OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 20, 2014, 11:21:54 PM *
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   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Douay-Rheims vs. Miles Coverdale Psalter  (Read 4492 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« on: March 10, 2011, 04:56:03 AM »

I live near a western rite parish within the antiochian western rite vicariate.

They use the Liturgy of St Gregory as their sole eucharistic liturgy, but use the "Book of Common Prayer" anglican style of Divine Office on Saturdays.

This combination is similar to the practice inherited from many "Anglo-Catholic" Protestant Episcopal Churches in the past and even recently. (see "Mt Calvary Church" in Baltimore, MD which has the same combination, it intends to soon join the papal ordinariate and preserve them as much as possible).

The mass itself and prayers are very good, theres no significant problems, only trivial minor ones, I'm fairly satisfied with it, though I do think it could use a "Great litany" type prayer inbetween those Kyrie Eleisons, if not troped Kyries.


However the divine office, is where I am less satisfied.

The main issue I have is that I am not comfortable with anglican practice of "Evensong", especially where they are inventions of thomas cranmer and diverge from those of the "Traditional Latin Papal Catholic" traditions from before the reformation and council of trent (as well as those after).

Essentially I am looking for a divine office closer to what I know from my 1962 breviary books.

Closer to what is on breviary.net

With this in mind I ordered the "Monastic Diurnal Noted" and its accompaning breviary for all the hours including Matins from Lancelote Andrewes Press. These are all in the Benedictine Monastic tradition to my surprise. Oddly enough they are the official divine office books to be used by clerics within the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate (or so I am told.)

I have been very pleased with them in general, however they still use a translation of the Psalms which was not historically preferred by the Latin/Papal Catholic Church.

The reason why the standard anglican communion's psalms, which are called the Miles Coverdale translation, were not approved by the Latin catholic church was because they were inaccurate translations of the Vulgate latin psalms in their "gallican edition" which was largely unchanged since the time of St Cyprian of Carthage (vetus latina bible).

Miles Coversdale was a more amateur translator, his Anglican Psalter was a paraphrase of the vulgate, not a literal translation. And yet this remains the dominant Psalter in use by the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate.

I have over the past year encountered innumerable errors with its translations which cause me to be very uncomfortable singing them in the divine office.


The official english language bible for the Catholic Church made as a response to the Protestant Bibles is called the Douay-Rheims translation. Until the 20th century this was the most important English language bible that English and Irish Latin Catholics used. This was the bible that Catholics received the death penalty for reading if they were caught with it during the reign of Queen Elizabeth the I. It is the anti-protestant orthodox bible by the Latin Catholic perception.

It exists in two different forms which are:

#1 The 1582/1610 edition (in 1582 the new testament was made, and decades later in 1610 the old testament was released)

#2 The 1752 "Challoner" edition, made by Bishop Richard Challoner (1749-1752).

The differences between these two editions themselves are somewhat significant and interesting, however, having compared about 30 of their Psalms back to back I find that they have more in common than differences.

The 1582/1910 Douay Rheims Bible is the most literally accurate Latin vulgate bible I know of.
The 1752 Douay Rheims Bible sacrifices a certain amount of accurate translation to take on a less awkward quality and match the flow you have with the King James and Miles Coverdale.

That being said, the 1752 Douay is far more accurate than the Coverdale, and somewhat more than the King James (though the King James is more accurate than the Coverdale in my experience.)

In either edition, or even mixing them both together (which I do) the Douay Rheims wins every time.

I do not find that the 1752 Douay is more more difficult, nor any less musical or less beautiful to sing than the Miles Coverdale and can see no reason to not promote it's useage within the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate.

This brings me to my question to everyone else...

What is the possibilty of finding receptivity toward using the Douay Rheims 1752 edition Psalms instead of the Miles Coverdale Psalms at Saturday "Evensong/Vespers" within the typical parish?

Especially a parish which is not made up of former anglicans and has no personal baggage or invested interest in the coverdale psalms?

Would I be the lone Traditional Catholic fruitcake ? or would lay people/pastors welcoming of something which is in fact more inherently Orthodox?

long ago a parish priest within the AWRV once told me there is no official psalms that are required or an absolute standard to use.

My feeling is that the continued usage of the Coverdale Psalms may be one aspect which proves that there is a subtle "protestant" spirit lingering about within the AWRV.

I can hardly call them a heterodox bible. I could use them if I had to for some time, but I can hardly see them as the future of the Western Rite in Orthodoxy either.

