OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 02, 2014, 08:20:57 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: Confused About the Rites  (Read 3932 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
africanus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catehumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 17


St. Moses the Ethiopean


WWW
« on: October 24, 2013, 02:20:10 AM »

As a catechumen of the OCA I am totally confused about the "Rites" of both Eastern and Western orthodoxy. Having seen the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostum and St. Basil I've not witnessed any other liturgies in the Orthodox churches I've visited. Just how many 'liturgies' are considered "Eastern" or "western"? And do not some Orthodox churches use "western rite"? What is going on with all this 'eastern vs. western rite' pot of gumbo? And speaking of 'liturgies' just how many legitimate or recognized Divine Liturgies are there between the east and west?
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,556


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #1 on: October 24, 2013, 02:24:27 AM »

There are also the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, held during Wednesdays and Fridays of Great Lent, and the Liturgy of St James, the most ancient of the Orthodox liturgies, though, these days, the least-commonly held. All Orthodox recognize these as "legitimate" liturgies, if such terminology must be used.

The same could not be said for the modern-day (less than a century, and often much less) western rite. You'll find opinions ranging from enthusiastic approval, to "liturgical archeology", to outright refusal of its use within certain Orthodox jurisdictions.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2013, 02:29:11 AM by LBK » Logged
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,102


« Reply #2 on: October 24, 2013, 02:42:16 AM »

While you will very rarely witness it in the Church in which you inquiring, the Liturgy of St. James is the most commonly celebrated liturgy of the Syriac Orthodox Church, which still celebrates it in the Syriac language (plus whatever the native language of the congregation is, of course; generally Arabic, Malayalam, and/or English -- here is a clip in mostly English from the Indian Syriacs in America, for instance, except for the Syriac phrases "barekhmor"/Lord bless and "Showe w zodek"/meet and right).
Logged

Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #3 on: October 24, 2013, 03:18:00 AM »

The same could not be said for the modern-day (less than a century, and often much less) western rite. You'll find opinions ranging from enthusiastic approval, to "liturgical archeology", to outright refusal of its use within certain Orthodox jurisdictions.

However no one denies validity of WR sacraments. Also, no one denies the idea that WRO are members of the Church.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 24, 2013, 05:13:04 AM »

Going back to the OP:

Liturgy of St. Basil is celebrated only around 10 times in a year so it's not suprising you did not see it very often. On the other hand it is celebrated universally.

Liturgies of St.St. John and Basil cover like 99.999999% of liturgical practice so it is really no need to be bothered by the rest. They also have very minor differences

If you are interested in,there are two additional Byzantine Liturgies celebrated from time to time in some places: of St. James and of St. Mark. St. James' is considered to be the least changed rite and it's celebrated mostly of St. James' feast (yesterday) and by the Church of Jerusalem. Liturgy of St. Mark is celebrated sometimes in the Church of Alexandria but I cannot say much about it.

As for Western Rite, Antiochians have two service types: Liturgy of St. Tikhon and Liturgy of St. Gregory the Dialogues. The first one is similar to Anglican and the second - to traditional RC Masses.

ROCOR used to have several other Western Liturgies in use but they seem to stop its WRO.

While you will very rarely witness it in the Church in which you inquiring, the Liturgy of St. James is the most commonly celebrated liturgy of the Syriac Orthodox Church, which still celebrates it in the Syriac language (plus whatever the native language of the congregation is, of course; generally Arabic, Malayalam, and/or English -- here is a clip in mostly English from the Indian Syriacs in America, for instance, except for the Syriac phrases "barekhmor"/Lord bless and "Showe w zodek"/meet and right).

I missed the part he asked about Oriental Orthodoxy.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
africanus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Catehumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 17


St. Moses the Ethiopean


WWW
« Reply #5 on: October 24, 2013, 05:41:58 AM »

Michal wrote: "As for Western Rite, Antiochians have two service types: Liturgy of St. Tikhon and Liturgy of St. Gregory the Dialogues. The first one is similar to Anglican and the second - to traditional RC Masses".
Thank you Michal. Is the Liturgy of St. Gregory some 4 hours long? I've heard that it is?
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 24, 2013, 05:42:52 AM »

Thank you Michal. Is the Liturgy of St. Gregory some 4 hours long? I've heard that it is?

I doubt.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 24, 2013, 07:15:50 AM »

WRO Liturgies - Liturgy of St. Tikhon, Liturgy of St. Gregory the Great, Sarum Liturgy (from which the Liturgy of St. Tikhon was derived, used somewhere in ROCOR), and Liturgy of St. John the Divine. This last one is more of liturgical archaeology than anything else. However, I do laugh at folks who think the first two are such.

Quote
Is the Liturgy of St. Gregory some 4 hours long? I've heard that it is?
It can be, but its not done anywhere IIRC.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,938


"My god is greater."


« Reply #8 on: October 24, 2013, 10:49:40 AM »

Thank you Michal. Is the Liturgy of St. Gregory some 4 hours long? I've heard that it is?

I doubt.

The first time I attended Presanctified it took over 3 hours, so I can believe that it could be stretched to 4.
Logged

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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,938


"My god is greater."


« Reply #9 on: October 24, 2013, 10:52:45 AM »

As a catechumen of the OCA I am totally confused about the "Rites" of both Eastern and Western orthodoxy. Having seen the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostum and St. Basil I've not witnessed any other liturgies in the Orthodox churches I've visited. Just how many 'liturgies' are considered "Eastern" or "western"? And do not some Orthodox churches use "western rite"? What is going on with all this 'eastern vs. western rite' pot of gumbo? And speaking of 'liturgies' just how many legitimate or recognized Divine Liturgies are there between the east and west?

The Western rite is an attempt by some Orthodox (largely converts in the US and Western Europe) to revive the old Western rites of undivided Christendom. It's unlikely that you will come across the Western rite unless you actively seek it out; the vast majority of Orthodox, including in the West, use the Eastern rite. WR is not a major trend in Orthodoxy and likely never will be.
Logged

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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #10 on: October 24, 2013, 10:53:23 AM »

ROCOR used to have several other Western Liturgies in use but they seem to stop its WRO.

AFAIK there's no Vicariate anymore but the parishes and monasteries still exist.
Logged
ilyazhito
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 862



« Reply #11 on: October 24, 2013, 11:54:26 AM »

The Western Rite in ROCOR is now directly under the authority of Metropolitan Hilarion. The parishes still exist, but the structure will probably be absorbed into the existing ROCOR geographical dioceses.
Logged
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek by desire; Antiochian by necessity
Posts: 5,959



« Reply #12 on: October 24, 2013, 01:17:33 PM »

As a catechumen of the OCA I am totally confused about the "Rites" of both Eastern and Western orthodoxy. Having seen the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostum and St. Basil I've not witnessed any other liturgies in the Orthodox churches I've visited. Just how many 'liturgies' are considered "Eastern" or "western"? And do not some Orthodox churches use "western rite"? What is going on with all this 'eastern vs. western rite' pot of gumbo? And speaking of 'liturgies' just how many legitimate or recognized Divine Liturgies are there between the east and west?

There are dozens of "western rites" which is why it is useless to speak of A western rite.  Some of the more famous and prominent western rites are/were the Gallican Rite, the Sarum Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, the Mozarabic Rite, the Rite of Pope St. Gregory, etc.   the western rites as used by the Antiochians (I cannot speak for ROCOR) are essentially cut and paste jobs from the English BoC.  Full disclosure:  I'm no fan of western rites in Orthodox churches but suum cuique.

I would direct you to this blog post by a Serbian priest and he lays out a lot of the criticisms about the western rite(s) and its/their implementation and practice.

http://frmilovan.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/thoughts-on-western-rite/
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #13 on: October 24, 2013, 09:07:04 PM »

Michal wrote: "As for Western Rite, Antiochians have two service types: Liturgy of St. Tikhon and Liturgy of St. Gregory the Dialogues. The first one is similar to Anglican and the second - to traditional RC Masses".
Thank you Michal. Is the Liturgy of St. Gregory some 4 hours long? I've heard that it is?


No. It's about an hour.
Logged

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

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2013, 10:16:59 PM »

In order to nurture an authentic Western Rite within Orthodoxy, those involved had to make a decision: attempt to resurrect older rites via scholarship and historical inquiry, using our best judgment; or, simply resume the living rites of those seeking to become Orthodox yet Western, and enrich them as necessary, either from the Eastern tradition, or from the Western.

ROCOR largely employed the former, Antioch the latter, though both have overlap. There are, perhaps, strengths and weaknesses to both. But the fruit of both approaches have been approved and blessed, time and time again, by competent Orthodox authority.

The liturgical tradition for the Orthodox Western Rite, at least within Antioch, has been firmly established and has been now for generations. It will, Lord willing, continue to blossom under the caring hands of our Orthodox leaders and faithful laypeople.
Logged
alexpetros
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 142


Go sábhála Dia Éire.


WWW
« Reply #15 on: October 24, 2013, 10:49:13 PM »

The liturgical tradition for the Orthodox Western Rite, at least within Antioch, has been firmly established and has been now for generations. It will, Lord willing, continue to blossom under the caring hands of our Orthodox leaders and faithful laypeople.

I sure hope so...
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 25, 2013, 08:02:27 AM »

Some thoughts on the critique that scamandrius posted.

Quote
Thus, the concept of a Western rite simply prolongs the East-West myth, beloved of the condemned Anglican branch theory, which heretically declares that the Orthodox Church is merely an ‘Eastern’ Church (and its rites ‘Eastern’ rites and not universal rites) and that the ‘other half of the Church’ is ‘Western’
This is not at all why the concept of a western rite was established. It has nothing to do with a myth of East/West. There was a distinct western tradition in Orthodoxy (look up the phrase "Do what the Romans do") that was lost in the isolation of the west. This is perfectly clear in the fact that there was a ruling monastery on Mt. Athos that was western rite clear into the 15th century.

Quote
Is this talk of ‘Western rite’ simply not all Western chauvinism, racism, the usual Western feeling of ‘superiority’ to the rest of humanity?
Well, this introduces a nice circular argument. Is this antagonism to a western rite due to western disdain? Anti-westernism? Hyperhellinism?

Quote
The concept of a Western rite suggests heretically that the Universal Orthodox Church is incomplete
Not at all. It is not incomplete. However, the west has been missing something for 1,000 years. Orthodoxy in the western tradition, which was clearly present, but lost due to Roman influence and the sword.

Quote
Fourthly, when the term ‘Western rite’ is used, of which Western rite is revival meant? The Roman rite? The Gallican? The Ambrosian? The Mozarabic? Or some later version based on the Anglican Book of Common Prayer? The problem is that the ancient rites only survive in an incomplete manuscript form. Can they ever be restored?
One of the only things I agree with. The western Rite, IMHO has been established using as a baseline, a theological low point of western theology. I personally would prefer the actual Sarum Rite of England, or the Liturgy of St. Gregory the Great (which is incredibly old, proven to be heavily used in the west, and we have the full text of it).

Quote
St Tikhon and St John
The entire section I find completely silly. So basically, because the group that applied left the Church, that nullifies the findings of the Holy Synod and St. Tikhon? Pretty weak there....

