OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 19, 2014, 11:27:13 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why isn't Western Rite Orthodoxy thriving?  (Read 40413 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #135 on: November 29, 2010, 06:11:12 PM »


Those thoughts are almost 15 years old, fyi. 


You want to resurrect liturgical forms which are 1500 years old but you don't think that thoughts from 15 years ago have any value.   laugh

Are you able, fmi,  to take what Bishop Kallistos wrote about the situation in the UK in 1996 and tell us what is inapplicable in 2010?    To my mind nothing has changed.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #136 on: November 29, 2010, 06:13:54 PM »

And the Award for "Most Obvious Joke" goes to... Wink

I'm not in the U.K. so I'm not sure how applicable it would be at this time.  Perhaps someone else could enlighten us.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #137 on: November 29, 2010, 06:39:06 PM »

lack of organization/unification perhaps?

I wonder if there are also political reasons, in the UK.    The websites of the English mission are very specific that they are targetting members of the state Church, the Church of England.  Now the connection between the Russian Church and the Russian Government is very tight.  It would not require much more than a small wink and a nod from members of the House of Lords or indeed simply from the House of Commons, into the ear of the Russian ambassador, to stop things dead in their tracks.   If only for the sake of trade and economic reasons Russia will be reluctant to offend Great Britain by pursuing the conversion of members of the Church of England.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #138 on: November 29, 2010, 06:42:55 PM »

My critique:


Quote
First, the historical aspect : Prior to the Schism, when the Latin West was still in full communion with the Orthodox East, various western rites were in use in the West, and it was never suggested that these rites - most notably, the ancient Roman rite - were not Orthodox. In princi ple, therefore, there is no reason why one or more western rites should not be used in Orthodoxy. There is no theological objection per se to the use of a diversity of rites in the one Church; on the contrary, this confirms the Church's catholicity.

Yay!  Grin

Quote
Second, the liturgical aspect : But what western rite should be used? In France, the Eglise CatholiqueOrthodoxe de France, until recently under the jurisdiction of the Church of Romania, has used what is termed "the rite of St. Germain of Paris." l have attended this and found it a mo ving and prayerful event. But liturgical specialists tell me that this is a modern reconstruction and that at many points it is unclear how far it corresponds to the ancient Gallican rites. I understand that there are "western rite" groups in the USA whi ch are using what is basically an Anglican rite, with a Byzantine epiclesis inserted into it. I have some reservations here.

The Anglican service is in large part the work of Cranmer, who was Zwinglian in his theology (i.e., he did not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist): do we make his rite "Orthodox" simply by inserting a Byzantine epiclesis? Indeed, is i t right to take the Byzantine epiclesis and insert it into a western liturgical text where it does not properly belong? It is said that St. Tikhon of Moscow, while Archbishop of North America at the start of this century, blessed a rite of this sort. But how carefully was he able to examine the question? And if he were living today, would he recommend the same course? If we Orthodox are indeed to use a western rite, then there needs to be a full discussion on a pan-Orthodox level to clarify what western rite we should employ.

So what if it's been changes some. It's not a historical reenactment. It's using a liturgy that is culturally relevant to the west. It is unrealistic to think it could be used today without some revisions. Revision, doesn't necessarily equal bad.

The Anglican BCP was transfered to Orthodoxy with little changes to it. The St. Tikon found it to be Orthodox, but in order to ensure it's orthodoxy, he inserted the Byzantine epiclesis for it's approval.

Quote
Returning to the critique of the 1892 Episcopalian Prayer Book produced by the Holy Governing Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, which was subsequently translated into English and published under Anglican auspices as Russian Observations upon the American Prayer Book (Alcuin Club Tracts XII) translated by Wilfrid J. Barnes and edited and annotated by Walter Howard Frere (the latter an English liturgical scholar and later Bishop of Truro in the Church of England) in 1917 (and which may be read here) it is a polite but critical examination of its subject from an Orthodox perspective; and it is remarkable how uncritical, and often approving, of its critique Frere (an anti-papal somewhat Orthodoxophile Anglo-Catholic) showed himself to be.  The critique deals, in its first section, with the Holy Communion rite, the Ordination rites (the longest section), the Baptism rite, Confirmation, Matrimony, the Sacrament of Penance and the Sacrament of Unction (or the absence of any rites for these last two) and then, in its second, with a number of general observations, most notably concerning the lack of any prayers for the dead in that Prayer Book.  As regards its critique of the Eucharistic rite, all that concerns us here, it makes two critical observations, first, the lack of any clear indication of a belief in, or explicit petition for, the “change” of the elements of bread and wine into the body and Blood of Christ and, secondly, the lack of any clear statement or even indication that the Eucharist is “a sacrifice for the living and the dead.”  (The Prayer of Consecration of the 1892 Prayer Book was identical to that of the 1928 book, although in 1892, as in 1789, the “Prayer of Humble Access” came between the Preface and Sanctus and what was specifically termed the Prayer of Consecration, beginning with “All Glory be to thee …“ etc.) The authors go on to conclude in this section that while there is nothing in the Prayer Book rite that explicitly contradicts these two beliefs, a denial of them can be as easily read into them, or by implication extracted from them, as their affirmation, and so calls for their being made clearer in any version of the BCP adapted for Orthodox use.
http://www.theanglocatholic.com/2010/06/the-liturgy-of-st-tikhon-of-moscow/




Quote
Third, the pastoral aspect : I will speak only of the situation in Britain, for I am not qualified to express an opinion about America. Here in Britain we Orthodox, few though we are in numbers, are fragmented into a multiplicity of "jurisdictions"; but at least we are united in the use of the same rite - the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. If a "western rite" is introduced here, it will add still further to our fragmentation. Is this desirable? Greeks, Russians, Serbs and so on, attending such a "western rite" service, wi ll not feel at home or recognize it as being Orthodox. There is a real danger that "western rite" Orthodox will find themselves cut off and isolated from the rest of the Orthodox around them. Is this pastorally helpful?

This is his true concern. It's not the Western Rite, itself. He's afraid of the effects of having two liturgies available with have for conversion. Especially, having negative effects on the Eastern Rite.

I disagree, it has been shown that the Western Rite has only helped to promote conversion due to ease of cultural acceptance. In fact, many people later move to the Eastern Rites, whether it be for a change, necessity, or preference. My local Antiochian priest grew up in a Western Rite church only to now be serving in an Eastern Rite.

Quote
If we wish to help western persons joining Orthodoxy, the best way is to offer them the possibility of attending the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom in the English language. There is nothing "oriental" or "ethnic" about this Liturgy. True, it was written in Greek and not in Latin; but then Plato and Sophocles wrote in Greek, yet we recognize them as part of our shared European culture. The same is true of St. John Chrysostom. We English can feel thoroughly at home in his Liturgy - as I know from m y own experience.

Bishop Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia

This is the common claim of people who are comfortable with the eastern liturgy. However, considering the amount of people that "have problems with the difference" and "cultural shock", that's hard to accept. The Western Rites are often described as linear, while the Eastern Rites are described as circular in their prayer style.

