|
0 members (),
466
guests, and
73
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,511
Posts417,525
Members6,161
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,595 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,595 Likes: 1 |
Originally posted by Edward Yong:
........
BUT... back to the topic - I'm trying to figure out two things:
1) There was one cardinal who didn't stand for the Gospel, receive communion or even budge from his seat until the very end - I wonder who it was.
2) There was one fellow in the cardinal's chasuble and red skullcap, who stood with the Eastern Patriarchs during their bit. My guess is that it was Sch�nborn of Vienna, as he's Ordinary for all Byzantines in Austria.
Ed - can't answer question 2 - though your suggestion makes sense Question 1 - well I can't identify WHO it was but as he was seated before the Entrance Procession I presume it was a rather mobility challenged Cardinal who had probably insisted on being present. I'll see if I can get any more information this week when I'm out there Anhelyna still hoping I will see the unknown one, who I will be able to ID clearly because of the head covering :p . Can you imagine the Challenge - " I challenge you - you are the unknown Byzcath member  "
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15
Global Moderator Member
|
|
Global Moderator Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15 |
Originally posted by Our Lady's slave of love: still hoping I will see the unknown one, who I will be able to ID clearly because of the head covering :p . Can you imagine the Challenge - " I challenge you - you are the unknown Byzcath member " Anhelyna, Will he be wearing a red paper bag or nested bags, a la tiara? Many years, Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15
Global Moderator Member
|
|
Global Moderator Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15 |
Originally posted by christiansteve:
Do you (or anyone) know who it was that was actually there from the Coptic Church? Steve, The representative of Pope Shenouda was His Excellency, Barnaba El-Soryany, Bishop of the Coptic Orthodox in Italy. Many years, Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 212
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 212 |
Originally posted by Edward Yong:
1) There was one cardinal who didn't stand for the Gospel, receive communion or even budge from his seat until the very end - I wonder who it was.
2) There was one fellow in the cardinal's chasuble and red skullcap, who stood with the Eastern Patriarchs during their bit. My guess is that it was Sch�nborn of Vienna, as he's Ordinary for all Byzantines in Austria.
Good morning Ed, I believe that the cardinal who was pre-seated may have been Cardinal Andrzej Deskur. Cardinal Deskur has been wheel-chair bound for many years. I do not know if he was well enough to attend the obsequies, but if he were, that would have been him. Concerning the identity of the caridnal who stood among the patriarchs, Cardinal Sch�nborn is a possibility, but also possibilities are Cardinal Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, Cardinal Scheid of Sao Paulo, and Cardinal Glemp of Warszawa. Each heads an ordinariate in their respective countries for Catholics of eastern Churhces who are without their own bishops. Peace, Charles Peace, Charles
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,595 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,595 Likes: 1 |
Originally posted by Irish Melkite: Originally posted by Our Lady's slave of love: [b] still hoping I will see the unknown one, who I will be able to ID clearly because of the head covering :p . Can you imagine the Challenge - " I challenge you - you are the unknown Byzcath member "
Will he be wearing a red paper bag or nested bags, a la tiara?
