Anthony Dr. Dragani is an Assistant Professor of
Religious Studies at Mount Aloysius College in Cresson,
Pennsylvania. He has an M.A. in Theology from Franciscan
University of Steubenville, and a Ph.D. in Systematic
Theology from Duquesne University. A Byzantine Catholic, Dr.
Dragani frequently lectures and writes on topics related to
spirituality and ecumenism
Order Anthony's critical examination of Adrian Fortescue, one of
England's foremost authorities on Eastern Christianity Place
order
|
Liturgy and Sacrament
Reception of Communion: Which
tradition is older, receiving communion by the hand onto the tongue or
by dropping it into the mouth from a silver spoon, like some Eastern
rites do?
Almost all liturgical scholars believe that communion in the hand was
the earliest practice. However, just because something is early doesn't
necessarily mean that it is best for our time. In most of the Byzantine
Churches, communion is administered from a spoon because the Body is
soaked in the Precious Blood. From a practical perspective, a spoon is
necessary. In the Melkite and Maronite Churches, the Body is dipped into
the Precious Blood, and dropped into the communicants mouth by the
priest or deacon's hand. The Latin Church was able to allow a return to
communion in the hand because the Body is not dipped or soaked in the
Blood. However, there is concern among some Latin Catholics that
communion in the hand is less reverent. I can understand their concern.
Nonetheless, communion in the hand is a legitimate practice.
 Top
of page
Liturgical
Languages: Is it true that some Eastern
Catholic parishes use English in their liturgy now? Is
this allowed?
In the United States many Eastern Catholic parishes
celebrate the Liturgy in English. My own Church, the
Byzantine-Ruthenian Catholic Church, celebrates Divine
Liturgy almost exclusively in English in the U.S. This
is because we are very Americanized, and have members
from numerous racial and ethnic backgrounds. The
Ukrainian Catholics, in contrast, are still very close
to their immigrant roots. They are still receiving new
waves of immigrants on a regular basis. Thus, they use
Ukrainian in most of their Divine Liturgies because it
is what the people are most comfortable with.
The ancient tradition of the Eastern Churches is for
Liturgy to be celebrated in the language of the people.
Hence, Byzantine Catholics were actually celebrating the
Divine Liturgy in English here in America, while Roman
Catholics were still using Latin.
Top
of page
Musical Instrumentation: Does the
Eastern Catholic Church maintain the tradition of not
permitting musical instrumentation such as organ music,
piano, or guitar music, during the Divine Liturgy?
Most Eastern Catholic Churches do not use any musical
instrumentation during the Divine Liturgy. The Ethiopian
Catholics do use drums, however.
The reason that we don't use instrumentation is because
of our particular perspective on the Liturgy. We try
very hard to model our liturgical worship on the Liturgy
being celebrated in heaven, as it is depicted in
Biblical books such as Revelation. In such texts the
heavenly Liturgy is celebrated using primarily the human
voice.
Top
of page
Infant Communion:
You referred to Infant Communion as being an ancient
practice in the Eastern Rite. I have been thinking a lot
about it; it makes so much more sense to me than the
Roman practice. Can you help me understand better how
ancient this is and why the Roman Catholic Church does
not do this?
In the ancient Church, both Western and Eastern, it was
very common for infants to receive communion immediately
after Baptism. In the East, it was the norm for them to
continue receiving the Eucharist each week. In the West,
it was more typical for them to only receive the
Eucharist immediately following Baptism, and not again
until they were older. Nonetheless, weekly infant
communion was practiced in many parts of the Western
Church. This changed definitively for the West at the
Fourth Lateran Council, and later the Council of Trent.
These Councils taught that children must be able to
understand what they are receiving, so that they can
give devotion to the Eucharist. This teaching did not
effect the discipline of the Eastern Churches.
The Catechism of the Council of Trent teaches that the
Eucharist should not be received by "those who on
account of their tender age have not attained the use of
reason. For these are not able to distinguish the Holy
Eucharist from common and ordinary bread and cannot
bring with them to this Sacrament piety and devotion.
Furthermore (to extend the precept to them) would appear
inconsistent with the ordinance of our Lord, for He
said: Take and eat words which cannot apply to infants,
who are evidently incapable of taking and eating." (The
Catechism of Trent, on the Holy Eucharist)
Obviously I, as a Byzantine Catholic, strongly favor
infant communion. But the Latin Church is entitled to
its own discipline in this regard. Both disciplines are
allowed to coexist in the Catholic Church, and must be
respected.
Top
of page
Mystery of Matrimony:
I recently attended a Byzantine Catholic wedding, and
the bride and groom did not recite wedding vows. Why?
Traditionally, in the Byzantine Churches vows are not
exchanged during the wedding ceremony. Rather, the most
significant event is the placing of the crowns on the
heads of the bride and groom, together with the blessing
of the priest. However, some Byzantine Catholic Churches
added vows to the ceremony in an attempt to conform to
Western culture. This was an unfortunate departure from
Byzantine tradition.
