The Eucharist?

FatherHLL

Archon
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Also Canon 1 of the 6th Ecumenical Council (in Trullo):

"Also we recognize as inspired by the Spirit the pious voices of the one hundred and sixty-five God-beating fathers who assembled in this imperial city in the time of our Emperor Justinian of blessed memory, and we teach them to those who come after us; for these synodically anathematized and execrated Theodore of Mopsuestia (the teacher of Nestorius), and Origen, and Didymus, and Evagrius, all of whom reintroduced feigned Greek myths, and brought back again the circlings of certain bodies and souls, and deranged turnings [or transmigrations] to the wanderings or dreamings of their minds, and impiously insulting the resurrection of the dead. Moreover [they condemned] what things were written by Theodoret against the right faith and against the Twelve Chapters of blessed Cyril, and that letter which is said to have been written by Ibas."

Even if Byzantine Catholics try to call this into question, there can be no doubt of their authority in Orthodoxy. 
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
FatherHLL said:
Also Canon 1 of the 6th Ecumenical Council (in Trullo):

"Also we recognize as inspired by the Spirit the pious voices of the one hundred and sixty-five God-beating fathers who assembled in this imperial city in the time of our Emperor Justinian of blessed memory, and we teach them to those who come after us; for these synodically anathematized and execrated Theodore of Mopsuestia (the teacher of Nestorius), and Origen, and Didymus, and Evagrius, all of whom reintroduced feigned Greek myths, and brought back again the circlings of certain bodies and souls, and deranged turnings [or transmigrations] to the wanderings or dreamings of their minds, and impiously insulting the resurrection of the dead. Moreover [they condemned] what things were written by Theodoret against the right faith and against the Twelve Chapters of blessed Cyril, and that letter which is said to have been written by Ibas."

Even if Byzantine Catholics try to call this into question, there can be no doubt of their authority in Orthodoxy.   
Father,

It's likely that I am not a typical Catholic, much less typical eastern Catholic, but I cannot ever remember at any time in my life as a Catholic being told by any teacher that I respected that I could readily ignore any local councils.

This falls into a beside-the-point category and I don't mean to start a rabbit trail here.

EM
 

Papist

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
13,771
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
39
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
elijahmaria said:
FatherHLL said:
Also Canon 1 of the 6th Ecumenical Council (in Trullo):

"Also we recognize as inspired by the Spirit the pious voices of the one hundred and sixty-five God-beating fathers who assembled in this imperial city in the time of our Emperor Justinian of blessed memory, and we teach them to those who come after us; for these synodically anathematized and execrated Theodore of Mopsuestia (the teacher of Nestorius), and Origen, and Didymus, and Evagrius, all of whom reintroduced feigned Greek myths, and brought back again the circlings of certain bodies and souls, and deranged turnings [or transmigrations] to the wanderings or dreamings of their minds, and impiously insulting the resurrection of the dead. Moreover [they condemned] what things were written by Theodoret against the right faith and against the Twelve Chapters of blessed Cyril, and that letter which is said to have been written by Ibas."

Even if Byzantine Catholics try to call this into question, there can be no doubt of their authority in Orthodoxy.   
Father,

It's likely that I am not a typical Catholic, much less typical eastern Catholic, but I cannot ever remember at any time in my life as a Catholic being told by any teacher that I respected that I could readily ignore any local councils.

This falls into a beside-the-point category and I don't mean to start a rabbit trail here.

EM
I am totally with ya there elijahmaria. I can think a particular local that holds considerable weight with Catholics: The council of Orange (spelling?), because of its condemnation of pelagianism.
 

FatherHLL

Archon
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
Points
0
elijahmaria said:
FatherHLL said:
Also Canon 1 of the 6th Ecumenical Council (in Trullo):

"Also we recognize as inspired by the Spirit the pious voices of the one hundred and sixty-five God-beating fathers who assembled in this imperial city in the time of our Emperor Justinian of blessed memory, and we teach them to those who come after us; for these synodically anathematized and execrated Theodore of Mopsuestia (the teacher of Nestorius), and Origen, and Didymus, and Evagrius, all of whom reintroduced feigned Greek myths, and brought back again the circlings of certain bodies and souls, and deranged turnings [or transmigrations] to the wanderings or dreamings of their minds, and impiously insulting the resurrection of the dead. Moreover [they condemned] what things were written by Theodoret against the right faith and against the Twelve Chapters of blessed Cyril, and that letter which is said to have been written by Ibas."