A western liturgy is merely a means of connecting psychologically with a westerner.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Aristibule
Your Weaker Brother
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 515


Xeno


« Reply #139 on: November 29, 2010, 06:44:31 PM »

And the Award for "Most Obvious Joke" goes to... Wink

I'm not in the U.K. so I'm not sure how applicable it would be at this time.  Perhaps someone else could enlighten us.

Sure - Metropolitan Kallistos has changed his mind.
Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #140 on: November 29, 2010, 06:49:33 PM »

And the Award for "Most Obvious Joke" goes to... Wink

I'm not in the U.K. so I'm not sure how applicable it would be at this time.  Perhaps someone else could enlighten us.

Sure - Metropolitan Kallistos has changed his mind.

Not my implication.  Just stating a fact.  Situations (and yes, minds) change quite a bit in a decade and a half.  Not saying the situation has changed, and I'm not saying Ware has adjusted his stance.  I don't know either way.
Logged
Aristibule
Your Weaker Brother
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 515


Xeno


« Reply #141 on: November 29, 2010, 06:53:30 PM »

And the Award for "Most Obvious Joke" goes to... Wink

I'm not in the U.K. so I'm not sure how applicable it would be at this time.  Perhaps someone else could enlighten us.

Sure - Metropolitan Kallistos has changed his mind.

Not my implication.  Just stating a fact.  Situations (and yes, minds) change quite a bit in a decade and a half.  Not saying the situation has changed, and I'm not saying Ware has adjusted his stance.  I don't know either way.

I know - Fr. Michael spoke with him in person before this endeavor began. He was consulted, and also gave us some illumination on what actually occurred 15 years ago.
Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #142 on: November 29, 2010, 06:53:58 PM »

And the Award for "Most Obvious Joke" goes to... Wink

I'm not in the U.K. so I'm not sure how applicable it would be at this time.  Perhaps someone else could enlighten us.

Sure - Metropolitan Kallistos has changed his mind.

This site, August 2008, is not aware of the bishop changing his mind

http://gwjolly.org/liturgy/index.shtml

And  by searching the web one finds other similar information.
Logged
Aristibule
Your Weaker Brother
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 515


Xeno


« Reply #143 on: November 29, 2010, 06:57:09 PM »

lack of organization/unification perhaps?

I wonder if there are also political reasons, in the UK.    The websites of the English mission are very specific that they are targetting members of the state Church, the Church of England.  Now the connection between the Russian Church and the Russian Government is very tight.  It would not require much more than a small wink and a nod from members of the House of Lords or indeed simply from the House of Commons, into the ear of the Russian ambassador, to stop things dead in their tracks.   If only for the sake of trade and economic reasons Russia will be reluctant to offend Great Britain by pursuing the conversion of members of the Church of England.

One - the Russian Orthodox Church is not at the beck and call of the Russian government: and we have the explicit support of the DECR. Two - our mission is small enough that the House of Commons and House of Lords aren't going to be worried by it - anymore than they are worried by conversions to Eastern Rite Orthodox, or Coptic, etc. If one would go, all would go. Besides - they have bigger worries - with the departures to Rome. In any case, the response we're getting is more from Roman Catholics in England. Rome is making a trade it seems. "Why do the heathen rage, and why do the people imagine a vain thing?"
Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #144 on: November 29, 2010, 06:57:54 PM »

What is Ware's current role in the U.K.?  I don't know much about him to be honest.  Is this something he would need to have a stance on, at all?
Logged
Aristibule
Your Weaker Brother
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 515


Xeno


« Reply #145 on: November 29, 2010, 06:58:36 PM »

Posting anew an old opinion of a living person is not the same as going to them and asking.

The Metropolitan is retired.
Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #146 on: November 29, 2010, 07:20:28 PM »

What is Ware's current role in the U.K.?  I don't know much about him to be honest.  Is this something he would need to have a stance on, at all?

Well, he must show solidarity with his Synod in Constantinople which is opposed to attempts to convert members of the Church of England.

I recall several years ago when a friend of mind had finished St Vlad's and was ordained in ACROD.  He wanted to relocate to Great Britain and undertake missionary work.   The application from his bishop to Archbishop Gregorios of London was refused because Archbishop Gregorios permitted no work among Anglicans in Great Britain.  Because of this the priest in question was released instead to the Russian Church Abroad and moved to Her Majesty's realm.

Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #147 on: November 29, 2010, 07:23:04 PM »


any case, the response we're getting is more from Roman Catholics in England.


Who is we?
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,144


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #148 on: November 29, 2010, 07:27:15 PM »

What is Ware's current role in the U.K.?  I don't know much about him to be honest.  Is this something he would need to have a stance on, at all?

You should be addressing him as Metropolitan KALLISTOS (of Diokleia, if you wish), or "His Eminence," not simply, "Ware."
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #149 on: November 29, 2010, 07:55:42 PM »

What is Ware's current role in the U.K.?  I don't know much about him to be honest.  Is this something he would need to have a stance on, at all?

You should be addressing him as Metropolitan KALLISTOS (of Diokleia, if you wish), or "His Eminence," not simply, "Ware."

Apologies!  That was totally absent-minded.  Thank you for addressing it!
Logged
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #150 on: December 02, 2010, 03:34:13 PM »


Sunday, March 21, 2010
New Western Rite Abbot

I discovered on Tuesday, March 16, 2010, that Fr. Hieromonk David (Pierce) has been confirmed in the rank of Abbot by Metropolitan Hilarion, first hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia. Dom David's community, formerly named Holyrood after the Holy Cross, now bears the name "Dormition Monastery."

Source :: http://sarisburium.blogspot.com/


Fr. David's blog has been reactivated recently: http://quicumquevult.blogspot.com
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,043



« Reply #151 on: December 02, 2010, 03:41:18 PM »

Fr. David's blog has been reactivated recently: http://quicumquevult.blogspot.com

It's interesting that he's naming his blog after a Western creed which seems include a sort of Filique:

Quote from: alleged St. Athanasius
The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2010, 03:42:15 PM by Alpo » Logged

Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #152 on: December 02, 2010, 03:46:15 PM »

Fr. David's blog has been reactivated recently: http://quicumquevult.blogspot.com

It's interesting that he's naming his blog after a Western creed which seems include a sort of Filique:

Quote from: alleged St. Athanasius
The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding.

The original Athanasian Creed, just like the original Nicene Creed, does not include the filioque clause.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #153 on: December 02, 2010, 03:48:29 PM »

What is Ware's current role in the U.K.?  I don't know much about him to be honest.  Is this something he would need to have a stance on, at all?

Well, he must show solidarity with his Synod in Constantinople which is opposed to attempts to convert members of the Church of England.

I recall several years ago when a friend of mind had finished St Vlad's and was ordained in ACROD.  He wanted to relocate to Great Britain and undertake missionary work.   The application from his bishop to Archbishop Gregorios of London was refused because Archbishop Gregorios permitted no work among Anglicans in Great Britain.  Because of this the priest in question was released instead to the Russian Church Abroad and moved to Her Majesty's realm.

