The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Iorbinicus, turaŭski, tobiasandedmund, Vladyka, Fisheater
6,307 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 members (San Nicolas), 1,702 guests, and 108 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Stone Carvings by Hutsul
Stone Carvings by Hutsul
by Hutsul, February 1
Stone Carved Deesis
Stone Carved Deesis
by Hutsul, December 10
Saint Basil the Great Byzantine Catholic Church - Los Gatos
St Elias in Brampton, Ontario
St Elias in Brampton, Ontario
by miloslav_jc, July 26
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,631
Posts418,292
Members6,307
Most Online18,864
Feb 27th, 2026
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 643
Likes: 1
T
Member
Member
T Offline
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 643
Likes: 1
Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J.

[Linked Image]

Jun11'14
Posted by Editor
http://www.praytellblog.com/index.php/2014/06/11/interviewing-liturgical-leaders-robert-taft-s-j/

Pray Tell is starting a new series of interviews with liturgical leaders. It is loosely inspired by a series in Time Magazine. Each person was asked ten questions. They were told they could answer as many questions as they wanted and they could also pose their own questions. Here is what we received�



Lifetime in liturgy�any regrets?

None whatever. But indecisiveness or regrets are not my style. Had there been any regrets, I would not have had a �lifetime in liturgy,� but would have dropped it early on and turned to something else.



What are you most proud of in your liturgical work?

I am most proud of my students, and the fact that, except for a couple of glaring exceptions, most of them love me and carry on, often brilliantly, the work I taught them to do. What could give an old geezer now careening toward his dotage greater satisfaction than that?



Any book you wish you had written?

Well, I guess all of us authors have a list of great books we would like to have written. But as one with a bibliography of publications comprising over 800 titles, including thirty-four books, three of them coauthored, eight others edited or co-edited in collaboration with others, with two more in press, there is not much I have not written about, nor do I feel the need to be jealous of the publishing success of others but rejoice in it.

But if I had to choose books I would like to have written I would pick two not on liturgy: Robert Louis Wilken�s The First Thousand Years. A Global History of Christianity (New Haven & London: Yale U. Press 2012). And German Jesuit Klaus Schatz�s justly famous book: Papal Primacy from its Origins to the Present (Collegeville: Liturgical Press 1996) from the German original and available in several other languages.

Prof. Wilken shows how Christianity really developed, pace the view of history propagated in the classic Catholic myth that there was once one Church, founded by Christ on Peter, all Christians originally belonged to it until they broke off into schism, and the solution was to return to it where they belong.

That is like the Greek Orthodox publication �Nostalgia for Orthodoxy,� provoked by the western romance with the Christian East, which led its authors to think its propagators were nostalgic to �return� to an Orthodoxy to which they had never belonged in the first place.

These Mickey-Mouse views of how the Churches of East and West originated in the early centuries are neatly flushed away by Wilken�s demonstration that originally there evolved in East and West what one might liken to a federation of independent local Churches, each governed by a ruling hierarch called pope, patriarch, or some other title, or by a synod. All these Churches were in communion with, but not dependent on, one another, until later disruptions caused breaks in the communion leading to the situation we have now.

And Schatz shows how one such branch, the Church of Rome, evolved and propagated its own Walt-Disney view of its history. But it did not begin this way, since the Roman Primacy, like everything else on earth, has a history, and Schatz shows how it evolved into � but did not start as � what it is today.



Three things to fix the liturgy � what would they be?

The liturgy doesn�t need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English. What needs fixing are the celebrating clergy. What I have often said of my own Jesuit confreres applies here too: all Jesuits have studied theology, but not all of them learned theology�i.e., learned how to think theologically. A classic instance is the question of the clergy�s refusal to cease giving communion from the reserved sacrament in the tabernacle despite the Church�s constant exhortations and orders to do so. That is not because the clergy are disobedient,but because they are theologically and liturgically ignorant, as I have tried to show in Worship 88/1 (pp. 2-22).



Pope Francis good for liturgical renewal or not?

Papa Francesco is good for everything, including liturgical renewal. When he first celebrated Mass in the Sistine Chapel he had them toss out the altar facing away from the congregation that his predecessor had installed, and thereby gave the signal indicating how he rated the reformed Vatican II liturgy vis-�-vis the restored pre-Vatican II Summorum Pontificum �extraordinary form.�



Is the Vatican II liturgical renewal secure or endangered?