The idea that you must be "eastern" to be Orthodox has no basis in fact. Should the Liturgy only be done in Greek? Russian? What about Latin, a western language? What about the Liturgy being in English? Is this also an issue? Is this "too western" or do people just love LARPing a Hellene? Where is the line drawn?

There is a western tradition in Orthodoxy that should be restored. It is no different than if Istanbul fell and called Constantinople again. There would be a restoration of things lost since the Turks took over. In the same token, if Orthodoxy is to re-take the west, the traditions of the west should be restored and used to help evangelize the west.

To be frank, my current Patriarch, his predecessor of blessed memory, the Holy Synod of Antioch, my Metropolitan, and my bishop have all approved it, and that is good enough for me.

Quote
The liturgical tradition for the Orthodox Western Rite, at least within Antioch, has been firmly established and has been now for generations. It will, Lord willing, continue to blossom under the caring hands of our Orthodox leaders and faithful laypeople.
Unfortunately, thats not good enough for some folks.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 25, 2013, 08:11:06 AM »

Where did you got that quote from?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2013, 09:41:25 AM »

All of them were from the critique on the western rite by a Serbian priest that scamandrius posted. The article is at http://frmilovan.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/thoughts-on-western-rite/

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,241


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 25, 2013, 10:25:24 AM »

All of them were from the critique on the western rite by a Serbian priest that scamandrius posted. The article is at http://frmilovan.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/thoughts-on-western-rite/

PP

I'm not WRO and that blog post upset me, so I understand pp's point.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #20 on: October 28, 2013, 08:04:23 AM »

All of them were from the critique on the western rite by a Serbian priest that scamandrius posted. The article is at http://frmilovan.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/thoughts-on-western-rite/

PP

I'm not WRO and that blog post upset me, so I understand pp's point.
Frankly, I don't have a problem with people being critical of the WR. There are some things that I don't particularly care for. However, if someone is going to critique it, do it from a neutral standpoint, or from one not so obviously hateful.

Thats why I like Fr. Reardon's critique of the WR. He gives good points and bad. Almost all of it I agree with. But even if I didn't, he does it with love and care, and in the correct spirit.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,699



« Reply #21 on: October 30, 2013, 11:24:02 AM »

All of them were from the critique on the western rite by a Serbian priest that scamandrius posted. The article is at http://frmilovan.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/thoughts-on-western-rite/

PP

I'm not WRO and that blog post upset me, so I understand pp's point.
Frankly, I don't have a problem with people being critical of the WR. There are some things that I don't particularly care for. However, if someone is going to critique it, do it from a neutral standpoint, or from one not so obviously hateful.

Thats why I like Fr. Reardon's critique of the WR. He gives good points and bad. Almost all of it I agree with. But even if I didn't, he does it with love and care, and in the correct spirit.

PP

I really like your balanced approach.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Jules_Grant
Anglo-Catholic with Byzantine theology turned Western-rite Orthodox Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Western-rite Orthodox Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology)
Posts: 21


Virgin of virgins, pray for us.


« Reply #22 on: October 30, 2013, 07:43:23 PM »

In order to nurture an authentic Western Rite within Orthodoxy, those involved had to make a decision: attempt to resurrect older rites via scholarship and historical inquiry, using our best judgment; or, simply resume the living rites of those seeking to become Orthodox yet Western, and enrich them as necessary, either from the Eastern tradition, or from the Western.

The liturgical tradition for the Orthodox Western Rite, at least within Antioch, has been firmly established and has been now for generations. It will, Lord willing, continue to blossom under the caring hands of our Orthodox leaders and faithful laypeople.

I happen to personally adore Western liturgy, as my previous faith was Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology (which you could say I still am, just I reject papal infalliability and the papal innovations on doctrine now) and a few Methodist views on sanctification and grace, such as previenient grace and perfection in love, if that makes any sense, you can message me for an explaination of that and my full religious history. The Sarum Use, the Gallician Uses, the York Use, the Ambrosian Rite, the Mozarabic Rite, the Tridentine Roman Rite (and the English and American Missals inspired by it) the 1928 and 1662 Book of Common Prayer, all beautiful liturgies. I love listening to Masses composed by Mozart, Rossini, and Bach, or any of the various classical composers.

However, the current Western Rite isn't Western, it's a very Byzantine Canon with Western features. The Liturgy of Saint Tikhon and the Liturgy of Saint Gregory are not organic, and a fusion of the Tridentine Roman Rite and the 1928 Book of Common Prayer with the Constantinopolitan Rite. It's simply just horrible, really. A true Western Rite is pure and untainted by Eastern liturgics.

I'd like to see a Western Rite that is very Anglo-Catholic in appearance and feel. Beautiful music, use of Western liturgical arts, an authentic liturgy which is centuries old, not a few decades.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2013, 08:09:19 PM by Jules_Grant » Logged

"Those who fear the Lord do not disobey his words, and those who love him keep his ways."
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #23 on: October 30, 2013, 09:02:59 PM »

In order to nurture an authentic Western Rite within Orthodoxy, those involved had to make a decision: attempt to resurrect older rites via scholarship and historical inquiry, using our best judgment; or, simply resume the living rites of those seeking to become Orthodox yet Western, and enrich them as necessary, either from the Eastern tradition, or from the Western.

The liturgical tradition for the Orthodox Western Rite, at least within Antioch, has been firmly established and has been now for generations. It will, Lord willing, continue to blossom under the caring hands of our Orthodox leaders and faithful laypeople.

I happen to personally adore Western liturgy, as my previous faith was Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology (which you could say I still am, just I reject papal infalliability and the papal innovations on doctrine now) and a few Methodist views on sanctification and grace, such as previenient grace and perfection in love, if that makes any sense, you can message me for an explaination of that and my full religious history. The Sarum Use, the Gallician Uses, the York Use, the Ambrosian Rite, the Mozarabic Rite, the Tridentine Roman Rite (and the English and American Missals inspired by it) the 1928 and 1662 Book of Common Prayer, all beautiful liturgies. I love listening to Masses composed by Mozart, Rossini, and Bach, or any of the various classical composers.

Mozart's Requiem Mass is my favorite piece of music.

Quote
However, the current Western Rite isn't Western, it's a very Byzantine Canon with Western features.

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.

Quote
The Liturgy of Saint Tikhon and the Liturgy of Saint Gregory are not organic, and a fusion of the Tridentine Roman Rite and the 1928 Book of Common Prayer with the Constantinopolitan Rite.

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.

Quote
It's simply just horrible, really. A true Western Rite is pure and untainted by Eastern liturgics.

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.

Quote
I'd like to see a Western Rite that is very Anglo-Catholic in appearance and feel. Beautiful music, use of Western liturgical arts, an authentic liturgy which is centuries old, not a few decades.

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.

It isn't perfect, but for those of us who love the magnificent Western heritage, it is what God has blessed us with. And we are the better for it.
Logged
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquiring into Orthodoxy
Posts: 274



« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2013, 11:15:47 PM »

Has anyone interested in the Western Rite seen the Rad Trad's blog? Despite the sedevacant-y name, he's actually just a Melkite Catholic with a really broad knowledge of liturgical history. He writes a lot about the difference between the Roman Rite just before Vatican II and the Tridentine and pre-Tridentine Rites, and about their various advantages and disadvantages, and the thing that actually struck me is that a lot of the problems he cites (in a six-part article beginning here http://theradtrad.blogspot.ca/2013/04/reasons-for-reform-of-roman-rite-part-i.html) are identical to common Orthodox complaints about the Western Rite, and the fix would be somewhere between the liturgies of St. Gregory and Sarum.

I'm also confused when people complain about the addition of the Byzantine epiclesis. I go to an Anglican Use Catholic parish, and the addition wouldn't bother me. It seems to flow reasonably well.
Logged

"To believe [the Paraclete] when you wish it, and then disbelieve him when you wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself." --St. Augustine, Contra Faustum XXXII.16
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #25 on: October 31, 2013, 01:33:21 AM »

A true Western Rite is pure and untainted by Eastern liturgics.

AFAIK, here.

http://www.allmercifulsavior.com/Liturgy/SarumMassLatin2011c.pdf
http://www.allmercifulsavior.com/Liturgy/SarumMass2011c.pdf
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,241


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 31, 2013, 09:43:51 AM »

[quote author=Sleeper link=topic=54464.msg1013188#msg1013188 date=13826674
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.


As a general rule I try not to comment on WRO threads as I don't have a strong opinion either way.

This quote did catch my eyes however as it resonated with my own jurisdiction's history (as it should with many in the OCA and UOC who came to Orthodoxy via the Unia (now at least 75 or more years ago).

The sentiments echo those of the overwhelming majority of mostly well intentioned Roman Catholics as the Greek Catholics immigrated to new lands. "Concessions to maintain peace and harmony" and "something familiar" to visitors from the "majority" rites were the same buzzwords which sent half of the North American Greek Catholics out of their churches - many to Orthodoxy, others to many disparate places.

I realize the circumstances are different, as well as why there is a WRO and how it came to be is surely not analogous to that of the Unia. But, if any lessons are to be learned from the experiences of those in and now out of the Unia, I would caution against trying too hard to force a Byzantine square peg into a western round hole. It is easy to ignite passions and the results can be unpredictable. Good luck and Godspeed.  
« Last Edit: October 31, 2013, 09:50:58 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
Jules_Grant
Anglo-Catholic with Byzantine theology turned Western-rite Orthodox Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Western-rite Orthodox Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology)
Posts: 21


Virgin of virgins, pray for us.


« Reply #27 on: October 31, 2013, 05:00:53 PM »

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. 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.

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.

Liturgical diffusion with other rites is inevitable, but let it be natural. As far as I know, the Divine Liturgy of S. John Chrysostom hasn't changed much since it was written. It seems unnatural for two western liturgies to be given an epiclesis and Eucharistic prayers from an entirely different liturgical tradition. Of course, modifications, such as those to the Nicene Creed and some theological language is necessary. There are times when modification for doctrine is necessary, but it must look and seem natural. If an invocation of the Holy Ghost in the epiclesis was so necessary, then the language saying brought by the hands of thy holy Angel to thine altar on high should be changed to brought by the hands of thy Holy Spirit to thine altar on high. If certain phrases needed modification, such should be done in a way that fits with the text present. 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. Traditional Eastern prayers are lovely, but they are just that, Eastern prayers. If we started introducing the Collect for Purity or the concept of a collect to the Byzantine Rite, we would be crucified.
Logged

"Those who fear the Lord do not disobey his words, and those who love him keep his ways."
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 31, 2013, 05:06:31 PM »

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. 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.

What do you think DL of St. Gregory is?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #29 on: October 31, 2013, 08:55:18 PM »

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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2013, 08:58:44 PM by Sleeper » Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #30 on: October 31, 2013, 09:31:19 PM »

Can we dismiss all those opposed to the WR as Romophobics?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Jules_Grant
Anglo-Catholic with Byzantine theology turned Western-rite Orthodox Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Western-rite Orthodox Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology)
Posts: 21


Virgin of virgins, pray for us.


« Reply #31 on: October 31, 2013, 10:06:30 PM »

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.

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.

