At the time, it was called the Church of St. Legontian and St. Domitian, and was under the custody of the Basilian Monks of the Greek Orthodox Rite.This was prior to the Great Schism of 1054.
One morning, while he was having a strong attack of doubt, he began the Consecration of the Mass for the people of the town. He used the same size host which is used in the Latin Rite masses today. What he beheld as he consecrated the bread and wine caused his hands to shake, indeed his whole body. He stood for a long time with his back to the people, and then slowly turned around to them.
He said; "O fortunate witnesses to whom the Blessed God, to confound my disbelief, has wished to reveal Himself in this Most Blessed Sacrament and to render Himself visible to our eyes.
AND some say it is the West who is wrong for using the unleavened bread - when in fact in 700 AD at the time of this miracle - it is the Greek Orthodox Rite who used the same Host used today in the West.
So i think some should rethink this idea that the West is the heretic for using unleavened...when it is the Greek who also used it and the miracle of Lanciano occurred in 700 AD prior to the schism.
Should be proof - one would think.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Matthew Chapter 7
7 "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened."
Why does it matter if it was unleavened bread that is proper to use for the Eucharist? What matters is whether or not the consecration is valid, not the type of bread used. For some people, some people can't eat bread because they have an allergy to the wheat gluten. Would you expect them to have to receive the bread form as well? Why not allow them to use a different kind of host such as a rice host for example? Or what about in nations like China where bread isn't nearly as common. Should they be required to use bread as well?
It's a cultural practice, not an issue of heresy or not heresy. Your own church's Eastern Rite uses leavened bread, so obviously Rome thinks leaved bread is fine.
__________________ Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig.
In the Christian liturgy bread is used principally as one of the elements of the Eucharistic sacrifice. Our Divine Lordconsecratedbread and wine at the Last Supper, and commanded His disciples to do the same in commemoration of Him, and thus ever since bread made of beaten flour has been offered at the altar for the officiating priest to consecrate into the Body of the Lord. It is a debated question whether Christ used leavened or unleavened bread at the institution of the Holy Eucharist, since different conclusions may be drawn, on the one hand, from the gospel of St. John and the synoptic Gospels on the other. History does not establish conclusively what the practice of the Apostles and their successors was, but it may be asserted with some probability that they made use of whatever bread was at hand, whether azymous or fermented. Different customs gradually began to grow up in different localities and then became tradition and fixed. The Eastern Churches for the most part made use of leavened bread as they still do, while the western Churches declared their preference for unleavened bread. At the time of the schism this difference of practice gave rise to much discussion of the value of their respective claims in following the example of Christ, and formented bitter controversy even in recent years. Either kind of bread is, of course, valid matter for the sacrifice, so the difference of usage should be of little dogmatic importance.
The quote is from that website. Bold for emphasis.
Edit - Before you start flinging accusations, you might want to check with your own church's stance on the matter first...
Last edited by Mikeb85; 7th December 2008 at 09:27 PM.
It's a cultural practice, not an issue of heresy or not heresy. Your own church's Eastern Rite uses leavened bread, so obviously Rome thinks leaved bread is fine.
I am glad you see it this way, I think all of us can try to be a little more understanding of the others traditions.
Does the Western Rite Orthodox Church use unleavened bread?
__________________ VIVA CRISTO REY
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
St.Raphael pray for us
O angel of God, my holy guardian, given to me from heaven, enlighten me this day, and save me from all evil. Instruct me in doing good deeds, and set me on the path of salvation. Amen.
I am glad you see it this way, I think all of us can try to be a little more understanding of the others traditions.
Does the Western Rite Orthodox Church use unleavened bread?
Edit: I was wrong. I just checked it out. They actually do use leavened bread, but they make it look like unleavened bread...go figure. =)
__________________ Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig.
At the time, it was called the Church of St. Legontian and St. Domitian, and was under the custody of the Basilian Monks of the Greek Orthodox Rite.This was prior to the Great Schism of 1054.
One morning, while he was having a strong attack of doubt, he began the Consecration of the Mass for the people of the town. He used the same size host which is used in the Latin Rite masses today. What he beheld as he consecrated the bread and wine caused his hands to shake, indeed his whole body. He stood for a long time with his back to the people, and then slowly turned around to them.
