OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 22, 2014, 11:25:12 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Eastern Catholic vs. Western Orthodox?  (Read 37918 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #135 on: August 04, 2005, 03:05:57 PM »

Quote
That said, western IS better than NO notation and the loss of the total art.

Indeed. ÂÂ The Saint Anthony's project has made the traditional music of the Divine Liturgy much more accesible to those who do not know Greek nor Byzantine notation. ÂÂ But I think more steps have to be taken before Byzantine chant really catches on in English - primarily good liturgical translations are desperately needed. ÂÂ Many of the ones in use today that strive to be uber modern and ridiculously banal, IMO. ÂÂ They may capture the meaning, but they have neither the flow nor spirit of the Greek. ÂÂ So until something that is more or less the standard translation in English speaking countries that flows and is memorized easily is used, Orthodox worship in English will just grow more and more chaotic. ÂÂ  
Logged
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #136 on: August 04, 2005, 03:20:48 PM »

Quote
that the *only* acceptable music to worship God was Byzantine Chant.

I don't think that anyone has really said that here.  But if you look at the various musical traditions within the ancient rites they are are fairly similar.  i.e. there are no instruments and a great deal of simplicity.  Legitimate diversity in chanting traditions (Byzantine, Coptic, Gregorian, Znameny etc) is a far difference between the highly developed choral system that Russians sometimes employ or Guitar masses.   
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,353



« Reply #137 on: August 04, 2005, 03:52:37 PM »

I don't think that anyone has really said that here.ÂÂ  

No, as I wrote, a person on GEnie (a text only place from over a decade ago) wrote that *only* Byzantine Chant was acceptable to God. It wasn't here on OC.net.  I've been on-line for a good while.

Quote
But if you look at the various musical traditions within the ancient rites they are are fairly similar.  i.e. there are no instruments and a great deal of simplicity.  Legitimate diversity in chanting traditions (Byzantine, Coptic, Gregorian, Znameny etc) is a far difference between the highly developed choral system that Russians sometimes employ or Guitar masses.  ÃƒÆ’‚  

And how would not God hear worship and praise from Human Beings while using polyphony or instruments, I wonder.  There is a myriad of musics in the world.  Why should that of only one time/place/group be the only one?

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #138 on: August 04, 2005, 04:46:15 PM »

I didn't say God wouldn't hear such people or music.  I said that the traditional music of the church is chant in its various forms, thus that is what should be used for liturgical music. 
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #139 on: August 04, 2005, 05:53:17 PM »

The pre-schism West used unleavened bread, at least form the 4th century.ÂÂ
I'm obviously not making myself clear.
The filioque also predates the schism- that doesn't make it Orthodox and worth including in the Western Rite.

 
However, while flat the Western Rite Host does not look really like a Latin Catholic Host in my experience.
Well then you disagree with the Western Rite's website and the GOA Church in Denver:
Quote
The host used in Western Rite liturgies resembles the unleavened wafer used by Roman Catholics and Episcopalians, but in fact it is leavened—although flattened—bread. The use of leavened bread in accordance with Orthodox theology, was required by Metropolitan Philip when he recieved these parishes into Orthodoxy. http://westernorthodox.com/greekdenver

And so my question remains unanswered.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2005, 05:54:10 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #140 on: August 04, 2005, 06:34:47 PM »

Quote
And so my question remains unanswered.

No it doesn't. The leavened, round, and flattened loaf is the more ancient form, still found in some of the non-Chalcedonian rites, and used in the West before the schism. A Byzantine-style cube would be utterly impractical for use in the Western rite, as the host itself (not the host and paten, like in the BR) is elevated, and so it must not shed crumbs when it is picked up.
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #141 on: August 04, 2005, 09:46:44 PM »

Legitimate diversity in chanting traditions (Byzantine, Coptic, Gregorian, Znameny etc) is a far difference between the highly developed choral system that Russians sometimes employ or Guitar masses.   
From what I've heard, my parish does the most Znammeny of any OCA parish, among other forms of chant.  We only do the more complex modern choral type pieces on rare occasions.  I find it interesting that many parishes do a lot of modern choral-like pieces, as I was unaware by seeing my parish as a reference point.  I hope chant really makes a resurgence, since it really is beautiful.  I also find it interesting how many Russians like the modern stuff and think of it as the norm.....as if liturgical music was always that way.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #142 on: August 05, 2005, 05:33:36 AM »

A Byzantine-style cube would be utterly impractical for use in the Western rite, as the host itself (not the host and paten, like in the BR) is elevated, and so it must not shed crumbs when it is picked up.

Sorry, I didn't see your earlier post about this.
Isn't the Body broken prior to it's elevation in the Western Rite? Is the Body elevated first and then broken?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,365



« Reply #143 on: August 05, 2005, 05:53:55 AM »

Well then you disagree with the Western Rite's website and the GOA Church in Denver:

"The host used in Western Rite liturgies resembles the unleavened wafer used by Roman Catholics and Episcopalians, but in fact it is leavened—although flattened—bread. The use of leavened bread in accordance with Orthodox theology, was required by Metropolitan Philip when he recieved these parishes into Orthodoxy."

And so my question remains unanswered.

It also says, as a preface to this article: "This short piece, while containing some incorrect information, is presented on WesternOrthodox.com to show that not all bishops and clergy of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America (Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople) hold the same unfavourable views on the Antiochian Western Rite that Greek Orthodox Bishop Anthony of San Francisco does."

