Some Syriac churches do, it’s more customary with monastics present. The Daily Mass practice originates with monastic practices in both East and WestAre there Eastern Catholic churches that have daily Divine Liturgy? or is this simply not a custom? if no, does anyone know why? I’m just curious how this developed compared to the West, where daily Mass is normal. Thank you!
In spite of appearances to the contrary, the Mass is not offered “so the people can worship,” but to render to God the adoration and thanks due him, to make satisfaction for sin, and to obtain his grace. According to Catholic belief, this worship is rendered by Christ Himself, through the ministry of a priest, with or without a congregation.. . . there’s no sense of “we need to have daily Mass so the people can worship during the week.”
What about preparation for Mass? More isn’t always better. Mass prayered well is better, more minimalist is not necessarily better.In spite of appearances to the contrary, the Mass is not offered “so the people can worship,” but to render to God the adoration and thanks due him, to make satisfaction for sin, and to obtain his grace. According to Catholic belief, this worship is rendered by Christ Himself, through the ministry of a priest, with or without a congregation.
My point is that part of the rationale for having more Masses is that we believe the Mass to be efficacious like no other form of prayer; the more the better.
Oh, absolutely. But sadly there is sometimes a difference between the official doctrine and the reality.In spite of appearances to the contrary, the Mass is not offered “so the people can worship,” but to render to God the adoration and thanks due him, to make satisfaction for sin, and to obtain his grace. According to Catholic belief, this worship is rendered by Christ Himself, through the ministry of a priest, with or without a congregation.
I’m not sure if it really boils down to “the more the better.” Were that truly the case, the Church would ordain every breathing Catholic male and have them mutter “thisismybodythisismyblood” over the Elements every waking moment of their lives. In reality, of course, she only ordains those with sufficient education and piety, and canon law forbids priests to say Mass more than two or three times per day.My point is that part of the rationale for having more Masses is that we believe the Mass to be efficacious like no other form of prayer; the more the better.
For the Byzantine tradition, some penitential periods, such as weekdays (M-F) in Lent (excepting the Annunciation), the Divine Liturgy is not offered, however there may the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts (typically on Wed and Fri).Are there Eastern Catholic churches that have daily Divine Liturgy? or is this simply not a custom? if no, does anyone know why? I’m just curious how this developed compared to the West, where daily Mass is normal. Thank you!
I would point out that in the East, or at least in the Byzantine East, it is a traditional practice that a priest doesn’t offer Divine Liturgy without the presence of at least one other person.In spite of appearances to the contrary, the Mass is not offered “so the people can worship,” but to render to God the adoration and thanks due him, to make satisfaction for sin, and to obtain his grace. According to Catholic belief, this worship is rendered by Christ Himself, through the ministry of a priest, with or without a congregation.
My point is that part of the rationale for having more Masses is that we believe the Mass to be efficacious like no other form of prayer; the more the better.
How closely it’s followed these days I can’t say, but as a matter of ancient tradition, the same holds true in the Syriac Churches as well.I would point out that in the East, or at least in the Byzantine East, it is a traditional practice that a priest doesn’t offer Divine Liturgy without the presence of at least one other person.
And I would say the presence of a congregation is ideal in the Latin tradition - even if not required.How closely it’s followed these days I can’t say, but as a matter of ancient tradition, the same holds true in the Syriac Churches as well.
I think that goes without saying regardless of liturgical rite or tradition.And I would say the presence of a congregation is ideal in the Latin tradition - even if not required.
You’re right. Monasteries have daily Divine Liturgy which is more feasible since monks are celibates.As I understand it, there’s a tradition to abstain from marital relations for the day or so before receiving the Eucharist. This works fine when the Liturgy is only on Sundays and feast days, but** a daily Liturgy would be uncomfortable for the married clergy.**
True. I think there’s a balance to be found there.What about preparation for Mass? More isn’t always better. Mass prayered well is better, more minimalist is not necessarily better.
You’re right, there often is.Oh, absolutely. But sadly there is sometimes a difference between the official doctrine and the reality.
Quite right. Again, I think there’s a balance between quality and quantity.I’m not sure if it really boils down to “the more the better.” Were that truly the case, the Church would ordain every breathing Catholic male and have them mutter “thisismybodythisismyblood” over the Elements every waking moment of their lives. In reality, of course, she only ordains those with sufficient education and piety, and canon law forbids priests to say Mass more than two or three times per day.
I recall an anecdote of an Armenian priest sitting in tears at church on Christmas as he was unable to offer the Soorp Badarak and in walked a random Indian (Malankara Orthodox) who had never attended an Armenian liturgy but nonetheless the priest was ecstatic.How closely it’s followed these days I can’t say, but as a matter of ancient tradition, the same holds true in the Syriac Churches as well.
Why Wednesday? Sunday is the Day of Resurrection, and Saturday is the Sabbath. What is significant about Wednesday?I recall an anecdote of an Armenian priest sitting in tears at church on Christmas as he was unable to offer the Soorp Badarak and in walked a random Indian (Malankara Orthodox) who had never attended an Armenian liturgy but nonetheless the priest was ecstatic.
Anyway, as Bar Hebraeus records, the Syriac parish custom was Wednesday, Saturday and Sunday for the Qurbono during non-Lent, and then a priest was permitted to offer our equivalent of the pre-sanctified three times a week maximum.
In addition to the information laid out in this article on the Church’s history of fasting on Wednesday, it is also the memorial of Mary for the Syriac Church (that’s more of a “by the way” rather than a causative explanation, though).
For those that did not read the link provided by SyroMalankar, an excerpt from it has:Why Wednesday? Sunday is the Day of Resurrection, and Saturday is the Sabbath. What is significant about Wednesday?
Yeah, but that’s about fasting. I am asking why they generally have a Liturgy on Wednesday.