He said; "O fortunate witnesses to whom the Blessed God, to confound my disbelief, has wished to reveal Himself in this Most Blessed Sacrament and to render Himself visible to our eyes.
AND some say it is the West who is wrong for using the unleavened bread - when in fact in 700 AD at the time of this miracle - it is the Greek Orthodox Rite who used the same Host used today in the West.
So i think some should rethink this idea that the West is the heretic for using unleavened...when it is the Greek who also used it and the miracle of Lanciano occurred in 700 AD prior to the schism.
im a little wary of that OP. ive always learned that the entire Church used leavened bread until the West stopped using Greek and lost the meaning of artos.
__________________ "Acquire a peaceful spirit and 1000s around you will be saved"--St. Seraphim
”For as it is not yet six thousand years since the first man, who is called Adam, are not those to be ridiculed rather than refuted who try to persuade us of anything regarding a space of time so different from, and contrary to, the ascertained truth?” St. Augustine
AND some say it is the West who is wrong for using the unleavened bread - when in fact in 700 AD at the time of this miracle - it is the Greek Orthodox Rite who used the same Host used today in the West.
So i think some should rethink this idea that the West is the heretic for using unleavened...when it is the Greek who also used it and the miracle of Lanciano occurred in 700 AD prior to the schism.
Should be proof - one would think.
Does it really matter? Sure, there is a lot that divides East and West, but I highly doubt that the leavening of one's bread is on the 'high priority' list next to that whole 'Filioque' thing.
In the 2,000 years of Christian history is there any writings by Church Fathers that says anything about leavening vs. unleavening being the basis of our salvation? Did anyone say that the West is heretical for using flat bread or just in error (there is a great difference)? Does the OP or any other Roman Catholic individuals feel that the East should change its practice just because that's what the Roman pope does? Even so, isn't that a bit antagonistic considering the not-too-great opinion that the East has towards so-called papal infallibility and/or papal supremacy?
Does anyone else find the use of leavened or unleavened bread about as pointless to our salvation as the length of one's big toenail?
Even so, as zhilan said, its probably a cultural thing. On Pascha, the Orthodox in the Slavic traditions have a bread they call the 'Artos' (yes, it's Greek) which is blessed during the Liturgy and eaten by the people afterward. Yet those in the Greek tradition do not have an 'Artos' and, if I recall, have not had an 'Artos' for a few centuries. I do not know the reasoning behind either side, but neither accuses the other of heresy or makes the use or non-use of 'Artos' an issue. Why? Because really I highly doubt its something to make an issue of and probably has about as much towards our salvation as the length of one's big toenail.
Even if the East used flat bread in the 8th century, I'm sure that there were things that happened after the 8th century that changed that.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. <--------I make that stuff! At $10.50 an hour, avg. 27 hours a week to prepare for a $1,000 college bill (and books, cars and other things)!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "Glory to God for all things!" - Last words of St. John Chrysostom To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It's a cultural practice, not an issue of heresy or not heresy. Your own church's Eastern Rite uses leavened bread, so obviously Rome thinks leaved bread is fine.
That's my point - BTW.
Originally Posted by Rhamiel
I am glad you see it this way, I think all of us can try to be a little more understanding of the others traditions.
Does the Western Rite Orthodox Church use unleavened bread?
Originally Posted by jckstraw72
im a little wary of that OP. ive always learned that the entire Church used leavened bread until the West stopped using Greek and lost the meaning of artos.
That's what the East says today because Michael Celerius [sp] gave this as one of the reasons he had the right to remove the entire West from what he considered the Church. Thousands of peeps thrown away because he was right? I still have no conclusive evidence that the East could excommunicate an entire Tradition because they didnt agree... Where was the council?
Altho - as we can see - the Host which has turned to flesh was unleavened.
It matters very little to me, but it matters to the East - hence the post.
Originally Posted by E.C.
Does it really matter? Sure, there is a lot that divides East and West, but I highly doubt that the leavening of one's bread is on the 'high priority' list next to that whole 'Filioque' thing.
.
Then you have to admit it made little sense that the East 'excommunicated' the entire Western Tradition [Latin Rite] because this was one of a few things they didnt agree with?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Matthew Chapter 7
7 "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened."
Linear Mode