I think it is secure, because I believe the vast majority of Catholic people throughout the world confirm it by voting with their feet and going to Mass in the reformed rite, showing thereby that despite the right-wing neo-con wackos (hereafter NCW�s), most Catholics prefer the reformed rite.

But that does not mean that the NCW�s are not a threat, since it is said that large numbers of them now control the terrain in our seminaries. As Professor Massimo Faggioli, the Catholic point-man on these issues has shown, the Vatican II Liturgical Constitution was the fundamental document that led the way to the rest of Vatican II, so an attack against that key document is an attack against the guiding spirit of the Vatican II Council.



Anything good coming out of Summorum Pontificum?

Nope, unless creating unnecessary divisions in the Church and driving crazy our harried bishops who have too few priests to start with and now have to try and accommodate the NCW�s is considered �good.�



Is liturgical ecumenism still alive?

It�s still alive as long as I�m still alive, and I was the last time I checked. I have spent my entire life, priestly and academic, building bridges to our sister Churches, especially those in the Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox East, but also not ignoring those of the Anglican and Reformation traditions. In fact, I have a new book in press entitled Beyond East and West 2: Problems in Ecumenical Understanding, which is an ecumenical clone of my highly popular and often reprinted Beyond East and West 1: Problems in Liturgical Understanding (Rome: Pontifical Oriental Institute 1997).

In the new, forthcoming book I develop my ecumenical theology already expressed in a conference still in press: �Communion, not Reunion: The Future Church of Sister Churches,� lecture at the 2013 Orientale Lumen XV Conference �Rome and the Communion of Churches,� Washington DC, June 20-23, 2013, to appear in the Congress Acta.

I outline there my ecumenical vision of how I conceive our future, which will not consist in any Churches becoming anything they are not already, but in their coming together freely in mutual respect, recognition, and ecclesial communion as Sister Churches.

Admittedly, this is more easily conceivable between the Catholic Church and the Churches of the East, which Rome already recognizes as �Sister Churches� possessing the full panoply of what for Rome constitutes a �Church� in the full sense of the term, with a valid apostolic episcopate and sacraments.

With regard to the Anglican and Reformation traditions the problem from the Catholic side remains more complicated, but not, in my view, insoluble, as I have already explained elsewhere in my writings. Among the outstanding ecumenical and liturgical priorities the Catholic Church could and should address to further the cause of ecumenism now would include the following:

First, I consider it both essential and urgent to revisit the question of the validity of Anglican orders. I have no pretense at being a specialist on this question. But now that the archives of the Catholic commission that studied the question are open, it is reported that half of the original Catholic commission members were in favor of recognizing validity. But it is said that the then Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster pleaded against doing so, lest Anglicans cease to convert to Catholicism. If that is true, then we are faced with the scandalously shameful manipulation of a serious religious cause regarding another Christian Church.

This question also involves a cluster of other issues that I believe need to be reconsidered:

[a] the whole question of conceiving apostolic succession via the �relay race pass the baton model� is questionable, since it is probably not provable with historical verisimilitude for any Church on earth, including that of Rome. It is not clear that Rome originally had a monarchical episcopate rather than some sort of collegial governing body, possibly presbyteral, in the earliest post-apostolic era.

[b] Besides, at least some reputable Catholic theologians today would agree that apostolic succession does not have to be validated via such a material process.

[c] In this context one might take a lesson from the Apostolic Sister Churches of the Orthodox East, for whom valid sacraments, including orders, are those recognized as such by the Church. Period. Now since the Orthodox have recognized Anglican orders,[1] where does that leave us Catholics, since we recognize the Apostolic Succession of Orthodox orders?

[d] Furthermore, the Catholic acceptance of a more nuanced view of apostolic succession would lead to considerable ecumenical progress with the classic communities of the Reformation traditions like the Lutherans, which could then be recognized as particular �Sister Churches,� something fully reputable Catholic theologians have already adumbrated, if I understand them correctly.[2]

[e] Finally, anyone who knows a little history of theology is aware that at the time of the Catholic decision denying the validity of Anglican orders there was in vogue in Catholicism a view of Christian presbyterate as �priesthood� overdeveloped from the time when the early (probably) African apologist Municius Felix (ca. 130-300 AD) could declare: �Aras non habemus � We [Christians] have no altars!� Here, as with all historical reality including religious phenomena, context is everything. And it is well documented that the theology of Christian ministry underwent a progressive �sacerdotalization� in the course of its evolution, once the need to resist recurrent Judaizing tendencies had abated.[3]

So that�s a few of the issues on my agenda for starters.