The approach that Antioch took is more organic and sensible than I originally thought. I was not aware that they look such a careful and thoughtful approach to crafting the Rites of Ss. Tikhon and Gregory. I underestimate the wisdom of our hierarchs, a habit from my experience with heretical and naive Anglican and Roman Catholic bishops and archbishops. I wish to break it with time.

I suppose liturgical purism is important, but we must also allow the liturgy to be diffused with authenic and beautiful liturgical material. I must say, you are only of a few people who have managed to change my opinion on an issue so quickly. I have synesthesia, in which certain words and concepts invoke certain colours and sensations for me, and in some cases, one being in pain causes me to empathise in such a way that I begin to feel pain. Orthodox Catholicism in the Western tradition was a word associated with dark brown, which represent something which is impure or even an abomination in my mind. You managed to change the colour association to a royal shade of purple and burgundy, two colours I associate with grandeur, beauty, magnificence, and splendour. The only dark brown associated with the Western Rite is the epiclesis in the Rite of S. Gregory which is, incidentally, Byzantine.

Now that my objections to the liturgy of Orthodox Catholicism in the Western tradition are no longer such, I feel now that the Western rite can use some real beautification and ornamentation with our help.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2013, 10:12:55 PM by Jules_Grant » Logged

"Those who fear the Lord do not disobey his words, and those who love him keep his ways."
Jules_Grant
Anglo-Catholic with Byzantine theology turned Western-rite Orthodox Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Western-rite Orthodox Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology)
Posts: 21


Virgin of virgins, pray for us.


« Reply #32 on: October 31, 2013, 10:07:03 PM »

Can we dismiss all those opposed to the WR as Romophobics?

No, because some have real, principled objections over the way the liturgy is structured.
Logged

"Those who fear the Lord do not disobey his words, and those who love him keep his ways."
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #33 on: October 31, 2013, 11:12:55 PM »

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.

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.

The approach that Antioch took is more organic and sensible than I originally thought. I was not aware that they look such a careful and thoughtful approach to crafting the Rites of Ss. Tikhon and Gregory. I underestimate the wisdom of our hierarchs, a habit from my experience with heretical and naive Anglican and Roman Catholic bishops and archbishops. I wish to break it with time.

I suppose liturgical purism is important, but we must also allow the liturgy to be diffused with authenic and beautiful liturgical material. I must say, you are only of a few people who have managed to change my opinion on an issue so quickly. I have synesthesia, in which certain words and concepts invoke certain colours and sensations for me, and in some cases, one being in pain causes me to empathise in such a way that I begin to feel pain. Orthodox Catholicism in the Western tradition was a word associated with dark brown, which represent something which is impure or even an abomination in my mind. You managed to change the colour association to a royal shade of purple and burgundy, two colours I associate with grandeur, beauty, magnificence, and splendour. The only dark brown associated with the Western Rite is the epiclesis in the Rite of S. Gregory which is, incidentally, Byzantine.

Now that my objections to the liturgy of Orthodox Catholicism in the Western tradition are no longer such, I feel now that the Western rite can use some real beautification and ornamentation with our help.

You have no idea how happy this makes me, as I too am a synesthete! I have strong color associations with things that deeply effect the way I think of, and relate to, them. So I don't take your shift in colors lightly Smiley
Logged
Jules_Grant
Anglo-Catholic with Byzantine theology turned Western-rite Orthodox Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Western-rite Orthodox Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology)
Posts: 21


Virgin of virgins, pray for us.


« Reply #34 on: October 31, 2013, 11:24:39 PM »

My preference would be for Sarum Use, Ambrosian Rite, Mozarabic Rite, and Gallician as well as Tridentine Roman Rite over the Rites of Ss. Tikhon and Gregory still. Perhaps it is just the ritualism in me that I get from rich Western liturgy. Something in my spirit just prefers to use the older rites. There is a richer hymnody and more propers and prayers in the older rites, it's more elaborate and more beautiful in my opinion. Lex orandi, lex credendi.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2013, 11:26:55 PM by Jules_Grant » Logged

"Those who fear the Lord do not disobey his words, and those who love him keep his ways."
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 01, 2013, 05:07:53 AM »

St. Gregory IS the Tridentine rite.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Jules_Grant
Anglo-Catholic with Byzantine theology turned Western-rite Orthodox Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Western-rite Orthodox Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology)
Posts: 21


Virgin of virgins, pray for us.


« Reply #36 on: November 01, 2013, 06:20:46 AM »

St. Gregory IS the Tridentine rite.

Albeit altered. Has a Byzantine epiclesis and no filioque (not that I support the filioque to begin with).
Logged

"Those who fear the Lord do not disobey his words, and those who love him keep his ways."
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #37 on: November 01, 2013, 10:20:40 AM »

My preference would be for Sarum Use, Ambrosian Rite, Mozarabic Rite, and Gallician as well as Tridentine Roman Rite over the Rites of Ss. Tikhon and Gregory still. Perhaps it is just the ritualism in me that I get from rich Western liturgy. Something in my spirit just prefers to use the older rites. There is a richer hymnody and more propers and prayers in the older rites, it's more elaborate and more beautiful in my opinion. Lex orandi, lex credendi.

I tend to agree, although I'm firmly convinced of the reintegration of the living Western tradition being the healthiest option as a starting point, recovering aspects of our rich, more ancient heritage over time, in an organic way. In other words, the Rites of Ss. Gregory and Tikhon, but developed further over time.

This has already been the case since the inception of the Western Rite within Orthodoxy. For example, just last year the fasting rules for those of us under Antioch were changed from the 1950's rules back to those of the ninth century. Devotional and festal aspects, such as the Sacred Heart, which were once widespread within the Vicariate have slowly fallen out of use (though not entirely). Originally, Western Rite Christians made the sign of the cross in the open-palmed manner, from left to right, but we now use the more ancient Western custom which just so happens to be that of contemporary Orthodoxy. Icons are now censed prior to the congregation, just before the Offertory. And so on.

And we've already discussed the enrichment of the Mass itself, from both traditional Western sources, as well as Eastern. As the Western Rite continues to plant roots in the Church, I anticipate more of this type of liturgical development. But it's extremely vital that it happen in a natural way, the way our ancient rites came about in the first place. This ensures that anything that is good, true, and beautiful within the Western heritage, regardless of era or geography, is preserved to the glory of God.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #38 on: November 01, 2013, 10:56:14 AM »

Someone in another thread shared a beautiful, insightful interview with schema-monk Gabriel Bunge, a one-time Benedictine who converted to Orthodoxy a few years ago. I thought this was perfectly in line with this discussion:

"Of those who are wavering—do you think they could go in the direction of Orthodoxy, or might they instead give up everything?

—The only way I see it happening is if they turn to their own Orthodoxy, because unless God works an unprecedented miracle that turns everyone to Byzantine Orthodoxy, there is a whole culture at work to prevent it. It is not just a matter of texts, or formulas. But they must turn back to their own Orthodoxy, their own traditions. For all these years, when I wrote my little books, my aim was this: as a monk, to help people have a spiritual life, to rediscover, reintegrate their own spiritual heritage, which is of course the same as ours; because we have the same roots."

Further, "I feel that my own path is to prove, even to the Orthodox, that it is possible, even within the Western tradition, to rediscover the common ground, and to live out of this. You can do this—not by yourself, of course, but only with God’s grace. But then I reached a point where I could no longer support being in only spiritual communion with the Orthodox Church so close to my heart. I wanted real, sacramental communion. Therefore, I asked for it."
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 11:03:59 AM by Sleeper » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #39 on: November 01, 2013, 10:59:30 AM »

Quote
I tend to agree, although I'm firmly convinced of the reintegration of the living Western tradition being the healthiest option as a starting point, recovering aspects of our rich, more ancient heritage over time, in an organic way. In other words, the Rites of Ss. Gregory and Tikhon, but developed further over time
Sarum or Liturgy of St. Gregory

Quote
This has already been the case since the inception of the Western Rite within Orthodoxy. For example, just last year the fasting rules for those of us under Antioch were changed from the 1950's rules back to those of the ninth century
Yeah, that caused some serious confusion at my parish.

Quote
Devotional and festal aspects, such as the Sacred Heart, which were once widespread within the Vicariate have slowly fallen out of use
Im glad. I always found the Sacred Heart disturbing. Now to get rid of some others.....

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #40 on: November 02, 2013, 04:06:59 PM »

^What others?
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #41 on: November 03, 2013, 05:18:48 PM »

St. Gregory IS the Tridentine rite.

Albeit altered. Has a Byzantine epiclesis and no filioque (not that I support the filioque to begin with).

Then why even bring up the filioque?
Logged

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

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 862



« Reply #42 on: November 03, 2013, 05:40:04 PM »

The reason why the Western rite liturgies were altered from their non-Orthodox originals (the rite of St. Gregory from the Tridentine Mass) was to bring them in line with mainstream Orthodox theology. The Tridentine mass places a profound emphasis on Christ's death and his sacrifice, whereas Orthodox traditionally emphasize the Resurrection of Christ, even in the hymns of Great and Holy Friday. I would not demand that Western Rite Orthodoxy cease to exist, but the rules are thus: Individuals converting to Orthodoxy have to accept the whole package, including the Byzantine Rite, but GROUPS admitted into Orthodoxy are allowed to use their own rite, if it conforms to Orthodox theology.
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #43 on: November 03, 2013, 06:00:36 PM »

Individuals converting to Orthodoxy have to accept the whole package, including the Byzantine Rite

The Byzantine rite = Orthodoxy. Way to go.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #44 on: November 03, 2013, 06:42:16 PM »

The reason why the Western rite liturgies were altered from their non-Orthodox originals (the rite of St. Gregory from the Tridentine Mass) was to bring them in line with mainstream Orthodox theology. The Tridentine mass places a profound emphasis on Christ's death and his sacrifice, whereas Orthodox traditionally emphasize the Resurrection of Christ, even in the hymns of Great and Holy Friday.

A false dichotomy.  First, you are comparing the Roman rite of Mass to non-Eucharistic Byzantine Holy Week services.  Compare the ordinary of the Mass with that of the Liturgy and try to make the same argument.  Second, I suspect that we are reading into the various rites our own pieties.  We associate the Latin West with "Passion" and the Greek East with "Resurrection" and through that lens we evaluate the rites.  But the Roman liturgy does have the resurrectional elements which offer the proper balance, and the Byzantine liturgy has its own "Passion" elements which balance the resurrectional "emphasis" (e.g., yours is the only rite in all of Christendom to use a spear to pierce the Lamb).

Quote
I would not demand that Western Rite Orthodoxy cease to exist, but the rules are thus: Individuals converting to Orthodoxy have to accept the whole package, including the Byzantine Rite, but GROUPS admitted into Orthodoxy are allowed to use their own rite, if it conforms to Orthodox theology.

LOL.  It is as Alpo said.  

I can't wait for the discussion on how many people constitute a group.  
« Last Edit: November 03, 2013, 06:42:35 PM by Mor Ephrem » Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #45 on: November 04, 2013, 08:02:18 AM »

Quote
The reason why the Western rite liturgies were altered from their non-Orthodox originals (the rite of St. Gregory from the Tridentine Mass) was to bring them in line with mainstream Orthodox theology
This is true.

