OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 04:43:30 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 4 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: WR Orthodox, a Rite or More?  (Read 4312 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
dcointin
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 61


« on: December 11, 2013, 11:27:42 AM »

I would like to hear everyones thoughts on the nature of Western Rite Orthodoxy.  My own parish priest seems to view the WR as a liturgical rite alone.  The teaching, preaching, catechesis, etc. is all drawn from standard (i.e. eastern) sources.  We also encorporate some Byzantine elements into the liturgy and prayers as well.  It seems to me however that the WR should embrace all of our western patrimony as far as is possible.  I suppose I see the analogy for us more in the example of the Eastern Catholic Churches.  Has there been any clarification on this subject?  Are we a liturgical rite alone or more than that?
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2013, 11:31:22 AM »

Could you explain what you mean?

At your parish, for example, is there special veneration for the Western Orthodox saints? Do they study their way of life and writings?
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.
lovesupreme
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,139


This is where I choose to tread


« Reply #2 on: December 11, 2013, 12:51:21 PM »

I believe the OP is asking if the Western Rite can be regarded as Eastern Orthodoxy with Western decoration, or as a strictly Western expression of Orthodoxy, independent of (but, of course, not forsaking) the East. Of course, being that Christianity is, in my view, an "Eastern" religion, one would be hard pressed to adopt a strictly Western approach to Orthodoxy.
Logged

I am prone to bouts of sarcasm. Please forgive me if my posts have offended you.
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #3 on: December 11, 2013, 01:06:36 PM »

My own parish priest seems to view the WR as a liturgical rite alone.

IMO a good approach. WRO should draw from Eastern sources and ERO should draw from Western sources. The teaching of Church is neither Western nor Eastern but Catholic. I like how bishop Jerome put it:

Quote from: Bishop Jerome of Manhattan
In other words, to be Orthodox means to be in union with the whole Orthodox Church, and to accept all of its heritage.
Logged

Nephi
Monster Tamer
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Byzantine
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,735



« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2013, 01:17:03 PM »

I believe the OP is asking if the Western Rite can be regarded as Eastern Orthodoxy with Western decoration, or as a strictly Western expression of Orthodoxy, independent of (but, of course, not forsaking) the East.

I think the OP is asking something other than that, rather if the WR is to embrace Latin (Western) patrimony in its entirety. Similar to their thread on Western devotions/sacramentals.
Logged
dcointin
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 61


« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2013, 01:30:30 PM »

I believe the OP is asking if the Western Rite can be regarded as Eastern Orthodoxy with Western decoration, or as a strictly Western expression of Orthodoxy, independent of (but, of course, not forsaking) the East.

I think the OP is asking something other than that, rather if the WR is to embrace Latin (Western) patrimony in its entirety. Similar to their thread on Western devotions/sacramentals.

Yes, that's exactly right.  I realize that it is impossible to make firm divisions between eastern and western Christianity, nor would it be desireable to do so, since the Church is catholic.  I do think however that embracing traditional western devotions, theological terminology, prayers, etc. is a good thing for us in the Western Rite.  My impression is increasingly that we are eastern in every way but our liturgy, and even that with Byzantine influences.
Logged
WPM
Revolutionary Writer
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,734



« Reply #6 on: December 11, 2013, 01:43:00 PM »

Western style as compared to the Eastern Liturgy.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2013, 01:43:32 PM by WPM » Logged
Nephi
Monster Tamer
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Byzantine
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,735



« Reply #7 on: December 11, 2013, 02:27:48 PM »

My impression is increasingly that we are eastern in every way but our liturgy, and even that with Byzantine influences.

This is where it needs to be taken carefully, so as to really analyze the theological assumptions being made and their harmony with universal pre/post-schism patrimony (throughout the Church, not just Latin or Byzantine). If they are in fact harmonious, then great. If not, then it's not just a case of Byzantine (or otherwise) elitism, but a real statement of the particular aspect's Orthodoxy. When it's not considered carefully, or rejected across-the-board like those types mentioned in the Sacramentals thread, then it can often amount to Byzantine (or otherwise) elitism.

My point is this: not accepting everything the West has done is not the same thing as Byzantine (or otherwise) elitism or being anti-Western. There can be real criticisms with practices, etc. that developed that aren't just rooted in "ew, but it's Western."
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2013, 02:33:33 PM »

My impression is increasingly that we are eastern Orthodox in every way

Fixed. No buts or reservations needed.
Logged

Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

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



WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2013, 01:04:18 AM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 01:08:51 AM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2013, 04:42:07 PM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.


What on earth are you talking about? I mean no offense, but I'm not sure you know what "rite" means. For one, it is distinct from canons. And there is no such thing as "byzantine orthodoxy." There is only Orthodoxy. The faith. Singular. And we in the Western Rite firmly hold to it. And while I can only speak of life in the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate, it is more than just the Western liturgy. Our whole devotional life is rooted in the ancient, Orthodox, Western practice. Our liturgy is Western, but so are our fasting rule, Kalendar, and devotional traditions. Your experience seems to be an anomaly. That, or it is rooted in your confusion about what constitutes a rite.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2013, 04:53:02 PM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.

What you're looking for is a time machine. You're right that the WR is not very credible as an expression of the pre-schism Orthodox West, and nothing will be. 1000 years of being dead has that sort of effect. That said, I also find SCA antics very laughable but some people appear satisfied with them.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 05:06:34 PM by Iconodule » Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #12 on: December 18, 2013, 05:05:05 PM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.

What you're looking for is a time machine. You're right that the WR is not very credible as an expression of the pre-schism Orthodox West, and nothing will be. 1000 years of being dead has that sort of effect. That said, I also find SCR antics very laughable but some people appear satisfied with them.
SCR?

So, you don't believe in the resurrection?
Logged

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

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #13 on: December 18, 2013, 05:08:10 PM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.

What you're looking for is a time machine. You're right that the WR is not very credible as an expression of the pre-schism Orthodox West, and nothing will be. 1000 years of being dead has that sort of effect. That said, I also find SCR antics very laughable but some people appear satisfied with them.
SCR?

So, you don't believe in the resurrection?

Sorry, SCA.

Christ resurrected, and at the end of time, the rest of us will follow. None of that has anything to do with playing medieval dress-up.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #14 on: December 18, 2013, 05:22:23 PM »

I believe the OP is asking if the Western Rite can be regarded as Eastern Orthodoxy with Western decoration, or as a strictly Western expression of Orthodoxy, independent of (but, of course, not forsaking) the East.

I think the OP is asking something other than that, rather if the WR is to embrace Latin (Western) patrimony in its entirety. Similar to their thread on Western devotions/sacramentals.

Yes, that's exactly right.  I realize that it is impossible to make firm divisions between eastern and western Christianity, nor would it be desireable to do so, since the Church is catholic.  I do think however that embracing traditional western devotions, theological terminology, prayers, etc. is a good thing for us in the Western Rite.  My impression is increasingly that we are eastern in every way but our liturgy, and even that with Byzantine influences.
Depends on what devotions, theological terminology, prayers, etc.  The Angelus, for instance, is fine.  Novena's to the "Immaculate Heart of Mary in the Miraculous Medal," no.

How Western is the Kyrie when it was adopted from the East and kept in Greek?  Such examples can be multiplied.  In fact, the boast of Abp. St. Gregory of his own primacy over Constantinople comes from a letter to complaints of the Latin Sicilians that Rome imitated everything from Constantinople.  It's not new.

Conversely, the Nativity Fast comes in imitation of the Gallican Church.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #15 on: December 18, 2013, 05:25:02 PM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.

What you're looking for is a time machine. You're right that the WR is not very credible as an expression of the pre-schism Orthodox West, and nothing will be. 1000 years of being dead has that sort of effect. That said, I also find SCR antics very laughable but some people appear satisfied with them.
SCR?

So, you don't believe in the resurrection?

Sorry, SCA.
SCA?
Christ resurrected, and at the end of time, the rest of us will follow. None of that has anything to do with playing medieval dress-up.
You mean, like this?:
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 05:25:27 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #16 on: December 18, 2013, 05:36:02 PM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.

What you're looking for is a time machine. You're right that the WR is not very credible as an expression of the pre-schism Orthodox West, and nothing will be. 1000 years of being dead has that sort of effect. That said, I also find SCR antics very laughable but some people appear satisfied with them.
SCR?

So, you don't believe in the resurrection?

Sorry, SCA.
SCA?
Christ resurrected, and at the end of time, the rest of us will follow. None of that has anything to do with playing medieval dress-up.
You mean, like this?:

No archaeology was needed in the making of this image (well, except for the painstaking recreation of the cathedral down to the ugly frescoes). This is just a recent expression of a tradition that has been in continuous and unbroken, if not unchanging, use.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2013, 05:45:11 PM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.

What you're looking for is a time machine. You're right that the WR is not very credible as an expression of the pre-schism Orthodox West, and nothing will be. 1000 years of being dead has that sort of effect. That said, I also find SCR antics very laughable but some people appear satisfied with them.
SCR?

So, you don't believe in the resurrection?

Sorry, SCA.
SCA?
Christ resurrected, and at the end of time, the rest of us will follow. None of that has anything to do with playing medieval dress-up.
You mean, like this?:

No archaeology was needed in the making of this image (well, except for the painstaking recreation of the cathedral down to the ugly frescoes). This is just a recent expression of a tradition that has been in continuous and unbroken, if not unchanging, use.

Assuming, for the purposes of discussion, that the "archaeology" charge frequently leveled at the WR is accurate: So what? I mean, honestly, so what? What does that even mean? And how is it a bad thing?

I think the implied slander is that the WR was dead and thus can have no life in the modern era. I'd contest both parts of that. The Western Church undoubtedly veered into heresy, but it's only shown up in her liturgy fairly recently. It truly doesn't take much to correct. But even assuming the Western Rite was dead, due to the schism and heresy of the See of Rome, again so what? Revivifying what was dead is precisely what the Church does in the first place! The Church baptizes culture; it doesn't discard it wholesale. And that is what the Antiochians and Russians have done with Western liturgics and piety: they have given them new life. Glory to God! This is exactly what the Church has done with Jewish worship and and Greek philosophy; and it has all been to the glory of God and the edification of the faithful. But will you now deride the life-giving mercy of the Body of Christ out mere spite for 'the West'? How shameful. How sad. How unhopeful.

The truth is, the Western Rite is a preeminent example of the true catholicity of the Orthodox Faith. Thanks be to God and our bishops for this witness.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2013, 05:57:12 PM »


No archaeology was needed in the making of this image (well, except for the painstaking recreation of the cathedral down to the ugly frescoes). This is just a recent expression of a tradition that has been in continuous and unbroken, if not unchanging, use.
So King Josiah should have left the idols alone.


And the EP should have stayed out of Constantinople since 1204. And Antioch out of Antioch, and Jerusalem out of Jerusalem.


And, of course, that guy in the middle up there shouldn't be, his office being abolished and all in 1721.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 05:58:52 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2013, 06:02:22 PM »

I think the implied slander is that the WR was dead and thus can have no life in the modern era.

Well, maybe it can have life. Maybe it can work. Mr. McAvoy here, previously quite the WR enthusiast, seems pessimistic on that count. But maybe it can. Even so, why is it necessary?

Quote
The Church baptizes culture; it doesn't discard it wholesale.

Sure, the Church baptizes culture; that's not the same as exhuming it.

Quote
This is exactly what the Church has done with Jewish worship and and Greek philosophy; and it has all been to the glory of God and the edification of the faithful.

And Jewish worship and Greek philosophy were very much alive when they were adopted by the Church.

Quote
But will you now deride the life-giving mercy of the Body of Christ out mere spite for 'the West'?

I have no spite for 'the West.' I do have a fair amount of skepticism for attempts to recreate 'the West' of 1000 years ago.

Quote
The truth is, the Western Rite is a preeminent example of the true catholicity of the Orthodox Faith.

Maybe. If it really does help bring people to the Church who wouldn't come otherwise, it's alright with me. Sometimes it looks more like an expression of phyletism than Catholicity. Prime example is Mr. McAvoy here who left not only WR, but Orthodoxy altogether because WR wasn't working the way he wanted. That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.
Logged

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

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #20 on: December 18, 2013, 06:07:57 PM »


No archaeology was needed in the making of this image (well, except for the painstaking recreation of the cathedral down to the ugly frescoes). This is just a recent expression of a tradition that has been in continuous and unbroken, if not unchanging, use.
So King Josiah should have left the idols alone.


And the EP should have stayed out of Constantinople since 1204. And Antioch out of Antioch, and Jerusalem out of Jerusalem.


And, of course, that guy in the middle up there shouldn't be, his office being abolished and all in 1721.

When the EP was kicked out of Constantinople, did the entire church of Constantinople, including its rites, cease to exist?
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #21 on: December 18, 2013, 06:20:45 PM »

When the EP was kicked out of Constantinople, did the entire church of Constantinople, including its rites, cease to exist?
Not any more than when he submitted to the Vatican.
Logged

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

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #22 on: December 18, 2013, 06:33:18 PM »

When the EP was kicked out of Constantinople, did the entire church of Constantinople, including its rites, cease to exist?
Not any more than when he submitted to the Vatican.

Indeed. The movements and errors of one particular bishop or his see are not comparable to the 1000 year disappearance of an entire branch of the Church.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #23 on: December 18, 2013, 08:27:23 PM »

The prayers, rites, and saints of the Orthodox West belong to the Orthodox Church. They are for our sanctification.
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: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #24 on: December 18, 2013, 09:56:51 PM »

I'm a little late to this topic, but wanted to share my thoughts.

As far as the Antiochian Western Rite is concerned, we still abide by the succinct definition given by our first Vicar General, Fr. Paul Schneirla:

“Western Orthodoxy is the rediscovery of the Orthodoxy which withered in the west, and its revitalization, not through the transferral of eastern Patristic thought and devotional attitudes, but by the patient searching out, assembly and coordination of the supratemporal factors which created and characterized pre-schismatic occidental Christianity in its essence, and the careful selection of valid survivals in contemporary western thought and culture. These supratemporal factors entail not just a rediscovery of liturgical practices but an appreciation of western Patristic thought, incipient devotional attitudes, practices and spirituality as they have evolved over the course of centuries.”

I believe that is exactly what the OP said they were looking for. Antioch's approach has been to reintegrate the Western tradition with Orthodoxy, preserving that which remains consonant with our faith, and purging anything that does not. It's really quite simple. It ensures the rite remains authentically Western and it ensures our Orthodoxy. It was never about recreating the past.

This vision is articulated quite clearly in our most recent Ordo, published by the Vicariate. There is an entire section titled "Fidelity to the Rite" which states:

"Western Rite clergy are not to use the dress, vestments, rites, forms, or customs of the Byzantine Rite clergy at any time. Temporary exceptions are granted for us for specific services when serving with or for Byzantine clergy in a Byzantine service. An exception to the prohibition of Eastern customs shall be made for the cult of icons. In the use of icons in the church, home, and among the faithful, preference should be given to those of our Lord, the Theotokos (the Blessed Virgin Mary), major Catholic Saints and great feasts rather than to those of local Eastern Saints."

So, yes, when the guidelines provided for us are followed closely, the Western Rite is more than merely the liturgy, but is the entire traditional Western catholic way of life, purged and set within the living tradition of the undivided Church once again. Our calendar, vestments, music, chant, prayers, devotions, customs, gestures, fasting rules, are all thoroughly, wholly, and authentically Western.

That being said, if Orthodoxy is the Church, and I am a convert to that Church in a Western Rite parish, then I shouldn’t feel uneasy about being formed by the literature and theological teachings of modern Orthodox saints, fathers, and writers, even if they are Greek speakers or Russian speakers who worship according to the Constantinopolitan Rite. At some point we just have to move on and simply be Orthodox. Sometimes we're so self-conscious Smiley
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 09:58:29 PM by Sleeper » Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #25 on: December 18, 2013, 10:10:06 PM »

Quote
In the use of icons in the church, home, and among the faithful, preference should be given to those of our Lord, the Theotokos (the Blessed Virgin Mary), major Catholic Saints and great feasts rather than to those of local Eastern Saints."

IOW, "All saints are equal, but some are more equal than others by virtue of their provenance". Frankly, I find this idea very, very disturbing, to put it mildly.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #26 on: December 18, 2013, 10:17:14 PM »

IOW, "All saints are equal, but some are more equal than others by virtue of their provenance". Frankly, I find this idea very, very disturbing, to put it mildly.

No more disturbing than a Russian church that may have an icon of St John of Kronstadt but not an icon of St Nektarios of Aegina. 
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #27 on: December 18, 2013, 10:19:16 PM »

Quote
In the use of icons in the church, home, and among the faithful, preference should be given to those of our Lord, the Theotokos (the Blessed Virgin Mary), major Catholic Saints and great feasts rather than to those of local Eastern Saints."

IOW, "All saints are equal, but some are more equal than others by virtue of their provenance". Frankly, I find this idea very, very disturbing, to put it mildly.


I'm guessing you won't like these other subpoints then, either:

"Icons of Western Saints and themes based on good Romanesque models are encouraged. Statues shall conform to pre-schismatic usage in general."
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 10:22:17 PM by Sleeper » Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #28 on: December 18, 2013, 10:24:23 PM »

IOW, "All saints are equal, but some are more equal than others by virtue of their provenance". Frankly, I find this idea very, very disturbing, to put it mildly.

No more disturbing than a Russian church that may have an icon of St John of Kronstadt but not an icon of St Nektarios of Aegina. 

Or St. Patrick...

Why is it so surprising that our Western Orthodox forbears are looked upon with affection by Western Rite Christians? And why is it surprising that this is encouraged by adorning our churches and homes with their holy images?
Logged
Nephi
Monster Tamer
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Byzantine
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,735



« Reply #29 on: December 18, 2013, 10:37:35 PM »

"Icons of Western Saints and themes based on good Romanesque models are encouraged. Statues shall conform to pre-schismatic usage in general."

IMO, Romanesque icons are great, but I haven't seen any modern ones. Not sure if "usage" means how they're used or designed, but is there a thread where you've explained the differences between pre and post schism usage?
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 #30 on: December 18, 2013, 11:28:02 PM »

Quote
That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.

