An Orthodox mindset about the Mysteries also takes much prayer and study. Many people only have the Latin, or latinized, books and so go from there. It is important to build up ones spiritual and theological library on our Eastern Christian faith and to speak with good Father Confessors and Monastics if one can do so, to have guidance in the aquisition of an Orthodox consciousness. It takes a lifetime to get a little taste of the fulness and the richness of our Tradition; my goal is to strive to learn more and more each day and especially do the Office and Typika at home so I can be filled with the Holy Spirit - oh, and we can't forget the riches of the Jesus Prayer in regard to that aquisition. So, again thank you.

Many Years to You, brother Alex!

In the Theotokos,


Robert

Dear Robert,

Many, many blessings to you, Servant of Christ and thank you for your teaching and insights in this regard!

I think that we of the Eastern Church must guard against the Latinizations that have crept into our tradition, both Catholic and Orthodox. And I think that "Latinisms" and the tradition of the Latin Church are two different things.

From the Eastern Catholic perspective, the Latin Church has its own spiritual culture that is legitimate and historical.

But "Latinizations" are misappropriations of western ideas that, when fused with Eastern ones, produce a bad religious hybrid.

Again, the Orthodox Church has had to struggle with this as well. Latinization affects us all, whether we are in communion with Rome or not.

But you are right. The more we live our faith as contained in the Horologion and the Jesus Prayer and the Divine Liturgy, the more the Spirit will transfigure us and lead us into all truth and grace.

May all Saints of Alaska protect you always!

Alex

Alex --

Yes, of course we also have the latinization problem. It mainly comes from the fact that the Western culture and mindset has, over the course of many centuries, become dominant throughout Europe, including the Orthodox part of Europe -- particularly among the so-called "educated" classes. Many practices crept in as a result of this trend. Some are okay, some are distorting. And there is much disagreement about what is right and what is wrong.

To take a case in point (now, I know I may be opening a can of worms here, but...), choir singing, which is now ubiquitous in Orthodoxy (particularly here in America) is not Orthodox, in terms of the Orthodox tradition. But, gee, there are a lot of Orthodox Christians who *think* it is Orthodox, simply because Orthodoxy has been doing it with choirs for several centuries now. I have even seen scandalous remarks in church bulletins advising the faithful not to sing too loudly during the liturgy lest people are prevented from hearing the choir ( !!!

Brendan

Slava Isusu Christu!

Good point about latinization. When must not deride our Latin brothers and sisters and make them feel like their traditions are somehow corrupt or essentially damaged. Latin traditions in a Latin Church are fine, but they should remain with that tradition to preserve its identity.

I liked what you said about many Orthodox dealing with latinization as well. I did have the opportunity to speak to a Russian priest who told me that the so-called latinizations in the Russian Church were actaully genuine Orthodox praxis and expression; he was referring to the Petrine (Peter the Great) influence on Russian Orthodoxy. He said that the Orthodox Church has always reserved the right to baptize the culture in which it resides, or sacredotalize things from other cultures, and that includes things that have been considered Latin, especially in art and chant. He even has a confessional in his Church. He said that it is wrong to say that the developments in the liturgical and artistic life of the Russian Church following Peter the Great are not Eastern. I just said, "Ok, Father" and asked his blessing. I did not agree, but it is an interesting side note.

Many Years!

In Christ and the Theotokos:


Robert

Dear Brendan,

Yes, excellent points (are you getting tired of hearing that?) and you'll have to teach me to make more effective use of the faces as you do.

We in your former Church have the additional problem of people who are hyper-against what they perceive to be Latinizations.

I brought in an Orthodox prayer rope to show my religion class when a teacher yelled, at the top of her voice, "You are Latinizing our children, our future . . .!"

Sheeesh! Get a life, people!

I also got into trouble for warning the kids about cults. I was told I was spreading religious intolerance.

I think I'll stick with this Forum. I'll live longer, at least.

And for me, "true Orthodoxy" also includes the use of Ukrainian in the liturgy, the Old Calendar and the full 12 meatless dishes on Nativity Eve.

Either we're Orthodox or we're not!

Alex

Dear Robert,

That is a most interesting issue you raise!

There are many local cultural variations in the practice of Orthodoxy and I've read about traditions in Ukrainian and other contexts that have disappeared either voluntarily or otherwise.

One of these was an old celebration of the "10th Friday" essentially a liturgical celebration of the icon, "Do not weep for me" which some might call the Pieta.

It developed during the Kozak wars with the Turks and Tatars and seemed to express the anguish of many mothers who lost their children in battle.

There is an Akathist in honour of this Feast which is quite beautiful, created in the Eastern Catholic Church, but used in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church as well.

Other devotions that were borrowed from the Ukrainian Catholic Church by the Orthodox included a number of Akathists that were adapted for Orthodox liturgical use.