Some Thoughts on the "Western Rite" In Orthodoxy

First, the historical aspect : Prior to the Schism, when the Latin West was still in full communion with the Orthodox East, various western rites were in use in the West, and it was never suggested that these rites - most notably, the ancient Roman rite - were not Orthodox. In princi ple, therefore, there is no reason why one or more western rites should not be used in Orthodoxy. There is no theological objection per se to the use of a diversity of rites in the one Church; on the contrary, this confirms the Church's catholicity.

Second, the liturgical aspect : But what western rite should be used? In France, the Eglise CatholiqueOrthodoxe de France, until recently under the jurisdiction of the Church of Romania, has used what is termed "the rite of St. Germain of Paris." l have attended this and found it a mo ving and prayerful event. But liturgical specialists tell me that this is a modern reconstruction and that at many points it is unclear how far it corresponds to the ancient Gallican rites. I understand that there are "western rite" groups in the USA whi ch are using what is basically an Anglican rite, with a Byzantine epiclesis inserted into it. I have some reservations here.

The Anglican service is in large part the work of Cranmer, who was Zwinglian in his theology (i.e., he did not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist): do we make his rite "Orthodox" simply by inserting a Byzantine epiclesis? Indeed, is i t right to take the Byzantine epiclesis and insert it into a western liturgical text where it does not properly belong? It is said that St. Tikhon of Moscow, while Archbishop of North America at the start of this century, blessed a rite of this sort. But how carefully was he able to examine the question? And if he were living today, would he recommend the same course? If we Orthodox are indeed to use a western rite, then there needs to be a full discussion on a pan-Orthodox level to clarify what western rite we should employ.

Third, the pastoral aspect : I will speak only of the situation in Britain, for I am not qualified to express an opinion about America. Here in Britain we Orthodox, few though we are in numbers, are fragmented into a multiplicity of "jurisdictions"; but at least we are united in the use of the same rite - the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. If a "western rite" is introduced here, it will add still further to our fragmentation. Is this desirable? Greeks, Russians, Serbs and so on, attending such a "western rite" service, wi ll not feel at home or recognize it as being Orthodox. There is a real danger that "western rite" Orthodox will find themselves cut off and isolated from the rest of the Orthodox around them. Is this pastorally helpful?

If we wish to help western persons joining Orthodoxy, the best way is to offer them the possibility of attending the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom in the English language. There is nothing "oriental" or "ethnic" about this Liturgy. True, it was written in Greek and not in Latin; but then Plato and Sophocles wrote in Greek, yet we recognize them as part of our shared European culture. The same is true of St. John Chrysostom. We English can feel thoroughly at home in his Liturgy - as I know from m y own experience.

Bishop Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia
The Priest. A Newsletter for the Clergy of the Diocese of San Francisco. Issue No. 5, May 1996

I have read nothing where His Grace rescinds this view that the Byzantine rite in English is perfectly good, correct and proper for western-Orthodox Christians.


Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #154 on: December 02, 2010, 03:49:29 PM »

It's interesting that he's naming his blog after a Western creed which seems include a sort of Filique. . .

Not in the version published on the blog itself:
Quote
The Holy Ghost is of the Father, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
Source: http://quicumquevult.blogspot.com/2007/12/quicumque-vult.html

Some say the Filioque in this creed is a later addition - not something written by St. Athanasius.
Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #155 on: December 02, 2010, 03:57:32 PM »

And the Award for "Most Obvious Joke" goes to... Wink

I'm not in the U.K. so I'm not sure how applicable it would be at this time.  Perhaps someone else could enlighten us.

Sure - Metropolitan Kallistos has changed his mind.
[/quote

Could you please show us evidence of this change of mind by His Grace?
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #156 on: December 02, 2010, 04:06:55 PM »

Posting anew an old opinion of a living person is not the same as going to them and asking.

The Metropolitan is retired.

His Eminence may be retired but he still writes, still serves and there is no rebuttal of his 1996 views anywhere that I can find.  A 14 year old opinion in still current unless the speaker has changed his mind although I think I read on one of Fr. Michael (Mansbridge-Wood)'s many blogs that he met with His Eminence, so perhaps he knows something which has not been published?

With far more converts to "Byzantine" Orthodoxy now than there were 14 years ago, western bishops and many more priests, monastics and faithful, it seems to me that the logic in the 1996 statement rings true.  I also accept that WR Orthodoxy has also had growth since that time, not the least being the worldwide Petrocian missions isince the beginnings of the St. Petroc monastery in Australia by Hieromonk Michael (Mansbridge-Wood) of Tasmania.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #157 on: December 02, 2010, 05:10:45 PM »


it seems to me that the logic in the 1996 statement rings true.  I also accept that WR Orthodoxy has also had growth since that time, not the least being the worldwide Petrocian missions isince the beginnings of the St. Petroc monastery in Australia by Hieromonk Michael (Mansbridge-Wood) of Tasmania.

Dear Subdeacon David,

I am interested in the status of the Petrochian mission.   I know that it created 2 missions in Australia 13 years ago. 

1.  The mission in Launceston reached 9 members.  It is now closed.

2.  The mission in Hobart has, according to information from Hobart, 5 members.

Five members on the Australian continent after 13 years of missionary activity is quite a small number.  Not that we want to judge a spiritual work by numbers.

Do you know the Petrochian figures for its WR mission in the UK?

It would seem to be a mission urgently in need of the prayers of all those who want to support the Western Rite.
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,043



« Reply #158 on: December 03, 2010, 01:23:36 AM »

It's interesting that he's naming his blog after a Western creed which seems include a sort of Filique. . .

Not in the version published on the blog itself:
Quote
The Holy Ghost is of the Father, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
Source: http://quicumquevult.blogspot.com/2007/12/quicumque-vult.html

Oh. Thank you for pointing that out.


Quote
Some say the Filioque in this creed is a later addition - not something written by St. Athanasius.

Who says so and when was it hypothetically added?
Logged

SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #159 on: December 03, 2010, 08:14:50 AM »


[Five members on the Australian continent after 13 years of missionary activity is quite a small number.  Not that we want to judge a spiritual work by numbers.

Do you know the Petrochian figures for its WR mission in the UK?

It would seem to be a mission urgently in need of the prayers of all those who want to support the Western Rite.


I don't know the Petrochian mission numbers for the  UK.   I believe that if one sees the many Petrochian paruchia websites that one can easily see the scope of their many activities.

Saint Petroc Monastery: http://stpetrocmonastery.blogspot.com/

Saint Eanswythe Mission: http://kentorthodox.blogspot.com/

Saint Nectan Mission: http://saintnectan.blogspot.com/

Saint Dyfan Mission: http://hobartorthodox.blogspot.com/

Saint Brendan Mission: http://saintbrendanoss.blogspot.com/

Newspaper: http://orthodoxchristianwest.blogspot.com/

Missions: http://saintpetrocmissionarysociety.blogspot.com/

History Site: http://westorthodoxhistory.blogspot.com/

English Orthodox: http://englishorthodox.blogspot.com/

Saint Stephen Mission: http://launcestonorthodox.blogspot.com/

Monastery Site - Liturgy: http://orthodoxresurgence.com/petroc/

Discussion Forum: http://elyforum.yuku.com/





That there is no western rite in the major cities of Sydney (4 million) and Melbourne (3 million) may be attributable to many things.  Certainly the established ROCOR parishes in those cities - about 12-14 parishes have many western clergy serving and many Byzantine rite western laity, as well as both English language and Greek/English monasteries.