Quote
I would not demand that Western Rite Orthodoxy cease to exist, but the rules are thus: Individuals converting to Orthodoxy have to accept the whole package, including the Byzantine Rite, but GROUPS admitted into Orthodoxy are allowed to use their own rite, if it conforms to Orthodox theolog
So basically, groups can be western rite, but must be eastern. Got it. So what would you say about Orthodox who did not use the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? So those that used the Liturgy of St. James also not Orthodox? What about the western rite monks on Mt. Athos which lasted all the way up to the 15th Century? Were they not Orthodox? THey used an extant version of the old liturgy of St. Gregory.

What about Pre norman England? Everyone says they were Orthodox, yet used the Sarum Liturgy.

What you have stated is nonsense, and doesn't even conform to RECENT Orthodox history.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
ilyazhito
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 862



« Reply #46 on: November 04, 2013, 07:26:31 PM »

Orthodox using accepted non-Byzantine Liturgies such as the Liturgy of St. James are OK. If pre-Schism liturgical forms coincide with Orthodox theology, why not use them? Any potential Western Rite Orthodox would be free to join existing Western Rite parishes, but new Western Rite parishes would have to be created with the permission of ecclesiastical authorities in the same manner as Eastern Rite parishes. The Western Rite monks on Athos were Orthodox, but they are not relevant any more as they do not exist.
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 #47 on: November 04, 2013, 07:39:17 PM »

I like what Mor Eprem last said. I see no true deficiencies in either liturgy.

The most I could say is that the Latin liturgy has no litany or bidding prayer in it usually for the last few hundred years.
However that is easily addressed and corrected should it be seen as necessary by whatever hierarch is overseeing it.
I do not think the addittion or omission of litany/bidding prayer is a substantial change to the liturgy but more a personal preference or accident of history.

Even the byzantine divine liturgy has a procession where they venerate the eucharist every sunday which is to my mind a strongly similar to the"Most Holy Body of Christ (Corpus Christi) feast that developed in the latin west with similar procession.

Ilyahito, most of what you said already occurs, I probably havent been following the conversation enough to make sense of all of it.

Carry on...
« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 07:39:57 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
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquiring into Orthodoxy
Posts: 274



« Reply #48 on: November 04, 2013, 09:17:26 PM »

Originally, Western Rite Christians made the sign of the cross in the open-palmed manner, from left to right, but we now use the more ancient Western custom which just so happens to be that of contemporary Orthodoxy.
As far as I know, the open-palmed Sign of the Cross is a very recent innovation. The traditional (post-schism, of course) Roman Sign of the Cross is made left to right with two fingers. What's wrong with doing it that way? I can see incorporating icons and removing feasts which are heretical in Orthodoxy, but if there's something not opposed to Orthodoxy why not keep it, preserving those parts of a living tradition touched comparatively little by heresy?
Logged

"To believe [the Paraclete] when you wish it, and then disbelieve him when you wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself." --St. Augustine, Contra Faustum XXXII.16
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #49 on: November 05, 2013, 08:24:17 AM »

Quote
If pre-Schism liturgical forms coincide with Orthodox theology, why not use them?
They are used. The Liturgy of St. Gregory goes back to the 6th century, with a complete extant copy dating in the 900's AD.

I would also ask, what do you consider pre-schism? 1054 is a nice boxed up number, but anyone who says, "THIS is when the schism occurred" really should not be discussing the schism. For us (Antioch) You can cherry-pick any date from 800 clear through the 12th or 13th century, when the Pope assigned Latin Patriarchs of Antioch directly.

Quote
The Western Rite monks on Athos were Orthodox, but they are not relevant any more as they do not exist
I realize that, however you made the supposition that to be Orthodox, you must be Byzantine. So I referenced a group that violated that stipulation. There are many more. The Alexandrians used (and still do AFAIK) the Liturgy of St. Mark, The pre-Norman English used the Sarum (Which our Liturgy, the Liturgy of St. Tikhon virtually mirrors). If you must be Byzantine to be Orthodox, you must say these folks are not Orthodox as well. Also by your stipulations, you have pretty much denied every saint west of Illiria post 476 since none of them were Byzantine or probably never were familiar with the Byzantine rite.

I would also ask you this: If Rome returned to Orthodoxy, do you think they would use the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? Would they not have every right to use completely Orthodox liturgies before they separated from us?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #50 on: November 05, 2013, 09:12:05 PM »

Originally, Western Rite Christians made the sign of the cross in the open-palmed manner, from left to right, but we now use the more ancient Western custom which just so happens to be that of contemporary Orthodoxy.
As far as I know, the open-palmed Sign of the Cross is a very recent innovation. The traditional (post-schism, of course) Roman Sign of the Cross is made left to right with two fingers. What's wrong with doing it that way? I can see incorporating icons and removing feasts which are heretical in Orthodoxy, but if there's something not opposed to Orthodoxy why not keep it, preserving those parts of a living tradition touched comparatively little by heresy?

I agree, and so does the Vicariate to a large extent. The reason for changing the manner of the sign of the cross was less about any theological issues, and mostly about practical ones.

I, for one, think the symbolism of the five-fingered open-palm cross is quite poignant.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #51 on: November 05, 2013, 09:36:32 PM »

I, for one, think the symbolism of the five-fingered open-palm cross is quite poignant.

What is it?
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquiring into Orthodoxy
Posts: 274



« Reply #52 on: November 05, 2013, 09:36:53 PM »

I, for one, think the symbolism of the five-fingered open-palm cross is quite poignant.
I wasn't aware there was any. I like the two natures of Christ/three Persons of the Trinity symbolism, especially because every one of the rites of Christendom uses some version of it.

There are some other, similar complaints I have about "ancient Western customs" in the WR, but they're mostly from the ROCOR side, e.g., no genuflections, no crossed priest's stoles, no surplices laced or otherwise, no hands in the orans position, etc. Does the AWRV do any of these things, or does it stay closer to the pre-1955 Tridentine as I've heard it does?
Logged

"To believe [the Paraclete] when you wish it, and then disbelieve him when you wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself." --St. Augustine, Contra Faustum XXXII.16
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #53 on: November 05, 2013, 10:35:13 PM »

I, for one, think the symbolism of the five-fingered open-palm cross is quite poignant.
I wasn't aware there was any. I like the two natures of Christ/three Persons of the Trinity symbolism, especially because every one of the rites of Christendom uses some version of it.

I agree, and I'm glad the Western Rite transitioned back to this venerable form.

However, there is something powerful about making the sign in the traditional (albeit more recent) Western manner. The five fingers in the open hand gesture represent the five wounds of Christ. Some have drawn a connection between these wounds and their healing effect on the five wounds of original sin (death, darkness of the nous, malice, and the passions, sexual or otherwise).

Quote
There are some other, similar complaints I have about "ancient Western customs" in the WR, but they're mostly from the ROCOR side, e.g., no genuflections, no crossed priest's stoles, no surplices laced or otherwise, no hands in the orans position, etc. Does the AWRV do any of these things, or does it stay closer to the pre-1955 Tridentine as I've heard it does?

We most certainly genuflect, every time we enter or leave the pew, and any time we cross in front of the Blessed Sacrament on the altar. It also happens on other occasions, such as venerating a relic. Stoles are crossed according to our rubrics. Surplices vary in style, but are certainly used. The Priest's hands are held in orans position several times during the Mass.
Logged
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquiring into Orthodoxy
Posts: 274



« Reply #54 on: November 06, 2013, 12:23:54 AM »

Glad to hear it. One other question: is there an Elevation at any point? I've seen it after the Words of Institution, RC-style, in a video from one AWRV church, but it would seem to make more sense to have it after the Epiclesis, if at all, from an Orthodox perspective (though the ROCOR WRV seems to omit it entirely, presumably because Eucharistic Adoration isn't an Orthodox practice).
« Last Edit: November 06, 2013, 12:24:05 AM by Regnare » Logged

"To believe [the Paraclete] when you wish it, and then disbelieve him when you wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself." --St. Augustine, Contra Faustum XXXII.16
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #55 on: November 06, 2013, 01:26:53 AM »

(though the ROCOR WRV seems to omit it entirely, presumably because Eucharistic Adoration isn't an Orthodox practice).

What?

In the Eastern rite we do adore Eucharist several times. Why it would be verboten in the Western rite.
Logged
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquiring into Orthodoxy
Posts: 274



« Reply #56 on: November 06, 2013, 01:38:58 AM »

I've generally heard (for example, from talks by Fr. Andrew Damick) that Eucharistic Adoration (that is, the exposition of the Eucharist for private adoration outside the liturgy) is an un-Orthodox practice, as it separates the Eucharist from its proper context as something to be eaten, not a talisman. I assumed this was the reason why even in the Divine Liturgies of the ROCOR Western Rite, the priest no longer elevates the Body and Blood after their respective consecrations to be adored by the congregation.

Under what circumstances is the Eucharist adored in the East?
« Last Edit: November 06, 2013, 01:39:20 AM by Regnare » Logged

"To believe [the Paraclete] when you wish it, and then disbelieve him when you wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself." --St. Augustine, Contra Faustum XXXII.16
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #57 on: November 06, 2013, 09:41:02 AM »

Under what circumstances is the Eucharist adored in the East?

I'll let others speak for the Byzantine rite because, IMO, it's less pronounced than in the other rites.  But in the Coptic and Syriac Liturgies, there is an adoration of the Eucharist, associated with either the Fraction or the Communion rites (or both).  The Armenian Liturgy has the same "adoration moments" as the Syriac Liturgy (the two are related), so I will include them even if I'm not sure if they classify those moments in this way.
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #58 on: November 06, 2013, 09:55:42 AM »

I've generally heard (for example, from talks by Fr. Andrew Damick) that Eucharistic Adoration (that is, the exposition of the Eucharist for private adoration outside the liturgy) is an un-Orthodox practice, as it separates the Eucharist from its proper context as something to be eaten, not a talisman.

And yet, Ware's The Orthodox Church, at least in some editions, doesn't say it's an "un-Orthodox" practice in the sense that there's something wrong with it, just that the way it's done in the West isn't an Eastern practice.

I'm wary of the new apologists for Orthodoxy who appear at times to see everything through an "East = Good, West = Bad" paradigm.  The West had to deal with numerous challenges to the doctrine of the Eucharist, and it's no surprise that Eucharistic devotion sprung out of that context, as a way of affirming the true faith regarding the Eucharist.  If the East never had this problem, good.  

But I doubt Fr Damick would agree that icon veneration is an un-Orthodox practice, as it separates iconography from its proper context as ecclesiastical adornment and catechism for the illiterate, not as "windows into heaven" through which veneration passes to the prototype (that's the same logic he applies to Eucharistic adoration).  Because icon veneration came under attack in certain regions in the East, the theology had to be expounded more thoroughly and devotion to icons increased.  In places where iconodulia was not called into question, their role is less pronounced and probably reflects "pre-controversy" levels of importance.  Where once it was called into question, now you have churches and cathedrals with icons on all walls, the ceiling, domes, on vessels, vestments, chandeliers, doors, bulletins, t-shirts, websites, kitschy bracelets, birthday cakes, just everywhere.  