THis being said...

I also think the idea of a Psalter which retains the literal accuracy and beautiful musical quality of the douay rheims but merges it with translations based as much on the septuagint would also be excellent.

The idea that Father Patrick has for a universal English language Orthodox Psalter is most inspiring.

http://fatherpatrick.wordpress.com/2009/07/06/psalm-50/

The translation of Psalm 50 listed there conforms to accurate translations of both latin vulgate and greek septuagint. Finding in most places more word for word agreement with Douay Rheims and much less agreement with either the Coverdale or King James.


What do you all think about this?

Additionally I desire to use either the official Benedictine Divine Office or the Sarum Divine Office for parish usage, especially on feast days, but the translation of the psalms seems to be the most important issue here.

I understand why in 1958, 60 years ago when the western rite was created in the USA that the Metropolitan would allow more anglican customs to predominate at a time when it was in it's infancy.

However the justification for continuing them is I think not as strong at the present time.
At the very least we ought to have more promotion of the Douay-Rheims as an alternative.
Yes?

I certainly enjoy the music and their plainchant adaptions, but at heart I have no connection to anglican heritage. I am pure cradle catholic in background, anti-protestant to the bone.

Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,443



« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2011, 06:44:29 AM »

If you can tell they're bad translations, then you can read Latin well enough to use the 1962 book, so why not just go with them?
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Posts: 7,132


"My god is greater."


« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2011, 09:03:58 AM »

I don't know about the specific texts, but evensong is not an Anglican innovation- it may be unique to England, though. For instance, evensong is attested by pre-Reformation English sources such as Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur.

EDIT: Looking at it further, it seems that evensong originally was a collective name for vespers and matins; in later Anglican practice, though, it became an independent service, so the current practice may indeed be an innovation.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 09:22:42 AM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2011, 05:13:07 PM »

Evensong is simply a traditional english name for Vespers.

What I refer to as an innovation is the Evensong found in the 1928 American Book of Common Prayer which is word for word retained within the Antiochian Orthodox Church'es Western Rite Vicariate.

The main issue I have with it is that it redistributes the psalms in a way which discourages the recital of 150 psalms per week. As well as the translation of psalms being used not being the best, it mixes and matches parts of the liturgy together which were not normally put together before the Reformation, the collects at the end and beginning in particular. It has a slight amount of a liturgical experimentation quality to it.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 05:14:12 PM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2011, 05:26:10 PM »

Quote
then you can read Latin well enough to use the 1962 book, so why not just go with them?

That itself is a complex story.

Essentially I believe that the Pope's authority is what destroyed the traditional liturgy and has greatly harmed his Church. It was widely believed that the Pope had a right to impose a liturgy created by a committee on all lay people in the entire world. Thus something deeply flawed and protestant in nature was allowed to overturn that which was genuine.

I believe that the Orthodox Church is more correct overall..
Only since 2007 has there been an official law that any priest may use the traditional liturgy again, exclusively in latin.


However those priests who do use the pre-1962 Traditional Latin Liturgy in communion with the Pope are also in communion with local Bishops. Most of the local bishops discourage the usage of it and find ways to punish clerics in their diocese who use it too frequently. The Pope promotes it but the bishops generally discourage it (a few exceptions out there). There are too many contradictions with this situation to make sense of it.

Not only that but..as you know there are various theological superiorities to the Orthodox Church..
It is more Orthodox...as far as I know.

I recognize that it is necessary to use english to remain "popular". I can see nothing wrong with it so long as the translations are good.  I have to concede if no one will ever properly translation latin into accurate english translations, latin may be necessary to be retained. But I think that there is not any real justification for strictly using latin and nothing else, nevertheless it may be true that it is the only way to retain adequate language (though it makes little sense to me that it be the only way).

Quote
Indeed Mediator Dei, so often cited by traditionalists, makes it clear that the Pope "alone has the right to permit or establish any liturgical practice, to introduce or approve new rites, or to make any changes in them he considers necessary".38 The tragedy is that in making this forceful statement with the evident intention of safeguarding our liturgical inheritance, Pius XII set before the Church a Pandora’s box which his successors were tempted to open, and did. Gone forever are the days when one could serenely subscribe to this teaching in the knowledge that the Roman Popes, whatever their failings, always uphold and protect liturgical tradition from the wanton vandalism of would-be reformers. Whereas the traditional rites of the Church had been constructed by apostles and saints, Roman-rite (and Ambrosian-rite) Catholics have today a Mass which is the work of theorists and committees of ‘experts’.