The St. Petroc site states at: Saint Petroc Monastery: http://stpetrocmonastery.blogspot.com/


Saint Petroc Monastery, acting in accordance with episcopal direction, has a paruchia of Monastery Missions and other formal groups:

Saint StepheSan Monastery Mission
Saint Gildas Monastery Mission
Saint Dyfan Monastery Mission
Saint Brendan OSS
Saint Eanswythe OSS


The Monastery came under the omphorion of His Eminence, Archbishop Hilarion in August 1997 and has remained as an official monastery of the ROCOR Diocese ever since.

The purpose of the Paruchia is to make Orthodoxy accessible to people whose western culture makes entry via the Byzantine worship and ethnic communities of most Orthodox parishes, difficult.

By and large the elements of the paruchia do not advertise themselves, but spread by word of mouth. The purpose being to enable those already seeking, rather than proselytising. Over the years, the Saint Petroc method has facilitated the conversion of a number of Protestant clergy, as well as individuals and small groups. Not all of these come under the Monastery, but are often directed eventually to a local ruling bishop.

The Monastery also provides retreat directors for those member groups of the paruchia wishing to introduce new members to Orthodoxy. It keeps in close contact with the paruchia and provides ongoing catechetical and liturgical material for members.

The Monastery is engaged in the task of producing liturgical resources for western rite Orthodox parishes.

Saint Petroc House and Holyrood House do not have visitor stay facilities, since this is difficult for such eremitic houses.


The St Petroc blog sites also has a saintpetrocmissionarysociety.blogspot.com with missions in the Philippines (2) and the United States of America (1 or 2?) so clearly the Petrochian paruchia is achieving in the mission fields if it has 300 catechumen in the Philippines.  I hope and pray that a missionary monk-priest or priest can go there and begin the baptisms, bringing these souls to Jesus Christ.

Saint Petroc Monastery Missionary Society is a Society set up to promote the missions run by Saint Petroc Monastery, to facilitate their funding and to assist the missionaries in the field.

Saint Petroc Monastery currently runs missions in the Philippines, England, Australia and the USA. Mostly these are "green fields" missions starting from scratch. Saint Petroc Monastery does not have access to official Church funds, large private funds or bequests, we rely entirely on the giving of devout Orthodox Christian Believers.


The Monastery is directly under the control of His Eminence, Metropolitan Hilarion, the Primate of ROCOR.

Missionary work at all levels - the individual - and the mass foreign.  We are looking at participating in an Orthodox school in London, we are opening missions in England.   We have opened two missions in the Philippines (300 people) - so the missionary work just never stops. The money however is another matter - there's none of it! So we have to find what we can wherever we can.  Pray for money for the missions in England and the Philippines!


Saint Petroc Monastery has the following missions:

SAINT ANASTASIA         Davao City,  Philippines
SAINT THOMAS              Mindanao, Philippines
SAINT NECTAN               Barnstaple, Devon, England
SAINT EANSWYTHE      Christchurch, Dorset, England
SAINT BRENDAN            Panama City, Florida, USA
SAINT PETER & PAUL   Huntsville Alabama
SAINT DYFAN                  Hobart, Tasmania
SAINT GILDAS                Perth, Western Australia




The present Directors of the Society are:

Fr. Michael,  Superior of Saint Petroc Monastery
Mr. Aristibule Adams of Saint Brendan Monastery Mission
Fr. Joshua
[/b][/color]

So Father this equals 8 missions under the Petrochian Paruchia spreading Western-rite Orthodoxy in 4 countries - Australia, Philippines, United States and the United Kingdom.  I am not aware of the Launceston mission being closed as Priest Barry Jeffrey is still resident there although currently serving in Hobart fortnightly in the absence of  St. Petroc Monastery Hieromonk Michael (Mansbridge-Wood), the Australian superior of the monastery-missionary WR organisation who is currently visiting the United Kingdom and has reported great success in evangelism.  

The Philippine missions site has the capacity for people to donate funds for their missionary work - a worthy outreach to see these souls baptised.  Is there the prospect of a permanent priest in the Philippines?  If they have 300 souls in 2 centres it would be possibly the largest western-rite parishes in the world.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2010, 08:17:21 AM by SubdeaconDavid » Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
Thomist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite: Archdiocese of Baltimore
Posts: 203



« Reply #160 on: December 29, 2010, 01:17:09 AM »

It's been mentioned a few times in this thread that some Eastern Rite Orthodox disapprove of having Western Rite Orthodoxy.

Why is that?
Logged

"Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?" - Saint Cyprian of Carthage
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,043



« Reply #161 on: December 29, 2010, 03:48:52 AM »

It's been mentioned a few times in this thread that some Eastern Rite Orthodox disapprove of having Western Rite Orthodoxy.

Why is that?

Here's short overview of anti-WRO arguments.
Logged

pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,360


metron ariston


« Reply #162 on: December 29, 2010, 09:54:18 AM »

It's been mentioned a few times in this thread that some Eastern Rite Orthodox disapprove of having Western Rite Orthodoxy.

Why is that?

Fr. Alexander Schmemman explains it this way:

Quote
Notes and Comments on the "Western Rite"

The question of rites is precisely not, has never been and cannot be a mere question of rites per se, but is and has always been a question of faith, of its wholeness and integrity. The liturgy embodies and expresses the faith, or better to say, the experience of the Church, and is that experience's manifestation and communication. And when rites, detached from their nature and function, begin to be discussed in terms of "acceptance" and "rejection" or "likes and dislikes", the debate concerning them becomes meaningless.

For many people, the eastern and western rites are two entirely different and self-contained "blocks" ruling out, as an impure "hybridization", all contacts and mutual influences. This, however, is wrong - first of all, historically. In a sense, the entire history of Christian worship can be termed a history of constant "hybridizations" - if only this word is deprived of its negative connotations. Before their separations, the east and the west influenced one another for centuries. And there is no exaggeration in saying that the anaphora of St. John Chrysostom's Liturgy is infinitely 'closer' to the Roman anaphora of the same period than the service of Holy Communion in the Book of Common Prayer is to, for example, the Tridentine Mass.

What makes a western rite Orthodox? For many proponents of the western rite, all it takes is a few additions and a few deletions, e.g. "striking the filioque " and "strengthening of the epiclesis." This answer implies, on the one hand, that there exists a unified and homogenous reality identifiable as the western rite and, on the other hand, that except for two or three "heretical" ingredients or omissions, this rite is ipso facto Orthodox. Both presuppositions are wrong.