Many years,
Neil [/b]OOOOOOPS   Trust you for casting that bit of doubt in my mind, Neil . I have to be honest and say that that thought had never crossed my mind. Ummmmmm well ...... ummm...... yes.... hmmmmm Now that will certainly bear thinking about. OK - tell you all - I'll let you know when I get back as to whether it was red [ scarlet of course ] or just ordinary paper bag type brown. Anhelyna
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15
Global Moderator Member
|
|
Global Moderator Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15 |
Originally posted by Edward Yong:
1) There was one cardinal who didn't stand for the Gospel, receive communion or even budge from his seat until the very end - I wonder who it was. Edward, I believe Charles is correct. The Cardinal was indeed seated in a wheelchair in advance of the entrance of the funeral procession and, I fairly certain, was wheeled discreetly into the Basilica prior to the exodus. 2) There was one fellow in the cardinal's chasuble and red skullcap, who stood with the Eastern Patriarchs during their bit. My guess is that it was Sch�nborn of Vienna, as he's Ordinary for all Byzantines in Austria. I hate to be cynical but I don't see the average Latin Cardinal stepping forth and identifying himself with our hierarchs on the basis that he has a pro forma connection to the East through an Ordinariate. I can only find one photo online of the grouping and it's a high angle shot from above that precludes any facial view and only suggests a sturdy frame and bald or balding head. From their photos, I'd be inclined to rule out the SA and Polish Cardinals, but I can't say it much resembles Schornborn either. I also wonder why there was no Dies Irae, this being a Requiem Mass... The Dies Irae was chanted near the beginning - possibly as they processed in - I heard it from the other room and got the chills that I only associate with the terrible beauty of it and the Kaddish. Many years, Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,964
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,964 |
Originally posted by Edward Yong:
[QUOTE]... There was one cardinal who didn't stand for the Gospel, receive communion or even budge from his seat until the very end - I wonder who it was.
I believe it was William Cardinal Baum, the former Archbishop of Washington in the 1970s. He has served in the Curia for the last 25 years and has been in poor health for some time. Cardinal Baum is one of the three eligible conclave voters who were appointed by Pope Paul VI. The others are Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Sin of the Phillpines, who will not attend the conclave due to health. John Pilgrim and Odd Duck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 121
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 121 |
I am sure it was Cardinal Ratzinger who was standing among the representatives of the Eastern Churches.
Does anyone know the identity of those representatives? A couple of links were given here previously, but I couldn't find individual names.
Stojgniev
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,252
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,252 |
Originally posted by Miserere Mei, Domine:
Edward,
I thought I saw Cardinal Ratzinger, the Mass's main celebrant, standing with the Eastern hierarchs. (I'll have to check the videotape.)
No "Dies Irae," because this was a Missa Normativa (Novus Ordo Mass), not a Tridentine Mass. And, if I do say myself, an excellent example of how beautiful (and sublime) a Novus Ordo Mass can be (despite the criticism about the Sistine Choir). That seemed to be the general consensus of the secular media and even President Bush. The Roman Rite in all it's post-Vatican II glory! And again, simplicity is the hallmark of the Roman Rite: contrast the Eastern hierarchs' rich vestments (which I love) with the chasubles of the Cardinals, which were tasteful, but subdued. I may be wrong, but I believe this was something Pope John Paul II had called for in the Roman Rite. (Then again, it may have had something to do with providing 120+ chasubles).
One notable difference in liturgical practice between Rome and the American church (and probably, I'm guessing, other English-speaking churches): We tend to employ hymns at the entrance, offertory, communion, etc. rather than the antiphons. If they are good music, I kind of like the hymns....
Martin Dear Martin, I agree tht the Mass PPVI is beautiful when done following the Roman missal. I am encouraged after seeing Cardinal Ratzinger offer the Pope's funeral mass at how well my parish priests celebrate the mass. Our choirs, though they mean well and work hard, don't have the proper direction they need. I hope my Bishop gets to work on liturgical music. Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15
Global Moderator Member
|
|
Global Moderator Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15 |
Originally posted by stojgniev:
I am sure it was Cardinal Ratzinger who was standing among the representatives of the Eastern Churches. Stojgniev, No, Cardinal Ratzinger remained behind the altar throughout the prayer. I had a link to a photo of the group (which I'm now unable to locate), but it was at too high an angle to identify the cardinal, other than that he appeared to be balding and sturdy in build. Many years, Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 351
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 351 |
Dear Friends:
I am not positively sure, but I think that the prelate who was standing to the side during the service was the Greek Catholic metropolitan for the Romanian Church.