Among your many books do you have any favorites, and why would you pick the ones you list?

Well, topping the list would have to be my very first book, The Great Entrance. A History of the Transfer of Gifts and other Preanaphoral Rites of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (OCA 200, Rome: Pontifical Oriental Institute 1975) xl + 485 pp., which has sold better than any book ever published by the Institute press, frequently sold out and had to be updated and reprinted again and again through the years, and has just now been translated into Italian and updated by Prof. Stefano Parenti in a huge tome about the the size of the Gutenberg Bible: Robert F. Taft, SJ and Stefano Parenti, Storia della Liturgia di San Giovanni Crisostomo, vol. II: Il Grande Ingresso. Edizione italiana rivista, ampliata e aggiornata (Analekta Kryptoferrys I0, Grottaferrata: Badia Greca 2014) 793 pp.

The first edition (1975) was immediately declared a classic, and I was dubbed �the Byzantine Jungmann� after the famous Austrian Jesuit liturgical scholar Josef Jungmann, author of Missarun Sollemnia, his classic history of the Roman Mass. Overnight I found myself famous, and nothing has been the same since, much to the chagrin of a couple of my confreres in Rome.

The Great Entrance became volume 1 of my by now massive multi-volume History of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, of which four volumes have appeared (= OCA 200, 238, 261, 281,) and the last is in press.

If allowed a second choice I would choose my Liturgical Press book The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West (1986, 2nd ed. 1993) that received the First Place Award of the Catholic Press Association for �The Best Book in Theology in 1986� and has been translated into Italian (twice), French, and Ukrainian.

But among my many books the one I actually use and re-read more than any other represents the only delving I ever did into the realm of spirituality, a book that resulted from a liturgical retreat to Ukrainian Greek-Catholic seminarians that I continue to use for my own personal edification and prayer. It is entitled Liturgy: Model of Prayer � Icon of Life (Fairfax, VA: Eastern Christian Publications 2008). It has been reprinted numerous times, is still available from the publisher, and continues to nourish my spiritual life.



Is academic liturgical study relevant to the real world?

In the first place, ALL serious liturgical study is academic, and academic liturgiologists also reside in and pray and worship in �the real world.� Furthermore, their study is relevant to the real world since it is the only liturgical study that has impacted the liturgical renewal of the Churches, as should be evident from reading the flagship liturgical literature in the field like Worship. Ecclesia Orans, Jahrbuch (later) Archiv f�r Liturgiewissenschaft, Ephemerides Liturgicae, La Maison-Dieu, Studia Liturgica, etc.



What were the most important reference books on liturgy you were repeatedly forced to turn to in your scholarly research?

Jungmann�a classic Missarum Sollemnia on the Mass of the Roman Rite, Andr� Jacob�s Histoire du formulaire grec de la Liturgie de Saint Jean Chrysostome. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Louvain 1968; Stefano Parenti & Elena Velkovska (eds.), L�Eucologio Barberini gr. 336. Seconda edizione riveduta con traduzione in lingua italiana (Biblioteca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 80, Rome 2000); Juan Mateos (ed.), Le Typicon de la Grande �glise. Ms. Sainte-Croix n� 40, Xe si�cle. Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes, 2 vols. (OCA 165-166, Rome: Pontifical Oriental Institute 1962-1963).



Does that mean you consider those the best books you have read on liturgy?

By no means. Those books are a short list of the essential reference works I had to constantly consult on a daily basis, though innumerable other reference works and critical editions of liturgical ms sources were in frequent use too.

As for the best books I have read on liturgy, surely near the top of my list would be St. John�s Abbey Benedictine Monk Alan Bouley�s From Freedom to Formula. The Evolution of the Eucharistic Prayer from Oral Improvisation to Written Texts (CUASCA 21, Washington, DC: Catholic University of America 1981), a work of genius and an extraordinarily well-written read.



Do you advise young people to go into liturgical studies?

I think it fair to say that I have fostered the careers and future success of my graduate students in myriad ways. But I am generally reluctant to advise them in choosing a future career path. I prefer to explain the possibilities and problems as I see them, and let them decide.



What would you judge to be the best doctoral dissertations you directed in your professorial career?

