OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 23, 2014, 06:22:03 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 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite?  (Read 9903 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« on: March 15, 2010, 11:58:19 AM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2010, 12:04:56 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I don't have a problem with the Western Rite per se, in the cases of say an entire Church converting en masse, but I believe that when it is used specifically for missionary purposes (setting up new Western Rite missions for new converts) it is not a good idea. I for one grew up Lutheran and spent some time in the Roman Catholic Church; I had no desire to continue with the Western Rite.  I wanted the Eastern liturgy only.

Just my opinion.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,183


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2010, 12:11:05 PM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

Actually, with the situation the way it is now in the Phillipines (with sometimes unclear deliniations between Roman Catholic, Orthodox, vagante Catholic and Orthodox etc.), in some ways I don't think this would make things any easier, but simply serve to muddy the waters even more.  So I don't see how adopting the Western rite would serve to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism, but that rather the opposite might happen.  If one considers the question simply on the level of how convenient it is for people to switch, "easy" is not a synonym for "better."  However, if an entire parish (or larger group) wishes to convert to Orthodoxy and wants to adopt the Western rite, then yes, I believe the Church should accomodate this.  
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2010, 12:11:32 PM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism).

No, pre-schism.

We talked about the WRO in the Phillipines off and on here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,15199.0.html

Quote
Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country?

On that thread it seemed to come down to a difference of opinion between the Greeks and the Antiocheans.  The Greek Archdiocese has many bishops here who are fiercely hostile to WRO.

Quote
Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

this isn't just a problem of WRO: the rites of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem were suppressed, and perhaps Georgia.  The Vatican unfortunately wasn't the only see to enforce uniformity when it wasn't necessary, just ethnocentric.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2010, 12:56:11 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I don't have a problem with the Western Rite per se, in the cases of say an entire Church converting en masse, but I believe that when it is used specifically for missionary purposes (setting up new Western Rite missions for new converts) it is not a good idea. I for one grew up Lutheran and spent some time in the Roman Catholic Church; I had no desire to continue with the Western Rite.  I wanted the Eastern liturgy only.

Just my opinion.
Father Bless,
I am a great fan of Gregorian chants and, owing to the 'western ears' of Filipinos, it would be hard for us to learn the Byzantine tonal system. But if Americans are able to adapt, why can't we? The only thing that bothers me is that it sounds eerie singing the English version of Byzantine Chants (it makes me shiver). Well, DL's not about sounds after all anyway. (And I believe Tagalog would sound good with it.)

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

Actually, with the situation the way it is now in the Phillipines (with sometimes unclear deliniations between Roman Catholic, Orthodox, vagante Catholic and Orthodox etc.), in some ways I don't think this would make things any easier, but simply serve to muddy the waters even more.  So I don't see how adopting the Western rite would serve to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism, but that rather the opposite might happen.  If one considers the question simply on the level of how convenient it is for people to switch, "easy" is not a synonym for "better."  However, if an entire parish (or larger group) wishes to convert to Orthodoxy and wants to adopt the Western rite, then yes, I believe the Church should accomodate this. 

Oops.. I actually meant that the Bishops were using (right now) the Eastern Rite to set Orthodoxy apart. And that this is actually the reason why they are not using Western Rite.
Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism).

No, pre-schism.

We talked about the WRO in the Phillipines off and on here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,15199.0.html

Quote
Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country?

On that thread it seemed to come down to a difference of opinion between the Greeks and the Antiocheans.  The Greek Archdiocese has many bishops here who are fiercely hostile to WRO.

Quote
Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

this isn't just a problem of WRO: the rites of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem were suppressed, and perhaps Georgia.  The Vatican unfortunately wasn't the only see to enforce uniformity when it wasn't necessary, just ethnocentric.



Gregorian is pre-schism?  Shocked

Why are they hostile?

Yeah, I noticed that. Are the rites of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem substantially different from the Greek? I thought all Eastern Rites were the same (well, except for language)
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2010, 01:28:42 PM »

Gregorian is pre-schism?  Shocked

In 785 Charlemagne asked, and received, liturgical books with the Gregorian chant, which he proceeded to spread (with the help of his sword) all over Europe.

Quote
Why are they hostile?

It is not from Constantinople.

Quote
Yeah, I noticed that. Are the rites of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem substantially different from the Greek? I thought all Eastern Rites were the same (well, except for language)
No, the language was even the same.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2010, 01:45:33 PM »

Let's keep this discussion on topic, which is about the Western Rites in the modern Orthodox Church. Let's not deviate into an EP thread here. Some of the history is pertinent, but the supression of other rites deserves its own thread.

Thanks,

Fr Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2010, 01:55:20 PM »

Back on the Ranch (did I leave?)....

Yes, Westerners should use the Western Rite.  The experience of going to a Western Rite (say, the Roman or Anglican) in an Eastern Culture (I did so in Egypt and Jerusalem) should convince anyone of that.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #8 on: March 15, 2010, 02:01:04 PM »

I don't have a problem with the Western Rite per se, in the cases of say an entire Church converting en masse, but I believe that when it is used specifically for missionary purposes (setting up new Western Rite missions for new converts) it is not a good idea.

I agree here. If established Catholic, Anglican, or Lutheran parishes want to convert and adopt this rite, and the Orthodox bishops concede to this, that is one thing. It is another to have a variety of rites on the basis of ethnicity or culture.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #9 on: March 15, 2010, 02:02:04 PM »

Back on the Ranch (did I leave?)....

Yes, Westerners should use the Western Rite.  The experience of going to a Western Rite (say, the Roman or Anglican) in an Eastern Culture (I did so in Egypt and Jerusalem) should convince anyone of that.

Why?

I and many others are perfectly happy going to an Eastern rite in a Western culture.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #10 on: March 15, 2010, 02:03:04 PM »

I don't have a problem with the Western Rite per se, in the cases of say an entire Church converting en masse, but I believe that when it is used specifically for missionary purposes (setting up new Western Rite missions for new converts) it is not a good idea.

I agree here. If established Catholic, Anglican, or Lutheran parishes want to convert and adopt this rite, and the Orthodox bishops concede to this, that is one thing. It is another to have a variety of rites on the basis of ethnicity or culture.

I've been to a WRO parish which had a large number of Easterners who had been Westernized, having come to America.  Better the WRO then they go to the Episcopalians.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #11 on: March 15, 2010, 02:25:34 PM »

Back on the Ranch (did I leave?)....

Yes, Westerners should use the Western Rite.  The experience of going to a Western Rite (say, the Roman or Anglican) in an Eastern Culture (I did so in Egypt and Jerusalem) should convince anyone of that.

Why?

I and many others are perfectly happy going to an Eastern rite in a Western culture.

Many are not.

But to your point: why are you all perfectly happy?

I remember a priest I know, who was dogmatically against the WRO, and how universal the Constantinople rite was (I'm not sure if he knew of any other Eastern rite)....The Church, he insisted is supposed to be different from the world: he was one for all the rubrics and not letting one litany drop, but had no use for pomp outside the Church door, even not going to his college graduation, for instance.  Problem is, is that that is not a Church-World distinction but a East-West distinction, which anyone who sees Eastern cultures operating outside the Church can attest.

When I brought this up, some scurried to find photos of eleborate Western Churches, but I saw no plain Eastern ones.

So a comparison of Western and Eastern secular ceremonial shows a difference which is reflected in the Western and Eastern rites, and other matters: the West has tried to keep the Scripture in the standard from of the contemporary vernacular ever since the Vulgate (indeed the Itala).  The East has been quite comfortable with diaglossia, at one time even contemplating Atticising the Koine of Scripture (as is done in the Church writings).  I am just curious that defenders of the Eastern rite in the West sound like the defenders of the Latin mass.  Uncomfortably close.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #12 on: March 15, 2010, 03:04:25 PM »

Many are not.

But to your point: why are you all perfectly happy?

I remember a priest I know, who was dogmatically against the WRO, and how universal the Constantinople rite was (I'm not sure if he knew of any other Eastern rite)....The Church, he insisted is supposed to be different from the world: he was one for all the rubrics and not letting one litany drop, but had no use for pomp outside the Church door, even not going to his college graduation, for instance.  Problem is, is that that is not a Church-World distinction but a East-West distinction, which anyone who sees Eastern cultures operating outside the Church can attest.

When I brought this up, some scurried to find photos of eleborate Western Churches, but I saw no plain Eastern ones.

So a comparison of Western and Eastern secular ceremonial shows a difference which is reflected in the Western and Eastern rites, and other matters: the West has tried to keep the Scripture in the standard from of the contemporary vernacular ever since the Vulgate (indeed the Itala).  The East has been quite comfortable with diaglossia, at one time even contemplating Atticising the Koine of Scripture (as is done in the Church writings).  I am just curious that defenders of the Eastern rite in the West sound like the defenders of the Latin mass.  Uncomfortably close.

I don't see what the big deal is. He said he's perfectly happy, what's wrong with that? I myself came from the RCC and much prefer the Eastern Orthodox way over the RC offering. Liturgical variety doesn't interest me -- I'd be happy attending the DL of St. John for the rest of my life. Note that I'm not saying my way has to be the way for everyone, but I feel that a simple "Western country = Western rite" can only lead to problems.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #13 on: March 15, 2010, 03:08:14 PM »

I've only seen a WR mass or whatever on the internet so my experience is limited; however, I would have never guessed that was an Orthodox service, unless they had stated so. Especially with all those Anglican/Lutheran hymns.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2010, 03:24:29 PM »

I remember a priest I know, who was dogmatically against the WRO, and how universal the Constantinople rite was (I'm not sure if he knew of any other Eastern rite)....The Church, he insisted is supposed to be different from the world: he was one for all the rubrics and not letting one litany drop, but had no use for pomp outside the Church door, even not going to his college graduation, for instance.  Problem is, is that that is not a Church-World distinction but a East-West distinction, which anyone who sees Eastern cultures operating outside the Church can attest.

What does this personal anecdote prove? Secularism and liberalism have reduced public pomp worldwide; it's hardly a Western phenomenon anymore. 

Quote
When I brought this up, some scurried to find photos of eleborate Western Churches, but I saw no plain Eastern ones.

What's your point? That Westerners don't like fancy ceremony and elaborate decor? Ever heard of rococo and baroque?

Quote
So a comparison of Western and Eastern secular ceremonial shows a difference which is reflected in the Western and Eastern rites, and other matters: the West has tried to keep the Scripture in the standard from of the contemporary vernacular ever since the Vulgate (indeed the Itala).  The East has been quite comfortable with diaglossia, at one time even contemplating Atticising the Koine of Scripture (as is done in the Church writings). 

So what? Have the Eastern rite in English then- most of the parishes around me certainly do. 

Quote
I am just curious that defenders of the Eastern rite in the West sound like the defenders of the Latin mass.  Uncomfortably close.

You sound uncomfortably close to my college literature professor who soaked up class time by indulging in obscure and irrelevant tangents.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2010, 03:54:33 PM »

Back on the Ranch (did I leave?)....

Yes, Westerners should use the Western Rite.  The experience of going to a Western Rite (say, the Roman or Anglican) in an Eastern Culture (I did so in Egypt and Jerusalem) should convince anyone of that.

The reality is that America while located in the West is not very "Western" nor are its people. America is in fact a true blend of Eastern and Western thought. We have a very Eastern sense of work ethic and cultural appreciation but have historical connection and some shared philosophical thought with Western Civilization.

In fact the Western Rite is completely foreign to most "Western" Christians who come from post enlightenment non-liturgical Protestant faiths. It is because it is identified as Western Rite that it turns those who are searching for a Church that has its origins in the Eastern context away from it. 
Logged

Joseph
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2010, 04:05:57 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I don't have a problem with the Western Rite per se, in the cases of say an entire Church converting en masse, but I believe that when it is used specifically for missionary purposes (setting up new Western Rite missions for new converts) it is not a good idea. I for one grew up Lutheran and spent some time in the Roman Catholic Church; I had no desire to continue with the Western Rite.  I wanted the Eastern liturgy only.

Just my opinion.

Would I also guess, Father, that as a traditionalist you are somewhat leery of the kind of archaeologizing and manufactured liturgy that the Orthodox "Western rites" represent?
Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2010, 04:23:47 PM »

Why do we assume that all Western Christians at one time were exposed to a form of Liturgy along the lines of the current Western rites that are accepted within Orthodoxy?  Most of these Western rites and liturgies seems to be heavily Anglicized and geared to an Anglo-Saxon or Anglophile audience.  From what I've seen, there tends to be a lot of Anglo/English sentiment that runs through your average Western rite Orthodox parish.  This might be fine if one is from an English/Anglican backround, but most people attached to "Western" or West European culture are not. 

For instance, why would someone who is Polish or Polish American who wants to convert to Orthodoxy have any interest in attending of the present Western rite parishes which, for the most part, use liturgical books based on ancient British and Celtic Church liturgies?  Why would someone like myself, who is primarily Italian American want to partake in such Anglicized ritual unless I was an Anglophile?  I certainly wouldn't want to be forced to accept what passes for Western rite Orthodoxy simply because some Church hierarchy thought that this was an expression of my culture.

Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
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 #18 on: March 15, 2010, 04:31:46 PM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? . . . Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country?

As far as I know, in the Philippines there are five WR missions under Antioch and hopefully there will be many more under the ROCOR soon.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2010, 05:00:24 PM »

Many are not.

But to your point: why are you all perfectly happy?

I remember a priest I know, who was dogmatically against the WRO, and how universal the Constantinople rite was (I'm not sure if he knew of any other Eastern rite)....The Church, he insisted is supposed to be different from the world: he was one for all the rubrics and not letting one litany drop, but had no use for pomp outside the Church door, even not going to his college graduation, for instance.  Problem is, is that that is not a Church-World distinction but a East-West distinction, which anyone who sees Eastern cultures operating outside the Church can attest.

