Is the Real Presence valid in EO services?

[Isa_Almisry]

Hi Isa, what is the qorban of annullments?

Annullments at least in practice (and in theory I contend, but that’s a separate argument) are a Catholic divorce. Calling it something else, like the Pharisees did to nullify the commandment. Mark 7:11.

I agree with you about Vatican II. Its probably best you didn’t make all those changes.

The one that get me is abandoning ad orietem. What was that all about?

 

[malphono]

Isa, ad orientem wasn’t exactly abandoned in the Latin Rite. Better to say it was “unused” for the most part. (In general, even the Missal of 1970 assumes it, and in Rome (and elsewhere, but not much in the US) it wasn’t uncommon to see ad orientem.) Now, after Summorum Pontificum plus the “reform of the reform” movement, ad orientem in the Latin Rite is making a bit of a comeback, even in the US.

But what is 1000 times worse than the Latin Rite having essentially “shelved” ad orientem for 40 years, are those in the East who, very sadly, followed suit. I’m waiting for the “reform of the reform” of that horror, but unfortunately I don’t expect to see it any time soon.

 

[malphono]

This thread seems to be going off in a “westerly” direction, but since it started out Eastern, being the Easterner that I am, I’ll make a comment on Western practices.

I’m familiar with the Roman Missal of Paul VI, and I have to agree with Lisa44 when she says *“I am so disappointed with the Mass I have experienced as a new convert. Its so watered down and Protestant in its effect. …” *

In a similar vein, I have to disagree with jfoges "The mass of paul vi can be very breathtaking if it is done correctly according to the rubrics. The entire mass can be said in Latin."

I’ve attended numerous services according to that Missal, and found nothing that made me want more. That includes several times in St Peter’s where the reigning Pontiff celebrated, including once by Paul VI himself. Yes, those were in Latin (unusual in the US but not at all unusual for St Peter’s) and no, I didn’t find anything “breathtaking” about any of them. They were simply the 1970 Missal in Latin.

Of course there is now a “reform of the reform” movement, which is trying to set some actual liturgical standards to the Latin Rite OF (“ordinary form”) but while they have had some success with following the suggested rubrics, there’s nothing they can do with the text. If it was simply a matter of rubrics there would have been no need for Benedict XVI to promulgate Summorum Pontificum.

Perhaps the solution to the liturgical problem is, as jfoges says, “[not] necessarily to go back to the Tridentine mass”, but on the other hand the ever increasing use of the 1962 Missal (the EF or “extradordinary form” of the Latin Rite liturgy) is, I think, testament to Benedict XVI’s wisdom in allowing the option.

jfoges also says "Vatican II proposed some changes to that mass which were necessary changes", but the problem with that is Bugnini and group, to use a tired cliché, threw the baby out with the bathwater. It took nearly 40 years, but at least some semblance of balance has been restored to the Latin Rite.

Just MHO.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Correct, in that it is not clear what Pope Benedict means by saying the “salvation granting presence of the Lord” is present in a Lutheran Eucharist.

My reason for posting the link was more of a response to the other poster who said Lutheran communion was just crackers and grape juice. As a Catholic-leaning Lutheran, whenever I wonder in the back of my mind whether I should convert, normally all I have to do is come to a message board like this and read an obnoxious post like that one, and I am cured of my “Roman fever” immediately.

My take on what Benedict XVI is saying in the sited passage is similar to what the Catechism has been saying all along - that is, those baptised non-Catholics who reject The Church through no fault of their own still have access to salvific grace through The Catholic Church. In other words, some Lutheran’s in attempting to imitate and emulate what the Catholics and Orthodox have been doing licitly, validly and continuously for 2,000 years will eventually come to discover through their symbolic acts the salvation granting presence that flows through the Catholic Church as “universal grace” and lead them to the real presence of Eucharist. This universal grace is available to all people. It is what God floods Creation with to call all mankind to Christ and His Catholic Church. So there is nothing really profound implied in Benedict’s statement since Universal Grace is present everywhere. Universal Grace is present at home among those giving prayers of thanks and blessings to God for their dinner meals just as much as its available to those gathered together in secular ecclesial communities as they sing gospel songs and serve symbolic “ecclesial refreshments”; and just as much as its present in the fellowship of those gathering afterwords in the social hall for coffee and donuts.

But this is nothing in comparison to the grace available through real presence received in the eucharist by an apostolicly ordained priest or bishop converting the bread and wine to The Eucharist.

What is obnoxious is anyone imaging that just any old secular person can wave their hands over wine and bread and declare by fiat “this is Jesus”. It is profoundly ironic that non-Catholics reject papal and ecclesial authority but embrace the nonsense that self proclaimed ecclesial leaders with no apostolic blessing whatsoever can claim they have an authority equal to those they and their congregation reject and have contempt for. That’s more than obnoxious - that is irrational since it attempts to duplicatate and emulate an authority andpower that they have contempt for.

James

 

[Lisa44]

Lisa,

The mass of paul vi can be very breathtaking if it is done correctly according to the rubrics. The entire mass can be said in Latin. I don’t think the solution to the liturgical problem is necessarily to go back to the Tridentine mass. Vatican II proposed some changes to that mass which were necessary changes.

Hi jfoges,

Yes, I believe you. I just wish I could see it for my own eyes. Where are these Masses? Probably in large metropolitan areas.
I just wish there was a standard that all Masses had to follow.

I would ask you more questions but I don’t want to go too far off topic in respect of the OP.

 

[Lisa44]

Annullments at least in practice (and in theory I contend, but that’s a separate argument) are a Catholic divorce. Calling it something else, like the Pharisees did to nullify the commandment. Mark 7:11.

The one that get me is abandoning ad orietem. What was that all about?

