confused about something

[Joshua G.]

While this warrants discussion, I still think a bigger deal is made out of this than it should be.

 

[Qoheleth]

While this warrants discussion, I still think a bigger deal is made out of this than it should be.

Agreed. I believe that Adoration/worship/veneration/devotion are all due to Christ.

I think the question is that of Perpetual Adoration or consecration with Adoration as its focus. Yet even in the West, all gifts consecrated for Adoration are consumed.

On the other hand, icons are venerated without fail...perpetually.

Also the devotion/adoration of the gifts (unsanctified) at the Great Entrance makes this even more interesting.


Here is what Bp. Kallistos said...


"there is no theological, as opposed to liturgical, reason" why public adoration of the Gifts is not practiced in the East. Theologically, adoration is appropriate, and the faithful should adore the Gifts whenever and wherever they are present. But the liturgical reason against a public service of veneration is that it does not conform to Christ's explicit liturgical instructions."



Q

 

[Philothei]

But the liturgical reason against a public service of veneration is that it does not conform to Christ's explicit liturgical instructions."

And yet that is excatly what the bottom line is. I would echo all the others in saying that the eucarist is not for adoration it is to be consumed. Icons are for veneration obviously not consumption.. Does this makes some sense? Yes to those of us who were brought up to understand that Christ is present in the Eucarist but we are not commanded to "adore" him in the Eucarist...

 

[Anhelyna]

Makes perfect sense to me Philothei

 

[Michael G]

but is it oki to worship it, since it's Christ? would it be idolatry to worship?

sorry for all the questions..

No, it is not ok to worship it. Only God is worshipped. The Eucharist is God incarnate, but the Eucharist is to be consumed. Christ did not say worship this for it is me, he said do this in memory of me. What they did that day was consume the body of Christ, not put it in a monstrance to worship it. I am not a theologian, but I would say it could border on idolatry.

 

[Qoheleth]

And yet that is excatly what the bottom line is. I would echo all the others in saying that the eucarist is not for adoration it is to be consumed. Icons are for veneration obviously not consumption.. Does this makes some sense? Yes to those of us who were brought up to understand that Christ is present in the Eucarist but we are not commanded to "adore" him in the Eucarist...

We believe that the Lord is Present in the Eucharist and Christ is adored/worshiped/venerated always in every place at all times.

I believe consecration of the gifts where their only purpose is for adoration to be problematic and misguided, yet not Idolatry for it is Christ Himself present.


Q

 

[Joshua G.]

Thank you Q.

 

[Protoevangel]

We venerate the items by which we recieve the Eucharist (the chalice, the right hand of the priest, the gifts during the great entrance, etc), but the Eucharist, in some views, isn't even fully the Eucharist until it is partaken of by the Body of Christ. We don't assign a moment at which the change occurs, so there isn't much sense in venerating it at a particular moment - though the closest thing I can think of is when we prostrate or bow after the invocation of the Holy Spirit over the gifts "And make these gifts the precious body of Thy Christ... " etc.

This is a Reformed view, called receptionism.

 

[Knee V]

As it was explained to me:

Q: When do the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ?
A: The bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ.

 

[Michael G]

We don't assign a moment at which the change occurs, so there isn't much sense in venerating it at a particular moment - though the closest thing I can think of is when we prostrate or bow after the invocation of the Holy Spirit over the gifts "And make these gifts the precious body of Thy Christ... " etc.

If I am not mistaken, that is the epiclesis.

 

[Protoevangel]

“Further, that the body itself and the blood of the Lord which are in the mystery of the Eucharist ought to be honored in the highest way, and worshiped with divine adoration. For the worship of the Holy Trinity and of the body and blood of the Lord is one.”
- Council of Jerusalem, 1672
​

It wasn't an ecumenical council, so further synods and councils can certainly revisit the subject... But it is not nearly so cut-and-dry “verboten” as some seem to think it is.