(The emphasis is mine.) Nor is it anything more than the website of one particular parish. What exactly it means in terms of genuine praxis is quite unclear, and I think the question will have to go unanswered even so far as it not being at all clear what any particular parish actually uses.

Quote
Isn't the Body broken prior to it's elevation in the Western Rite? Is the Body elevated first and then broken?

The answer is-- there IS no answer! Elevations aren't rubricated in the western rite service book.

Michno (std. modern Episcopal praxis) has up to four elevations: at the offertory, during the institution narrative, at the doxology (the big elevation), and at "gifts of God". Only the last comes after the fraction. To confuse matters, older BCPs rubricate the fraction during the institution narrative. The WR service book, however, puts it in the modern location.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #144 on: August 05, 2005, 06:20:53 AM »

The WR service book, however, puts it in the modern location.
Is that before or after the breaking?
And yes, that is a leading question of sorts....I think the idea of flattening the Host to prevent fragments falling at elevation is a pretty crumby (  Wink !)  reason if the Body is elevated after fraction anyway.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2005, 06:26:33 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #145 on: August 05, 2005, 08:34:04 AM »

The Host is elevated at the Institution Narrative, the concluding Doxology, and the Agnus Dei.  Only the Agnus Dei occurs after fraction.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #146 on: August 05, 2005, 08:44:09 AM »

The Host is elevated at the Institution Narrative, the concluding Doxology, and the Agnus Dei.ÂÂ  Only the Agnus Dei occurs after fraction.

Can the Host be elevated in the Paten? Do the rubrics absolutely rule this out?
Also, how is the Body broken in the Western Rite? Is a Lance used or is it broken by hand?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #147 on: August 05, 2005, 08:47:18 AM »

"I'm obviously not making myself clear.
The filioque also predates the schism- that doesn't make it Orthodox and worth including in the Western Rite."

The Filioque was introduced by the Spanish and was resisted by Rome until 1008.  Unleavened bread was used by St. Sylvester, St. Gregory Dialogos, St. Leo, St. Ambrose, St. Isidore, etc.  You are comparing apples and oranges.  One was a practice the Orthodox always rejected, the other was one the Orthodox not only accepted but practiced if one accepts that pre-schism Latin saints were Orthodox. ÂÂ

"Well then you disagree with the Western Rite's website and the GOA Church in Denver:

'The host used in Western Rite liturgies resembles the unleavened wafer used by Roman Catholics and Episcopalians, but in fact it is leavened—although flattened—bread. The use of leavened bread in accordance with Orthodox theology, was required by Metropolitan Philip when he recieved these parishes into Orthodoxy.'"

Resembles in that it is flattened and round.  One can easily distinguish between a Western Rite Host and Roman Rite Host.  The WR Host is light brown with obvious thickness in comparison to the completely flat and white RR Host.

Fr. Deacon Lance


Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #148 on: August 05, 2005, 09:01:24 AM »

The purpose of the elevation is to show it to the people and rubrics (at least the Roman Rite rubrics state the Host is to be elvated alone with both hands.  The Host is broken by hand as well.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #149 on: August 05, 2005, 02:08:26 PM »

Quote
Isn't the Body broken prior to it's elevation in the Western Rite? Is the Body elevated first and then broken?

I'm mainly familiar with the Roman rite, not having had much exposure to the Anglican usage. It's elevated at roughly the same points as Keble mentioned.

The crumb problem would mainly come about if one insisted on a Byzantine-style cube, that had been cut out of a larger loaf of bread. It would be possible to have a tall, prosphora-looking host, but what would be the point? Just to make it look a little bit Eastern? It would be foreign to the right, which has always used a round, flat bread.

Quote
Can the Host be elevated in the Paten? Do the rubrics absolutely rule this out?
Also, how is the Body broken in the Western Rite? Is a Lance used or is it broken by hand?

In the Roman rite, during the anaphora, the host is not sitting on the paten. The paten is either laid aside or held by the subdeacon with a humeral veil, while the host lays on the altar itself. At the doxology, the priest makes the sign of the cross with the host over the chalice, and when the host is held up before communion it is also being held by the priest directly. The only time it is elevated with the paten is at the offertory. Because the priest touches the host so much directly, there is a rubric that from the time of consecration to the ablutions after communion, the priest is not allowed to separate his thumbs and forefingers except while touching the host.

It would of course be possible to change the service so the host is always elevated with the paten, but that would be introducing a foreign element into the rite, and also taking away one of the major functions of the subdeacon.

When the host is broken, it is done by hand.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #150 on: February 22, 2010, 03:06:36 AM »


I'd love to attend a Western Orthodox parish but unfortunately there aren't any close to me.  

I figured most of you would agree with me.  I find it strange that many Eastern Catholics think differently about this.  I've observed a lot of discussions about this on Catholic and Eastern Catholic boards and it almost seems like the ECs who would go to an RC Mass are seen as being somehow less 'eastern.'  

What they are is anti-dogmatists. Unfortunately. Their "union" with Rome is as false as it can get. Most of them are in belief Eastern Orthodox, but for some reason think it right for them to be united with Rome.  Undecided

[EDIT]: Oops. Can someone delete this post if possible?
« Last Edit: February 22, 2010, 03:07:20 AM by deusveritasest » Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #151 on: November 23, 2010, 02:47:52 PM »

I can't really imagine putting myself in this situation. I would never attend a Byzantine-Rite Catholic church for religious reasons (I might go for a social reason, such as the wedding of a friend, but not take part). But the liturgy is such a huge part of my spiritual experience that I can't imagine trying to satisfy that profound need with anything else--however Orthodox the Western-Rite believers may be.
Logged
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #152 on: November 23, 2010, 02:49:40 PM »

A Byzantine-style cube would be utterly impractical for use in the Western rite, as the host itself (not the host and paten, like in the BR) is elevated, and so it must not shed crumbs when it is picked up.