In such a context, it's rather ignorant, IMO, to criticise Eucharistic adoration as un-Orthodox, unless the argument is that Byzantine = Orthodox.  And then, it's totally ignorant.    
« Last Edit: November 06, 2013, 09:56:50 AM by Mor Ephrem » Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,401


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #59 on: November 06, 2013, 10:04:29 AM »

Under what circumstances is the Eucharist adored in the East?

I'll let others speak for the Byzantine rite because, IMO, it's less pronounced than in the other rites.  But in the Coptic and Syriac Liturgies, there is an adoration of the Eucharist, associated with either the Fraction or the Communion rites (or both).  The Armenian Liturgy has the same "adoration moments" as the Syriac Liturgy (the two are related), so I will include them even if I'm not sure if they classify those moments in this way.

When exactly do we do the adoration? During the Procession of the Holy Mysteries?
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #60 on: November 06, 2013, 10:11:43 AM »

In the Liturgy, the priest turns to the faithful, and holds the Eucharist up and says, "Behold the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the world". The Laity then (usually on knees or standing) says, "Lord I am unworthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof, but speak the word only and my soul shall be healed" three times.

Is this what you're referring to when speaking about adoration?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #61 on: November 06, 2013, 10:12:47 AM »

When exactly do we do the adoration? During the Procession of the Holy Mysteries?

It is done three times.  The first is during the Fraction, when the priest elevates the Body at the words Walyawmo thlithoyo qom men qabro.  Even though the veil is drawn, the bell is rung so that those in the nave can join those within the sanctuary in worshiping.  The other two occur during the Procession: ideally one before Communion and one after, but as many priests process only after communing the people, they can also be done afterward.  
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquiring into Orthodoxy
Posts: 274



« Reply #62 on: November 06, 2013, 11:28:35 AM »

In the Liturgy, the priest turns to the faithful, and holds the Eucharist up and says, "Behold the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the world". The Laity then (usually on knees or standing) says, "Lord I am unworthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof, but speak the word only and my soul shall be healed" three times.

Is this what you're referring to when speaking about adoration?

PP
That's also an example, but the one I was talking about is the one where in the Tridentine Mass, the priest reads the first part of the Institution Narrative to consecrate the bread, genuflects, elevates the Eucharist, genuflects again, then does the same with the second part of the narrative and the chalice. It would seem to make more sense, from an Orthodox standpoint, to move this to the Epiclesis.
Logged

"To believe [the Paraclete] when you wish it, and then disbelieve him when you wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself." --St. Augustine, Contra Faustum XXXII.16
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #63 on: November 06, 2013, 11:43:33 AM »

Under what circumstances is the Eucharist adored in the East?

Within liturgies. If ER Orthodox can venerate the Eucharist withing the liturgy I can't see a reason why ROCOR WRO couldn't.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #64 on: November 06, 2013, 12:42:34 PM »

In the Liturgy, the priest turns to the faithful, and holds the Eucharist up and says, "Behold the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the world". The Laity then (usually on knees or standing) says, "Lord I am unworthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof, but speak the word only and my soul shall be healed" three times.

Is this what you're referring to when speaking about adoration?

PP
That's also an example, but the one I was talking about is the one where in the Tridentine Mass, the priest reads the first part of the Institution Narrative to consecrate the bread, genuflects, elevates the Eucharist, genuflects again, then does the same with the second part of the narrative and the chalice. It would seem to make more sense, from an Orthodox standpoint, to move this to the Epiclesis.
A version of this is done, yes.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Jules_Grant
Anglo-Catholic with Byzantine theology turned Western-rite Orthodox Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Western-rite Orthodox Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism with Byzantine theology)
Posts: 21


Virgin of virgins, pray for us.


« Reply #65 on: November 07, 2013, 07:48:56 AM »

Do Western rite parishes practice Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament? Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament on Corpus Christi is a magical experience. The practice of the Benediction itself may date from the 18th century, but it is a venerable practice.

Western Eucharistic hymns are also simply magificient.
Logged

"Those who fear the Lord do not disobey his words, and those who love him keep his ways."
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #66 on: November 07, 2013, 08:11:33 AM »

Quote
Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament on Corpus Christi is a magical experience
I dont believe Corpus Christi is celebrated....at least I've not heard about it.

Quote
Western Eucharistic hymns are also simply magificient
Oh yes. I absolutely love them. Is there alot of congregational singing in the ER? (I have yet to go to an ER Liturgy, so I have no idea).

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #67 on: November 07, 2013, 12:49:11 PM »

Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament on Corpus Christi is a magical experience. The practice of the Benediction itself may date from the 18th century, but it is a venerable practice.

Western Eucharistic hymns are also simply magificient.

+1
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #68 on: November 07, 2013, 10:31:11 PM »

Do Western rite parishes practice Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament?

It may depend, but we do it as an actual devotion only once, during Holy Week. When the altar is stripped bare, and all the icons and crosses have been veiled, the Body of Our Lord is solemnly carried to a shrine outside of the sanctuary, where the faithful "keep watch" throughout the night. It is easily my favorite part of the liturgical year. Especially visiting Our Lord after the beautiful, haunting service of Tenebrae.

Quote
Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament on Corpus Christi is a magical experience. The practice of the Benediction itself may date from the 18th century, but it is a venerable practice.

We do celebrate the Feast of Corpus Christi, but it usually isn't done in a manner that different from any other feast throughout the year. There isn't any special benediction aspect to it, in other words.

Quote
Western Eucharistic hymns are also simply magificient.

Agreed!
Logged
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquiring into Orthodoxy
Posts: 274



« Reply #69 on: November 07, 2013, 11:52:19 PM »

I just remembered another question. Which version of the Tridentine Mass is the Divine Liturgy of St. Gregory based on? Traditional Catholics seem to be split between the 1963 John XIII version and the 1911 Pius X version.
Logged

"To believe [the Paraclete] when you wish it, and then disbelieve him when you wish it, is to believe nobody but yourself." --St. Augustine, Contra Faustum XXXII.16
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #70 on: November 08, 2013, 09:46:53 AM »

I just remembered another question. Which version of the Tridentine Mass is the Divine Liturgy of St. Gregory based on? Traditional Catholics seem to be split between the 1963 John XIII version and the 1911 Pius X version.
All I know is that it is pre-Vatican 2.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #71 on: November 08, 2013, 12:45:06 PM »

Is there alot of congregational singing in the ER? (I have yet to go to an ER Liturgy, so I have no idea).

In here it's usually only something like one troparion, the creed and our father that are sung congregationally.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #72 on: November 08, 2013, 12:46:18 PM »

Is there alot of congregational singing in the ER? (I have yet to go to an ER Liturgy, so I have no idea).

In here it's usually only something like one troparion, the creed and our father that are sung congregationally.
Ah. Pretty much everything is congregational. It really makes me feel as if Im actually participating, and being involved with the liturgy instead of just sitting on the sidelines.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,470


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #73 on: November 08, 2013, 04:06:25 PM »

While you will very rarely witness it in the Church in which you inquiring, the Liturgy of St. James is the most commonly celebrated liturgy of the Syriac Orthodox Church,

here is a clip in mostly English from the Indian Syriacs in America, for instance
, except for the Syriac phrases

thanks for this, it is lovely, and great to be able to understand it
 Smiley
it is really similar to the british orthodox (within the coptic church) use of the liturgy of saint james, including the rattles.
(don't know what the church name is for the rattles)

does anyone have any links to western rite liturgy of saint james?
i would be very interested to see the similarities.
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #74 on: November 09, 2013, 05:50:53 AM »

Is there alot of congregational singing in the ER? (I have yet to go to an ER Liturgy, so I have no idea).

In here it's usually only something like one troparion, the creed and our father that are sung congregationally.
Ah. Pretty much everything is congregational. It really makes me feel as if Im actually participating, and being involved with the liturgy instead of just sitting on the sidelines.

PP

I don't mind the choir singing pretty much everything. It has never bothered me. I don't feel like passive as we stand, light candles, make prostrations and pray with the choir. etc.

You people should get rid of the pews. I attended a Tridentine mass few weeks ago and it felt extremey weird to attend a church with pews.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 05:53:28 AM by Alpo » Logged
Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #75 on: November 10, 2013, 05:02:12 AM »

Just a question, no valid liturgy in the three hundred and forty seven years before the birth of St. John Chrysostom?
Logged
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,102


« Reply #76 on: November 10, 2013, 05:46:55 AM »

Just a question, no valid liturgy in the three hundred and forty seven years before the birth of St. John Chrysostom?

How are we to understand this question? Did St. John Chrysostom author the liturgy when he was 1 year old? Huh
Logged

Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #77 on: November 10, 2013, 08:04:18 AM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite, it didn't exist in the first several centuries, I understand suspicion of changes, that is one of the reasons I converted from RC.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #78 on: November 10, 2013, 10:12:32 AM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite, it didn't exist in the first several centuries, I understand suspicion of changes, that is one of the reasons I converted from RC.

It should also be kept in mind that St. John (nor St. Basil before him) did not write the liturgy himself, but rather reformed (there's that nasty r-word!) the existing liturgy of his time. On St. Basil's reform:

“It is certain that St. Basil made a reformation of the Liturgy of his Church, and that the Byzantine service called after him represents his reformed Liturgy in its chief parts, although it has undergone further modification since his time. St. Basil himself speaks on several occasions of the changes he made in the services of Caesarea. He writes to the clergy of Neo-Caesarea in Pontus to complain of opposition against himself on account of the new way of singing psalms introduced by his authority (Ep. Basilii, cvii, Patr. Gr. XXXII, 763). St. Gregory Nazianzos (Nazianzen, d. 390) says Basil had reformed the order of prayers (euchon diataxis - Orat. xx, P.G., XXXV, 761). Gregory of Nyssa (died 395) compares his brother Basil with Samuel because he ‘carefully arranged the form of Service’ (Hierourgia, In laudem fr. Bas., P.G., XLVI, 808). Proklos (Proclus) of Constantinople (d. 446) writes, 'When the great Basil...saw the carelessness and degeneracy of men who feared the length of the Liturgy - not as if he thought it too long - he shortened its form, so as to remove the weariness of the clergy and assistants’ (De traditione divinae Missae, P.G., XLV, 849).”

On St. John's further reform:

“The next epoch in the history of the Byzantine Rite is the reform of St. John Chrysostom (d. 407)... The tradition of his Church says that during the time of his patriarchate he composed from the Basilian Liturgy a shorter form that is the one still in common use throughout the Orthodox Church. The same text of Proklos (Proclus) quoted above continues: ‘Not long afterwards our Father, John Chrysostom, zealous for the salvation of his flock as a shepherd should be, considering the carelessness of human nature, thoroughly uprooted every diabolical objection. He therefore left out a great part and shortened all forms lest anyone...stay away from this Apostolic and Divine Institution’, etc. He would, then, have treated St. Basil’s rite exactly as St. Basil treated the older rite of Caesarea... But it is also certain that the modern Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom has received considerable modifications and additions since his time.”

Source: New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia, Byzantine Rite.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,938


"My god is greater."


