www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Anyone familiar with "Adoremus?"

Dear Steve and Serge,

I speak as an Eastern Catholic who attended Novus Ordo Masses at school for ten years and this is my take on the subject.

As with everything, it depends how the NO Mass is celebrated.

I've been to many Eastern Catholic liturgies that were done carelessly.

I would suggest that the problem here is not with the NO Mass per se, but with the attitudes and approaches of those who participate in them.

Is the NO approximating to Protestant religious culture?

Absolutely! And there is nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with what many Western Christians have told me is the forbidding, Imperial Byzantine style of our Churches and Liturgies.

We've only really heard from the Orthodox on the Roman Liturgical renewal. I've heard more than many earfuls from RC's who had a lot to say about the Byzantine liturgies they attended, much of it negative.

Fr. Keleher was a Ukrainian Catholic priest when he was in Toronto under Bishop Isiore Borecky.

I can tell you that he tended to force the liturgical issue, in a somewhat controversial way, by doing things in concelebration that no other priest did to the shock and dismay of the congregations.

The "High Orthodox" liturgical style isn't for everyone. It isn't for every Byzantine Catholic parish or even Orthodox parish.

If we see things only through the prism of our own liturgical tradition, well, I think that is rather narrow and it tends to smack of an attitude I myself am disturbed about among the Orthodox, that is, "if it isn't the way we do it, it shouldn't be done."

Quoting ancient sources etc. won't do much good since the liturgy is always growing and developing.

The Roman Church has decided to settle on the NO. Let us respect that and see the "good" in it.

The Orthodox have enough liturgical issues at home to keep them busy, if Schmemann is to be believed (and I do).

I personally don't like the critical tone of Roman liturgy by our Orthodox brothers (who are great fellows otherwise!!).

As I told Brendan, he has more in depth conversations about Orthodoxy with Eastern Catholics than he does with members of his own Communion.

(It's a great Communion too!).

O.K. Brendan and Serge, you can come and get me.

But at least give me a blindfold first!

Alex

"I've been to many Eastern Catholic liturgies that were done carelessly."

True.

"Absolutely! And there is nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with what many Western Christians have told me is the forbidding, Imperial Byzantine style of our Churches and Liturgies."

But how is it that Protestant religious culture is as legitimate as Byzantine/Imperial religious culture? I would draw a distnction there, although I understand that others would not.

"I've heard more than many earfuls from RC's who had a lot to say about the Byzantine liturgies they attended, much of it negative."

As have I, unfortunately.

"it tends to smack of an attitude I myself am disturbed about among the Orthodox, that is, "if it isn't the way we do it, it shouldn't be done.""

Honestly, I don't see anyone advocating a Byzantinization of the Latin rite, Alex. I don't think that charge is accurate or fair.

Christ is borne!

It seems to me that a lot of people have have teh covert syndrome, id est, my new beliefs, Church, spirituality, &c. are better, to the discredit and complete rejection of the old. I know this because my folks gave me a long talking-to about the convert mentality when I transfered from the Latin to the Rusyn Church. That said, there is nothing wrong with the new Roman Missal. I have read the parts, in Latin, contained in the '73 Sacramentary. I believe the problems stem from poor implimentation to the Missal, beginning with a p*ss-poor translation (see Liturgiam Authenticam). The "Liturgists" were/are more interested in putting on a good show, than worship. Many of those in power in the Latin parishes pushed their own agendas, using inherent clericism and ingorance of the Joe in the pew to do so, "in the spirit of Vatican II," as their battle cry went. Thus it is today, a Latin Church, stripped to its bare bones, with little life outside of the Sunday due (that is changing now in a precious few places).

God bless.

Serge,
In all Chairty,

"Sorry if I've sunk to ad hominem here on the forum, but rites are fair game, including things like complaining about latinizations, and as several members agree, bear on both RC-BC relations (perhaps in a future Church where the BCs really are independent, on the way to ending the Schism) and Catholic-Orthodox relations."

My point exactly, what game are we playing. Is it let's change the way that the Latin Church worships or behaves so that it will easier for it to return to Orthodoxy? Is it lets support those who are in revolt against the authority of the Pope? Is it let's get these Byzantine Catholics to agree that they are in communion with error? Is it portray the Latin Church as the bastion of that evil liberalism? What are we hunting?

