www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West ROCOR Western Rite Disappears?

Xristoforos,

OK, but the Anglican Ordinariate is more than just about rubrics and which Liturgy one uses.

Not all members of the Ordinariate are interested in the Sarum Use and this isn't a deal-breaker for them for the most part.

But whatever ROCOR intended to say about the matter, and however it will clarify its position and/or insist that there is much misinterpretation of it - the point is, as you yourself say, that this has all negatively impacted its Western Rite members and parishes.

Apotheoun responded by wishing the WR folk well as they undertake the spirituality of the Byzantine Rite. He isn't someone who jumps to rash conclusions - far from it - and that is how he understood the matter.

It could very well be that ROCOR needed to act quickly to head off a situation that was getting out of control.

But just as this or that action by Rome towards Eastern Catholics is more than likely to be interpreted badly by both EC's and Orthodox observers, so too is this action by ROCOR (which I think we can all agree was communicated poorly) will only serve to underscore the popular notions about Orthodoxy being insular with respect to the Byzantine-Russian tradition and incapable of expressing a truly "catholic" praxis that reflects the spiritual pluralism of the Church prior to 1054 AD.

I'm not saying that is true - only that this contributes to that caricature.

Alex

Xristoforos,

And a number of Ordinariate acquaintances have indeed told me they see the "pining" after the Sarum Use as irrelevant - it comes from them in the first instance.

Alex

If he is a member of ROCOR joining an Antiochian Western Rite parish is always an option, or he can convert to Roman Catholicism.

The letter / decree does sound like it is suppressing the ROCOR's Western Rite. Perhaps a clarification / correction will be issued at some point in the future.

So, after reading all that has been said here, I still have an unanswered question.

Whats the point of the Western Rite?

In all seriousness, for the most part, the majority of posters believe in the validity of sacraments for both churches, correct? Does it simply boil down to celibacy?

Another question; Why is it assumed that Western Rite Orthodox have an ecumenical mindset? Do they? I can say I have met some rather rabid Western Rite Orthodox.

Now if people say that some westerners can more easily identify with the WRO, are they not just continuing the whole ethnic division problem or even Phyletism?

How about hearing a mixture of Slavonic and English at the WR Liturgy?

The point of Western Orthodoxy is ecclesial communion. People are frequently personally and culturally extremely attached to the way they pray, and abstract matters like communion take a second place in the human heart. Offer the heart a solution, and the head has an easier time following.

Yes, he has thought about Antioch, but finds them to be "too liberal" would you believe.

He has now formally joined the Ordinariate with his wife. A number of acquaintances are now enthusiastic members. I was to have been his sponsor two years ago when he initially wanted to join the Ordinariate, but he walked out of the church when he saw an altar girl there . . .

Alex

very good sir!

Can you be a little more specific?

Dear Peter the Rock,

I think Chadrook means that there is a perception that Western Rite Orthodox are a kind of Orthodox bridge to the West, just as EC's are said to be a Catholic bridge to the East.

Alex

I'll take it for now that ROCOR WR is stavropegial, simply no longer a vicariate, and I won't presume to predict its future.

Antiochian WR is ecumenical. It's the mirror of what Greek Catholicism's supposed to be: showing the other side that 'the water's fine here; you can keep all your practices, as they are fine under our doctrine'. Antiochian WR is traditional Catholicism but without the Pope.

ROCOR WR is anti-ecumenical, sort of like heavily latinized Greek Catholics. 'Your church is bogus; to be in the true church either join the dominant rite or accept our invented, mutilated version of WR.'

I don't know of any ex-Catholics who switched to WR so they could get married and be priests. It seems to me most WR priests are ex-Anglicans who were married priests as Anglicans.

Dear Sergey,

As always, you have such a deep insight on this and so many other things!

Thank you sir!

Alex

Serge,

What interested most people about the ROCOR WR was that it allowed individuals to create missions in the same way the average Eastern rite parish creates missions. In the USA you will find numerous Eastern rite antiochian missions that began with only 5 to 10 people and eventually reached over 100.

