| De donde se deduce que San Cipriano pone en directa relación el vino y el agua del cáliz consagrado con la harina y el agua con la cual se confecciona el pan consagrado. Quería decir con esto que se excluía el pan con levadura? No osaríamos afirmarlo; era un detalle insignificante que no afectaba a su alegorismo. San Epifanio (+ 402) nos ha dejado noticia de algunas comunidades de cristianos judaizantes existentes en su tiempo, de las cuales señala ciertas particularidades rituales, entre las cuales está la de consagrar con agua y pan ácimo. Este detalle, puesto de relieve por San Epifanio, hace suponer que, en cambio, el pan eucarístico normalmente consagrado en las iglesias del Oriente no era ácimo, sino fermentado. Por lo demás, cuando los Padres y después el antiguo ceremonial romano (I OR) hablan de la ofrenda del pan llevado al altar por los fieles para ser consagrado, nunca amonestan que tal pan deba tener una especial confección sin levadura. San Ambrosio lo llama, en efecto, pañis usitatus. Todavía en tiempo de San Gregorio Magno debía usarse un pan de este género, porque sólo así se explica el episodio, narrado en su vida por Juan Diácono, de aquella mujer que se rió escépticamente cuando vio dar en la comunión pan que el día antes había cocido en casa y ofrecido poco antes en la misa. Si ella lo hubiese intencionadamente confeccionado para tal fin sin levadura, su maravilla no habría tenido ningún fundamento. Por tanto, según nuestro parecer, mientras juzgamos más probable la sentencia de aquellos que admiten también en Occidente el uso preferente del pan fermentado en la misa, como ocurría y ocurre todavía en las iglesias orientales, comprendidas las nestorianas (cuyas costumbres litúrgicas se remontan al siglo V), concedemos de buena gana que, en defecto de testimonios explícitos, la cuestión queda indecisa, si bien no queremos concluir que, en la disciplina litúrgica antigua, el seguir una u otra costumbre (del pan fermentado o no) fuese indiferente para la Iglesia. |
| I have sinned by contempt for people, gloating over misfortunes others, self-reliance, pride and blasphemous thoughts. Forgive me, O Lord, and help me to become a better Christian. Sins of the tongue : I have sinned, my Lord, by idle talk, unnecessary laughter, speaking in the church and by using Your Holy Name in vain. I have sinned by criticizing others, by using rude words, yelling, and by making sarcastic comments. I have sinned by cursing people and wishing them evil, by mockery and insults. I have sinned by telling indecent jokes, bragging and breaking my promises. I have sinned by complaining, irreverent conversations and damning. I have sinned by spreading unkind rumors, gossiping, lying, slandering and denunciation. Forgive me, O Lord, and help me to become a better Christian. Sins through deeds : I have sinned, my Lord, by not loving You, my Creator and Benefactor, with all my heart and all the time as I should. I have sinned, by being selfish, lazy and by wasting time. I have sinned by careless and disoriented prayer, by missing church services and coming late to church. I have sinned by being disrespectful with my parents, by refusing to help them and to do what they said, by disobedience and stubbornness. I have sinned by negligence towards family needs and by failing to instruct my children in the Christian faith. I have sinned by self-centeredness, over-preoccupation with my career and success in life, greediness, stinginess and by failing to help the needy. I have sinned by over-eating, over-indulgence, breaking fasts, smoking, abusing alcohol, using stimulants, squandering resources and by gambling. Forgive me, O Lord, and help me to become a better Christian. I have sinned, my Lord, by looking at someone with lust, looking at indecent films or magazines, listening to music which evokes crude or lustful desires, listening to indecent jokes and stories. I have sinned by wasting too much time in front of a TV, by watching scenes of violence and sin. I have sinned by being obsessed with my appearance, by behaving in a tempting matter, masturbation, lasciviousness, sexual perversions, adultery, and other corporal sins which are too shameful to say aloud. |