Quote
The present liturgical chaos in the Western Church is due in no small part to the emphasis that Latin Christians have always placed on dogma, with the consequent tendency to regard the liturgical texts as a mere locus theologicus, a means to an end, rather than a living source of doctrinal truth. Thus orthodoxia, which originally meant ‘right worship’, gives way to orthopistis ‘right believing’, or orthodidascalia ‘right teaching’.45 When taken to the extreme, this exclusive emphasis on the rational culminates in that heresy which rejects the living components of tradition in favour of the written records of the Early Church, the Bible and Patristic writings, and which we know as Protestantism and full-blown Jansenism. The rejection of the liturgical tradition thus implies a rejection of the Church itself.

http://www.theanglocatholic.com/2010/04/the-proto-history-of-the-roman-liturgical-reform/

Quote
    "The Orthodox approach to religion is fundamentally a liturgical approach, which understands doctrine in the context of divine worship: it is no coincidence that the word ‘Orthodoxy’ should signify alike right belief and right worship, for the two things are inseparable. It has truly been; said of the Byzantines: ‘Dogma with them is not only an intellectual system. Apprehended by the clergy and expounded to the laity, but a field of vision wherein all things on earth are seen in their relation to things in heaven, first and foremost through liturgical celebration’"46

A similar outlook is by no means absent in the Latin West today, even if it is a minority view. Commenting on Pius XII’s reversal of Prosper of Aquitaine’s dictum, American Benedictine liturgist Dom Aidan Kavanagh notes that:

    "To reverse the maxim, subordinating the standard of worship to the standard of belief, makes a shambles of the dialectic of revelation. It was a Presence, not faith, which drew Moses to the burning bush, and what happened there was a revelation, not a seminar. It was a Presence, not faith, which drew the disciples to Jesus, and what happened there was not an educational program but His revelation to them of Himself as the long-promised Anointed One, the redeeming because reconciling Messiah-Christos".41
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 05:32:33 PM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2011, 06:03:16 PM »

Evensong is simply a traditional english name for Vespers.

What I refer to as an innovation is the Evensong found in the 1928 American Book of Common Prayer which is word for word retained within the Antiochian Orthodox Church'es Western Rite Vicariate.

The main issue I have with it is that it redistributes the psalms in a way which discourages the recital of 150 psalms per week. As well as the translation of psalms being used not being the best, it mixes and matches parts of the liturgy together which were not normally put together before the Reformation, the collects at the end and beginning in particular. It has a slight amount of a liturgical experimentation quality to it.

Perhaps it's because my parish uses the St. Dunstan's Plainsong Psalter (or even the way in which we use it), but I'm not sure what you have in mind when you say it mixes and matches parts of the liturgy and the collects. What parts of the liturgy are even being used during Evensong and when are collects being said? For our Vespers (Evensong) we chant the appointed Psalms, read the appointed Old and New Testament readings, sing the Magnificat and finish with the Nunc Dimittis.

We cycle through the 150 Psalms every month, rather than every week. Why would this be an "issue" for someone and something that is "discouraging"?

Translation issues are one thing, and I'd be willing to bet the most common response you'll get is that the Coverdale Psalter was used for pastoral purposes, more than anything else.
Logged
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2011, 10:51:51 PM »


Quote
We cycle through the 150 Psalms every month

No other Orthodox Church does this, no other western rite church does this before the reformation.

The idea is from protestantism!
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2011, 10:56:41 PM »

http://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~renwick/sarum-english.htm
http://www.allmercifulsavior.com/Liturgy/SarumPsalter.html
http://www.breviary.net/propsaints/propsaints04/propsaints04_stjoseph.htm

compare what is there, with what is in St Dunstan's...and the Book of Common Prayer 1928.

You will see the differences. The traditional Latin Catholic Antiphons and Vespers pattern does not harmonize easily with what the Book of Common Prayer offers.
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2011, 11:05:04 PM »


Quote
We cycle through the 150 Psalms every month

No other Orthodox Church does this, no other western rite church does this before the reformation.

The idea is from protestantism!

 Shocked

http://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~renwick/sarum-english.htm
http://www.allmercifulsavior.com/Liturgy/SarumPsalter.html
http://www.breviary.net/propsaints/propsaints04/propsaints04_stjoseph.htm

compare what is there, with what is in St Dunstan's...and the Book of Common Prayer 1928.