Likewise I can that also being "Eastern" is more important to most of the hierarchy than being Orthodox.
If we're wrong to have attachments to cultural expressions, than we're both equally wrong. The Ordination of multiple men to the priesthood within a single Mass is a legitimate ancient Western custom, yet it is disrepected and made now viewed as heterodox, but it is not. WHo is going to tell me that this was not the custom in the ancient Latin rite? It is Orthodox.

I think there is enough hypocrisy to go around here, I'll be pleased to share it with others.
I'm not proud of the history of prejudice, latinization (and lately protestantization) within the Roman Catholic Church either.
I continue to respect the Orthodox Church, but I recognize it has limitations amongst the people within it. I was naive about what those limitations actually are.

The man who helped give momentum to the ROCOR WR in 2010 and spur much of it's growth has also left it a few days ago, Anthony Bondi. Theres not only one disillusioned person out there.


Feast of All Saints, Sunday, November 17, 2013, Christ the King ROCOR WR Orthodox Church, Tullytown, PA:
"Fr." Anthony Bondi, Metropolitan Jonah (retired), Very Rev. Bishop Jerome (retired),  It is a potent picture of an interesting time and an interesting place. Well intentioned men, flawed as we are all are doing the best they can, rightly and wrongly, divided by politics.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 11:56:40 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
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #31 on: December 18, 2013, 11:36:06 PM »

Quote
That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.

Likewise I can that also being "Eastern" is more important to most of the hierarchy than being Orthodox.
The Ordination of multiple men to the priesthood within a single Mass is a legitimate ancient Western custom, yet it is disrepected and made now viewed as heterodox, but it is not. It is Orthodox.

I think there is enough hypocrisy to go around here, I'll be pleased to share it with others.

If you have a list of legitimate Western customs, canons, etc. that you feel are disregarded or viewed as heterodox within Eastern Orthodoxy, or if you would compile such a list, I for one would be interested in reading it.  At least some of those things, I'm sure, would also affect us (OO): for example, none of our Churches prohibits multiple men from being ordained to the same rank within a single Liturgy (in fact, it is often done, even for the ordination of bishops).   
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
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 #32 on: December 19, 2013, 12:00:13 AM »

Quote
That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.

Likewise I can that also being "Eastern" is more important to most of the hierarchy than being Orthodox.
The Ordination of multiple men to the priesthood within a single Mass is a legitimate ancient Western custom, yet it is disrepected and made now viewed as heterodox, but it is not. It is Orthodox.

I think there is enough hypocrisy to go around here, I'll be pleased to share it with others.

If you have a list of legitimate Western customs, canons, etc. that you feel are disregarded or viewed as heterodox within Eastern Orthodoxy, or if you would compile such a list, I for one would be interested in reading it.  At least some of those things, I'm sure, would also affect us (OO): for example, none of our Churches prohibits multiple men from being ordained to the same rank within a single Liturgy (in fact, it is often done, even for the ordination of bishops).   

Dr. Jack Turner is the one who researched this, he'd make a list faster than I could.
His articles are invaluable, though not without flaws (I dont agree with all of them, but generally most of it.)
Though I could make such a list, I currently lack the motivation, and am persueing other ways of spending my time.
Such a list would surely be of value to the official dialogues between RC, EO, OO churches.
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
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #33 on: December 19, 2013, 12:19:15 AM »

IOW, "All saints are equal, but some are more equal than others by virtue of their provenance". Frankly, I find this idea very, very disturbing, to put it mildly.

No more disturbing than a Russian church that may have an icon of St John of Kronstadt but not an icon of St Nektarios of Aegina. 

In the past, where people lived in relative isolation and cultural homogeneity, an emphasis on local saints was quite understandable. In many parts of the world, this is no longer the case. Indeed, the knowledge of the existence of saints, eastern and western, from traditionally Orthodox cultures and otherwise, has exploded in recent years. The St Herman's Calendar, produced by an American monastery of Serbian tradition, has incorporated the listing of increasing numbers of Orthodox saints from the pre-schism west for many years now. Fr Andrew Phillips in the UK has an extensive repository of material on the lives and hymnography of western saints. New churches and missions are being dedicated to western saints, including where I live. Yet in none of these situations has there been a sense of "we need to emphasize the western saints over the local eastern ones".

That is my objection to the above statement. Veneration of saints, at a liturgical and private level, should be both/and, not either/or. The latter is veering towards western phyletism, which is just as objectionable to the "eastern" variety.
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 #34 on: December 19, 2013, 12:23:12 AM »

I agree LBK.
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #35 on: December 19, 2013, 12:34:21 AM »

When the EP was kicked out of Constantinople, did the entire church of Constantinople, including its rites, cease to exist?
Not any more than when he submitted to the Vatican.

Indeed. The movements and errors of one particular bishop or his see are not comparable to the 1000 year disappearance of an entire branch of the Church.
Oh?  Where did they go?
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #36 on: December 19, 2013, 12:36:00 AM »

IOW, "All saints are equal, but some are more equal than others by virtue of their provenance". Frankly, I find this idea very, very disturbing, to put it mildly.

No more disturbing than a Russian church that may have an icon of St John of Kronstadt but not an icon of St Nektarios of Aegina. 

In the past, where people lived in relative isolation and cultural homogeneity, an emphasis on local saints was quite understandable. In many parts of the world, this is no longer the case. Indeed, the knowledge of the existence of saints, eastern and western, from traditionally Orthodox cultures and otherwise, has exploded in recent years. The St Herman's Calendar, produced by an American monastery of Serbian tradition, has incorporated the listing of increasing numbers of Orthodox saints from the pre-schism west for many years now. Fr Andrew Phillips in the UK has an extensive repository of material on the lives and hymnography of western saints. New churches and missions are being dedicated to western saints, including where I live. Yet in none of these situations has there been a sense of "we need to emphasize the western saints over the local eastern ones".

That is my objection to the above statement. Veneration of saints, at a liturgical and private level, should be both/and, not either/or. The latter is veering towards western phyletism, which is just as objectionable to the "eastern" variety.

They should venerate good Western saint like St. Anthony, St. George, St. Nicholas....
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #37 on: December 19, 2013, 12:45:07 AM »

Yet in none of these situations has there been a sense of "we need to emphasize the western saints over the local eastern ones".

That is my objection to the above statement. Veneration of saints, at a liturgical and private level, should be both/and, not either/or. The latter is veering towards western phyletism, which is just as objectionable to the "eastern" variety.

Phyletism is one of those bogeymen that gets pulled out from under the bed when it's useful to do so, but I really don't see its relevance here.  

It's no big deal for "Eastern Rite" Eastern Orthodoxy to incorporate Western saints into the calendar, have icons and services created for them, dedicate churches to their memory, etc.  It's not going to make things less Eastern because there is more stability in those communities.  If those things led to even the serious suggestion that Western liturgics or customs should be incorporated into normal practice, those things would be de-emphasised fairly quickly.  

On the other hand, WRO, really a minority within a minority and without as much of the stability of "Big Brother", needs to gain that stability which "regular" EO take for granted in part by hunkering down and resisting influences that, at this point in their history and development, will simply result in a "rite" that is neither here nor there.

In the past, where people lived in relative isolation and cultural homogeneity, an emphasis on local saints was quite understandable. In many parts of the world, this is no longer the case.
     

It is still very much the case.  Among EO in America, I think the Antiochians are probably the most "catholic" in terms of the saints they commemorate.  Everyone else seems to line up more or less according to the "relative isolation and cultural homogeneity" that would be less out of place in 15th century Rus than in 21st century New York.  I still remember going to an OCA parish on 6 October some years ago and learning with surprise that the commemoration of the glorification of St Innocent trumped the feast of the Apostle Thomas.  How does a non-primary feast of a Bishop trump the primary feast of an Apostle?  That's just as phyletistic as anything above.  And I have other examples.    
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #38 on: December 19, 2013, 12:53:55 AM »

Quote
I still remember going to an OCA parish on 6 October some years ago and learning with surprise that the commemoration of the glorification of St Innocent trumped the feast of the Apostle Thomas.  How does a non-primary feast of a Bishop trump the primary feast of an Apostle?

When that saint is the patron of the parish. In such cases, both saints are commemorated simultaneously, or the feast of the Apostle is translated to the day before or day after. A patronal feast, even of a lesser-ranked saint in rubrical terms, means the rank of feast is a full vigil with litia and polyeleos, and, if feasible, a Lesser Blessing of Water on the following morning before the DL.

(Whether that OCA church was dedicated to St Innocent, I don't know, of course.  Smiley )
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 12:54:49 AM by LBK » Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #39 on: December 19, 2013, 01:02:04 AM »

Aww, LBK!  It was a rhetorical question (I knew the rubric), but  Kiss all the same. 

FYI: the church was not dedicated to St Innocent. 
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #40 on: December 19, 2013, 01:07:58 AM »

Aww, LBK!  It was a rhetorical question (I knew the rubric), but  Kiss all the same. 

Sorry!  Grin There should be a "rhetorical question" smiley somewhere.  Wink


FYI: the church was not dedicated to St Innocent. 

Enlightener-saints are often given prominence over the usual listing in the Menaion in the regions and cultures they evangelized.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #41 on: December 19, 2013, 01:11:25 AM »

Enlightener-saints are often given prominence over the usual listing in the Menaion in the regions and cultures they evangelized.

I can understand that (even though we'd never let them trump an Apostle).  That said, if it can be justified based on "region" and "culture", I don't think it's substantially different from WRO emphasising Western saints. 
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #42 on: December 19, 2013, 01:16:58 AM »

Enlightener-saints are often given prominence over the usual listing in the Menaion in the regions and cultures they evangelized.

I can understand that (even though we'd never let them trump an Apostle).  That said, if it can be justified based on "region" and "culture", I don't think it's substantially different from WRO emphasising Western saints. 

Unfortunately, ISTM this emphasis still pushes the equation too far towards "either/or", rather than "both/and".

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 #43 on: December 19, 2013, 02:22:22 AM »

I'm happy that this forum has become a productive place to have these important discussions.
All the users who participated in this conversation have made interesting comments.

The ideas I had for the western rite orthodoxy, I believe are ahead of their time, perhaps less impractical presently.
Many of the ideas you all express in this section of the forum are probably ahead of their time.

I do not think that the western influence in the Orthodox Church is going to disappear or dimish. As it gradually increases, to the extent that it still exists the "western rite" community will continue to gain some interest, and especially if there is a unified jurisdiction, past mistakes will probably be corrected. I always strive to have more of the virtue of patience.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 02:27:11 AM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #44 on: December 19, 2013, 02:44:38 AM »

Enlightener-saints are often given prominence over the usual listing in the Menaion in the regions and cultures they evangelized.

I can understand that (even though we'd never let them trump an Apostle).  That said, if it can be justified based on "region" and "culture", I don't think it's substantially different from WRO emphasising Western saints.  

Unfortunately, ISTM this emphasis still pushes the equation too far towards "either/or", rather than "both/and".



Further to the above:

The "neglect" of the active commemoration of many western saints for centuries was as much to do with honest ignorance brought on by geographic separation and other such practical factors. Yet, in recent years, the non-WRO Church has made surprisingly good progress in redressing this, and through natural and reasonable effort, "organic", if you will. Communication is now unimaginably far-reaching than in past eras, and instantaneous, and so there is far more scope for the Church to broaden its pool of saints, and for Orthodox believers, cleric and layman alike, to be better informed of not only the existence of these "forgotten" saints, but also of their lives and contributions to the life of the Church.

By contrast, the WRO directive comes across as forced and artificial.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 02:45:21 AM by LBK » Logged
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,301



« Reply #45 on: December 19, 2013, 06:46:27 AM »

IOW, "All saints are equal, but some are more equal than others by virtue of their provenance". Frankly, I find this idea very, very disturbing, to put it mildly.

No more disturbing than a Russian church that may have an icon of St John of Kronstadt but not an icon of St Nektarios of Aegina. 
My parish is dedicated to St. Innocent of Alaska and we have icons of St. John and St. Nektarios. Wink

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,301



« Reply #46 on: December 19, 2013, 06:58:15 AM »

Obviously, my disassociation from Orthodoxy was largely because of the question asked in this thread.

My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone. Without the fullness of the actual western rite, the complete rite, canons etc, there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy, with only a part of it. Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.

A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make. Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again. It is a permanent inconsistency, it is neither "fish nor fowl".
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite.

The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved.
I understand there isnt much other option, as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches are the only two churches people think of when they think of consistently ancient pre-reformation christianity (novus ordo aside...). I admit that the intentions are very holy and noble, I admire the intentions of the western liturgy within Orthodoxy, but with this is comes also naivity and flawed perception

Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever.
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community.
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with.

Hokum. Pure hokum.

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #47 on: December 19, 2013, 08:51:15 AM »

Quote
My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone
I dont know what parish you attended, but a real WR parish will celebrate pre-schism western feasts (which we do), pre-schism western saints (which we do), and pre-schism fasting rules for the West (again, which we do). Sounds to me that parish you spent time in were Orthodox LARP'ers trying to be Roman Catholics.
Quote
Without the fullness of the actual western rite
We have it.
Quote
the complete rite
We have it.
Quote
canons et
We share the same canons...we're not Eastern Catholics after all.
Quote
there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy
The Church disagrees with you.
Quote
Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite by the byzantine = Orthodox crowd is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.
There ya go.
Quote
A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make
Since Orthodoxy does not equal Byzantine this is completely accurate.
Quote
Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again
Time and Time again what? Your sentence makes no sense. What theology expressed? We have the same exact theology. I hate to tell you, but a HUGE amount of Orthodox theology came from a *gasp* western source. Your sentence above shows me you know exactly nothing of the western rite, but are using Ortho-sounding filler words to make yourself sound far more knowledgeable than you actually are about this topic.

Quote
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite
Ah, so those who agree with you are educated, and those who don't arent? Well, lets go through the list of the uneducated who have ruled on the Orthodoxy of the Western Rite, shall we? St. Tikhon, the Holy Synod of Russia, Metropolitan Phillip, the Ecumenical Patriarch (the last 2), Patriarch Ignatius IV of blessed memory, Patriarch of Antioch John, the Holy Synod of Antioch, the Holy Synod of ROCOR (yes, they no longer are actively pursuing the WR, but they have always stipulated, and still do, that the WR is indeed totally Orthodox). On top of that, every single Orthodox parish in the world will receive Western Rite Orthdox..including Mt. Athos. So, yeah they're all very uneducated concerning this supposed Latin Rite.

Facts are facts, the Church has universally accepted the Western Rite, but you haven't. Therefore, you're right and they're all simply uneducated concerning the "Latin Rite".

Quote
The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved
Not at all. We use the western tradition and expression of the Orthodox faith. If Rome returned to Orthodoxy, do you REALLY think they'll use the Byzantine liturgy? Keep dreaming.

Quote
Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever
The Western Rite is growing all the time, champ.

Quote
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community
It exists already, but you just choose to disagree with the Church who says not only is it a viable rite,  but completely in every way Orthodox.

Quote
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with
If the Roman Catholic or Orthodox scholars you mentioned are experts in wine or computer science maybe, not so if they were scholars in Church history, liturgics, etc.

PP
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 08:55:54 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
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #48 on: December 19, 2013, 09:10:48 AM »

Enlightener-saints are often given prominence over the usual listing in the Menaion in the regions and cultures they evangelized.

I can understand that (even though we'd never let them trump an Apostle).  That said, if it can be justified based on "region" and "culture", I don't think it's substantially different from WRO emphasising Western saints.  

Unfortunately, ISTM this emphasis still pushes the equation too far towards "either/or", rather than "both/and".



Further to the above:

The "neglect" of the active commemoration of many western saints for centuries was as much to do with honest ignorance brought on by geographic separation and other such practical factors. Yet, in recent years, the non-WRO Church has made surprisingly good progress in redressing this, and through natural and reasonable effort, "organic", if you will. Communication is now unimaginably far-reaching than in past eras, and instantaneous, and so there is far more scope for the Church to broaden its pool of saints, and for Orthodox believers, cleric and layman alike, to be better informed of not only the existence of these "forgotten" saints, but also of their lives and contributions to the life of the Church.

By contrast, the WRO directive comes across as forced and artificial.

If "preference should be given" sounds "forced" then I really don't know what to tell you. It's the same thing with feasts. Why would we celebrate the feast of a "local" Eastern saint, over a local Western one? Wouldn't that just seem odd? It's not like we don't venerate those saints, we are just encouraged to develop a deeper devotion to those of our "own" organic history. If we don't do this consciously and intentionally, it would be very easy for it to wither away altogether, I'm afraid. Lines have to be drawn sometimes, for purely practical reasons. 

I really do think you're making a big deal out of nothing.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #49 on: December 19, 2013, 09:14:15 AM »

The directive is not only speaking of liturgical commemoration, but of personal, private devotion, including which saints should be preferred in one's choice of domestic iconography. You're trying to tell me this isn't forced or artificial?

EDIT: For those who came in late, this is the directive referred to:


This vision is articulated quite clearly in our most recent Ordo, published by the Vicariate. There is an entire section titled "Fidelity to the Rite" which states:

"Western Rite clergy are not to use the dress, vestments, rites, forms, or customs of the Byzantine Rite clergy at any time. Temporary exceptions are granted for us for specific services when serving with or for Byzantine clergy in a Byzantine service. An exception to the prohibition of Eastern customs shall be made for the cult of icons. In the use of icons in the church, home, and among the faithful, preference should be given to those of our Lord, the Theotokos (the Blessed Virgin Mary), major Catholic Saints and great feasts rather than to those of local Eastern Saints."


« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 09:25:12 AM by LBK » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #50 on: December 19, 2013, 09:16:22 AM »

The directive is not only speaking of liturgical commemoration, but of personal, private devotion, including which saints should be preferred in one's choice of domestic iconography. You're trying to tell me this isn't forced or artificial?
In all fairness, I gotta say, if it is forced, then I wouldn't want that either. LBK, even though it doesn't seem to be forcing folks into it, I can also say that I totally see why some folks would think it was forced.

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: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #51 on: December 19, 2013, 10:14:10 AM »

The directive is not only speaking of liturgical commemoration, but of personal, private devotion, including which saints should be preferred in one's choice of domestic iconography. You're trying to tell me this isn't forced or artificial?