« Reply #79 on: November 10, 2013, 10:42:31 AM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.
Logged

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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #80 on: November 10, 2013, 11:59:22 AM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

I've seen it couple of times here. My particular favourite was when someone told WRO to "Man up and become Orthodox!" I don't remember who it was though.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,938


"My god is greater."


« Reply #81 on: November 10, 2013, 12:10:33 PM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

I've seen it couple of times here.

Has anyone actually claimed that the current Byzantine rites are the only ones that have ever been valid in the Orthodox Church?
Logged

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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #82 on: November 10, 2013, 12:16:02 PM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

I've seen it couple of times here.

Has anyone actually claimed that the current Byzantine rites are the only ones that have ever been valid in the Orthodox Church?

That's a bit different to Orthodoxy being defined by a particular rite. Most critics seem to think that while Western rite(s) used to be valid in some mythical long gone past they can't be valid today.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,938


"My god is greater."


« Reply #83 on: November 10, 2013, 12:46:01 PM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

I've seen it couple of times here.

Has anyone actually claimed that the current Byzantine rites are the only ones that have ever been valid in the Orthodox Church?

That's a bit different to Orthodoxy being defined by a particular rite. Most critics seem to think that while Western rite(s) used to be valid in some mythical long gone past they can't be valid today.

I'm specifically addressing Rdunbar's "if...then" line of reasoning which doesn't apply to any of the WR criticisms I've seen. Also, I think it's quite an exaggeration to say that "most critics" of WR don't think it is a valid liturgy.
Logged

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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #84 on: November 10, 2013, 02:31:54 PM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

I've seen it couple of times here. My particular favourite was when someone told WRO to "Man up and become Orthodox!" I don't remember who it was though.

It was either Devin (88Devin__) or "Peacemaker", IIRC.  "Man up and become Orthodox" is also a personal favourite of mine. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,416



WWW
« Reply #85 on: November 10, 2013, 03:21:10 PM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

I've seen it couple of times here. My particular favourite was when someone told WRO to "Man up and become Orthodox!" I don't remember who it was though.

It was either Devin (88Devin__) or "Peacemaker", IIRC.  "Man up and become Orthodox" is also a personal favourite of mine. 

It looks like the phrase was actually coined by ialmisry (at least, according to Google) when in a discussion with Antonis he condensed Antonis' anti-WR position to it's most quotable essence here http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,52431.msg961190.html#msg961190
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!
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #86 on: November 10, 2013, 03:35:42 PM »

Leave it to Isa.  Smiley

(This would make an interesting television show, IMO.)
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #87 on: November 10, 2013, 04:03:04 PM »

Leave it to Isa.  Smiley

(This would make an interesting television show, IMO.)

It would have a lot of maps.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,647



« Reply #88 on: November 10, 2013, 04:08:41 PM »

Leave it to Isa.  Smiley

(This would make an interesting television show, IMO.)

It would have a lot of maps.

Lonely Isa?
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #89 on: November 10, 2013, 04:27:35 PM »

Leave it to Isa.  Smiley

(This would make an interesting television show, IMO.)

It would have a lot of maps.

Lonely Isa?

I don't see how Isa could get lonely with all those maps.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 64


Khouri Al-Imwas


WWW
« Reply #90 on: November 10, 2013, 07:32:19 PM »

I've generally heard (for example, from talks by Fr. Andrew Damick) that Eucharistic Adoration (that is, the exposition of the Eucharist for private adoration outside the liturgy) is an un-Orthodox practice, as it separates the Eucharist from its proper context as something to be eaten, not a talisman.

And yet, Ware's The Orthodox Church, at least in some editions, doesn't say it's an "un-Orthodox" practice in the sense that there's something wrong with it, just that the way it's done in the West isn't an Eastern practice.

I'm wary of the new apologists for Orthodoxy who appear at times to see everything through an "East = Good, West = Bad" paradigm.  The West had to deal with numerous challenges to the doctrine of the Eucharist, and it's no surprise that Eucharistic devotion sprung out of that context, as a way of affirming the true faith regarding the Eucharist.  If the East never had this problem, good.  

But I doubt Fr Damick would agree that icon veneration is an un-Orthodox practice, as it separates iconography from its proper context as ecclesiastical adornment and catechism for the illiterate, not as "windows into heaven" through which veneration passes to the prototype (that's the same logic he applies to Eucharistic adoration).  Because icon veneration came under attack in certain regions in the East, the theology had to be expounded more thoroughly and devotion to icons increased.  In places where iconodulia was not called into question, their role is less pronounced and probably reflects "pre-controversy" levels of importance.  Where once it was called into question, now you have churches and cathedrals with icons on all walls, the ceiling, domes, on vessels, vestments, chandeliers, doors, bulletins, t-shirts, websites, kitschy bracelets, birthday cakes, just everywhere.  

In such a context, it's rather ignorant, IMO, to criticise Eucharistic adoration as un-Orthodox, unless the argument is that Byzantine = Orthodox.  And then, it's totally ignorant.    

A few things:  I did not say that venerating the Eucharist is not Orthodox.  The remarks I made were referring specifically to set-aside Eucharistic adoration chapels used by the RCC, in which the Eucharist is removed from the context of the liturgy and made into an isolated object of worship outside the liturgy.  There are even whole services and devotional prayers dedicated to the practice, and of course it is also carried in processions outside the mass.

Iconography doesn't function in the same way as the Eucharist for many reasons, not the least of which is that there have (as far as we know) always been portable icons.  Indeed, pretty much every icon that is claimed to have been painted by St. Luke is not painted on a wall but is portable.

In any event, I do not believe nor have ever believed that "Byzantine = Orthodox."
Logged

Author, "Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy" & "An Introduction to God" (both from Ancient Faith Publishing / Conciliar Press)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #91 on: November 10, 2013, 08:29:38 PM »

Fr Andrew,

Thanks for weighing in.  My remarks were directed toward another poster's representation of your own; forgive me if we lost something of your argument along the way.

The remarks I made were referring specifically to set-aside Eucharistic adoration chapels used by the RCC, in which the Eucharist is removed from the context of the liturgy and made into an isolated object of worship outside the liturgy.  There are even whole services and devotional prayers dedicated to the practice, and of course it is also carried in processions outside the mass.

You're right, and I agree that, from our perspective, divorcing the Eucharist from its liturgical context does justice to neither.  But I still can't help seeing in RC Eucharistic devotion the affirmation of a doctrine that has been repeatedly attacked in the West.  In this, I feel it bears a resemblance to the Eastern Orthodox cult of icons, a cult not practiced with nearly as much intensity in traditions unaffected by iconoclasm. 

Quote
Iconography doesn't function in the same way as the Eucharist for many reasons, not the least of which is that there have (as far as we know) always been portable icons.  Indeed, pretty much every icon that is claimed to have been painted by St. Luke is not painted on a wall but is portable.

I'm not sure what relevance portable icons has in this discussion.  Whether the icon is portable or not, the theology and praxis is the same.  Portable icons actually lend themselves more easily than murals on walls to the kinds of devotion we see RC's practice with the Eucharist: special shrines, prayer services (canons/akathists), feast days for particular icons, processions, etc.  What part of your argument am I missing? 

Quote
In any event, I do not believe nor have ever believed that "Byzantine = Orthodox."

Smiley
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #92 on: November 10, 2013, 10:36:19 PM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

Nope, the flavor of the comments on this site is that there there is no acceptable liturgy other than the liturgy of St John Chrysostom.
at least that is what I get. ALL liturgies we developed, the worship of God it the important aspect. IMO many posters tend to over analyze things instead of worrying about essentials.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,938


"My god is greater."


« Reply #93 on: November 11, 2013, 08:34:42 AM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

Nope, the flavor of the comments on this site is that there there is no acceptable liturgy other than the liturgy of St John Chrysostom.
at least that is what I get.

Then your reading comprehension could use some work.
Logged

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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #94 on: November 11, 2013, 09:00:31 AM »

No, my point was, that if Orthodoxy is defined by a particular rite,

No one says this, so there goes your point.

Nope, the flavor of the comments from a few posters, not at all representing this site is that there there is no acceptable liturgy other than the liturgy of St John Chrysostom.
at least that is what I get. ALL liturgies we developed, the worship of God it the important aspect. IMO many posters tend to over analyze things instead of worrying about essentials.
There ya go.

Thank you for weighing in Fr. Andrew. I so appreciate your podcasts. It helped me a great deal during my investigations into Orthodoxy, and still helps my family to this day.

PP
« Last Edit: November 11, 2013, 09:01:26 AM by primuspilus » Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,470


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #95 on: November 11, 2013, 10:39:14 AM »

this is an interesting thread.
can anyone tell me more about the western rite liturgy of saint james of jerusalem?

i would like to compare it with the british orthodox (oriental orthodox) one next time i visit.
that one is here:
http://britishorthodox.org/miscellaneous/the-divine-liturgy-of-saint-james/

i am an orthodox Christian who studies liturgies and church history in her spare time.
 Cool
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #96 on: November 11, 2013, 10:40:02 AM »

I didn't know you are a girl.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Hawkeye
Onomatodoxicologist
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: With a schismatic twist.
Jurisdiction: An Old Rite soglasie
Posts: 603


My great-grandmother, the elderly nun Verena


« Reply #97 on: November 11, 2013, 11:40:17 AM »

I didn't know you are a girl.

Your recent posts indicate that there are several other folk whose gender identities you don't quite know.

What revelations will come next?! Cheesy
Logged

mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,470


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #98 on: November 11, 2013, 03:52:51 PM »

my picture is saint matthias who i love a lot.
he was a man, so i understand the confusion!

however, my name (as i occasionally point out to increase the awareness of the lovely arabic language) means 'happy'
in the female gender. a happy man (egyptian dialect) would be 'mabsoot'.

also i like theology and history and dislike cuddly animals (my favourites are insects and arachnids), so people who favour
stereotypes might think i am a man (not when they see me!)
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #99 on: November 11, 2013, 04:40:13 PM »

my picture is saint matthias who i love a lot.
he was a man, so i understand the confusion!

Some apostles are very much emphasised, but others, like St Matthias or my own patron, get ignored by and large.  I always feel bad about that.  Good for you for doing your part to change this!
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,470


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #100 on: November 11, 2013, 05:11:38 PM »

i became closer to him just before joining the orthodox church, and later found out that the day of my chrismation was his feast in the eastern orthodox church!
on our calendar, we commemorate simeon the stylite that day (syrian), who is also very special to me.

when i chose my picture for the website, i hadn't realised ihad been chrismated on his feast day, so i was very happy to find this out.
 Smiley
this is the story of his martydom:
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/7_8.html#1

at one stage, he was preaching somewhere in africa and was captured, and saint andrew came to rescue him.
from an article i wrote:
Saint Andrew’s third missionary journey took him far into Africa, and he encountered another terrifying tribe of people who ate their visitors after torturing them in terrible ways, starting with gauging out their eyes.
Saint Matthias had gone there to preach and was imprisoned by this group.
By God’s grace, and through the faith, hope and love of Saint Andrew, he rescued his brother, sent him on his way to continue preaching, and stayed behind to preach to the tribe, convicting them of the power and love of God.

anyway, back to the topic:
can anyone tell me more about the western orthodox liturgy of saint james of jerusalem?
 Cool
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #101 on: November 12, 2013, 08:12:40 AM »

Quote
can anyone tell me more about the western orthodox liturgy of saint james of jerusalem?
I didn't know there was a western version of this.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #102 on: November 12, 2013, 11:30:27 AM »

Quote
can anyone tell me more about the western orthodox liturgy of saint james of jerusalem?
I didn't know there was a western version of this.