Indeed, one does not have to be an "authority on the West" in order to know that liturgical development in the West was shaped to a degree unknown in the East by various theologies, the succession of which - and the clashes of one with another - constitute western religious history. Scholasticism, Reformation, Counter-Reformation, etc., have all resulted in sometimes radical liturgical metamorphoses and all have had a decisive impact on worship. Therefore, one should speak today not of the western rite, but of western rites, deeply - if not radically - differing from one another, yet all reflecting in one way or another, the western theological tragedy and fragmentation. This does not mean that all these rites are "heretical" and simply to be condemned. It only means that, from an Orthodox point of view, their evaluation in terms merely of "deletions" and "additions" is - to say the least - inadequate. For the irony of our present situation is that while some western Christians come to Orthodoxy in order to salvage the rite they cherish (Book of Common Prayer, Tridentine Mass, etc.) from liturgical reforms they abhor, some of these reforms, at least in abstacto, are closer to the structures and spirit of the early western rite - and thus to the Orthodox liturgical tradition - than the later rite, those precisely that the Orthodox Church is supposed to "sanction" and to "adopt."

It is my deep conviction that the eastern liturgical tradition is alone today in having preserved, in spite of all historical "deficiencies", the fullness of the Church's lex orandi and constitutes, therefore, the criterion for all liturgical evaluations.

Father Alexander Schmemann (1920-1983)
(SVTQ 24/4, 1980)
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #163 on: December 29, 2010, 11:03:25 AM »

It's interesting that he's naming his blog after a Western creed which seems include a sort of Filique. . .

Not in the version published on the blog itself:
Quote
The Holy Ghost is of the Father, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
Source: http://quicumquevult.blogspot.com/2007/12/quicumque-vult.html

Oh. Thank you for pointing that out.


Quote
Some say the Filioque in this creed is a later addition - not something written by St. Athanasius.

Who says so and when was it hypothetically added?

The text of the creed, believed to be from the 4th century southern France (see heavy Trinitarian theology), predates the filioque, which was first employed in 6th century Spain.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #164 on: December 29, 2010, 12:57:59 PM »

It's been mentioned a few times in this thread that some Eastern Rite Orthodox disapprove of having Western Rite Orthodoxy.

Why is that?

Fr. Alexander Schmemman explains it this way:

Quote
Notes and Comments on the "Western Rite"

The question of rites is precisely not, has never been and cannot be a mere question of rites per se, but is and has always been a question of faith, of its wholeness and integrity. The liturgy embodies and expresses the faith, or better to say, the experience of the Church, and is that experience's manifestation and communication. And when rites, detached from their nature and function, begin to be discussed in terms of "acceptance" and "rejection" or "likes and dislikes", the debate concerning them becomes meaningless.

For many people, the eastern and western rites are two entirely different and self-contained "blocks" ruling out, as an impure "hybridization", all contacts and mutual influences. This, however, is wrong - first of all, historically. In a sense, the entire history of Christian worship can be termed a history of constant "hybridizations" - if only this word is deprived of its negative connotations. Before their separations, the east and the west influenced one another for centuries. And there is no exaggeration in saying that the anaphora of St. John Chrysostom's Liturgy is infinitely 'closer' to the Roman anaphora of the same period than the service of Holy Communion in the Book of Common Prayer is to, for example, the Tridentine Mass.

What makes a western rite Orthodox? For many proponents of the western rite, all it takes is a few additions and a few deletions, e.g. "striking the filioque " and "strengthening of the epiclesis." This answer implies, on the one hand, that there exists a unified and homogenous reality identifiable as the western rite and, on the other hand, that except for two or three "heretical" ingredients or omissions, this rite is ipso facto Orthodox. Both presuppositions are wrong.

Indeed, one does not have to be an "authority on the West" in order to know that liturgical development in the West was shaped to a degree unknown in the East by various theologies, the succession of which - and the clashes of one with another - constitute western religious history. Scholasticism, Reformation, Counter-Reformation, etc., have all resulted in sometimes radical liturgical metamorphoses and all have had a decisive impact on worship. Therefore, one should speak today not of the western rite, but of western rites, deeply - if not radically - differing from one another, yet all reflecting in one way or another, the western theological tragedy and fragmentation. This does not mean that all these rites are "heretical" and simply to be condemned. It only means that, from an Orthodox point of view, their evaluation in terms merely of "deletions" and "additions" is - to say the least - inadequate. For the irony of our present situation is that while some western Christians come to Orthodoxy in order to salvage the rite they cherish (Book of Common Prayer, Tridentine Mass, etc.) from liturgical reforms they abhor, some of these reforms, at least in abstacto, are closer to the structures and spirit of the early western rite - and thus to the Orthodox liturgical tradition - than the later rite, those precisely that the Orthodox Church is supposed to "sanction" and to "adopt."

It is my deep conviction that the eastern liturgical tradition is alone today in having preserved, in spite of all historical "deficiencies", the fullness of the Church's lex orandi and constitutes, therefore, the criterion for all liturgical evaluations.

Father Alexander Schmemann (1920-1983)
(SVTQ 24/4, 1980)

Interestingly enough, Fr. Schmemann was part of the of original Western Rite Vicariate Commission.
Logged
Thomist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite: Archdiocese of Baltimore
Posts: 203



« Reply #165 on: December 29, 2010, 02:10:16 PM »

I'm no expert on liturgy, but it sounds like the East's answer to Latinism, to me.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2010, 02:10:27 PM by Thomist » Logged

"Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?" - Saint Cyprian of Carthage
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #166 on: December 30, 2010, 07:10:16 AM »

It's been mentioned a few times in this thread that some Eastern Rite Orthodox disapprove of having Western Rite Orthodoxy.

Why is that?
It is not a question of disapproving that which the Church has pronounced licit.  Is having the WR resurrected more desirable than having all of the few WR missions worshipping together with the Byzantine majority?  In my view, no even though the WR is clearly licit.  The price that is paid for having the WR is fine if you don't mind having small missions of convert Orthodox largely living a spiritual life in isolation from the majority Orthodox world, albeit they have occasional episcopal visits, and their clergy do sometimes attend BR services.

 Doctrinal agreement with Byzantine Orthodoxy needs to be reflected in liturgy, the primary mark of Christian unity and this should not just be WR clergy attending or even concelebrating once in a while,but should involve all the laity worshipping together.  The problem with having Byzantine Orthodox worshipping in a WR mass is that it is just so foreign to them -particularly those built closely around Church of England (Anglican) useage - their offices, and their mass that you just won't get the average Greek or Russian to attend.  In many WR churches you cannot even light a candle before an icon of a saint.  It might as well be an Anglican chapel - and indeed today many Anglican Churches will have an icon of the Theotokos or Our Lord.

None of this is to deny the validity of the Western-rite or it's place in the scheme of things.  Clearly it needs numbers - a critical mass of laity, and enough trained clergy to get a momentum of it's own.  Ultimately it needs WR bishops.  

Is the WR the best medium to evangelise the West?  WR advocates like to claim that the Byzantine-rite loses 50% of it's converts.  Even if this doubtful figure was true, converts make up a significant and culture shifting element witin Orthodoxy in the diaspora today.  Everything a convert needs is here in the Byzantine-rite.  English prayer books. English liturgies.  Convert priests, monks, nuns, bishops and thousands of laity.   The Byzantine-rite has achieved that which the WR can only dream of at present.  