I would not even dream of giving an answer to such a question! Some dissertations were more obviously landmark works of scholarship than others, but on my list of doctoral dissertation written under my direction they number thirty-four, to which one can add eight more in the direction of which I had a major role, though was not the official director. To that list one can add an additional twenty-one licentiate or MA level theses I directed. Those in the trade will recognize that as an enormous workload, but I was often asked to assume the direction of theses because the students knew I really directed them, despite my reputation for being exigent and even tough, or because the official director was seen to be inadequate for the task.

Many of these dissertations were eventually published and are now recognized works of scholarship in the field of Liturgiewissenschaft. Those who know how to read will know them already or can find them easily. For me as director to make the selection would be easy but odious and reprehensible in the extreme.

��-

[1] At least of male candidates, but I do not know if that recognition has been rescinded since the Anglicans began to ordain women presbyters, ordinations I presume no Orthodox recognize as valid.

[2] See, for example, Thomas P. Rausch, S.J., �Occasional Eucharistic Hospitality: Revisiting the Question,� TS 74/2 (June 2013) 399-419. I do not wish to imply that Fr. Rausch agrees with the broader conclusions I am drawing from his observations.

[3] For an excellent account of this evolution, see Nathan Mitchell, Mission and Ministry in the Sacrament of Order (Message of the Sacraments 6, Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier 1982). See also the Grove Liturgical Studies (Grove Books, Bramcote Notts.) touching on the topic: Study No. 19: R.P.C. Hanson, Eucharistic Offering in the Early Church; No. 31: Rowan Williams, Eucharistic Sacrifice � The Roots of a Metaphor; No. 40: Colin Buchanan (ed.), Essays on Eucharistic Sacrifice.



Robert F. Taft, S.J., born in Providence, RI (USA) Jan. 9, 1932, is a Jesuit priest ordained in the Byzantine Slavonic (Russian) Rite in 1963. He is founder and editor-in-chief of Anaphorae Orientales, and Professor-emeritus of Oriental Liturgy at the Pontifical Oriental Institute, Rome, where he served as Vice-Rector from December 20, 1995-April 29, 2001. He received there his doctorate in 1970, followed in 1971-72 by postdoctoral studies in Oriental Philology at the University of Louvain, Belgium. He has also served as Visiting Professor in the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame since 1974. A prolific writer, the bibliography of his publications and writings comprises over 800 titles, written in English, French, and Italian, mostly scholarly publications on Eastern Liturgy, including 34 books, 5 of them co-authored, plus 9 others edited or co-edited in collaboration with other authors. His writings have been translated into nineteen different languages.

Fr. Taft also serves as Consultor for Liturgy of the Vatican Congregation for the Oriental Churches, and is a member of several Vatican commissions and other editorial and advisory boards.

In recognition of his work, Fr. Taft has received numerous academic awards, including three honorary doctorates, and several ecclesiastical honors. In 2001, he was elected Corresponding Fellow of the British Academy, the highest honor the Academy confers in recognition of scholarly distinction. He was the first and at that time only American Jesuit in history ever to be so honored.

In recent years, since the fall of Communism in 1989, Fr. Taft has been actively engaged in assisting in the restoration of the persecuted and suppressed Eastern Churches in the former Soviet East Bloc. On May 5, 1998, the Head of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church elevated Fr. Taft to the dignity of Mitred Archimandrite in recognition of his services to the Eastern Churches. On November 11, 1999, Archbishop Vsevolod of Scopelos, of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA within the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, conferred on Fr. Taft, in the name of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, a second pectoral cross, with the right to wear the double pectoral insignia, in recognition of his scholarly research and writings on the Orthodox tradition.

On his recent visit to Rome, May 8, 2008, His Holiness Karekin II of Etchimiadzin, �Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians,� conferred on Fr. Taft a third pectoral cross in recognition of his studies on the Armenian liturgical tradition and his work for the education of their clergy.

Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 44
2
Member
Member
2 Offline
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 44
Boy does Fr. Taft ever rub me the wrong way! He's done the entire Church a great service by his scholarly work but he has that Jesuit ability to be really abrasive and bluntly insulting. His dismissive remarks about NCWs is really over the top and frankly Manichean, as if there are only the nice fluffy sheeplike Catholics who go along with the regime of the Novus Ordo and liturgical abuses galore, and then the evil ones who reverence the retired Pope Benedict. Shame on Taft for his jabs at that saintly man! Just so there is no mistake: my wife and I attend a parish that uses the Novus Ordo; I occasionally attend FSSP Masses, and was for 12 years an Orthodox Christian (first Antiochain, then OCA). Why do people keep giving Fr. Taft fora to speak when he spews crud like this?

