www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Priestly Society of St Josaphat - keeping latinisms?

Can anyone elaborate on precisely what liturgical (rather than theological or disciplinary) "latinisms" the Priestly Society of St Josaphat wants to keep, or to put it another way; what does the UGCC do that it thinks it shouldn't (aside from using modern languages)?

Read about this on wikipedia and curious for more detail.

From what I've read, various members within want to keep one or more of the following:

• Roman fiddleback vestments with cuffs and zone added.
• No iconostasi
• Minimalized ektenie.
• silent anaphora
• Spoken responses
• Rosary in place of the hours and the chotkis
• Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament

Ned,

There are several old threads here that discuss the SSJK, but they're hard to find (our search engine is a pain, quite frankly). As well as the points that Aramis makes, I specifically recollect Stations of the Cross and Confessionals, statuary, most any Western sacramental of which you might think, use of the Filioque, 'Low Mass' Liturgy, bells, and more (too tired tonight to recollect all).

Many years,

Neil

If you go through their photo album, you'll be able to see some of the latinizations: http://www.saintjosaphat.org.ua/fotogalereya/

Here is a previous thread about this group: Priestly Society of Saint Josephat[sic]

So a 'silent' Anaphora is a latinisation? Isn't a 'mystical' reading of the anaphora and the other 'silent' prayers of the priest merely traditional Orthodox usage? Please note, I am not interested in opening the debate as to whether the anaphora should be read quietly by the priest. I am merely asking if this 'silent' Anaphora of which Aramis speaks is in someway different from the Orthodox are used to doing?

Fr David Straut

Silent anaphora isn't a latinization, but it is one of the things they are harped on about... but the one's I read complaining about it truly mean SILENT, not secret, not even sotto voce as the Latins tended to do.

My understanding of the Orthodox version is merely spoken at sotto voce.

Yes, the prayers are ordinarily said in a voice that the concelebrants and those in the altar can hear. The people in the nave of the church do not hear the words clearly because the hymns and responses are sung by the chanters over what the priest is praying.

Fr David

Why not just go all the way and leave any connection with the Eastern Church if one feels this way?

They still want leavened bread and intincted communion by spoon.

Slava Isusu Christu!

I feel that since the Old Russian Rite is allowed, this expression of the Ukrainian Rite should also. I have heard many times from Ukrainians that during the persecution that these so-called latinizations helped them preserve their Ukrainian Catholic faith. The UGCC Major Archbishop should welcome them and regularize them. By persecuting The Society of St. Josaphat it only makes them grow. A change of strategy is in order. By accepting this group it would freeze its growth or greatly slow it, such was the strategy with uniatism in the beginning--it should work here as well. If you want a group to go away, just remove their persecution complex and voila--they get re-integrated into the larger group or remain a quiet insignificant minority. It is simple strategy. I know it is the desire of the Patriarch to be more Eastern Orthodox in praxis, but this little group will not affect ecumenical relations--most of Orthodoxy will never recognize Eastern Catholics anyway.

Robert

In the Roman Rite today they can do whatever they want.



So what is wrong with the Priestly Society of St. Josaphat doing whatever they want?.

Only the Holy Orthodox Church seems to be strictly Byzantine in it's worship.

Robert,

Quite frankly, this is not an expression of the Byzantine Rite as served in the Ukrainian GCCC. Comparison of it with the pre-Nikonian Russian praxis of the Old Ritualists is an analogy that has no merit.

The Old Ritualists serve according to praxis that once was the normative form in the Russian Church. The praxis of the SSJK never existed as a valid form; it is a bastardization of both the Byzantine and Latin Rites. In times psst, latinizations were foisted on us and sometimes adopted by us in an effort to prove our Catholicity. The result was the long struggle - still being waged in some places - required to distinguish, in the minds of our people, what heritage was really ours. To allow this parody of Eastern Catholicism any measure of validity or licity would do nothing except to hamper and confuse the efforts to return to our heritage.

Our Syro-Malabar brethren, divided among those who would retain blatant latinizations, those who seek indianization of their liturgical praxis, and those who would return to their historic liturgical forms are a ready example of why not to allow this - to seek to nip it in the bud, as has been done.

Many years,

Neil

bkovacs,

We're not going there - the thread is about the SSJK - we are not doing analysis of the Latin Church and its issues.

Many years,

Neil

The simple end of the matter is that the SSJK is no longer a group of practical Catholics; they rejected the UGCC synod's joint decision to suppress their irregular form of the DL of St. John.

In so doing they rejected union with Rome as well.

And I forgot a few items, as well:

• No infant communion
• delay of 1st communion until age 8
• delay of Confirmation until age 8 or later
• Suppression of canonical hours other than Vespers and Matins
• spoken responses by the laity

Essentially, it's a hybrid rite, using the text of St. John's liturgy, but a latin style of worship.

There is an Orthodox semi-parallel, and it's not the Old Rite. It's the Western Rite, a hybrid of Western Liturgy and byzantine theology resulting in a few small changes to the texts, and a significant change in the visual environment of the chapel. It is neither fully western, nor fully byzantine. Ironically, it's closer to Roman praxis than the SSJK is to either.

Thanks for the replies. I would just make the observation that the "latinizations" you describe I don't think were ever part of the normative Ukrainian rite but seem to have been added.

Was the "Ukrainian rite" as practiced by SSJK ever normative in the Ukraine?