Arguably the Byzantine rite's biggest attraction is it's street credibility.  There is no playing with the semantics of "ye-olde Sarum", or of trying to say that my Western-rite is less Anglican than yours, or playing with the history books of Western society to seek to show that 1054 and the Great Schism didn't count for that much especially in the Celticosphere. In the Byzantine rite we have hundreds and indeed thousands of post-Schism saints - something that stopped dead in the water in 1054 in the West. We have holiness steeped in the lives of generation after generations of believers and it is this holiness that has impelled so many Westerners to look at Orthodoxy.

We live in a world shrunk by the internet and cheap travel, in which that which some call "Eastern" is not exotic at all.  That the "East" has come to the US, Australia and Western Europe has been a lived experience in our countries for over a hundred years.  Before the Russian and Greek and Arab diaspora to the West was an empty vacuum of a people ripe for the living holiness entering our midst from the East.  

By all means resurrect the DNA of Western Orthodoxy, but don't do it with Reformation Eucharists  with an Orthodox epiclesis  ( and a little more) and call it a "Usus Sarum"  "Liturgy", downplaying the Latin saints and popes of Western Orthodox Europe, that ironically are honoured in the Byzantine 'rite'. Westerners hungry for the authentic Orthodox Christian message want authentic holiness.  I have no doubt that it is there in the Western-rite in Orthodoxy but it's fruits are marked not just by claimed Sarum liturgical purity, or rivalry between this WR camp and another,  but by living congregations with real parish churches, monasteries that generate vocations and witness a living monastic life, with retreats for the laity, offices that we can attend, and holiness marked by a deep prayer life.

These things are not axiomatic in the so-called Byzantine rite either.  They are hard one prizes, and yet in the Byzantine Church - of Russia, Serbia, Antioch, Jerusalem and elsewhere it is the laity who honour, recognise, value and support these signals of the grace of God.  Such holiness will do more to win the so-called opponents of Western-rite Orthodoxy than any spurious arguments about Celtic Orthodoxy.

It is a noble and difficult task that the pioneers of Western-rite Orthodoxy are undertaking.  Concentration on holiness, on building meaningful parishes, on creating institutions of substance that goes beyond the blogosphere, build places where people want to come, to have their children baptised, and above all build relations with the Byzantine-rite, forgetting the cultural baggage of pax Anglicana and the British Empire, and just maybe there will no Byzantine rite critics of the Western-rite.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2010, 07:23:23 AM by SubdeaconDavid » Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #167 on: December 30, 2010, 09:19:49 AM »

It's been mentioned a few times in this thread that some Eastern Rite Orthodox disapprove of having Western Rite Orthodoxy.

Why is that?
It is not a question of disapproving that which the Church has pronounced licit.  Is having the WR resurrected more desirable than having all of the few WR missions worshipping together with the Byzantine majority?  In my view, no even though the WR is clearly licit.  The price that is paid for having the WR is fine if you don't mind having small missions of convert Orthodox largely living a spiritual life in isolation from the majority Orthodox world, albeit they have occasional episcopal visits, and their clergy do sometimes attend BR services.

 Doctrinal agreement with Byzantine Orthodoxy needs to be reflected in liturgy, the primary mark of Christian unity and this should not just be WR clergy attending or even concelebrating once in a while,but should involve all the laity worshipping together.  The problem with having Byzantine Orthodox worshipping in a WR mass is that it is just so foreign to them -particularly those built closely around Church of England (Anglican) useage - their offices, and their mass that you just won't get the average Greek or Russian to attend.  In many WR churches you cannot even light a candle before an icon of a saint.  It might as well be an Anglican chapel - and indeed today many Anglican Churches will have an icon of the Theotokos or Our Lord.

None of this is to deny the validity of the Western-rite or it's place in the scheme of things.  Clearly it needs numbers - a critical mass of laity, and enough trained clergy to get a momentum of it's own.  Ultimately it needs WR bishops.  

Is the WR the best medium to evangelise the West?  WR advocates like to claim that the Byzantine-rite loses 50% of it's converts.  Even if this doubtful figure was true, converts make up a significant and culture shifting element witin Orthodoxy in the diaspora today.  Everything a convert needs is here in the Byzantine-rite.  English prayer books. English liturgies.  Convert priests, monks, nuns, bishops and thousands of laity.   The Byzantine-rite has achieved that which the WR can only dream of at present.  

Arguably the Byzantine rite's biggest attraction is it's street credibility.  There is no playing with the semantics of "ye-olde Sarum", or of trying to say that my Western-rite is less Anglican than yours, or playing with the history books of Western society to seek to show that 1054 and the Great Schism didn't count for that much especially in the Celticosphere. In the Byzantine rite we have hundreds and indeed thousands of post-Schism saints - something that stopped dead in the water in 1054 in the West. We have holiness steeped in the lives of generation after generations of believers and it is this holiness that has impelled so many Westerners to look at Orthodoxy.

We live in a world shrunk by the internet and cheap travel, in which that which some call "Eastern" is not exotic at all.  That the "East" has come to the US, Australia and Western Europe has been a lived experience in our countries for over a hundred years.  Before the Russian and Greek and Arab diaspora to the West was an empty vacuum of a people ripe for the living holiness entering our midst from the East.  

By all means resurrect the DNA of Western Orthodoxy, but don't do it with Reformation Eucharists  with an Orthodox epiclesis  ( and a little more) and call it a "Usus Sarum"  "Liturgy", downplaying the Latin saints and popes of Western Orthodox Europe, that ironically are honoured in the Byzantine 'rite'. Westerners hungry for the authentic Orthodox Christian message want authentic holiness.  I have no doubt that it is there in the Western-rite in Orthodoxy but it's fruits are marked not just by claimed Sarum liturgical purity, or rivalry between this WR camp and another,  but by living congregations with real parish churches, monasteries that generate vocations and witness a living monastic life, with retreats for the laity, offices that we can attend, and holiness marked by a deep prayer life.

These things are not axiomatic in the so-called Byzantine rite either.  They are hard one prizes, and yet in the Byzantine Church - of Russia, Serbia, Antioch, Jerusalem and elsewhere it is the laity who honour, recognise, value and support these signals of the grace of God.  Such holiness will do more to win the so-called opponents of Western-rite Orthodoxy than any spurious arguments about Celtic Orthodoxy.

It is a noble and difficult task that the pioneers of Western-rite Orthodoxy are undertaking.  Concentration on holiness, on building meaningful parishes, on creating institutions of substance that goes beyond the blogosphere, build places where people want to come, to have their children baptised, and above all build relations with the Byzantine-rite, forgetting the cultural baggage of pax Anglicana and the British Empire, and just maybe there will no Byzantine rite critics of the Western-rite.
Please note I am not saying that there is no holiness in WR Orthodoxy or no problems in BR Orthodoxy.  Far from it.  The point I have tried to make is that those Westerners who have embraced Orthodoxy via the BR have in many instances been heavily influenced by the holiness they have encountered from monastics, from humble laity in a parish church, from liturgy that has not undergone the multiple reforms and new editions that has occurred in the West. Not shutting the doors and leaving out the dismissal of the catechumens is about as bad as it gets.