What ever game it is, I'm not playing.

Pushing an Orthodox agenda or an agenda consonant with conservative politics is simply inapproprirate. This is a place for others to learn about Byzantine Christainity which is a precious jewel in God's Churches. Where is that outlook in what you say?

Look to the words you have chosen to talk about the way in which our Church worship in the postings under rite or wrong. I think that the description of Liturgical action that is different from what you personally and Day personally would like to see as star wars, is a clear example of what I am trying to point out.

You have points, can you not make them without mocking that with which you disagree. It ill servers the cause of ecumenicism, in my opinion. It is bashing the Latin Liturgy approved by our Hierarchy and accepted by our people. Personally, I think you could achieve your ends without doing this. Of course though, that is your option.

I am obliged out of respect for my Church and the Eastern and Oriental Catholic Churches with which we share communion to point out such disrespect and belittling. I ask again, in fraternal love, for you to stop mocking the Latin Church, its Liturgy, and its practices. Question, discuss, pray! Do not engage in polemics and nay saying.



"Also, doesn't the East claim a major connection between theology and liturgy? The separation of the two is one of the longstanding problems in the Latin Church. Which perhaps is why some Catholics can be perfectly orthodox in their beliefs, then go worship like Protestants."

The Latin Church claims that connection also, Serge. That was a major reason for Council and the renewal. Your assertion sounds makes it sound like the Latin Church believes one way and prays another. That is clearly false to anyone who lives, believes and prays in her.

I think Brendan in another thread talked about the difficulties in enculturating the faith and its practices. What he said seemed to a framework for a discussion on your continuing claim that
Latin Catholics go worship Protestant. We, you and I and Brendan have gone over this issue before. I am sorry that you cannot distinguish the Liturgy celebrated in the Latin Church from the worship services held in Protestant Churches.

In my opinion, the issue is not to be found in the Latin Liturgy. I know that the idea of misusing mental constructs and drawing erroneous conclusions has been discussed here. Respectfully, I am positing that your conclusion here is result of such misuse.

Quote:

The Novus Ordo has been directly influenced by the Eastern Catholic Hierarchs and experts.

Another chestnut. Thomas Day does a good job cooking it in Where Have You Gone, Michelangelo? Fr Serge Keleher, a Russian Catholic priest, in an article in Eastern Churches Journal agrees: an epiklesis and token deacon do not equal major Byzantine influence on the Roman Rite, to compare Eastern Communion under both kinds to the American NO free-for-all with people handling Hosts like hors d'oeuvres and grabbing the chalice from Aunt Maggie to self-commune is a sick joke, and the so-called "renewal' is obviously a secularized, Protestantized drift AWAY from the Christian East!"

I stand by the record of Vatican II on this issue. I also stand by the reports of periti and self reports about Eastern Hierarchs contributions to the Latin Church there. I choose to trust them. I do not know Thomas Day's date of commission to speak authoritatively about Catholic beliefs and practices? Does he have one?

I must go now. But I would like to point out the words with which you describe what is a reverent taking of Jesus shared by one memeber of His Body with another. Again, Serge you're doing it!

Please in the Spirit, in fraternal love....

In Love in the Brother in Whom we both live,

Steve
JOY!

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Inawe ]

Given that while on this earth, Our Lord's came in phyiscal contact with every sort of sinner, taxcollector and whore, does this mean that Aunt Maggie ranks below these persons?

K.

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: Kurt ]

Dear Brendan,

Having wiped the tears from my eyes following your comment that I wasn't being fair, I would like to say this . . .

The Western Rite experiments within Orthodoxy have been subject to great Byzantinization pressures, surely. I've been to some Orthodox conferences (I know most of you won't bite) and this is a real problem.

Whenever issues have arisen, the Orthodox Church has always recommended that Rome follow what the Orthodox believe should be the right way (e.g. the epiklesis in the Orthodox Tridentine Rite).

There are Catholics who value the Orthodox liturgy and would like to see ways of bringing in more of its spirit into the Roman Liturgy. I don't mean more incense or prostrations, but the public nature of the liturgy as a communal celebration etc.

I apologise if I ruffled your Orthodox feathers, old boy.

