Eastern/Oriental Divine Mercy Sunday?

[aemcpa]

Is there really any reason fort he rude tone of this post? Rciadan was just pointing a similarity in the Divine Mercy prayer and the Triasagon prayer used in every Divine Liturgy. If you already knew that then great, but not every Latin Catholic does.

It is apparently because I was confusing this thread with another very similar one in which that fact was pointed out several times. In fact, I just realized that they are, in fact, two different threads. I apologize.

 

[Catherine_Grant]

Please keep each thread on-topic.

A reminder of the topic of this thread:

Yesterday was, of course, New Sunday (at least it was on the Syriac calendar). The question is, did any other of our Eastern and Oriental members experience an observance of “Divine Mercy Sunday” in its place? Along with it? If so, which took precedence? And again if so, how was it done?

When you have a new topic to discuss, please look for existing threads on the same topic and post to them.

If there is not an existing thread on the topic, please start a new one in the appropriate forum instead of inserting an off-topic post into another thread. You may post a link to the new discussion in the original thread.

Please make descriptive thread titles so that all know what will be discussed inside the thread.

Thank you for your assistance!

 

[neokarny]

I was just reading a Divine Mercy pamphlet, published by the Marian Helpers, quoting Faustina’s diary I believe. It said that the Divine Mercy feast was supposed to be observed, according to the will of Jesus, by the entire Church. This obviously meant the entirety of the physical Church and not just the Latin Church. The pamphlet of course said that Pope John Paul II accomplished this through Divine Mercy Sunday.

However, since it’s not been inserted into the liturgical calendar of the various Eastern Catholic churches it seems that either: 1) Divine Mercy Sunday didn’t actually establish what Faustina called for, or 2) Faustina is equating the Latin Church as synonomous with “the Church” in its entirety.

Any thoughts on this? I’m not trying to criticize any Catholics at all - it just confused me as seeming contrary.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I was just reading a Divine Mercy pamphlet, published by the Marian Helpers, quoting Faustina’s diary I believe. It said that the Divine Mercy feast was supposed to be observed, according to the will of Jesus, by the entire Church. This obviously meant the entirety of the physical Church and not just the Latin Church. The pamphlet of course said that Pope John Paul II accomplished this through Divine Mercy Sunday.

However, since it’s not been inserted into the liturgical calendar of the various Eastern Catholic churches it seems that either: 1) Divine Mercy Sunday didn’t actually establish what Faustina called for, or 2) Faustina is equating the Latin Church as synonomous with “the Church” in its entirety.

Any thoughts on this? I’m not trying to criticize any Catholics at all - it just confused me as seeming contrary.

Here is what the Divine Mercy Chaplet consists of:

1. Begin with the Sign of the Cross, 1 Our Father, 1 Hail Mary and The Apostles Creed.

In the Divine Liturgy which the Byzantine Rite Catholics share with us, they already pray the Our Father, profess the Nicene Creed, and hymn the Theotokos

1. Then on the Our Father Beads say the following:
   Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.

At the Anaphora the priest prays “We offer to You Yours of Your own in behalf of all and for all”

1. On the 10 Hail Mary Beads say the following:
   For the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

We say “Lord have mercy” more than 50 times throughout the Divine Liturgy

(Repeat step 2 and 3 for all five decades).

1. Conclude with (three times):
   Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

We have the Trisagion

 

[neokarny]

Here is what the Divine Mercy Chaplet consists of:

1. Begin with the Sign of the Cross, 1 Our Father, 1 Hail Mary and The Apostles Creed.

In the Divine Liturgy which the Byzantine Rite Catholics share with us, they already pray the Our Father, profess the Nicene Creed, and hymn the Theotokos

1. Then on the Our Father Beads say the following:
   Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.

At the Anaphora the priest prays “We offer to You Yours of Your own in behalf of all and for all”

1. On the 10 Hail Mary Beads say the following:
   For the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

We say “Lord have mercy” more than 50 times throughout the Divine Liturgy

(Repeat step 2 and 3 for all five decades).

1. Conclude with (three times):
   Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

We have the Trisagion

I’m confused as my post wasn’t in reference to the Chaplet, but rather the DM apparitions to Faustina desiring the establishment of a universal feast in honor of DM.

 

[twf]

neokarny: As I noted in your other thread - the Second Sunday of Easter didn’t change…the propers didn’t change…it is still the Second Sunday of Easter focussed on the Risen Christ appearing to the 11 and St. Thomas. Divine mercy was always an underlining theme, and by adding “Divine Mercy Sunday” as an additional secondary title for this feast, Bl. John Paul was highlighting the special place that Our Lord’s infinite mercy has in the celebration of Easter. When it comes down to it, it is for the Church - the pope and bishops - to interpret Christ’s will in these matters. The liturgy of the Church is the very prayer of Christ which the Church makes her own…the voice of the Lord speaking through our bishops and liturgy takes precedence over apparitions: always has, always will.