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
I'd say this needs to be heard, rather than read. Very Rev Archimandrite Robert is openly in support of the theology and Liturgy behind the Novus Ordo vs. the Tridentine Rite - because of the ideal behind the Novus Ordo, not it's usual poor experience; that being said, I'll bet he was egging the interviewer a bit for bothering to waste his time asking about the Latin Church's problems. He is a total Easterner and an expert on Eastern Liturgics, why waste his time on asking him about matters that aren't on his table. In addition, remember the pre-VC2 mindset: Latin is best, Eastern everything subordinate to the superior Latin Rite, no room for other expressions even Western ones, congregtion should pray devotionals in silence, etc...

Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 44
2
Member
Member
2 Offline
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 44
While I like to think I am a student of history (BA and MA in History plus grad-level church history courses), I can only say, so what if the "pre-VC2 mindset" was, shall we say, triumphalist and less-than-irenic towards the East? (As if many in the Latin Rite knew/cared about the East!) It's this whole niggling historical minutia and hold on to every perceived grievance for the past 2000 year thing that tears at the Body of Christ! Can we PLEASE just let it go and focus on worshiping Christ at the Cross and serving our brothers and sisters in this damaged creation?! So Fr. Taft may not have liked the questions--surely there is something in the Ignatian way that could have helped him just keep his mouth closed and to ask for the next question.

Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 87
R
Member
Member
R Offline
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 87
2lungambassador,

You are absolutely right, and it had never occurred to me that I probably would never have been drawn to the Eastern Rite in search of liturgy that is about God, not about man, were it not for the coming of the NOM.

I really don't know what is preventing the reunion of East and West, but it does seem that a large part of the difficulty does involve historical minutiae.

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Sure, it's always minutiae when the other party was affected, and is currently being affected. I've yet to see the same "minutiae" reciprocated by the East - where have celibate non-monastic clergy been forbidden to exercise their priesthood? Where have Latins been compelled to stop using the Western practices and adopt the Eastern, by force? Where in the East has the Latin practice been treated as second class, even barely tolerated?

Even today, Easterners are treated less than equally. VC2 hasn't yet reached 50yrs, including the freedom that Eastern Churches should have always enjoyed, and some want to prevent it from gathering root. Of course Easterners are weary of Latin minutiae - it turns into a monumental boulder for us to shoulder!

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
Member
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
Quote
Where in the East has the Latin practice been treated as second class, even barely tolerated?


Seriously?


Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Originally Posted by JBenedict
Quote
Where in the East has the Latin practice been treated as second class, even barely tolerated?


Seriously?
Within our same Communion, not with those outside of the Catholic Communion. Why should Eastern Catholics be treated as second class within our own Communion?

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 294
M
Member
Member
M Offline
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 294
Fr. Taft's work is valuable merely because no one else has done it and so well to boot. I will be the first to admit that when the Jesuits are good at something they are better than everyone else. I do find his personality rebarbative, just as I do a certain Franciscan nun who used to be on TV a lot, although I suppose many Americans find that kind of affect "genuine".
But should this ivory towet stuff have any impact on the parochial level? Perhaps not directly but filtered through hierarchical or catechetical intermediaries. Alexander Pope, I believe, said a little learning is a dangerous thing and too much can be applied too haphazardly a la post-VII enthusiasm. As it is, we live in an era obsessed with minutiae and the geekification of knowledge that any new knowledge shoukd be tested according to what the Lord requires of us.

Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 44
2
Member
Member
2 Offline
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 44
Michael,
Please don't assume I mean those issues you mention are minutia. I did not want to get into a whole listing trope and I apologize for not being exactingly precise. But part of your reply proves my point; the whole approach of being aggrieved, of proud victimhood that so afflicts the East. It is one of the reasons I petitioned to have my ascription changed from East to West. Being a Latin Catholic is no picnic, and after being in the East it is an exercise in humility because of all the liturgical abuses we have to endure. When I am talking minutia I was referring to such things as fasting guidelines, the length of liturgies, the prerogatives of so and so and so and so, the status of ROCOR vs. OCA and how everybody knows the Jerusalem Patriarchate is more holy than the Antiochians and etc. etc. On another point regarding Fr. Taft's affiliation: I agree that when the Jesuits are good they are great, but when they are bad.... I stand by my assertion that his swipe at those who appreciate the EF AND ESPECIALLY his gratuitous knock of retired Pope Bendict were uncalled for and just plain spiteful.