| Esto se manifestó también, en el siglo IX, en el retiro del cáliz del laicado . Desde ese momento, aunque la comunión continuó siendo distribuida bajo las dos especies, fue dada por medio de una cuchara . Es significativo que haya sido un argumento relacionado con la interpretación litúrgica el que sirviera de ocasión para el así llamado cisma de 1054. El asunto en disputa entre Oriente y Occidente era el uso de los ázimos . Occidente usaba pan ázimo para la eucaristía, mientras que Oriente usaba pan leudado . Los griegos sostenían que el pan leudado simbolizaba el cuerpo animado de Cristo: el hecho de que los latinos usaran ázimos mostraba que eran apolinaristas, pues negaban que Jesús tenía un alma humana. Los griegos, además, sostenían que el pan eucarístico debía ser normal, el pan leudado de todos los días, para ser así consubstancial con la humanidad: «Nuestro pan de cada día.» Entendían que el pan era el «tipo» de la humanidad, de nuestra humanidad, que cambia en la humanidad transfigurada de Cristo. La piedad medieval latina, por otro lado, enfatizaba la «supersubstancialidad» del pan. Los latinos, al no atribuir mucha significación a este detalle rubricista aparentemente menor, sólo querían que los griegos cesaran de condenar la costumbre latina y estaban perfectamente de acuerdo en permitirles continuar usando pan leudado. Ésta era la disputa principal y la razón primaria para los acontecimientos dramáticos de 1054: en aquel momento, los bizantinos ni siquiera trajeron a colación los otros puntos de conflicto. Esta intransigencia bizantina sobre un punto aparentemente tan trivial revela mucho acerca de su piedad litúrgica. Primero, consideran los textos y ritos litúrgicos como fuentes de la teología . Por eso los métodos tradicionales de exégesis bíblica pueden ser aplicados a la liturgia. Pues la liturgia , junto con la Biblia , es la fuente primaria y la manifestación de la vida de la Iglesia , y la revelación de la verdad eterna . Un rito o texto litúrgico, igual que un pasaje de la Escritura, debe tener no sólo un sentido literal sino también espiritual , y el sentido espiritual es igual de importante y tan verdadero como el literal. Los peligros son obvios en tal aproximación, en particular cuando los vuelos del alegorismo no son controlados por una visión coherente y consistente, y cuando se intenta fragmentar los sentidos sin tener en cuenta el rito como un todo. Sin embargo, la noción de que «la liturgia es una fuente primaria para la teología de la Iglesia,» así como su expresión primaria, sigue siendo característica de la Iglesia oriental. |
| I have not preserved a love for God and for my neighbor nor have I made enough efforts, because of laziness and lack of care, to learn the Commandments of God and the precepts of the Holy Fathers. I have sinned: by not praying in the morning and in the evening and in the course of the day; by not attending the services or by coming to Church only half-heartedly, lazily and carelessly; by conversing during the services, by not paying attention, letting my mind wander and by departure from the Church before the dismissal and blessing. I have sinned by judging members of the clergy. I have sinned by not respecting the Feasts, breaking the Fasts, and by immoderation in food and drink. I have sinned by self-importance, disobedience, willfulness, self-righteousness, and the seeking of approval and praise. I have sinned by unbelief, lack of faith, doubts, despair, despondency, abusive thoughts, blasphemy and swearing. I have sinned by pride, a high opinion of my self, narcissism, vanity, conceit, envy, love of praise, love of honors, and by putting on airs. I have sinned: by judging, malicious gossip, anger, remembering of offenses done to me, hatred and returning evil for evil; by slander, reproaches, lies, slyness, deception and hypocrisy; by prejudices, arguments, stubbornness, and an unwillingness to give way to my neighbor; by gloating, spitefulness, taunting, insults and mocking; by gossip, by speaking too much and by empty speech. I have sinned by unnecessary and excessive laughter, by reviling and dwelling upon my previous sins, by arrogant behavior, insolence and lack of respect. I have sinned by not keeping my physical and spiritual passions in check, by my enjoyment of impure thoughts, licentiousness and unchastity in thoughts, words and deeds. I have sinned by lack of endurance towards my illnesses and sorrows, a devotion to the comforts of life and by being too attached to my parents, children, relatives and friends. I have sinned by hardening my heart, having a weak will and by not forcing myself to do good. |