Do I believe that St. Faustina encountered the Lord? Yes I do…I believe that Jesus gave her the chaplet…but for an obedient Catholic, a private revelation can never trump the Christ given authority of the bishops. It could very well be that St. Faustina did indeed mean the Latin Church - for as Constantine points out, the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, in particular, already has a very great deal of emphasis on the Lord’s Divine Mercy. Often references to “the Church” do refer to the Latin Church…it is a bad habbit and hard to overcome as the Latin Church comprises 98% of the Catholic Communion. It should be noted, however, that in the context of Church law, “universal” within a Latin context means “universal within the Latin Church”… For example, if one were to read the Latin code of canon law, it would state that the universal norm of the Church is to receive Our Lord in Holy Communion on the tongue and while kneeling. Clearly this is not and has never been a universal norm among Eastern Catholics - in context, universal means the Latin Church as a whole as opposed to individual national churches or dioceses.

(Yes, I am well aware of the irony that this universal norm is only observed in a handful of parishes…as Rome dispensed many local churches from this universal norm).

 

[neokarny]

neokarny: As I noted in your other thread - the Second Sunday of Easter didn’t change…the propers didn’t change…it is still the Second Sunday of Easter focussed on the Risen Christ appearing to the 11 and St. Thomas. Divine mercy was always an underlining theme, and by adding “Divine Mercy Sunday” as an additional secondary title for this feast, Bl. John Paul was highlighting the special place that Our Lord’s infinite mercy has in the celebration of Easter. When it comes down to it, it is for the Church - the pope and bishops - to interpret Christ’s will in these matters. The liturgy of the Church is the very prayer of Christ which the Church makes her own…the voice of the Lord speaking through our bishops and liturgy takes precedence over apparitions: always has, always will.

Do I believe that St. Faustina encountered the Lord? Yes I do…I believe that Jesus gave her the chaplet…but for an obedient Catholic, a private revelation can never trump the Christ given authority of the bishops. It could very well be that St. Faustina did indeed mean the Latin Church - for as Constantine points out, the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, in particular, already has a very great deal of emphasis on the Lord’s Divine Mercy. Often references to “the Church” do refer to the Latin Church…it is a bad habbit and hard to overcome as the Latin Church comprises 98% of the Catholic Communion. It should be noted, however, that in the context of Church law, “universal” within a Latin context means “universal within the Latin Church”… For example, if one were to read the Latin code of canon law, it would state that the universal norm of the Church is to receive Our Lord in Holy Communion on the tongue and while kneeling. Clearly this is not and has never been a universal norm among Eastern Catholics - in context, universal means the Latin Church as a whole as opposed to individual national churches or dioceses.

(Yes, I am well aware of the irony that this universal norm is only observed in a handful of parishes…as Rome dispensed many local churches from this universal norm).

The manner of observance of Divine Mercy Sunday does not matter in my post in this thread, so much as it simply being a Church-wide feast day.

You do interestingly bring up universal, which the quote provided in pamphlet IIRC did not use. The quote seemed clearly in reference to Jesus wanting the Roman Catholic Church (Latin or otherwise) throughout the world to observe a feast day in remembrance of his Divine Mercy. He seemed to want a specific feast day, as well as a general remembrance (hence the 3 o’clock DM hour).

The Easterners, while they may have a devotion to the Divine Mercy in general, don’t observe a feast day in its honor specifically as the apparition of Jesus apparently desired.

I suppose none of this is really important except for those Catholics that truly believe the Divine Mercy apparitions and view Jesus’ desires expressed in them as authoritative, and the perspective on Eastern Catholics that might be affected thereby.

 

[twf]

The manner of observance of Divine Mercy Sunday does not matter in my post in this thread, so much as it simply being a Church-wide feast day.

You do interestingly bring up universal, which the quote provided in pamphlet IIRC did not use. The quote seemed clearly in reference to Jesus wanting the Roman Catholic Church (Latin or otherwise) throughout the world to observe a feast day in remembrance of his Divine Mercy. He seemed to want a specific feast day, as well as a general remembrance (hence the 3 o’clock DM hour).

The Easterners, while they may have a devotion to the Divine Mercy in general, don’t observe a feast day in its honor specifically as the apparition of Jesus apparently desired.