Even if Byzantine Catholics try to call this into question, there can be no doubt of their authority in Orthodoxy.   
Father,

It's likely that I am not a typical Catholic, much less typical eastern Catholic, but I cannot ever remember at any time in my life as a Catholic being told by any teacher that I respected that I could readily ignore any local councils.

This falls into a beside-the-point category and I don't mean to start a rabbit trail here.

EM
Good to hear!  I was actually just referring to Heorhij's comment about Easter rite Catholics saying he was a perverter of truth, so I was referring to them.  Perhaps should have inserted the word "certain" or "those particular" into my sentence.  I hope no offense was taken due to my poor choice of words.   
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
FatherHLL said:
Good to hear!  I was actually just referring to Heorhij's comment about Easter rite Catholics saying he was a perverter of truth, so I was referring to them.  Perhaps should have inserted the word "certain" or "those particular" into my sentence.  I hope no offense was taken due to my poor choice of words.   
I do my level best never to take offense Father, even when it is intended, so its a breeze when its not!!  I thought you might be pleased to hear though that some of us are trained pretty well!  :)....It's difficult to tell sometimes for all the "noise."

EM
 

minasoliman

Stratopedarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
20,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NJ
Whether the message is misunderstood or not, it seems that the congregants who read His Eminence's word erroneously believe in an spirit form of body, and not a material form.  For this, I think His Eminence needs to clarify to help not have congregants go astray, as is clear from Heorhij's experiences.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
minasoliman said:
Whether the message is misunderstood or not, it seems that the congregants who read His Eminence's word erroneously believe in an spirit form of body, and not a material form.  For this, I think His Eminence needs to clarify to help not have congregants go astray, as is clear from Heorhij's experiences.
Would there be a problem if Metropolitan Hilarion, a Russian prelate, offered corrective advice to Ukrainians--as congregants?
 

Heorhij

Merarches
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
8,574
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
62
Location
Columbus, MS, USA (Originally from Ukraine)
Website
www.muw.edu
Second Chance said:
minasoliman said:
Whether the message is misunderstood or not, it seems that the congregants who read His Eminence's word erroneously believe in an spirit form of body, and not a material form.  For this, I think His Eminence needs to clarify to help not have congregants go astray, as is clear from Heorhij's experiences.
Would there be a problem if Metropolitan Hilarion, a Russian prelate, offered corrective advice to Ukrainians--as congregants?
I am afraid patriotic Ukrainians will not listen to him because he is from the Moscow Patriarchate (a.k.a. KGB-FSB Patriarchate or the Kremlin's Department of Religious Affairs). On the other hand, Ukrainian Orthodox who are faithful to the Moscow Patriarchate (the canonical folks) are way too busy hating Ukraine to bother themselves with insignificant things like body, matter, spirit, the Eucharist etc. :) (Mods, this is HUMOR, IRONY! Please do not move to "Politics"! :)))
 

Ivanov

Jr. Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
US
I am an ex-Catholic, currently a catechumen in the Greek Orthodox Church. The discussion re: 'transubstantiation' is very helpful to me. In the discussion regarding the 'spatial' presence of The Risen Christ in the context of His enthronement at the right hand of the Father and his Precious Body and Blood present to us in Holy Communion at the Divine Liturgy, 2 scriptures came to mind. John 3:13 and 20:26. I have also wondered for many years what was meant in scripture when Christ's post-resurrection appearances were described using the language... "He appeared in ANOTHER FORM".

I would sincerely appreciate someone commenting on what I have written here. Your help is very much appreciated. I understand and rejoice in the reality of 'mystery'... it invites wonder, prayer and a more earnest seeking of 'understanding' (but not 'understanding' as an end in and of itself).

