Commemeration of Pope in Liturgy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul_theApostle
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Paul_theApostle

Guest
I went to a Russian Catholic liturgy and heard them commemerate the Pope first in their list of Bishops to mention

Was wondering if all Eastern Catholics do the same thing with commemerating the Pope ?

Also do any of the eastern Cath.s have a patriarch? and would they still name the Pope first in their liturgy if they did? like say if the Orthodox churches united with rome would they commem the Pope before their own Patriarch?
 
Yes we do. We commemorate in this order:

Pope, Patriarch, Metropolitan, Bishop
 
With the Ruthenian Church, the pope is listed in a separate commemoration verse in the litanies, and first in the commemoration in the anaphora. We have no patriarch, and our metropolitan see is empty, so it goes straight from pope to our local bishop… for now.
 
Ive been to many Orthodox liturgies and they commem. their Patriarch then their archbishop etc

Im wondering if they were united with Rome,do you think they would commem the Pope also before their Patriarch?

Do you think they did this in their liturgy before the schism?

I know they have some dyptichs thing but i think thats different from litugy commem,not sure
 
Paul_theApostle said:
Ive been to many Orthodox liturgies and they commem. their Patriarch then their archbishop etc

Im wondering if they were united with Rome,do you think they would commem the Pope also before their Patriarch?

Do you think they did this in their liturgy before the schism?

I know they have some dyptichs thing but i think thats different from litugy commem,not sure
Click to expand...
I think the way it was done pre-schism was that liturgies performed under a patriarch (or perhaps even other high ranking clergy) would commemorate the other patriarchs (hence the importance of the diptychs), but that most liturgies would not. At my parish, we certainly do not even commemorate the Patriarch of Constantinople (who technically is our patriarch) in our liturgy, just the local metropolitan.
 
Aramis said:
With the Ruthenian Church, the pope is listed in a separate commemoration verse in the litanies, and first in the commemoration in the anaphora. We have no patriarch, and our metropolitan see is empty, so it goes straight from pope to our local bishop… for now.
Click to expand...
The parish I was attending in Tucson still commemorates the metropolitian, but adds of blessed memory.
 
Paul_theApostle said:
I went to a Russian Catholic liturgy and heard them commemerate the Pope first in their list of Bishops to mention

Was wondering if all Eastern Catholics do the same thing with commemerating the Pope ?

Also do any of the eastern Cath.s have a patriarch? and would they still name the Pope first in their liturgy if they did? like say if the Orthodox churches united with rome would they commem the Pope before their own Patriarch?
Click to expand...
Well, to answer your question about if the Orthodox and Rome United the Pope would not be commemorated first. The only Bishop who is commemorated in the Orthodox Church is the Primate and/or the Diocesan Bishop, the only time the Patriarch is commemorated would be if he were present at the service. Since we would only ever see the Pope (if he returned to Orthodoxy) as the Patriarch of the West, and not the head of the Church, and this will still be the same for Orthodox even if some sort of union is ever reached, so he would only be commemorated in those churches that would be under his direct Primatial See. 🙂

The sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Mother of God save us!
 
Paul_theApostle said:
Ive been to many Orthodox liturgies and they commem. their Patriarch then their archbishop etc

Im wondering if they were united with Rome,do you think they would commem the Pope also before their Patriarch?

Do you think they did this in their liturgy before the schism?

I know they have some dyptichs thing but i think thats different from litugy commem,not sure
Click to expand...
Rome “asked” that the Pope be commemorated in Eastern Liturgies of Churches that are in communion with him. I’m pretty sure in the event of reunification, it will happen that way as well.
 
OrthodoxJosh said:
Well, to answer your question about if the Orthodox and Rome United the Pope would not be commemorated first. The only Bishop who is commemorated in the Orthodox Church is the Primate and/or the Diocesan Bishop, the only time the Patriarch is commemorated would be if he were present at the service. Since we would only ever see the Pope (if he returned to Orthodoxy) as the Patriarch of the West, and not the head of the Church, and this will still be the same for Orthodox even if some sort of union is ever reached, so he would only be commemorated in those churches that would be under his direct Primatial See. 🙂

The sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Mother of God save us!
Click to expand...
Actually Josh I think your incorrect about the commemorating of the Patriarch, at least I know in the Serbian Orthodox Church the priest always commemorates the Serbian Orthodox Patriarch, then the Metropolitan, etc. We do not commemorate Patriarch Bartholomew during the Literuday as he is the Primus inter Pares (First among equals) of the Orthodox Patriarchs (Serbian, Greek, Russian, etc). However in the Greek Orthodox Church, they do commemorate Patriarch Bartholomew along with their local bishops, etc.