I suppose none of this is really important except for those Catholics that truly believe the Divine Mercy apparitions and view Jesus’ desires expressed in them as authoritative, and the perspective on Eastern Catholics that might be affected thereby.

Within context, the author of the pamphlet probably didn’t even consider the Eastern Churches…in fact it is possible that the author wasn’t even aware that the Eastern Churches exist (sadly, many Catholics aren’t…). When the author says “universal Church” I think it is fair to assume that the author means the “universal Latin Church” just as canon law does when it speaks of “universal norms” (as opposed to local norms within a particular country or diocese). That being said, it is for the bishops of the Eastern Churches, who are true vicars of Christ (to use Latin terminology - as taught at the Second Vatican Council), to interpret Christ’s will for their churches. Could the Eastern Churches implement a divine mercy feast day? Sure - but that’s not for me to determine.

Jesus appeared to a Medieval saint (can’t remember who off hand) and expressed His desire that the feast of Corpus Christi be instituted. This apparition is also non-binding, but the Church decided to institute the feast in the Latin Church. As with Divine Mercy, this doesn’t mean that Catholics are bound to accept the apparition - for the liturgical feast does not reference nor commemorate, per se, the apparition, but rather the sentiment behind it - honoring the body and blood of the Lord in the eucharistic species. In this case, the Melkite Patriarch, upon restoring full communion with Rome, did write a Byzantine adaption of this feast for his own church…but it wasn’t forced upon the Melkites - their own patriarch, as a living icon of Christ, determined that it would be beneficial for his flock.

 

[Vico]

… if one were to read the Latin code of canon law, it would state that the universal norm of the Church is to receive Our Lord in Holy Communion on the tongue and while kneeling…

The canon law no not specific way of receiving the Eucharist. Did you mean the liturgical norms?

 

[babochka]

Here is what the Divine Mercy Chaplet consists of:

1. Begin with the Sign of the Cross, 1 Our Father, 1 Hail Mary and The Apostles Creed.

In the Divine Liturgy which the Byzantine Rite Catholics share with us, they already pray the Our Father, profess the Nicene Creed, and hymn the Theotokos

1. Then on the Our Father Beads say the following:
   Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.

At the Anaphora the priest prays “We offer to You Yours of Your own in behalf of all and for all”

1. On the 10 Hail Mary Beads say the following:
   For the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

We say “Lord have mercy” more than 50 times throughout the Divine Liturgy

(Repeat step 2 and 3 for all five decades).

1. Conclude with (three times):
   Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

We have the Trisagion

Excellent. The first time I brought my husband to the Divine Liturgy (while we were dating), it was Divine Mercy Sunday in the Latin Church. He was surprised when I told him that we don’t have Divine Mercy Sunday. At the end of the Liturgy, he pointed out that we don’t need Divine Mercy Sunday; we celebrate it every Sunday.

 

[twf]

The canon law no not specific way of receiving the Eucharist. Did you mean the liturgical norms?

You’re right - sorry… but the point is, it is referred to as a “universal norm” though in context it means universal throughout the Latin Church - not the entire Catholic Communion.

 

[theistgal]

The Easterners, while they may have a devotion to the Divine Mercy in general, don’t observe a feast day in its honor specifically as the apparition of Jesus apparently desired.

Lord have mercy!

Let’s cut to the chase: do you think that Eastern Catholics, whose rites the Church recognizes as fully equal to the Latin Rite, are not being good Catholics if they don’t observe every devotion called for in a private apparition?

I’m being blunt but frankly, this is - what? the third or fourth time I’ve seen a similar thread here in the past month - and it’s getting a little wearing.

 

[twf]

Lord have mercy!

Let’s cut to the chase: do you think that Eastern Catholics, whose rites the Church recognizes as fully equal to the Latin Rite, are not being good Catholics if they don’t observe every devotion called for in a private apparition?

I’m being blunt but frankly, this is - what? the third or fourth time I’ve seen a similar thread here in the past month - and it’s getting a little wearing.

The OP is an Orthodox Christian - not a Latin criticizing Eastern pratices… if that makes a difference.

 

[Vico]

You’re right - sorry… but the point is, it is referred to as a “universal norm” though in context it means universal throughout the Latin Church - not the entire Catholic Communion.

I don’t know where you got concept “the universal norm of the Church is to receive Our Lord in Holy Communion on the tongue and while kneeling”. And I have not seen Church documents that indicate universal means Latin Church, rather meaning general vs particular. I’ve looked in the *Missale Romanum and *Eucharisticum Mysterium (linked below) and do not find such a concept. I am interested to see a document with that usage, if you know of one.