Hi Isa,
What does the EO do regarding the issue? I take it they don’t do annulments? Or do they just allow people to get divorced and remarried?

What is the “ad orietem”?

 

[Formosus]

The Catholic Position is that the Orthodox are not severed from the body, merely no longer taking direction from the main body of the Church.

Much like a palsied limb, it still lives, still functions, but doesn’t always do what is right, and sometimes does its own thing.

Same for the SSPX, the Old Catholics, and the PNCC…

I think when one starts “ordaining” women, the limb fails off completely.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Hi Isa,
What does the EO do regarding the issue?

Think it’s Pharisaical.

I take it they don’t do annulments?

No.

Or do they just allow people to get divorced and remarried?

According to the canon, only the innocent, and only after reconciliation has failed. Remarriage for any reason (including after widowhood, not encouraged) only twice.

What is the “ad orietem”?

Facing East (i.e. towards God, back to congregation, or rather, congregation facing and following the leader).

 

[CentralFLJames]

According to the canon, only the innocent, and only after reconciliation has failed. Remarriage for any reason (including after widowhood, not encouraged) only twice.

Except in the “western” eastern orthodox where they have taken on the local mores to play baseball with 3 strikes and your out (if you have a “compassionate” bishop).

Facing East (i.e. towards God, back to congregation, or rather, congregation facing and following the leader).

EO are so far to the east that when many of them worship to the east they essentially have to bow to the west to go around the globe to get to Jerusalem.

James

 

[Lisa44]

Think it’s Pharisaical.

No.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Except in the “western” eastern orthodox where they have taken on the local mores to play baseball with 3 strikes and your out (if you have a “compassionate” bishop).

That would be korban of a different sort. And still korban.

The survey of religions a decade ago found that the Orthodox were the least divorced in the US, land of divorce on demand. I think it was around 5% divorce rate.

And even with the three strikes korban, at least that’s limited. How many annulments and remarriages can you get? With a compassionate tribunal, an unlimited number.

EO are so far to the east that when many of them worship to the east they essentially have to bow to the west to go around the globe to get to Jerusalem.

anything wrong being East?

btw, you are confusing us with Jews. And since most of your priests don’t face East at all, I wonder what your problem is with it.

James

 

[Isa_Almisry]

I don’t understand that?

Don’t understand what exactly?

 

[Lisa44]

According to the canon, only the innocent, and only after reconciliation has failed. Remarriage for any reason (including after widowhood, not encouraged) only twice.

Only the innocent what? Can get divorced or an annulment?

You said remarriage for any reason …only twice. What does that mean, you can get married twice?

Maybe you could just tell me does the EO allow divorce? Does the EO allow remarriage in the Church?

Thanks

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Only the innocent what? Can get divorced or an annulment?

Remarried.

You said remarriage for any reason …only twice. What does that mean, you can get married twice?

For instance, if you are widowed, only remarriage twice.

Maybe you could just tell me does the EO allow divorce?

It allows remarriage for adultery, and other grave matters.

Does the EO allow remarriage in the Church?

For those reasons, if reconcilliation failed, yes.

 

[CentralFLJames]

anything wrong being East?

btw, you are confusing us with Jews. And since most of your priests don’t face East at all, I wonder what your problem is with it.

James

Just having fun with you.
In the Catholic Church facing “east” is always “ecclesial east” which is by definition toward the altar. Compass East is not used any more due to too church many sites in the west being constrained by building codes and zoning laws that made it too hard to keep all the churches built in a manner where the ecclesial east was also Compass East (toward Jerusalem).

James

 

[Aramis]

I think when one starts “ordaining” women, the limb fails off completely.

I would agree; I note the PNCC because they are mentioned in the CCC… Some Old Catholic sects have also ordained women to the priesthood.

Note, however, ordination to the order of the Deaconess may be possible; historically it was done, and many debates rage over whether it was equivalent to minor orders or major orders…

They are a significant part of the Early Church, mentioned in the Apostolic Constitutions.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

I would agree; I note the PNCC because they are mentioned in the CCC… Some Old Catholic sects have also ordained women to the priesthood.

Note, however, ordination to the order of the Deaconess may be possible; historically it was done, and many debates rage over whether it was equivalent to minor orders or major orders…

They are a significant part of the Early Church, mentioned in the Apostolic Constitutions.

Yes, if Deaconesses are deal breakers, the Orthodox fall under that.

 

[mercygate]

Correct, in that it is not clear what Pope Benedict means by saying the “salvation granting presence of the Lord” is present in a Lutheran Eucharist.

My reason for posting the link was more of a response to the other poster who said Lutheran communion was just crackers and grape juice. As a Catholic-leaning Lutheran, whenever I wonder in the back of my mind whether I should convert, normally all I have to do is come to a message board like this and read an obnoxious post like that one, and I am cured of my “Roman fever” immediately.

Off topic: my own solution to Roman fever was to go to Mass on a Sunday. That would buy me a three-year reprieve. However, my case was terminal, and here I am. The Eucharistic presence of Our Lord really is a huge deal. For one solid year after coming into the Church I wept floods of tears: tears of gratitude.

 

[mercygate]

Yes, if Deaconesses are deal breakers, the Orthodox fall under that.

Do Deaconesses in the Orthodox Churches function liturgically? Give blessings? Homilies & sermons? Chant the Gospel??? Holding my breath here.

 

[Aramis]

Do Deaconesses in the Orthodox Churches function liturgically? Give blessings? Homilies & sermons? Chant the Gospel??? Holding my breath here.

I have read that they function as Deacons for remote female monasteries. It is explicit that they do the Typica.

Their traditional role included preaching in cloisters, baptizing women, and instructing women and children in the faith.