Sorry, I didn't see your earlier post about this.
Isn't the Body broken prior to it's elevation in the Western Rite? Is the Body elevated first and then broken?

Yes, broken before elevation. It's broken over the chalice, so none of the crumbs are lost.
Logged
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #153 on: November 23, 2010, 03:31:00 PM »

Quote
There is no continuity in the Sarum Rite. Not only was it a dead liturgy with no living tradition, we only have fragments of the original pre-schism rite.

This is what I was wondering about, too. Any rererence to a pre-schism rite must be highly speculative. Nothing really conclusive is known even about the forms of the late Middle Ages. One of the reasons for local variants, such as the Sarum Rite (or the Mozarabic Rite in Spain, the Beneventan Rite in France, or the Ambrosian Rite in Italy), had to do with the scarcity of source materials--books, in other words. Music was notated without fixing either pitch or rhythm accurately (non-diastematic notation), and the scarcity of books meant monks had to memorize most of what they sang; so liturgical traditions depended to a very high degree on oral transmission and local custom. Anything at all complete and purporting to be an "orthodox" Sarum-Rite liturgy must be based on some quite debatable claims. There is no substantive agreement among scholars as to what might have constituted "standard" liturgical practice in the West in any period or in any locale before the Council of Trent (and very little such agreement afterwards). The sources are simply too scanty, and their meaning too unclear.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #154 on: November 23, 2010, 06:21:31 PM »

Quote
There is no continuity in the Sarum Rite. Not only was it a dead liturgy with no living tradition, we only have fragments of the original pre-schism rite.
This is what I was wondering about, too. Any rererence to a pre-schism rite must be highly speculative. Nothing really conclusive is known even about the forms of the late Middle Ages. One of the reasons for local variants, such as the Sarum Rite (or the Mozarabic Rite in Spain, the Beneventan Rite in France, or the Ambrosian Rite in Italy), had to do with the scarcity of source materials--books, in other words. Music was notated without fixing either pitch or rhythm accurately (non-diastematic notation), and the scarcity of books meant monks had to memorize most of what they sang; so liturgical traditions depended to a very high degree on oral transmission and local custom. Anything at all complete and purporting to be an "orthodox" Sarum-Rite liturgy must be based on some quite debatable claims. There is no substantive agreement among scholars as to what might have constituted "standard" liturgical practice in the West in any period or in any locale before the Council of Trent (and very little such agreement afterwards). The sources are simply too scanty, and their meaning too unclear.

Your post is completely incorrect.  The Mozarabic and Ambrosian Rites are not local variants but totally seperate Rites from the Roman.  They are also both well documented and attested to by manuscripts from before the late Middle Ages.  The oldest Manuscript Latin Missal still around is a one Mozarabic ca. 1100s
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #155 on: November 23, 2010, 08:50:28 PM »

Quote
There is no continuity in the Sarum Rite. Not only was it a dead liturgy with no living tradition, we only have fragments of the original pre-schism rite.
This is what I was wondering about, too. Any reference to a pre-schism rite must be highly speculative. Nothing really conclusive is known even about the forms of the late Middle Ages. One of the reasons for local variants, such as the Sarum Rite (or the Mozarabic Rite in Spain, the Beneventan Rite in France, or the Ambrosian Rite in Italy), had to do with the scarcity of source materials--books, in other words. Music was notated without fixing either pitch or rhythm accurately (non-diastematic notation), and the scarcity of books meant monks had to memorize most of what they sang; so liturgical traditions depended to a very high degree on oral transmission and local custom. Anything at all complete and purporting to be an "orthodox" Sarum-Rite liturgy must be based on some quite debatable claims. There is no substantive agreement among scholars as to what might have constituted "standard" liturgical practice in the West in any period or in any locale before the Council of Trent (and very little such agreement afterwards). The sources are simply too scanty, and their meaning too unclear.

Your post is completely incorrect.  The Mozarabic and Ambrosian Rites are not local variants but totally seperate Rites from the Roman.  They are also both well documented and attested to by manuscripts from before the late Middle Ages.  The oldest Manuscript Latin Missal still around is a one Mozarabic ca. 1100s

Nonsense. The Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites both follow the same general outline as the Roman rite. They are differ musically and in some of the rubrics, but they are very recognizable versions of the Latin Mass, as distinct from the Byzantine liturgies. You may be correct about the date of the earliest Missal (there was no established norm for what a Missal ought to contain in 1100 in order to be complete), but only in the narrowest and most literal sense of a Missal, vs., say, a Graduale. However, the two earliest St. Gallen manuscripts date from the end of the Ninth Century. 1100 is quite late, for the purposes of this discussion. In any case, I would very much doubt any two experts would agree on how the liturgies in that missal ought to be celebrated, any more than they agree on the interpretation of the St. Gallen Mss. "Documented and attested to" is a very long way indeed from "complete and performable." Such is the state of our understanding. But I mentioned these two rites only as an aside.