When I brought this up, some scurried to find photos of eleborate Western Churches, but I saw no plain Eastern ones.

So a comparison of Western and Eastern secular ceremonial shows a difference which is reflected in the Western and Eastern rites, and other matters: the West has tried to keep the Scripture in the standard from of the contemporary vernacular ever since the Vulgate (indeed the Itala).  The East has been quite comfortable with diaglossia, at one time even contemplating Atticising the Koine of Scripture (as is done in the Church writings).  I am just curious that defenders of the Eastern rite in the West sound like the defenders of the Latin mass.  Uncomfortably close.

I don't see what the big deal is. He said he's perfectly happy, what's wrong with that? I myself came from the RCC and much prefer the Eastern Orthodox way over the RC offering. Liturgical variety doesn't interest me -- I'd be happy attending the DL of St. John for the rest of my life. Note that I'm not saying my way has to be the way for everyone, but I feel that a simple "Western country = Western rite" can only lead to problems.

When the OCA Cathedral here switched to English (or rather, started using English), one gentleman sighed that "Oh, Vladiko, when you hear the old Russian tone, you get a warm feeling here (hand over heart).  Archb. John, of blessed memory responded: "Yes, I get the same feeling after three vodkas."

What is a problem, and why I said anything at all, is that usually those who are quite fine with the Constantinople rite are not fine with those who are not.  And among the former I find a lot of confusion between nostalgia, revisionism, mystique, the exotic and equating it with piety. 

The issue of Western country=Western rite is the odds are that in a Western country, most are Westerners.  You can find Westerners in the East, just not that many (remember: EP Celarius closed Latin rite parishes in Constantinople, so they were there).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2010, 05:14:05 PM »

I remember a priest I know, who was dogmatically against the WRO, and how universal the Constantinople rite was (I'm not sure if he knew of any other Eastern rite)....The Church, he insisted is supposed to be different from the world: he was one for all the rubrics and not letting one litany drop, but had no use for pomp outside the Church door, even not going to his college graduation, for instance.  Problem is, is that that is not a Church-World distinction but a East-West distinction, which anyone who sees Eastern cultures operating outside the Church can attest.

What does this personal anecdote prove? Secularism and liberalism have reduced public pomp worldwide; it's hardly a Western phenomenon anymore. 

It's not a modern issue: the Repubican Romans and the early empire had plenty to comment on the difference.

Quote
Quote
When I brought this up, some scurried to find photos of eleborate Western Churches, but I saw no plain Eastern ones.

What's your point? That Westerners don't like fancy ceremony and elaborate decor? Ever heard of rococo and baroque?


Why yes I have: an extreme counter action of the Counter Reformation to the iconoclasm of Calvin and company.  Ever notice how short and limited (not catching on in the North of Europe or the British Isles, but popular at St. Petersburg).

Quote
Quote
So a comparison of Western and Eastern secular ceremonial shows a difference which is reflected in the Western and Eastern rites, and other matters: the West has tried to keep the Scripture in the standard from of the contemporary vernacular ever since the Vulgate (indeed the Itala).  The East has been quite comfortable with diaglossia, at one time even contemplating Atticising the Koine of Scripture (as is done in the Church writings).

So what? Have the Eastern rite in English then- most of the parishes around me certainly do.
 

To really be Eastern rite, the DL should be in at least Chaucerian English, if not Anglo-Saxon.  Elizabethan English isn't even a close correspondance.

Quote
Quote
I am just curious that defenders of the Eastern rite in the West sound like the defenders of the Latin mass.  Uncomfortably close.

You sound uncomfortably close to my college literature professor who soaked up class time by indulging in obscure and irrelevant tangents.
[/quote]

I just prefer that when I upbraid the Vatican for Latinization, I can do so with a straight face and a clear conscience.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2010, 05:21:16 PM »

Back on the Ranch (did I leave?)....

Yes, Westerners should use the Western Rite.  The experience of going to a Western Rite (say, the Roman or Anglican) in an Eastern Culture (I did so in Egypt and Jerusalem) should convince anyone of that.

The reality is that America while located in the West is not very "Western" nor are its people. America is in fact a true blend of Eastern and Western thought. We have a very Eastern sense of work ethic

What work ethic you tallking about?

Quote
and cultural appreciation but have historical connection and some shared philosophical thought with Western Civilization.

LOL.  It's all Western thought.

Quote
In fact the Western Rite is completely foreign to most "Western" Christians who come from post enlightenment non-liturgical Protestant faiths.

The TLM, SPPIX, etc. say otherwise.  It hasn't been effaced. And it is not like we in the East didn't pass through the Great Western Captivity unscarred.

Quote
It is because it is identified as Western Rite that it turns those who are searching for a Church that has its origins in the Eastern context away from it. 
Why should they search for a Church that has its origins in the Eastern context?  To be exotic? If they want East, as Rafa points out they can have the Church of the East, which is headquarted wtih its patriarch here in Chicago.  Best of both worlds.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2010, 05:28:06 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I don't have a problem with the Western Rite per se, in the cases of say an entire Church converting en masse, but I believe that when it is used specifically for missionary purposes (setting up new Western Rite missions for new converts) it is not a good idea. I for one grew up Lutheran and spent some time in the Roman Catholic Church; I had no desire to continue with the Western Rite.  I wanted the Eastern liturgy only.

Just my opinion.

Would I also guess, Father, that as a traditionalist you are somewhat leery of the kind of archaeologizing and manufactured liturgy that the Orthodox "Western rites" represent?

You mean like the Gregorian Reform?  The Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2010, 05:30:07 PM »

Why yes I have: an extreme counter action of the Counter Reformation to the iconoclasm of Calvin and company.

And what were Protestant iconoclasts responding to?

Quote
To really be Eastern rite, the DL should be in at least Chaucerian English, if not Anglo-Saxon.  Elizabethan English isn't even a close correspondance.

Please point me to the rubrics that call for an archaic language in the liturgy.

Quote
I just prefer that when I upbraid the Vatican for Latinization, I can do so with a straight face and a clear conscience.

Uniformity is fine, as long as it is uniformity in the right faith. I prefer to upbraid the Vatican for their real errors.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2010, 05:32:53 PM »

Why do we assume that all Western Christians at one time were exposed to a form of Liturgy along the lines of the current Western rites that are accepted within Orthodoxy?  Most of these Western rites and liturgies seems to be heavily Anglicized and geared to an Anglo-Saxon or Anglophile audience.  From what I've seen, there tends to be a lot of Anglo/English sentiment that runs through your average Western rite Orthodox parish.  This might be fine if one is from an English/Anglican backround, but most people attached to "Western" or West European culture are not. 

For instance, why would someone who is Polish or Polish American who wants to convert to Orthodoxy have any interest in attending of the present Western rite parishes which, for the most part, use liturgical books based on ancient British and Celtic Church liturgies?  Why would someone like myself, who is primarily Italian American want to partake in such Anglicized ritual unless I was an Anglophile?  I certainly wouldn't want to be forced to accept what passes for Western rite Orthodoxy simply because some Church hierarchy thought that this was an expression of my culture.

The Rite of St. Gregory is Roman.  For the Poles, St. John's is as foreign as St. Gregory, just less so as most Poles have a history of the latter.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2010, 05:38:32 PM »

Why do we assume that all Western Christians at one time were exposed to a form of Liturgy along the lines of the current Western rites that are accepted within Orthodoxy?  Most of these Western rites and liturgies seems to be heavily Anglicized and geared to an Anglo-Saxon or Anglophile audience.  From what I've seen, there tends to be a lot of Anglo/English sentiment that runs through your average Western rite Orthodox parish.  This might be fine if one is from an English/Anglican backround, but most people attached to "Western" or West European culture are not. 

For instance, why would someone who is Polish or Polish American who wants to convert to Orthodoxy have any interest in attending of the present Western rite parishes which, for the most part, use liturgical books based on ancient British and Celtic Church liturgies?  Why would someone like myself, who is primarily Italian American want to partake in such Anglicized ritual unless I was an Anglophile?  I certainly wouldn't want to be forced to accept what passes for Western rite Orthodoxy simply because some Church hierarchy thought that this was an expression of my culture.

I've noticed this too. I'm not Anglican, have never been, and have no desire to immerse myself in a tradition I was never part of in the first place.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2010, 06:41:30 PM »

Why do we assume that all Western Christians at one time were exposed to a form of Liturgy along the lines of the current Western rites that are accepted within Orthodoxy?  Most of these Western rites and liturgies seems to be heavily Anglicized and geared to an Anglo-Saxon or Anglophile audience.  From what I've seen, there tends to be a lot of Anglo/English sentiment that runs through your average Western rite Orthodox parish.  This might be fine if one is from an English/Anglican backround, but most people attached to "Western" or West European culture are not. 

For instance, why would someone who is Polish or Polish American who wants to convert to Orthodoxy have any interest in attending of the present Western rite parishes which, for the most part, use liturgical books based on ancient British and Celtic Church liturgies?  Why would someone like myself, who is primarily Italian American want to partake in such Anglicized ritual unless I was an Anglophile?  I certainly wouldn't want to be forced to accept what passes for Western rite Orthodoxy simply because some Church hierarchy thought that this was an expression of my culture.

I've noticed this too. I'm not Anglican, have never been, and have no desire to immerse myself in a tradition I was never part of in the first place.

I didn't know you hailed from Constantinople. Cheesy
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2010, 06:53:54 PM »

Why yes I have: an extreme counter action of the Counter Reformation to the iconoclasm of Calvin and company.

And what were Protestant iconoclasts responding to?

The Seventh Ecumenical Council.

Quote
Quote
To really be Eastern rite, the DL should be in at least Chaucerian English, if not Anglo-Saxon.  Elizabethan English isn't even a close correspondance.

Please point me to the rubrics that call for an archaic language in the liturgy.


My favorite is the Gospel of the Road to Emmaus in the Slavic Church:with the two disciples you have all sorts fo duals which have dropped out of the Slavic languages (except Slovenian) still in the Church Slovanic.

Anna Comnena talks about teaching Greeks (i.e. Romans) to speak Greek (i.e. Attic):
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,26357.msg416749/topicseen.html#msg416749

That's just it: there is no need for a canon.  It is that deeply engrained in the East.

Quote
Quote
I just prefer that when I upbraid the Vatican for Latinization, I can do so with a straight face and a clear conscience.

Uniformity is fine, as long as it is uniformity in the right faith. I prefer to upbraid the Vatican for their real errors.

Confusing Rome with the World (and uniformity of rite is this part of this Urbs et Orbis error) is the core of its errors.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #28 on: March 15, 2010, 07:40:53 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I agree with you Father. That is the reason why I am cautious concerning the Western Rite is that it will cause just that problem. Its like if some Protestant goes to and Eastern church and sees people kissing icons and they feel uncomfortable so maybe they will just decide to go Western Rite because they cannot fully accept kissing icons. The same goes for musical instruments. I'm fine with a big pipe organ when it comes to Western liturgies but I've seen Antiochian Western Rite churches using violins so it makes me wonder how far it will go. What if some people in the Western Rite say they want to use guitars since thats what they use in the West, will that be ok by their standards?
Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2010, 08:16:06 PM »

Since the rite of Constantinople has survived and flourished for around 15 centuries, it obviously must have some benefits over those archaic rites once used in the West, but now almost completely obscured and extinct. 

I also kind of get a kick at how some Orthodox, mainly converts will decry and disparage all things in Orthodoxy which they find too Eastern, ethnic, and exotic, as well as Ethnicity in general as "phyletheism". However they will, at the same time exhort and praise all things Western (which I guess they equate with "English") almost to the point that you could consider "Anglo-Phyletheist".  Talk about the pot and the Kettle...

I have my deep suspicions of the Western rite of Orthodoxy, but I fully except it as a valid choice for those who wish to attend it (as long as it is approved by an Orthodox synod).  I'm just not a fan of having people tell me that I MUST attend to and belong to Western rite Orthodoxy simply because I was born in a country that they define as "Western".
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2010, 08:19:05 PM »

Many are not.

But to your point: why are you all perfectly happy?

I remember a priest I know, who was dogmatically against the WRO, and how universal the Constantinople rite was (I'm not sure if he knew of any other Eastern rite)....The Church, he insisted is supposed to be different from the world: he was one for all the rubrics and not letting one litany drop, but had no use for pomp outside the Church door, even not going to his college graduation, for instance.  Problem is, is that that is not a Church-World distinction but a East-West distinction, which anyone who sees Eastern cultures operating outside the Church can attest.

When I brought this up, some scurried to find photos of eleborate Western Churches, but I saw no plain Eastern ones.

So a comparison of Western and Eastern secular ceremonial shows a difference which is reflected in the Western and Eastern rites, and other matters: the West has tried to keep the Scripture in the standard from of the contemporary vernacular ever since the Vulgate (indeed the Itala).  The East has been quite comfortable with diaglossia, at one time even contemplating Atticising the Koine of Scripture (as is done in the Church writings).  I am just curious that defenders of the Eastern rite in the West sound like the defenders of the Latin mass.  Uncomfortably close.

I don't see what the big deal is. He said he's perfectly happy, what's wrong with that? I myself came from the RCC and much prefer the Eastern Orthodox way over the RC offering. Liturgical variety doesn't interest me -- I'd be happy attending the DL of St. John for the rest of my life. Note that I'm not saying my way has to be the way for everyone, but I feel that a simple "Western country = Western rite" can only lead to problems.

When the OCA Cathedral here switched to English (or rather, started using English), one gentleman sighed that "Oh, Vladiko, when you hear the old Russian tone, you get a warm feeling here (hand over heart).  Archb. John, of blessed memory responded: "Yes, I get the same feeling after three vodkas."

