www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West What is a Latinsation?

Today, according to the Latin calender, is the feastday of St Josaphat of Ukraine and it made me begin to think about the issue of 'Latinisation'.

I remember the way the Roman populace reacted to Pope St Gregory the Great's insertion of the Kyrie Eleison into the Latin liturgy. They were not pleased. Indeed, they were so displeased that Pope St Gregory had to address his flock formally to explain himself. The Roman people of this period were no fans of Greek and regarding the language as pretensious to the ear were most displeased by Gregory's actions. Yet today large numbers of Roman Catholics look back at Pope St Gregory as pseudo-Patriarch of the Roman Rite. It made me wonder...what is a Latinsation, really? Where does legitimate borrowing end and loss of identity begin?

Arguably the inclusion of the Kyrie Eleison in the Roman liturgy was a Hellenization. Put yourself in the shoes of the average 6th century Italian: Suddenly and without warning in the process of his liturgical formalisations your Pope and Patriarch restructures the penetential rite in a language that is not only foreign but regarded as belonging to a people you regard as uppity and proud. Would you like it?

Yet, in spite of that, the Kyrie Eleison has become an integral part of the Roman Mass. It has been set to some of the most beautiful pieces of Western music ever written and its vernacular form is held in contempt by 'Latin trads'.

Thus I ask: What is Latinisation? Where does pooling the Catolica become drowning oneself in foreign traditions and (maybe more importantly) theology. I ask this sincerely because I believe for the Greek Catholic Church to go forward in our times it requires a clear sense of identity that--and I say this not to cause offense and admittedly as an outsider--appears to be currently lacking.

INXC
Myles

Identity lacking?
You've got to be kidding!

The thread at the link below contains some useful information (and some irrelevant information too) on Latinisations in the Eastern Churches:

Catalogue of Latinisations

Example:

Pavloosh I apologise for causing offence I didnt mean to be rude. Sorry. Apoutheon thats quite a comprehensive list and it sounds fair and reasonable enough. Though I dont think the Stations of the Cross need neccessarily be considered a negative exchange.

Well, that solves that then

Dear Myles,
On the issue of the Stations of the Cross we obviously differ. But first a bit of theory:

In the use of the term as applied to the Eastern Catholics, Latinisation has two distinct meanings:

a) the assimilation of Eastern Catholics into the Latin Church and practice, whether by force or by enticement; and/or

b) the imposition of various and sundry usages, disciplines, spiritual traditions and/or theology from the Latin tradition upon one or another Eastern Catholic tradition.

One could reasonably ask what is "wrong" with either or both of these phenomena. Well, they represent cultural genocide, the existence of these phenomena gives the lie to repeated promises of the Popes, and so on.


But there are two good studies available on the subject: Uniatism by Father Cyril Korolevsky and a much more recent book by Father Ernst-Christoph Suttner (I don't remember the title off-hand).

Almost invariably the practice or thinking imposed from the Latin tradition is from the worst of the Latin tradition. Nobody has ever tried to form Greek-Catholic Trappists, for instance. But if I start giving negative examples, I'll inevitably insult people.

Incognitus

"I remember the way the Roman populace reacted to Pope St Gregory the Great's insertion of the Kyrie Eleison into the Latin liturgy. "

You are over 1700 years old? Wow! Well, the Kyrie wasn't inserted, it was left over from the earlier liturgy, and the Greek kept to remind people that the Mass was in Greek before it was in Latin.

Yes, myles is over 1700 years old. His beard is proof of the fact (yes I ended a sentence with a preposition).
Myles, trust us colonials. They're working hard on the front-lines in the battle against latinizations (you know we use the letter z here in the colonies).

An interesting list of old and familiar Latinizations! More subtle (and more dangerous) are new Latinizations, that are championed now, unrecognized for what they are, and not included in this list.

Elias

How about the substitution of scholastic theology (especially that of Aquinas) for that of our Eastern Fathers?

From Pope St Gregory the Great's Register of Epistles Book IX, Letter 12 [newadvent.org]

I had been led to believe that though the Roman Liturgy had been in Greek until the pontificate of Pope St Damasus in the 380s AD there had been no use of the Kyrie Eleison therein until the pontificate of Pope St Gregory the Great. However, if any information can be provided to the contrary then I would be grateful for the correction.

This goes to the heart of my question. What is legitimate to take from the Latin tradition and what is not? For instance, you disagreed with my sentiments that the stations of the cross fall into the category of legitimate pooling of traditions. Why is that? If adopted properly e.g. in iconic form how do the stations of the cross threaten the East's identity and patrimony. You are free moreover to criticise the West as you wish. I will show you the same courtesy that you have shown me and not take offence to your opinions.

INXC
Myles

PS) What Latinisations do you allude to Fr Elias?

Myles and All,

I have two general comments/suggestions.

First, may I submit that the situation with the Eastern Catholic churches vis-a-vis adopting Latin practices is somewhat different from that historical case of the Latin Rite adopting the Greek kyrie eleison? You may ask why. Well, here is why: the Orthodox are watching us. As long as we hold fast to the Orthodox traditions we have received, and do not deviate, we are a clear witness to the fact that union with Rome does not entail assimilation and rigid uniformity. This is one of our chances to bear witness to unity through our actions, so to speak. If we adopt Latin practices, on the other hand, we will portray exactly the opposite of what we want to portray: namely, it will appear to the Orthodox as if we are not really Orthodox at all, but rather have assimilated to the Western church and abandoned our traditions in favor of assimilation. This latter option is simply not acceptable.

I think that clears up a lot of the issue, because then it becomes obvious that even seemingly "minor" changes might carry drastic consequences. We have to be on our guard against everything. Were the churches united, then I think freely adopting different practices across rites could end up being much more acceptable -- for now, though, it is not.

Keeping that in mind, something helpful might be to list things that are obviously Latinizations and things that are obviously not. Then maybe we can work on finding the common features of each. Sure, there may be a vague middle ground, but this should at least be helpful (although I have no suggestions). But even once those categories are clarified, I would urge caution again that virtually any change is going to be controversial in light of what's been said above, and usually ought to be guarded against.

Thanks, and God bless,
Jason

Dear Myles,
Why do I suspect that you have an agenda here? As to stations of the cross, I really don't want to insult people. However, since you appear to insist:

a) that devotional form ignores the Resurrection of Our Savior.

b) the use of that form in our Churches displaces our proper services for Great Lent (such as the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, the Akathistos Hymn to the Holy Theotokos, and Little Compline.

c) the manner of the procession for that activity does not resemble ours, and

d) attend the Passion Gospels service on Holy Thursday evening sometime - you might get the idea!

Incognitus

'Latinisation' is when congos and marimba are added to the beat.

-ray

Latinisation occurs in the UK; here we have had Latinization.

Do you mean that he actually remembers when you had to get up - to change the TV channel.

My God! That IS old!

-ray