The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Margarita, Cae, Cyril_Meth, ruthenianbyz513, Panteleimon
5625 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (1 invisible), 144 guests, and 450 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Byzantine Nebraska
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,808
Posts412,317
Members5,625
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 5 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 14
Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Otsheylnik] #341243 01/12/10 08:39 PM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,527
theophan Offline
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,527
Christ is Born!! Christ is in our midst!!

Permit me to make a comment that is a bit tangential. I've watched this "trad" thing from the time when the Mass of Pope John XXIII was the norm to this day. I have no problem with people who want to use this form. OTOH, I also believe that people who wish to remain with this form as the center of their living out of their pilgrimage should go the whole way. That is, they should be living the full life that was part and parcel of that time, with all the fasts and other parts of daily living that went with it. To quibble about the ritual itself seems to me to be spiritually dangerous because it make of the ritual a god: an end in itself, rather than the means to deepening communion with the One Who came here to establish communion with us. I've met many in my daily travels who go on and on about the Extraordinary form, but who don't make full use of the other parts of life at that time. And so often it seems to generate a superior attitude that somehow the rest of us are less Catholic because we fail to share the same enthusiam for the Extraordinary form.

That said, please forgive me for this tangent.

In Christ,

BOB

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: theophan] #341245 01/12/10 10:26 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,010
C
Chtec Offline
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,010
On a somewhat related note, I once had a friend rather excitedly tell me that in Russia, they allow subdeacons to walk through the Royal Doors when serving with a hierarch; he said he even had video to prove it.

I was skeptical, so I watched the video--it was of Patriarch Alexey serving Pascha in the early 1990's. Much to my friend's chagrin, I pointed out one key detail he hadn't noticed: the "subdeacons" were wearing cuffs. They were deacons who wore their oraria crossed for the entire Liturgy, and were responsible for the trikirion and dikirion. I don't think that counts as pretending to be a subdeacon, since deacons also wear their oraria crossed at times, and in Greek practice, the trikirion and dikirion are (ideally) handled by the deacons.

David

Last edited by Chtec; 01/12/10 10:27 PM.
Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Chtec] #341248 01/12/10 11:49 PM
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,168
Fr. Deacon Lance Offline
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,168
It should also be noted that Orders and Societies dedicated to the Extraordinary form due ordain their seminarians porter through subdeacon.


My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Otsheylnik] #341274 01/13/10 09:24 AM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 700
A
aramis Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 700
I know one who wouldn't mind assisting at a TLM. His bishop's even had him assist whilst wearing fiddlebacks...

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: aramis] #341279 01/13/10 02:53 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Why is it called the "Traditional Latin Mass"? It only dates to the mid-16th century, and embodies usage that only developed in the late Middle Ages. The real Traditional Latin Mass is the Old Roman Rite. If you want to revive that, I'm all in favor. That's what Vatican II was supposed to do. In fact, that was what Trent was supposed to do. Somehow, nobody seems capable of getting it done.

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Otsheylnik] #341287 01/13/10 04:21 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133
Memo Rodriguez Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133
Yes, having a deacon serve as sub-deacon is better than having a priest serve as sub-deacon.

As I said earlier, it is even better to have an acolyte or other lay person serve as sub-deacon.

In all cases, the ministers should vest according to the order they belong to, not according to their specific role for a particular liturgical celebration.

As for the views of the traditionalists about the permanent diaconate, it is irrelevant. The Church has allowed them to have the "Extraordinary Form" of the liturgy, but they are NOT allowed to declare as invalid the legitimate developments in Church life in the last 40 years.

ALL Catholics HAVE TO accept what the Council says and what the Magisterium has said since the Council (as far as it pertains to them, since a good number of these pronounciations are specific to the Latin church, but even then, Eastern Catholics have to agree that those are legitimate developments for the Latin church, even if they are not so for their own Particular church).

Now that the Extraordinary Form is openly allowed, it has been shown that it is this doctrinal and disciplinary issue, and NOT the Liturgy what's preventing the SSPX from being in full communion with the Catholic Church.

By extension, it should challenge the sense of full communion some other Traditionalists have, if they continue to subscribe to their Anti-V2 positions.

Just take the issue a few centuries back. What would you think of this: "We are not Arians, but we reject Nicea. We are truly faithful to the Catholic/Orthodox faith".

It doesn't really work.

Thanks.

Shalom,
Memo

Last edited by Memo Rodriguez; 01/13/10 04:23 PM.
Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: StuartK] #341292 01/13/10 04:44 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 700
A
aramis Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 700
Originally Posted by StuartK
Why is it called the "Traditional Latin Mass"? It only dates to the mid-16th century, and embodies usage that only developed in the late Middle Ages. The real Traditional Latin Mass is the Old Roman Rite. If you want to revive that, I'm all in favor. That's what Vatican II was supposed to do. In fact, that was what Trent was supposed to do. Somehow, nobody seems capable of getting it done.


Because, per Roman Canons of several councils, anything over 200 years old is "traditional." Further, the Trent-triggered missal reform was pretty trivial for the Romans... and pretty drastic for many localized liturgies... and so the trent liturgy is the same traditions as the prior 250-300 years.

Let's face it, the Roman Missal has been pretty stable, but has a history of continuous top-down changes going back to the 800's. But until Trent, it wasn't the only missal, nor even the dominant missal, in the patriarchate of Rome. It was merely the Patriarchal liturgy. And almost every province had it's own revisions. Until Trent.