As to the Sarum Rite, which was the topic of discussion, I would simply inquire: Do Mss. exist of (more or less) complete texts of the Sarum-Rite liturgy, including rubrics, from before the middle of the 11th Century? A Sarum Missal is known to have been complied by St. Norbert in 1078 (he was a Norman bishop who came over with the Conqueror), and there are still extant an Antiphonale and Graduale from the 13th Century, as well as a monastic Antiphonary, F. 160, also 13th Century (from Worcester cathedral), reprinted in Paléographie Musicale, v. 12. Those are very thin sources upon which to base an assertion of orthodoxy. And that was my whole point.

Of course, earlier references to a Sarum Rite abound. But that is all they are: references.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, 08:51:46 PM by Hermogenes » Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #156 on: November 25, 2010, 10:33:46 PM »

Nonsense. The Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites both follow the same general outline as the Roman rite. They are differ musically and in some of the rubrics, but they are very recognizable versions of the Latin Mass, as distinct from the Byzantine liturgies.

Yes, they use Latin and are in the Western family of Rites as opposed to Eastern but they are quite distinct.  I will concede the Roman and Ambrosian Masses are very close.  However, besides the Mass, the Mozarabic and Ambrosian Rites have recognizably different Divine Offices and Sacrament rituals.

The Byzantine and Armenian Rites also follow the same general outline but that does not make them one Rite.

For Comparison:

The Ordinary of the Mozarabic Missal
http://www.mercaba.org/LITURGIA/Mozarabe/ordinario_latin.htm#RITUS INITIALES

The Ordinary of the Roman Missal
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/latinmass2.html

The Ordinary of the Ambrosian  Missal
http://www.allmercifulsavior.com/Liturgy/Ambrosian%20Liturgy.pdf
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #157 on: November 26, 2010, 03:05:47 AM »

Nonsense. The Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites both follow the same general outline as the Roman rite. They are differ musically and in some of the rubrics, but they are very recognizable versions of the Latin Mass, as distinct from the Byzantine liturgies.

Yes, they use Latin and are in the Western family of Rites as opposed to Eastern but they are quite distinct.  I will concede the Roman and Ambrosian Masses are very close.  However, besides the Mass, the Mozarabic and Ambrosian Rites have recognizably different Divine Offices and Sacrament rituals.

The Byzantine and Armenian Rites also follow the same general outline but that does not make them one Rite.

For Comparison:

The Ordinary of the Mozarabic Missal
http://www.mercaba.org/LITURGIA/Mozarabe/ordinario_latin.htm#RITUS INITIALES

The Ordinary of the Roman Missal
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/latinmass2.html

The Ordinary of the Ambrosian  Missal
http://www.allmercifulsavior.com/Liturgy/Ambrosian%20Liturgy.pdf

I am familiar with Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites, and I am familiar with the ways in which they differ from Roman usage. My comments on those rites was an aside in my original post, and not the main point. The main point was my belief that any claims for the existence of an orthodox Sarum rite as a basis for an orthodox Western liturgy could not be substantiated. I had understood this thread was more to do with liturgical theology and practice than with philology or musicology.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #158 on: November 26, 2010, 12:55:36 PM »

Well as the Sarum is a variant of the Roman Rite, it depends on how legitimate you find the Roman Rite.  Given that the Sarum use came from France with the Normans and some Orthodox claim England was Orthodox until the William the Conquerer, I imagine some would find it objectionable.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #159 on: November 26, 2010, 03:24:14 PM »

. . .the Sarum use came from France with the Normans. . .

This is a very unfair simplification.

Quote
Re: Norman Additions to Sarum
From:   Fr. Aidan


This is an excellent question. The short answer is that there is not a single known change or discrepancy between the liturgy of pre-Conquest Sarum and post-Conquest Sarum. According to some scholars, there was zero change. But, that said, the Use of Sarum as it comes down to us looks very suspiciously like the Use of Rouen. Of course we don't know of any change in the liturgy of Rouen from pre-May 1054 to post-May 1054, nor for the following century. Those were the days of not much change in the spirituality and content of the Western liturgy.

The real changes that would impact on the theology of the Liturgy, people's experience of it, really are found in the late 12th century and 13th century: the insertion of an elevation at the "Words of Institution," and so forth.

These latter, changed features are not in the Sarum service books I am familiar with, which have been blessed for celebration in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia.
Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Occidentalis
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #160 on: November 26, 2010, 04:00:48 PM »

I believe it is fair.

"...it is found that the Use of Rouen and that of Sarum were almost identical in the 11th century. A curious and interesting illustration of this will be found in an extract of a Rouen manuscript missal, assumed to be 650 years old... The Rouen Pontifical, of about 1007 A.D., quoted in the same work, shows a like affinity of that of Sarum and Exeter in later days."

http://books.google.com/books?vid=08I4RhaJDeU0z2Dt&id=cyUBAAAAQAAJ&pg=RA20-PA615&lpg=RA20-PA615&dq=Rouen+Missal&as_brr=1#v=onepage&q=Rouen%20Missal&f=false

Further, Fr. Aidan has been proved unreliable as to his scholarship concerning the Sarum Rite, as several Western Rite members of this forum can confirm.  Please note his version of the SArum Missal has not been approved for use in ROCOR which received him in 2008.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #161 on: November 26, 2010, 04:28:13 PM »

. . .the Sarum use came from France with the Normans. . .

This is a very unfair simplification.