You will see the differences. The traditional Latin Catholic Antiphons and Vespers pattern does not harmonize easily with what the Book of Common Prayer offers.

Does it have to? And what's truly your concern? That it will take those of us who prayer these bastardized "Evensongs" 4 times as long to become truly holy, since we move through the Psalter once a month, rather than once a week?
Logged
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2011, 11:07:02 PM »

This is from the beginning of the book of common prayer evensong as found in St Dunstan's plainsong psalter.

Quote
DEARLY beloved brethren, the Scripture moveth us, in sundry places, to acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness; and that we should not dissemble nor cloak them before the face of Almighty God our heavenly Father; but confess them with an humble, lowly, penitent, and obedient heart; to the end that we may obtain forgiveness of the same, by his infinite goodness and mercy. And although we ought, at all times, humbly to acknowledge our sins before God; yet ought we chiefly so to do, when we assemble and meet together to render thanks for the great benefits that we have received at his hands, to set forth his most worthy praise, to hear his most holy Word, and to ask those things which are requisite and necessary, as well for the body as the soul. Wherefore I pray and beseech you, as many as are here present, to accompany me with a pure heart, and humble voice, unto the throne of the heavenly grace, saying after me;


Find me the latin equivalent of this and you can say it is not protestant in origin.
It does not exist in latin. This is pure Thomas Cranmer and is not part of Orthodox Christianity.
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2011, 11:13:36 PM »


Quote
The traditional Latin Catholic Antiphons and Vespers pattern does not harmonize easily with what the Book of Common Prayer offers.

Quote
Does it have to? And what's truly your concern?

Yes, I think it does have to, if the vespers is supposed to be in harmony with the western church when it was Orthodox, than one would expect there to be a natural harmony between what traditional latin catholics had up to 1962 and what they did 1000 years ago, in the areas in which there has not been significant change.

My concern is that the Orthodox Church is promoting Anglican protestantism instead of genuine Western liturgy, when it comes to the Divine Office.

The Mass on the other hand seems to be alright. 
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2011, 11:17:15 PM »

Honesty I do not think anyone here is educated enough to begin offer commentary to me.
If anything, perhaps this post will encourage people to educate themselves more regarding the Divine office.
It's really not that difficult to learn. Though it probably helps to know a certain amount of latin.

At least I have heard that many clergy within the Antiochian Western Rite do desire to use the Douay Rheims. So far it appears to not be allowed by the Vicar. Which is scandolous.  But at least there is hope for the future.
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2011, 11:23:58 PM »

This is from the beginning of the book of common prayer evensong as found in St Dunstan's plainsong psalter.

Quote
DEARLY beloved brethren, the Scripture moveth us, in sundry places, to acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness; and that we should not dissemble nor cloak them before the face of Almighty God our heavenly Father; but confess them with an humble, lowly, penitent, and obedient heart; to the end that we may obtain forgiveness of the same, by his infinite goodness and mercy. And although we ought, at all times, humbly to acknowledge our sins before God; yet ought we chiefly so to do, when we assemble and meet together to render thanks for the great benefits that we have received at his hands, to set forth his most worthy praise, to hear his most holy Word, and to ask those things which are requisite and necessary, as well for the body as the soul. Wherefore I pray and beseech you, as many as are here present, to accompany me with a pure heart, and humble voice, unto the throne of the heavenly grace, saying after me;


Find me the latin equivalent of this and you can say it is not protestant in origin.
It does not exist in latin. This is pure Thomas Cranmer and is not part of Orthodox Christianity.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that the contents of the St. Dunstan's Plainsong Psalter were of non-Orthodox origin. My parish doesn't begin our Vesperal service with that prayer, so I wasn't too familiar with it. You do, of course, realize that the SDPP is not an Orthodox publication and is intended for the use of any English-speaking Christians, right? We've been given the full blessing and permission of our Metropolitan to make use of any post-Schism devotions we'd like, so long as they do not contradict Orthodox faith.

At any rate, there are many components of the Divine Liturgy of St. Tikhon that are of non-Orthodox origin too, and as much as you'd like to say otherwise, it is, in fact, now "part of Orthodox Christianity" in that it is prayed and offered to Our Lord by thousands of Orthodox Christians, with the blessing of Orthodox bishops, Metropolitans and Patriarchates, and became possible at the behest of Orthodox Saints.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #13 on: March 10, 2011, 11:26:38 PM »

Honesty I do not think anyone here is educated enough to begin offer commentary to me.