Top
of page
Moment of
Consecration: When does transubstantiation
take place in the Divine Liturgy?
Concerning the moment of "transubstantiation," Eastern
Catholic theology does not narrow in exclusively on the
words of institution as being the moment of
consecration. The Eastern Church Fathers taught that the
Eucharist mysteriously becomes the body and blood of
Christ sometime during the anaphora (Eucharistic
prayer). Eastern Catholics have traditionally placed a
great emphasis on the epiclesis, which is the moment in
which the Holy Spirit is called down upon the gifts to
transform them into the Body and Blood of Christ. In the
great Eatern Liturgies, which we still use, the
epiclesis comes after the words of institution.
This difference in no way ruptures our communion with
the Latin Church. Rather, it highlights what is
distinctive about Eastern Christian theology: a heavy
emphasis on mystery. We choose to believe that Christ
manifests himself in the Eucharist at some (unspecified)
time during the Eucharistic prayer. Narrowing in on an
exact moment of consecration is not the Eastern style.
Rather, we see the coming of Christ in the Eucharist as
being a great mystery which we are unable to comprehend.
Top
of page
"Mass" or
"Divine Liturgy?" Could you explain why
the celebration of the Eucharist is called in the Latin
Church "Holy Mass" and in the Eastern Churches "Divine
Liturgy," and whether the two terms may be used
interchangeably?
The word "Mass" refers properly only to the Eucharistic
Liturgy of the Latin Church. The word has its origins in
a dismissal found only in this liturgy. At the end of
the celebration, the priest says (in Latin) "Ite missa
est." This can be roughly translated as "The dismissal
is made." In time the word "missa" was used to designate
the entire Latin liturgy, and the word began to be
pronounced as "Mass" by the laity.
In the Eastern Churches, the Liturgy is properly
referred to as the "Divine Liturgy." Liturgy is a Greek
word, meaning "the work of the people." Literally,
Divine Liturgy means "the heavenly work of the people."
In the Eastern Liturgies there is a strong sense that
the congregation has left this world, and is being
mystically transported to heaven, where we participate
in the Heavenly Liturgy. That is why we don't use
musical instruments.
It really is not correct to use the two terms
interchangeably, although it sometimes happens.
Top
of page
Blessed Bread #1:
I attended an Eastern Orthodox liturgy a while back and
I noticed that at the end, the congregation was allowed
to take home the remaining Eurharist. Was this the
Eucharist or was it just some other bread?
What the people received at the end of the liturgy is
not the Eucharist. It is called "antidoran," which is
blessed bread given out after communion. In Eastern
Orthodox Churches it is traditional to distribute the
antidoran at the end of every liturgy. The antidoran
comes from the same loaf as the consecrated Eucharist,
but it is not consecrated but blessed. It harkens back
to the era in which Christians received communion
infrequently, only once or twice a year. Because people
didn't receive communion, they would come up to receive
the antidoran. Thus, antidoran literally means "instead
of the gift." Most Eastern Orthodox parishes will offer
the antidoran to any baptized Christian, although some
will only offer it to Orthodox Christians.
Top
of page
Blessed Bread #2:Do the Eastern
Catholic Churches distribute blessed bread like they do
in the Eastern Orthodox Churches?
The distribution of antidoran is common to both the
Byzantine and Armenian liturgical traditions. I do not
know if any other traditions use it. Among Byzantine
Catholics, the practice varies. I know from personal
experience that Byzantine Catholics of the Ruthenian
Recension have largely abandoned the practice, although
the antidoran is still distributed on certain feast days
together with an annointing.
Top
of page
Role of Woman #1:
As you know, for sometime the Latin Rite has utilized
female lectors, ushers, altar servers and Eucharistic
Ministers. What, if any, functions are open to women
during Eastern Rite services?
In the Eastern Catholic Churches women can (and do)
serve as cantors, lectors, and ushers/greeters. Some of
our very best cantors are women, and in the Eastern
Churches cantors play a crucial role. It is difficult to
celebrate the liturgy properly without a trained and
experienced cantor.
Top
of page
Role of Woman #2:
Is a true that a woman cannot approach the santuary except during church
cleaning?
In the Byzantine tradition women are generally not allowed to go behind
the icon screen (there are exceptions). However, this isn't a judgement
against women or anything of that nature. It is simply that the
sanctuary (which we call the altar) is a sacred area, and no one is
allowed in there unless they have a specific reason to be there. I, as a
layman, am forbidden to enter there unless I have been told to do so.
Even the priest only enters the sanctuary when he is carrying out a
liturgical function, or is making preparations to do so. Since in our
tradition we do not have altar girls, there usually isn't a reason for a
woman to enter into the altar.
|
"Thus
says the LORD of hosts: Behold, I will save my people from the East
country and from the West country; and I will bring them to dwell in the
midst of Jerusalem; and they shall be my people and I will be their God,
in faithfulness and in righteousness." -Zech 8:7-8