Right, I wasn't speaking of merely liturgics. And yes, I'm trying to tell you this isn't forced or artificial. It's conscious and intentional for the purpose of preserving aspects of our Western heritage that, quite honestly, were it not for WR parishes/people, would likely disappear altogether. This is also why directives were given even as to the style of the images (Romanesque).

Expand it further; would you find it troublesome if there were explicit directives that "preference should be given" to pray the Divine Office according to the Benedictine Rule, rather than that of eastern monastics? Did you know that fasting rules are also exclusive of Byzantine ones? Even in our private lives? Or that we are strictly forbidden by our Metropolitan to pray the Hail Mary in the Byzantine manner, rather than the Ave Maria?

That we should "prefer" all things Western over Eastern should simply be a given. The only reason it was made explicit in regards to icons is because the "cult of icons" is the one exception to this rule, for us.

The directive says nothing about veneration of the many holy fathers, mothers, and saints of the "East" which we do, frequently and also quite intentionally. But merely the images that we choose to adorn our churches and homes.

I don't expect you to agree with this, but don't turn it into something that it isn't. The directive is not a commentary about Eastern saints or Eastern styles of iconography.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 10:14:43 AM by Sleeper » Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #52 on: December 19, 2013, 12:05:22 PM »

Enlightener-saints are often given prominence over the usual listing in the Menaion in the regions and cultures they evangelized.

I can understand that (even though we'd never let them trump an Apostle).  That said, if it can be justified based on "region" and "culture", I don't think it's substantially different from WRO emphasising Western saints. 

Unfortunately, ISTM this emphasis still pushes the equation too far towards "either/or", rather than "both/and".

LBK,

There is no rule that the East can only venerate Eastern saints and the West Western saints.  The saints belong to the Catholic Church (in the ialmisry sense: as opposed to Vatican City Smiley).  But that doesn't mean that each of the local Orthodox Churches celebrates all the saints from everywhere except in a very general sense. 

The calendar is only so big, and the calendars of local Churches reflect the saints which they hold in especial esteem, because the whole phenomenon of recognition of saints is proper to the local Church.  No one handed down a calendar from above: local Churches kept feasts for certain saints and events, and some of these gradually spread to the entire Church (e.g., Christmas, SS Peter and Paul) while others remained local.  It doesn't mean the saints aren't saints, but it does mean that the calendar of a local Church reflects the devotion of its people and is not simply some magisterial proclamation of who is and who is not a saint. 

That doesn't scandalise us when it comes to the East.  It doesn't scandalise anyone that the Typikon of the Church of Greece makes no mention of commemorating St Herman of Alaska in any way whatsoever on 13 December, while in America he might be more popular than SS Eustratios, Auxentios, Eugene, Mardarios, and Orestes of Sebaste.  And forget about St Herman, since his relation to America is special: the OCA calendar includes a handful of Slavic saints on the same date, which the Greeks omit entirely.  No one is bothered by that.  Why is it a problem if the WRO want to replicate the same in accordance with their own tradition? 

It's difficult for me to see how the real problem is not an uneasiness regarding Western Orthodoxy, rather than a perceived deficiency in the piety due to the saints.           
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #53 on: December 19, 2013, 12:15:43 PM »

Enlightener-saints are often given prominence over the usual listing in the Menaion in the regions and cultures they evangelized.

I can understand that (even though we'd never let them trump an Apostle).  That said, if it can be justified based on "region" and "culture", I don't think it's substantially different from WRO emphasising Western saints. 

Unfortunately, ISTM this emphasis still pushes the equation too far towards "either/or", rather than "both/and".

LBK,

There is no rule that the East can only venerate Eastern saints and the West Western saints.  The saints belong to the Catholic Church (in the ialmisry sense: as opposed to Vatican City Smiley).  But that doesn't mean that each of the local Orthodox Churches celebrates all the saints from everywhere except in a very general sense. 

The calendar is only so big, and the calendars of local Churches reflect the saints which they hold in especial esteem, because the whole phenomenon of recognition of saints is proper to the local Church.  No one handed down a calendar from above: local Churches kept feasts for certain saints and events, and some of these gradually spread to the entire Church (e.g., Christmas, SS Peter and Paul) while others remained local.  It doesn't mean the saints aren't saints, but it does mean that the calendar of a local Church reflects the devotion of its people and is not simply some magisterial proclamation of who is and who is not a saint. 

That doesn't scandalise us when it comes to the East.  It doesn't scandalise anyone that the Typikon of the Church of Greece makes no mention of commemorating St Herman of Alaska in any way whatsoever on 13 December, while in America he might be more popular than SS Eustratios, Auxentios, Eugene, Mardarios, and Orestes of Sebaste.  And forget about St Herman, since his relation to America is special: the OCA calendar includes a handful of Slavic saints on the same date, which the Greeks omit entirely.  No one is bothered by that.  Why is it a problem if the WRO want to replicate the same in accordance with their own tradition? 

It's difficult for me to see how the real problem is not an uneasiness regarding Western Orthodoxy, rather than a perceived deficiency in the piety due to the saints.           
I just came across my bulletin from when I went to Holy Trinity Cathedral in Chicago, announcing that in Moscow that day St. John Kochurov was being glorified, and that the cathedral had sent a delegation, including the priest, who was the successor of St. John, the priest who had pastored the Cathedral while it was being built.  The Russians had come earlier to see if their was a local cult (there was) but the glorification was still left to Moscow as his "local Church."
Logged

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

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Byzantine
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,735



« Reply #54 on: December 19, 2013, 05:32:55 PM »

Quote
That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.

Likewise I can that also being "Eastern" is more important to most of the hierarchy than being Orthodox.
The Ordination of multiple men to the priesthood within a single Mass is a legitimate ancient Western custom, yet it is disrepected and made now viewed as heterodox, but it is not. It is Orthodox.

I think there is enough hypocrisy to go around here, I'll be pleased to share it with others.

If you have a list of legitimate Western customs, canons, etc. that you feel are disregarded or viewed as heterodox within Eastern Orthodoxy, or if you would compile such a list, I for one would be interested in reading it.  At least some of those things, I'm sure, would also affect us (OO): for example, none of our Churches prohibits multiple men from being ordained to the same rank within a single Liturgy (in fact, it is often done, even for the ordination of bishops).   

I know others elsewhere (CAF? I can't remember) have pointed out EO churches doing multiple ordinations (Antiochian, etc.), including video footage. Even if those were violating the standards of the Byzantine-EO tradition or whatever, it still just comes across as polemical more than anything when it's applied to other churches.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,055


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #55 on: December 19, 2013, 05:48:11 PM »

If you have a list of legitimate Western customs, canons, etc. that you feel are disregarded or viewed as heterodox within Eastern Orthodoxy, or if you would compile such a list, I for one would be interested in reading it.  At least some of those things, I'm sure, would also affect us (OO): for example, none of our Churches prohibits multiple men from being ordained to the same rank within a single Liturgy (in fact, it is often done, even for the ordination of bishops).   

Unleavened bread for the Eucharist, Baptism by affusion, Icons not in conformity with Byzantine canons are three that seem to come up alot.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #56 on: December 19, 2013, 06:46:29 PM »

Quote
My lesson from my time within the what is called the western rite of the orthodox church was that it is not the western rite at all, but the western liturgy alone
I dont know what parish you attended, but a real WR parish will celebrate pre-schism western feasts (which we do), pre-schism western saints (which we do), and pre-schism fasting rules for the West (again, which we do). Sounds to me that parish you spent time in were Orthodox LARP'ers trying to be Roman Catholics.
Quote
Without the fullness of the actual western rite
We have it.
Quote
the complete rite
We have it.
Quote
canons et
We share the same canons...we're not Eastern Catholics after all.
Quote
there can be no viable western rite orthdooxy
The Church disagrees with you.
Quote
Until the prejudice against the complete pre-schism western rite by the byzantine = Orthodox crowd is overcome the western liturgical community (it is not a western rite community) will never become successful.
There ya go.
Quote
A western liturgy alone, within a byzantine orthodoxy, byzantine canon law, byzantine customs exclusively, does not a western rite make
Since Orthodoxy does not equal Byzantine this is completely accurate.
Quote
Therefore, where there is any confusion or disagreement connected to the western liturgy and theology expressed, it will eventually revert back to the byzantine, time and time again
Time and Time again what? Your sentence makes no sense. What theology expressed? We have the same exact theology. I hate to tell you, but a HUGE amount of Orthodox theology came from a *gasp* western source. Your sentence above shows me you know exactly nothing of the western rite, but are using Ortho-sounding filler words to make yourself sound far more knowledgeable than you actually are about this topic.

Quote
As it currently exists it will never ever retain credibility with educated people who deeply understand the latin rite
Ah, so those who agree with you are educated, and those who don't arent? Well, lets go through the list of the uneducated who have ruled on the Orthodoxy of the Western Rite, shall we? St. Tikhon, the Holy Synod of Russia, Metropolitan Phillip, the Ecumenical Patriarch (the last 2), Patriarch Ignatius IV of blessed memory, Patriarch of Antioch John, the Holy Synod of Antioch, the Holy Synod of ROCOR (yes, they no longer are actively pursuing the WR, but they have always stipulated, and still do, that the WR is indeed totally Orthodox). On top of that, every single Orthodox parish in the world will receive Western Rite Orthdox..including Mt. Athos. So, yeah they're all very uneducated concerning this supposed Latin Rite.

Facts are facts, the Church has universally accepted the Western Rite, but you haven't. Therefore, you're right and they're all simply uneducated concerning the "Latin Rite".

Quote
The use of the western liturgy without the western rite in the orthodox church is an act of desperation on the part of those involved
Not at all. We use the western tradition and expression of the Orthodox faith. If Rome returned to Orthodoxy, do you REALLY think they'll use the Byzantine liturgy? Keep dreaming.

Quote
Some can live with the western liturgical orthodox churches for a time, but I suspect not many forever
The Western Rite is growing all the time, champ.

Quote
I yearn for the day when the Western liturgical community is a bonafide western rite community
It exists already, but you just choose to disagree with the Church who says not only is it a viable rite,  but completely in every way Orthodox.

Quote
And what I am saying is something any orthodox or catholic scholar would agree with
If the Roman Catholic or Orthodox scholars you mentioned are experts in wine or computer science maybe, not so if they were scholars in Church history, liturgics, etc.

PP

*slow clap*

Well done, sir. +1
Logged
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #57 on: December 19, 2013, 06:50:56 PM »

The Church baptizes culture; it doesn't discard it wholesale.

Sure, the Church baptizes culture; that's not the same as exhuming it. 

Yeah, if only the Church believed in resurrection...
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 #58 on: December 20, 2013, 12:19:26 AM »

Phronesis and primuspilus,

Until the those who use the western liturgy within the Orthodox Church also abide by the canons found in:

The Collectio Anselmo dedicata (9th c. Italy)
The Libri duo de synodalibus causis (ca. 906, by Regino of Prüm)
The Decretum by Burchard of Worms (ca. 1020)

They are not truly practicing the western rite, but a primarily a western liturgy with a handful of familiar western customs thrown in to appease ignorant lay people who have little exposure beyond the weekly Sunday morning Mass and possibly Sunday Vespers.

« Last Edit: December 20, 2013, 12:21:00 AM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #59 on: December 20, 2013, 01:08:26 AM »

Phronesis and primuspilus,

Until the those who use the western liturgy within the Orthodox Church also abide by the canons found in:

The Collectio Anselmo dedicata (9th c. Italy)
The Libri duo de synodalibus causis (ca. 906, by Regino of Prüm)
The Decretum by Burchard of Worms (ca. 1020)

They are not truly practicing the western rite, but a primarily a western liturgy with a handful of familiar western customs thrown in to appease ignorant lay people who have little exposure beyond the weekly Sunday morning Mass and possibly Sunday Vespers.



Again, I don't think you understand what the word, "rite," means.

rite
rīt
noun
noun: rite; plural noun: rites
1.
a religious or other solemn ceremony or act.
"the rite of communion"
synonyms:   ceremony, ritual, ceremonial; More
a body of customary observances characteristic of a church or a part of it.
"the Byzantine rite"
synonyms:   ceremony, ritual, ceremonial; More
a social custom, practice, or conventional act.
"the family Christmas rite"
synonyms:   ceremony, ritual, ceremonial; More
Logged
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #60 on: December 20, 2013, 01:14:42 AM »

Observing the Western Rite =/= Doing everything as the Western Church did pre-schism.

We're not trying to recreate the Roman See as it was in 1054. We are restoring the ancient Western liturgical and devotional traditions to the life of the Holy Catholic Orthodox Church, in conformity with the theology thereof.

If you were expecting something different, I'm not surprised that you're disappointed. The Western Rite is not a haven for those who don't really want to become Orthodox. It is The Church.
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 #61 on: December 20, 2013, 01:54:45 AM »

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13064b.htm

A quote from the beginning of the definition of a rite in the catholic encyclopedia of A.D. 1912 :

"A Christian rite, in this sense comprises the manner of performing all services for the worship of God and the sanctification of men. This includes therefore: (1) the administration of sacraments, among which the service of the Holy Eucharist, as being also the Sacrifice, is the most important element of all; (2) the series of psalms, lessons, prayers, etc., divided into unities, called "hours", to make up together the Divine Office; (3) all other religious and ecclesiastical functions, called sacramentals. This general term includes blessings of persons (such as a coronation, the blessing of an abbot, various ceremonies performed for catechumens, the reconciliation of public penitents, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament etc.), blessings of things (the consecration of a church, altar, chalice, etc.), and a number of devotions and ceremonies, e.g. processions and the taking of vows. Sacraments, the Divine Office, and sacramentals (in a wide sense) make up the rite of any Christian religious body."

If one does not follow the pre-1054 western rite, nor the post-1054 western rite, one follows, in fact, no western rite, but simply a particular component of a rite. I hold the historic ORTHODOX teaching that a using particular liturgy by itself does not equate to using the entire western rite.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2013, 02:00:50 AM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #62 on: December 20, 2013, 07:11:57 AM »

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13064b.htm

A quote from the beginning of the definition of a rite in the catholic encyclopedia of A.D. 1912 :

"A Christian rite, in this sense comprises the manner of performing all services for the worship of God and the sanctification of men. This includes therefore: (1) the administration of sacraments, among which the service of the Holy Eucharist, as being also the Sacrifice, is the most important element of all; (2) the series of psalms, lessons, prayers, etc., divided into unities, called "hours", to make up together the Divine Office; (3) all other religious and ecclesiastical functions, called sacramentals. This general term includes blessings of persons (such as a coronation, the blessing of an abbot, various ceremonies performed for catechumens, the reconciliation of public penitents, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament etc.), blessings of things (the consecration of a church, altar, chalice, etc.), and a number of devotions and ceremonies, e.g. processions and the taking of vows. Sacraments, the Divine Office, and sacramentals (in a wide sense) make up the rite of any Christian religious body."

If one does not follow the pre-1054 western rite, nor the post-1054 western rite, one follows, in fact, no western rite, but simply a particular component of a rite. I hold the historic ORTHODOX teaching that a using particular liturgy by itself does not equate to using the entire western rite.

This is why you're so confusing, because the Antiochian Western Rite does exactly this.
Logged
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,301



« Reply #63 on: December 20, 2013, 07:36:00 AM »

Phronesis and primuspilus,

Until the those who use the western liturgy within the Orthodox Church also abide by the canons found in:

The Collectio Anselmo dedicata (9th c. Italy)
The Libri duo de synodalibus causis (ca. 906, by Regino of Prüm)
The Decretum by Burchard of Worms (ca. 1020)

They are not truly practicing the western rite, but a primarily a western liturgy with a handful of familiar western customs thrown in to appease ignorant lay people who have little exposure beyond the weekly Sunday morning Mass and possibly Sunday Vespers.


Which holy synod of bishops do you sit on again? Until then, you are the arbiter of your own ecclesiastical fantasy. I know "prelest" is not a "western" word, but perhaps you should look it up and meditate on it. Please, brother, reconsider your schism from Holy Orthodoxy.

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #64 on: December 20, 2013, 08:28:09 AM »

Quote
If one does not follow the pre-1054 western rite, nor the post-1054 western rite, one follows, in fact, no western rite, but simply a particular component of a rite. I hold the historic ORTHODOX teaching that a using particular liturgy by itself does not equate to using the entire western rite.
I find this statement completely hilarious, especially since in the defense of your Byzantine only approach, in the preceding paragraph to make your nonsensical point, you use a Roman Catholic definition of something.

Also, I'd like to further note that in this statement:

Quote
A Christian rite, in this sense comprises the manner of performing all services for the worship of God and the sanctification of men. This includes therefore: (1) the administration of sacraments, among which the service of the Holy Eucharist, as being also the Sacrifice, is the most important element of all; (2) the series of psalms, lessons, prayers, etc., divided into unities, called "hours", to make up together the Divine Office; (3) all other religious and ecclesiastical functions, called sacramentals. This general term includes blessings of persons (such as a coronation, the blessing of an abbot, various ceremonies performed for catechumens, the reconciliation of public penitents, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament etc.), blessings of things (the consecration of a church, altar, chalice, etc.), and a number of devotions and ceremonies, e.g. processions and the taking of vows
You just gave my parish's schedule sans the days we do them in.

I would also note that there are PLENTY of ER churches that do none of these things, but they seem to evade your sagely critique.

Finally, you bring up the year 1054 alot. That is a nice round figure for the schism, but it is in no means historically accurate. The schism could go anywhere from 800 through the 15th Century when the Pope started naming and recognizing titular Latin Patriarchs of Antioch.

Quote
Until the those who use the western liturgy within the Orthodox Church also abide by the canons found in:

The Collectio Anselmo dedicata (9th c. Italy)
The Libri duo de synodalibus causis (ca. 906, by Regino of Prüm)
The Decretum by Burchard of Worms (ca. 1020)

They are not truly practicing the western rite, but a primarily a western liturgy with a handful of familiar western customs thrown in to appease ignorant lay people who have little exposure beyond the weekly Sunday morning Mass and possibly Sunday Vespers.
Since you have no clue about the aforementioned western customs, your statement is nonsense. Again, more Ortho-sounding fillers to make yourself far more knowledgeable than your wiki searches would make you out to be.