PP

Mabsoota, do you mean Western (Latin) or Western (Greek)?  I don't think there's a Latin version of the James Liturgy, but the Greek version looks a lot like what the British Orthodox use (except without the added Coptic elements).  In its basic structure, it is like our own Syriac version, but there are a number of ritual and textual differences. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,470


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #103 on: November 12, 2013, 04:21:19 PM »

someone earlier in the thread mentioned the liturgy of saint james and so i wondered if it was similar to 'ours'
(i am sort of a member of the british orthodox church as i go to several of their events, but i go more often to the main coptic church and fast with the main church. the british orthodox are on a revised calendar, so you can't be a member of both at the same time or your stomach gets confused).
happy start of advent fast to all british orthodox, finns and others on the new calendar!

i would like to know about the greek version if there isn't a latin one. ideally in an english translation as my greek only extends to 'agios o Theos' (holy God) and 'Christos anesti ek nekron' (Christ is risen from the dead) and a few other parts of the liturgy where our 'coptic' parts turn out to be actually greek!

the british orthodox version is here:
http://britishorthodox.org/miscellaneous/the-divine-liturgy-of-saint-james/

the tunes are great, unfortunately they are not available online (as far as i know).
they sound like european popular music of the 14th - 16th centuries, but are actually mostly written much later.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #104 on: November 12, 2013, 04:29:54 PM »

i would like to know about the greek version if there isn't a latin one. ideally in an english translation as my greek only extends to 'agios o Theos' (holy God) and 'Christos anesti ek nekron' (Christ is risen from the dead) and a few other parts of the liturgy where our 'coptic' parts turn out to be actually greek!

the british orthodox version is here:
http://britishorthodox.org/miscellaneous/the-divine-liturgy-of-saint-james/

Greek St James, in English
Syriac St James, in English (Liturgy of the Faithful)

Mabsoota, do you know if the British Orthodox Liturgy has ever been recorded and put online?  I'd like to see it, but I can't afford airfare.  Smiley
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,102


« Reply #105 on: November 12, 2013, 04:54:10 PM »

I didn't know you are a girl.

Well, joyfulness is, strictly speaking, feminine in Arabic. Wink
Logged

mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,470


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #106 on: November 12, 2013, 04:59:26 PM »

thanks, brother, that is what i was looking for  Smiley
may God reward you in His kingdom.

for now you will have to save up for the airfare, as they don't want people to sit at home enjoying the liturgy online,
but rather they want people to come to their nearest orthodox church and experience the divine liturgy.

orthodox Christianity can't be lived on line through virtual friends (i apologise if this comes as a terrible shock to anyone here...)
 Wink
and for most people whose nearest church is less than 50 miles (75km) away, this will encourage them to go to church. for the others, there are already very many orthodox liturgies recorded.

but maybe i'll ask them to record one or two songs or chants so people can get a taste of what it is like.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #107 on: November 13, 2013, 07:38:22 PM »

for now you will have to save up for the airfare, as they don't want people to sit at home enjoying the liturgy online,
but rather they want people to come to their nearest orthodox church and experience the divine liturgy.

But I already do that!  Can't you tell them I'm a geek?  Tongue
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
asdamick
Doctrine matters.
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 64


Khouri Al-Imwas


WWW
« Reply #108 on: November 14, 2013, 02:59:20 PM »

Quote
Iconography doesn't function in the same way as the Eucharist for many reasons, not the least of which is that there have (as far as we know) always been portable icons.  Indeed, pretty much every icon that is claimed to have been painted by St. Luke is not painted on a wall but is portable.

I'm not sure what relevance portable icons has in this discussion.  Whether the icon is portable or not, the theology and praxis is the same.  Portable icons actually lend themselves more easily than murals on walls to the kinds of devotion we see RC's practice with the Eucharist: special shrines, prayer services (canons/akathists), feast days for particular icons, processions, etc.  What part of your argument am I missing?  

I was responding directly to the assertion above that icon veneration "separates iconography from its proper context as ecclesiastical adornment."  That is, I was observing that the very first Christian icons themselves wouldn't have fit into the context of ecclesiastical adornment, so it doesn't make much sense to limit them in that way.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2013, 02:59:49 PM by asdamick » Logged

Author, "Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy" & "An Introduction to God" (both from Ancient Faith Publishing / Conciliar Press)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #109 on: November 14, 2013, 03:32:00 PM »

That is, I was observing that the very first Christian icons themselves wouldn't have fit into the context of ecclesiastical adornment, so it doesn't make much sense to limit them in that way.

ISTM that you might be limiting "ecclesiastical adornment" to icons painted on walls, and that, too, makes little sense to me.  Portable icons, vestments, altar coverings, etc. all count as "ecclesiastical adornment", at least in the way I was using the term.  They may have other levels of importance as well, but they are at least adornment. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,470


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #110 on: November 16, 2013, 06:57:10 PM »

but maybe i'll ask them to record one or two songs or chants so people can get a taste of what it is like.

ok, don't hold your breath, but we may get some recordings done in the next month or two.
it will not be a full liturgy.
i will post a link to them when they are out, or you can keep checking http://britishorthodox.org
 Smiley
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #111 on: November 17, 2013, 12:22:51 AM »

Breathing!
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,938


"My god is greater."


« Reply #112 on: November 20, 2013, 09:50:32 AM »

Just came across a video of a WR church singing "A Mighty Fortress is Our God". What the heck? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBLTP4ojITs
Logged

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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #113 on: November 20, 2013, 12:27:47 PM »

Just came across a video of a WR church singing "A Mighty Fortress is Our God". What the heck? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBLTP4ojITs

What the heck what?
Logged
asdamick
Doctrine matters.
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 64


Khouri Al-Imwas


WWW
« Reply #114 on: November 20, 2013, 02:43:19 PM »

That is, I was observing that the very first Christian icons themselves wouldn't have fit into the context of ecclesiastical adornment, so it doesn't make much sense to limit them in that way.

ISTM that you might be limiting "ecclesiastical adornment" to icons painted on walls, and that, too, makes little sense to me.  Portable icons, vestments, altar coverings, etc. all count as "ecclesiastical adornment", at least in the way I was using the term.  They may have other levels of importance as well, but they are at least adornment.  

Well, we seem to be talking past one another, because it doesn't make sense to me that venerating icons removes them from anything at all.  I also don't see what warrant there is for defining icons as properly limited to "ecclesiastical adornment" in the same sense that the Eucharist is properly for the purpose of communion.  I don't see how venerating icons is analogous to isolated Eucharistic worship as per adoration chapels, processions, etc.

So perhaps that could be explained further.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2013, 02:43:46 PM by asdamick » Logged

Author, "Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy" & "An Introduction to God" (both from Ancient Faith Publishing / Conciliar Press)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #115 on: December 06, 2013, 05:29:56 PM »

So perhaps that could be explained further.

Sure, Father.

Quite simply, I've never come across any evidence for iconography ever having been other than "art" or "adornment" when it first shows up in our tradition.  That people may have spontaneously developed forms of devotion with which to venerate icons, or that this got ramped up and defined in the aftermath of iconoclasm, doesn't mean that the first icon painters consciously painted icons as objects for the devotion of the faithful (I don't think St Luke had II Nicaea's doctrinal definitions in mind when painting icons, even if he wouldn't disagree with it).  I would be happy to be proven wrong on this. 

Anyway, if they started as art and gradually came to be understood as it is today in Eastern Orthodoxy due to the challenge of iconoclasm, I don't think it's unreasonable to posit a similar development in the West surrounding the Eucharist, which was the subject of various heresies.  Originally, the Eucharist may well have been understood in the West as we understand it, but in response to various challenges, devotions arose in order to support and defend the orthodox teaching. 

From where I stand (OO of Syriac tradition), neither the EO devotion to icons nor the Western devotion to the Eucharist is "the ancient practice".  We affirm iconography, but devotion is much less defined and "required".  Similarly, we have no extra-liturgical devotion to the Eucharist.  These were never challenged among us, and so we maintained the same practice we always have.  But if these practices developed in places where the orthodox faith was endangered as a way of protecting it, I don't see it as a big deal.

I'm not sure how much more simply I can explain myself.  Forgive me for suggesting that this...

Quote
...because it doesn't make sense to me that venerating icons removes them from anything at all.  I also don't see what warrant there is for defining icons as properly limited to "ecclesiastical adornment" in the same sense that the Eucharist is properly for the purpose of communion.  I don't see how venerating icons is analogous to isolated Eucharistic worship as per adoration chapels, processions, etc.

...may have more to do with how, as an EO Christian, you take iconography and icon veneration as it is practiced in the EO Church for granted as part of the apostolic faith.  It's not quite what it once was, even if the later development is consistent with its earlier manifestations.   
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
asdamick
Doctrine matters.
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 64


Khouri Al-Imwas


WWW
« Reply #116 on: December 06, 2013, 05:53:29 PM »

Forgive me for suggesting that this...

Quote
...because it doesn't make sense to me that venerating icons removes them from anything at all.  I also don't see what warrant there is for defining icons as properly limited to "ecclesiastical adornment" in the same sense that the Eucharist is properly for the purpose of communion.  I don't see how venerating icons is analogous to isolated Eucharistic worship as per adoration chapels, processions, etc.

...may have more to do with how, as an EO Christian, you take iconography and icon veneration as it is practiced in the EO Church for granted as part of the apostolic faith.  It's not quite what it once was, even if the later development is consistent with its earlier manifestations.   

Even if everything you say is true, the analogy doesn't hold.  Why?  Because venerating an icon doesn't prevent it from being used as adornment in churches, etc., but removing the Eucharist from the liturgy to make it the subject of adoration absolutely prevents one from actually eating it.  That is, in the latter case, the devotee must say "Don't eat it.  Bow down before it instead."  But in the former, there is no analogous "Do not put icons on walls.  Venerate them instead."

That's why I don't think the analogy really holds.
Logged

Author, "Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy" & "An Introduction to God" (both from Ancient Faith Publishing / Conciliar Press)
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,986


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #117 on: December 06, 2013, 05:56:43 PM »

Forgive me for suggesting that this...

Quote
...because it doesn't make sense to me that venerating icons removes them from anything at all.  I also don't see what warrant there is for defining icons as properly limited to "ecclesiastical adornment" in the same sense that the Eucharist is properly for the purpose of communion.  I don't see how venerating icons is analogous to isolated Eucharistic worship as per adoration chapels, processions, etc.

...may have more to do with how, as an EO Christian, you take iconography and icon veneration as it is practiced in the EO Church for granted as part of the apostolic faith.  It's not quite what it once was, even if the later development is consistent with its earlier manifestations.    