Christ is Risen!

Ivanov
 

witega

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,617
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Ivanov said:
I am an ex-Catholic, currently a catechumen in the Greek Orthodox Church. The discussion re: 'transubstantiation' is very helpful to me. In the discussion regarding the 'spatial' presence of The Risen Christ in the context of His enthronement at the right hand of the Father and his Precious Body and Blood present to us in Holy Communion at the Divine Liturgy, 2 scriptures came to mind. John 3:13 and 20:26. I have also wondered for many years what was meant in scripture when Christ's post-resurrection appearances were described using the language... "He appeared in ANOTHER FORM".

I would sincerely appreciate someone commenting on what I have written here. Your help is very much appreciated. I understand and rejoice in the reality of 'mystery'... it invites wonder, prayer and a more earnest seeking of 'understanding' (but not 'understanding' as an end in and of itself).

Christ is Risen!

Ivanov

Hi Ivanov,

I'm not sure exactly what you are looking for commentary on? The one clear question in your post is with regards to "another form". To the best of my knowledge this phrase is used once in St. Mark's account of His encounter with the disciples on the road to Emmaus (though I could be misremembering or you could be thinking of a  different translation than the ones I'm most familiar with). As that passage makes clear at least part of what 'another form' means is simply that Christ looked like a different person so the disciples didn't not immediately recognize him. And as far as I can recall that is all the Fathers take from this passage--this isn't even necessarily tied to His risen, glorified form as there are passages from His pre- resurrection ministry where His enemies sought to lay hands on Him and suddenly  couldn't find Him. The passages are a little vague as to whether they are talking  about Him disguising His appearance, messing His pursuer's perceptions so they couldn't see him, or actual invisibility, but it's pretty clear He exerted some degree of His miraculous power to make sure they couldn't lay hands on Him before His time had come even when He was standing right in front of them.
 

Ivanov

Jr. Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
US
Thanks for your response. I can see how finding my question could be difficult :>) I should have included the quote(s) I was responding to.

Thanks again!

Ivanov
 

akimel

High Elder
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
523
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
afkimel.wordpress.com
Ivanov, you might find of interest Sergius Bulgakov's discussion of the resurrection appearances in his essay "The Eucharistic Dogma," in The Holy Grail & the Eucharist

I think sometimes we read the resurrection accounts too literally, as if our Lord's glorified body is just like his his mortal body, only no longer subject to death.  But of course there are hints in all the accounts of the mystery and transcendent nature of Christ's risen corporeality.  Of course he appeared to his disciples in the form of the body that they would personally recognize and which they would understand as the fulfillment of the eschatological hope of the resurrection from the dead (as opposed to a ghostly continuation, for example).  But surely the resurrection involves a transfiguration of material reality that we cannot possibly imagine, comprehend, or literally verbalize.  There is continuity but also radical discontinuity.  Our language necessarily breaks down when speaking of the resurrection.     
 

Ivanov

Jr. Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
US
Thank you Father. I made a note earlier today to look up 'The Eucharistic Dogma' (saw it referenced on the thread I was reading through). In my reading, another question came up (this is probably covered in another thread... just need to find it) regarding sin, confession and Holy Communion. In my RC experience, I was taught that I could receive Holy Communion as long as I wasn't 'in mortal sin'. They defined mortal sin and gave you 3 criteria that needed to be met in order for mortal sin to be present, which helped, at least practically. I'm growing in my understanding of the Orthodox teaching regarding sin and how its consequences are dealt with, but it is difficult to reconcile (in the Orthodox context) that I cannot receive Holy Communion if I have sinned and placed myself outside the Church, and at the same time what I pray in my Orthodox Prayer Book each morning to my Angel Guardian..."How can I beg forgiveness for all my bitter, evil and wicked sins which  I COMMIT EACH DAY, EACH NIGHT AND AT EVERY HOUR"? I was reading what a Priest had written (on an Orthodox Q&A) site, and he said that "IF" (my emphasis) someone had sinned , then... (as I referenced above). On the one hand it's "if" I sin... on the other it's, I sin virtually constantly! Can you refer me to the right thread or provide a concise answer when you have the time to answer this question. I do not at all desire to presume on your time by asking it.