He was wearing a modified eastern version of western choir dress for a bishop (black cassock with violet piping & buttons).
defreitas
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15
Global Moderator Member
|
|
Global Moderator Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15 |
Originally posted by defreitas:
I am not positively sure, but I think that the prelate who was standing to the side during the service was the Greek Catholic metropolitan for the Romanian Church.
He was wearing a modified eastern version of western choir dress for a bishop (black cassock with violet piping & buttons). Jose, You are absolutely correct. See his photo on the website of the Metropolia [ christusrex.org] Many years, Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 335
Former
|
|
Former
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 335 |
[Edward Yong posted:
"Ahem. The Copts are Henophysites, not Monophysites. They condemn the Monophysites too."
This is their semantic distinction. We consider them Monophysites, as witnessed in the Service of Orthodoxy on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, in which Diodoros (sp?) (who is a saint in the Coptic Church) is among those anathematized as a "Monophysite". That service has the same lists up to the time of Photius versus Nicholas for Byzantine Catholics as for Orthodox ... or at least it did until Vatican II; certainly some changes must have been made since then in the Catholic version because St. Gregory Palamas had been on the Anathema List in Catholic versions, but John Paul II decided that Gregory is a Saint, after all.
I rather like the Copts (and Ethiopians) and have attended divine services in their Churches a number of times. But, we can not change what we call a group, IMHO, (especially if that group's name is in our service books) because they decide that's not who they really are.
Photius
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517 |
Dear Photius, Actually it was Paul VI (or rather his ministers during his pontificate) who restored Saint Gregory Palamas in the Anthologion. Nicely done book in 4 volumes.
You write that "we can not change what we call a group, IMHO, (especially if that group's name is in our service books) because they decide that's not who they really are". Well, I suppose that depends on several factors. Normally, one calls people what they wish to be called, and that is of course subject to change (women often take their husband's surname; men seldom take their wives surname; converts to this or that Church often take a new name, those newly-made citizens of somewhere occasionally take a new name, and so on). The same is often true of groups - I can think of some terms that certain groups in society at one time used of themselves but would nowadays find offensive (to offer an immediate example, I was brought up to refer to persons of the feminine gender as "ladies" until or unless one or another acted in such a way as to demonstrate that the word would be misapplied; these days one says "women". Don't ask me why; I don't know). And on, and on.
As to the Monophysites, I actually agree with you on the doctrinal point - and "non-Chalcedonian" is not only a mouthful but a bit unconvincing. Shall we call the Mohammedans "pre-Nicene"? However, rather than irritating people unnecessarily, there are neutral terms available.
Reading back what I've just written, it's a bit muddled. Unfortunately, so is the point involved. That's life with linguistics!
Incognitus
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 335
Former
|
|
Former
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 335 |
Dear Incognitus:
Many thanks for correcting my error on which Pope restored Saint Gregory Palamas in the Anthologion.
> Normally, one calls people what they wish to be
> called, and that is of course subject to change
Certainly I follow that norm in secular life, using the politically correct jargon de'jour, as I oft consult for Fotune 50 companies.
And, I generally use the term "Non-Calcedonian", but reverted to the tradional term in my short post mostly because I thought it clearer there. However, some terms have a lineage that makes them more exact.
"Negro" is more exact than "African American" as the latter could include, say, Copts (I know a Copt woman who likes calling herself an "African American" both for the shock value and to drive in a point) and I once heard someone contrasting the white minority in Uganda with the "African Americans" in Uganda (of whom, I'm sure, there are scant few).
"Non-Calcedonian" would seem to include Nestorians as well as all manner of modern sects, would it not? So, is not "Monophysite" simply more exact?
As for calling people what they want to be called, you seem to share my penchant for "Mohammedan"!
BTW, since I referred to the Service of Orthodoxy, do you know how it has fared in the post Vatican II Byzantine Catholic world?
Photius the Atrocious
Reading back what I've just written, it's a bit muddled. Unfortunately, so is the point involved. That's life with linguistics!
Incognitus [/QB][/QUOTE]
|
|
|
|
|