Haha, well okay then. Nice chattin' with ya. Sorry us n00bs, about whom you quite obviously know very little, aren't up to a non-Orthodox's opinion of what "real" Orthodoxy is.  Roll Eyes
Logged
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968


Ungrateful Biped


« Reply #14 on: March 10, 2011, 11:29:42 PM »

Honesty I do not think anyone here is educated enough to begin offer commentary to me.

Fantastic attitude!  Since it's clear you've mastered humility, love, and Christianity as a whole, it's probably time to move on to another challenge for your unmatched intellect.  

You are so educated that your sentences don't even have to be correctly written; that's impressive.
Logged

North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2011, 11:39:35 PM »


Quote
The traditional Latin Catholic Antiphons and Vespers pattern does not harmonize easily with what the Book of Common Prayer offers.

Quote
Does it have to? And what's truly your concern?

Yes, I think it does have to, if the vespers is supposed to be in harmony with the western church when it was Orthodox, than one would expect there to be a natural harmony between what traditional latin catholics had up to 1962 and what they did 1000 years ago, in the areas in which there has not been significant change.

Ah, therein lies the rub. This is not, in actuality, what Western Rite Orthodoxy is about. In some circles, perhaps, and they are free to pursue whatever their bishops and metropolitans counsel them to. But, the AWRV in general, is not interested in liturgical archaeology, nor in setting the clock back 1,000 years. They have taken the path of adapting existing historical rites, as they have been handed down to us and while the Book of Common Prayer did indeed incorporate some Protestant ideals, it was not made whole-cloth out of nothing. I'm sure you'll agree that there was much in it that was theologically correct, beautifully rendered and extremely meaningful to the English people. We're not talking about isolated texts here, we're talking about the fullness of the rites that were kept alive and developed by the people using them.

The beautiful thing about Orthodoxy is that it recognizes truth wherever it may be found, and the long and interesting story of the ancient British rite as it has been handed down to us today, by way of ancient Celtic/Gaulish/Roman pre-Schism uses, the highly developed Anglo-Saxon uses of the high middle ages, the Sarum Use, the BCP (and through the various versions and adaptations that it has gone through via the Caroline Divines, Anglo-Catholics, Non-Jurors, etc.), is one that I (along with many others) find extremely interesting and profoundly beautiful in that the Holy Orthodox Church would adapt it as its own and offer it to Her people as a way to celebrate the Divine Mysteries.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 11:41:46 PM by Sleeper » Logged
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2011, 11:52:54 PM »

The High water mark of Orthodoxy within Western christianity was before the reformation.
Even within the Latin papal church after the council of trent ended, since the 16th centiry it was all downhill, a gradual slide to the state of vatican II.

This is why the idea of "taking the path of adapting existing historical rites, as they have been handed down to us" as the exclusive method is a tremendously ignorant and flawed approach. To do it in part is alright, but exclusively, no.

To adapt certain parts, certain devotions which are from after the 16th century is fine, but to enshrine ALL customs, ALL liturgy as it was in 1958 in either Roman or Anglican Churches (especially the Anglican) as your exclusive form of liturgy is a grave error.

The amount of gorgeous RICHLY theological liturgical music purged from the liturgy after the reformation is tremendous.
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #17 on: March 11, 2011, 12:59:20 AM »

This is why the idea of "taking the path of adapting existing historical rites, as they have been handed down to us" as the exclusive method is a tremendously ignorant and flawed approach. To do it in part is alright, but exclusively, no.

It's not exclusive, as the rites clearly weren't ideal as they were. Things need supplementation and correction, from historical sources. This is exactly what you find in the AWRV.

Quote
To adapt certain parts, certain devotions which are from after the 16th century is fine, but to enshrine ALL customs, ALL liturgy as it was in 1958 in either Roman or Anglican Churches (especially the Anglican) as your exclusive form of liturgy is a grave error.

Thankfully, no one is doing this.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2011, 01:00:02 AM by Sleeper » Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,443



« Reply #18 on: March 11, 2011, 06:51:13 AM »

The amount of gorgeous RICHLY theological liturgical music purged from the liturgy after the reformation is tremendous.

...but it can hardly begin to compare with that written during and after the reformation, if only because it is contemporary with the development of modern, harmonized music.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2011, 06:51:35 AM by Keble » Logged
jamesdm49
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
Posts: 35


« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2011, 06:59:54 PM »

Evensong is simply a traditional english name for Vespers.

