Weekly Liturgy

[anawim]

I was wondering what is the historical Tradition for the East having a weekly, as opposed to a daily liturgy?

[Rilian]

[I misspoke in my original post] -

Anyway the structure of the Eucharist come from the Jewish heritage of the church. The Eucharistic gathering took place on the day of Resurrection after the Sabbath.

A few other things I have run across.

I believe Fr. Schmemann said something along the lines of there being a tendency to make the divine liturgy not the summit of all services, but the only service in the mind of the faithful. This elevation of the divine liturgy would then come at the cost of devaluing the other services in the daily/weekly cycle.

A practical issue is the fast that must be maintained in order to commune. This applies as much for the priest and/or bishop as it does for the laity.

[gzt]

The Divine Liturgy is not part of the weekly cycle, it is outside the Liturgy of Time. The Divine Liturgy can and indeed was celebrated daily [outside Lent]. Many places have the Divine Liturgy during the week, usually not every day because they don't have the resources. My own parish has it every Thursday morning, for instance. I know of one that has it every Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday. Most places don't have the resources and the daily liturgy is not usually celebrated outside of cathedrals and monasteries and usually not even there. HTH.

[anawim]

The Divine Liturgy can and indeed was celebrated daily [outside Lent].

Do you know when it changed, or why?

[Rilian]

I think the original Eucharistic gathering was weekly. The liturgy and the typikon then evolved in stages over time to be as we have them now.

[icxn]

Do you know when it changed, or why?
It hasn't changed. Many monasteries do have liturgy(ies) every day. Someone was telling me the other day of a monastery, I think the one in Jordanville, that they have been having liturgy every day for the last ~80 years!

icxn

[gzt]

It still can be and is, the reason that it usually is not is practicality. I'm not sure when it ceased to be typical. But some recent saints, like St. John of Kronstadt [1906], St. John of San Francisco [1966], and St. Theophan the Recluse [1891] were known for celebrating the liturgy daily and it still occurs in some cathedral nad monasteries.

[Xpycoctomos]

I too have heard that, for example, dily liturgy is common practice in many parts of Russia (agian, where they ahve they resources/priests)a dn that this consept is not foreign to Orthodoxy even if it is foreign to most of us here. However, I would have to imagine that this developed later in the Church, perhaps parallel with the formation of monastic orders (???) becuase it seems that in the early CHuch the DL was mostly intended for teh 8th day and, hence, a weekly celebration (granted, outside of time... but still meant to be celebrated aftter they 7th day, the sabbath, that is saturday). I don't think the apostles were meeting everyday for DL and if they were I would be interested in seeing what we might base this belief on. Nevertheless, I think the developmetn of daily or several-times-a-week DLs is good and pious development in the Church.

John

[gzt]

I don't think it would have been a monastic development because most early monks were not priests and were fairly isolated except when they met on Sundays and feast days, or at least that's my impression. It's probably from urban Christianity and I've definitely seen antenicene references to it.

[gzt]

St Cyprian of Carthage, ca 250 ad, says, "Moreover, we ask that this bread be given daily, lest we, who are in Christ and receive the Eucharist daily as food of salvation...". An antenicene reference.

[xristos.anesti]

It is very important to realise that as it is wrong to belive that whole of the BIBLE fell from the sky in the time of the Apostles (together with a 12 volume set of the Biblical Commentary), it is wrong to think that whole of the Orthodox Theology got developed by the time of St. Athanasius (just an example).

Orthodox Church grows and her theology grows. Unlike Latins who see evolution of theology as "finding" completely new and acatholic (contradictory) teachings (not to even mention majority of those considering themselves to be Protestants), Orthodox Church see evolution of theolgy within one frame.

Not everything was developed by the end of Seventh ecumenical synod, we did not stop living then. Development is living. Tradition is living. The Tradition that is not living is not Tradition.

When we say Catholic we do not presume beliving what was believed by all, everywhere and until the end of Seventh Ecumenical council. No, it is what is believed by all, everywhere and always. This word, always, gives the 3rd dimension (element of time) to the word Catholic, the other two being of people and space.

How does something become Catholic? Well, the Church agrees or disagrees on something. It starts being lived. It gets accepted. There were many wrong ideas that came (and are coming) that at the moment of their conception were not so clear - regarding their Orthodoxy (or lack of thereof). But over time (that 3rd element) those other two elements (people and space) lead by the action of God (for it is His Church) decided on Orthodoxy of an idea or a structure of something.

We are changing Church, by being a Church that does not change. And this was so from the day 0. How do we see this, apparent contradiction?

Easy, say something new, and if you get babushkas pull your hair, you will know if that is right or wrong. This, somewhat funny approach is reality of the Orthodox Church. Bishop is Orthodox if he teaches the right ideas, it is not that idea is right if it is taught by a Bishop. And who decides on what is Right or Wrong? The Catholic Church - whole 3 elements.

Same with the Services. Want to worship as early Christians did? Go, digg a whole and hide.

We have grown, and are growing...

We are changing by not changing.

[Rilian]

I started reading Fr. Schmemann's Liturgical Theology again which I had a lot of problems staying with before, but gzt suggested I try again at some point. It actually covers a fair amount of this topic and I'm having an easier time with it.

He does mention the significance of the day of the Eucharistic gathering in the earliest period, referring to it as with the eighth day term that xpycoctomos mentioned. The reason for this is again a carryover from the Jewish heritage of the church (he says the Eucharist is also modeled on the kiddush). The eighth day is the day of messianic fulfillment. Therefore the Eucharist, and the divine liturgy by extension I guess, is itself outside of "time". It is something that is an entry in to the next age or aeon as Fr. Schmemann says.

In his study he says the cycle of structed services began early but continued to undergo development. He points to sources such as the Didache, the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, St. Cyprian and others to show how worship was formed.

I think he considers the monastic envrionments to be fairly critical in forming and shaping the worship we have now. I think one of the two main Typikons in use now came from the monastic environment.

[The Prokeimenon!]

also on a practical note- the fasting guidelines for receiving the mysteries are quite strict: no food or drink from midnight (or from after Vespers) until after the Liturgy, and no marital relations before receiving or on the same day as receiving the Eucharist. In other words, if a community has only one Priest, he'd almost never get to see his wife, if you will, and get nothing done for the Parish because he's constantly preparing for the Eucharist.

Moses

[The Prokeimenon!]

Want to worship as early Christians did? Go, digg a whole and hide.

:D :D :D