Your time and desire to help are deeply appreciated! God bless you for your kindness!

Ivanov
 

akimel

High Elder
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
523
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
afkimel.wordpress.com
Perhaps the following citation from St John Cassian might be helpful to you:

"We must not avoid communion because we deem ourselves to be sinful. We must approach it more often for the healing of the soul and the purification of the spirit, but with such humility and faith that considering ourselves unworthy, we would desire even more the medicine for our wounds. Otherwise it is impossible to receive communion once a year, as certain people do, considering the sanctification of heavenly Mysteries as available only to saints. It is better to think that by giving us grace, the sacrament makes us pure and holy. Such people manifest more pride than humility, for when they receive, they think themselves as worthy. It is much better if, in humility of heart, knowing that we are never worthy of the Holy Mysteries we would receive them every Sunday for the healing of our diseases, rather than, blinded by pride, think that after one year we become worthy of receiving them."
 

Ivanov

Jr. Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
US
Thank you, Father. So very true. I received Holy Communion at least once a week, sometimes more often when I was a RC. The crux of my question/concern is if the Orthodox Church doesn't distinguish between venial and mortal (sin that disallows Holy Communion) sin, then how does one know when one's sins are such that he should refrain from Holy Communion and hasten to prayer and confession? Practically, I don't think (and I'm sure the Church doesn't teach) that I could go through each day wondering if I'm in or out, or in again... but maybe out again, ad infinitum, of communion with the Church... given that we are not wise or humble enough at times to see where we have sinned against God in a "communion-breaking" way. This would be a psychologically torturous dilemma that no christian could honestly hide under a cloak of pretended peace or joy. Now I say all of that, having at times been enslaved by what I've just described (mostly through my own ignorance and lack of faith) so that I can find the healing I need in this regard from the Truth now being given to me by the hand of the Orthodox Church in Christ's Name.

I hope that's a bit clearer. I do tie myself up in knots with too many words, too often :>) Thank you so very much for any help you can give.

Glory to our Risen Savior!

Ivanov
 

FatherHLL

Archon
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Despite modern writings to the contrary, the Orthodox Church does distinguish between pardonable sins, sin not unto death, and sin unto death (mortal sin).  This is true from Scripture onward:  all sin is unrighteousness, but not all sin is unto death.  The Kollyvades Fathers show how in the earlier Church Fathers sin actually has seven levels, the most grievous being sin unto death or mortal sin.  St. Nikodemos gives examples. 
 

peteprint

High Elder
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
706
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
60
Ivanov said:
Thank you, Father. So very true. I received Holy Communion at least once a week, sometimes more often when I was a RC. The crux of my question/concern is if the Orthodox Church doesn't distinguish between venial and mortal (sin that disallows Holy Communion) sin, then how does one know when one's sins are such that he should refrain from Holy Communion and hasten to prayer and confession? Practically, I don't think (and I'm sure the Church doesn't teach) that I could go through each day wondering if I'm in or out, or in again... but maybe out again, ad infinitum, of communion with the Church... given that we are not wise or humble enough at times to see where we have sinned against God in a "communion-breaking" way. This would be a psychologically torturous dilemma that no christian could honestly hide under a cloak of pretended peace or joy. Now I say all of that, having at times been enslaved by what I've just described (mostly through my own ignorance and lack of faith) so that I can find the healing I need in this regard from the Truth now being given to me by the hand of the Orthodox Church in Christ's Name.

I hope that's a bit clearer. I do tie myself up in knots with too many words, too often :>) Thank you so very much for any help you can give.

Glory to our Risen Savior!

Ivanov
Dear Ivanov.

Obviously the fathers here can give you better counsel than I can (we are fortunate to have so many priests on the forum), but my advice would be "when in doubt, talk with your priest".  He should be able to clear up the confusion for you.  I have an arrangement with my priest to confess once a month if I want to commune each week.  Of course, I can (and do) confess anytime I feel the conviction that I have something that I really need to confess to father.  I hope this helps.
 
Top