Quote
Re: Norman Additions to Sarum
From:   Fr. Aidan


This is an excellent question. The short answer is that there is not a single known change or discrepancy between the liturgy of pre-Conquest Sarum and post-Conquest Sarum. According to some scholars, there was zero change. But, that said, the Use of Sarum as it comes down to us looks very suspiciously like the Use of Rouen. Of course we don't know of any change in the liturgy of Rouen from pre-May 1054 to post-May 1054, nor for the following century. Those were the days of not much change in the spirituality and content of the Western liturgy.

The real changes that would impact on the theology of the Liturgy, people's experience of it, really are found in the late 12th century and 13th century: the insertion of an elevation at the "Words of Institution," and so forth.

These latter, changed features are not in the Sarum service books I am familiar with, which have been blessed for celebration in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia.
Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Occidentalis

What this leaves out is that there are NO extant sources for Sarum rite liturgy before the Conquest. The earliest (incomplete) texts date from the 12th-13th centuries. What is needed to qualify, according to the criteria laid out at the beginning of this thread, is a liturgy that is orthodox, recognizably "like" the liturgy now being put forth as "Western Orthodox," and dating  from before the Great Schism. Proponents of the Western Rite are saying enough authentic primary sources exist to produce such a liturgy. Skeptics disagree. That's not to say the Sarum Rite isn't a beautiful liturgy, or the 1549 Cranmer/Edward VI prayer book, for that matter. They're just not Orthodox, without some editing.

But--the Carpatho-Rusyn metropolis did exactly that when its adherents became Orthodox in the 1930s. They made the few changes the EP required and kept the rest.

What's most surprising to me about this thread is the number of people, devoutly Orthodox, who actually prefer the Western Rite. In my arrogance, I had always thought use of the Western rite would be some kind of transition until a person could learn to appreciate "real" Orthodox liturgy. Anyone who liked the Western rite simply couldn't have been exposed enough to the glories of Byzantine worship.
Logged
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #162 on: November 26, 2010, 04:49:13 PM »

I believe it is fair.

I've just made a little research and came accros a message from one of the WR members of this forum:
Quote from: Aristibule
The Sarum, of course, is not 'pre-schism' though it is essentially the same as pre-schism British and French liturgy of the Roman rite. According to Dr. David Chadd , musicologist, Oxford; ( in the 1988 essay 'Beyond the Frontiers: Guides for uncharted territory' from the symposium 'Frontiers of Research in Medieval music' Dartmouth College, NH) we have in the medieval period (post-schism) an early Sarum and a late Sarum. The early Sarum according to some rubrics is based on the early use of the Royal Chapel and Sherbourne Abbey (so, when speaking of pre-schism - Sherbourne or Wessex Royal would be more historically accurate). Dr. Sara Gibbs Casey (U. Pittsburgh), also a musicologist, traces a tradition from the Stowe (late Celtic, mostly Roman), into the Drummond (transitional Celtic-Roman, proto-Sarum) to early Sarum (see the essay 'Through a glass darkly: steps towards reconstructing Irish chant from the neumes of the Drummond Missal', Early Music, OUP, May 2000.)
Source: http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/2006/04/tridentine-mass-why-do-orthodox-care.html

If this is accurate than saying that "the Sarum use came from France with the Normans" and that "there was zero change" are both oversimplifications.



Further, Fr. Aidan has been proved unreliable as to his scholarship concerning the Sarum Rite, as several Western Rite members of this forum can confirm.  Please note his version of the SArum Missal has not been approved for use in ROCOR which received him in 2008.

Fr. Aidan claims otherwise:
Quote
Fr. Aidan has been blessed by Metr. Hilarion (Sept. 26, 2008) to celebrate services according to the Sarum use of the Roman rite, using the full line of liturgical books published by St. Hilarion Press and which are due for re-issue under the aegis of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Source: http://sarisburium.blogspot.com/2008/10/good-news-for-sarum-use-of-roman-rite.html
« Last Edit: November 26, 2010, 04:50:40 PM by Michał » Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,252

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #163 on: November 26, 2010, 04:56:28 PM »

What's most surprising to me about this thread is the number of people, devoutly Orthodox, who actually prefer the Western Rite. In my arrogance, I had always thought use of the Western rite would be some kind of transition until a person could learn to appreciate "real" Orthodox liturgy. Anyone who liked the Western rite simply couldn't have been exposed enough to the glories of Byzantine worship.

I've experienced both Eastern and Western rites, and all I can say is that I just find the Western Rite (Tikhon specifically) to be much more beautiful and meaningful to me than the Byzantine.  But that's because it is from my own heritage and lineage, my own culture and tradition.  It feels natural and authentic and like my worship is coming from a genuine place.  I think I could feel that way in the Byzantine, but it would take some hard to work.  I'm very thankful that Orthodoxy has provided a way for those of us with a more Western mindset to have a fulfilling and authentic form of worship.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #164 on: November 26, 2010, 08:34:19 PM »


Fr. Aidan claims otherwise:
Quote
Fr. Aidan has been blessed by Metr. Hilarion (Sept. 26, 2008) to celebrate services according to the Sarum use of the Roman rite, using the full line of liturgical books published by St. Hilarion Press and which are due for re-issue under the aegis of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Source: http://sarisburium.blogspot.com/2008/10/good-news-for-sarum-use-of-roman-rite.html

Yes, he has a habit of claiming that. 
http://westernorthodox.blogspot.com/2006/04/sigha-response-to-derek-fr-aidan.html

Perhaps, he finally got approval.  That does not mean his scholarship is accurate.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #165 on: November 26, 2010, 09:57:20 PM »


Fr. Aidan claims otherwise:
Quote
Fr. Aidan has been blessed by Metr. Hilarion (Sept. 26, 2008) to celebrate services according to the Sarum use of the Roman rite, using the full line of liturgical books published by St. Hilarion Press and which are due for re-issue under the aegis of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Source: http://sarisburium.blogspot.com/2008/10/good-news-for-sarum-use-of-roman-rite.html

Yes, he has a habit of claiming that. 
http://westernorthodox.blogspot.com/2006/04/sigha-response-to-derek-fr-aidan.html

Perhaps, he finally got approval.  That does not mean his scholarship is accurate.