My understanding of the Antiochian Western rite vicariate is that you must have a larger sized church, rented or owned, with a more stable number of attendees (30 people or more?). You are not allowed to begin a western rite mission with the same freedoms of beginning a byzantine rite mission. So there is an inherent bias unfortunately. Many came to ROCOR not because they disliked the Antiochian WR or were more anti-catholic but because it was the only option open to them.

Fr. Aidan (formerly Alvin) Kimel, he is an associate priest at an Antiochian Western rite parish in Roanoke, VA and is very happy there. However , if I understand correctly, he was not able to enter through Antioch, but through ROCOR he was able to be a priest again and attack himself to the nearest parish, since he didnt bring one with him. This was the main solution ROCOR provided, the oppurtunity to evangelize and enter into the WR of Orthodoxy more freely, some think too freely.

In ROCOR at least one had the freedom to form missions with less restrictions. Ideally the way one forms an eastern or western rite mission should be equal. The priests should have the same qualifications, same education, same time period of ordination, etc. Perhaps ROCOR could have screened people better? Surely in life there are always different poles and extremes we are where we struggle to find the proper compromise. It can not happen instantly.

The preservation of the Sarum use as a living tradition is important, regardless if many find it irrelevant.I understand it's not a deal breaker for almost anyone to not have the Sarum use. That is alright.

What is interesting is that nearly all of the propers for the Sarum use are actually includedin the St. Tikhon liturgies. The Mass and Office ordinaries for "St. Tikhon's Liturgy" are more often elements of the BCP, but actual the propers are the true historic ones from before the reformation. (I guess it's missing "sequence" proses for feasts, but those could be added into it or sung as recessional after Mass.)

The deal breaker for many interested in the RC ordinariate has been the novus ordo components enforced upon them. The forbiddance of the traditional one year lectionary is a primary concern, beyond altar girls. Additionally as noted elsewhere, Monsignor Jeffrey Steenson is viewed as far too liberal, to the extent that he seemed to create an unnecessary wedge between the traditional latin mass and the anglican use mass. Compare this to ROCOR's Bishop Jerome who would intentionally celebrate a Salisbury use Roman Mass in Latin and a Salisbury use Roman Mass in english to show how they are the same thing regardless of language.

It would make sense at this point if the ROCOR WR became more similar to the Antiochian WR. The only thing I'd recommend ROCOR keep in it's WR, besides the option of the Sarum use, is "The Psalter for Prayer" by David James. That is an awesome correction of the coverdale psalter. Otherwise I think the ROCOR WR should use the exact same liturgies used in the Antiochian WR. I don't think they need to have 5 different slightly different versions of the Latin rite, not with such small size. Until you have thousands or millions of people and multiple monasteries you ought to have only 2 or 3 liturgies at the most.
Most people would be happier that way.

God will bring good out of this trying time.

The majority of the outreach and evangelism with the Orthodox churches western rite vicariates has been to protestants. They were and are the majority in Antioch and ROCOR WR.

Though they are a minority, I have noticed a number of former Roman Catholics in different WR churches. However I have to say, of these former Roman Catholics a number of them, if they were not going to be in the Orthodox Church would more likely be in a protestant church or no church at all, rather than go back to the RC churches, which I think a number had felt their "bridges were burned" at.

I don't know of any ex-Catholics who switched to WR so they could be married and be priests. I do not think this is ever going to happen and rarely a concern to avoid in newcomers.

For the record, both ROCOR WR and Antiochian WR have two or three layman who were originally Roman Catholics who are now ordained priests for them. However, none of these layman intentionally joined them because they wanted to be married priests.

Being a married man who was a priest was never a primary reason but happened for completely different reasons. The main reason being that the Orthodox church allows and encourages it.

What is interesting is that the presence of former-Roman Catholics is much more profound within the byzantine rite of the Orthodox Church. That's where I think one is inclined to find fascinating surprises.

I have acquaintances who are/were in the ROCOR WR and the Antiochian WR as well as others within the Ordinariate.

The ease with which some of them move from one church to another is . . . well, very North American.

The ones I know are very traditionalist and they appear to place traditionalism, as they themselves define it, ahead of Orthodoxy or Catholicism.

The former ROCOR WR members I know tell me they were getting ready to leave ROCOR in any event.

I quipped that they now at least know what it means to be a Greek Catholic . . .

Funny? No? Sorry . . .

Alex