The canon may have somewhat of an Eastern quality to it, but that has more to do with the Scottish Non-Jurors and their study of the ancient liturgies, as well as their correspondence with Orthodox Patriarchs, than it does with some kind of forced Byzantinization; something which Met. PHILLIP strongly and vocally opposes.
This is partially correct, in that the Mass of St. Tikhon is essentially a "fusion Mass," but it is not with the Constantinopolitan Liturgy, but rather with the Roman Mass itself. And contrary to what you may have read or heard, this was itself an organic process, spanning centuries of liturgical development via the Caroline Divines, Scottish Non-Jurors, Tractarians, the Oxford Movement, etc. It's a fascinating history.
While not "horrible" by any stretch of the imagination, I can somewhat sympathize with the desire to maintain Western purity, free from Byzantinizations. But we are, after all, Orthodox Christians, and in order for the Western Rite to grow within the bosom of the Eastern Orthodox Church, sometimes that entails making concessions to maintain peace and harmony. When the Patriarch of Antioch requested the pre-Communion prayers from the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom be added to both of our Western Masses, part of his reason was so that worshipers from an Eastern context would have something familiar and comfortable to pray when they attend our services. I think it's a nice gesture.
The Western Rite, at least within Antioch, draws from the full 2000 year tradition of the West, not specific time periods, whether ancient or recent. We offer God the very best within our heritage, not giving precedence to one thing over another merely because of geography or era. You'll hear Bach settings, you'll see people praying the Rosary, you'll see beautiful Western art along with contemporary icons.
I suppose I was being a tad bit melodramatic. I still stand firmly behind liturgical purism, however. I oppose use of the Liturgy of Saint Gregory and the Liturgy of Saint Tikhon because they aren't from Western heritage.
Of course they are. They were the living rites of the parishes that came into Orthodoxy as Western Rite and had been their established forms of worship for generations.
They are created from use of the Byzantine Rite, two Books of Common Prayer, and the Tridentine Roman Rite. The Orthodox Catholic Church, having great reverence to tradition should use a traditional Western rite, like the Tridentine Roman Rite, the Sarum Use or the York Use.
The Orthodox Church, have great reverence for tradition, uses the living liturgies that were literally traditioned
to the people who brought them into the Church. They are entirely Western, entirely authentic, entirely traditional. The only thing from the Byzantine rite is the set of pre-Communion prayers. Not even the epiclesis is Byzantine.
Similar to what another individual has said in this thread, there is a great danger in making concessions to those who aren't familiar with the rite. We have service leaflets for that purpose and prayer books. Certainly if we wanted to make concessions, we'd start with making the Divine Liturgy of S. John Chrysostom more understandible to the Catholics and Protestants who visit Orthodox Catholic churches. I don't see anyone suggesting that.
There is also a great danger in being unwilling to be charitable and open when it comes to the spiritual leadership of our Church. I see nothing wrong with the Byzantine pre-communion prayers. There has always been cross-pollination in liturgical development. The Gloria is wholly Eastern, but no one is calling for its removal merely because it didn't rise up from within Latin-speaking Christians.
I would love to see more English use of the Byzantine Rite.
Liturgical diffusion with other rites is inevitable, but let it be natural.
I agree, I just disagree that the Rites of Ss. Gregory and Tikhon do not fit this description. The natural development of liturgy was beautifully described in his classic work On the Organic Development of Liturgy
, by Dom Alcuin Reed. He says, “We can observe in St. Gregory’s reply to St. Augustine that there is a clear sense in which the liturgy is received and not simply constructed anew according to the tastes of the people among whom he finds himself and that innovation must be for a good reason and carefully integrated with the Tradition."
Those reasons being: 1. a necessity for the development, 2. a profound respect for liturgical Tradition, 3. little pure innovation, 4. the tentative positing of newer liturgical forms alongside the old, and 5. the integration of the newer forms following their acceptance over time. Reid says, "This is the principle of the organic development of the liturgy in operation. It combines profound respect for the received liturgical tradition, with an openness to necessary development. Continuity and harmony with tradition are primary concerns. Liturgical orthopraxy and orthodoxy are thus ensured, without precluding necessary and natural development...Progress in liturgy must be an enrichment by the acquisition of new forms rather than by the violent loss of the ancient ones.”
There is no reason the pre-Communion prayers should not be seen as "enrichment" in this sense. In a contemporary Orthodox context, an epiclesis is certainly a necessity. The one added to both of our Western Masses stems from having a profound respect for liturgical tradition in that they were pulled from ancient Western sources, rather than Byzantine. The addition of said epiclesis, as well as the two pre-Communion prayers are definitely not "pure innovation" as there were very good, grounded reasons for incorporating them. They also weren't added immediately, but were "tentatively posited alongside" the existing rite and now continue to remain due to their acceptance by the faithful over time.
Antioch took the received tradition of Western catholics and used that as the starting point for an authentic, healthy Western Rite to grow within the bosom of the Orthodox Church. It couldn't have been more organic.
An example of this done correctly is the English Missal and Anglican Missal, Anglo-Catholic variations on the Tridentine Roman Rite, Sarum Rite, and the Book of Common Prayer.
Incidentally, it was indeed the Anglican Missal that served as the basis for the Mass of St. Tikhon.