What I refer to as an innovation is the Evensong found in the 1928 American Book of Common Prayer which is word for word retained within the Antiochian Orthodox Church'es Western Rite Vicariate.

The main issue I have with it is that it redistributes the psalms in a way which discourages the recital of 150 psalms per week. As well as the translation of psalms being used not being the best, it mixes and matches parts of the liturgy together which were not normally put together before the Reformation, the collects at the end and beginning in particular. It has a slight amount of a liturgical experimentation quality to it.

The well-known Roman Catholic liturgist, Fr. Louis Bouyer, in his book, Life and Liturgy, p. 47, has this to say about the Prayer Book divine office, "In spite of these defects" [an exaggerated brevity in the psalmody being the chief one, as you have already noted], "we must frankly admit that the Offices of Morning Prayer and of Evensong, as they are performed even today in St. Paul's, Westminster Abbey, York Minster, or Canterbury Cathedral, are not only one of the most impressive, but also one of the purest forms of Christian common prayer to be found anywhere in the world." So, while I agree that Orthodox parishes should use a translation of the psalms that is consistent with the Septuagint Greek text that is the official text of the whole Orthodox Church, Eastern and Western [which St. Dunstan's Plainsong Psalter is not], I am not unsympathetic to the AWRV leadership's retention of these beautiful services in parish practice, augmented, as they have been, with the ancient office hymns and Marian anthems. Monasteries, of course, would naturally prefer to use the fuller ancient forms of the Divine Office. As for the restoration of the ancient practice of weekly recitation of the full psalter, it could easily be accomplished in parishes by simply adopting the Eastern Rite schedule of kathisma readings at daily Morning and Evening Prayer.

David James
« Last Edit: May 15, 2011, 07:02:44 PM by jamesdm49 » Logged
Punch
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,801



« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2011, 07:18:03 PM »

Honesty I do not think anyone here is educated enough to begin offer commentary to me.

True.  I thank God that I was not educated to your level of arrogance.

Quote
If anything, perhaps this post will encourage people to educate themselves more regarding the Divine office.
 

Probably not. See above.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
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: 38,142



« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2011, 07:41:16 PM »

Christus resurrexit!
Evensong is simply a traditional english name for Vespers.

What I refer to as an innovation is the Evensong found in the 1928 American Book of Common Prayer which is word for word retained within the Antiochian Orthodox Church'es Western Rite Vicariate.

The main issue I have with it is that it redistributes the psalms in a way which discourages the recital of 150 psalms per week. As well as the translation of psalms being used not being the best, it mixes and matches parts of the liturgy together which were not normally put together before the Reformation, the collects at the end and beginning in particular. It has a slight amount of a liturgical experimentation quality to it.

The well-known Roman Catholic liturgist, Fr. Louis Bouyer, in his book, Life and Liturgy, p. 47, has this to say about the Prayer Book divine office, "In spite of these defects" [an exaggerated brevity in the psalmody being the chief one, as you have already noted], "we must frankly admit that the Offices of Morning Prayer and of Evensong, as they are performed even today in St. Paul's, Westminster Abbey, York Minster, or Canterbury Cathedral, are not only one of the most impressive, but also one of the purest forms of Christian common prayer to be found anywhere in the world." So, while I agree that Orthodox parishes should use a translation of the psalms that is consistent with the Septuagint Greek text that is the official text of the whole Orthodox Church, Eastern and Western [which St. Dunstan's Plainsong Psalter is not], I am not unsympathetic to the AWRV leadership's retention of these beautiful services in parish practice, augmented, as they have been, with the ancient office hymns and Marian anthems. Monasteries, of course, would naturally prefer to use the fuller ancient forms of the Divine Office. As for the restoration of the ancient practice of weekly recitation of the full psalter, it could easily be accomplished in parishes by simply adopting the Eastern Rite schedule of kathisma readings at daily Morning and Evening Prayer.
Why do 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
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 16, 2011, 01:14:55 AM »

Fr. Louis Bouyer was a former Lutheran minister who entered the Catholic Church in 1939. He was a co-founder of the progressivist review Communio and a perito at Vatican II. In 1969 he was chosen by Paul VI to be part of the team of 30 theologians who would initiate the International Theological Commission (ITC).  He wrote a large work on spirituality, ecumenism and liturgy.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_025_BoyerCatholicism.htm

Fr. Louis Bouyer is no friend of Orthodox christianity, He was a modernist through and through.