Last edited by 2lungsambassador; 06/17/14 04:58 AM.
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,469
Likes: 115
Moderator
Member
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,469
Likes: 115
Some of Father Taft's opinions point to some of his own prejudices. For example

Quote
The liturgy doesn�t need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English.

Elsewhere I've read that there was a proposal to have the Eastern Catholics of the Byzantine tradition and the Orthodox collaborate on a common English translation. It came to nothing because Father Taft insisted that it follow what some call "inclusive language" and others "feminist language." This latter was supposedly a non-starter for the Orthodox.

Quote
[c] In this context one might take a lesson from the Apostolic Sister Churches of the Orthodox East, for whom valid sacraments, including orders, are those recognized as such by the Church. Period. Now since the Orthodox have recognized Anglican orders,[1] where does that leave us Catholics, since we recognize the Apostolic Succession of Orthodox orders?

[d] Furthermore, the Catholic acceptance of a more nuanced view of apostolic succession would lead to considerable ecumenical progress with the classic communities of the Reformation traditions like the Lutherans, which could then be recognized as particular �Sister Churches,� something fully reputable Catholic theologians have already adumbrated, if I understand them correctly.[2]

The question of the Orthodox Churches recognizing Anglican Orders was discussed in The Orthodox Church--a book written by Bishop Kallistos Ware. His Grace states that the question was answered in a more nuanced manner than Father Tafty suggests decades ago. He says that the Orthodox Church might recognize Anglican Orders if the Anglicans became fully Orthodox in Faith, but that the dialogue usually then became what the Anglicans would accept and what they found troubling from their point of view. Bishop Kallistos says that from the Orthodox point of view the whole of the Faith has to be taken as it is without negotiation. We also have to remember the response of the Russian Orthodox Church in the mid1970s when the Episcopal Church in the United States first ordained women. The Russian Church was referenced in Time magazine as taking the position that if this were to be the future, all dialogues would not have as their end future ecclesial communion because this was something that could not be squared with Apostolic Faith and praxis.

The whole area of what constitutes Apostolic Succession seems to be from the Roman side, even though Father has spent his entire life living as an Easterner. It seems to me that this whole question cannot be solved by Rome or Roman theologians alone without first finding a common understanding with all of the other Apostolic Churches not currently in full communion. So before expanding this area, it might be well to resolve how this is to be commonly understood and applied. Some time ago, our brother, Irish Melkite, posted about the differences in approach between the Cyrillian and Augustinian theologies to the Mystery of Orders. The actual problem in application is still visible in the Chaldean Catholic church's acceptance of a man the Church of the East defrocked from the episcopate and the Chaldeans not only accepted in orders but have since given the man official status as a bishop. That type of thing must be ironed out long before the question of expanding the definition can be discussed. And it includes mutual respect for another Church and its discipline.

It seems to me that Father's interview misses the whole point of all the separated Churches coming into full communion with each other. It cannot start with the assumption that Rome will be the arbiter of how it will happen and how it will proceed. Otherwise, we remain where we are today. I'm surprised by the answers in this interview because earlier Father Taft had an interview that was posted on this forum wherein he stated that the best we could hope for in the future would be communion where each Church would have to be respected and he implied that a consensus would have to be achieved in so many areas such as the ones he discusses above.

Bob

Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 19
M
Junior Member
Junior Member
M Offline
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 19
Quote
Father Taft said:
"The liturgy doesn't need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English."
This cannot be a true statement. Father Taft is the author of the Ruthenian Revised Divine Liturgy. Father Petras and Father Hayduk and Bishop Kudrick all say they revised the Divine Liturgy the way Father Taft said to. Is he embarrassed at how bad his Revised Divine Liturgy is? What's going on?

Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 87
R
Member
Member
R Offline
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 87
"context is everything." says Fr. Taft.

Doesn't that statement explain his thought?

Divine Truth is not dependent on context.

I don't claim to have the solution, but true and objective unity among Christians does not seem possible to me through manipulation and/or the giving of pride of place to subjective context.

Constant change leads nowhere but to more and more rapid change. I long for the return of objectivity.

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Originally Posted by MichaelO
Quote
Father Taft said:
"The liturgy doesn't need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English."
This cannot be a true statement. Father Taft is the author of the Ruthenian Revised Divine Liturgy. Father Petras and Father Hayduk and Bishop Kudrick all say they revised the Divine Liturgy the way Father Taft said to. Is he embarrassed at how bad his Revised Divine Liturgy is? What's going on?
Fr. Taft, I think would deny being the author of the RDL. He is not Ruthenian. He was asked to verify that the RDL contains nothing heretical.