But, like Jan Hus said, if you could show me where I err specifically I will recant - and before you burn me.

Alex

Dear Kurt,

To be fair, I think Serge was quoting this from Serge Keleher. I don't think he has an "Aunt Maggie."

If you wanted to be offensive to Serge in general, I am pretty much convinced you succeeded.

Was that necessary, Friend? And would you kindly apologize on behalf of all of us Byzantine Catholics for that offense given to an Orthodox brother?

If not, I won't understand.

Alex

Alex --

I was referring in my prior post to the other postings on this thread. I don't think Serge or other Orthodox posters have advocated a Byzantinization of the Latin rite -- unless facing liturgical east is a Byzantinization (I guess then maybe the Latin Rite was always Byzantinized...?)

Brendan

I did not mean to imply that Serge has an actual aunt who lacks virtue. I am sure that is not the case. I simply meant the "Aunt Maggie" that Serge made a reference to.

I apologize for the implication that was the case.

K.

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: Kurt ]

Let me step in here again.

Kurt: Serge's aunt is not a loose woman. You should apologize.

Serge: The Roman Mass is not a sick joke. You should apologize.

Olga Nimchek

Dear Brendan,

Sorry, I'm having a bad day and now Edwin is mad at me . . .

You are right, but if someone could outline what an "acceptable" Roman liturgy would be (apart from the Orthodox Western Rites) then maybe then we could see if anyone is advocating Byzantinization of the Latin Rite.

I personally don't see much wrong with the Novus Ordo, provided it is done properly.

No one is trying to take away your Rite to to comment on RC liturgy. After all, you've been RC most of your life, correct?

It is just that Orthodox sometimes come across as saying that their liturgy is perfect and subject to no change.

Yet, Orthodox theologians have said otherwise.

I would like to hear more on how the Orthodox Liturgy should be changing and who can say more on this than yourself and Serge?

Is the structure of the liturgy such that can reach out to the unchurched in Russia and Ukraine today, for instance?

The Novus Ordo has become the liturgical whipping boy here.

Is that not offensive to our Latin brothers who post here?

And what do the Orthodox bishops and theologians participating in ecumenical talks have to say about the Novus Ordo?

If agreement is reached on all things, would they still hold out against reunion until such time as the Novus Ordo is replaced?

I don't think so, but what do I know?

Alex

I never said the American NO free-for-all Communion IS the Roman Mass so I have nothing to apologize for here.

Good examples of the Roman Rite?

• Tridentine Mass, 1962 Missal, as is, in Latin
• "", 1965 Missal with parts in the vernacular — this a slightly pared-down Tridentine Mass with no prayers at the foot of the altar, Last Gospel or Leonine Prayers
• "", 1962 or '65, completely translated into the vernacular � la English (Anglican) Missal (verbatim translation of Tridentine Mass)
• Anglican Use but with the original Miles Coverdale translation of the Gregorian canon — no fudging of the consecration to say "for you and for all' (yes, the AU is largely Cranmer's Prayer Book but those parts fit in with the ethos of the Roman Rite)
• Any of the Antiochian Western Rite versions (the Byzantine epiklesis they tack on isn't necessary)
• Novus Ordo in Latin (no mistranslation problems), priest facing versus apsidem about equally often as versus populum, no altar girls, no Eucharistic ministers, no junk hymns, just the chants of the Mass itself (Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Gradual/Sequence, Credo, Sanctus/Benedictus, Agnus Dei, Communion verse) — and with incense
• """, same as above, but in a fresh, authentic translation, much like the English Missal but thous and thees aren't necessary
• Communion in the hand and under both kinds for laity are fine — imitate how the Anglicans do both (and some think me closed-minded and unecumenical! Snort!)

Freestanding altars? With Anglican Laudian frontals covering all four sides in vestment-style brocade? OK. Better for the priest to walk around the Holy Table while censing it. But keep shelf altars too. Long, sweeping Gothic vestments? A liturgical-movement specialty — yes! Alongside fiddlebacks. Congregational participation in the chant? Yes. Concelebration? OK, in versions where it's provided for. Deacons — and I mean real deacons, including married deacons — decked out in dalmatics? Absitively.

None of these are attempts to pseudomorph the Roman Rite into the Byzantine, but all play up natural affinities with it.