What is a problem, and why I said anything at all, is that usually those who are quite fine with the Constantinople rite are not fine with those who are not.  And among the former I find a lot of confusion between nostalgia, revisionism, mystique, the exotic and equating it with piety. 

The issue of Western country=Western rite is the odds are that in a Western country, most are Westerners.  You can find Westerners in the East, just not that many (remember: EP Celarius closed Latin rite parishes in Constantinople, so they were there).

Among adherents to the Western rite, you can find a lot mythologizing, romanticizing, and waxing nostalgia for "Merry old England", King Aurthur and his Knights, and all things (Western) Medieval as well.
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2010, 08:22:10 PM »

Since the rite of Constantinople has survived and flourished for around 15 centuries, it obviously must have some benefits over those archaic rites once used in the West, but now almost completely obscured and extinct.

The Roman rite has also survived and flourished.  The benefit which both had was the sword in the hand of its supporter.

Quote
I also kind of get a kick at how some Orthodox, mainly converts will decry and disparage all things in Orthodoxy which they find too Eastern, ethnic, and exotic, as well as Ethnicity in general as "phyletheism". However they will, at the same time exhort and praise all things Western (which I guess they equate with "English") almost to the point that you could consider "Anglo-Phyletheist".  Talk about the pot and the Kettle...

But here both pot and kettle are on their stove.

Quote
I have my deep suspicions of the Western rite of Orthodoxy, but I fully except it as a valid choice for those who wish to attend it (as long as it is approved by an Orthodox synod).  I'm just not a fan of having people tell me that I MUST attend to and belong to Western rite Orthodoxy simply because I was born in a country that they define as "Western".
As long as the majority in that country who define themselves as Western can go to the Western Rite.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #32 on: March 15, 2010, 08:27:22 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I agree with you Father. That is the reason why I am cautious concerning the Western Rite is that it will cause just that problem.

I've met plenty Eastern rite Orthodox who never "convert."


Quote
Its like if some Protestant goes to and Eastern church and sees people kissing icons and they feel uncomfortable so maybe they will just decide to go Western Rite because they cannot fully accept kissing icons.

They kiss icons in the WRO. And Crosses, and Bibles and all sorts of things.

Quote
The same goes for musical instruments. I'm fine with a big pipe organ when it comes to Western liturgies but I've seen Antiochian Western Rite churches using violins so it makes me wonder how far it will go.

Though I'm not for violins, I have to say that they have sounded better than the organs I have heard in scores of Eastern Churches. Btw, I've seen a wedding at a Eastern Greek Orthodox Church where they had *gasp* violins.

Quote
What if some people in the Western Rite say they want to use guitars since thats what they use in the West, will that be ok by their standards?

The Eastern Orthodox crossed that when they put the first organ in.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #33 on: March 15, 2010, 08:28:44 PM »

Many are not.

But to your point: why are you all perfectly happy?

I remember a priest I know, who was dogmatically against the WRO, and how universal the Constantinople rite was (I'm not sure if he knew of any other Eastern rite)....The Church, he insisted is supposed to be different from the world: he was one for all the rubrics and not letting one litany drop, but had no use for pomp outside the Church door, even not going to his college graduation, for instance.  Problem is, is that that is not a Church-World distinction but a East-West distinction, which anyone who sees Eastern cultures operating outside the Church can attest.

When I brought this up, some scurried to find photos of eleborate Western Churches, but I saw no plain Eastern ones.

So a comparison of Western and Eastern secular ceremonial shows a difference which is reflected in the Western and Eastern rites, and other matters: the West has tried to keep the Scripture in the standard from of the contemporary vernacular ever since the Vulgate (indeed the Itala).  The East has been quite comfortable with diaglossia, at one time even contemplating Atticising the Koine of Scripture (as is done in the Church writings).  I am just curious that defenders of the Eastern rite in the West sound like the defenders of the Latin mass.  Uncomfortably close.

I don't see what the big deal is. He said he's perfectly happy, what's wrong with that? I myself came from the RCC and much prefer the Eastern Orthodox way over the RC offering. Liturgical variety doesn't interest me -- I'd be happy attending the DL of St. John for the rest of my life. Note that I'm not saying my way has to be the way for everyone, but I feel that a simple "Western country = Western rite" can only lead to problems.

When the OCA Cathedral here switched to English (or rather, started using English), one gentleman sighed that "Oh, Vladiko, when you hear the old Russian tone, you get a warm feeling here (hand over heart).  Archb. John, of blessed memory responded: "Yes, I get the same feeling after three vodkas."

What is a problem, and why I said anything at all, is that usually those who are quite fine with the Constantinople rite are not fine with those who are not.  And among the former I find a lot of confusion between nostalgia, revisionism, mystique, the exotic and equating it with piety. 

The issue of Western country=Western rite is the odds are that in a Western country, most are Westerners.  You can find Westerners in the East, just not that many (remember: EP Celarius closed Latin rite parishes in Constantinople, so they were there).

Among adherents to the Western rite, you can find a lot mythologizing, romanticizing, and waxing nostalgia for "Merry old England", King Aurthur and his Knights, and all things (Western) Medieval as well.
LOL.  And no mythologizing about a couple of "Orthodox" empires we all know?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #34 on: March 15, 2010, 08:47:07 PM »

I've met plenty Eastern rite Orthodox who never "convert."

One of the greatest things I fear is that Orthodoxy will soon become something like post Vatican II Roman Catholicism.


Quote

They kiss icons in the WRO. And Crosses, and Bibles and all sorts of things.

Well, I've never been to a Western Rite church so I will take your word for it.

Quote
Though I'm not for violins, I have to say that they have sounded better than the organs I have heard in scores of Eastern Churches. Btw, I've seen a wedding at a Eastern Greek Orthodox Church where they had *gasp* violins.

Yes, it sounds good to you and so a guitar or rock band might sound good to others so why not bring that silliness to the Western Rite too?

Quote

The Eastern Orthodox crossed that when they put the first organ in.

I agree with you and I think that all organs found within Eastern churches should either be smashed or taken out.

I just don't see the Western Rite as necessary. I was born Roman Catholic and I'm fine with the Eastern liturgy.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 08:49:04 PM by Andrew21091 » Logged
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #35 on: March 15, 2010, 08:52:40 PM »

Hmmm.. One thought to ponder: Could the Bishops make a new rite? I mean, they did that in Russia right?  Wink
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #36 on: March 15, 2010, 08:53:11 PM »

Among adherents to the Western rite, you can find a lot mythologizing, romanticizing, and waxing nostalgia for "Merry old England", King Aurthur and his Knights, and all things (Western) Medieval as well.

Hey, I happen to love England (spent a few years there as a kid), I grew up on King Arthur (from Boy's King Arthur to L'Morte de Arthur, and Once and Future King to the Pendragon Cycle), and I attended Episcopal services on and off (mostly off) for a few years leading up to my inquiring into Orthodoxy.  I could care less about Rite worship, just so long as I have right worship.

Preferably in English, I know enough Greek to know when to cross myself, but never ever Latin (though I know enough of that to know when to cross myself, as well)!  Of course, a good Italian language liturgy approved by an Orthodox church would be an interesting experience (and I know enough to know when to cross myself).

P.S. so far the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom is all I've been to.  Whatever Church is closest and Orthodox works fine for me.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 08:54:21 PM by FormerReformer » Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #37 on: March 15, 2010, 09:07:57 PM »

I could care less about Rite worship, just so long as I have right worship.

Preferably in English, I know enough Greek to know when to cross myself, but never ever Latin (though I know enough of that to know when to cross myself, as well)!  Of course, a good Italian language liturgy approved by an Orthodox church would be an interesting experience (and I know enough to know when to cross myself).

I agree!! The right Rite is, of course, just secondary to availability.  Smiley

Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,505



« Reply #38 on: March 15, 2010, 09:15:45 PM »

For most Evangelical and other non-liturgical Protestants (non-denom and otherwise), Eastern and Western Rites are equally foreign. In fact, Western may seem too "Catholic" (horrors!) for any with very limited exposure to Roman Catholicism, and be a real turn-off. Appeal might be limited to those already moving towards RCism.
Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #39 on: March 15, 2010, 09:39:41 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I agree with you Father. That is the reason why I am cautious concerning the Western Rite is that it will cause just that problem. Its like if some Protestant goes to and Eastern church and sees people kissing icons and they feel uncomfortable so maybe they will just decide to go Western Rite because they cannot fully accept kissing icons. The same goes for musical instruments. I'm fine with a big pipe organ when it comes to Western liturgies but I've seen Antiochian Western Rite churches using violins so it makes me wonder how far it will go. What if some people in the Western Rite say they want to use guitars since thats what they use in the West, will that be ok by their standards?

Have you seen, "my big fat greek wedding"? You can find organs in the GOA. You don't have to go western rite to see that. To be honest, I'm actually fine with the Arabic/Syrian style of the Byzantine Divine Liturgy.






ICXC NIKA
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #40 on: March 15, 2010, 09:41:38 PM »

I've met plenty Eastern rite Orthodox who never "convert."

One of the greatest things I fear is that Orthodoxy will soon become something like post Vatican II Roman Catholicism.

The Eastern Rite isn't saving those in submission to the Vatican.  The WRO won't bring that into Orthodoxy, given the ethos of those in it.



Quote
Quote
Though I'm not for violins, I have to say that they have sounded better than the organs I have heard in scores of Eastern Churches. Btw, I've seen a wedding at a Eastern Greek Orthodox Church where they had *gasp* violins.

Yes, it sounds good to you and so a guitar or rock band might sound good to others so why not bring that silliness to the Western Rite too?

I didn't say it sounded good (or well Tongue).  I said it sounded better.

Quote
Quote

The Eastern Orthodox crossed that when they put the first organ in.

I agree with you and I think that all organs found within Eastern churches should either be smashed or taken out.

I just don't see the Western Rite as necessary. I was born Roman Catholic and I'm fine with the Eastern liturgy.
[/quote]

I was born into a Lutheran family. I'm fine with the Eastern Liturgy. But then, I'm an Easterner.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #41 on: March 15, 2010, 09:49:16 PM »

Hmmm.. One thought to ponder: Could the Bishops make a new rite? I mean, they did that in Russia right?  Wink

I could be wrong, but I think one of the Czar's did that in Russia. The slavic rite is a hybrid of both Roman Catholicism and Byzantinism.

And so it's both Eastern and Western. I'm not gonna front.....I actually like the slavic rite. I don't like it's statues and some of it's Icons, but I do like alot of other things about it.






ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 10:16:32 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 15, 2010, 09:57:59 PM »

For most Evangelical and other non-liturgical Protestants (non-denom and otherwise), Eastern and Western Rites are equally foreign. In fact, Western may seem too "Catholic" (horrors!) for any with very limited exposure to Roman Catholicism, and be a real turn-off. Appeal might be limited to those already moving towards RCism.

I agree. The Byzantine Divine Liturgy will work just fine for alot of converts from low church protestantism. There is really no need for a western rite for those that came from a low church Baptist or Pentecostal/Charismatic background....as well as for those that come from neopaganism, old paganism, secularism, atheism.....etc. And this is one of the reasons why I'm fine with the Arabic/Syrian Byzantine Divine Liturgy.

It will work just fine as a mission for those that came from low churchism.









ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 10:21:35 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #43 on: March 15, 2010, 10:04:44 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I agree with you Father. That is the reason why I am cautious concerning the Western Rite is that it will cause just that problem. Its like if some Protestant goes to and Eastern church and sees people kissing icons and they feel uncomfortable so maybe they will just decide to go Western Rite because they cannot fully accept kissing icons. The same goes for musical instruments. I'm fine with a big pipe organ when it comes to Western liturgies but I've seen Antiochian Western Rite churches using violins so it makes me wonder how far it will go. What if some people in the Western Rite say they want to use guitars since thats what they use in the West, will that be ok by their standards?

Have you seen, "my big fat greek wedding"? You can find organs in the GOA. You don't have to go western rite to see that. To be honest, I'm actually fine with the Arabic/Syrian style of the Byzantine Divine Liturgy.






ICXC NIKA

I never said that there are not organs in GOA churches. I go to an Antiochian church that uses and organ unfortunately. They should not be there.
Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 15, 2010, 10:08:52 PM »

Most attempts to revive the Western Rite in modern times have been highly problematic, and have encouraged people to think they are not required to "fully convert" in my experience. This is a generalization.

I agree with you Father. That is the reason why I am cautious concerning the Western Rite is that it will cause just that problem. Its like if some Protestant goes to and Eastern church and sees people kissing icons and they feel uncomfortable so maybe they will just decide to go Western Rite because they cannot fully accept kissing icons. The same goes for musical instruments. I'm fine with a big pipe organ when it comes to Western liturgies but I've seen Antiochian Western Rite churches using violins so it makes me wonder how far it will go. What if some people in the Western Rite say they want to use guitars since thats what they use in the West, will that be ok by their standards?

Have you seen, "my big fat greek wedding"? You can find organs in the GOA. You don't have to go western rite to see that. To be honest, I'm actually fine with the Arabic/Syrian style of the Byzantine Divine Liturgy.


I never said that there are not organs in GOA churches. I go to an Antiochian church that uses and organ unfortunately. They should not be there.

I agree. I also don't like pews....and I like beards...etc.

 I guess the only thing to do about it is to pray, educate the kids, youth, young adults, and start a mission. The more missions the better! So that hopefully, the next generation will want things that are more Orthodox.






ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 10:13:34 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,264


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #45 on: March 15, 2010, 10:13:35 PM »

I just wanna give you all the perspective of a traditional Western Catholic. I love the TLM with a passion. I also love the NO celebrated properly, with reverence, sacred music, and the priest facing Liturgical East.
Now, that being said, I attended a Byzantine Catholic Church for a whole year and I loved it and found it beautiful.
BUT, Byzantine Liturgy still remains alien and foreign to me. I connecting to Christ in the Divine Liturgy of St. John. I don't think that this means that there is anything wrong with the Byzantine Liturgy but I have always experience Christ in the framework of a Western Liturgy. Because my spiritual life was formed in this way,it would be difficult for me to be forced into a a situation where being Byzantine was my only option.
I want to emphasize that I don't think that there is anything wrong with Eastern Liturgies. They are very beautiful. I just couldn't imagine myself fitting well into them permanently.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #46 on: March 15, 2010, 10:29:24 PM »

Another point that I want to make with my caution to the Western Rite is that I'm afraid some teachings may be carried over from other sects like it does with the Eastern Catholics. Eastern Catholics pretty much ignore the filoque, celebrate post-schism Eastern Saints, and keeping some former theology (for instance some Nestorian ideas from Chaldeans) so are these Western Rite parishes going to celebrate post schism Western Saints who are not Orthodox? The OCA is already letting New Skete get away with that with their celebration of Francis of Assisi. We don't need more churches that do things like that.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #47 on: March 15, 2010, 10:49:48 PM »

Another point that I want to make with my caution to the Western Rite is that I'm afraid some teachings may be carried over from other sects like it does with the Eastern Catholics. Eastern Catholics pretty much ignore the filoque, celebrate post-schism Eastern Saints, and keeping some former theology (for instance some Nestorian ideas from Chaldeans) so are these Western Rite parishes going to celebrate post schism Western Saints who are not Orthodox? The OCA is already letting New Skete get away with that with their celebration of Francis of Assisi. We don't need more churches that do things like that.

And the OCA has, up untill the election of Met. Jonah, been fiercely anti-WRO.  New Skete is not the only Eastern Church with such features.

I have never seen a "post schism" saint in a WRO.  The closest I've seen is Our Lady of Walsingham, which dates to a vision of a Saxon noblewoman in 1053-1061.  Since the Theotokos is pre-schism, and the Saxons (as opposed to the Normans) have some question when they really went into schism, I think this is safe, besides the issue of statues.

They do have a lot on Orthodox saints neglected, like St. Benedict (we venerated a relic of his, which we received from the WRO priest who used to serve with us: Memory eternal Father David!).  Despite what many have said of St. John Maximovich and St. Tikhon, I do not think that their involvement in the WRO was an "exception" to their sanctity.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #48 on: March 15, 2010, 10:51:58 PM »

I just wanna give you all the perspective of a traditional Western Catholic. I love the TLM with a passion. I also love the NO celebrated properly, with reverence, sacred music, and the priest facing Liturgical East.
Now, that being said, I attended a Byzantine Catholic Church for a whole year and I loved it and found it beautiful.
BUT, Byzantine Liturgy still remains alien and foreign to me. I connecting to Christ in the Divine Liturgy of St. John. I don't think that this means that there is anything wrong with the Byzantine Liturgy but I have always experience Christ in the framework of a Western Liturgy. Because my spiritual life was formed in this way,it would be difficult for me to be forced into a a situation where being Byzantine was my only option.
I want to emphasize that I don't think that there is anything wrong with Eastern Liturgies. They are very beautiful. I just couldn't imagine myself fitting well into them permanently.
So as a traditional RC is the lack of a Western Rite community near you the only thing keeping you from becoming Orthodox?
Logged

Joseph
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #49 on: March 15, 2010, 11:15:08 PM »

I've never understood the whole "Eastern" and "Western" Rite thing. Its not as if the Eucharist is a "natural" thing for any culture. The Liturgy is Eternity breaking through into time and space, so it is foreign to all of us.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #50 on: March 15, 2010, 11:30:45 PM »

New Skete is not the only Eastern Church with such features.

So because some do it makes it ok? I'm not sure why point this out. It is a problem that needs to be fixed but I think that by an increase in Western Rite may increase them. I'm saying may not will. I'm worried that if we do one Western things that that may involve doing others which are not Orthodox.

Quote
They do have a lot on Orthodox saints neglected, like St. Benedict (we venerated a relic of his, which we received from the WRO priest who used to serve with us: Memory eternal Father David!).  Despite what many have said of St. John Maximovich and St. Tikhon, I do not think that their involvement in the WRO was an "exception" to their sanctity.

I go to a Byzantine church and we have St. Benedict's icon on our Southern wall.

I'm going to say that I'm not against the Western Rite but I think we need to have a cautious approach to it and not jump right into the idea. Is it going to turn into something so that converts can do to make church more comfortable and what not? Or should they conform themselves to the Church rather than the other way around? I honestly don't see how Western Rite is a necessity.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 11:33:28 PM by Andrew21091 » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #51 on: March 15, 2010, 11:57:34 PM »

New Skete is not the only Eastern Church with such features.

So because some do it makes it ok? I'm not sure why point this out.

Because you point out what you fear may happen with the WRO, and I am telling what actually happens in both the WRO and the Eastern Orthodox.

Quote
It is a problem that needs to be fixed but I think that by an increase in Western Rite may increase them.

Why?  They have nothing to do with WRO.  You would have to go to the GOA to find a more hostile environment for the WRO.  And yet the Skete, with NO encouragement for the WRO, still had these problems.

Quote
I'm saying may not will. I'm worried that if we do one Western things that that may involve doing others which are not Orthodox.

How about doing Eastern things which are not Orthodox (yes, it is possible).

Quote
Quote
They do have a lot on Orthodox saints neglected, like St. Benedict (we venerated a relic of his, which we received from the WRO priest who used to serve with us: Memory eternal Father David!).  Despite what many have said of St. John Maximovich and St. Tikhon, I do not think that their involvement in the WRO was an "exception" to their sanctity.

I go to a Byzantine church and we have St. Benedict's icon on our Southern wall.


Until the likes of St. John and others involved in WRO, saints such as Benedict fell off the calendar.

Quote
I'm going to say that I'm not against the Western Rite but I think we need to have a cautious approach to it and not jump right into the idea. Is it going to turn into something so that converts can do to make church more comfortable and what not? Or should they conform themselves to the Church rather than the other way around? I honestly don't see how Western Rite is a necessity.

You just proved it was: Easternization does not equal conforming yourself to the Church, anymore than Westernization=modernization.  If it did, the East would be packed with saints.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #52 on: March 15, 2010, 11:58:56 PM »

I've never understood the whole "Eastern" and "Western" Rite thing. Its not as if the Eucharist is a "natural" thing for any culture. The Liturgy is Eternity breaking through into time and space, so it is foreign to all of us.
So why make it more foreign?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,264


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #53 on: March 16, 2010, 12:11:43 AM »

I just wanna give you all the perspective of a traditional Western Catholic. I love the TLM with a passion. I also love the NO celebrated properly, with reverence, sacred music, and the priest facing Liturgical East.
Now, that being said, I attended a Byzantine Catholic Church for a whole year and I loved it and found it beautiful.
BUT, Byzantine Liturgy still remains alien and foreign to me. I connecting to Christ in the Divine Liturgy of St. John. I don't think that this means that there is anything wrong with the Byzantine Liturgy but I have always experience Christ in the framework of a Western Liturgy. Because my spiritual life was formed in this way,it would be difficult for me to be forced into a a situation where being Byzantine was my only option.
I want to emphasize that I don't think that there is anything wrong with Eastern Liturgies. They are very beautiful. I just couldn't imagine myself fitting well into them permanently.
So as a traditional RC is the lack of a Western Rite community near you the only thing keeping you from becoming Orthodox?
No. I have other reasons for not becoming Eastern Orthodox.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 12:34:54 AM by Papist » Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #54 on: March 16, 2010, 12:27:16 AM »

I've never understood the whole "Eastern" and "Western" Rite thing. Its not as if the Eucharist is a "natural" thing for any culture. The Liturgy is Eternity breaking through into time and space, so it is foreign to all of us.
So why make it more foreign?
It couldn't possibly be more foreign to anyone, so I think that's a moot question.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #55 on: March 16, 2010, 12:35:55 AM »

I've never understood the whole "Eastern" and "Western" Rite thing. Its not as if the Eucharist is a "natural" thing for any culture. The Liturgy is Eternity breaking through into time and space, so it is foreign to all of us.
So why make it more foreign?
It couldn't possibly be more foreign to anyone, so I think that's a moot question.
So there should be no problem with WRO then, should there?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #56 on: March 16, 2010, 01:01:17 AM »

So there should be no problem with WRO then, should there?

Just the same problems as the Eastern rite Wink
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #57 on: March 16, 2010, 01:19:12 AM »

So there should be no problem with WRO then, should there?

Just the same problems as the Eastern rite Wink
Exactly.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #58 on: March 16, 2010, 01:41:22 AM »

I've never understood the whole "Eastern" and "Western" Rite thing. Its not as if the Eucharist is a "natural" thing for any culture. The Liturgy is Eternity breaking through into time and space, so it is foreign to all of us.
So why make it more foreign?
It couldn't possibly be more foreign to anyone, so I think that's a moot question.
So there should be no problem with WRO then, should there?
Not necessarily so. There may be problems (including canonical ones) in the way it was implemented, or there may be problems in that it is not tried and tested. Along with this is the fact that just because two local Orthodox Churches introduce something doesn't automatically make it "correct rubric" for the entire Ecumene of the Church. Kissing the Chalice after receiving Communion is "correct rubric" if you are in a Russian Church, but it is "incorrect rubric" in other jurisdictions.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 01:45:09 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
sohma_hatori
Earthbending Novice
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
Posts: 526


The Blind Bandit


« Reply #59 on: March 16, 2010, 05:26:23 AM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

We can be looking at things from a different perspective, but if you want to "set Orthodoxy apart from Roman Catholicism", why not adopt the Eastern Rite? The Antiochians in the Philippines have adopted the Western Rite and it has not been received well, even amongst their own members (partly due to alleged "un canonical practices"). The Orthodox faithful here want to BE known as Orthodox and if we are merely talking about "identity", then celebrating Eastern Rite is the logical thing to do.

My two cents.
Logged

""Pride is not the opposite of shame, but it's source. True humility is the only antidote to shame.""
— Iroh- Avatar:The Last Airbender
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #60 on: March 16, 2010, 06:30:20 AM »

Now, that being said, I attended a Byzantine Catholic Church for a whole year and I loved it and found it beautiful.
BUT, Byzantine Liturgy still remains alien and foreign to me. I connecting to Christ in the Divine Liturgy of St. John. I don't think that this means that there is anything wrong with the Byzantine Liturgy but I have always experience Christ in the framework of a Western Liturgy. Because my spiritual life was formed in this way,it would be difficult for me to be forced into a a situation where being Byzantine was my only option.
I want to emphasize that I don't think that there is anything wrong with Eastern Liturgies. They are very beautiful. I just couldn't imagine myself fitting well into them permanently.

Ha, that's exactly how I used to thought before conversion!
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 06:31:05 AM by Alpo » Logged

Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #61 on: March 16, 2010, 08:20:40 AM »

Quote

Please point me to the rubrics that call for an archaic language in the liturgy.


My favorite is the Gospel of the Road to Emmaus in the Slavic Church:with the two disciples you have all sorts fo duals which have dropped out of the Slavic languages (except Slovenian) still in the Church Slovanic.

Anna Comnena talks about teaching Greeks (i.e. Romans) to speak Greek (i.e. Attic):
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,26357.msg416749/topicseen.html#msg416749

That's just it: there is no need for a canon.  It is that deeply engrained in the East.

Not deeply engrained enough, apparently, since the Church translated the liturgy into modern English without anyone raising a fuss.

Here's the problem Isa- your entire argument in favor of the WR and liturgical phyletism is based on obscure historical tangents which have negligible relevance and which the average Orthodox in the US or other western lands is neither aware of nor affected by.

The Eastern rite is served in modern English, not middle English and not Anglo-Saxon, so what are you complaining about? Are you now critiquing the Eastern Rite because the form of English selected was not sufficiently archaic? Did Sts. Cyril and Methodius deliberately pick archaic dialects when they formed Old Church Slavonic? Did St. Innocent of Alaska reach for the oldest forms of native languages they could find?

Quote
Confusing Rome with the World (and uniformity of rite is this part of this Urbs et Orbis error) is the core of its errors.

The Vatican's errors are exactly what the Church says they are- filioque, Papal supremacy, etc. The Church has never made its critique of the Vatican on the phyletist grounds that everyone should get his own rite for his own culture and ethnicity.
The old local rites are dead and gone; let's put away the fantasy roleplaying and accept what the Church has given us.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 08:21:02 AM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #62 on: March 16, 2010, 09:32:58 AM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

We can be looking at things from a different perspective, but if you want to "set Orthodoxy apart from Roman Catholicism", why not adopt the Eastern Rite? The Antiochians in the Philippines have adopted the Western Rite and it has not been received well, even amongst their own members (partly due to alleged "un canonical practices"). The Orthodox faithful here want to BE known as Orthodox and if we are merely talking about "identity", then celebrating Eastern Rite is the logical thing to do.

My two cents.

Hi "sohma_hatori"  Wink (Hey, where's my tea man? You promised to send it before Lent. Cool)

Yeah, you told me that before. But, truly, truly I say unto you: "mas chada jud ang Gregorian bai" (Gregorian chant is really much nicer.)

Anyway, jokes aside, I truly believe that it will be hard for Filipinos to adapt the Byzantine Chant. Even if Lutherans and other Protestants convert they are at least familiar (even a little bit) of Gregorian Chant, owing to Masses on television and Catholic churches with large speakers.

Lets let the Bishops decide anyway.
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #63 on: March 16, 2010, 11:53:24 AM »

Anyway, jokes aside, I truly believe that it will be hard for Filipinos to adapt the Byzantine Chant. Even if Lutherans and other Protestants convert they are at least familiar (even a little bit) of Gregorian Chant, owing to Masses on television and Catholic churches with large speakers.

Lets let the Bishops decide anyway.

