The guy with the bluish vestments is the deacon. He never crosses his vestments in a way similar to the 2 subdeacons. I did think about that but I did notice that the deacon of St. Elias didn’t do it.
It is not difficult, but of course you need the familiarity. Celebrant bishops would bless the people with the trikiri and dikiri. The Pope might have no familiarity on how to actually do that. Even if he was coached prior to Liturgy, he will definitely miss his cues.
The Pope is still a Latin Rite cleric. He is still the Bishop of Rome, which is a Latin Rite Church.
Technically he can give himself biritual faculties at his whim. But as mentioned, it comes down to familiarity. In Pope John Paul II’s childhood, Ukraine was part of Poland. He probably attended a lot of Divine Liturgies in his life. Contrary to internet rumor, he never acknowledged wheher his mother is actually Ukrainian Catholic even when he was directly asked about it.
Yes, that was true in the 1st Millennium. Subsequently, it’s still technically true, but let’s call a spade a spade and not confuse it with a club. The development of the papacy from what it was in the 1st Millennium to the behemoth that it is today seems to me to be due to the absolute commingling of the the concepts of “Patriarch of the West” and “head bishop” of the Church universal. One can make all the distinctions in the world, but it still doesn’t change the situation on the ground, and that despite Benedict XVI having put the title “Patriarch of the West” in abeyance.
I think the point is, as acknowledged above, that the Pope is omni-ritual by definition.
Yet, he himself while serving as Bishop of Krakow is listed in the Apostolic Succession as Administrator of several Eastern Catholic Eparchies under Communist oppression, and as Pope became one of the greatest advocates of the Eastern Churches to occupy the chair of St. Peter in centuries.
Poland has always had strong Orthodox/Byantine influence. Also with the moving border over the centuries, they’ve had Eastern Orthodox and also Eastern Catholics who became part of their territory, like the Ukrainians. It is not surprising that one Poles would be familiar with Eastern Christianity. Krakow is close to Ukraine and Slovakia, traditional Orthodox territory.I think the point is, as acknowledged above, that the Pope is omni-ritual by definition.
Yet, he himself while serving as Bishop of Krakow is listed in the Apostolic Succession as Administrator of several Eastern Catholic Eparchies under Communist oppression, and as Pope became one of the greatest advocates of the Eastern Churches to occupy the chair of St. Peter in centuries.
Coincidence?
There are a protodeacon, and two deacons communing in that viedo. The extra long deacon’s orarion says to me he’s a protodeacon.
I’ve been in a number of Divine Liturgies at a local parish with their OCA Bishop present where another priest was the celebrant. The bishop likes to be in the kliros singing, as does that parish priest. They let the visiting priest celebrate.
Oh, I see Fr Moses addressed that…
I am still interested in this if someone knows what this difference comes from.
Maybe they take 3 sips anyway without tilting the chalice. I know most would tilt the chalice to have that visual component.
Those aren’t subdeacons, save the one on the end (the one who does not commune). See 1:11…
IMO, EVERY bishop (not just the Pope) is omni-ritual by definition. Every bishop of a particular Church is bound by the divine law of charity to provide for the ritual needs of members within his jurisdiction. Suppose that an Eastern bishop has Latin members in his See. He provides for their needs according to their Rite. According to Catholic doctrine, the bishop is the highest office of sanctification in the Church universal, and the celebration of the Liturgy falls under that purview. If the Eastern bishop chooses to celebrate with his Latin-Rite members for which he has made provision according to the Latin Rite, there is nothing to stop him from doing so aside from his own familiarity with that Rite. Canon law restricts only pastors of parishes in the celebration of the Mass/DL/HQ according to Rite. i am not aware of any canon limiting bishops. I’ll change my mind if you can provide such a canon.
Oh, I see Fr Moses addressed that…
Hi Fr Moses. Glad to see you here again!
I am still interested in this if someone knows what this difference comes from.
A lot of wisdom here, dear brother. This is an oft mentioned model (with merit) for a reunified Church.
A bishop owns the Liturgy in his Church. Prior to all these standardizations, a bishops would celebrate the Liturgy in some way in his Church, while another would celebrate in another way (how different may vary). The liturgy of a paritcular Church is part of the tradition of that particular Church, so there is really no reason why a bishop would have the right to celebrate Liturgy that is not the tradition of his Church. Does the Coptic Pope celebrate Liturgy the Armenian way?
Except that the 1st milenium has the Bishop-Patriarch of Antioch celebrating both the Byzantine and the Syrian liturgies…