The typical editions of the Missale Romanum, Ordinary Form, Latin language, was promulgated in four versions, for the Latin Church: 1969 Pope Paul VI (typical edition)
1975 Pope Paul VI (second typical edition)
2002 Pope John Paul II (third typical edition)
2008 Pope Benedict XVI (third typical edition emended)
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19690403_missale-romanum_en.html

catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/TextContents/Index/4/SubIndex/67/TextIndex/9

And the document Eucharisticum Mysterium from 1967, n. 34, predating GIRM, states that kneeling or standing are the norm:

The Way of Receiving Communion34. a. In accordance with the custom of the Church, the faithful may receive communion either kneeling or standing. One or the other practice is to be chosen according to the norms laid down by the conference of bishops and in view of the various circumstances, above all the arrangement of the churches and the number of the communicants. The faithful should willingly follow the manner of reception indicated by the pastors so that communion may truly be a sign of familial union among those who share in the same table of the Lord.

b. When the faithful communicate kneeling, no other sign of reverence toward the most holy sacrament is required, because the kneeling itself expresses adoration.

When they receive communion standing, it is strongly recommended that, approaching in line, they make a sign of reverence before receiving the sacrament. This should be done at a designated moment and place, so as not to interfere with the coming and going of the other communicants.

catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/2/SubIndex/11/DocumentIndex/338

 

[neokarny]

Lord have mercy!

Let’s cut to the chase: do you think that Eastern Catholics, whose rites the Church recognizes as fully equal to the Latin Rite, are not being good Catholics if they don’t observe every devotion called for in a private apparition?

I’m being blunt but frankly, this is - what? the third or fourth time I’ve seen a similar thread here in the past month - and it’s getting a little wearing.

As twf rightly pointed out I’m not Catholic, but I wasn’t trying to imply any superiority of any given sui iuris church and/or rite. Rather, I was confused regarding the seemingly Latin-centered apparitions and their devotees regarding calls for a Church-wide feast day and Pope John Paul II’s institution of Divine Mercy Sunday.

So I’m sorry if it came across as condemning or judging anyone particularly - I had no intent to do so.

 

[theistgal]

As twf rightly pointed out I’m not Catholic, but I wasn’t trying to imply any superiority of any given sui iuris church and/or rite. Rather, I was confused regarding the seemingly Latin-centered apparitions and their devotees regarding calls for a Church-wide feast day and Pope John Paul II’s institution of Divine Mercy Sunday.

So I’m sorry if it came across as condemning or judging anyone particularly - I had no intent to do so.

OK then, mea culpa.

If you hang around here longer (and I hope you will! ) you may see why I had that knee-jerk reaction.

 

[aemcpa]

Excellent. The first time I brought my husband to the Divine Liturgy (while we were dating), it was Divine Mercy Sunday in the Latin Church. He was surprised when I told him that we don’t have Divine Mercy Sunday. At the end of the Liturgy, he pointed out that we don’t need Divine Mercy Sunday; we celebrate it every Sunday.

This seems to be implying that the Roman Mass does not celebrate the mercy of God, which is nonsense.

 

[RyanBlack]

This seems to be implying that the Roman Mass does not celebrate the mercy of God, which is nonsense.

Of course that would be nonsense, but I’m virtually certain that was not what was implied. But I also know that in a Byzantine Divine Liturgy, God’s mercy is mentioned many times more than in a Roman Catholic Mass. I suspect that is what prompted the remark.

 

[aemcpa]

Lord have mercy!

Let’s cut to the chase: do you think that Eastern Catholics, whose rites the Church recognizes as fully equal to the Latin Rite, are not being good Catholics if they don’t observe every devotion called for in a private apparition?

I’m being blunt but frankly, this is - what? the third or fourth time I’ve seen a similar thread here in the past month - and it’s getting a little wearing.

I don’t think that’s the issue at hand. I think the issue at hand is twofold:

1. Does the Roman Pontiff have the authority to insert a feast into the liturgical calendar of the Eastern Catholic Churches?
2. Did John Paul II intend to do that when he established that the Feast of Mercy should be observed in “the universal Church”?

The answer is certainly yes to the first, so it remains to find an answer to the second.

 

[babochka]

This seems to be implying that the Roman Mass does not celebrate the mercy of God, which is nonsense.

No, not at all. But the feast of Divine Mercy is to emphasize and pay special attention to the mercy of God. It is something that is emphasized liturgically in every Divine Liturgy in the same way that it is emphasized while praying the Chaplet of Divine Mercy, with nearly the same words. As Constantine pointed out, we pray a Divine Mercy chaplet within every Divine Liturgy.