What's wrong with Russian choral settings?
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #64 on: March 16, 2010, 01:51:29 PM »

Hmmm.. One thought to ponder: Could the Bishops make a new rite? I mean, they did that in Russia right?  Wink

I could be wrong, but I think one of the Czar's did that in Russia. The slavic rite is a hybrid of both Roman Catholicism and Byzantinism.

And so it's both Eastern and Western. I'm not gonna front.....I actually like the slavic rite. I don't like it's statues and some of it's Icons, but I do like alot of other things about it.






ICXC NIKA

Statues? The only one venerated statue in the Slavic Church I know is in Kosovo.

There were at least three major changes of rites in Russia: the one by Patr. Nikon, the one by Peter the Great and the one by the Living Church (thanks God, failed). Which do you mean?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #65 on: March 16, 2010, 03:18:44 PM »

Quote

Please point me to the rubrics that call for an archaic language in the liturgy.


My favorite is the Gospel of the Road to Emmaus in the Slavic Church:with the two disciples you have all sorts fo duals which have dropped out of the Slavic languages (except Slovenian) still in the Church Slovanic.

Anna Comnena talks about teaching Greeks (i.e. Romans) to speak Greek (i.e. Attic):
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,26357.msg416749/topicseen.html#msg416749

That's just it: there is no need for a canon.  It is that deeply engrained in the East.

Not deeply engrained enough, apparently, since the Church translated the liturgy into modern English without anyone raising a fuss.

LOL. Where have you been. You're lucky to get English, modern, archaic or Indo-European given the fuss in many quarters over this, e.g. the Greek Archdiocese of Canada/Toronto.

Couple of things on that, first of which is that Orthodox didn't translate it. Hapgood has dominated English liturgy in North America for the past century.  She was, and remained, an Episcopalian, and the ECUSA's predecessor was part, if not the main, part of her intended audience, to reunite the "branches," East and West.  Hence the BCP language, explicitely using the KJV and the BCP for the Psalms, and even the BCP translation of the prayer of St. Chrysostom ("Byzantinization" started before the WRO even existed, or were thought of).  (In contrast, St. Nicholas the Apostle of Japan rejected the earlier translations by Protestants, not for problems of dogma, but because they used vernacular Japanese, and he started his own translation into archaic Classical Japanese).  Prior to her, translations were done by Fr. Bjerring, a convert priest (who later apostacized) who served the East coast Orthodox, being installed in New York in 1870.  He had to translate them for the simple reason that he did not speak either Russian/Slavonic nor Greek, and had to go from a German translation.  Most of his parish barely spoke English, so the English being used didn't become an issue.

Prior to that, English was used in the San Francisco Cathedral, the parishes in New Orleans and Galveston as the lingua franca of the mixed congregations, and liturgical use wasn't in question.  The "English priest" Fr. (soon to officially St.) Sebastian Dabovich translated for the clergy (he was the first priest born in America of European parantage, but just barely: his mother went into labor as their boat sailed past the Golden Gate Bridge towards immigration).

Things didn't change much until the conversion of Fr. Ingrim Irwin, the first of a rash of convert priests when the See of North America was translated to New York.  A former Episcopalian, he began writing English articles in the Russia/Ukrainian publications (oddly, the HGS allowed Ukrainian in North America although banned in the Empire: despite the 1st Ammendment, the Church publications had to get the approval of the Russian censor). When St. Tikhon returned to Russia, he was tranferred to St. Raphael's jurisdiction.  There his started the Anglisation of al-Kalimah (now the Word), and began to target the children of the Arabs, who were being lured away by English services of the Protestants. At the same time, back in the Mother Patriarchate, Arabic had just been restored as the liturgical language, and so was undergoing a process of translation/standardization not unlike what was going on in America, at a time that the Christians were standardizing modern Arabic (yes, the Christians.  The Muslims refused to acknowledge anything but Quranic Arabic at the time).  Given that dynamic, Fr. Irwin placed a premium on intelligibility, as he spoke out forcefully for mission (severely criticizing Hapgood in the process) in North America. Hence, no reason to adopt the Eastern mentality on language (i.e. diglossia). The Syrian Diocese went from 100% Arabic in 1906 to 84% at least some English, including 52% all English, in 1916.  Up until the OCA and the switching to English which picked up steam after Autocephaly, the Antichians were the biggest source of English Orthodoxy.
http://orthodoxhistory.org/2009/08/language-in-american-orthodoxy-1916/

Another source of English translation came from Archb. Fan Noli's Albanians.  Back in the empire the Porte forbade Albanian and the Phanar excommunicated those who used it, and the Greeks brought that rule here in America: the origin of the autocephalous Church of Albania sprung into existence from the refusal of the Greek priest in Boston to bury an "Albanian Nationalist."  So Fan Noli and the Albanians went to the Russian bishop. Fan Noli translated into English and Albanian the classics (Harvard educated, he was a philologist, aside from liturgical translations, and himself a poet in both languages) of English and the writings of Albanian natinalists. His writings helped standardize Albanian (accomplished within his lifetime).  Again, a different dynamic than usual in Eastern countries, and given that history, not suprising that we have the translations we have. (another element being that Vatican, with a different agenda, approved and published all sorts of materials in English, which we all use).

Meanwhile, in Greece the Evangelika "Gospel Questions" (the translation of the NT into Modern Greek and distributed in Greece, at nearly no cost, sponsored by the Queen of the Greeks) resulted in bloodshed and deaths, the deposition of the Archbishop of Athens and the fall of the government.  All that without a canon or a rubric.


Quote
Here's the problem Isa- your entire argument in favor of the WR and liturgical phyletism

You mean the DL in the language the Faithful actually speak: whether English, Yupik, French or Spanish...or whatever?


Quote
is based on obscure historical tangents which have negligible relevance

Like
rococo and baroque?

Quote
and which the average Orthodox in the US or other western lands is neither aware of nor affected by.

Those in the WRO, and the Western detractors of Orthodoxy say otherwise.

Quote
The Eastern rite is served in modern English, not middle English and not Anglo-Saxon, so what are you complaining about?

Since I pray in Arabic, for myself, nothing.  Just defending the Catholicity of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic [that means sent] Church.

Quote
Are you now critiquing the Eastern Rite because the form of English selected was not sufficiently archaic?

Just stating the fact that this is not the usual manner of things in the East.

Quote
Did Sts. Cyril and Methodius deliberately pick archaic dialects when they formed Old Church Slavonic? Did St. Innocent of Alaska reach for the oldest forms of native languages they could find?


LOL. Bad examples, as neither the Slavs nor the Amerindians had any means to have an archaic form of their language-that requires a literary form to make the comparison, and the saints were the first to put the languages into writing.  Plus SS Cyril and Methodius were technically a Western mission.  The written form they created, the Glagolithic, survives in Croatia, using the Western rite.  I've refered to the example of St. Nicholas of Japan above, and I'll add the Classical Chinese translations done by the Orthodox missions: both Japan and China had literary traditions, where the choice of an archaic form was available, and chosen.  When Romanian finally came into its own, it borrowed Slavonic for its archaism (the knowledge of Latin was completely gone at the time), as Coptic and Syriac used Greek, and Arabic used Syriac.  But getting back to the Slavonic, once the Cyrillic alphabet was adopted, yes, archaisms like the "Greek letters" (letters that were different in Attic but merged in Koine) and breathings (meaningless in Slavonic) were adopted.

Quote
Confusing Rome with the World (and uniformity of rite is this part of this Urbs et Orbis error) is the core of its errors.

The Vatican's errors are exactly what the Church says they are- filioque, Papal supremacy, etc. [/quote]

The filioque was Spain's error.  It only became the Vatican, and the cause of Rome being dropped from the diptychs, when introduced at Rome, and Rome therefore insisted all the other Churches adopt it.  Same with the authority of its bishop over all the other Churches.

Quote
The Church has never made its critique of the Vatican on the phyletist grounds
Au contraire: The Byzantine lists: errors of the Latins By Tia M. Kolbaba
http://books.google.com/books?id=X8F9EghcuD8C&printsec=frontcover&dq=erros+of+the+latins&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false


Quote
that everyone should get his own rite for his own culture and ethnicity.

Constantinople was not yet underway for a century after the schism to transform itself into the Phanar, and suppressed the rites of the other local Churches.

Quote
The old local rites are dead and gone; let's put away the fantasy roleplaying and accept what the Church has given us.
Like the Resurrection?  Yes, these dead bones live.

Interesting how you both say
I agree here. If established Catholic, Anglican, or Lutheran parishes want to convert and adopt this rite, and the Orthodox bishops concede to this,

and tell them to "put away the fantasy roleplaying and accept what the Church has given us."  What when those "established Catholic, Anglican or Lutheran parishes" establish other parishes (as I said, Apostolic means "sent")?  Would they be setting up Eastern parishes?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 03:24:01 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #66 on: March 16, 2010, 04:34:17 PM »

Since the rite of Constantinople has survived and flourished for around 15 centuries, it obviously must have some benefits over those archaic rites once used in the West, but now almost completely obscured and extinct.

The Roman rite has also survived and flourished.  The benefit which both had was the sword in the hand of its supporter.


Quote
I also kind of get a kick at how some Orthodox, mainly converts will decry and disparage all things in Orthodoxy which they find too Eastern, ethnic, and exotic, as well as Ethnicity in general as "phyletheism". However they will, at the same time exhort and praise all things Western (which I guess they equate with "English") almost to the point that you could consider "Anglo-Phyletheist".  Talk about the pot and the Kettle...

But here both pot and kettle are on their stove.

Quote
I have my deep suspicions of the Western rite of Orthodoxy, but I fully except it as a valid choice for those who wish to attend it (as long as it is approved by an Orthodox synod).  I'm just not a fan of having people tell me that I MUST attend to and belong to Western rite Orthodoxy simply because I was born in a country that they define as "Western".
As long as the majority in that country who define themselves as Western can go to the Western Rite.

The Roman rite did not survive in a continuous manner as did the rite of Constantinople.  Many times throughout history has the Latin liturgy used by Rome changed.  Before the Council of Trent there was not even a single standardized Latin rite used throughout the whole Western Church.  Rome got wise to an idea that Constantinople had long since promoted, that it is better for unitys sake to have one standardized rite for the whole Church instead of numerous "local" ones.  This is why the Vatican created the Tridentine rite out of numerous, already existing liturgies that were used in various parts of Europe at that time. 
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #67 on: March 16, 2010, 07:51:06 PM »

Since the rite of Constantinople has survived and flourished for around 15 centuries, it obviously must have some benefits over those archaic rites once used in the West, but now almost completely obscured and extinct.

The Roman rite has also survived and flourished.  The benefit which both had was the sword in the hand of its supporter.


Quote
I also kind of get a kick at how some Orthodox, mainly converts will decry and disparage all things in Orthodoxy which they find too Eastern, ethnic, and exotic, as well as Ethnicity in general as "phyletheism". However they will, at the same time exhort and praise all things Western (which I guess they equate with "English") almost to the point that you could consider "Anglo-Phyletheist".  Talk about the pot and the Kettle...

But here both pot and kettle are on their stove.

Quote
I have my deep suspicions of the Western rite of Orthodoxy, but I fully except it as a valid choice for those who wish to attend it (as long as it is approved by an Orthodox synod).  I'm just not a fan of having people tell me that I MUST attend to and belong to Western rite Orthodoxy simply because I was born in a country that they define as "Western".
As long as the majority in that country who define themselves as Western can go to the Western Rite.

The Roman rite did not survive in a continuous manner as did the rite of Constantinople.  Many times throughout history has the Latin liturgy used by Rome changed. 

LOL.  So has the one used by New Rome, which is not even its own native DL, but one imported from Antioch in the late 4th century (by St. John and Nestorius  Shocked).

Quote
Before the Council of Trent there was not even a single standardized Latin rite used throughout the whole Western Church.

The Roman rite had been standardized and had been imposed on England in 664 (to the extermination of the native Celtic rite there) France in 789 (to the detriment of the native Gallic rite), on Milan in 849 (to the detriment of the native Milanese/Ambrosian rite), on Scotland after 1066 (to the extermination of the native Celtic rite there), on Spain in 1085 (to the deteriment of the native Mozarabic rite), on Ireland by Crusade in 1155 (to the extermination of the remnants of the native Celtic rite). Germany knew nothing but the Roman rite, which it proceeded to impose on the Church of Moravia (the present Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia) and other lands evangelized by the Orthodox.  The single standardized Latin rite was imposed from Ireland to Poland-Lithuania, from Scandinavia to the Crusaders states at a time when the Orthodox did not have a single standardized rite.

Quote
  Rome got wise to an idea that Constantinople had long since promoted, that it is better for unitys sake to have one standardized rite for the whole Church instead of numerous "local" ones.

No, it's not.  The debacle of the schism caused by Nikon should show that. But besides the point: Constantinople abolished the Antiochean rite and then the Alexandrian rite around 1200.  The Roman rite had been imposed long before throughout the whole Western patriarchate and what it could get of the East.  In fact, its imposition on Southern Italy was one of the factors that led to the Schism.