The way my Priest explained it to me: Yes, Christ IS present fully in the Eucharist. But not singularly in the Eucharist. In the Divine Liturgy, we are surrounded by Christ, and and indwelled by Christ. It is not an error to recognize Christ present in the Eucharist, and while the Body and blood are present, it is natural to be worshipful... However Christ is also present in the people, in the Gospel, et al. It would be a mistake of focus to fixate on this single manifestation of Christ at the expense of the others.

 

[Philothei]

First of we do have the "time of epiclesis" But not the "excact time of concecration" we woud rather not talk about excact time when the "body and blood " takes place.....I agree with Q you are right... I also agree with Proto since we do not have a "time" during the whole time of the Litrugy we are "in the presence" of Christ. We do not "specify" neither we single out the time like our western breathren does. Now if we consider that adoration hmmmm I am skeptical...I cannot discern from the quote above as it is out of its context IMHO. It does conlude about the Holy Trinity and I would assume that Damascus refers to it as to point that the whole of the Trinity is worshiped... I think that to single out any person of the Trinity and say that ONLY we adore Christ as HE is ONLY present in the Eucarist is flat out wrong

 

[cassc]

ooh oki! wow this is confusing me so much cause everyone's telling me different things thanks though! I just found this picture...
Greek Orthodox Church: St. George Greek Orthodox Church in Lowell, Massachusetts

ooo that's the church that my Grandmother (memory eternal) attended!! Small world, or big internet

 

[Protoevangel]

I cannot discern from the quote above as it is out of its context IMHO.

Free download (2Mb PDF): The Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem Page 161 (148)

 

[Philothei]

Third effort to post this... grrrr. Thanks for the link Proto first off. First off I think it does refers to the Holy Trinity adoration/worship (at first glance) I will try to read more tonight but I think that confirmed my suspision all along that it does refer to the Holy Trinity. The whole Liturgy refers to that "presence" during Liturgy. Christ's presence is also consumed rather than "just" adored though that is a defenate act that takes place in Liturgy of course by adoring the Holy Trinity we do adore Christ that goes without saying. But in our Trad we do not single out CHRIST as the one to be solemely adored... hope that makes sense. I tried to persuade my hubby to post here but he is too busy to watch Celtics versus Orlando....and they hardly win...hehehehe...

Casc... He is a true Bostonian as you know Go CELTICS !!!!

 

[cassc]

Haha don't get me started, someone proposed rescheduling last weeks Parish Council Meeting because it conflicted with the Celtics game (Father said NO!) It has been fun watching the Cs back on top though ;-)

 

[MoNiCa4316]

thanks to everyone who replied

I guess I still disagree, lol, but I'm glad I got a bit of a better understanding of the Orthodox view here...

In the Catholic church, the priests don't consecrate the Eucharist just for Adoration, but primarily for Communion. And I agree that Christ is also present in the Gospel, in the people, etc. However, of course, He is not physically present in these things, only in the Eucharist. It's His Body and Blood. So the purpose of adoration is not separated from Communion, it's just something we do "along the way" since it is Christ and it's not idolatry to worship Him... and it's also taught that when we adore the Eucharist, that helps us appreciate Communion all the more. So.. that's just a bit of clarification on some points.... I don't disagree with you that Christ is present in other ways, or that the primary purpose of the Eucharist is Communion. But I don't think that rules out any secondary purposes it might have. However.... I won't keep on arguing.. lol.. this is sort of a touchy topic I guess?

God bless

ooo that's the church that my Grandmother (memory eternal) attended!! Small world, or big internet

wow cool!

 

[Joshua G.]

You don't need to convince some of us here Monica.

 

[Joshua G.]

Haha don't get me started, someone proposed rescheduling last weeks Parish Council Meeting because it conflicted with the Celtics game (Father said NO!) It has been fun watching the Cs back on top though ;-)

I have to say, I wouldn't feel bad for saying that I cared more about the game than the PCM.

 

[Joshua G.]

This is a Reformed view, called receptionism.

Thanks, I was always wondering what this was called. I found out after I had already converted that my former Lutheran Parish taught this. I would have found that nutty even as a Lutheran had I known. I never believed that.