And aomst all those revisions were small... a new saint, adding or deleting a pre-entrance or post-recesionsional prayer.

Last edited by aramis; 01/13/10 04:46 PM.
Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: aramis] #341294 01/13/10 04:54 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 29
P
Precentrix Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
P
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 29
Memo,

With reference to the 'Latin-rite traditionalists and permanent deacons' thingymawhatsit, I have no problem with it. A deacon is a deacon is a deacon. Even *I* can understand that. And, while I have on occasions seen priests 'dress down', I don't for that think that they have somehow temporarily forgotten that they are priests!

Stuart,

If the older forms of the Latin liturgies had been in constant use, there would be no problem. Trent did not cause drastic changes, but it effectively supressed local developments in the West in favour of a standard liturgy based on what was done in Rome. The reforms of Pope St. Gregory had, earlier, done the same thing for the chants. The legitimacy of some of those developments was acknowledged, especially with the continuance of local variants of significant antiquity (such as the Salisbury and York uses which only went out of use with the English Reformation and not as a result of liturgical reforms).

Unfortunately, many of the legitimate variants of the Roman use have fallen out of usage for significant lengths of time and there is a policy of not resurrecting them. Versions, however, which are currently celebrated include the most recent Dominican, Benedictine and Premonstratensian liturgies, together with the Braga and Ambrosian (unfortunately usually the reformed version). And, of course, the Charterhouse has barely changed its liturgy even in the so-called modern version. All of these variants have been up-dated since Trent and, indeed, in the twentieth century, but most revisions are merely insertions to the callendar of recently canonised saints etc.

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Otsheylnik] #341303 01/13/10 05:44 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
E
Epiphanius Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
My experience is that latin mass types generally view the permanent diaconate as an abuse of the post vatican II era ... so far I haven't met a trad priest who thinks the diaconate is a good move.

Otsheylnik,

This is a significant observation. If I may be allowed to read between the lines here, I think it has to do with the fact that permanent deacons are (usually) married, which introduces a radical change to one of the most cherished institutions of the pre-Vat. II RCC, namely the all-celibate clergy.


Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
Otoh, I have also not met any permanent deacons who think that the Tridentine liturgy is good.

This is also very interesting. It may be due to the liturgical training the deacons have received, which would have been exclusively in the context of the NO, but it also may be related to the fact that the TLM tends to go with a "pre-Vat. II" mentality, which would disallow their role in the Church as noted above.

One of my impressions regarding the whole TLM issue is that at the time of Vat. II, there was a widespread impression among the clergy that "something" was wrong with the Church, and that "something" came to be identified with the TLM--as if this change alone made everything right. This would help to explain why the clergy were so steadfastly opposed to the TLM, or anything associated with it (use of Latin, Gregorian Chant, etc.)

By the same token, trads tend to identify anything associated with Vat. II as the reason why "something" is wrong with the Church.


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Epiphanius] #341304 01/13/10 06:24 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Let's not forget that most Latin clergy were married for more than 1100 years. Even a Pope or two, come to think of it.

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: StuartK] #341311 01/13/10 07:11 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
F
Fr Serge Keleher Offline
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
"...most Latin clergy were married for more than 1100 years."

Now that is remarkable longevity!

Fr.Serge

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Fr Serge Keleher] #341313 01/13/10 08:09 PM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Otsheylnik Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Deacon Richard, you summarise my points better than I could!

I am not completely sure that it is correct to say that MOST Latin clergy were married in the first millenium. We don't have census data to indicate it, firstly, but secondly it is apparent that celibacy was exalted in the Roman church at least from the fourth century (look at Augustine for example).

There was certainly a significant party in the western church espousing both clerical continence in marriage and clerical celibacy at least as early as the fourth century. To keep this reply on topic, this is suggested as one of the reasons for the decline of the permanent diaconate in the west, and is discussed at length in the excellent book by Barnett, "The Diaconate: a full and equal order".

Let us also not forget that the Quinisext Council in the sixth century saw it necessary to restate earlier canons regarding clerical marriage, because it saw already the preference for unmarried clergy in the west. This was one of the reasons why this Council is considered "reprobate" in the west by Bede, among others. The fact that a sixth century Council saw fit to deal with this issue I think shows that enforced celibacy was a real issue in the west long before the great schism.

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Otsheylnik] #341314 01/13/10 08:27 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Quote
Now that is remarkable longevity!


Not to mention fidelity!

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: StuartK] #341317 01/13/10 10:54 PM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
Logos - Alexis Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
"it is apparent that celibacy was exalted in the Roman church at least from the fourth century (look at Augustine for example)."

Celibacy has been exalted in the entire Church from Apostolic times.

Alexis

Re: Should priests vest as deacons and serve as such? [Re: Logos - Alexis] #341318 01/13/10 10:59 PM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
Logos - Alexis Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
Why are Easterners so quick to push their view on clerical celibacy on the West? As all have admitted, it's been the required norm for a millennium, and was widely encouraged for the millennium preceding that. Until recent decades, there has never been a priest shortage in the West, and anyway I personally believe that is not tied to celibacy. Roman Catholic priests are extracted from that amount of the male Latin population that has a vocation to celibacy, and then further a vocation to the holy priesthood. I think God can manage that.

Alexis

Page 5 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 14

Moderated by  Alice, Father Deacon Ed, theophan 

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2020 (Forum 1998-2020). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3