Second point is if unification were to happen, I could see them listing Pope, then the corresponding Patriarch, etc as a gesture of a newly unified Church as in the first millenium. However I don’t see this happening in a very very long time
 
Pravoslavac said:
Actually Josh I think your incorrect about the commemorating of the Patriarch, at least I know in the Serbian Orthodox Church the priest always commemorates the Serbian Orthodox Patriarch, then the Metropolitan, etc. We do not commemorate Patriarch Bartholomew during the Literuday as he is the Primus inter Pares (First among equals) of the Orthodox Patriarchs (Serbian, Greek, Russian, etc). However in the Greek Orthodox Church, they do commemorate Patriarch Bartholomew along with their local bishops, etc.

Second point is if unification were to happen, I could see them listing Pope, then the corresponding Patriarch, etc as a gesture of a newly unified Church as in the first millenium. However I don’t see this happening in a very very long time
Click to expand...
But if this wasn’t done in the first millennium, why do it now?
 
Vico said:
Weren’t the Diptychs read in the first millenium at some Divine Liturgies?
Click to expand...
Aramis said:
Still read in some liturgies. Specifically hierarchical divine liturgies.
Click to expand...
Aramis explained it correctly. My point was that hierarchical liturgies should commemorate the other patriarchs on the diptychs, but not normal liturgies. I’m not sure why commemorating the pope at every liturgy would or should be a requirement for union, when we don’t even always commemorate our own patriarchs. It just seems like a liturgical change which is unnecessary.
 
Cavaradossi said:
Aramis explained it correctly. My point was that hierarchical liturgies should commemorate the other patriarchs on the diptychs, but not normal liturgies. I’m not sure why commemorating the pope at every liturgy would or should be a requirement for union, when we don’t even always commemorate our own patriarchs. It just seems like a liturgical change which is unnecessary.
Click to expand...
It may not be strictly necessary, but I can see it from a practical standpoint. After a thousand years of schism, there might be some benefit for the faithful if the the liturgy, which is the focal point of our spirituality, highlights the (potential) blessed reunion on a weekly basis. It would be foolish to believe that the divine liturgy hasn’t organically evolved over the centuries. (Ask the Old Believers!) In the case of the Eastern Catholics, I think commemorating the Pope of Rome is simply a gesture which reflects the reality of our contemporary world; in a world in which the vast majority of Eastern Christians are not in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, some would say it is prudent for the eucharistic liturgy of those few who are in communion with Rome to proclaim this reality. As we Latins say…lex orandi, lex credendi - the law of prayer is the law of faith…we believe what we pray. When we celebrate the mystery of holy communion during the liturgy, why not express our faith in the communion of the Catholic Church in union with the Bishop of Rome?
 
twf said:
It may not be strictly necessary, but I can see it from a practical standpoint. After a thousand years of schism, there might be some benefit for the faithful if the the liturgy, which is the focal point of our spirituality, highlights the (potential) blessed reunion on a weekly basis. It would be foolish to believe that the divine liturgy hasn’t organically evolved over the centuries. (Ask the Old Believers!) In the case of the Eastern Catholics, I think commemorating the Pope of Rome is simply a gesture which reflects the reality of our contemporary world; in a world in which the vast majority of Eastern Christians are not in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, some would say it is prudent for the eucharistic liturgy of those few who are in communion with Rome to proclaim this reality. As we Latins say…lex orandi, lex credendi - the law of prayer is the law of faith…we believe what we pray. When we celebrate the mystery of holy communion during the liturgy, why not express our faith in the communion of the Catholic Church in union with the Bishop of Rome?
Click to expand...
Yeah, but coming from the Orthodox perspective where it’s unusual to commemorate anybody above your archbishop in a non-hierarchical liturgy, why would Rome ask us to commemorate the pope? This shows the radical difference in our ecclesiology, as the implication is that belief in Rome as the center of communion is some sort of central tenet of the Christian faith. The Orthodox do not view it this way, and I think it would be unrealistic to expect for the Orthodox to commemorate the pope at every liturgy if union should occur, since doing so would violate our very ecclesiology. I suppose that part of the problem is that we are probably imagining two different kinds of union.
 