I mean just look at the Western rite.  Tridentinist missal masses in the US and elsewhere, masses and rites that are called "Sarum" but which differ between the US and elsewhere.  The Petrochian missions have their own "Usus Cascadae", plus an "English Liturgy" (mass) and Sarum rite.......it is all just too confusing, to have so much change from one chapel to the next. And that is before you even go to the Antiochian WRV who at least have some size, some history and some large parishes.
If you cannot have cooperation - and I mean real cooperation, not fraternal relations on paper, why would you expect to succeed in evangelism?

Go back to the "Eastern Orthodox".  We have substantial monastic houses, and humble sketes, in every country in the West.  Functioning communities, ,some even with real hermits - and not the travelling kind, but men of prayer and renunciation and solitude.  Power houses of the spirit. 

Now the West has some wonderful pre-Schism traditions of Benedictine monastic life.  That is what we need to see in the WR.  The Benedictine office, the Benedictine Rule - it is already happening in a couple of houses in the US, but it should be the monastic norm in the neophyte and tiny world of WR monastic life.  Forget the Celtic mists and settle on Benedictine substance.  That is something that would resonate with the laity.

A 2 hour all Slavonic liturgy served with deep prayerfulness by priest and people will always impress a western would-be-convert more than would-be Sarum masses aka liturgies if the odour of sanctity is missing.  Substance is the key - the tangible presence of God, marked by profound holiness and love.  Put these ingredients into the WR in abundance, and maybe the WR would get real churches, throw away the rented meeting rooms and get some real momentum and credibility.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 753



« Reply #168 on: December 30, 2010, 04:46:39 PM »

The problem with having Byzantine Orthodox worshipping in a WR mass is that it is just so foreign to them -particularly those built closely around Church of England (Anglican) useage - their offices, and their mass that you just won't get the average Greek or Russian to attend.  

And that is precisely why the Western rite is needed in Orthodoxy.  The Byzantine rite, beautiful though it is, is foreign to those of us steeped in traditional Anglicanism and Catholicism.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #169 on: December 30, 2010, 05:29:44 PM »

Things take time and the Western Rite restoration is still very much in its infancy.  This is not lost on those of us involved.  Of course we need to get substantive monasteries going, of course there are numerous things we could be doing better.  We're working on it.

I've always appreciate this quote from Bishop BASIL:

"Whenever I attend a Western Rite conference or a small Western Rite parish, someone raises the topic of growth. It may surprise you, but in one sense I don’t care if Western Orthodoxy grows. Let me qualify that. This comment does not have to do just with the Western Rite, although I’m speaking in a Western Rite context now. I am not concerned about growth and numbers at all. Of course growth and numbers are good because they mean that more souls are being saved. In that sense I do hope that all come to the knowledge of the truth. And in that sense I am glad that so many people and parishes have become Western Orthodox.

But the worth and validity of the Western Rite do not depend on growth or numbers. What if only a single parish were to survive by God’s grace? What if somehow all of the seeds that you have planted and have tended for so long shrivel up, like many churches do in many places—Byzantine and Western Rite and Catholic and Lutheran and Methodist? If only one Western Orthodox parish flourishes someplace, then it is to the glory of God. It provides a home for someone of the Orthodox faith to worship God in a liturgical context in which they feel not only comfortable but authentic.

The faith that you hold, combined with the rite in which you practice that faith, is more important than anything else. You gentlemen know that. Indeed, that’s a message that’s been brought home to all Orthodox by you."

Yes, SubdeaconDavid, the big picture matters and we'd love nothing more than to see the ancient Western Rite restored in all its glory.  But at the same time, that's not really our concern or our focus.  We're concerned with becoming Orthodox, plain and simple.  And right now, all many of us can do is to continue on in our rented halls and meeting rooms, to that end.
Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #170 on: December 31, 2010, 01:33:06 AM »

Things take time and the Western Rite restoration is still very much in its infancy.  This is not lost on those of us involved.  Of course we need to get substantive monasteries going, of course there are numerous things we could be doing better.  We're working on it.

I've always appreciate this quote from Bishop BASIL:

"Whenever I attend a Western Rite conference or a small Western Rite parish, someone raises the topic of growth. It may surprise you, but in one sense I don’t care if Western Orthodoxy grows. Let me qualify that. This comment does not have to do just with the Western Rite, although I’m speaking in a Western Rite context now. I am not concerned about growth and numbers at all. Of course growth and numbers are good because they mean that more souls are being saved. In that sense I do hope that all come to the knowledge of the truth. And in that sense I am glad that so many people and parishes have become Western Orthodox.

But the worth and validity of the Western Rite do not depend on growth or numbers. What if only a single parish were to survive by God’s grace? What if somehow all of the seeds that you have planted and have tended for so long shrivel up, like many churches do in many places—Byzantine and Western Rite and Catholic and Lutheran and Methodist? If only one Western Orthodox parish flourishes someplace, then it is to the glory of God. It provides a home for someone of the Orthodox faith to worship God in a liturgical context in which they feel not only comfortable but authentic.

The faith that you hold, combined with the rite in which you practice that faith, is more important than anything else. You gentlemen know that. Indeed, that’s a message that’s been brought home to all Orthodox by you."

Yes, SubdeaconDavid, the big picture matters and we'd love nothing more than to see the ancient Western Rite restored in all its glory.  But at the same time, that's not really our concern or our focus.  We're concerned with becoming Orthodox, plain and simple.  And right now, all many of us can do is to continue on in our rented halls and meeting rooms, to that end.
Thanks for sharing the beautiful quote from Bishop Basil
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
Dewi Sant
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 9


Saint David of Wales, Pray for Us!


« Reply #171 on: January 01, 2011, 11:40:52 PM »

Hopeful I know,

With the current crisis in the Anglican Communion, besides the vast numbers of Roman favouring clergy and laity flying toward the Tiber, there is also a strong Orthodox contingent within Anglicanism, largely the laity, but I know of quite a few clergymen who would like to consider it a possibility.

By maintaining the Liturgy of St. Tikhon (and other BCP based liturgies), it will surely make the transition for priest and parishoner easier. I do of course realise that there is a great number of Orthodox (my old self included) who felt that a journey to Orthodoxy ought to resemble the Twelve Labours of Heracles in terms of ease.
There are a great number of Anglicans out there who are confused about what to do. Do they go to Rome and inherit her error or go to Orthodoxy and abandon the cultural language of the Church as revealed to the English people?


Logged

"Guide me, O thou great Redeemer, pilgrim through this barren land."
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #172 on: January 02, 2011, 03:00:10 AM »

Hopeful I know,

With the current crisis in the Anglican Communion, besides the vast numbers of Roman favouring clergy and laity flying toward the Tiber, there is also a strong Orthodox contingent within Anglicanism, largely the laity, but I know of quite a few clergymen who would like to consider it a possibility.

