B
Byzman
Guest
Does attending Vespers for the Vigil of Sunday fulfill the obligation for Sunday in the Byzantine Metropolia of Pittsburgh?
- Status
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Yes.
From the CCEO;
Canon 881
- The Christian faithful are bound by the obligation to participate on Sundays and feast days in the Divine Liturgy, or according to the prescriptions or legitimate customs of their own Church sui iuris, in the celebration of the divine praises.
B
Byzman
Guest
Yeah, but the reason for me asking was because of the clause “their own Church sui iuris.” I really can’t find the Canons of my Church on this matter.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I have looked through the Particular Law for the Byzantine-Ruthenian Church in the USA and see nothing listed for this Canon, so I believe that it is as it stands.
I also know of a priest who used to teach at Sts Cyril & Methodius Byzantine Catholic Seminary and administered a parish just outside of Pittsburgh. He replaced the Saturday evening Vesperal Divine Liturgy with Great Vespers and told his parishioners that it fill the obligation.
D
Deacon_Lance
Guest
No. Each Church Sui Iuris must make the positive application of this allowance in its Particular Law which the Pittsburgh Metropolia has not done yet. The Ukrainin Greek Catholic Church has.
B
Byzman
Guest
Are you saying that the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church has allowed in their Particular Law for the Divine Praises to fulfill obligation in place of attending Divine Liturgy, or are you saying that they made specific mention concerning this issue of this in their Particular Law?
A
Aramis
Guest
Ukrainian Particular Law specifically permits Vespers to fulfil the sunday precept for laity.
Ruthenian Particular law does not speak to the issue at all, and therefore has not granted that dispensation.
Normative praxis in the Metropolia, however, is a saturday evening vesperal divine liturgy or an anticipatory divine liturgy sans vespers. (The former is traditional, but used beyond the normal uses of 2 feasts a year, and the latter, a latinization, butone much beloved by a significant chunk of the faithful.)
Ruthenian Particular law does not speak to the issue at all, and therefore has not granted that dispensation.
Normative praxis in the Metropolia, however, is a saturday evening vesperal divine liturgy or an anticipatory divine liturgy sans vespers. (The former is traditional, but used beyond the normal uses of 2 feasts a year, and the latter, a latinization, butone much beloved by a significant chunk of the faithful.)
B
Byzman
Guest
Actually I don’t see that at all, unless I am looking at something outdated.
CANONS OF THE PARTICULAR LAW OF THE UKRAINIAN GREEK CATHOLIC CHURCH
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
FWIW, the local Melkite parish celebrates Vespers on Saturday Evening, which does NOT take the place of the Sunday Divine Liturgy.
The people who go to Vespers also attend Liturgy, unless providentially hindered.
The people who go to Vespers also attend Liturgy, unless providentially hindered.
B
Byzman
Guest
We are not talking about if it takes the place of the Divine Liturgy but if Vespers on Saturday evening can fulfill the obligation for Sunday.
H
Hesychios
Guest
What exactly is a Sunday obligation? [Mike asks rhetorically]
If attending a Vespers fulfills an obligation normally fulfilled by a Mass (or Divine Liturgy) they are being regarded as equivalent for that particular purpose.
Apparently for that Melkite parish, no, Vespers does not fulfill the Sunday obligation.
H
Hesychios
Guest
Does anyone know where this concept originated? Orthodox seem always surprised by it.
It is in the CCEO, of course. But I wonder why?
I don’t know of any Apostolic church that has had this practice before in their own native liturgical tradition (but I can’t claim to know them all very well), and it does not seem to be a practice of the Latin church (although the ‘Sunday obligation’ terminology is most likely Latin). Since there are 22 or so eastern Catholic churches Sui Iuris I was wondering if there is an old tradition in one of the churches which I am unfamiliar with.
Who came up with this concept to offer it as an optional practice to the eastern Catholic churches?
A
Aramis
Guest
I can’t answer your question, Mike, but I’ll point out that the concept of minimum expected participation exists within orthodoxy as well. Many of the OCA-RO in Alaska are Sunday morning only; for those not working, especially in the RO villages, the social and communal expectation is Sunday liturgy… even if you are NOT RO, the locals in some villages want you there anyway. (Had that happen!)
But for those who have to work Sunday, the social and parish expectation of participation is met by vespers, and no one blinks about the guy who can’t make Sundays being at vespers.
The guy who does neither, he gets noticed as well. And not in a positive way.