| Partir el pan fue en la Iglesia primitiva una función puramente ministerial, exigida por la necesidad de reducir en trozos el pan consagrado, a fin de darlo en comunión a los fieles. In oblatione (Christus) patitur frangí – escribía el Crisóstomo – Ut Omnes Impleat. En efecto, ésta se realizaba inmediatamente después de la fracción del pan. Frangens panem – prescribe el ritual de la Traditio – (episcopus) singulas partes porrigens, dicat: Pañis caelestis in Christo lesu. Pero la función material, precisamente porque interesaba más a los sentidos, atraía la común atención con preferencia sobre otras. Se explica por esto cómo muy pronto se le agregaron significados místico-simbólicos, dos de los cuales desembocaron en un rito de conmixtión. El simbolismo más antiguo en cuanto al tiempo fue éste: que el pan fraccionado, panis quem frangimus, representaba al cuerpo de Cristo, roto en su pasión. La fracción se convertía, en cierto sentido, como en un rito de sacrificio. He aquí el porqué de la antigua glosa apostólica: κλμενον υπρ υμν=roto por vosotros; y del concepto frecuentemente referido por los Padres: Cristo es el pan que cada día se lleva a la mesa de la Iglesia y que se parte ( frangitur) en remisión de los pecados. Fraccionado el pan, se disponían sobre la patena las partículas de tal manera que formasen la figura de la humanidad crucificada de Cristo. El concilio II de Tours prohibió estas extravagancias y ordenó que se pusiesen las partículas simplemente en forma de cruz, como todavía se hace en el rito mozárabe. El fraccionamiento de las oblatas consagradas era una función imponente, característica, en la cual tomaba parte el presbyterium entero. Obispos, sacerdotes y diáconos se apresuraban a partir el pan eucarístico, que se les presentaba en grandes patenas, e introducían los trozos en saquitos de lino que los acólitos tenían abiertos. Durante el desarrollo de las ceremonias, el papa Sergio I (687–701) había oportunamente ordenado ejecutar un canto, el Agnus Dei. La fracción como tal se mantuvo en el ritual de la misa hasta que se hizo necesario que el pan ofrecido se partiese en trozos para ser distribuido. Es difícil precisar un término de tiempo sobre el particular, porque varió de lugar a lugar. |
| – Which details are in question in the first place? – Due to the importance of the problem, which has become now especially acute in connection with certain events, I will give an extensive quotation from the 1993 IOC final document sealed by representatives of all the universally recognized autocephalous Churches: ‘3. The full convergence of views was noted with regard to the necessary canonical conditions for declaring autocephaly of a Local Church, i. e., with regard to the consent and actions of the Mother Church, the ensuring of pan-Orthodox consensus and the role of the Ecumenical Patriarchate as well as other autocephalous Orthodox Church in declaring autocephaly. Accordingly: a) the Mother Church, in receiving a request from a subordinate church region, shall assess the existing ecclesiological, canonical and pastoral preconditions for granting autocephaly. Should a Local Council as the supreme church body give its consent, it shall make an appropriate proposal to the Ecumenical Patriarchate to seek a pan-Orthodox consensus informing the rest of the autocephalous Churches. b) the Ecumenical Patriarchate, in accordance with pan-Orthodox arrangements, by a patriarchal letter brings to general notice all things connected with a concrete request and seeks a pan-Orthodox consensus. Pan-Orthodox consensus is expressed in the unanimity of the Councils of the autocephalous Churches. c) In expressing the consent of the Mother Church and pan-Orthodox consensus, the Ecumenical Patriarch shall officially proclaim the autocephaly of a petitioning Church by issuing a Patriarchal Tomos. The Tomos is to be signed by the Ecumenical Patriarch and (advisably) the Primates of all the autocephalous Churches but without fail by the primate of the Mother Church. 4. The Local Churches declared autocephalous are to be brought in as equal to the fellowship of Orthodox Churches and shall have all the common Orthodox established privileges (diptychs, liturgical mention of names, inter-Orthodox relations, etc.). |
| In April 2016, the Russian Orthodox Church Holy Synod determined (Proceeding No. 34) the membership of the Russian Orthodox Church delegation to the Pan-Orthodox Council and His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople was notified of it in an appropriate letter. Concurrently, critical remarks began to be voiced concerning draft documents soon after their publication, coming from the episcopate, clergy and laity of the Russian Church. The Moscow Patriarchate, the Department for External Church Relations and other Synodal bodies received en mass letters from the Orthodox faithful criticizing the Council’s texts and the very process of preparations for the Council. In response to the confusion of the flock, the Department for External Church Relations came out with the necessary explanations and comments by publishing an appropriate statement. To ensure a broad