The end of this discussion is simple. The Church has decreed that the Western Rite is completely viable, and NOBODY can deny us the Eucharist without being in schism. Everything else doesn't matter. You are in direct opposition to what the Church has decreed multiple times (Im still waiting on a response from you concerning those poor uneducated sops I listed before...you know, the one including synods, saints, and Patriarchs).
If you think that the Church is wrong, then maybe you need to stop listing canons for us and start reading them yourself.

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
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #65 on: December 20, 2013, 09:32:39 AM »

Quote
That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.

Likewise I can that also being "Eastern" is more important to most of the hierarchy than being Orthodox.
If we're wrong to have attachments to cultural expressions, than we're both equally wrong.

Nope, there's a very plain difference: whatever cultural attachments the hierarchs may be guilty of, they're still in the Church, and you're in... Charismatic crypto-Lefebvrian Catholic land? You are lost and confused. Come back to the Church.
Logged

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

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #66 on: December 20, 2013, 10:45:30 AM »

Quote
That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.

Likewise I can that also being "Eastern" is more important to most of the hierarchy than being Orthodox.
If we're wrong to have attachments to cultural expressions, than we're both equally wrong.

Nope, there's a very plain difference: whatever cultural attachments the hierarchs may be guilty of, they're still in the Church, and you're in... Charismatic crypto-Lefebvrian Catholic land? You are lost and confused. Come back to the Church.

This. WRO is important but when it comes to salvation the most important "thing" is Christ and His Church.
Logged

Nephi
Monster Tamer
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Byzantine
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,735



« Reply #67 on: December 20, 2013, 01:14:03 PM »

Quote
That means being "Western" is more important to him than being Orthodox.

Likewise I can that also being "Eastern" is more important to most of the hierarchy than being Orthodox.
If we're wrong to have attachments to cultural expressions, than we're both equally wrong.

Nope, there's a very plain difference: whatever cultural attachments the hierarchs may be guilty of, they're still in the Church, and you're in... Charismatic crypto-Lefebvrian Catholic land? You are lost and confused. Come back to the Church.

This. WRO is important but when it comes to salvation the most important "thing" is Christ and His Church.

+1 to both of you.

There are people that, with no Eastern background, go to densely ethnic and xenophobic parishes that speak little to no English. And why would they do that if the highest priority is preserving one's [cultural/religious/ethnic] heritage?
Logged
Misplaced Book
NO LONGER POSTING HERE
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Constantinople
Posts: 203


« Reply #68 on: January 05, 2014, 10:44:33 AM »

I believe the OP is asking if the Western Rite can be regarded as Eastern Orthodoxy with Western decoration, or as a strictly Western expression of Orthodoxy, independent of (but, of course, not forsaking) the East. Of course, being that Christianity is, in my view, an "Eastern" religion, one would be hard pressed to adopt a strictly Western approach to Orthodoxy.

A very important question.

From my understanding (which I am open to correction), the Western Rite was conceived as a way for Western Christian Communities to retain many of their customs and at the same time,  come into Orthodoxy.

I am trying to understand how the Western Rite is NOT a form of Liturgical Anthropology and Reconstructionism....and at the same time, how can you shield the WR from its critics who state that it has had "Byzantinizations" imposed upon it and is not an organic expression of Western Spirituality.

It reminds me a lot of the Tractarian Movement within Anglicanism.  The so called "Anglo-Catholics" were tolerated with the Communion at large, and were technically in Communion with everybody else.  But there was a fairly big disconnect.

In the end,  they were a Liturgical flight of fancy,  and ended up ghettoized.   How does the WR differ?
Logged
Deacon Lance
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,055


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #69 on: January 05, 2014, 02:14:53 PM »

WRO is important but when it comes to salvation the most important "thing" is Christ and His Church.

This is a false dichotomy.  There is no generic Orthodox or Catholic.  One can only be Orthodox or Catholic by following one of the Ritual Traditions present in that Church. 
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
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 #70 on: January 05, 2014, 02:58:55 PM »

Deacon Lance,

The Roman Catholic Church in the past more frequently emphasized that those who leave the faith have a higher chance of going to hell.
I think that Alpo is entitled to that point of view. It is a legitimate point of view that I have a higher chance of going to hell if I leave the "true faith". I accept this fact. I agree with Alpo and would say it myself.

I think for myself, my contingency on whether the Orthodox Church was the true faith hinged on how well it accepted the principal of catholicity and inculturation. I guess once it failed to pass this test from my own perspective , the rest of my confidence in it was lost.

Irregardless of others views, my own view has always been that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches are profoundly similar. Similar to the extent that for me to accepting one as true and the other as false rests upon a few subtle details. I've always felt that the debates over papal authority and filioque for instance were largely political rather than absolute "black and white" divisions.
In a sense they are black and white, but it is also for me seen as an abstract concept far removed from the everyday life of prayer and a parish community.

I would hate to say that I am a moral relativist... I don't know what I am. I may be tied to the tradition of the church in most ways,  but for hierarchy and advanced theology...not as strongly...  From my perspective my life will be far easier if I accept the mainstream traditional roman catholicism and become obedient to whatever the Roman Catholic Church historically teaches through it's councils. From this point forward thats my goal. I am blessed that the very beautiful sung latin mass and RC "anglican use" ordinariate masses and communities are exist close enough to where I live.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2014, 03:07:29 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
Deacon Lance
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,055


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #71 on: January 05, 2014, 03:36:57 PM »

Deacon Lance,

The Roman Catholic Church in the past more frequently emphasized that those who leave the faith have a higher chance of going to hell.
I think that Alpo is entitled to that point of view. It is a legitimate point of view that I have a higher chance of going to hell if I leave the "true faith". I accept this fact. I agree with Alpo and would say it myself.

I think for myself, my contingency on whether the Orthodox Church was the true faith hinged on how well it accepted the principal of catholicity and inculturation. I guess once it failed to pass this test from my own perspective , the rest of my confidence in it was lost.

Irregardless of others views, my own view has always been that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches are profoundly similar. Similar to the extent that for me to accepting one as true and the other as false rests upon a few subtle details. I've always felt that the debates over papal authority and filioque for instance were largely political rather than absolute "black and white" divisions.
In a sense they are black and white, but it is also for me seen as an abstract concept far removed from the everyday life of prayer and a parish community.

I would hate to say that I am a moral relativist... I don't know what I am. I may be tied to the tradition of the church in most ways,  but for hierarchy and advanced theology...not as strongly...  From my perspective my life will be far easier if I accept the mainstream traditional roman catholicism and become obedient to whatever the Roman Catholic Church historically teaches through it's councils. From this point forward thats my goal. I am blessed that the very beautiful sung latin mass and RC "anglican use" ordinariate masses and communities are exist close enough to where I live.
Christopher,

That was not the point I was addressing.  Rather I was refering to the fact that some seem to think there is a base-line Orthodoxy or Catholicism to which Roman, Byzantine, Syriac, etc are tacked on.  One can only be Catholic or Orthodox by being Roman, or Byzantine, or Syriac or any of the others.  It is like saying male/female isn't important I am just human.  No, one is only human while also being either male or female.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #72 on: January 05, 2014, 03:53:43 PM »

I don't know what I am. I may be tied to the tradition of the church in most ways,  but for hierarchy and advanced theology...not as strongly...

This doesn't sound like mainstream traditional Roman Catholicism. Actually the exact opposite.
Logged

Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #73 on: January 05, 2014, 05:11:33 PM »

I believe the OP is asking if the Western Rite can be regarded as Eastern Orthodoxy with Western decoration, or as a strictly Western expression of Orthodoxy, independent of (but, of course, not forsaking) the East. Of course, being that Christianity is, in my view, an "Eastern" religion, one would be hard pressed to adopt a strictly Western approach to Orthodoxy.

A very important question.

From my understanding (which I am open to correction), the Western Rite was conceived as a way for Western Christian Communities to retain many of their customs and at the same time,  come into Orthodoxy.

This is correct.

Quote
I am trying to understand how the Western Rite is NOT a form of Liturgical Anthropology and Reconstructionism

It is neither of these things (at least within Antioch) because it was the living traditions of the communities that were merely resumed and reintegrated with Orthodox tradition. It was not a retreat to the past nor was anything concocted artificially according to the whims of a few individuals.

Quote
....and at the same time, how can you shield the WR from its critics who state that it has had "Byzantinizations" imposed upon it and is not an organic expression of Western Spirituality.

The onus is on those claiming something has been Byzantinized. Can an epiclesis really be considered one? Are icons? Two pre-Communion prayers from the Byzantine liturgy?

It is also important to bear in mind the spirit in which any of these sorts of adjustments are made. There are great reasons for all of them.

Quote
It reminds me a lot of the Tractarian Movement within Anglicanism.  The so called "Anglo-Catholics" were tolerated with the Communion at large, and were technically in Communion with everybody else.  But there was a fairly big disconnect.

In the end,  they were a Liturgical flight of fancy,  and ended up ghettoized.   How does the WR differ?

The biggest difference is that this Western liturgical tradition is now under the care of the undivided One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Surely that makes an immeasurable difference? And experience has shown that WR parishes are remarkably involved in pan-Orthodox initiatives at the local level and are very much integrated into the wider Orthodox presence in their respective communities.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2014, 05:11:58 PM by Sleeper » Logged
Misplaced Book
NO LONGER POSTING HERE
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Constantinople
Posts: 203


« Reply #74 on: January 06, 2014, 12:07:51 AM »

It is neither of these things (at least within Antioch) because it was the living traditions of the communities that were merely resumed and reintegrated with Orthodox tradition. It was not a retreat to the past nor was anything concocted artificially according to the whims of a few individuals.

That leaves open the question of how compatible the Tradition is.   In the case of Anglicanism you have rupture upon rupture in it's history.   Sure there are some Traditions which may have their roots in the "Orthodox West" but they have been smothered by centuries of innovation.   Reintegration would not be possible without some form of "modification" and if that is the case,  how is that not a reconstruction?

The onus is on those claiming something has been Byzantinized. Can an epiclesis really be considered one? Are icons? Two pre-Communion prayers from the Byzantine liturgy?

It is also important to bear in mind the spirit in which any of these sorts of adjustments are made. There are great reasons for all of them.

   The fact that those things were part of the "original Liturgy" is irrelevant to the larger question.   To attempt to reinsert or reestablish practices that have been dead for a thousand years is itself innovation and not "organic" at all.   It is the same spirit that some flavors of Protestantism evoke when they attempt to "bring back First Century practices."   What is the difference?  Things were part of the Tradition then but they no longer are.

I understand the spirit of receiving the WR.  It is an act of Economy, and I have no doubt that it has nourished many of the souls who entered into the agreement.  Nor will I speak ill of Our Bishops who have set up these arrangements.


The biggest difference is that this Western liturgical tradition is now under the care of the undivided One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Surely that makes an immeasurable difference? And experience has shown that WR parishes are remarkably involved in pan-Orthodox initiatives at the local level and are very much integrated into the wider Orthodox presence in their respective communities.


Again, I have no doubt that many souls have benefited.   

Don't misunderstand,  I am not hostile to the WR.    I have mixed feelings about them and am in doubt as to it's long term viability.   How can they grow or be "promoted" without being painted as reverse Uniatism?  Trying to resurrect Western Orthodoxy in pockets and piecemeal just seems to be a self defeating thing, which will no doubt cause friction in the long term.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #75 on: January 06, 2014, 09:11:15 AM »

Quote
In the case of Anglicanism you have rupture upon rupture in it's history
Ruptures can be healed.

Quote
Sure there are some Traditions which may have their roots in the "Orthodox West" but they have been smothered by centuries of innovation
Which can be corrected. Just look at Iconoclasm.

Quote
To attempt to reinsert or reestablish practices that have been dead for a thousand years is itself innovation and not "organic" at all
So when/if Rome returns, they better learn the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? What about the Hagia Sophia? Its been 600 years. So we should stop praying for it to come back to Christian hands? How long is too long for something to be "organic"? Further, the Western rite was not dead for 1,000 years. More like 500 when you account for the fact that there was a Western ruling monastery on Mt. Athos.

Quote
Again, I have no doubt that many souls have benefited.
Based on what findings?

Quote
How can they grow or be "promoted" without being painted as reverse Uniatism?
Because anyone who has read more than 5 minutes into Uniatism knows the WR is nowhere close to it. Unless said person wants to use it as an argument and remain blissfully ignorant (yes, Im looking at you Met. Kallistos).

Quote
Trying to resurrect Western Orthodoxy in pockets and piecemeal just seems to be a self defeating thing, which will no doubt cause friction in the long term
No, its defeating because people still hold to the Byzantine = Orthodox nonsense.

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
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #76 on: January 06, 2014, 04:13:05 PM »

I really can't believe we keep hearing this "liturgical archaeology/anthropology" nonsense.

Several posters here have repeatedly explained why these charges don't stick, but there's a bigger issue:

SO WHAT?!?!

I mean, really. People throw around the liturgical archaeology label like it's some kind of trump card. But seriously, so what if it is? Why is it a bad thing? Which part of the WR are you saying is incompatible with the life of the Orthodox Church and faith? Which of the synods, saints, and patriarchs who've affirmed the WR do you believe were in error? I've yet to see one person actually explain what they mean by "liturgical archaeology/anthropology," let alone why that's a bad thing.

As I've pointed out before, the Church believes both in giving new life and resurrection; it seems quite appropriate to put those beliefs into action w/r/t a venerable and ancient rite whose practice had been forced to persist outside the Church.

Look, I get why people get nervous when it comes to liturgical innovation - and that is a healthy response. We shouldn't just be digging up any old assemblage of prayers and saying they're OK to use just because they're old. But that's not what's happening here. Here you have an entire devotional and liturgical rite that was faithfully lived out within the Orthodox faith from the earliest centuries of the church up through the schism. Thereafter, it persisted but only under the watch of a See that was in error. What the WR restores is this ancient rite, free from any later modifications that took place when the rite was no longer in use among the sees not in error. Is this really archaeology? We're just picking up where we left off. But even if it is, so what?

There is only one valid reason to oppose the WR and that is because you believe it is incompatible with the Orthodox faith. But to make that argument, you're going to need to excommunicate a lot of saints and every bishop before the schism.
Logged
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 753



« Reply #77 on: January 06, 2014, 04:58:58 PM »

Look, I get why people get nervous when it comes to liturgical innovation - and that is a healthy response. We shouldn't just be digging up any old assemblage of prayers and saying they're OK to use just because they're old. But that's not what's happening here. Here you have an entire devotional and liturgical rite that was faithfully lived out within the Orthodox faith from the earliest centuries of the church up through the schism. Thereafter, it persisted but only under the watch of a See that was in error. What the WR restores is this ancient rite, free from any later modifications that took place when the rite was no longer in use among the sees not in error. Is this really archaeology? We're just picking up where we left off. But even if it is, so what?

Generally true, although there are a couple of pre-schism references to "merits" of saints which were excised from the Antiochian liturgy of St. Gregory.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,055


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #78 on: January 06, 2014, 06:10:23 PM »

The fact that those things were part of the "original Liturgy" is irrelevant to the larger question.   To attempt to reinsert or reestablish practices that have been dead for a thousand years is itself innovation and not "organic" at all.   It is the same spirit that some flavors of Protestantism evoke when they attempt to "bring back First Century practices."   What is the difference?  Things were part of the Tradition then but they no longer are.

They haven't been dead for a thousand years.  They have been in use, by Churches the Orthodox may consider heretical and schismatic, but they have been in use.  Don't the Orthodox always proclaim we don't know where the Spirit isn't? Did the Western Church lose every grace of the Spirit, every bit of holiness?  I don't think the hiearchy of the Orthodox Church thinks so.

edit for typos
« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 06:27:49 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #79 on: January 06, 2014, 06:18:00 PM »

The fact that those things were part of the "original Liturgy" is irrelevant to the larger question.   To attempt to reinsert or reestablish practices that have been dead for a thousand years is itself innovation and not "organic" at all.   It is the same spirit that some flavors of Protestantism evoke when they attempt to "bring back First Century practices."   What is the difference?  Things were part of the Tradition then but they no longer are.

They haven't been dead for a thousand years.  They have been in use, by Churches the Orthodox may consider heretical and schismatic, but they have been in use.  Don't they Orthodox always proclaim we don't know where the Spirit isn't? Did the Wetsern Church lose every grace of the Spirit, every bit of holiness?  I don't think the hiearchy of the Orthodox Church thinks so.

+1

Precisely.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #80 on: January 06, 2014, 07:54:03 PM »

I really can't believe we keep hearing this "liturgical archaeology/anthropology" nonsense.

Several posters here have repeatedly explained why these charges don't stick, but there's a bigger issue:

SO WHAT?!?!

I mean, really. People throw around the liturgical archaeology label like it's some kind of trump card. But seriously, so what if it is? Why is it a bad thing? Which part of the WR are you saying is incompatible with the life of the Orthodox Church and faith? Which of the synods, saints, and patriarchs who've affirmed the WR do you believe were in error? I've yet to see one person actually explain what they mean by "liturgical archaeology/anthropology," let alone why that's a bad thing.

As I've pointed out before, the Church believes both in giving new life and resurrection; it seems quite appropriate to put those beliefs into action w/r/t a venerable and ancient rite whose practice had been forced to persist outside the Church.

Look, I get why people get nervous when it comes to liturgical innovation - and that is a healthy response. We shouldn't just be digging up any old assemblage of prayers and saying they're OK to use just because they're old. But that's not what's happening here. Here you have an entire devotional and liturgical rite that was faithfully lived out within the Orthodox faith from the earliest centuries of the church up through the schism. Thereafter, it persisted but only under the watch of a See that was in error. What the WR restores is this ancient rite, free from any later modifications that took place when the rite was no longer in use among the sees not in error. Is this really archaeology? We're just picking up where we left off. But even if it is, so what?

There is only one valid reason to oppose the WR and that is because you believe it is incompatible with the Orthodox faith. But to make that argument, you're going to need to excommunicate a lot of saints and every bishop before the schism.

Agreed.

