Without prejudice to any of the topics under discussion, and not even meaning to comment on them, one receives a tradition. One does not typically "restore" a tradition, much less an ancient one. Since tradition is that which is handed down, the things which have not been handed down cannot rightly be called tradition. Ancient practices, long abandoned, are not traditional. They're just old.

As a long time subscriber and occasional contributor to the Bride I am delighted to find you here and to glimpse your new ministry.

Many years!

JDC,

Well, items 2 and 3 have been "restored" to many Eastern Catholic Churches in the past 20 years after having been "abandoned."

You will note that I included the word "typically". As modern folk have got increasingly to be too big for their humble human britches, there has been a ridiculous amount of slashing and burning of tradition. These days are not typical, and we must all do our best. Still, the principle articulated is to be observed and, come what may, language isn't much use if we use words to mean things they do not.

Bishop Maelruain (Dowling) of the Celtic Orthodox Church (an independent Church) has this to say on a list devoted to Celtic Christianity.

They have added a form of epiclesis into the 8th century Lorrha Missal:

"The prayer we have chosen to use at every celebration of the Eucharist is the Post Mysterium of the Feast of the Throne of Saint Peter. The Post Mysterium is a variable proper to the feast day. Some feasts have none and the P.M.s for those that do may or may not make reference to the Bread and Wine becoming the Body and Blood.

"The primary reason we made this alteration in practice is that one member of our synod felt strongly that the Byzantines needed it to recognize the Eucharist as properly confected. Personally, I feel that there are plenty of prayers throughout the Liturgy which serve the same purpose, so I would not consider the Liturgy lacking without the added specific epiklesis any more than I would consider the Chrysostom Liturgy lacking because it lacks those other prayers.

"Some have tried to force me to use the Byzantine prayer, but I see no value in doing so. "


Here is the prayer which Bishop Maelruain has added into the Lorrha Missal to act as an epiclesis. It is the Post Mysterium prayer for the Feast of the Throne of Saint Peter at Rome and it may be the origin of the Byzantine and Mozarabic forms:

"We who serve, offer these prescribed Holy Gifts of our Salvation, that Thou may be pleased to send Thy Holy Spirit upon this Sacrifice so that it may be changed into a legitimate Eucharist for us in the Name of Thee, Thy Son and the Holy Spirit, in the transformation of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; and may it be unto us who eat and drink, Life eternal and the eternal Kingdom. Through Christ Himself Our Lord who reigneth with Thee and the Holy Spirit
throughout all ages of ages. Amen."

Source:
http://celticchristianity.org/library/epikl.html

I suspect that the east need do nothing to satisfy the Latins liturgically. As a Byzantine working in Latin parishes as a music director/organist for years, I have observed one thing. There is no way to make Latins happy. In matters liturgical, they dislike what was, what is, and likely will object to what is to come. The east should follow its traditions, and not worry about what others think.

Of possible technological interest:

Noticed tonight that Vimeo has just put up a HD version of this Western Rite Mass:

Western Rite Orthodox Mass in HD.

Sort of reminds me of the Daily Mass they keep having on the EWCN TV.