The Immaculate Conception devotion among the Orthodox is by far the most interesting.

God bless,

Alex

Slava Isusu Christu!

I have often found it very interesting that not a few traditionalist Orthodox Churches have acquired their own particular latinizations. I find this interesting in light of their diatribes about our, and our SCOBA Orthodox friends as well, lacking Grace et al. Since their thesis is: it is the Latin/Western Christian Mindset and theological paradigm, that according to them is the part and parcel of Greek Catholicism and "modernist Orthodoxy", that is the cause of the supposed lack of Grace in our Mysteries. Maybe they subscribe to what my Russian priest friend believed about Orthodoxy's relationship to culture. I do know that I subscribe to quite a number of Orthodox email forums, thanks to my brother John and I guess the thing to talk about now is the shpeal going on with ROCOR and their retired Metropolitan being assaulted, captured, by Bishop Michael and Canadian police et al. And we thought we had problems. Well, Eastern Christians have always been very, very passionate about their religion

Your brother in Christ,


Robert

Robert notes above:

"This call to return to the Early Church is heresy, for it tells the Holy Spirit that He did not guide the Church, that it was governed and led by men alone. To becon to an earlier time in Church history as a model is to subscribe to the heresy of archiologicalism and the apostasy doctrine whereby the Church gradually was corrupted and fell away and now needs to be fixed by "experts"; or it stems from the lazyness and spiritual apathy of the age to find an easier path; when the Path of the Early Church and the Fathers was one of extreme Penance and Mortification, long Fasting, and deep and grand asceticism; which is something these "quoters" of the Early Church deliberately set aside to further their liberal and heretical agendas of so-called "reform," "restoration" and "modernization"."

I've got a logic problem with the basic premise that looking back at the earliest Church is heresy because it implies that the Holy Spirit's past over-the-generations inspiration was immutable and forever and, to go back is to deny these past graces.

If this logic were valid, then we would never be able to discard any practices or anything from the past, ever, no exceptions. And our liturgies, practices, etc. would continue to get longer and longer as we move through the eons.

It also implies that the Holy Spirit could never have the power to inspire anything that didn't jibe with the practices He inspired in the past. Are we really that "conservationist" that we would hogtie the Holy Ghost and forbid Him to inspire as He wills?

What makes me very uncomfortable is the concept that being "liberal" or willing to look at and investigate our history is in-itself heretical. Sure, if we just do stuff willy-nilly and make changes for the sake of change, then we're being really stupid. But to automatically equate "liberal" with "ill-will" is the worst type of judgementalism.

And to judge folks who make changes as "heretical" is more appropriate for the political arena rather than the ecclesiastical. It is difficult to equate the "I know what is correct (=what I want) and any change unauthorized by me is, by definition, heresy and worthy of eternal damnation in the fires of hell (-the penalty for heresy).

I would hope that we would not allow our political personages/personalities and inclinations to be used as a weapon against those who irk us because of their own unique perspectives.

If one doesn't like "liberals" or "conservatives", then one can just say so. If one doesn't like changes in liturgy or practices, then just say it. But don't label those who disagree, and then attribute their perspectives to one or another political orientation.

One can be a political social liberal -- of the Christian Socialist type: do WHATEVER is necessary to help people-- feed 'em, clothe 'em, teach 'em, shelter 'em and the community should make sure that we do what we can to help. But liturgically, one may not like changes, i.e., comfortable with what we have. What overarching label could one apply to this person?

Labels are dangerous because they are mere generalizations that cannot, by definition, apply to individuals.

Blessings! (And Happy St. Nicholas Day!!!)

The Syrian Liturgy, for all its greatness (I love this Liturgy more than any other), lacks processions. Usually processions around the church are held on important feasts and for certain occasions. There is a procession at the beginning of the Liturgy when the priest and deacons go around the altar while the hymn of Mar Severios is chanted (interestingly enough, this hymn is very, very similar to your hymn "O Only Begotten Son and Word of God"), and this is very powerful in its effect on me. There is supposed to be/an option for a procession with the Evangelion, but this is often omitted. So we don't often get processions. I have no question, really, I just wanted to say how cool the Little and Great Entrances are. Having never been to a Byzantine Liturgy, I'm sure I'm missing out on something which I know only in theory, but hopefully I will fix that one day. But I just wanted you to know that this guy thinks they are pretty cool.

[ 12-07-2001: Message edited by: Mor Ephrem ]

Slava Isusu Christu!

Dear John:

My context was and is those who use the Early Church to justify liberal agendas and laxity in discipline, are heretics and gravely wrong.

All Catholics have a right to judge a spade a spade. Again, I do not believe that my posts are geared toward anything but promoting a genuine expression of our Holy Faith.

In Christ,


Robert