By maintaining the Liturgy of St. Tikhon (and other BCP based liturgies), it will surely make the transition for priest and parishoner easier. I do of course realise that there is a great number of Orthodox (my old self included) who felt that a journey to Orthodoxy ought to resemble the Twelve Labours of Heracles in terms of ease.
There are a great number of Anglicans out there who are confused about what to do. Do they go to Rome and inherit her error or go to Orthodoxy and abandon the cultural language of the Church as revealed to the English people?
Personally I think the so-called Byzantine Orthodox liturgy served in ecclesiastical English is culturally very comfortable to me as an Australian and as someone who lived and breathed the Church of England.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,440



« Reply #173 on: January 04, 2011, 11:43:21 AM »

Personally I think the so-called Byzantine Orthodox liturgy served in ecclesiastical English is culturally very comfortable to me as an Australian and as someone who lived and breathed the Church of England.

But that is, as you wrote, how you feel.  There are others for whom the Byzantine Liturgy is not culturally nor worshipfully "comfortable".  I am one such.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #174 on: January 04, 2011, 04:00:04 PM »

Personally I think the so-called Byzantine Orthodox liturgy served in ecclesiastical English is culturally very comfortable to me as an Australian and as someone who lived and breathed the Church of England.

But that is, as you wrote, how you feel.  There are others for whom the Byzantine Liturgy is not culturally nor worshipfully "comfortable".  I am one such.

Ebor
I understand that this is how you feel.  What exactly do you find challenging about the Byzantine rite?  I also feel that for me at least, that submission to God and His Church requires of me that I give up in some way my own preferences, which is how I have approached religion for much of my life.  My other challenge with the WR is not that it is Western, because the Anglican mass that I grew up with is so close to the so-called St. Tikhon liturgy or the BCP based mass aka liturgy used by the ROCOR WR. 

I am challenged by the multiplicity of WR usage even within  ROCOR, let alone when you look at Antioch.  It troubles me how little connection there is in reality between those in the WR - and by that I mean charitable, fraternal sharing.  One group even try and restrict their prayer-book from those outside their group - even canonical Orthodox priests!  Too much seems to depend on the individual characteristics - strengths and weaknesses of individual WR leaders, whose own connection with the majority so-called Byzantine rite may be limited or frayed. 

When every 'monastery' or mission uses a slightly different rite from the next WR place - some calling virtually the same mass English and others Sarum and others Gregorian (or Tridentine to their WR opponents) and these centres have a handful of laity, where is the unity - the lived unity?  I think that the WR need to achieve far greater meaningful - i.e. actual unity in reality (not the paper-thin unity of a shared Creed) for it to be taken seriously.  Maybe then our episcopates will see fit to appoint WR bishops and this will allow the WR to develop further. 
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,531


« Reply #175 on: January 04, 2011, 04:06:05 PM »

Byzantine Liturgy is not unified too. Beatitudes vs. no Beatitudes, flat fellonions vs. high felonions, all that different stuff that is sung/read while clergy communes, litany for catechumens vs. no litany for catechumens, 1 hour lasting vs. 2.5 hour lasting, different times where sermon and collection is, 5 prosphoras vs. one prosphora, chalice blessings vs. no chalice blessings... And I haven't ever mentioned St Basil Liturgy.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #176 on: January 04, 2011, 05:17:32 PM »

I am challenged by the multiplicity of WR usage even within  ROCOR, let alone when you look at Antioch.

The Antiochian Western Rite is pretty uniform actually.  We have one approved missal with which we conduct our services, many parishes serving both liturgies.
Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #177 on: January 05, 2011, 12:29:31 PM »

I am challenged by the multiplicity of WR usage even within  ROCOR, let alone when you look at Antioch.

The Antiochian Western Rite is pretty uniform actually.  We have one approved missal with which we conduct our services, many parishes serving both liturgies.
Arguably the western theological mindset has had a huge influence of the Antiochian Archdiocese in the USA - clergy wearing western style clericals outside of liturgical worship, beardless bishops and priests ( some), the New Calendar to name a few that stand out.  Some of these I suspect are even barriers to non-Antiochian WR being closer to the Antiochian WR Vicariate.

The level of dispute amongst WR clergy in particular in relation to liturgy i.e. the Western-rite mass is amazing with some labelling Antiochian WR as "Tridentine" because you have a high mass with 6 candles on the altar, which is anathema to ye-olde Sarum purists.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
tuesdayschild
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 971



« Reply #178 on: January 05, 2011, 02:08:23 PM »

I am challenged by the multiplicity of WR usage even within  ROCOR, let alone when you look at Antioch.

The Antiochian Western Rite is pretty uniform actually.  We have one approved missal with which we conduct our services, many parishes serving both liturgies.
Arguably the western theological mindset has had a huge influence of the Antiochian Archdiocese in the USA - clergy wearing western style clericals outside of liturgical worship, beardless bishops and priests ( some), the New Calendar to name a few that stand out.  Some of these I suspect are even barriers to non-Antiochian WR being closer to the Antiochian WR Vicariate.

The level of dispute amongst WR clergy in particular in relation to liturgy i.e. the Western-rite mass is amazing with some labelling Antiochian WR as "Tridentine" because you have a high mass with 6 candles on the altar, which is anathema to ye-olde Sarum purists.

It is common knowledge that the "western" dress and beardlessness of clergy in the Self-Ruled Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America is a result of directives issued from and enforced by His Eminence, the Most Reverend Metropolitan PHILIP. See this thread for one example: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=31038.0. The "western theological mindset," whatever that vague generalization means, is not the cause here.
Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #179 on: January 05, 2011, 02:35:39 PM »

I am challenged by the multiplicity of WR usage even within  ROCOR, let alone when you look at Antioch.

The Antiochian Western Rite is pretty uniform actually.  We have one approved missal with which we conduct our services, many parishes serving both liturgies.
Arguably the western theological mindset has had a huge influence of the Antiochian Archdiocese in the USA - clergy wearing western style clericals outside of liturgical worship, beardless bishops and priests ( some), the New Calendar to name a few that stand out.  Some of these I suspect are even barriers to non-Antiochian WR being closer to the Antiochian WR Vicariate.

The level of dispute amongst WR clergy in particular in relation to liturgy i.e. the Western-rite mass is amazing with some labelling Antiochian WR as "Tridentine" because you have a high mass with 6 candles on the altar, which is anathema to ye-olde Sarum purists.

It is common knowledge that the "western" dress and beardlessness of clergy in the Self-Ruled Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America is a result of directives issued from and enforced by His Eminence, the Most Reverend Metropolitan PHILIP. See this thread for one example: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=31038.0. The "western theological mindset," whatever that vague generalization means, is not the cause here.
Given that Catholic/Episcopalian style clergy shirts with dog-collars has no Eastern precedent and that beards have both canonical and historical and Biblical reasons for their use in the Church by clergy from Apostolic times to this day, what do you base the decision of His Eminence Metropolitan Phillip (Saliba) to direct his bishops and clergy in such a way on?  Is it about fitting in with US secular society?  Is it about being ecumenical? The Roman Church is trying to undo Vatican II's de-sacralization of churches and modernist Orthodox thinking is not so different - "relevance" with the world.

I appreciate that many in the Self-Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese hold much more traditionalist Orthodox views about such things and that it appears that much depends on the rulings of your chief hierarch.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
Tags: Western Rite 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.192 seconds with 72 queries.