It's not about archaeology. It's about getting our stuff back after the divorce.
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.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #81 on: January 06, 2014, 07:56:08 PM »

Look, I get why people get nervous when it comes to liturgical innovation - and that is a healthy response. We shouldn't just be digging up any old assemblage of prayers and saying they're OK to use just because they're old. But that's not what's happening here. Here you have an entire devotional and liturgical rite that was faithfully lived out within the Orthodox faith from the earliest centuries of the church up through the schism. Thereafter, it persisted but only under the watch of a See that was in error. What the WR restores is this ancient rite, free from any later modifications that took place when the rite was no longer in use among the sees not in error. Is this really archaeology? We're just picking up where we left off. But even if it is, so what?

Generally true, although there are a couple of pre-schism references to "merits" of saints which were excised from the Antiochian liturgy of St. Gregory.

I thought that was a misunderstanding. Prior to the schism (and a couple centuries afterward), "meritas" did not refer to there being some great pool of extra grace from the works of the saints.
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.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #82 on: January 06, 2014, 07:59:55 PM »

The fact that those things were part of the "original Liturgy" is irrelevant to the larger question.   To attempt to reinsert or reestablish practices that have been dead for a thousand years is itself innovation and not "organic" at all.   It is the same spirit that some flavors of Protestantism evoke when they attempt to "bring back First Century practices."   What is the difference?  Things were part of the Tradition then but they no longer are.

They haven't been dead for a thousand years.  They have been in use, by Churches the Orthodox may consider heretical and schismatic, but they have been in use.  Don't the Orthodox always proclaim we don't know where the Spirit isn't? Did the Western Church lose every grace of the Spirit, every bit of holiness?  I don't think the hiearchy of the Orthodox Church thinks so.

edit for typos

I think a strong case can be made that the Western Church through schism and heresy lost, certainly, the grace of the Holy Spirit that came through the sacraments--and that any grace that may be there operated in spite of, not because of, those sacraments. But that is another question entirely when one looks at rites. Just because a group goes into schism doesn't mean its prayers, composed by Orthodox, prayed by Orthodox, sanctifying the faithful, have ceased to be Orthodox. Prayers are neither baptized, nor do they fall into heresy and schism, provided they are not corrupted. And what changes were made after the schism are not hard to see and fix.
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.
WPM
Revolutionary Writer
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,734



« Reply #83 on: January 06, 2014, 08:14:32 PM »

Needs more emphasis on the Western-style of worship service
« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 08:14:54 PM by WPM » Logged
Misplaced Book
NO LONGER POSTING HERE
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Constantinople
Posts: 203


« Reply #84 on: January 07, 2014, 04:06:07 AM »

To primuspilus:

"Ruptures can be healed."

REPLY:  Very true.  However, some wounds require a band aid...and others require reconstructive surgery.

"Which can be corrected. Just look at Iconoclasm."

REPLY:  Yes, but lets not pretend that all situations are equal.

"So when/if Rome returns, they better learn the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? What about the Hagia Sophia? Its been 600 years. So we should stop praying for it to come back to Christian hands? How long is too long for something to be "organic"? Further, the Western rite was not dead for 1,000 years. More like 500 when you account for the fact that there was a Western ruling monastery on Mt. Athos."

REPLY:  No...but there will need to a very serious discussion as to what can be kept, and what must be discarded.   Latin Ecclesiology and Life has become so intertwined with its Errors, that separating them will require the "major reconstructive surgery" to go back to my earlier analogy.    One Monastery on the Holy Mountain does not translate into the vast expanse of Church life.

We should never stop praying for anything.

"Based on what findings?"

REPLY:  I was trying to be charitable and concede the point (which I have no doubt is true) that souls have benefited from what you are doing.  If they haven't, what is the point?  Calling your own position into doubt in an attempt to out me as a hypocrite or troll isn't putting glitter on this conversation.

"Because anyone who has read more than 5 minutes into Uniatism knows the WR is nowhere close to it. Unless said person wants to use it as an argument and remain blissfully ignorant (yes, Im looking at you Met. Kallistos)."

REPLY:  I never said that the Union of Brest or any of that nonsense is the same as the Western Rite, which is voluntary and an act of Pastoral Economy.
However,  "Perception is Reality" for many people, and for any Church to grow, it requires some evangelization and "promotion" to use crude secular terms.  How will you "sell" the Western Rite?  What about those disaffected Anglicans and Latins out there who may want to keep their traditions?  Orthodox-Western Rite:  You don't have to be Byzantine to be Orthodox.  That's your draw, is it not?  I'm saying this because that is how it will come off.   The comparison comes in, because Eastern Catholics say that "You don't have to be Western to be Catholic."  And that they can "keep their traditions" and be in union with Rome.   Western Rite people can "keep their traditions" and be in union with Canonical Orthodoxy.   That is where comparisons to the Unia come in.  No sensible person would attempt to stack up their histories or engage in any moral equivocation....this is about the stripped down, fundamental perception between the two.   My post was not an attack but a question/point of discussion.   How can the Western Rite grow and avoid this mess?  

Perhaps it can't.  Maybe the masks need to come off on both sides,  and both sides admit that Ecumenism of Return is the default position of both sides.   I'm fine with that.  Let's not dance around the point.

"No, its defeating because people still hold to the Byzantine = Orthodox nonsense."

REPLY:  And those people are wrong.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2014, 04:08:21 AM by Misplaced Book » Logged
Misplaced Book
NO LONGER POSTING HERE
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Constantinople
Posts: 203


« Reply #85 on: January 07, 2014, 04:25:06 AM »

I really can't believe we keep hearing this "liturgical archaeology/anthropology" nonsense.

Several posters here have repeatedly explained why these charges don't stick, but there's a bigger issue:

SO WHAT?!?!

I mean, really. People throw around the liturgical archaeology label like it's some kind of trump card. But seriously, so what if it is? Why is it a bad thing? Which part of the WR are you saying is incompatible with the life of the Orthodox Church and faith? Which of the synods, saints, and patriarchs who've affirmed the WR do you believe were in error? I've yet to see one person actually explain what they mean by "liturgical archaeology/anthropology," let alone why that's a bad thing.

As I've pointed out before, the Church believes both in giving new life and resurrection; it seems quite appropriate to put those beliefs into action w/r/t a venerable and ancient rite whose practice had been forced to persist outside the Church.

Look, I get why people get nervous when it comes to liturgical innovation - and that is a healthy response. We shouldn't just be digging up any old assemblage of prayers and saying they're OK to use just because they're old. But that's not what's happening here. Here you have an entire devotional and liturgical rite that was faithfully lived out within the Orthodox faith from the earliest centuries of the church up through the schism. Thereafter, it persisted but only under the watch of a See that was in error. What the WR restores is this ancient rite, free from any later modifications that took place when the rite was no longer in use among the sees not in error. Is this really archaeology? We're just picking up where we left off. But even if it is, so what?

There is only one valid reason to oppose the WR and that is because you believe it is incompatible with the Orthodox faith. But to make that argument, you're going to need to excommunicate a lot of saints and every bishop before the schism.

Innovation, as it plays out in our modern context is something I believe to be corrosive, and very dangerous.  The Latin Church is a lesson on this point.   American Culture itself was born of this spirit of Innovation and the Worship of Progress.  It is the stream we swim in, it is a very very fine line, and very dangerous to the Faith.  It needs to be Transformed, not Adopted.  This may seem like needless hyperbole and exaggerations, but the Spiritual Wreckage of Western Religious Life says otherwise.  It is this trauma that causes the Reactions to "Innovation."   The calls for "understanding" go both ways.

I don't oppose the Western Rite.     My point/question was in the context of Ecumenism and how the Western Rite will be able to grow and fit in into that framework.  "Sheep Stealing" is a very sensitive issue, and I had that in mind as I framed the post.   I am beginning to see that that is perhaps the wrong way to approach the question.  

Forgive me if anything I said offended anyone.   I understand that some folks might be defensive. Please remember that not every doubt is an attack.



« Last Edit: January 07, 2014, 04:26:16 AM by Misplaced Book » Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #86 on: January 07, 2014, 07:29:49 PM »

Great questions by Misplaced Book, and superb answers all around. I don't think you've said anything offensive and it's healthy to ask these kinds of questions.

In regards to much of what has been said and asked, I am reminded of the recent remarks of Fr. Thomas Hopko on Ancient Faith Radio (titled "The Slippery Slope" from Speaking the Truth in Love):

"I really think, we have to be mature enough, enlightened enough, careful and responsible enough, in our Church, to make changes that the conditions of our life and culture compel us to do. And it's not just for convenience or prudence, but it can be for societal changes, and it may be for the restoration of something that has been lost. Why not? Why cannot there be things in society that require us to make changes in our behavior, and even in our worship? There are Russians who, any little change you would make about anything, is considered to be a dangerous and poisonous changing of tradition. Well, why? The true Church is not the perfect Church. People make mistakes, things come into existence, things go out of existence; it's a living organism inspired by the Holy Spirit. You have to have discernment, that's why you have bishops and clergy, scholars, holy monks and nuns, so that we don't lose the real tradition."
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #87 on: January 07, 2014, 07:48:36 PM »

Great questions by Misplaced Book, and superb answers all around. I don't think you've said anything offensive and it's healthy to ask these kinds of questions.

In regards to much of what has been said and asked, I am reminded of the recent remarks of Fr. Thomas Hopko on Ancient Faith Radio (titled "The Slippery Slope" from Speaking the Truth in Love):

"I really think, we have to be mature enough, enlightened enough, careful and responsible enough, in our Church, to make changes that the conditions of our life and culture compel us to do. And it's not just for convenience or prudence, but it can be for societal changes, and it may be for the restoration of something that has been lost. Why not? Why cannot there be things in society that require us to make changes in our behavior, and even in our worship? There are Russians who, any little change you would make about anything, is considered to be a dangerous and poisonous changing of tradition. Well, why? The true Church is not the perfect Church. People make mistakes, things come into existence, things go out of existence; it's a living organism inspired by the Holy Spirit. You have to have discernment, that's why you have bishops and clergy, scholars, holy monks and nuns, so that we don't lose the real tradition."

And it's important to recognize how much the Church has changed what it does over time. For example, we no longer start the Liturgy at one place in the city and process to another. Fasts used to be shorter, but services used to be longer. More people used to become monastics than today--this is actually problematic for our hierarchical structure, giving a much smaller pool to draw from and by extension fewer bishops than may be needed.
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.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #88 on: January 07, 2014, 07:54:39 PM »

Is the so-called Eastern Rite more than a rite? I don't think so. To me, a rite is something encompassing a way of prayer and possibly administration and praxis. Essentially, however, all the basic and essential elements of Orthodox Christianity should be there, no matter the rite. These don't come about automatically, however. The prayers are a means to communication with God, the sacraments for sanctification, the canons and the practices for good order.
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.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #89 on: January 08, 2014, 08:46:38 AM »

Quote
However, some wounds require a band aid...and others require reconstructive surgery
The medicine is already been prescribed. Return to the Pre-Schism West which the WR is. Whether Rome or anyone else takes their medicine is another issue entirely.

Quote
Yes, but lets not pretend that all situations are equal
Im not saying they are, but Im saying that major problems can be corrected, and its not an insurmountable obstacle.

Quote
I was trying to be charitable and concede the point (which I have no doubt is true) that souls have benefited from what you are doing.  If they haven't, what is the point?
You said that you doubted that many souls have benefited. I asked for evidence. I wasn't calling you a hypocrite. I just asked for evidence to back up your assumption.

Quote
Calling your own position into doubt in an attempt to out me as a hypocrite or troll isn't putting glitter on this conversation
If you think I was attacking you I apologize. I was not.

Quote
How will you "sell" the Western Rite?
We dont have to "sell" it. We're not con men.
Quote
What about those disaffected Anglicans and Latins out there who may want to keep their traditions?
If those traditions are Orthodox then why not? The WR isn't like Rome where as long as you bow your knee to the Pope you can believe whatever you want.

Quote
hat is where comparisons to the Unia come in.  No sensible person would attempt to stack up their histories or engage in any moral equivocation....this is about the stripped down, fundamental perception between the two.   My post was not an attack but a question/point of discussion.   How can the Western Rite grow and avoid this mess?
The difference is pretty obvious. With Rome, you can believe whatever you wish, as long as you bow your knee to Rome. Melkites can believe all they want that the Pope is primus inter pares, while they bow their knee to him and obey his whims.

With the WR, we have to be completely orthodox and Orthodox in every way. Every other argument concerning the WR and the Unia is really a non sequitur.

Quote
Maybe the masks need to come off on both sides,  and both sides admit that Ecumenism of Return is the default position of both sides.   I'm fine with that.  Let's not dance around the point
The WR isn't dancing around anything. The WR is giving people a chance to see that there is a time before Rome's innovations, and see what the western half Orthodoxy looked like before the schism. That return is possible without having to be ethno-centric (as they see it).

Quote
sheep stealing
That is something everyone wants to avoid. I cant speak for everyone, but in my town, there are 2 Orthodox churches. The Greek church has no priest, and only has services maybe twice a month. So quite a few come to our Church (especially on major feasts) but when a priest shows up there they go o their home church. Very few (I can only think of one family) has actually switched to our church "full time".

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: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #90 on: January 08, 2014, 08:50:05 AM »

Is the so-called Eastern Rite more than a rite? I don't think so.

Me neither. But most of the Netodox seem to have an idea that Eastern rite = Orthodoxy whereas Western rite = just a rite.
Logged

Misplaced Book
NO LONGER POSTING HERE
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Constantinople
Posts: 203


« Reply #91 on: January 08, 2014, 09:43:26 AM »

To primuspilus:

"The medicine is already been prescribed. Return to the Pre-Schism West which the WR is. Whether Rome or anyone else takes their medicine is another issue entirely."

REPLY:  I agree.

"Im not saying they are, but Im saying that major problems can be corrected, and its not an insurmountable obstacle."

REPLY:  I agree.

"You said that you doubted that many souls have benefited. I asked for evidence. I wasn't calling you a hypocrite. I just asked for evidence to back up your assumption."

REPLY:  Re-read my post #74.  I said that "I have NO doubt that...."

"If you think I was attacking you I apologize. I was not."

REPLY:  I apologize as well.

"We dont have to "sell" it. We're not con men."

REPLY:  No, you aren't.  BUT, for the Western Rite to grow it has to be made to be seen as a viable alternative for Western Christians who for whatever reason are wary of Our Liturgy and Traditions.   I used the word sell to put it in more general layman's terms, although a better word could have been chosen.

"If those traditions are Orthodox then why not? The WR isn't like Rome where as long as you bow your knee to the Pope you can believe whatever you want."

REPLY: No argument here.

"The difference is pretty obvious. With Rome, you can believe whatever you wish, as long as you bow your knee to Rome. Melkites can believe all they want that the Pope is primus inter pares, while they bow their knee to him and obey his whims.

With the WR, we have to be completely orthodox and Orthodox in every way. Every other argument concerning the WR and the Unia is really a non sequitur."

REPLY:  That is a bit of an oversimplification of the Latin position.  They do have boundaries, although thos are being pushed further out as time goes on.   Eastern Catholics make the same claim about "keeping your traditions" but it is reversed.   This is the fact of the matter.  I'm not saying they are the same,  only that the two can be compared in respect to their "selling point" to the other side of the fence.

"The WR isn't dancing around anything. The WR is giving people a chance to see that there is a time before Rome's innovations, and see what the western half Orthodoxy looked like before the schism. That return is possible without having to be ethno-centric (as they see it)."

REPLY:  I don't know if I would go so far as to say that this is what the Western Half of Orthodoxy looked like, but I do agree that it is good to offer a path for those people.

"That is something everyone wants to avoid. I cant speak for everyone, but in my town, there are 2 Orthodox churches. The Greek church has no priest, and only has services maybe twice a month. So quite a few come to our Church (especially on major feasts) but when a priest shows up there they go o their home church. Very few (I can only think of one family) has actually switched to our church "full time".  "

REPLY:  This is within Canonical Orthodoxy, though.   If I was a Traditionalist Roman Catholic and an Orthodox Western Rite Church opened up down the street, I would certainly get ticked off and view it as encroachment.   

This is the main thrust of my points.   How can the growth of the Western Rite occur without this clash?  I would be disinclined to worry about it, but in the interest of neighborly relations it is inevitably a consideration.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #92 on: January 08, 2014, 10:08:45 AM »

I do not think a thing's worth or validity should in any way be based upon "growth," as nice as it would be for more parishes to come into Holy Orthodoxy via the Western tradition. It's just not a good measuring stick. I rather like the Right Rev. Bp. BASIL's attitude:

"You are the inheritors of a precious treasure: the authentic and Orthodox rites that nourished thousands now in the Kingdom of Heaven. The Orthodox Church thanks you for preserving this tradition all these years, so that it could be restored to her through Western Rite Orthodox parishes...I don’t care if Western Orthodoxy grows. Let me qualify that. This comment does not have to do just with the Western Rite, although I’m speaking in a Western Rite context now. I am not concerned about growth and numbers at all. Of course growth and numbers are good because they mean that more souls are being saved. In that sense I do hope that all come to the knowledge of the truth. And in that sense I am glad that so many people and parishes have become Western Orthodox.

But the worth and validity of the Western Rite do not depend on growth or numbers. What if only a single parish were to survive by God’s grace? What if somehow all of the seeds that you have planted and have tended for so long shrivel up, like many churches do in many places—Byzantine and Western Rite and Catholic and Lutheran and Methodist? If only one Western Orthodox parish flourishes someplace, then it is to the glory of God. It provides a home for someone of the Orthodox faith to worship God in a liturgical context in which they feel not only comfortable but authentic.

The faith that you hold, combined with the rite in which you practice that faith, is more important than anything else."
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #93 on: January 08, 2014, 10:28:57 AM »

Quote
"The medicine is already been prescribed. Return to the Pre-Schism West which the WR is. Whether Rome or anyone else takes their medicine is another issue entirely."

REPLY:  I agree.

"Im not saying they are, but Im saying that major problems can be corrected, and its not an insurmountable obstacle."

REPLY:  I agree.

"You said that you doubted that many souls have benefited. I asked for evidence. I wasn't calling you a hypocrite. I just asked for evidence to back up your assumption."

REPLY:  Re-read my post #74.  I said that "I have NO doubt that...."

"If you think I was attacking you I apologize. I was not."