James, you're quoting the worst person you'd want to support the book of common prayer evensong.
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2011, 01:25:25 AM »

Quote
Honesty I do not think anyone here is educated enough to begin offer commentary to me.

True.  I thank God that I was not educated to your level of arrogance.

As one who has spent a period of their life defending traditional western liturgy. I say that no one here is educated enough to begin to offer commentary to me because of examples like the ones that just happened.

Quoting dissident catholics who created all the turmoil of the last few decades to defend orthodox practice.  I made that comment because few people on this forum seem to care about supporting anything other than the "status quo" within the western rites of the orthodox church. The status quo is to do as little as possible to remove you're protestant culture while officially being "orthodox". I know this because I witnessed it myself.

Orthodox christianity is not ment to be a wholesale adoption of anglican liturgical praxis.

To accept too much of the adoption of protestant traditions is the lazy persons way out of doing their homework on pre-reformation/pre-schism western rite praxis which have a much longer history.

As I've said before.. there is an irony that the protestant psalter has been supported so far and the only english bible that Latin/Roman catholics gave their lifes to defend is not allowed to be used within Orthodoxy.  (The english government would execute you as a traitor if they found you possessed a douay rheims.)

Thats the real question here..

why a literal english translation of the latin vulgate or even literal septuagint translation is not allowed for official liturgical usage within the AWRV.

The reason is because so many of the western rite clerics are former anglicans and methodists who hold the influence and do not want anything but that which they knew as protestants. They don't want to start over from scratch, even if it means gaining a psalm text which is truly more orthodox from the genuine western perspective.

And another point..there are almost no latin usages existing within the western rite vicariate.

If one truly valued their liturgy theyd have more ready access to latin language texts. It is through the knowledge of the original latin that you have the most authentic understanding of western christianity. The complete basis in english encourages protestant tendencies.

There is no prayerbook office that exists in Latin.

That's the secret no one wants you to know.

You  can't do evensong in latin.
Therefore..it is illegitimate in spirit.

« Last Edit: May 16, 2011, 01:37:55 AM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2011, 01:53:07 AM »

The High water mark of Orthodoxy within Western christianity was before the reformation.
Even within the Latin papal church after the council of trent ended, since the 16th centiry it was all downhill, a gradual slide to the state of vatican II.

This is why the idea of "taking the path of adapting existing historical rites, as they have been handed down to us" as the exclusive method is a tremendously ignorant and flawed approach. To do it in part is alright, but exclusively, no.

If your idea is to turn the clock back 500 years and engage in liturgical archaeology, then forget it. Become Byzantine. What point is there, if the tradition is long dead?
« Last Edit: May 16, 2011, 01:57:36 AM by lubeltri » Logged
Monk Cyprian
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 70


Hooray! I'm useful!


WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 16, 2011, 11:36:12 AM »

The High water mark of Orthodoxy within Western christianity was before the reformation.
Not quite.  The west was Orthodox until the Great Schism, which would place the "high water mark" roughly 500 years prior to the Reformation.  If you're enthralled with the west directly up to the Reformation, you're likely looking for medieval Roman Catholicism.
Logged

Was it Divine Liturgy in English in XIXth Century Russia?  No, it was not I am the telling you!  Is OUTRAGE!  Now is to be Slavonic music and Byzantine vestment in same church. This is what when KGB run the seminary.
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #26 on: May 16, 2011, 11:55:47 AM »

Quote
Honesty I do not think anyone here is educated enough to begin offer commentary to me.

True.  I thank God that I was not educated to your level of arrogance.

As one who has spent a period of their life defending traditional western liturgy. I say that no one here is educated enough to begin to offer commentary to me because of examples like the ones that just happened.

Well, at least you admit why you're arrogant. That says something I suppose.

Quote
Quoting dissident catholics who created all the turmoil of the last few decades to defend orthodox practice.  I made that comment because few people on this forum seem to care about supporting anything other than the "status quo" within the western rites of the orthodox church. The status quo is to do as little as possible to remove you're protestant culture while officially being "orthodox". I know this because I witnessed it myself.

On the contrary, the "status quo" is to be obedient to our local bishop and use what our Church has blessed and given to us for our use.

The "removal" of "Protestant culture" is not a concern only for those worshipping in the Western Rite. It's an issue for any and all converts.

