Differences between Byzantine and Roman

[PilgrimMichelangelo]

I was referring to the doctrine and praxis of using leavened bread in the Eucharist. That is the topic of this derailment, is it not?

Whoops, missed that important tidbit.

Sorry. Yes, you are right about leavened bread for the Eucharist.

Carry on with the derailment.

 

[dochawk]

I was referring to the doctrine and praxis of using leavened bread in the Eucharis

Even that has an exception . . .

 

[Margaret_Ann]

WOW.

 

[PilgrimMichelangelo]

I assume the facepalm is in reference to the Anti-Catholic Constantinopolitan Councils…(say that three times fast. )

Yep. Pretty depressing. If you note, the Moscow Patriarchate was created only ten years after the Gregorian calendar was rejected by the Greek Church and a mere hundred years after the repudiation in Council against the Florence-Ferrara Union. Thus she was veritably birthed in anti-Latin polemics since her founding.

Perhaps ere the End we shall see reconciliation.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Even that has an exception . . .

Really? Is there a circumstance under which Eastern Orthodox Priest can consecrate Eucharist from leavened bread?

 

[dochawk]

The entire Armenian Apostolic Church

 

[Anesti33]

Once again… repeating myself here… I said the Eastern Orthodox are uniform in doctrine and praxis. The Armenians are Oriental Orthodox. The Armenians are not in communion with any (AFAIK) EO Churches because theirs is a more ancient schism. The Armenians are in communion with the Copts, the Syriacs, the Malankaras, etc. (Yet these aforementioned Churches, I believe, also use leavened bread in line with the EOC. Correct me if I am wrong.)

Among the whole landscape of apostolic Churches, yes, the Armenians are an outlier and an exception. But that wasn’t part of the question.

 

[tuffsmurf]

The Latin church is the largest of the apostolic Churches so I wouldn’t call unleavened bread an outlier.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

The Latin church is the largest of the apostolic Churches so I wouldn’t call unleavened bread an outlier.

Armenians are an outlier because they are only Eastern Church that uses unleavened bread. And they actually used unleavened bread before Latins did.

 

[Alexandria2020]

Is the Ruthenian (Byzantine) Church the main Byzantine Rite Catholic Church in the US? I mean in regards to the fact they are English friendly and have a more mixed Americanized group of people.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

WOW. I didn’t know that! When did the Latin Church switch from leavened to unleavened bread?

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

WOW. I didn’t know that! When did the Latin Church switch from leavened to unleavened bread?

@dochawk knows for sure… I think it was something around 6th century.

Main proof that Latin Church used leavened bread is that archeologists found things where Byzantines put their bread before consecration (I don’t know the name sadly) in Latin areas and hence we assume that Latin Church used leavened bread. It would definitely make sense because Latin Church indeed came from Greek Church by large. Liturgical language of Rome was Greek until like 3rd century (IIRC but I might as well be mistaken).

So what we can say for sure is that Latins used leavened bread, and hence we assume Latins did not use unleavened bread!

It is worth to note that main practices of Byzantine Rite came from Antioch before Constantinople actually came to hold influence. Therefore it isn’t that Greek Church held some supremacy over Roman practices … it was that practices we now find in Greek Church were once held by Latin Church.

 

[dochawk]

Is the Ruthenian (Byzantine) Church the main Byzantine Rite Catholic Church in the US?

I wouldn’t say “main” but “largest”. Even then, it might be the Ukrainians. I know we have more bishops, and are the only sui juris Eastern Catholic church in the US., (in fact, when not talking about the College of Cardinals, this actually leaves our Metropolitan as the highest ranking Catholic clergyman in the US . . .)

@dochawk knows for sure… I think it was something around 6th century.

Actually, he never quite manages to remember whether it was the 900s or the 9th century . . .

Use starts earlier than that, and both were in use when the decree came out. And it wasn’t about validity . . .

It is worth to note that main practices of Byzantine Rite came from Antioch before Constantinople actually came to hold influence.

Yes, what we know of as byzantine liturgy didn’t start in Byzantium/constantinople. Rather, Antioch practices displaced the local practices (I want to say they were Syriac, but am not sure why, so I won’t)

 

[Anesti33]

and are the only sui juris Eastern Catholic church in the US.

I am not sure what you mean, because all 23 Eastern Catholic Churches are sui iuris.

 

[Alexandria2020]

I am not sure what you mean, because all 23 Eastern Catholic Churches are sui iuris .

I think he means the Ruthenian church is mainly based in the US. And the Pittsburgh Archbishop William C. Skurla is the primate of the church.

When compared to other EC churches in US, most of them are based in another foreign country and have dioceses here in the US for the communities that immigrated over.

 

[Elvis_George]

(I want to say they were Syriac, but am not sure why, so I won’t)

From what I have heard, there was only one Syriac rite. The 2 started to split when the Syriacs in the Levant used the Anaphora of St. James while the Syriac in Mesopotamia and India used the Anaphora of Mar Addai and Mari. The 2 permenatly split when the East Syriacs established there own Catholicos and added many prayers and composed new Anaphoras to the Holy Qurbana. The West Syriacs split into Maronites, who were isolated, the Melkites, who eventually used the Byzantine Liturgy during the 10th century, and the Jacobites, who used the orginal Syriac liturgy but highly hellenised (e.g the use kyrie eleison and stamoen kalos. None of these words or phrases are used by the East Syriacs.) The East Syriacs had a more semitic flavour, the West Syriacs had a more hellenised flavour. The Maronites were stuck in between.

 

[tuffsmurf]

How can you be sure that it was the Latins who used leavened bread and not the Byzantines who used unleavened bread? During apostolic times all christians most likely used unleavened bread, since that was the bread used during the jewish passover.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

During apostolic times all christians most likely used unleavened bread, since that was the bread used during the jewish passover.

Let’s not start this conversation… it leads to nowhere at all. There is no way to prove which bread was used. Last Supper probably wasn’t held at time of Passover meal, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t have been used.

How can you be sure that it was the Latins who used leavened bread and not the Byzantines who used unleavened bread?

Well archaeologists found indication that Latin Churches used leavened bread. I am not saying Greeks couldn’t have used unleavened one. But it is clear that Latins used leavened bread (and not saying Latins couldn’t have used unleavened one before and after, but that’s somewhat less likely).

 

[tuffsmurf]

What indications was that? That Greek style plates for Sacred hosts etc were found is no indication at all, since we don’t know if the greek christians at the time used leavened bread.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

That Greek style plates for Sacred hosts etc were found is no indication at all, since we don’t know if the greek christians at the time used leavened bread.

Alright but those plates would have no use for leavened bread. They were used for unleavened bread.