REPLY:  I apologize as well.

"We dont have to "sell" it. We're not con men."

REPLY:  No, you aren't.  BUT, for the Western Rite to grow it has to be made to be seen as a viable alternative for Western Christians who for whatever reason are wary of Our Liturgy and Traditions.   I used the word sell to put it in more general layman's terms, although a better word could have been chosen.

"If those traditions are Orthodox then why not? The WR isn't like Rome where as long as you bow your knee to the Pope you can believe whatever you want."

REPLY: No argument here.

"The difference is pretty obvious. With Rome, you can believe whatever you wish, as long as you bow your knee to Rome. Melkites can believe all they want that the Pope is primus inter pares, while they bow their knee to him and obey his whims.
You and I are in complete agreement on alot of stuff it seems.

Quote
That is a bit of an oversimplification of the Latin position
You're absolutely correct, I am oversimplifying for conversation's sake.

Quote
They do have boundaries, although thos are being pushed further out as time goes on
The clown and guitar masses, along with the "Charismatic" Catholics prove this.

Quote
astern Catholics make the same claim about "keeping your traditions" but it is reversed.   This is the fact of the matter
You're correct, and unfortunately, no amount of arguing can change this, it seems.

Quote
This is within Canonical Orthodoxy, though
I thought that was what you were talking about. Sorry.

Quote
If I was a Traditionalist Roman Catholic and an Orthodox Western Rite Church opened up down the street, I would certainly get ticked off and view it as encroachment
I would totally see where a Roman Catholic was coming from if they complained about this.

Quote
How can the growth of the Western Rite occur without this clash?
I would assume, dont sheep steal, and just be open to disenfranchised Anglicans and Roman Catholics who are wanting to rid themselves of all the nonsense....of course that is again, an oversimplification on my part.

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
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,301



« Reply #94 on: January 08, 2014, 01:51:47 PM »

I am of the opinion that neither ER or WR Orthodoxy will grow very well in America until the Orthodox stop walking on eggshells with the Protestants and RCs and start preaching that one is not a true Christian unless they are united to Christ's bride. I pray both will flourish in our spiritually thirsty land.

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #95 on: January 08, 2014, 03:12:31 PM »

I am of the opinion that neither ER or WR Orthodoxy will grow very well in America until the Orthodox stop walking on eggshells with the Protestants and RCs and start preaching that one is not a true Christian unless they are united to Christ's bride. I pray both will flourish in our spiritually thirsty land.

In Christ,
Andrew
^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
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 2,591


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #96 on: January 08, 2014, 03:20:20 PM »

I am of the opinion that neither ER or WR Orthodoxy will grow very well in America until the Orthodox stop walking on eggshells with the Protestants and RCs and start preaching that one is not a true Christian unless they are united to Christ's bride. I pray both will flourish in our spiritually thirsty land.

In Christ,
Andrew


POTM ^
Logged

My sins run out behind me and I do not see them, but today I am coming to judge the errors of another.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #97 on: January 08, 2014, 05:43:17 PM »

I am of the opinion that neither ER or WR Orthodoxy will grow very well in America until the Orthodox stop walking on eggshells with the Protestants and RCs and start preaching that one is not a true Christian unless they are united to Christ's bride. I pray both will flourish in our spiritually thirsty land.

In Christ,
Andrew


POTM ^


It's a bold statement and the gist is true, but more and more folks in America have no church affiliation. From what I've seen, there is little being done for them.
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.
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,301



« Reply #98 on: January 08, 2014, 05:53:16 PM »

I am of the opinion that neither ER or WR Orthodoxy will grow very well in America until the Orthodox stop walking on eggshells with the Protestants and RCs and start preaching that one is not a true Christian unless they are united to Christ's bride. I pray both will flourish in our spiritually thirsty land.

In Christ,
Andrew


POTM ^


It's a bold statement and the gist is true, but more and more folks in America have no church affiliation. From what I've seen, there is little being done for them.
This is true, too, unfortunately. Sad

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #99 on: January 09, 2014, 04:12:50 PM »

That is something everyone wants to avoid. I cant speak for everyone, but in my town, there are 2 Orthodox churches. The Greek church has no priest, and only has services maybe twice a month. So quite a few come to our Church (especially on major feasts) but when a priest shows up there they go o their home church.

How do they like your church?
Logged

frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #100 on: January 09, 2014, 10:34:50 PM »

If you have a list of legitimate Western customs, canons, etc. that you feel are disregarded or viewed as heterodox within Eastern Orthodoxy, or if you would compile such a list, I for one would be interested in reading it.  At least some of those things, I'm sure, would also affect us (OO): for example, none of our Churches prohibits multiple men from being ordained to the same rank within a single Liturgy (in fact, it is often done, even for the ordination of bishops).   

Unleavened bread for the Eucharist, Baptism by affusion, Icons not in conformity with Byzantine canons are three that seem to come up alot.

The Antiochian Western Rite uses leavened bread for the Eucharist. The Western Rite parish in Fort Worth has an adult sized Baptismal font for full immersion. If we took all the icons out of Byzantine Rite Churches that do not conform to Byzantine standards, there would be a lot of older Byzantine Rite Orthodox Churches without icons.

Fr.  John W. Morris
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #101 on: January 10, 2014, 12:10:32 PM »

That is something everyone wants to avoid. I cant speak for everyone, but in my town, there are 2 Orthodox churches. The Greek church has no priest, and only has services maybe twice a month. So quite a few come to our Church (especially on major feasts) but when a priest shows up there they go o their home church.

How do they like your church?
They love it, because we're all pretty tightly knit to one degree or another. Not only that, but we're active in the life of our Church. A bunch show up for major feast days, because they feel that we really celebrate the feasts as we should. This all being said, not alot have truly joined because St. George's (the Greek Church) is their church, but they recognize that we're all Orthodox so we're all members of the Body regardless.

Unfortunately, they never stay long enough to teach me how to make proper Dolmathes Smiley

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: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #102 on: January 10, 2014, 05:22:18 PM »

WR has not caused any fuss? Glad to hear it.
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 #103 on: January 10, 2014, 07:23:10 PM »

Though I know that there is important theology and practices involved, Primuspilus comment illustrates that some of the friction between western/eastern customs/rites is politics amongst the hierarchy and particular apologist that the average lay people can not be as concerned with. People can come together if they are allowed to and have leaders willing to do it.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 07:23:45 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
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 7,003


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #104 on: January 10, 2014, 07:27:54 PM »

My own parish priest seems to view the WR as a liturgical rite alone.

IMO a good approach. WRO should draw from Eastern sources and ERO should draw from Western sources. The teaching of Church is neither Western nor Eastern but Catholic. I like how bishop Jerome put it:

Quote from: Bishop Jerome of Manhattan
In other words, to be Orthodox means to be in union with the whole Orthodox Church, and to accept all of its heritage.

Christianity is Catholic, as you say, but it is also a Middle Eastern religion.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #105 on: January 13, 2014, 09:08:49 AM »

WR has not caused any fuss? Glad to hear it.
Well, that's not ENTIRELY accurate. There have been a few folks who have come in, expecting the Liturgy they know, and have never heard of the Western Rite, and leave very quickly, thinking us a schismatic group, or stay and ask us how we can be called Orthodox and not use the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

This comes usually from folks who are visiting town and see that St. George's is closed (which it often times, is) so they come to our church.

For the local Roman Catholic churches, they tend to be really cool about it all. Some have inquired, but I dont know if any have joined.

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 #106 on: January 13, 2014, 03:31:38 PM »

WR has not caused any fuss? Glad to hear it.
Well, that's not ENTIRELY accurate. There have been a few folks who have come in, expecting the Liturgy they know, and have never heard of the Western Rite, and leave very quickly, thinking us a schismatic group, or stay and ask us how we can be called Orthodox and not use the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

This comes usually from folks who are visiting town and see that St. George's is closed (which it often times, is) so they come to our church.

For the local Roman Catholic churches, they tend to be really cool about it all. Some have inquired, but I dont know if any have joined.

PP

May I suggest that you put the name of the Archdiocese, the Metropolitan and your Bishop  on your sign and in the bulletin so that people will know that you are canonically Orthodox. We had a Western Rite Vespers service at the Archdiocesan convention, but most Eastern Orthodox including those in the Antiochian Archdiocese which has an active and growing Western Rite have never actually attended a Western Rite service. I have only been to a few Vespers and 2 Western Rite Divine Liturgies during 34 years as an Antiochian Orthodox Priest.

Fr. John W. Morris
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 03:33:48 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #107 on: January 14, 2014, 09:03:26 AM »

WR has not caused any fuss? Glad to hear it.
Well, that's not ENTIRELY accurate. There have been a few folks who have come in, expecting the Liturgy they know, and have never heard of the Western Rite, and leave very quickly, thinking us a schismatic group, or stay and ask us how we can be called Orthodox and not use the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

This comes usually from folks who are visiting town and see that St. George's is closed (which it often times, is) so they come to our church.

For the local Roman Catholic churches, they tend to be really cool about it all. Some have inquired, but I dont know if any have joined.

PP

May I suggest that you put the name of the Archdiocese, the Metropolitan and your Bishop  on your sign and in the bulletin so that people will know that you are canonically Orthodox. We had a Western Rite Vespers service at the Archdiocesan convention, but most Eastern Orthodox including those in the Antiochian Archdiocese which has an active and growing Western Rite have never actually attended a Western Rite service. I have only been to a few Vespers and 2 Western Rite Divine Liturgies during 34 years as an Antiochian Orthodox Priest.

Fr. John W. Morris
We have the name of the Archdiocese and the Rite. I think we have Met. Phillip's name somewhere, but I dont recall.

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 #108 on: January 14, 2014, 10:16:51 AM »

WR has not caused any fuss? Glad to hear it.
Well, that's not ENTIRELY accurate. There have been a few folks who have come in, expecting the Liturgy they know, and have never heard of the Western Rite, and leave very quickly, thinking us a schismatic group, or stay and ask us how we can be called Orthodox and not use the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

Fr. John W. Morris
This comes usually from folks who are visiting town and see that St. George's is closed (which it often times, is) so they come to our church.

For the local Roman Catholic churches, they tend to be really cool about it all. Some have inquired, but I dont know if any have joined.

PP

May I suggest that you put the name of the Archdiocese, the Metropolitan and your Bishop  on your sign and in the bulletin so that people will know that you are canonically Orthodox. We had a Western Rite Vespers service at the Archdiocesan convention, but most Eastern Orthodox including those in the Antiochian Archdiocese which has an active and growing Western Rite have never actually attended a Western Rite service. I have only been to a few Vespers and 2 Western Rite Divine Liturgies during 34 years as an Antiochian Orthodox Priest.

Fr. John W. Morris
We have the name of the Archdiocese and the Rite. I think we have Met. Phillip's name somewhere, but I dont recall.

PP

Eastern Orthodox do not like change or anything that is different from what they are used to seeing and experiencing. Because only about 10% of the Antiochian Archdiocese is Western Rite, most Orthodox, even those in our Archdiocese which has an active and growing Western Rite, do not know that there is even  Western Rite Orthodoxy. I suspect that those who are not in the two American Orthodox Churches with the Western Rite, us and ROCOR know that there are Western Rite parishes within Orthodoxy. I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2014, 10:17:59 AM by frjohnmorris » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #109 on: January 14, 2014, 10:22:04 AM »

Quote
Because only about 10% of the Antiochian Archdiocese is Western Rite, most Orthodox, even those in our Archdiocese which has an active and growing Western Rite, do not know that there is even  Western Rite Orthodoxy
Judging by some folk's responses, quite a few that do know about it try to explain away its Orthodoxy (and orthodoxy).

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

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 #110 on: January 14, 2014, 10:35:26 AM »

Quote
Because only about 10% of the Antiochian Archdiocese is Western Rite, most Orthodox, even those in our Archdiocese which has an active and growing Western Rite, do not know that there is even  Western Rite Orthodoxy
Judging by some folk's responses, quite a few that do know about it try to explain away its Orthodoxy (and orthodoxy).

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

PP

The more Eastern Rite Orthodox are exposed to the beauty of the Western Rite, the more will accept it as Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #111 on: January 14, 2014, 11:41:51 AM »

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

Yes.  Do you really have no experience with Eastern Rite Orthodoxy, but only Western?  Just curious, not a criticism at all.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #112 on: January 14, 2014, 12:53:11 PM »

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

Yes.  Do you really have no experience with Eastern Rite Orthodoxy, but only Western?  Just curious, not a criticism at all.

If you are asking me. I have been a Byzantine Rite Eastern Orthodox Priest for almost 34 years. I have had only limited experience with Western Rite Orthodoxy. I would have have no idea how to serve the Western Rite or do the chant properly. I only know the Antiochian expression of the Byzantine Rite. I have been to 2 Armenian Liturgies and several Coptic Liturgies. I have never been to a Syriac Rite Liturgy.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #113 on: January 14, 2014, 01:34:50 PM »

Would you like to serve in WR? Would you need any special permission from your bishop to do that?
Logged

frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #114 on: January 14, 2014, 01:56:50 PM »

Would you like to serve in WR? Would you need any special permission from your bishop to do that?

I would need special permission to serve the Western Rite. I would also have to receive proper training to know how to do it. I have the Western Rite liturgical books, but reading rubrics and seeing it actually done are two separate things. The Western Rite has its own traditions. For example, the way that they cense is different. I have no idea how to chant properly in the Western tradition. The same thing would be true for a Western Rite Priest, before he could serve the Byzantine Rite, he would have to be properly trained.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #115 on: January 14, 2014, 03:13:41 PM »

If you are asking me. I have been a Byzantine Rite Eastern Orthodox Priest for almost 34 years. I have had only limited experience with Western Rite Orthodoxy. I would have have no idea how to serve the Western Rite or do the chant properly. I only know the Antiochian expression of the Byzantine Rite. I have been to 2 Armenian Liturgies and several Coptic Liturgies. I have never been to a Syriac Rite Liturgy.

Fr. John W. Morris

Sorry, Father, my question was for primuspilus (but I was glad to read your reply anyway!). 
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #116 on: January 15, 2014, 12:05:01 PM »

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

Yes.  Do you really have no experience with Eastern Rite Orthodoxy, but only Western?  Just curious, not a criticism at all.
I have never been to an ER anything. Vespers, Liturgy, nothing...well, almost nothing.

When I was a Baptist missionary in Russia, we accidentally stumbled in on a Patriarchial Liturgy at the Cathedral of the Dormition, but I had no idea what was going on.

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 #117 on: January 15, 2014, 12:42:18 PM »

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

Yes.  Do you really have no experience with Eastern Rite Orthodoxy, but only Western?  Just curious, not a criticism at all.
I have never been to an ER anything. Vespers, Liturgy, nothing...well, almost nothing.

When I was a Baptist missionary in Russia, we accidentally stumbled in on a Patriarchial Liturgy at the Cathedral of the Dormition, but I had no idea what was going on.

PP

Actually if you outline the Western Rite Mass and compare it to an outline of the Byzantine Rite Divine Liturgy, you will see that the outline is identical. We Easterners just fill in the blanks differently.

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #118 on: January 15, 2014, 12:55:12 PM »

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

Yes.  Do you really have no experience with Eastern Rite Orthodoxy, but only Western?  Just curious, not a criticism at all.
I have never been to an ER anything. Vespers, Liturgy, nothing...well, almost nothing.

When I was a Baptist missionary in Russia, we accidentally stumbled in on a Patriarchial Liturgy at the Cathedral of the Dormition, but I had no idea what was going on.

PP

Actually if you outline the Western Rite Mass and compare it to an outline of the Byzantine Rite Divine Liturgy, you will see that the outline is identical. We Easterners just fill in the blanks differently.

Fr. John W. Morris

This this this this this! Time eleventy billion. THIS.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #119 on: January 15, 2014, 01:18:13 PM »

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

Yes.  Do you really have no experience with Eastern Rite Orthodoxy, but only Western?  Just curious, not a criticism at all.
I have never been to an ER anything. Vespers, Liturgy, nothing...well, almost nothing.

When I was a Baptist missionary in Russia, we accidentally stumbled in on a Patriarchial Liturgy at the Cathedral of the Dormition, but I had no idea what was going on.

PP

Actually if you outline the Western Rite Mass and compare it to an outline of the Byzantine Rite Divine Liturgy, you will see that the outline is identical. We Easterners just fill in the blanks differently.

Fr. John W. Morris
Thats what a group of Greeks visiting from New Jersey told us. St. George's was closed and they came to our parish. They loved it and said every time they're down here they're coming to our parish.

Too bad not all ER's understand this. Even some priests, unfortunately.

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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #120 on: January 15, 2014, 01:47:36 PM »

Quote
Because only about 10% of the Antiochian Archdiocese is Western Rite, most Orthodox, even those in our Archdiocese which has an active and growing Western Rite, do not know that there is even  Western Rite Orthodoxy
Judging by some folk's responses, quite a few that do know about it try to explain away its Orthodoxy (and orthodoxy).

Quote
I was very happy that they had a Western Rite Vespers service at our Archdiocesan Convention because it exposes more of our people to the  Western Rite
Is it really that different?

PP
the only difference my sons commented on was a) the flat Eucharist, b) it was shorter.

One of the services we went to they had instrumental music, which they immediately noticed.

Other than that, no difference.
Logged

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

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #121 on: January 15, 2014, 02:04:19 PM »

Is it true that the WR eucharist uses leavened bread flattened to look like azymes?
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #122 on: January 15, 2014, 02:27:54 PM »

Quote
the only difference my sons commented on was a) the flat Eucharist, b) it was shorter
Yeah, ours is like a rectangular shape.

Quote
One of the services we went to they had instrumental music, which they immediately noticed
We use an electric keyboard in only 2 places. One, a single note is played to signify the beginning note of a chant. Second, a 1 or 2 bar into when we are singing a hymn from the hymnal, since many in our parish never sang a capella. After the intro, its no music at all.

Quote
Is it true that the WR eucharist uses leavened bread flattened to look like azymes?
Before the Body is broken into pieces, which are rectangular in shape, it looks like .

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
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #123 on: January 15, 2014, 02:51:33 PM »

Before the Body is broken into pieces, which are rectangular in shape, it looks like .