Quote
Orthodox christianity is not ment to be a wholesale adoption of anglican liturgical praxis.

It's not meant to be a wholesale adoption of any liturgical praxis. Orthodoxy is the Apostolic confession of faith and the union of the whole self with Christ through the sacramental life of His Church.

As for any praxis, you can't simply say "Anglican" and then dismiss it as if that's all that needs to be said. Is not the point of any rubric or text the truth that it proclaims and the reality it ushers you into? Is it of any relevance that "Anglicans" were the source of something? Saint Tikhon the Enlightener of America would have some choice words for you on that front, methinks. Ah! But Christopher McAvoy has read more than anyone else, so who cares?!

Quote
As I've said before.. there is an irony that the protestant psalter has been supported so far and the only english bible that Latin/Roman catholics gave their lifes to defend is not allowed to be used within Orthodoxy.  (The english government would execute you as a traitor if they found you possessed a douay rheims.)

Thats the real question here..

why a literal english translation of the latin vulgate or even literal septuagint translation is not allowed for official liturgical usage within the AWRV.

I think I asked you at one point which officially-released statement you were referring to that made the Latin Bible "not allowed." Do you have a reference?

Quote
The reason is because so many of the western rite clerics are former anglicans and methodists who hold the influence and do not want anything but that which they knew as protestants. They don't want to start over from scratch, even if it means gaining a psalm text which is truly more orthodox from the genuine western perspective.

It's true, they don't want to start over from scratch, because they obey their hierarchs who insisted that any Western Rite within the Antiochian Church was to be based upon the living liturgy of the West, not some reconstruction of the past or some entirely new "from scratch" fabrication.

Quote
And another point..there are almost no latin usages existing within the western rite vicariate.

Probably because we speak English, and the Orthodox Church has a long historical tradition of using the vernacular of the people.

Quote
If one truly valued their liturgy theyd have more ready access to latin language texts.

You're right, we don't value our liturgy at all. That's why we just did the Byzantine liturgy and said to hell with our English patrimony.

Quote
It is through the knowledge of the original latin that you have the most authentic understanding of western christianity.

Which I'm sure we'll never understand until the great Christopher McAvoy enlightens us all.

Quote
The complete basis in english encourages protestant tendencies.

Which are?

Quote
There is no prayerbook office that exists in Latin.

We speak English.

Quote
That's the secret no one wants you to know.

Is it? I wasn't aware that people thought one existed and were being lied to...

Quote
You  can't do evensong in latin.
Therefore..it is illegitimate in spirit.

It's true, English is the Devil's language and shouldn't be allowed for the things of God!
Logged
Punch
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,801



« Reply #27 on: May 16, 2011, 12:48:19 PM »

The problem is this, the Latin Rite did not survive the heresies of the West.  So, why use it?  Nobody in the West speaks Latin anymore.  This is different than the Greek and Slavonic, which while not spoken in general conversation, have been used continuously in ORTHODOX worship, by the Greeks since day one, and the Slavs since shortly after their conversion.  While I do not particularly care for the Western Rite, I believe it is entirely within the keeping of the merciful tradition of the Orthodox Church to allow those Christians that have come to her in large numbers, being familiar with a fallen, but still salvageable liturgical rite, to use a corrected version of that rite.  However, it would be corrected to ORTHODOX standards, not some heretical standard in use after the fall of the Western Church.  I am happy these people were afforded that opportunity in the ROCOR and the Antiochian Church.  However, if these people want to become "Old Catholics", there are such churches out there.  Join them instead.  There is a nice one down the road from me that has services in Latin and is not in communion with the Pope.  However, it is also not in communion with the Orthodox, either.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,443



« Reply #28 on: May 17, 2011, 08:19:31 AM »

The problem is this, the Latin Rite did not survive the heresies of the West.

"In America, they haven't used it for years."
Logged
Deacon Lance
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,054


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #29 on: May 17, 2011, 05:20:02 PM »


Quote
We cycle through the 150 Psalms every month

No other Orthodox Church does this, no other western rite church does this before the reformation.

The idea is from protestantism!

The Church of Milan cycled through the 150 Psalms in two weeks.  The idea of having to cycle the 150 Pslams in a week is a monastic practice that was imported into parochial practice.  The most common parochial abbreviation you will see in Orthodox Churches is the reduction/suppression of the kathisma Psalms.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Tags:
Pages: 1   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 0.125 seconds with 58 queries.