Cavaradossi said:
Yeah, but coming from the Orthodox perspective where it’s unusual to commemorate anybody above your archbishop in a non-hierarchical liturgy, why would Rome ask us to commemorate the pope? This shows the radical difference in our ecclesiology, as the implication is that belief in Rome as the center of communion is some sort of central tenet of the Christian faith. The Orthodox do not view it this way, and I think it would be unrealistic to expect for the Orthodox to commemorate the pope at every liturgy if union should occur, since doing so would violate our very ecclesiology. I suppose that part of the problem is that we are probably imagining two different kinds of union.
Click to expand...
We can’t presume what Rome will ask in the event of reunion. I’m sure the respective synods of the East will address the issue with the Pope when the time comes.
 
Cavaradossi said:
Aramis explained it correctly. My point was that hierarchical liturgies should commemorate the other patriarchs on the diptychs, but not normal liturgies. I’m not sure why commemorating the pope at every liturgy would or should be a requirement for union, when we don’t even always commemorate our own patriarchs. It just seems like a liturgical change which is unnecessary.
Click to expand...
So the Eastern Orthodox practice is to begin with the head of the Church, being one of these that your Divine Liturgy is of?

Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem
Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Greek Orthodox Church of Constantinople
Russian Orthodox Church
Serbian Orthodox Church
Romanian Orthodox Church
Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Georgian Orthodox Church
Cypriot Orthodox Church
Orthodox Church of Greece
Polish Orthodox Church
Albanian Orthodox Church
Czech and Slovak Orthodox Church
Orthodox Church of America (from ROC)

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=601&pictureid=7742
 
Vico said:
So the Eastern Orthodox practice is to begin with the head of the Church, being one of these that your Divine Liturgy is of?
Click to expand...
I am confused by your question. Our rubrics for the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom don’t typically include a place where a patriarch is commemorated. At my Church, I’m pretty sure the only person we commemorate on a regular basis is our Metropolitan Isaiah (we don’t typically make mention of Patriarch Bartholomew or Archbishop Demetrios). I think my father’s Church, which is Antiochian, does something similar. If I recall correctly, they typically only commemorate Bishop Basil, not Metropolitan Philip or Patriarch Ignatius IV.
 
Cavaradossi said:
I am confused by your question. Our rubrics for the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom don’t typically include a place where a patriarch is commemorated. At my Church, I’m pretty sure the only person we commemorate on a regular basis is our Metropolitan Isaiah (we don’t typically make mention of Patriarch Bartholomew or Archbishop Demetrios). I think my father’s Church, which is Antiochian, does something similar. If I recall correctly, they typically only commemorate Bishop Basil, not Metropolitan Philip or Patriarch Ignatius IV.
Click to expand...
Oh. So the commeration does not begin with the primate of Greek Orthodox Church of America (H.E. Archbishop Demetrios), but of Denver, so that would be H.E. Metropolitan Isaiah.
 
Vico said:
Oh. So the commeration does not begin with the primate of Greek Orthodox Church of America (H.E. Archbishop Demetrios), but of Denver, so that would be H.E. Metropolitan Isaiah.
Click to expand...
Typically that has been my experience. I would assume that if we were commemorating H.E. Archbishop Demetrios, we would put him first, and if we were commemorating H.A.H Patriarch Barholomew, he would get put first, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard Patriarch Bartholomew being commemorated.

If they were commemorating all of the patriarchs listed in the diptychs, as I think they do at certain hierarchical liturgies, I think they would be placed in order of seniority (i.e., Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, etc.). Some churches have a different ordering for the patriarchs/archbishops after the patriarchs of those four ancient sees (which have their ranking defined by Canon 28 of Chalcedon), but it doesn’t seem to be a big deal. Presumably, in the case of union, Rome would be commemorated first.

Again, I’m not against commemorating Rome at liturgies like this where it’s normal for the patriarchs of other churches to be commemorated, just the idea that the pope of Rome should be commemorated at all liturgies being performed, even when it is not customary to commemorate other patriarchs or even one’s own patriarch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top