discussion on the Council’s draft documents, with the blessing of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, a conference on ‘The Pan-Orthodox Council: Opinions and Expectations’ took place on April 19 at the St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University of the Humanities in Moscow. As a result of this conference, some amendments to the Council’s documents on ‘Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World’, and ‘The Mission of the Orthodox Church in Today’s World’ were prepared and submitted to the Supreme Church Authority for consideration. In spite of the decreasing period of time remaining till the convocation of the Council, there are still a multitude of unresolved problems, which question the possibility for the Council to reach a pan-Orthodox consensus. The Council’s Working Procedure, prepared at the Synaxis of the Primates of Orthodox Churches on January 21-28, 2016, in Chambesy, has not been signed by the delegation of the Patriarchate of Antioch. The draft document on ‘The Sacrament of Marriage and Impediments to It’ has not been signed by the delegations of the Patriarchate of Antioch and Georgia. The proposal of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill to use the remaining time for starting pan-Orthodox negotiations on this matters as part of the Pan-Orthodox Secretariat, ‘with the consequent consideration of the proposals developed by the Synaxis of the Primates of Local Orthodox Churches’ (His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia’s letter to His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople No. 01/818 of 26 February 2016) has not been supported by the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The Secretariat met only twice for the past period to be engaged predominantly in logistical matters. The proposal of the representative of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Pan-Orthodox Secretariat to consider the negotiation of the documents was declined. |
| 6) coordinate the work of the pan-Orthodox Secretariat of the Council. Article 6 Secretariat of the Council The Secretariat of the Council is a pan-Orthodox body, i.e.: 1) it shall consist of one hierarch from each delegation as well as a secretary for the preparation of a Holy and Great Council, who supervises the work of the pan-Orthodox Secretariat: 2) members of the Secretariat shall be assisted in their work by ad hoc advisers: clergy, monastics or laity who are chosen from among the consultants of the delegations of the Local Orthodox Churches and shall support the manifold work of the pan-Orthodox Secretariat. The number of such advisers cannot exceed two persons from each delegation. Article 7 Terms of Reference of the Secretariat of the Council The terms of reference of the Secretariat of the Council shall be as follows: 1) to compile files with materials for the pre-Council progress for drafting texts on items on the Council’s agenda in the official working languages; 2) to take the minutes of the Council’s sessions; 3) to assist in the work of plenary sessions and the Council’s Commissions; 4) to ensure the proper organization of simultaneous translation of the Council’s discussion into the official languages; 5) to set up Special Committees for both drafting reports for immediate information to the public on the progress of the Council and for preparing its message; 6) to properly inform the present observers from other Christian churches or confessions by providing them with appropriate files with items on the Council’s agenda; and 7) to solve immediately all other unforeseen practical or procedural problems. Article 8 The Work of the Council The work of the Council shall begin and end with the celebration of the pan-Orthodox Divine Liturgy presided over by the Ecumenical Patriarchate with the participation of all the primates of the autocephalous Orthodox Churches or their representatives in accordance with the diptychs of the Ecumenical Patriarchate; 1) It shall be carried out in the form of plenary sessions and/or Council’s Commissions in accordance with the elaborated program of studies on the agenda items, the texts of which were unanimously approved by the Pan-Orthodox Pre-Council Conferences and Meetings of the Primates of autocephalous Orthodox Churches; |