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/372681/Was%20RDL,%20now%20Q%20on%20Father%20Rober

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/322231

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,433
Likes: 33
ajk Offline
Member
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,433
Likes: 33
Quote
Prof. Wilken shows how Christianity really developed, pace the view of history propagated in the classic Catholic myth that there was once one Church, founded by Christ on Peter, all Christians originally belonged to it until they broke off into schism, and the solution was to return to it where they belong.
This reviewer has quite a different take on Wilken's book: Review of Robert Louis Wilken’s [i]The First Thousand Years: A Global History of Christianity[/i] [calledtocommunion.com]

"...that there was once one Church, founded by Christ on Peter, all Christians originally belonged to it" is more than plausible, and it should not be too difficult to connect the "One...Church" of the Creed to that Church of Pentecost and the Acts of the Apostles.

Quote
Papa Francesco is good for everything, including liturgical renewal. When he first celebrated Mass in the Sistine Chapel he had them toss out the altar facing away from the congregation that his predecessor had installed,
"...the altar facing away from the congregation...", just like those benighted churches of the East who consider that ALL, clergy and people TOGETHER, are oriented in prayer to God?


Quote
These Mickey-Mouse views of how the Churches of East and West originated in the early centuries...
Such injudicious and unwarranted words of Fr. Taft make him a more worthy bearer of the famous ears than those he criticizes.



Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 9
Pray Tell's Nathan Chase stated the following in the comments section, due to a lot of negative comments regarding the interview:

Pray Tell interviewed Robert Taft and asked him to be witty, humorous and engaging. Taft delivered. We decided to post his responses in their unedited form due to the nature of the post, i.e. an interview in which we requested wit and humor.
It is important to realize that many years of scholarship lie behind Taft’s responses, so they are not just flippant remarks. They are perhaps embellished by Taft’s characteristic wit, but not flippant. Instead of critiquing the tone of Taft’s interview, this thread should discuss the issues that Taft’s responses bring up.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,433
Likes: 33
ajk Offline
Member
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,433
Likes: 33
Originally Posted by Michael_Thoma
Pray Tell's Nathan Chase stated the following in the comments section, due to a lot of negative comments regarding the interview:... Instead of critiquing the tone of Taft’s interview, this thread should discuss the issues that Taft’s responses bring up.
There is one more line in this response by Nathan Chase:
Quote
I.e. – keep the comments civil and about content, not style
He might better have said that to Taft from the get go.

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
E
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E Offline
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by 2lungsambassador
Boy does Fr. Taft ever rub me the wrong way! He's done the entire Church a great service by his scholarly work but he has that Jesuit ability to be really abrasive and bluntly insulting.

2lungs,

Some of Archm. Robert's remarks didn't sit well with me, either. I am a great believer in the notion that true ecumenism *has* to work in both directions--otherwise, the ecumenists on both sides (of whichever division we're considering) will have their "dialogues" and might even achieve a kind of "reunion," but since the stalwarts (or "NCWs") on both sides have already excommunicated them in their minds, what have they achieved? Just another iteration of the old adage that "when two churches unite, the result is three churches."

(Actually, I find it rather strange that ecumenists can be *so* patient and accepting of diverse points of view--as long as those points of view are on the other side of the fence.)

Originally Posted by 2lungsambassador
His dismissive remarks about NCWs is really over the top and frankly Manichean.
Hmm ... I'm curious as to why you consider them "Manichean."

Originally Posted by 2lungsambassador
... as if there are only the nice fluffy sheeplike Catholics who go along with the regime of the Novus Ordo and liturgical abuses galore ...
Now, here it depends entirely on what you are calling "abuses." AFAIK, a practice can only be called an "abuse" if it is in violation of the current liturgical norms of the RCC.

Aside from poor homiletics (and people performing liturgical roles without any kind of liturgical garb), my #1 complaint about the current RC practice is something that Dom Gueranger himself was complaining about over 150 years ago--the absence of (or lack of attention to) congregational singing!