Even if everything you say is true, the analogy doesn't hold.  Why?  Because venerating an icon doesn't prevent it from being used as adornment in churches, etc., but removing the Eucharist from the liturgy to make it the subject of adoration absolutely prevents one from actually eating it.  That is, in the latter case, the devotee must say "Don't eat it.  Bow down before it instead."  But in the former, there is no analogous "Do not put icons on walls.  Venerate them instead."

That's why I don't think the analogy really holds.

Father, is it therefore appropriate for icons be used to decorate t-shirts and other non-liturgical apparel?

Perhaps, more importantly, did the Early Christians use icons to embellish their non-liturgical apparel?

I am asking these questions to see how far we can separate veneration from icons.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2013, 05:58:20 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
alexpetros
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 142


Go sábhála Dia Éire.


WWW
« Reply #118 on: December 06, 2013, 06:30:36 PM »

Because venerating an icon doesn't prevent it from being used as adornment in churches, etc., but removing the Eucharist from the liturgy to make it the subject of adoration absolutely prevents one from actually eating it.  That is, in the latter case, the devotee must say "Don't eat it.  Bow down before it instead."  But in the former, there is no analogous "Do not put icons on walls.  Venerate them instead."

That's why I don't think the analogy really holds.

Actually, not true. The priest still has to eat the host within a week or month (depending on parish) and supply a new host to venerate.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,537


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #119 on: December 06, 2013, 08:49:32 PM »

Because venerating an icon doesn't prevent it from being used as adornment in churches, etc., but removing the Eucharist from the liturgy to make it the subject of adoration absolutely prevents one from actually eating it.  That is, in the latter case, the devotee must say "Don't eat it.  Bow down before it instead."  But in the former, there is no analogous "Do not put icons on walls.  Venerate them instead."

That's why I don't think the analogy really holds.

Actually, not true. The priest still has to eat the host within a week or month (depending on parish) and supply a new host to venerate.

Basically, this. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #120 on: December 06, 2013, 09:18:15 PM »

St. Gregory IS the Tridentine rite.

Albeit altered. Has a Byzantine epiclesis and no filioque (not that I support the filioque to begin with).

Most studies of the history of the Western Rite claim that there was an Epiklesis in the original Western Rite. Significantly, in  Novo Ordo Roman Catholic Mass, every Canon of the Mass, but the Roman Canon has an Epiklesis.
I may be wrong, but I heard that the Patriarch wanted the pre-Communion prayer from the Eastern Liturgy inserted to insure that it is clear that the Western Rite Orthodox must actually believe that the bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ, not just a symbol or a kind of spiritual presence as some Anglican believe.
Fr. John W. Morris
« Last Edit: December 06, 2013, 09:19:28 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #121 on: December 09, 2013, 12:50:01 PM »

Quote
I may be wrong, but I heard that the Patriarch wanted the pre-Communion prayer from the Eastern Liturgy inserted to insure that it is clear that the Western Rite Orthodox must actually believe that the bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ, not just a symbol or a kind of spiritual presence as some Anglican believe
I was under the impression that it was Met. Phillip that ordered this.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #122 on: December 09, 2013, 02:17:08 PM »

Quote
I may be wrong, but I heard that the Patriarch wanted the pre-Communion prayer from the Eastern Liturgy inserted to insure that it is clear that the Western Rite Orthodox must actually believe that the bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ, not just a symbol or a kind of spiritual presence as some Anglican believe
I was under the impression that it was Met. Phillip that ordered this.

PP

I heard that it was the Patriarch. One problem with the Book of Common Prayer is that it was deliberately written in a way that can be interpreted several different ways. I heard that His Beatitude wanted to make it clear that we believe that the bread and wine are actually transformed by the Holy Spirit into the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

Fr. John W.  Morris
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #123 on: December 10, 2013, 06:25:45 PM »

Quote
I may be wrong, but I heard that the Patriarch wanted the pre-Communion prayer from the Eastern Liturgy inserted to insure that it is clear that the Western Rite Orthodox must actually believe that the bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ, not just a symbol or a kind of spiritual presence as some Anglican believe
I was under the impression that it was Met. Phillip that ordered this.

PP

I heard that it was the Patriarch. One problem with the Book of Common Prayer is that it was deliberately written in a way that can be interpreted several different ways. I heard that His Beatitude wanted to make it clear that we believe that the bread and wine are actually transformed by the Holy Spirit into the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

Fr. John W.  Morris

The prayers were added by the Patriarch, and are present in both of the WR liturgies, though neither really needed them. The DL of St. Tikhon in particular has some of the most explicit prayers in any liturgy. While the prayers do indeed serve to further highlight that doctrine, they were also (and maybe primarily?) added so that ER visitors had something familiar to pray when attending WR masses.
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #124 on: December 10, 2013, 09:02:46 PM »

Quote
I may be wrong, but I heard that the Patriarch wanted the pre-Communion prayer from the Eastern Liturgy inserted to insure that it is clear that the Western Rite Orthodox must actually believe that the bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ, not just a symbol or a kind of spiritual presence as some Anglican believe
I was under the impression that it was Met. Phillip that ordered this.

PP

I heard that it was the Patriarch. One problem with the Book of Common Prayer is that it was deliberately written in a way that can be interpreted several different ways. I heard that His Beatitude wanted to make it clear that we believe that the bread and wine are actually transformed by the Holy Spirit into the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

Fr. John W.  Morris

The prayers were added by the Patriarch, and are present in both of the WR liturgies, though neither really needed them. The DL of St. Tikhon in particular has some of the most explicit prayers in any liturgy. While the prayers do indeed serve to further highlight that doctrine, they were also (and maybe primarily?) added so that ER visitors had something familiar to pray when attending WR masses.

I am sorry to disagree with you, but the Anglican prayers can be used by someone who believes as we do that the bread and wine are actually changed into the Body and  Blood of Christ as well as someone who believes that the bread and wine only symbolize the Body and Blood of Christ and that Christ is only spiritually present. Since most members of Western Rite are converts from Anglicanism, we have to be careful that they understand exactly what they are expected to believe as Orthodox Christians.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
dcointin
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 61


« Reply #125 on: December 11, 2013, 11:47:03 AM »

My own parish used the Liturgy of St. Tikhon before changing to the Liturgy of St. Gregory.  I was uncomfortable with some of the language used since I know the understanding of Cramner, a Zwinglian in his Eucharistic belief, when he composed it.  For example, "Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith, with thanksgiving."
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,256

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #126 on: December 11, 2013, 11:47:37 PM »

The entire Mass must be taken into context, though. Many prayers by themselves could have all sorts of things "read into" them, including those from the Byzantine liturgy. Here are a few explicit examples from the Mass of St. Tikhon:

And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us; and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to send down thy holy Spirit upon these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be changed into the Body and Blood of thy most dearly beloved Son. Grant that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood.

...humbly beseeching thee, that we, and all others who shall be partakers of this Holy Communion, may worthily receive the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son Jesus Christ, be filled with thy grace and heavenly benediction, and made one body with him, that he may dwell in us, and we in him.

...deliver me by thy most sacred Body and Blood from all mine iniquities.

Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood in these Holy Mysteries, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.

Almighty and ever living God, we most heartily thank thee, for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us who have duly received these holy mysteries, with the spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ; and dost assure us thereby of thy favor and goodness towards us; and that we are very members incorporate in the mystical body of thy Son, which is the blessed company of all faithful people; and are also heirs through hope of thy everlasting kingdom.


These prayers are just as explicit as, "And I believe that this is truly thine own immaculate Body, and that this is truly thine own precious Blood." I also love their portrayal of the intimate connection between the holy mysteries and theosis.
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #127 on: December 12, 2013, 12:02:13 AM »

The entire Mass must be taken into context, though. Many prayers by themselves could have all sorts of things "read into" them, including those from the Byzantine liturgy. Here are a few explicit examples from the Mass of St. Tikhon:

And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us; and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to send down thy holy Spirit upon these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be changed into the Body and Blood of thy most dearly beloved Son. Grant that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood.

...humbly beseeching thee, that we, and all others who shall be partakers of this Holy Communion, may worthily receive the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son Jesus Christ, be filled with thy grace and heavenly benediction, and made one body with him, that he may dwell in us, and we in him.

...deliver me by thy most sacred Body and Blood from all mine iniquities.

Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood in these Holy Mysteries, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.

Almighty and ever living God, we most heartily thank thee, for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us who have duly received these holy mysteries, with the spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ; and dost assure us thereby of thy favor and goodness towards us; and that we are very members incorporate in the mystical body of thy Son, which is the blessed company of all faithful people; and are also heirs through hope of thy everlasting kingdom.


These prayers are just as explicit as, "And I believe that this is truly thine own immaculate Body, and that this is truly thine own precious Blood." I also love their portrayal of the intimate connection between the holy mysteries and theosis.

The Epiklesis is specific, but it was added. There are many Anglicans who say the other prayers and vehemently deny that the bread and wine are changed into the actual Body and Blood of Christ, as does one of the 39 Articles of Anglican doctrine. In fact outright Calvinism is growing among continuing Anglicans. Therefore, it is important that the Western Rite Orthodox version of Anglican services be as explicit as possible and emphasize the correct Orthodox doctrine that there the bread and wine are really transformed into the real Body and Blood of Christ. 

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #128 on: December 12, 2013, 12:05:54 AM »

The entire Mass must be taken into context, though. Many prayers by themselves could have all sorts of things "read into" them, including those from the Byzantine liturgy. Here are a few explicit examples from the Mass of St. Tikhon:

And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us; and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to send down thy holy Spirit upon these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be changed into the Body and Blood of thy most dearly beloved Son. Grant that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood.

...humbly beseeching thee, that we, and all others who shall be partakers of this Holy Communion, may worthily receive the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son Jesus Christ, be filled with thy grace and heavenly benediction, and made one body with him, that he may dwell in us, and we in him.

...deliver me by thy most sacred Body and Blood from all mine iniquities.

Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood in these Holy Mysteries, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.

Almighty and ever living God, we most heartily thank thee, for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us who have duly received these holy mysteries, with the spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ; and dost assure us thereby of thy favor and goodness towards us; and that we are very members incorporate in the mystical body of thy Son, which is the blessed company of all faithful people; and are also heirs through hope of thy everlasting kingdom.


These prayers are just as explicit as, "And I believe that this is truly thine own immaculate Body, and that this is truly thine own precious Blood." I also love their portrayal of the intimate connection between the holy mysteries and theosis.

The Epiklesis is specific, but it was added. There are many Anglicans who say the other prayers and vehemently deny that the bread and wine are changed into the actual Body and Blood of Christ, as does one of the 39 Articles of Anglican doctrine. In fact outright Calvinism is growing among continuing Anglicans. Therefore, it is important that the Western Rite Orthodox version of Anglican services be as explicit as possible and emphasize the correct Orthodox doctrine that there the bread and wine are really transformed into the real Body and Blood of Christ. 
Besides the Byzantine Prayer "I believe..." is  beautiful addition to the Western Rite. Throughout history Western and Eastern Rites have borrow from each other, the chant, "Glory be to God..." in the Western Mass was taken from Byzantine Rite Matins.
Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
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 0.356 seconds with 156 queries.