| Following the decision, at the First Pan-Orthodox Conference in Rhodes in 1961, to work towards a council that would address the major issues of Orthodox Church life (the Great and Holy Council of the Orthodox Church), a number of pan-Orthodox consultations and conferences have been held in between to discuss the themes to be addressed at the Council: the Inter-Orthodox Preparatory Commission (1971) and the first (1976), second (1982) and third Preconciliar Pan-Orthodox Conferences in Chambésy. These meetings, in which all local Orthodox Churches participate, are defined as follows: ‘Preconciliar Pan-Orthodox Conferences are extraordinary meetings of the Orthodox Church which are summoned according to the Pan-Orthodox established customs of the canonically appointed representatives of the local Autocephalous and Autonomous Orthodox Churches, aiming to cover the collective preparation of the Holy and Great Council.’ 45 The following text is a translation of the document (in the working languages Greek, Russian and French) unanimously adopted at the Third Preconciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference in Chambésy, October 28–November 6, 1986. The contribution of the Orthodox Church to the realization of the Christian ideals of peace, justice, freedom, fraternity and love between the nations as well as to the elimination of racial and other forms of discrimination. 46 Conscious of the burning issues that concern the whole of today’s humanity, the Orthodox Church has from the very beginning inscribed “the contribution of the Orthodox Church to the realization of the Christian ideals of peace, justice, freedom, fraternity and love between the nations as well as to the elimination of racial discrimination” on the agenda of the Holy and Great Council. Needless to say, this concern is not limited to the Orthodox Church. Peace is a matter of concern for all Christians and for all religions, and it reflects, in diverse shapes and forms, the preoccupations of humanity as a whole. What, then, shall be the common basis upon which the Orthodox, living in differing contexts, shall accomplish the Christian ideals of peace, justice, freedom, fraternity and love between the nations? More specifically, which is the position of the Orthodox Church regarding these ideals, and what concrete actions can it undertake in order to contribute towards their accomplishment? On these matters, the III Preconciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference, after thorough and systematic study, submits the following text to the Holy and Great Council, expressing satisfaction over what has been achieved, yet in full awareness of the human insufficiencies that have been recognized in this field. |
| The only possible decision in this case is to continue the preparation of the Holy and Great Council with the subsequent achievement of pan-Orthodox consent to its convocation at a different date. In connection with the above, the Holy Synod, in keeping with the decision made by the Russian Orthodox Church Bishops’ Council on February 2-3, 2016, (Resolutions, Par. 6), resolves: 1) that support be given to the proposals of the Orthodox Churches of Antioch, Georgia, Serbia and Bulgaria to postpone the convocation of the Pan-Orthodox Council for a time which will need to be established as a result of a pan-Orthodox discussion and under the indispensable condition that the Primates of all the generally recognized Local autocephalous Orthodox Church agree to it; 2) that an appropriate proposal be immediately sent to His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and all the Primates of Local Orthodox Churches; 3) that in case of this proposal is not accepted by the Most Holy Church of Constantinople while the Council on Crete is still convened despite the absence of the consent of several Local Orthodox Churches, the participation of the delegation of the Russian Orthodox Church in it, with profound regret, be considered impossible; 4) that effort to consolidate pan-Orthodox cooperation in preparing the future Holy and Great Council be continued by all possible means, as it is called to become a true witness to the unity of the Holy Universal and Apostolic Church; 5) that the opinion be expressed once again that a successful accomplishment of the Council’s preparation could be promoted by the more intensive work of the Pan-Orthodox Secretariat as a body which makes it possible to examine proposals for the resolution of problematic issues, to settle the existing differences, to finalize the necessary documents and to remove all the obstacles for the convocation and God-pleasing completion of the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church; 6) to consider it desirable that, taking into account the proposals expressed in many Local Orthodox Churches, the future Council could be attended by all the hierarchs of the Holy Churches of God without restrictions, since it will certainly enhance the authority of the decisions made by the Council. |
|
|