But for those who have to work Sunday, the social and parish expectation of participation is met by vespers, and no one blinks about the guy who can’t make Sundays being at vespers.
The guy who does neither, he gets noticed as well. And not in a positive way.
D
Diak
Guest
The Particular Law for the Ukrainian Catholic Church in the USA, usually referred to as the Pastoral Guide addresses this specifically. Article 170 of that document specifically states:
Canon law proceeds in its specificity of legislation from the more general law (CCEO) to the more specific particular of the local Church. The CCEO in Canon 881,
gives the particular Church the ability to legislate at a more local level with "or according to the prescriptions or legitimate customs of their own Church sui iuris, in the celebration of the divine praises.
The Pastoral Guide only further clarifies the Synodal particular law of the UGCC to provide *economia *for the fulfillment of the “obligation” .
I am pleased of this provision in the Pastoral Guidefor several reasons. The first is quite personal, in that I am the administrator of two priestless missions and can thus make abundant pastoral use of this provision. The second speaks more to the larger issue of particular identity in that our people can feel assured in following their own authentic liturgical traditions when the exigencies of modern life (namely working on weekends) may preclude attendance at the only Sunday Divine Liturgy in sometimes a large area. I hope that this greater emphasis from the Synod and the hierarchy on the importance of the Divine Praises, especially Vespers and Matins (another provision of the Particular Law also mandates Vespers and Matins be reintroduced into parishes) brings a renewed sense of the traditional Eucharistic cycle of our churches. I also hope that as a tangential effect that other latinizations such as the Saturday evening Divine Liturgy and the misguided need to attend a Latin parishes for Satuday Evening Mass when Vespers is available and when unable to attend on Sunday is eliminated.
B
Byzman
Guest
I agree totally! The reason for me asking this question in the first place was because I did not want to have to attend a Latin parish on the weekend in order to fulfill my obligation.
5
5Loaves
Guest
Would it also help discourage them from feeling compelled to go outside their patrimony to a Latin Church in order to fulfill the Sunday “obligation”?
A
Aramis
Guest
Absolutely! But so does the evening vesperal divine liturgy, which fulfils and obligation due the following day for all Catholics without concern for their Church Sui Iuris (as it’s in both the CCEO and CIC).
5
5Loaves
Guest
Tho Diak brought this benefit up re his missions being sans a priest so the DL at that time is not an option for his missions. I’m not touching that “evening vesperal divine liturgy” potential hot potato
Howz your weather up there? Are you having all the storms we’re having? It’s been wild!
A
Aramis
Guest
The VDL (outside 4 times per year, where it is actually traditional and proper, according to Orthodox wiki) is a latinzation, but where there are priests, it’s equally as viable as the use of vespers alone.Tho Diak brought this benefit up re his missions being sans a priest so the DL at that time is not an option for his missions. I’m not touching that “evening vesperal divine liturgy” potential hot potato
Howz your weather up there? Are you having all the storms we’re having? It’s been wild!
Where there are no priests available, the deacon leading the hours is in fact the right, traditional and proper thing for the Byzantines… And the Romans, too. (Tho the dearth of Deacons made it irrelevant for the Roman Church until the 1970’s.)
But, theologically, the hours as replacement for the Divine Liturgy is not a sound permanent practice. They should be an addition, not a replacement, tho as an economia, those who can’t make the Divine Liturgy should be making it to the Hours to remain a part of the community. It’s been said that one can not be Christian by one’s self… for a Christian Life is a communal life. (Even many Hermits often had others they interacted with regularly, if only for prayers.) The ideal is for a community of believers who come together for prayers many times daily… and that ideal is impractical in the working world, but some monastics manage it.
As for the weather: the chinooks are not here yet, there’s not been a lot of snow, and we’ve been getting a lot of fog…
D
Diak
Guest
The Eucharistic cycle of Vespers, Matins, and the Divine Liturgy traditionally was and is one whole, organic sacrifice of praise, one deific movement of the soul in more intimate communion with the Life-Giving Trinity. I strongly disagree with a dissection and relativistic “valuation” of any “component parts” of the Eucharistic cycle. The hierarchy of the UGCC in the US has correctly noted the organic whole of the Eucharistic cycle and placed the needed emphasis back on this traditionally Byzantine liturgical view.
The bottom line is that if one cannot attend all of the services of the Eucharistic cycle for good reason, the particular Church wants them to be at peace and will not inflict, implicitly or explicitly, an undue psychological and spiritual burden.
- Status