Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion related to learning about the faith (Catechetics), defense of the Faith (Apologetics), the Liturgy and canon law, motivated by a desire to grow closer to Christ or to bring someone else closer.

Saint Augustine of Hippo is considered on of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time and the Doctor of the Church.
Learn More: Saint Augustine

Jul 04 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: Paul, your comment carries no more weight than Larry's. Perhaps your friend's actions in this matter were inappropriate.

Sorry, but it is a common practice in her Church.
Jul 04 new
(quote) Chelsea-743484 said: Are you certain that was not eulogia (the blessed bread)? There is a very old practice of handing that out when there is not enough consecrated species for everyone to communicate.
It was the consecrated bread.
Jul 04 new
(quote) Chelsea-743484 said: Here is the quote again: "Now as to the reception of the Sacrament, it was always the custom in the Church of God, that laymen should receive the communion from priests; but that priests when celebrating should communicate themselves; which custom, as coming down from an Apostolical tradition, ought with justice and reason to be retained."

To communicate one's self is to take the sacred species in hand and place it into one's own mouth. The Council of Trent states that "priests when celebrating should communicate themselves" as opposed to the custom that "laymen should receive the communion from priests." Priests communicate themselves vs. laymen receiving it from priests.

If the action is the same, taking the bread in hand and putting it into one's own mouth, in both cases, then why is a differentiation being made at the Council? I am not trying to wag a finger at you or demean you in any way, but it doesn't make any sense to me to say that the Council made no differentiation. That would effectively mean that the Council put forth a senseless binding proposition (ought) on this issue.

Matters of small "t" tradition can vary and change, but to say that a custom which is an Apostolic tradition can change is really putting one's foot in it. Who can change an Apostolic tradition??
As long as it is a discipline, it can be changed.

As hard as you try,the words used do not indicate how the lay person receives other than he receives it from the priest. All the words say is the layperson cannot walk up to the altar and take the bread, it must be given to him by a priest.

In any case, how communion is received is a discipline which can be changed.
Jul 04 new
(quote) Paul-866591 said: Oh is that why a Coptic Orthodox friend offered me some of the sacred bread she had brought home from the Easter services for her family members who could not attend? She brought home a whole loaf and it was not indicted.

Darn, there goes another slightly misinformed unthinkable action!
Paul, Chelsea is right: It was "eulogia" that you were given. As I mentioned, communion is given by means of intinction.

I can assure you that your friend did not sneak away with the consecrated Host. Orthodox priests don't allow such shenanigans -- especially the Russians!

Your willingness to call me "uninformed" despite your obvious unawareness of the Eastern practice I will allow to pass without remark.

Except for that.
Jul 04 new
(quote) Paul-866591 said: It was the consecrated bread.
You are making an understandable mistake.

The bread you received had been blessed (which is what 'eulogia' means) but it was not the host over which the consecration and paraclesis had been said.

Again, familiarize yourself with Orthodox practice first. The consecrated bread is placed into the chalice and is spooned into the mouths of the faithful. The remains are consumed on the spot by the priest.
Jul 04 new
The eulogia is often distributed after Divine Liturgy, especially on special feast days. That is how your friend gets a hold of it in the first place.

We also process up to kiss the Cross on such days; and on very special days we have our foreheads brushed with perfumed chrism.
Jul 04 new
(quote) Larry-979190 said: You are making an understandable mistake.

The bread you received had been blessed (which is what 'eulogia' means) but it was not the host over which the consecration and paraclesis had been said.

Again, familiarize yourself with Orthodox practice first. The consecrated bread is placed into the chalice and is spooned into the mouths of the faithful. The remains are consumed on the spot by the priest.
Sorry, I will take the word of my friend. She was very clear and unambiguous, it was Consecrated bread, not just blessed. We discussed it at length.

I explained why I could not partake. If it were merely blessed she would have explained that.
Jul 04 new
(quote) Paul-866591 said: Sorry, I will take the word of my friend. She was very clear and unambiguous, it was Consecrated bread, not just blessed. We discussed it at length.

I explained why I could not partake. If it were merely blessed she would have explained that.
She is wrong.

In any case, there is no reason for you to "take the word" of your friend, or believe me or Chelsea.

On this page: evangelismcopticorthodox.org

you can see this line: "The Holy Communion is offered only to the members of the Oriental Orthodox churches, which are: the Coptic Orthodox Church, the Syrian Orthodox Church, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Armenian Orthodox Church, and the Indian Orthodox Church."

So, either your friend broke her own rules, or she was offering you the eulogia.


Jul 04 new
(quote) Paul-866591 said: Sorry, but it is a common practice in her Church.
The frequency of the practice says nothing of its legitimacy.

Jul 05 new
(quote) Larry-979190 said: She is wrong.

In any case, there is no reason for you to "take the word" of your friend, or believe me or Chelsea.

On this page: http://evangelismcopticorthodox.org/images/A_Few_Things_to_Know_final.pdf

you can see this line: "The Holy Communion is offered only to the members of the Oriental Orthodox churches, which are: the Coptic Orthodox Church, the Syrian Orthodox Church, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Armenian Orthodox Church, and the Indian Orthodox Church."

So, either your friend broke her own rules, or she was offering you the eulogia.


And of course there is never even the remotest possibility that the Church is making an accommodation for pastoral reasons.

No never!!

The whole point which I very badly phrased was your statement, "Among us, as among the Orthodox, lay communion in the hand is unthinkable." A statement which allows for no possible deviation.

Here was a clear example to the contrary, yet the insistence is that it is not possible.

At least give credit to my friend that she may well know the teachings and practices of her Church as well as you do your rite.
Posts 41 - 50 of 52