I recall, sadly only too well, the hostility against Fr Aidan which was both deep-seated and long-running.  It was not widespread though, and was confined to just five people.  Within ROCA - **********.  Among the Antiochians -**********  The latter uses his blog to denigrate Fr Aidan and misrepresent what he says. 

The anti-Fr Aidan campaign was well organised. It went back several years both in public messages on blogs and e-lists as well as in private mailings to Church authorities.  It has been a very illuminating example of the pettiness which can posses some of the souls in the WR world when their hegemony is challenged.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2010, 10:37:25 PM by arimethea » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #166 on: November 26, 2010, 10:00:53 PM »


  Please note his version of the SArum Missal has not been approved for use in ROCOR which received him in 2008.


It most certainly has been approved, by Metropolitan Hilarion who has also always allowed its sale in church bookshops and there are now plans to reprint it with his blessing.
Logged
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #167 on: November 26, 2010, 10:20:07 PM »

It most certainly has been approved, by Metropolitan Hilarion who has also always allowed its sale in church bookshops and there are now plans to reprint it with his blessing.

But it also has to be noted that in the ROCOR Fr. Aidan's Sarum is used only by himself, when he occasionally serves according to WR at St. Nicholas Monastery, Ft. Myers, Florida.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2010, 10:21:59 PM by Michał » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #168 on: November 26, 2010, 10:40:43 PM »

It most certainly has been approved, by Metropolitan Hilarion who has also always allowed its sale in church bookshops and there are now plans to reprint it with his blessing.

But it also has to be noted that in the ROCOR Fr. Aidan's Sarum is used only by himself...

Your point?

What priests in ROCA use Dom James Deschene's Black Benedictine books and his form of the Tridentine Mass?  Only himself.

What priests in ROCA use Abbot David Pierce's form of the Sarum (Achbp John LoBue's) cum Dom Augustine's Mt Royal preferences?  Only himself.

What priests in ROCA use the Gallican forms of Fr Allyne Lev Smith?  Only himself.

 
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #169 on: November 26, 2010, 11:16:18 PM »


  Please note his version of the SArum Missal has not been approved for use in ROCOR which received him in 2008.


It most certainly has been approved, by Metropolitan Hilarion who has also always allowed its sale in church bookshops and there are now plans to reprint it with his blessing.

I stand corrected. 
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #170 on: November 26, 2010, 11:33:21 PM »

It most certainly has been approved, by Metropolitan Hilarion who has also always allowed its sale in church bookshops and there are now plans to reprint it with his blessing.

But it also has to be noted that in the ROCOR Fr. Aidan's Sarum is used only by himself...

Your point?

What priests in ROCA use Dom James Deschene's Black Benedictine books and his form of the Tridentine Mass?  Only himself.

What priests in ROCA use Abbot David Pierce's form of the Sarum (Achbp John LoBue's) cum Dom Augustine's Mt Royal preferences?  Only himself.

What priests in ROCA use the Gallican forms of Fr Allyne Lev Smith?  Only himself.

The point it would seem is the ROCOR Western Rite is subjected to the personal preferences and idiosyncrasies of the few priests it has.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #171 on: November 27, 2010, 09:57:25 AM »

Your point?

Just wanted to make it clear for those who don't know that in this case "approved for use in ROCA" does not neceserily mean that it is used by more than one priest-monk.

What priests in ROCA use Dom James Deschene's Black Benedictine books and his form of the Tridentine Mass?  Only himself.

The Divine Liturgy of St. Gregory included in St. Colman Prayer Book, used by St. Petroc Monastery's missions, is the one of the Christminster. I also guess that St. Patrick chapel, Northville, Michigan, as a dependency of Christminster, is in some kind of liturgical uniformity with its mother-monastery. I also assume that the WR Liturgy of the bi-ritual St. Benedict church, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, isn't that different from the one of Christminster as both communities have the Benedictione element in common.

What priests in ROCA use Abbot David Pierce's form of the Sarum (Achbp John LoBue's) cum Dom Augustine's Mt Royal preferences?  Only himself.

As for the Mt. Royal, Archimandrite Anthony (Bondi) wrote recently in his open letter that he and his clergy "will
. . . be able to keep [their] Liturgy which is based on the Dom Augustine Liturgy."

What priests in ROCA use the Gallican forms of Fr Allyne Lev Smith?  Only himself.

Yes, but there used to be a whole ROCA diocese, with its own WR bishop, which was using it, and we can hope that after Fr. Allyne Lev Smith's reception more Gallican rite parishes will come back home.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2010, 10:05:31 AM by Michał » Logged
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #172 on: November 27, 2010, 09:58:56 AM »

The point it would seem is the ROCOR Western Rite is subjected to the personal preferences and idiosyncrasies of the few priests it has.

