Confused About the Rites

[primuspilus]

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.

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

[ilyazhito]

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.

[Christopher McAvoy]

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...

[Regnare]

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?

[primuspilus]

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.

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

[Sleeper]

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.

[Mor Ephrem]

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

What is it?

[Regnare]

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?

[Sleeper]

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).

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.

[Regnare]

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).

[Alpo]

(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.

[Regnare]

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?

[Mor Ephrem]

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.

[Mor Ephrem]

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.    

[sheenj]

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?

[primuspilus]

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

[Mor Ephrem]

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.  

[Regnare]

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.

[Alpo]

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.

[primuspilus]

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

[Jules_Grant]

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.

[primuspilus]

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.

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

[Mor Ephrem]

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

[Sleeper]

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.

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.

Western Eucharistic hymns are also simply magificient.

Agreed!

[Regnare]

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.

[primuspilus]

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

[Alpo]

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.

[primuspilus]

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

[mabsoota]

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
 
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.

[Alpo]

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.

[Rdunbar123]

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

[dzheremi]

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?

[Rdunbar123]

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.

[Sleeper]

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.

[Iconodule]

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

No one says this, so there goes your point.

[Alpo]

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.

[Iconodule]

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?

[Alpo]

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.

[Iconodule]

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.

[Mor Ephrem]

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. 

[FormerReformer]

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

[Mor Ephrem]

Leave it to Isa. 

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

[Shanghaiski]

Leave it to Isa. 

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

It would have a lot of maps.

[Alpo]

Leave it to Isa. 

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

It would have a lot of maps.

Lonely Isa?

[Shanghaiski]

Leave it to Isa. 

(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.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Liturgy > Western Rite Discussion (Moderator: arimethea) > Topic: Confused About the Rites