Quote
  This is why the Vatican created the Tridentine rite out of numerous, already existing liturgies that were used in various parts of Europe at that time.
By the time of Trent, the other liturgies were reduced to a handful of parishes (the Mozarabic, for instance, to only the Toledo cathedral and six parishes).  There were various uses (as there were, and all in the rite of Constantinople), and various differences caused by manuscripts etc., but no, Trent did not create a new rite by combining rites: it took what Rome had.  The new technology of printing allowed Trent/Pius V to standardize the rite (as Nikon did in Russia).  The Roman rite before Pius V was pretty much the one before him.  The advance in printing, not any great theological breakthrough, produced the Tridentine Mass.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #68 on: March 16, 2010, 08:02:09 PM »

I'm a bit of a liturgical history buff. This interested me. It was quoted in the margins of Rorate Caeli:

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2010/03/classical-roman-rite-c-1570.html

Quote
St. Francis of Assisi can be rightly regarded as the “savior” of the Ancient Roman Rite, since, at the time of the foundation of his Order, on account of his desire to live the same religious life that the Apostles lived with Christ Jesus, the three years before He was Crucified and Died for our salvation, he petitioned Pope Innocent III to take as the rite of his Order, the ancient Rite of the Roman Church, which was held to be the “Rite of St. Peter the Apostle”. During the reign of Innocent III, this rite was only used on the Feast of the Chair of St. Peter, in the private papal Chapel, for the so-called Gallican Rite was universally employed in the Diocese of Rome. In addition only 3 known copies of the liturgical books of this ancient rite were still extant in 1215, one of which was falling to pieces. Pope Innocent III granted St. Francis’ request and gave him one of the good, still extant copies of the Sacramentum, Lectionary, Rituale and other books.

On account of the Rule of St. Francis, the Order of Friars Minor published the first Missale in 1245 — which was entitled the Missale Regulare — so that all the priests of the Order could easily fulfill their duties, without having to carry about these several liturgical books. Pope Innocent IV attempted to reform the liturgy of the Roman Church in the same year, a reform which was widely unpopular with the clergy of the Diocese of Rome by 1265 A.D..

And so by the reign of Pope Nicholas III, a close collaborator with St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, the pope having heard how well received the Missale Regulare of the Order was throughout all parts of Europe, on account of the great devotion of the Catholic Faithful to St. Peter the Apostle, decided to respond to the failed liturgical renewal of Innocent IV by establishing the Ancient Roman Rite once again as the proper rite of the Diocese of Rome.

This same Missale Regulare of 1245, which was adopted with very minor alterations for the calendar of the diocese clergy in 1265, was republished in 1465 as the curial missal. It was this Missale, that Pope St. Pius V, by his Bull Missale Romanum of 1570, established as the Missale Romanum, and imposed upon the entire Latin Rite in according with the mandate of the Council of Trent, granting to all Roman Rite priests the perpetual privilege of celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to this Missal.

Essentially the Gallican Liturgy once nearly reigned supreme in the Roman church! But the Franciscans came along and preferred the private liturgy of the Chair of St. Peter (performed once a year). And because of them, eventually it swallowed up the Gallican and its cousin the Mozaribic (although it borrowed elements like the Gloria). I read some where that the Sarum Rite is a variant of the Missale Romanum and there are links that align the (Norman-imported?) liturgy with the Dominicans and the Carmelites.

Absolute papal "monarchism" and the Roman Catholic culture of obedience, is ultimately the reason why the post-Vatican II liturgical destruction succeeded. The current pope is conscious of liturgical discontinuity and actually cited the Old Believers and the Nikonian reforms as a precaution against those who would impose even minor changes to the liturgy with the stroke of a pen (such as St. Joseph being inserted into the Latin canon/anaphora). Yes, there are old school Catholics who reject the 1962 Missal.

Meanwhile, in Dalmatia/Croatia, their traditional Tridentine Mass was actually in Old Slavonic (!)
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 08:05:55 PM by John Larocque » Logged
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #69 on: March 16, 2010, 11:49:38 PM »

Anyway, jokes aside, I truly believe that it will be hard for Filipinos to adapt the Byzantine Chant. Even if Lutherans and other Protestants convert they are at least familiar (even a little bit) of Gregorian Chant, owing to Masses on television and Catholic churches with large speakers.

Lets let the Bishops decide anyway.

What's wrong with Russian choral settings?

Nothing, Znammeny and Kiev Chants are nice and its much more analogous with Gregorian chants -- even Rachmaninov's vespers are written in western notation.  Smiley Too bad the Patriarchate of Russia isn't the one assigned in the Phil.  Undecided

Don't get me wrong I like Byzantine chant, its just really hard to sing. And ease in assimilation of Orthodoxy in the Philippines is really needed.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 11:51:43 PM by yochanan » Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #70 on: March 16, 2010, 11:55:09 PM »

Do any of you have any links of Western Rite texts in the net?
I read one in our school's library but I can't borrow anymore Sad its finals week.
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #71 on: March 17, 2010, 12:16:04 AM »

Do any of you have any links of Western Rite texts in the net?
I read one in our school's library but I can't borrow anymore Sad its finals week.


Your school had a WRO book?  What kind of school do you go to?

I've posted links before, I'll look if I can find them.

Here's some.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,24362.msg376041.html#msg376041
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,22944.msg350046.html#msg350046
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 12:30:37 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #72 on: March 17, 2010, 12:47:45 AM »

There's a short history of the Roman Rite here from Michael Davies, largely cribbed from Fortescue. It seems the Franciscans had revised history a little bit.

http://www.latin-mass-society.org/msshst.htm

Long before St. Francis came along, the Gallican liturgy became displaced by a Gallicanized form of the old Roman Rite. It replaced this separate rite, but absorbed elements of the former. Thus the "Gallican" liturgy being celebrated in Rome in the early era of the Franciscans was actually Alcuin's Gallicanized Roman Rite... along with this older rite of St. Peter, which seems to have been held up as an example of an earlier pre-Gallicanized version. There is a strong imprint of St. Gregory the Great on the canon and several prayers - so in many ways, the Roman Rite in its various versions can be said to be his, much in the same way as the liturgy of St. Basil bears the imprint of St. Basil.

This paragraph stuck out for me in the piece:
 
Quote
The Missal of 1570 was indeed the result of instructions given at Trent, but it was, in fact, as regards the Ordinary, Canon, Proper of the time and much else a replica of the Roman Missal of 1474, which in its turn repeated in all essentials the practice of the Roman Church of the epoch of Innocent III, which itself derived from the usage of Gregory the Great and his successors in the seventh century. In short, the Missal of 1570 was, in all essentials, the usage of the mainstream of medieval European liturgy which included England and all its rites.

« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 01:00:35 AM by John Larocque » Logged
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #73 on: March 17, 2010, 01:00:34 AM »

Do any of you have any links of Western Rite texts in the net?
I read one in our school's library but I can't borrow anymore Sad its finals week.


Your school had a WRO book?  What kind of school do you go to?

I've posted links before, I'll look if I can find them.

Here's some.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,24362.msg376041.html#msg376041
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,22944.msg350046.html#msg350046

Thanks. BTW, I go to a Protestant University, which (ironically) has lots of books about Roman Catholicism -- not sure if that was pre-schism though -- it could be post-Vatican I  Embarrassed

Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #74 on: March 17, 2010, 01:56:43 AM »

All I know is that the rite of Constantinople survived down through the centuries while the other, Western ones did not.  Maybe the See of Rome had just cause to suppress the local rites with a standardized one (Just when it was territories within their own jurisdiction).  The idea of having dozens of local rites as opposed to one standardized one can lead to confusion and even heresy (Council of Toledo and the Filique).
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #75 on: March 17, 2010, 04:13:59 AM »

All I know is that the rite of Constantinople survived down through the centuries while the other, Western ones did not. 

LOL.  Well, if that is all you know, then I'm afraid you don't know anything, as such is not the case, as shown above.

Quote
Maybe the See of Rome had just cause to suppress the local rites with a standardized one

No, it did not.

Quote
(Just when it was territories within their own jurisdiction). 

Why the difference, if it were right, it would be right whenever.

Quote
The idea of having dozens of local rites as opposed to one standardized one can lead to confusion and even heresy

Whether it could or could not is moot, as it did not.

Quote
(Council of Toledo and the Filique).

Which had nothing to do with the question at hand, as 1) the rite of Toledo survives to this day 2) at the time of the insertion of the fillioque, the Orthodx had at least a half dozen different rites, 3) the filioque has been inserted in (via those submitted to the Vatican) in all rites, including Constantinople's.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
sohma_hatori
Earthbending Novice
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
Posts: 526


The Blind Bandit


« Reply #76 on: March 17, 2010, 07:54:57 AM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

We can be looking at things from a different perspective, but if you want to "set Orthodoxy apart from Roman Catholicism", why not adopt the Eastern Rite? The Antiochians in the Philippines have adopted the Western Rite and it has not been received well, even amongst their own members (partly due to alleged "un canonical practices"). The Orthodox faithful here want to BE known as Orthodox and if we are merely talking about "identity", then celebrating Eastern Rite is the logical thing to do.

My two cents.

Hi "sohma_hatori"  Wink (Hey, where's my tea man? You promised to send it before Lent. Cool)

Yeah, you told me that before. But, truly, truly I say unto you: "mas chada jud ang Gregorian bai" (Gregorian chant is really much nicer.)

Anyway, jokes aside, I truly believe that it will be hard for Filipinos to adapt the Byzantine Chant. Even if Lutherans and other Protestants convert they are at least familiar (even a little bit) of Gregorian Chant, owing to Masses on television and Catholic churches with large speakers.

Lets let the Bishops decide anyway.

True enough that Gregorian chants are charming, but allow me to repeat, if we are merely talking about "identity" then the Orthodox in the Philippines adopting the Western Rite would just seem to other Filipinos as if we are just another "rogue catholic group". There are too many other heretical groups in the Philippines who claim to be Orthodox! These heretical bishop's ORDAINED THEMSELVES and proclaimed their group to be "The Orthodox Church", or some people who claim to be divinely ordained to unite the Catholic and Orthodox Churches without any canonical bishop whosoever to back their claims! (At least we know the Antiochians here come from a canonical bishop), but these other "groups" aren't. And you know what? Their rites are western. Modified Catholic Liturgies. They may use Eastern elements in their garb but the rubrics are basically western (with so little modification, ever heard of "His Holiness Patriarch John Florentine Patriarch of the Philippines"?  Undecided )

My fear is that if we adopt a western rite for the Orthodox here, other Filipinos might just view us as another catholic vagante group, instead of us being identified as "Eastern Orthodox". By the way, Byzantine Chant isn't that hard really, you just really need to practice. Besides, our priest here has been very diligent to us in the teaching of chant, so I don't see any "real" problem. Adopting Byzantine Chant in Filipino languages maybe difficult at the start, but think about how the Spanish people adopten Byzantine Chant and how at present, they sing beautiful heavenly hymns.   Smiley

C'mon my friend, the reason why so many Roman Catholic seminarians visit our parish every Sunday is precisely because we have a unique rite in the Philippine context (i.e. Eastern Rite), and us Orthodox Christians are actually "performing them a service" so to speak. LOL!  laugh

By the way. Your tea has to wait until Pascha. (I have money problems at present). I do pray it will reach you in time.  Smiley
Logged

""Pride is not the opposite of shame, but it's source. True humility is the only antidote to shame.""
— Iroh- Avatar:The Last Airbender
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #77 on: March 17, 2010, 08:40:38 AM »

Using the Byzantine rite does not necessitate Byzantine chant. I'm sure the Gregorian style could be imported to the Eastern rite.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #78 on: March 17, 2010, 08:48:52 AM »

Isa- Let's cut through the tangents which you seem very fond of.

We have a modern English liturgy now, so your point about diglossia is moot. No one is fighting to adopt Middle or Old English.

As an aside, Elizabethan English is in fact our closest parallel to, say, Classical Chinese or Attic Greek, because it is generally recognized that English literature and English expressive power reached its highest point in that era (Shakespeare, KJV, Milton, Spenser, etc.), Beowulf, Sir Gawain, and Chaucer notwithstanding. Old and Middle English are often said to be less flexible and less rich in expressive power and subtlety than Early Modern English.

That's why poets continued to write in this language up to the 19th century (and some, even today), even after Early Modern English had been replaced by contemporary English in everyday speech. If there is anything to be called "Classical English" it is Early Modern English, not Old English or Middle English.

Someone who argues that every ethnicity or culture should have its own rite has no right to criticize those who think every ethnicity or culture should have its own church.

« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 08:52:43 AM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #79 on: March 17, 2010, 09:05:17 AM »

Using the Byzantine rite does not necessitate Byzantine chant. I'm sure the Gregorian style could be imported to the Eastern rite.

Sounds like Georgian Baptists to me:

http://www.ebcgeorgia.org/Neue_Dateien/News24/news24-PIX/Easter%20Eucharist.JPG

Or perhaps we should keep different rites separate.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 09:06:28 AM by Alpo » Logged

Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #80 on: March 17, 2010, 09:18:53 AM »

Using the Byzantine rite does not necessitate Byzantine chant. I'm sure the Gregorian style could be imported to the Eastern rite.

Sounds like Georgian Baptists to me:

http://www.ebcgeorgia.org/Neue_Dateien/News24/news24-PIX/Easter%20Eucharist.JPG

Or perhaps we should keep different rites separate.

You mean, like when the Russians imported Renaissance and Baroque music into their liturgy?

Speaking of Georgians, how often do you hear Byzantine chant in the Georgian Orthodox Church?

A style of music is not inextricably bound to a rite. Adopting Gregorian for the Eastern rite is actually a better fit than a lot of the modern Russian music, since it has common origins with Byzantine chant.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #81 on: March 17, 2010, 09:52:10 AM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

We can be looking at things from a different perspective, but if you want to "set Orthodoxy apart from Roman Catholicism", why not adopt the Eastern Rite? The Antiochians in the Philippines have adopted the Western Rite and it has not been received well, even amongst their own members (partly due to alleged "un canonical practices"). The Orthodox faithful here want to BE known as Orthodox and if we are merely talking about "identity", then celebrating Eastern Rite is the logical thing to do.

My two cents.

Hi "sohma_hatori"  Wink (Hey, where's my tea man? You promised to send it before Lent. Cool)

Yeah, you told me that before. But, truly, truly I say unto you: "mas chada jud ang Gregorian bai" (Gregorian chant is really much nicer.)