I'm sure a greater uniformity will be worked out with time.
Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,605



WWW
« Reply #173 on: November 27, 2010, 11:55:04 AM »

Quote
I'm very thankful that Orthodoxy has provided a way for those of us with a more Western mindset to have a fulfilling and authentic form of worship.

I don't think that I could have a more Western mindset. I am English, and then British, and proud to be so going back to unrecorded history. I don't think it is fair to suggest that people with a 'Western mindset' become WR. I am very happy being Western and Orthodox and I don't find the Western liturgical tradition immediately makes a connection with me because I was never Anglican. In my experience most WR enthusiasts are Anglican. (That is not a criticism, but an observation).

If it was required that I learn Arabic and/or Coptic to be able to worship I would not be as comfortable in my situation as I am. But in fact as a small missionary diocese of mostly British people in the Coptic Patriarchate I find myself under no pressure to become an Egyptian, and find that the forms of worship we use are entirely accessible to English people. Indeed our diocese has been tasked with sharing our Orthodoxy in a British ethos. As an entirely British person this has NEVER meant being Anglican to me, nor do I consider that to be British means becoming in some manner an Anglican, or adopting Western Catholic forms.

Even the Anglicans who did become Orthodox with the Antiochians became Eastern Rite, and I am not in a position to know whether or not they feel that they need to become Eastern Orthodox as well as Eastern Rite. But for my own community, we are, as I described, Western Orthodox using Eastern Rites, very comfortably, and without diminishing our sense of being entirely British. Perhaps it is because I was never an Anglican that I am not very concerned about which rites I am instructed to use by my bishop. It seems much more important to me that I enter into the prayers as much as possible, and I believe that this depends on the quality of the prayers rather than their origin. I am sure that in other circumstances I would be as content to pray as a Western Orthodox priest using an Armenian Rite in English, or a Syriac in English, or St John Chrysostom in English, while I actually use St James. As far as my experience goes, the process of translating the liturgy (of St James) into good, liturgical English makes it a Western Rite.

I am entirely British, even English. I love the heritage of my own country. My patron saint is buried 20 miles from where I am typing. There are the remains of Christian churches within 20 miles of my home which date back to the 4th century. But in my experience, and this is just my experience, I feel no need to use liturgical forms from the distant past in the West to validate my Western Orthodoxy. I wonder if that is one reason (I know there are others) for the lack of success in the UK for the Western Rite? That is, that since we ARE British and English we don't need to prove it, and whatever we do in our own language, unless we are trying to become a pretend Russian , Greek or Egyptian, is already Western and Orthodox. 
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #174 on: November 27, 2010, 12:08:48 PM »

It most certainly has been approved, by Metropolitan Hilarion who has also always allowed its sale in church bookshops and there are now plans to reprint it with his blessing.

But it also has to be noted that in the ROCOR Fr. Aidan's Sarum is used only by himself...

Your point?

What priests in ROCA use Dom James Deschene's Black Benedictine books and his form of the Tridentine Mass?  Only himself.

What priests in ROCA use Abbot David Pierce's form of the Sarum (Achbp John LoBue's) cum Dom Augustine's Mt Royal preferences?  Only himself.

What priests in ROCA use the Gallican forms of Fr Allyne Lev Smith?  Only himself.

The point it would seem is the ROCOR Western Rite is subjected to the personal preferences and idiosyncrasies of the few priests it has.

I always thought the whole Western Orthodox idea was to remove a stumbling block to Protestants becoming Orthodox. If they were attached to their liturgy, OK, clean up the parts that are doctrinally heterodox and you can still use the Coverdale prayer book. I can't imagine individual priests have that much latitude, even with the Western rite. I mean, the Antiochian archdiocese just suspended a priest for wearing his cassock in public, in defiance of Metropolitan Philip's orders. How much leeway is he gonna give on liturgy?
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,252

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #175 on: November 27, 2010, 12:26:15 PM »

Quote
I'm very thankful that Orthodoxy has provided a way for those of us with a more Western mindset to have a fulfilling and authentic form of worship.

I don't think that I could have a more Western mindset. I am English, and then British, and proud to be so going back to unrecorded history. I don't think it is fair to suggest that people with a 'Western mindset' become WR. I am very happy being Western and Orthodox and I don't find the Western liturgical tradition immediately makes a connection with me because I was never Anglican. In my experience most WR enthusiasts are Anglican. (That is not a criticism, but an observation).

If it was required that I learn Arabic and/or Coptic to be able to worship I would not be as comfortable in my situation as I am. But in fact as a small missionary diocese of mostly British people in the Coptic Patriarchate I find myself under no pressure to become an Egyptian, and find that the forms of worship we use are entirely accessible to English people. Indeed our diocese has been tasked with sharing our Orthodoxy in a British ethos. As an entirely British person this has NEVER meant being Anglican to me, nor do I consider that to be British means becoming in some manner an Anglican, or adopting Western Catholic forms.

Even the Anglicans who did become Orthodox with the Antiochians became Eastern Rite, and I am not in a position to know whether or not they feel that they need to become Eastern Orthodox as well as Eastern Rite. But for my own community, we are, as I described, Western Orthodox using Eastern Rites, very comfortably, and without diminishing our sense of being entirely British. Perhaps it is because I was never an Anglican that I am not very concerned about which rites I am instructed to use by my bishop. It seems much more important to me that I enter into the prayers as much as possible, and I believe that this depends on the quality of the prayers rather than their origin. I am sure that in other circumstances I would be as content to pray as a Western Orthodox priest using an Armenian Rite in English, or a Syriac in English, or St John Chrysostom in English, while I actually use St James. As far as my experience goes, the process of translating the liturgy (of St James) into good, liturgical English makes it a Western Rite.