OK, here are two mild Byzantinizations that would not be out of place. At Communion, have two altar boys, men who are ordained acolytes, or the deacon and subdeacon (or two deacons), all vested, stand on either side of the priest and hold a long white or red "houseling cloth' (actually a medieval Roman Rite item that disappeared in the early 1900s) to hold under the communicant's chin, or hands if s/he is receiving making a throne for the Lord with the palms like the Episcopalians. This can be done with kneeling or standing communicants. If one doesn't want to do Communion in the hand, a deterrent is for the priest to practice intinction with one of those mini-chalices set in a bowl-like vessel — he dips each Host in the Precious Blood before placing It on the person's tongue.

Thanks, Alex, for defending me against even passive-aggressive personal attacks. I have no Aunt Maggie, nor did Fr Serge refer to one.

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Serge ]

Ouch !! Serge you are making massive generalisations here [ or quoting them ] again.
Sorry I've had a bad day and come to this rather late. Normally I would not comment on this type of thread but I can't let this one past.
Your description of the administration of Holy Communion is not worthy of being posted here. Maybe the American RC [ yes, I will use the term this time - I'm irritated to put it mildly !] Church does seem to suffer from what I would regard as abuses but we aren't all like that. Here we are instructed [ and I use the term instructed advisedly] as to how to help in the administration of the Sacrament with reverence and awe. The Hosts are NOT handled like hors d'oevres and the Chalice is not grabbed by anyone.

Serge please, in all charity/love I ask you to pick your examples with prudence
Angela

I would like to hear more on how the Orthodox Liturgy should be changing and who can say more on this than yourself and Serge?

Legit options, all existing side by side, for our rite:

• Russian usage, as is*
- In Russia, option of translating to modern Russian as indeed the Holy Synod mooted before the Revolution, IF it's necessary (the two languages, Slavonic and Russian, are pretty close — the Slavonic wordings are as embedded in the culture as the thou-and-thee Our Father and Hail Mary in English)
- English
• Ruthenian recension, 1944
- Existing option of translation into modern Ukrainian
- English
- Existing option: audible anaphora
• New Skete usage (as an option, NOT to totally replace Russian usage) with its different iconostas (St John of Kronstadt used a low iconostas too)
• SS. Peter & Paul, Ben Lomond, CA, usage when it was Fr David Anderson's liturgical laboratory
• Greek usage minus the organ
- Option of translating into demotic Greek in Greece?
- English
• Arabic (Antiochian, Melkite) usage
• Existing Albanian, Romanian, Bulgarian and Serbian usages

Some more thoughts:

I like Roman Rite Vespers and Matins, and their offspring, Anglican Evensong and Matins — including in the current Roman offices (though I prefer the greater number of psalms in the pre-Vatican II versions) — where the psalm readings are many and prominent. I would like to see the Byzantine Rite as used in churches of Russian heritage return to using the kathismata at these offices instead of the truncated version of Vespers taken from the All-Night Vigil used now, in which the many and variable psalm readings disappear and are replaced by the ritual repetition of Psalm 1, "Блаженъ мужъ', week in, week out. The стихири, great as they are, functionally replace the Bible, which doesn't seem quite right.

For a daily prayer rule, instead of repeating Psalm 50, "Помилуй мя, Боже' twice a day, seven days a week, I recommend rotating the psalm between "Приидите, поклонимся' and the Creed based on the single-psalm readings given for morning and evening every day in the back of the Antiochians' Orthodox Study Bible New Testament and Psalms. (My priest's criticism of that book is there are no prayers to Our Lady given in back, which he thinks is a giveaway of the writers' Protestant background.)

I have no problem with shortening services! I can be moved even by a pared-down Ukrainian Catholic Liturgy lasting 40 minutes (which I have been to several times), as long as there is an iconostas and the church and Liturgy retain a basically Eastern physiognamy. (Don't skip the incense, though.)

*It is always good to have the original, traditional usage as a living presence in the Church as a reference and a sort of backup one always can fall back on in case experimentation goes wrong elsewhere

http://oldworldrus.com

Dear friend, Angela,

Sorry you have had a bad day. I remember well the Roman Catholic Church in Britain is in better shape than in the US.

I have seen what I described many times in US RC churches.

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Serge ]