Anyway, jokes aside, I truly believe that it will be hard for Filipinos to adapt the Byzantine Chant. Even if Lutherans and other Protestants convert they are at least familiar (even a little bit) of Gregorian Chant, owing to Masses on television and Catholic churches with large speakers.

Lets let the Bishops decide anyway.

Quote
True enough that Gregorian chants are charming, but allow me to repeat, if we are merely talking about "identity" then the Orthodox in the Philippines adopting the Western Rite would just seem to other Filipinos as if we are just another "rogue catholic group". There are too many other heretical groups in the Philippines who claim to be Orthodox! These heretical bishop's ORDAINED THEMSELVES and proclaimed their group to be "The Orthodox Church", or some people who claim to be divinely ordained to unite the Catholic and Orthodox Churches without any canonical bishop whosoever to back their claims! (At least we know the Antiochians here come from a canonical bishop), but these other "groups" aren't. And you know what? Their rites are western. Modified Catholic Liturgies. They may use Eastern elements in their garb but the rubrics are basically western (with so little modification, ever heard of "His Holiness Patriarch John Florentine Patriarch of the Philippines"?  Undecided )

My fear is that if we adopt a western rite for the Orthodox here, other Filipinos might just view us as another catholic vagante group, instead of us being identified as "Eastern Orthodox". By the way, Byzantine Chant isn't that hard really, you just really need to practice. Besides, our priest here has been very diligent to us in the teaching of chant, so I don't see any "real" problem. Adopting Byzantine Chant in Filipino languages maybe difficult at the start, but think about how the Spanish people adopten Byzantine Chant and how at present, they sing beautiful heavenly hymns.   Smiley

C'mon my friend, the reason why so many Roman Catholic seminarians visit our parish every Sunday is precisely because we have a unique rite in the Philippine context (i.e. Eastern Rite), and us Orthodox Christians are actually "performing them a service" so to speak. LOL!  laugh

By the way. Your tea has to wait until Pascha. (I have money problems at present). I do pray it will re

His Holiness Patriarch John Florentine Patriarch of the Philippines!!!???  Shocked OMG!

Well, if you say so, then we really do have to use the Eastern Rite. Hmmm..

Look at this:

Using the Byzantine rite does not necessitate Byzantine chant. I'm sure the Gregorian style could be imported to the Eastern rite.

If this is true, then some churches could just use the Eastern Rite - Gregorian Chant model. Easier to assimilate and emphasizes our identity, or does it?

« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 09:54:01 AM by yochanan » Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #82 on: March 17, 2010, 09:55:49 AM »

Using the Byzantine rite does not necessitate Byzantine chant. I'm sure the Gregorian style could be imported to the Eastern rite.

Sounds like Georgian Baptists to me:

http://www.ebcgeorgia.org/Neue_Dateien/News24/news24-PIX/Easter%20Eucharist.JPG

Or perhaps we should keep different rites separate.

Baptists have a liturgy? And they use Gregorian? Shocked
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #83 on: March 17, 2010, 09:59:04 AM »

Is there a substantial difference between the Eastern and Western Rites? They preach the same thing right?
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #84 on: March 17, 2010, 10:01:47 AM »

Using the Byzantine rite does not necessitate Byzantine chant. I'm sure the Gregorian style could be imported to the Eastern rite.

Sounds like Georgian Baptists to me:

http://www.ebcgeorgia.org/Neue_Dateien/News24/news24-PIX/Easter%20Eucharist.JPG

Or perhaps we should keep different rites separate.

Baptists have a liturgy? And they use Gregorian? Shocked

No, they're Georgian baptists who have adopted Georgian Orthodox customs to make conversions easier. Alpo's point seems to be that anyone who uses any music other than Byzantine chant in the Eastern rite is imitating these baptists.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #85 on: March 17, 2010, 10:03:35 AM »

Is there a substantial difference between the Eastern and Western Rites? They preach the same thing right?

Yes. The problem is, the Western rites are defunct. The rites currently being promoted as "Western Rite Orthodoxy" are historical guesswork and pastiche, mostly using post-schism Roman Catholic and Anglican texts.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #86 on: March 17, 2010, 10:06:28 AM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

We can be looking at things from a different perspective, but if you want to "set Orthodoxy apart from Roman Catholicism", why not adopt the Eastern Rite? The Antiochians in the Philippines have adopted the Western Rite and it has not been received well, even amongst their own members (partly due to alleged "un canonical practices"). The Orthodox faithful here want to BE known as Orthodox and if we are merely talking about "identity", then celebrating Eastern Rite is the logical thing to do.

My two cents.

Hi "sohma_hatori"  Wink (Hey, where's my tea man? You promised to send it before Lent. Cool)

Yeah, you told me that before. But, truly, truly I say unto you: "mas chada jud ang Gregorian bai" (Gregorian chant is really much nicer.)

Anyway, jokes aside, I truly believe that it will be hard for Filipinos to adapt the Byzantine Chant. Even if Lutherans and other Protestants convert they are at least familiar (even a little bit) of Gregorian Chant, owing to Masses on television and Catholic churches with large speakers.

Lets let the Bishops decide anyway.

True enough that Gregorian chants are charming, but allow me to repeat, if we are merely talking about "identity" then the Orthodox in the Philippines adopting the Western Rite would just seem to other Filipinos as if we are just another "rogue catholic group".

If worshipping in the Western Rite would make you seem to other Filipinos to be Filipino, then indeed it is a matter of identity, and you should be Western Rite.  That is clearest in the Middle East, where an Eastern Rite doesn't mark you as being Orthodox, as everyone else is Eastern too.  That is becoming clear too now in the Ukraine, where the Lutherans have divised an Eastern Rite (somewhere here there is a thread of Baptists doing the same thing in Georgia). And then there is the example of those in submission to the Vatican: I've seen the Immaculate Conception, perpetual adoration, Our Lady of Fatima, the rosary, stations of the Cross etc. etc. etc. done in Eastern style.

Quote
There are too many other heretical groups in the Philippines who claim to be Orthodox! These heretical bishop's ORDAINED THEMSELVES and proclaimed their group to be "The Orthodox Church", or some people who claim to be divinely ordained to unite the Catholic and Orthodox Churches without any canonical bishop whosoever to back their claims! (At least we know the Antiochians here come from a canonical bishop), but these other "groups" aren't. And you know what? Their rites are western. Modified Catholic Liturgies. They may use Eastern elements in their garb but the rubrics are basically western (with so little modification, ever heard of "His Holiness Patriarch John Florentine Patriarch of the Philippines"?  Undecided )

The "Ukrainian Orthodox Church," the one in combat with the Ukrainian Orthodox, also consecrated themselves.  We have a fair amount of such vagante and self-proclaimed groups adopting Eastern rite.  Makes them seem mysterious. It seems that appeal doesn't restrict itself to canonical bishops, or canonical groups with Eastern rite.

Quote
My fear is that if we adopt a western rite for the Orthodox here, other Filipinos might just view us as another catholic vagante group, instead of us being identified as "Eastern Orthodox".

Letting others define your identity is always a bad thing.


Quote
By the way, Byzantine Chant isn't that hard really, you just really need to practice.
Besides, our priest here has been very diligent to us in the teaching of chant, so I don't see any "real" problem. Adopting Byzantine Chant in Filipino languages maybe difficult at the start, but think about how the Spanish people adopten Byzantine Chant and how at present, they sing beautiful heavenly hymns.   Smiley

C'mon my friend, the reason why so many Roman Catholic seminarians visit our parish every Sunday is precisely because we have a unique rite in the Philippine context (i.e. Eastern Rite), and us Orthodox Christians are actually "performing them a service" so to speak. LOL!  laugh[/quote]

Acts 17:21.


Quote
By the way. Your tea has to wait until Pascha. (I have money problems at present). I do pray it will reach you in time.  Smiley
Lord have mercy!  Blessed Pascha!
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #87 on: March 17, 2010, 10:07:50 AM »

Is there a substantial difference between the Eastern and Western Rites? They preach the same thing right?

Yes. The problem is, the Western rites are defunct. The rites currently being promoted as "Western Rite Orthodoxy" are historical guesswork and pastiche, mostly using post-schism Roman Catholic and Anglican texts.

Funny, I've been to several of those "defunct" Churches.  If I was going to worry about "defunct" things, I'd start with the diptychs....
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 10:08:11 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #88 on: March 17, 2010, 10:08:06 AM »

Using the Byzantine rite does not necessitate Byzantine chant. I'm sure the Gregorian style could be imported to the Eastern rite.

Sounds like Georgian Baptists to me:

http://www.ebcgeorgia.org/Neue_Dateien/News24/news24-PIX/Easter%20Eucharist.JPG

Or perhaps we should keep different rites separate.

Baptists have a liturgy? And they use Gregorian? Shocked

No, they're Georgian baptists who have adopted Georgian Orthodox customs to make conversions easier. Alpo's point seems to be that anyone who uses any music other than Byzantine chant in the Eastern rite is imitating these baptists.

That's just preposterous! Isn't that like a copyright infringement? I always thought Baptists always hated rituals.
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #89 on: March 17, 2010, 10:16:59 AM »

Could predominant Catholic countries use Western Rite? I personally believe it would be easier. Like in the Philippines, we Filipinos are more used to Western Rite music and Gregorian Chant (yeah, I know its post-schism). Why don't the Bishops try to revive it in our country? Maybe perhaps to set Orthodoxy apart from Catholicism?  Huh

We can be looking at things from a different perspective, but if you want to "set Orthodoxy apart from Roman Catholicism", why not adopt the Eastern Rite? The Antiochians in the Philippines have adopted the Western Rite and it has not been received well, even amongst their own members (partly due to alleged "un canonical practices"). The Orthodox faithful here want to BE known as Orthodox and if we are merely talking about "identity", then celebrating Eastern Rite is the logical thing to do.

My two cents.

Hi "sohma_hatori"  Wink (Hey, where's my tea man? You promised to send it before Lent. Cool)

Yeah, you told me that before. But, truly, truly I say unto you: "mas chada jud ang Gregorian bai" (Gregorian chant is really much nicer.)

Anyway, jokes aside, I truly believe that it will be hard for Filipinos to adapt the Byzantine Chant. Even if Lutherans and other Protestants convert they are at least familiar (even a little bit) of Gregorian Chant, owing to Masses on television and Catholic churches with large speakers.

Lets let the Bishops decide anyway.

True enough that Gregorian chants are charming, but allow me to repeat, if we are merely talking about "identity" then the Orthodox in the Philippines adopting the Western Rite would just seem to other Filipinos as if we are just another "rogue catholic group".

If worshipping in the Western Rite would make you seem to other Filipinos to be Filipino, then indeed it is a matter of identity, and you should be Western Rite.  That is clearest in the Middle East, where an Eastern Rite doesn't mark you as being Orthodox, as everyone else is Eastern too.  That is becoming clear too now in the Ukraine, where the Lutherans have divised an Eastern Rite (somewhere here there is a thread of Baptists doing the same thing in Georgia). And then there is the example of those in submission to the Vatican: I've seen the Immaculate Conception, perpetual adoration, Our Lady of Fatima, the rosary, stations of the Cross etc. etc. etc. done in Eastern style.

Quote
There are too many other heretical groups in the Philippines who claim to be Orthodox! These heretical bishop's ORDAINED THEMSELVES and proclaimed their group to be "The Orthodox Church", or some people who claim to be divinely ordained to unite the Catholic and Orthodox Churches without any canonical bishop whosoever to back their claims! (At least we know the Antiochians here come from a canonical bishop), but these other "groups" aren't. And you know what? Their rites are western. Modified Catholic Liturgies. They may use Eastern elements in their garb but the rubrics are basically western (with so little modification, ever heard of "His Holiness Patriarch John Florentine Patriarch of the Philippines"?  Undecided )

The "Ukrainian Orthodox Church," the one in combat with the Ukrainian Orthodox, also consecrated themselves.  We have a fair amount of such vagante and self-proclaimed groups adopting Eastern rite.  Makes them seem mysterious. It seems that appeal doesn't restrict itself to canonical bishops, or canonical groups with Eastern rite.

Quote
My fear is that if we adopt a western rite for the Orthodox here, other Filipinos might just view us as another catholic vagante group, instead of us being identified as "Eastern Orthodox".

Letting others define your identity is always a bad thing.


Quote
By the way, Byzantine Chant isn't that hard really, you just really need to practice.
Besides, our priest here has been very diligent to us in the teaching of chant, so I don't see any "real" problem. Adopting Byzantine Chant in Filipino languages maybe difficult at the start, but think about how the Spanish people adopten Byzantine Chant and how at present, they sing beautiful heavenly hymns.   Smiley

C'mon my friend, the reason why so many Roman Catholic seminarians visit our parish every Sunday is precisely because we have a unique rite in the Philippine context (i.e. Eastern Rite), and us Orthodox Christians are actually "performing them a service" so to speak. LOL!  laugh

Acts 17:21.


Quote
By the way. Your tea has to wait until Pascha. (I have money problems at present). I do pray it will reach you in time.  Smiley
Lord have mercy!  Blessed Pascha!
[/quote]

sohma_hatori is talking about the identity of Eastern Orthodoxy as a religion in the Philippines while you are talking about identity of the Philippine Orthodox Church as a whole in comparison with the other Orthodox churches in the world.

Indeed, its quite an identity to be WRO -- but in the Philippines there are, as sohma said, so many vagante groups -- we have an Anglican 'offshoot' (Pilipinista), St. Pope Pius Vatican One-ists Undecided, Unorthodox 'Orthodox' and Tridentine Mass Fan Catholics -- all of these causing genuine Eastern Orthodoxy to vanish from the picture  Sad -- if WR was to be used.