This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #124 on: January 15, 2014, 03:02:27 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

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
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #125 on: January 15, 2014, 03:18:55 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP

Yeah, we use the same thing: leavened bread in the shape of the wafers typically used in the West. I'm guessing the idea is to use leavened bread in conformity with Orthodox custom and belief, but in the shape and style long seen in the West. Never actually heard an explanation of this, but I've always just assumed it was one example of the slight modifications made to the Roman liturgy and rubrics in order to bring them into conformity with Orthodox belief and practice. Makes sense to me.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #126 on: January 15, 2014, 03:23:37 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP

Yeah, we use the same thing: leavened bread in the shape of the wafers typically used in the West. I'm guessing the idea is to use leavened bread in conformity with Orthodox custom and belief, but in the shape and style long seen in the West. Never actually heard an explanation of this, but I've always just assumed it was one example of the slight modifications made to the Roman liturgy and rubrics in order to bring them into conformity with Orthodox belief and practice. Makes sense to me.
Yeah, I never knew it was even an issue. Is Intinction an issue as well? Serious question.

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
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #127 on: January 15, 2014, 03:28:05 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP

Yeah, we use the same thing: leavened bread in the shape of the wafers typically used in the West. I'm guessing the idea is to use leavened bread in conformity with Orthodox custom and belief, but in the shape and style long seen in the West. Never actually heard an explanation of this, but I've always just assumed it was one example of the slight modifications made to the Roman liturgy and rubrics in order to bring them into conformity with Orthodox belief and practice. Makes sense to me.
Yeah, I never knew it was even an issue. Is Intinction an issue as well? Serious question.

PP

Yeah, leavened vs. unleavened bread was one of the controversies at issue around the time of the schism.

I don't think intinction is a problem, as that's how every Orthodox church I've been to administers the sacrament. I've attended the Divine Liturgy at several ER parishes and they all mix the bread and wine in a cup and give it to the hateful on a spoon. The spoon is the only part that's different. My priest dips a piece of the bread in the wine and places on our tongue by hand.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #128 on: January 15, 2014, 03:40:01 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP

Yeah, we use the same thing: leavened bread in the shape of the wafers typically used in the West. I'm guessing the idea is to use leavened bread in conformity with Orthodox custom and belief, but in the shape and style long seen in the West. Never actually heard an explanation of this, but I've always just assumed it was one example of the slight modifications made to the Roman liturgy and rubrics in order to bring them into conformity with Orthodox belief and practice. Makes sense to me.

Do you realize that you are equating Orthodox with Eastern here? Azymes were in use the West well before the schism.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #129 on: January 15, 2014, 04:01:29 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP

Yeah, we use the same thing: leavened bread in the shape of the wafers typically used in the West. I'm guessing the idea is to use leavened bread in conformity with Orthodox custom and belief, but in the shape and style long seen in the West. Never actually heard an explanation of this, but I've always just assumed it was one example of the slight modifications made to the Roman liturgy and rubrics in order to bring them into conformity with Orthodox belief and practice. Makes sense to me.

Do you realize that you are equating Orthodox with Eastern here? Azymes were in use the West well before the schism.

Oops, sorry bout that. Yes, it was the Eastern practice before the schism. Since then, it's simply been the Orthodox practice. Of course, even at the time, I believe the contention was that it wasn't just an Eastern practice, but was another area where the Western church had deviated from normative faith and practice. I don't recall it off the top of my head, but believe there was some theological reasoning behind the use of leavened bread.
Logged
phronesis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AWRV
Posts: 46


St. Mark, Pillar of Orthodoxy, pray for me.


« Reply #130 on: January 15, 2014, 04:05:12 PM »

Re: leavened bread, this is helpful: http://www.prosphora.org/page27.html
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #131 on: January 15, 2014, 04:07:17 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP

Yeah, we use the same thing: leavened bread in the shape of the wafers typically used in the West. I'm guessing the idea is to use leavened bread in conformity with Orthodox custom and belief, but in the shape and style long seen in the West. Never actually heard an explanation of this, but I've always just assumed it was one example of the slight modifications made to the Roman liturgy and rubrics in order to bring them into conformity with Orthodox belief and practice. Makes sense to me.

Do you realize that you are equating Orthodox with Eastern here? Azymes were in use the West well before the schism.

Oops, sorry bout that. Yes, it was the Eastern practice before the schism. Since then, it's simply been the Orthodox practice. Of course, even at the time, I believe the contention was that it wasn't just an Eastern practice, but was another area where the Western church had deviated from normative faith and practice. I don't recall it off the top of my head, but believe there was some theological reasoning behind the use of leavened bread.
I think its because the Last Supper was in the evening, so leavened bread would naturally be used.
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
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 #132 on: January 15, 2014, 05:44:56 PM »

I did learn that intinction was a normal practice in the latin rite as well toward the 11th century.
Apparently Cardinal Humberts objections to it around 1054 were laughed off in France and other areas where it had become and continued to be the normal practice as well. I don't know the full details but certainly intinction remained common in much of the latin west for at least two more centuries if not longer...

Quote
on either side to seize upon points of difference hitherto ignored or at least regarded as unimportant in order to emphasize the growing antagonism For example the use of unleavened bread for the Eucharist having become fairly general in the West by the end of the ninth century this was later elevated into a serious matter of disagreement between the Greeks and Latins by partisans on both sides 1 Similarly when Cardinal Humbert bishop of Silva Candida and papal legate was busy collecting pretexts for abuse of the Easterns he condemned intinction and the delivery of the sacrament in a spoon as undesirable customs that traversed the commands given at the institution of the Eucharist He asserts that in the West the Bread and the Wine are administered separately 2 This statement which denies the existence of intinction among the Latins is hard to reconcile with the facts of the case for undoubtedly the practice was in full vigour in many parts of the West at this time But his remarks serve to show how the custom would soon cease to be viewed as a matter of indifference when the absence of intinction could be cited in controversy with the Greeks This consideration would therefore help to account for the growing disfavour with which the practice came to be regarded in the West Yet this was after all a minor point In any case intinction stood condemned as soon as ever the implications of concomitance were worked out Moreover toward the end of on either side to seize upon points of difference hitherto ignored or at least regarded as unimportant in order to emphasize the growing antagonism For example the use of unleavened bread for the Eucharist having become fairly general in the West by the end of the ninth century this was later elevated into a serious matter of disagreement between the Greeks and Latins by partisans on both sides 1 Similarly when Cardinal Humbert bishop of Silva Candida and papal legate was busy collecting pretexts for abuse of the Easterns he condemned intinction and the delivery of the sacrament in a spoon as undesirable customs that traversed the commands given at the institution of the Eucharist He asserts that in the West the Bread and the Wine are administered separately 2 This statement which denies the existence of intinction among the Latins is hard to reconcile with the facts of the case for undoubtedly the practice was in full vigour in many parts of the West at this time But his remarks serve to show how the custom would soon cease to be viewed as a matter of indifference when the absence of intinction could be cited in controversy with the Greeks This consideration would therefore help to account for the growing disfavour with which the practice came to be regarded in the West Yet this was after all a minor point In any case intinction stood condemned as soon as ever the implications of concomitance were worked out Moreover toward the end of the eleventh and during the early part of the succeeding century teachers like Hildebert of Tours and Anselm were asserting the doctrine in plainer terms than had ever been used before while in certain localities zealous ecclesiastics were ready to carry the implication of this teaching to practical conclusions For some time however intinction did not lack supporters and apologists Bishop John of Avranches 1069 for example while forbidding the clergy to receive intincted Hosts defended the practice of communicating the people in this manner 1 That is to say he approved of the common Gallican usage of the preceding century such as is described in the Codex Rato di 2 in which the bishop is ordered to communicate the clergy above the rank of subdeacon with the separate species while the subdeacons and by inference all subordinate orders and lay folk receive an intincted Host 3 His defence of intinction is as usual made to rest upon an exaggerated fear of risk in administering the chalice to the laity Anxiety on this score and the desire to avoid other forms of involuntary irreverence which had already been the cause of several modifications in the administration of the chalice were reinforced by the steadily growing acceptance of transubstantiation as the doctrine of the Church.,

It was obviously open to an opponent of intinction to retort that the better way was to omit the second species altogether from the lay folks houselling since all were agreed that reception in the one kind was enough to procure the benefits of communion 1 This argument indeed finally prevailed But a worthy champion for intinction was found in the person of Ernulph Bishop of Rochester Early in the twelfth century he wrote a defence of the practice in reply to a correspondent who had asked him the reason why the communion was commonly delivered in a conjoint manner Ernulph admits that the custom then in daily use was of comparatively recent growth but he justifies it in a very able fashion He draws attention to the fact that in instituting the sacraments our Saviour commands what we are to do but leaves the manner of doing it to the discretion of the Church No one is scandalized because customs and ceremonies have developed in connection with baptism and the divine command to baptize contains no regulations about triple or simple immersion As to the mere fact of mingling the two sacred species of the Eucharist a priest does this whenever he performs the commixture and no exception can be taken therefore to the act in itself Then of course there is the objection that the conjoint sacrament resembles the sop given to the traitor But if this is allowed to have weight we must be consistent and not only never use sops at our meals but also abolish the kiss of peace because by a kiss Judas betrayed his Lord Every one knows that men's beards and moustaches are apt to be a cause of unintentional irreverence at communion when the chalice is used and it is not to be expected that a priest should housel some of his flock in one way and some in another Intinction seems to be a natural and reverent way of delivering the sacrament If it is still further urged that a papal decree can be quoted against it there are other cases of such decrees 157 being overruled by the practice of the Church The section of Ernulph's letter dealing with these points is subjoined at length below for it is written with independence of judgement and practical wisdom beyond the common 1

Quote
1 Ep nt II ad Lambertum

Prima ergo posita est percunctatio de sacra men to altaris ita proposita ut quaeratur cur hodierna ecclesiae consuetudo alio et pene contrario ritu censeat porrigi corpus dominicum quam a domino in coena discipulis suis fuerit distributum Id enim quotidianus ecclesiae praetendit usus ut tribuatur hostia sanguine intincta cum a domino prius corpus deinde sanguis porrectus fuisse metnoretur Quem etiam morem ecclesiae ex decretis Julii papae nitimini improbare quibus idem papa dominicum commendat ordinem et apostolica confidentia ecclesiasticam arguit dispositionem adjiciens intinctam panis buccellam dominum proditori suo contulisse De cuius dubietatis ambiguitate quod intelligimus quod a nostris doctoribus accepimus edicere parati iumus

    "Redemptor noster veniens in mundum quia propter hominum salutem inter homines apparuit quaeque reparationi infirmitatis humanae commoda seu necessaria fore praevidit sicut oportere vidit in sapientia sua ita ab hoininibus fieri et esse voluit in ecclesia sua Haec eis cum quibus conver sari dignatus est verbo vel exemplo insinuavit quae facienda erant docens certum quo facienda erant modo praefigere omittens Hinc esse videtur quod ait hoc facite in meam commemorationem Non ait hoc modo facite Et ite baptizate omnes gentes in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritiit Sancti Non ait hoc modo baptizate non ait semel mergite aut tertio mergite Non ait scrutinium facite chrisma sacrate Qua in re insinuasse videtur quae praecepta sunt non fieri non licere pro ratione vero necessitatis vel honestatis alio et alio modo fieri licere Qui ergo quaerit cur non accipiantur exemplo dominico singulatim quae de altari sumuntur nova consuetudine simul mixta simili ratione quaerere potest cur non sumantur in simili loco aut de simili mensa vel in simili forma aut cur etiam aliud sumatur videlicet aqua quae a domino non legitur in coena esse porrecta Si vero ea necessartis causis intelligit rationabiliter esse parta ac reperta noverit et ea de quibus quaeritur et cur aliter fiant quam a domino facta sunt inquiritur ratione non inferiori esse comparata Porro cur miratur quispiam quod sacramenta porriguntur simul mixta Nonne indesinenter in dominici corporis et sanguinis consecratione diviso corpore in tres partes una a sacerdote videlicet quae ab ipso sumenda est in calice reservatur sanguini admiscetur sanguine infunditur cum sanguine sumitur Quis sacerdotem peccare dicat dum in quotidiano tanti mysterii officio carnem cum sanguinis suscipit admixtione Si ergo bonum est sumere hostiam sanguine infusam malum erit sumere hostiam sanguine intinctam Quod qui malum non esse agnoverit desinet mirari cum ratione factum esse cognoverit Arguitur iste mos ex eo quod buccellae intinctae a domino traditori suo porrectae similitudinem videtur habere Id si diligenter inspiciatur nihil dignum reprehensione continere videbitur Si enim exteriora pensentur nemo dicet justum hominem edere non debere panem intinctum in sua coena quia id proditor manducavit Judas in dominica coena Aut nemo ideo non dabit osculum pacis quia Judas osculo dedit"
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 05:51:08 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
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #133 on: January 15, 2014, 08:26:36 PM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP

Yeah, we use the same thing: leavened bread in the shape of the wafers typically used in the West. I'm guessing the idea is to use leavened bread in conformity with Orthodox custom and belief, but in the shape and style long seen in the West. Never actually heard an explanation of this, but I've always just assumed it was one example of the slight modifications made to the Roman liturgy and rubrics in order to bring them into conformity with Orthodox belief and practice. Makes sense to me.

Do you realize that you are equating Orthodox with Eastern here? Azymes were in use the West well before the schism.

Oops, sorry bout that. Yes, it was the Eastern practice before the schism. Since then, it's simply been the Orthodox practice. Of course, even at the time, I believe the contention was that it wasn't just an Eastern practice, but was another area where the Western church had deviated from normative faith and practice. I don't recall it off the top of my head, but believe there was some theological reasoning behind the use of leavened bread.
I think its because the Last Supper was in the evening, so leavened bread would naturally be used.
PP

Not necessarily. St. John 18:28 The Mystical Supper took place before the actual Passover. do He would have used leavened bread. We use leavened bread because we partake of the resurrected living Body of Christ.  Originally event the West used leavened bread for the Eucharist.

Fr. John W. Morris
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 #134 on: January 15, 2014, 08:29:38 PM »

I will always believe it is an error to use unleavened bread for the eucharist, without being actually heretical, I view it as inadviseable done out of ignorance or some other reason. It remains a legitimate sacrament nevertheless.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 08:30:29 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
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #135 on: January 15, 2014, 10:49:46 PM »

To primuspilus:


REPLY:  This is within Canonical Orthodoxy, though.   If I was a Traditionalist Roman Catholic and an Orthodox Western Rite Church opened up down the street, I would certainly get ticked off and view it as encroachment.   
 

Why?  Our Western Rite is not based on deception designed to fool people into believing that they had not left the Orthodox Church but simply became  Orthodox in Communion with Rome or a Roman Catholic monarch forcing people to submit to Rome.  Our Western Rite is clearly identified as Orthodox. No Roman Catholic monarch forced people to join our Western Rite, they freely came to us.

Fr. John W. Morris
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 10:51:15 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #136 on: January 16, 2014, 12:19:30 AM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP
It makes happy two implacable camps-those who think azymes are heresy (i.e. a lot of ERO) and those who hold flat wafers as Western tradition (with a dash of disdain for the loaves that have multiplied in the West after Vatican II).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

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



WWW
« Reply #137 on: January 16, 2014, 01:09:04 AM »

Quote
To primuspilus:
If I was a Traditionalist Roman Catholic and an Orthodox Western Rite Church opened up down the street, I would certainly get ticked off and view it as encroachment.  


I also have never viewed the "Western Rite" Orthodox Church as an encroachment, because less than 10% of it's members are former Traditionalist Roman Catholics. If someone saw multiple missions/parishes who had that background, the view of encroachment might make sense.  

Yes, I agree with Rev. Fr. John. Almost all the traditional Roman Catholics who had converted to Orthodox that I met were part of the byzantine rite majority. IN various "WR" Orthodox Churches, out of about 30 people in a mission or parish, I tended to meet one or two people who were former conservative or traditional Roman Catholics. 98% are former protestants or something else. It is actually quite amazing how many former Roman Catholics are in the byzantine rite of the Orthodox Church and how few are in the Western rite. It is probably a great blessing from the Eastern Orthodox Perspective to have this many come to them. I don't think anyone fits into Orthodoxy as easily as Roman Catholics, once they go beyond any remaining ritual preferences.

I have concluded that like myself, many other Roman Catholic seekers saw the inconsistencies and hardships in being part of the so-called "Western Rite" as not worth the amount of effort it would require to participate happily. Given a fully functioning large byzantine rite parish, few people are going to go through the effort of doing something different. The attachment to a particular rite is not a barrier for them. They came to the church for the faith and were quite content with the glories of the rite(s) of byzantium and probably less content with the "low mass mentality" typically found in the western rite.

Unlike those Roman Catholics who converted to the Byzantine rite, I am probably more attached to the fullness of the Western rite as I typically encounter it in ideal parish or monastery of the Roman Catholic Church. These are rare, but they exist near where I live, despite the Roman Church being more greatly weakened by modernization and heresies within her clergy than the Orthodox. Somehow I justify this, but to many others I may appear peculiar or immature.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 01:20:51 AM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #138 on: January 16, 2014, 08:41:49 AM »

I know for us, the overwhelmingly vast majority in our parish were Anglicans or Episcopalians that got fed up with their complete nonsense and converted. I know for a fact that there is one family that left Rome after Vatican 2, were ER and are now WR (originally because again, the Greek Church is hardly ever open) and now stay WR because they love it. They were my sponsors Smiley

About 30% or so came from a this-or-that Protestant background. However there is one totally awesome thing that happens alot in our Church. I live in the town that unfortunately is also inhabited by Liberty University. Every year, they tell kids in "bible class" to find a church that is different from the one they grew up with, go to a service, and note the differences. Well, alot of those kids come to our parish and view a liturgy, and afterwards stay for coffee hour and talk with our Priest. A year later, they are Orthodox Smiley It happens every year (including this year, we have at least 2, possibly more).

Quote
Not necessarily. St. John 18:28 The Mystical Supper took place before the actual Passover. do He would have used leavened bread. We use leavened bread because we partake of the resurrected living Body of Christ.  Originally event the West used leavened bread for the Eucharist.