I am entirely British, even English. I love the heritage of my own country. My patron saint is buried 20 miles from where I am typing. There are the remains of Christian churches within 20 miles of my home which date back to the 4th century. But in my experience, and this is just my experience, I feel no need to use liturgical forms from the distant past in the West to validate my Western Orthodoxy. I wonder if that is one reason (I know there are others) for the lack of success in the UK for the Western Rite? That is, that since we ARE British and English we don't need to prove it, and whatever we do in our own language, unless we are trying to become a pretend Russian , Greek or Egyptian, is already Western and Orthodox. 

Wonderful post, but honestly, I wasn't trying to imply otherwise!  See my reply to you in the other thread you commented on. 
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,252

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #176 on: November 27, 2010, 12:28:59 PM »

I always thought the whole Western Orthodox idea was to remove a stumbling block to Protestants becoming Orthodox.

That's part of it, but not anywhere near the whole of the idea.  First and foremost is for those who love and treasure the ancient Western expression of the Faith to participate in bringing it back home to Orthodoxy and redeeming it.  It would be done whether there is was a missionary opportunity or not.  It's for the glory of God.
Logged
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #177 on: November 27, 2010, 12:35:22 PM »

I always thought the whole Western Orthodox idea was to remove a stumbling block to Protestants becoming Orthodox.

That's part of it, but not anywhere near the whole of the idea.  First and foremost is for those who love and treasure the ancient Western expression of the Faith to participate in bringing it back home to Orthodoxy and redeeming it.  It would be done whether there is was a missionary opportunity or not.  It's for the glory of God.

But the issue, amply argued on this thread, is that the "ancient" Western expressions have not been preserved in any form we really understand. There's nothing like the continuity of the Eastern rite. The Dark Ages ensured that books would be scarce to begin with. The reformation and Counter-Reformation ensured that most of the primary sources would be damaged or destroyed and institutional memory mostly wiped out. Our understanding of pre-Tridentine forms is sketchy and fragmentary at best, which makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to construct a coherent liturgy. It's a nice idea, but there's just no practical basis on which to realize it.
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,252

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #178 on: November 27, 2010, 12:50:04 PM »

Sure, I can understand that.  However (and I realize many won't agree with this, or like it) but the ancient Western rites have been preserved; they've just been preserved by heterodox churches.

The Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate gets a ton of vehement flack for taking the approach they take, but there was actually a rationale behind it, believe it or not (and it wasn't one of pandering to people who refused to change, or any other charge that gets thrown around willy-nilly).  The fact is that the Rites of St. Gregory and St. Tikhon are adapted/corrected versions of the ancient rites that have survived and have been preserved by those who continued to use them.

Yes changes were made and things reflected the results of the Schism (which is why corrections were needed) but this seemed to be the best approach precisely because they are the rites that have continued to exist amongst the Western people.

It is correct that the ancient rites, as they were then, can be difficult to figure out as far as rubrics and such.  Which is why the AWRV chose the path of adapting the existing rites, rather than insist on a pre-Schism liturgy, which would ultimately amount to a "living museum" of sorts, or an historical reenactment.

In Bishop BASIL's words, “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."

Yes, from an Orthodox perspective, these Western rites were "lost" in that they ceased to be a part of the Undivided Church; but in a practical and literal way, they weren't lost at all but were continued to be used by those bodies that got swept away in the Schism.

Again, I realize this won't satisfy many people, but to me it's a sane and reasonable approach.
Logged
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #179 on: November 27, 2010, 01:12:14 PM »

Sure, I can understand that.  However (and I realize many won't agree with this, or like it) but the ancient Western rites have been preserved; they've just been preserved by heterodox churches.

The Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate gets a ton of vehement flack for taking the approach they take, but there was actually a rationale behind it, believe it or not (and it wasn't one of pandering to people who refused to change, or any other charge that gets thrown around willy-nilly).  The fact is that the Rites of St. Gregory and St. Tikhon are adapted/corrected versions of the ancient rites that have survived and have been preserved by those who continued to use them.

Yes changes were made and things reflected the results of the Schism (which is why corrections were needed) but this seemed to be the best approach precisely because they are the rites that have continued to exist amongst the Western people.

It is correct that the ancient rites, as they were then, can be difficult to figure out as far as rubrics and such.  Which is why the AWRV chose the path of adapting the existing rites, rather than insist on a pre-Schism liturgy, which would ultimately amount to a "living museum" of sorts, or an historical reenactment.

In Bishop BASIL's words, “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."

Yes, from an Orthodox perspective, these Western rites were "lost" in that they ceased to be a part of the Undivided Church; but in a practical and literal way, they weren't lost at all but were continued to be used by those bodies that got swept away in the Schism.

Again, I realize this won't satisfy many people, but to me it's a sane and reasonable approach.

A reasonable approach, at any rate.

I think one reason I find the whole debate puzzling is that the Eastern liturgy is so deeply moving to me. I can't imagine my spiritual life without it.
Logged
Tags: ROCOR Western Rite 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   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 0.166 seconds with 72 queries.