Sadly, I have diverted from my former stand of supporting WR to not supporting it.
But I nonetheless still support Gregorian chants.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 10:19:45 AM by yochanan » Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #90 on: March 17, 2010, 10:20:40 AM »

Isa- Let's cut through the tangents which you seem very fond of.

We have a modern English liturgy now, so your point about diglossia is moot.


We have WRO now, so your point about uniformity of rite is moot.

Quote
No one is fighting to adopt Middle or Old English.

But they are fighting to adopt WRO: what became the "Nordic Catholic Church" went over to the Polish National Catholic only after the Greek bishop of Sweden stated that he didn't want the idea to get out that Orthodoxy was for Scandinavians.


Quote
As an aside, Elizabethan English is in fact our closest parallel to, say, Classical Chinese or Attic Greek, because it is generally recognized that English literature and English expressive power reached its highest point in that era (Shakespeare, KJV, Milton, Spenser, etc.), Beowulf, Sir Gawain, and Chaucer notwithstanding. Old and Middle English are often said to be less flexible and less rich in expressive power and subtlety than Early Modern English.

That's about the only thing it has in common with a parallel with Classical Chinese, Arabic or Greek.  Nowhere near the difference between it and formal English of today, because both are Modern English.  There are other problems with the comparison, but I wouldn't want to go out on a tangent....

Bishop Kallistos, however, made a statement which makes it moot anyway: he stated that he translated the Festal Menaion and Lenten Triodion (which are in the language you speak of) because he was raied with that style (KJV and BCP and all being Authorized) and would remain with it to his dying day, but he realized that that was not the language of the Cypriot immigrants (the bulk of the Greeks in Britain it seems) and so modern translations should be done.  Such a statement is incomprehensibile in the East (as the Evanglika and other incidents/statements have shown).


Quote
That's why poets continued to write in this language up to the 19th century (and some, even today), even after Early Modern English had been replaced by contemporary English in everyday speech. If there is anything to be called "Classical English" it is Early Modern English, not Old English or Middle English.

See above.


Quote
Someone who argues that every ethnicity or culture should have its own rite has no right to criticize those who think every ethnicity or culture should have its own church.

And to whom are you refering?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,025


"My god is greater."


« Reply #91 on: March 17, 2010, 10:24:04 AM »

Is there a substantial difference between the Eastern and Western Rites? They preach the same thing right?

Yes. The problem is, the Western rites are defunct. The rites currently being promoted as "Western Rite Orthodoxy" are historical guesswork and pastiche, mostly using post-schism Roman Catholic and Anglican texts.

Funny, I've been to several of those "defunct" Churches.  

And some people, visiting Epcot center in Disney World, might think they had visited France or China.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #92 on: March 17, 2010, 10:26:28 AM »

sohma_hatori is talking about the identity of Eastern Orthodoxy as a religion in the Philippines while you are talking about identity of the Philippine Orthodox Church as a whole in comparison with the other Orthodox churches in the world.

I tend to think big: I should think that the Phillipine Orthodox would be both fully Phillipine and fully Orthodox, and would eventually leaven the whole lump into an autocephalous Church with a majority in the Phillipines.

You don't have any Eastern vagante groups in the Phillipines?

Quote
Indeed, its quite an identity to be WRO -- but in the Philippines there are, as sohma said, so many vagante groups -- we have an Anglican 'offshoot' (Pilipinista), St. Pope Pius Vatican One-ists Undecided, Unorthodox 'Orthodox' and Tridentine Mass Fan Catholics -- all of these causing genuine Eastern Orthodoxy to vanish from the picture  Sad -- if WR was to be used.

Is there a reason why all these groups try to appeal to Phillipinos with a Western Rite?

Quote
Sadly, I have diverted from my former stand of supporting WR to not supporting it.
Sadly indeed.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #93 on: March 17, 2010, 10:29:34 AM »

sohma_hatori is talking about the identity of Eastern Orthodoxy as a religion in the Philippines while you are talking about identity of the Philippine Orthodox Church as a whole in comparison with the other Orthodox churches in the world.

I tend to think big: I should think that the Phillipine Orthodox would be both fully Phillipine and fully Orthodox, and would eventually leaven the whole lump into an autocephalous Church with a majority in the Phillipines.

You don't have any Eastern vagante groups in the Phillipines?

Quote
Indeed, its quite an identity to be WRO -- but in the Philippines there are, as sohma said, so many vagante groups -- we have an Anglican 'offshoot' (Pilipinista), St. Pope Pius Vatican One-ists Undecided, Unorthodox 'Orthodox' and Tridentine Mass Fan Catholics -- all of these causing genuine Eastern Orthodoxy to vanish from the picture  Sad -- if WR was to be used.

Is there a reason why all these groups try to appeal to Phillipinos with a Western Rite?

Quote
Sadly, I have diverted from my former stand of supporting WR to not supporting it.
Sadly indeed.

1. Yes, there are Eastern vagante groups --  the one 'His Holiness Patriarch John Florentine' is part of.

2. Isn't the answer obvious? Its because the Philippines is majorly Catholic! -- just like what the Baptists did in Georgia. Should we emulate them?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 10:32:32 AM by yochanan » Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #94 on: March 17, 2010, 10:31:23 AM »

Is there a substantial difference between the Eastern and Western Rites? They preach the same thing right?

Yes. The problem is, the Western rites are defunct. The rites currently being promoted as "Western Rite Orthodoxy" are historical guesswork and pastiche, mostly using post-schism Roman Catholic and Anglican texts.

Funny, I've been to several of those "defunct" Churches.  

And some people, visiting Epcot center in Disney World, might think they had visited France or China.

And going to Church of some others, you would swear that you were in X (fill in Old World country of choice). And then there's those who think that Y (fill in defunct monarchy) still rules from Z (fill in defunct capital).
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 10:44:58 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #95 on: March 17, 2010, 10:42:47 AM »

sohma_hatori is talking about the identity of Eastern Orthodoxy as a religion in the Philippines while you are talking about identity of the Philippine Orthodox Church as a whole in comparison with the other Orthodox churches in the world.

I tend to think big: I should think that the Phillipine Orthodox would be both fully Phillipine and fully Orthodox, and would eventually leaven the whole lump into an autocephalous Church with a majority in the Phillipines.

You don't have any Eastern vagante groups in the Phillipines?

Quote
Indeed, its quite an identity to be WRO -- but in the Philippines there are, as sohma said, so many vagante groups -- we have an Anglican 'offshoot' (Pilipinista), St. Pope Pius Vatican One-ists Undecided, Unorthodox 'Orthodox' and Tridentine Mass Fan Catholics -- all of these causing genuine Eastern Orthodoxy to vanish from the picture  Sad -- if WR was to be used.

Is there a reason why all these groups try to appeal to Phillipinos with a Western Rite?

Quote
Sadly, I have diverted from my former stand of supporting WR to not supporting it.
Sadly indeed.

Isn't the answer obvious? Its because the Philippines is majorly Catholic! -- just like what the Baptists did in Georgia. Should we emulate them?

Denying your basic dogma?  No.  The problem that the Baptist have is that they are adopting, like wolves in sheep's clothing, things that Baptist dogma says they shouldn't do (liturgy, vestments, clergy, etc.).  There is no such thing in WRO, which is also what sets it apart from "reverse uniatism."

When Bulgaria, in the Patriarchate of the West, adopted the Eastern rite, it also became Easternized.  I've brought up before, how Eastern is the Phillipines?  Aftet half a millenium of Westernization which united the islands, how much of the culture of the thalassocracies that preceded remained?  How Eastern were they (I don't know)?

The aim of the Philipine Orthodox should be the aim of the Orthodox everywhere: not to be the exotic exception, but the mainstream norm.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #96 on: March 17, 2010, 10:46:09 AM »

sohma_hatori is talking about the identity of Eastern Orthodoxy as a religion in the Philippines while you are talking about identity of the Philippine Orthodox Church as a whole in comparison with the other Orthodox churches in the world.

I tend to think big: I should think that the Phillipine Orthodox would be both fully Phillipine and fully Orthodox, and would eventually leaven the whole lump into an autocephalous Church with a majority in the Phillipines.

You don't have any Eastern vagante groups in the Phillipines?

Quote
Indeed, its quite an identity to be WRO -- but in the Philippines there are, as sohma said, so many vagante groups -- we have an Anglican 'offshoot' (Pilipinista), St. Pope Pius Vatican One-ists Undecided, Unorthodox 'Orthodox' and Tridentine Mass Fan Catholics -- all of these causing genuine Eastern Orthodoxy to vanish from the picture  Sad -- if WR was to be used.

Is there a reason why all these groups try to appeal to Phillipinos with a Western Rite?

Quote
Sadly, I have diverted from my former stand of supporting WR to not supporting it.
Sadly indeed.

1. Yes, there are Eastern vagante groups --  the one 'His Holiness Patriarch John Florentine' is part of.

Then what is rejection of WRO going to accomplish?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #97 on: March 17, 2010, 11:03:48 AM »


The aim of the Philipine Orthodox should be the aim of the Orthodox everywhere: not to be the exotic exception, but the mainstream norm.

You have a point. But can not the Eastern Rite make itself the mainstream norm by presenting something new and curiosity-arousing? Can not the Eastern Rite preach that it is God who is the Judge and not the Church? Can not the Eastern Rite speak by itself that those who practice it are not servants of the Roman Pope but of the whole Church of Christ and the God of whom they serve?

(Forgive me for the poem-like tone.)
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 11:04:23 AM by yochanan » Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #98 on: March 17, 2010, 12:33:45 PM »


The aim of the Philipine Orthodox should be the aim of the Orthodox everywhere: not to be the exotic exception, but the mainstream norm.

You have a point. But can not the Eastern Rite make itself the mainstream norm by presenting something new and curiosity-arousing?

Sure-but so can the Pentacostals. They are certainly new and very curios.

Curiosity killed the cat.

Quote
Can not the Eastern Rite preach that it is God who is the Judge and not the Church?

No. That's Protestantism.

Quote
Can not the Eastern Rite speak by itself that those who practice it are not servants of the Roman Pope but of the whole Church of Christ and the God of whom they serve?

No. The Vatican has plenty of followers in various Eastern rites. And restricting Orthodoxy to the Eastern rite restricts the Church of Christ from the whole into a geograhical/cultural confine.  It denies that the Orthodox Church is the Catholic Church.

Quote
(Forgive me for the poem-like tone.)

No problem.  We Arabs love rhetoric.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #99 on: March 17, 2010, 07:20:58 PM »

Although I am not a Liturgical expert, I still believe that the rite of Constantinople is superior to all other rites, either now defunct or revived in recnet times.

Any attempt to bring other ritesonto the scene will just muddy up already unclear waters, IMHO.
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #100 on: March 17, 2010, 10:14:10 PM »

Although I am not a Liturgical expert, I still believe that the rite of Constantinople is superior to all other rites, either now defunct or revived in recnet times.

Well, that's a different issue.


Quote
Any attempt to bring other ritesonto the scene will just muddy up already unclear waters, IMHO.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
yochanan
Arch-laity of the Room of Supreme Awesomeness
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OMHKSEA (Philippines)
Posts: 185


O majestic aurora, how seeming did He fashion you!


« Reply #101 on: March 18, 2010, 08:09:21 AM »


The aim of the Philipine Orthodox should be the aim of the Orthodox everywhere: not to be the exotic exception, but the mainstream norm.

You have a point. But can not the Eastern Rite make itself the mainstream norm by presenting something new and curiosity-arousing?

Sure-but so can the Pentacostals. They are certainly new and very curios.

Curiosity killed the cat.

Quote
Can not the Eastern Rite preach that it is God who is the Judge and not the Church?

No. That's Protestantism.

Quote
Can not the Eastern Rite speak by itself that those who practice it are not servants of the Roman Pope but of the whole Church of Christ and the God of whom they serve?

No. The Vatican has plenty of followers in various Eastern rites. And restricting Orthodoxy to the Eastern rite restricts the Church of Christ from the whole into a geograhical/cultural confine.  It denies that the Orthodox Church is the Catholic Church.

Quote
(Forgive me for the poem-like tone.)

No problem.  We Arabs love rhetoric.

Don't get me wrong I love Western Rite. (If only you just knew the reason why I came to the Catholic Church). It's just that it's so Catholic -- perhaps we could do something to set it apart from Catholicism and Vatican I-ist groups.

BTW, what sets Orthodoxy aside from all other religions? I mean the external.
Logged

"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." (Acts 15: 28)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #102 on: March 18, 2010, 09:31:37 AM »


The aim of the Philipine Orthodox should be the aim of the Orthodox everywhere: not to be the exotic exception, but the mainstream norm.

You have a point. But can not the Eastern Rite make itself the mainstream norm by presenting something new and curiosity-arousing?

Sure-but so can the Pentacostals. They are certainly new and very curios.

Curiosity killed the cat.

Quote
Can not the Eastern Rite preach that it is God who is the Judge and not the Church?

No. That's Protestantism.

Quote
Can not the Eastern Rite speak by itself that those who practice it are not servants of the Roman Pope but of the whole Church of Christ and the God of whom they serve?

No. The Vatican has plenty of followers in various Eastern rites. And restricting Orthodoxy to the Eastern rite restricts the Church of Christ from the whole into a geograhical/cultural confine.  It denies that the Orthodox Church is the Catholic Church.

Quote
(Forgive me for the poem-like tone.)

No problem.  We Arabs love rhetoric.

Don't get me wrong I love Western Rite. (If only you just knew the reason why I came to the Catholic Church). It's just that it's so Catholic -- perhaps we could do something to set it apart from Catholicism and Vatican I-ist groups.

WRO is not NO, nor in Latin. And the faithful participate (people used to do the rosary because they had nothing to do with what the priest was doing).


Quote
BTW, what sets Orthodoxy aside from all other religions? I mean the external.

Someone else should probably answer this. I don't worry about externals.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 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 0.391 seconds with 131 queries.