Fr. John W. Morris
Thats why Im not a priest....well, that and because I dont wanna be one Smiley

Quote
It makes happy two implacable camps-those who think azymes are heresy
Isa, are they really that many who view them as heresy?

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 #139 on: January 16, 2014, 09:00:06 AM »

Quote
This is a bit puzzling to me. If azymes are okay, why is this leavened? If azymes are not okay, why do you want your bread to look like them?
I honestly, have no answer for you. They just look small and circular. I wasn't trying to say they were azymes or anything. My priest says, "Behold the Lamb of God; behold him that takest away the sins of the world" and thats it for me. I don't really think about the other stuff.

PP
It makes happy two implacable camps-those who think azymes are heresy (i.e. a lot of ERO) and those who hold flat wafers as Western tradition (with a dash of disdain for the loaves that have multiplied in the West after Vatican II).

The wafers used by the Antiochian Western Rite are leavened. I believe that they get them from some Roman Catholic nuns who bake them.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,546


« Reply #140 on: January 16, 2014, 09:29:23 AM »

Why would RC nuns bake leavened wafers?
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #141 on: January 16, 2014, 09:39:15 AM »

Why would RC nuns bake leavened wafers?

I do not know why they bake them, but I have been told more than once by Western Rite clergy, including their Vicar General, that they get leavened wafers baked by RC nuns. I am not Western Rite, so only know what the Western Rite clergy tell me about what they do.

Fr. John  W.  Morris
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #142 on: January 16, 2014, 09:42:48 AM »

I know for us, the overwhelmingly vast majority in our parish were Anglicans or Episcopalians that got fed up with their complete nonsense and converted. I know for a fact that there is one family that left Rome after Vatican 2, were ER and are now WR (originally because again, the Greek Church is hardly ever open) and now stay WR because they love it. They were my sponsors Smiley

About 30% or so came from a this-or-that Protestant background. However there is one totally awesome thing that happens alot in our Church. I live in the town that unfortunately is also inhabited by Liberty University. Every year, they tell kids in "bible class" to find a church that is different from the one they grew up with, go to a service, and note the differences. Well, alot of those kids come to our parish and view a liturgy, and afterwards stay for coffee hour and talk with our Priest. A year later, they are Orthodox Smiley It happens every year (including this year, we have at least 2, possibly more).

Quote
Not necessarily. St. John 18:28 The Mystical Supper took place before the actual Passover. do He would have used leavened bread. We use leavened bread because we partake of the resurrected living Body of Christ.  Originally event the West used leavened bread for the Eucharist.

Fr. John W. Morris
Thats why Im not a priest....well, that and because I dont wanna be one Smiley

Quote
It makes happy two implacable camps-those who think azymes are heresy
Isa, are they really that many who view them as heresy?
Too many.

Btw, as I have mentioned before, I have met cradle ethic ERO who have Americanized and now are WRO.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 09:45:11 AM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #143 on: January 16, 2014, 09:46:24 AM »

I know for us, the overwhelmingly vast majority in our parish were Anglicans or Episcopalians that got fed up with their complete nonsense and converted. I know for a fact that there is one family that left Rome after Vatican 2, were ER and are now WR (originally because again, the Greek Church is hardly ever open) and now stay WR because they love it. They were my sponsors Smiley

About 30% or so came from a this-or-that Protestant background. However there is one totally awesome thing that happens alot in our Church. I live in the town that unfortunately is also inhabited by Liberty University. Every year, they tell kids in "bible class" to find a church that is different from the one they grew up with, go to a service, and note the differences. Well, alot of those kids come to our parish and view a liturgy, and afterwards stay for coffee hour and talk with our Priest. A year later, they are Orthodox Smiley It happens every year (including this year, we have at least 2, possibly more).

Quote
Not necessarily. St. John 18:28 The Mystical Supper took place before the actual Passover. do He would have used leavened bread. We use leavened bread because we partake of the resurrected living Body of Christ.  Originally event the West used leavened bread for the Eucharist.

Fr. John W. Morris
Thats why Im not a priest....well, that and because I dont wanna be one Smiley

Quote
It makes happy two implacable camps-those who think azymes are heresy
Isa, are they really that many who view them as heresy?
Too many.

Btw, as I have mentioned before, I have met cradle ethic ERO who have Americanized and now are WRO.
Which is awesome Smiley

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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #144 on: January 16, 2014, 09:58:29 AM »

I know for us, the overwhelmingly vast majority in our parish were Anglicans or Episcopalians that got fed up with their complete nonsense and converted. I know for a fact that there is one family that left Rome after Vatican 2, were ER and are now WR (originally because again, the Greek Church is hardly ever open) and now stay WR because they love it. They were my sponsors Smiley

About 30% or so came from a this-or-that Protestant background. However there is one totally awesome thing that happens alot in our Church. I live in the town that unfortunately is also inhabited by Liberty University. Every year, they tell kids in "bible class" to find a church that is different from the one they grew up with, go to a service, and note the differences. Well, alot of those kids come to our parish and view a liturgy, and afterwards stay for coffee hour and talk with our Priest. A year later, they are Orthodox Smiley It happens every year (including this year, we have at least 2, possibly more).

Quote
Not necessarily. St. John 18:28 The Mystical Supper took place before the actual Passover. do He would have used leavened bread. We use leavened bread because we partake of the resurrected living Body of Christ.  Originally event the West used leavened bread for the Eucharist.

Fr. John W. Morris
Thats why Im not a priest....well, that and because I dont wanna be one Smiley

Quote
It makes happy two implacable camps-those who think azymes are heresy
Isa, are they really that many who view them as heresy?
Too many.

Btw, as I have mentioned before, I have met cradle ethic ERO who have Americanized and now are WRO.
Which is awesome Smiley

PP
Exactly.
Logged

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

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #145 on: January 16, 2014, 11:45:48 AM »

Why would RC nuns bake leavened wafers?

I think the bigger question is, why would anyone bake them?  If all bread for the eucharist must be leavened then don't make wafers; if unleavened bread is an acceptable Western practice, then don't leaven them.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #146 on: January 16, 2014, 12:13:02 PM »

Quote
If all bread for the eucharist must be leavened then don't make wafers
You can have leavened wafers. It also makes for easier shipping I'd imagine.

Quote
if unleavened bread is an acceptable Western practice, then don't leaven them
I believe we use leavened because unleavened is not acceptable to the WR.

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: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #147 on: January 16, 2014, 01:27:45 PM »

I believe another factor is that the established ritual rubrics for our Masses necessitate that the bread be in traditional wafer form. In other words, the motions and such wouldn't work if what were used were something more like a loaf. But I could be wrong.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


"My god is greater."


« Reply #148 on: January 16, 2014, 01:32:48 PM »

Quote
If all bread for the eucharist must be leavened then don't make wafers
You can have leavened wafers. It also makes for easier shipping I'd imagine.

Quote
if unleavened bread is an acceptable Western practice, then don't leaven them
I believe we use leavened because unleavened is not acceptable to the WR.

PP

But the whole form of the wafer comes from the tradition of using unleavened bread. Essentially you are making leavened bread to look like unleavened bread. As I recall, the basic argument against unleavened bread made by the East is that the leaven represents the resurrection- the bread rises like Christ. If you're not allowing the bread to puff up the symbolism is defeated. If unleavened bread is not acceptable in WR, then this is a concession that the West was in error long before the schism. I thought the whole idea of WR was that the pre-schism West was equally Orthodox to the East.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 01:37:40 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #149 on: January 16, 2014, 01:32:55 PM »

]I have never been to an ER anything. Vespers, Liturgy, nothing...well, almost nothing.

That's really interesting, in a good way.  It doesn't often happen that way.  
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #150 on: January 16, 2014, 01:42:33 PM »

Quote
If all bread for the eucharist must be leavened then don't make wafers
You can have leavened wafers. It also makes for easier shipping I'd imagine.

Quote
if unleavened bread is an acceptable Western practice, then don't leaven them
I believe we use leavened because unleavened is not acceptable to the WR.

PP

But the whole form of the wafer comes from the tradition of using unleavened bread. Essentially you are making leavened bread to look like unleavened bread. As I recall, the basic argument against unleavened bread made by the East is that the leaven represents the resurrection- the bread rises like Christ. If you're not allowing the bread to puff up the symbolism is defeated. If unleavened bread is not acceptable in WR, then this is a concession that the West was in error long before the schism. I thought the whole idea of WR was that the pre-schism West was equally Orthodox to the East.
I honestly have no clue as to why. Could I use economia on this?

]I have never been to an ER anything. Vespers, Liturgy, nothing...well, almost nothing.

That's really interesting, in a good way.  It doesn't often happen that way. 
I've been told it is pretty rare. I'm pretty sure I'll feel very out of sorts from going to not needing a liturgy book at all to getting all befuddled at "the doors, the doors" Smiley

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: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #151 on: January 16, 2014, 02:46:30 PM »

Quote
If all bread for the eucharist must be leavened then don't make wafers
You can have leavened wafers. It also makes for easier shipping I'd imagine.

Quote
if unleavened bread is an acceptable Western practice, then don't leaven them
I believe we use leavened because unleavened is not acceptable to the WR.

PP

But the whole form of the wafer comes from the tradition of using unleavened bread. Essentially you are making leavened bread to look like unleavened bread. As I recall, the basic argument against unleavened bread made by the East is that the leaven represents the resurrection- the bread rises like Christ. If you're not allowing the bread to puff up the symbolism is defeated. If unleavened bread is not acceptable in WR, then this is a concession that the West was in error long before the schism. I thought the whole idea of WR was that the pre-schism West was equally Orthodox to the East.

Before the bread is pressed into the flattened disc, it does indeed rise like any other leavened bread would. But I also believe there is more than one way to make them, some perhaps not being "pressed" but being baked directly into the smaller wafer shape. But either way, the leaven is there and the bread does rise, if not as drastically as an entire loaf would.

As with many things in the Orthodox Western Rite, this is likely a theological change that simultaneously preserves the long-established tradition in question. In other words, what has become a normative aspect of the organic tradition in the West is preserved to whatever extent possible, in content and form, while only changing (and thus fulfilling) what needs to be changed in order to become fully consonant with Orthodoxy. This ensures the continued organic development of the tradition while also pointing it in the right direction; the faithful are not scandalized by the hijacking of their traditions, yet their heritage is now, in a sense, fuller and more closely connected with Orthodoxy.

Other examples might include how the Rosary is prayed (eschewing "imagination" for an approach that uses Scripture, thus rooting it deeper in the ancient Western tradition of lectio divina), kneeling on Sundays (less about penitence or more about awe and reverence; "Come, let us worship and bow down, Let us kneel before the LORD our Maker"), or even the mere adjusting of texts in the Mass to preserve the feeling and flow of the language, whilst totally shifting its meaning (for example, correcting "Who by His one oblation" to "Who by His own oblation" in the Mass of St. Tikhon).
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #152 on: January 16, 2014, 02:49:43 PM »

As with many things in the Orthodox Western Rite, this is likely a theological change that simultaneously preserves the long-established tradition in question. In other words, what has become a normative aspect of the organic tradition in the West is preserved to whatever extent possible, in content and form, while only changing (and thus fulfilling) what needs to be changed in order to become fully consonant with Orthodoxy. This ensures the continued organic development of the tradition while also pointing it in the right direction; the faithful are not scandalized by the hijacking of their traditions, yet their heritage is now, in a sense, fuller and more closely connected with Orthodoxy.

So it is the belief, and not merely the practice, of the Eastern Orthodox Church that unleavened bread is always and everywhere inappropriate for use in the Eucharistic Liturgy?
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #153 on: January 16, 2014, 02:57:58 PM »

As with many things in the Orthodox Western Rite, this is likely a theological change that simultaneously preserves the long-established tradition in question. In other words, what has become a normative aspect of the organic tradition in the West is preserved to whatever extent possible, in content and form, while only changing (and thus fulfilling) what needs to be changed in order to become fully consonant with Orthodoxy. This ensures the continued organic development of the tradition while also pointing it in the right direction; the faithful are not scandalized by the hijacking of their traditions, yet their heritage is now, in a sense, fuller and more closely connected with Orthodoxy.

So it is the belief, and not merely the practice, of the Eastern Orthodox Church that unleavened bread is always and everywhere inappropriate for use in the Eucharistic Liturgy?

It's a great question and one I don't know the answer to. I just know that, to the powers that be, it was important for WRO to use leaven. Whether this was seen as temporary, pastoral, or what, I haven't the foggiest.

Interestingly, Fr. Thomas Hopko stated (in his remarks on what it would take for Rome to become Orthodox again; which essentially amounts to his manifesto on what Western Orthodoxy would/should look like) that: "As for the bread, unleavened wafers may be used for pastoral reasons in the churches with this practice, but the pope would affirm leavened bread as normative for the Christian Eucharist." (source: http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php)

So maybe it's both/and?
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,746


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #154 on: January 16, 2014, 03:08:07 PM »

Interestingly, Fr. Thomas Hopko stated (in his remarks on what it would take for Rome to become Orthodox again; which essentially amounts to his manifesto on what Western Orthodoxy would/should look like) that: "As for the bread, unleavened wafers may be used for pastoral reasons in the churches with this practice, but the pope would affirm leavened bread as normative for the Christian Eucharist." (source: http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php)

So maybe it's both/and?

Or maybe Fr Hopko overreaches.  It would be difficult for Rome to affirm that leavened bread is normative for the Eucharist if they are still allowed to use it in a reunion: over one billion people using unleavened wafers versus something like three hundred million using leavened bread?  How could it ever be normative with numbers like that?  Why would it need to be normative?   
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 753



« Reply #155 on: January 16, 2014, 03:57:36 PM »

Quote
If all bread for the eucharist must be leavened then don't make wafers
You can have leavened wafers. It also makes for easier shipping I'd imagine.

Quote
if unleavened bread is an acceptable Western practice, then don't leaven them
I believe we use leavened because unleavened is not acceptable to the WR.

PP

But the whole form of the wafer comes from the tradition of using unleavened bread. Essentially you are making leavened bread to look like unleavened bread. As I recall, the basic argument against unleavened bread made by the East is that the leaven represents the resurrection- the bread rises like Christ. If you're not allowing the bread to puff up the symbolism is defeated. If unleavened bread is not acceptable in WR, then this is a concession that the West was in error long before the schism. I thought the whole idea of WR was that the pre-schism West was equally Orthodox to the East.

The situation with the azymes is not much different from that of the West being in error on the filioque long before the schism.  Those Western practices and teachings that contributed to the schism obviously had to exist before the schism:  azymes, filioque, and papal authority.  During the period in which the schism hardened (11th - 15th centuries), these matters were joined by purgatory and the epiclesis.  WR Orthodoxy naturally takes the Orthodox line on these matters.  "Pre-schism" is not a strictly chronological term, as though everything done in the West before 1054 must be okay.  Likewise, there are some post-schism Western practices (e.g., vernacular hymnody) that are compatible with Orthodoxy, and the Western Rite rightly retains them.
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 #156 on: January 16, 2014, 05:04:01 PM »

The practice of making leavened bread that appears unleavened as always seemed especially absurd to me.
Either use one form or use another, I do not think that pretending that it's not what it by giving it a different appearance makes sense, it is too peculiar. As an attempt to compromise it is debateable how successful it really is. I would argue that a more universal appearance of bread for the eucharist is of greater benefit than a this form of pretending otherwise.

Many of the ROCOR "WR" churches use the exact same obviously leavened bread that byzantine rites use.
If one follows the older rubrics which do not elevate the eucharist above the head it is not difficult to use it.
If one does not expect to put a larger leavened eucharist in the same size monstrance for a tiny wafer it is possible to do the same things with it.  The monstrances from before the 15th century would be better for larger sized eucharist.  Likewise the older forms  of pyxes, sacrariums or church tabernacles should fit well a larger leavened eucharist.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 05:10:16 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
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,044



« Reply #157 on: January 16, 2014, 05:15:56 PM »

If one follows the older rubrics which do not elevate the eucharist above the head it is not difficult to use it.

Elevating the gifts above the head doesn't seem so hard with leavened bread either. I've seen it in Eastern rite around here.
Logged

Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #158 on: January 16, 2014, 06:43:46 PM »

The practice of making leavened bread that appears unleavened as always seemed especially absurd to me.
Either use one form or use another, I do not think that pretending that it's not what it by giving it a different appearance makes sense, it is too peculiar. As an attempt to compromise it is debateable how successful it really is. I would argue that a more universal appearance of bread for the eucharist is of greater benefit than a this form of pretending otherwise.

Many of the ROCOR "WR" churches use the exact same obviously leavened bread that byzantine rites use.
If one follows the older rubrics which do not elevate the eucharist above the head it is not difficult to use it.
If one does not expect to put a larger leavened eucharist in the same size monstrance for a tiny wafer it is possible to do the same things with it.  The monstrances from before the 15th century would be better for larger sized eucharist.  Likewise the older forms  of pyxes, sacrariums or church tabernacles should fit well a larger leavened eucharist.

Labeling it "pretending" is neither fair nor accurate. No one is trying to fool anybody. It's merely the customary bread we have always used, it just has leaven now. Nothing more nothing less.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #159 on: January 22, 2014, 01:25:22 PM »

The practice of making leavened bread that appears unleavened as always seemed especially absurd to me.
Either use one form or use another, I do not think that pretending that it's not what it by giving it a different appearance makes sense, it is too peculiar. As an attempt to compromise it is debateable how successful it really is. I would argue that a more universal appearance of bread for the eucharist is of greater benefit than a this form of pretending otherwise.

Many of the ROCOR "WR" churches use the exact same obviously leavened bread that byzantine rites use.
If one follows the older rubrics which do not elevate the eucharist above the head it is not difficult to use it.
If one does not expect to put a larger leavened eucharist in the same size monstrance for a tiny wafer it is possible to do the same things with it.  The monstrances from before the 15th century would be better for larger sized eucharist.  Likewise the older forms  of pyxes, sacrariums or church tabernacles should fit well a larger leavened eucharist.

Labeling it "pretending" is neither fair nor accurate. No one is trying to fool anybody. It's merely the customary bread we have always used, it just has leaven now. Nothing more nothing less.
Ah, if this leaven thing was the biggest issue holding us back.......

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
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 4 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 0.513 seconds with 187 queries.