From it's very inception, a major principle of the RC "Liturgical Movement" was that the faithful needed to be actively involved in the Liturgy itself (i.e. not merely the usual para-liturgy of hymns and prayers taking place during Mass). This meant singing and chanting the actual liturgical parts that pertained to the people. The problem then, as now, was that few priests really perceived music as an integral part of the Liturgy, and therefore would be willing to take the trouble to try and get a reluctant congregation to learn the simple chants and then sing them--with very few changs--every week. It was/is *much* easier to have a "real" choir (often with a paid choir director) who can "perform new material" every week while everyone else--the priest included--only has to listen. (And if for some reason this was not possible, no music at all was "just fine!")


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
E
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E Offline
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by Roman refugee
"context is everything." says Fr. Taft.

Doesn't that statement explain his thought?

Divine Truth is not dependent on context.
Roman,

While this is certainly true, Divine Truth in its purest form cannot be expressed in human language. What is expressed in human language is always subject to interpretation, for which context plays an important role--*that's* what Fr. Taft is talking about. (Just think of all the times when heretics have taken scripture passages out of context!)


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 426
Member
Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 426
Originally Posted by Michael_Thoma
Originally Posted by MichaelO
Quote
Father Taft said:
"The liturgy doesn't need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English."
This cannot be a true statement. Father Taft is the author of the Ruthenian Revised Divine Liturgy. Father Petras and Father Hayduk and Bishop Kudrick all say they revised the Divine Liturgy the way Father Taft said to. Is he embarrassed at how bad his Revised Divine Liturgy is? What's going on?
Fr. Taft, I think would deny being the author of the RDL. He is not Ruthenian. He was asked to verify that the RDL contains nothing heretical.

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/372681/Was%20RDL,%20now%20Q%20on%20Father%20Rober

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/322231


Thank you, for clarifying this.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
Father Taft is most assuredly NOT the author of the RDL, which was the internal product of the Byzantine Catholic Church's Intereparchial Liturgical Committee--of which Taft is NOT a member. Taft was asked by the Congregation for the Oriental Churches to review a draft of the RDL, but was instructed ONLY to look for overt instances of heresy or gross theological errors. Of course, he did not find any. This does not mean he approves of the RDL, and his statement above is largely conditioned by his experience with it.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
From the general tenor of the comments on this thread, I conclude that a lot of the participants are not intellectually equipped to deal with Archimandrite Robert in an intelligent manner. You just have no idea what he is saying--and worse, you have no idea what YOU are saying.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405
Likes: 39
Member
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405
Likes: 39
Well, I'm certainly not so equipped to deal with either Father Archimandrite Taft or Stuart!

That doesn't prevent me from enjoying reading both while trying to comphrehend them.

Context is very important when trying to understand the very precise mind of Father Taft whose conclusions may sometimes startle people. That is because his mind is racing way above my own speed limit, for example.

Usually, in such a case, I blame myself and go back to the drawing board of a slower and more comprehensive approach that could/should go beyond the parameters of an interview or the like.

My two cents' worth.

Alex

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
E
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E Offline
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by StuartK
From the general tenor of the comments on this thread, I conclude that a lot of the participants are not intellectually equipped to deal with Archimandrite Robert in an intelligent manner. You just have no idea what he is saying--and worse, you have no idea what YOU are saying.
Stuart,

Sorry if any of my comments have given you that impression.

However, I should have to note that in this interview, Archm. Robert
makes a number of offhand remarks that *probably* sound a lot more normal to someone like yourself, who know him much better than we do. But to the uninitiated, they *do* come off as echoing statements we've all heard numerous times--often from some, shall we say, less-than-qualified sources.

The one item in particular that had me scratching my head was this one:
Quote
Papa Francesco is good for everything, including liturgical renewal. When he first celebrated Mass in the Sistine Chapel he had them toss out the altar facing away from the congregation that his predecessor had installed.
Is he actually saying that *no* oriented altar existed in the Sistine Chapel until Pope Benedict added one?

This one also had me puzzled:
Quote
The liturgy doesn't need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English.
One might assume here that he's talking about the RDL, but the implication is that *no* decent translations exist. Also, the implication certainly appears to be that the problem is entirely that *all* existing translations try too hard to match the originals, with the quality of English expression suffering as a result--is that really what he means? (That hardly seems to be the case with the RDL.)


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
He's eighty-something and in the Honey Badger phase of his life. He's earned the right to say what he wants and not care how people take it.

Quote
Also, the implication certainly appears to be that the problem is entirely that *all* existing translations try too hard to match the originals, with the quality of English expression suffering as a result--is that really what he means? (That hardly seems to be the case with the RDL.)

The problem exists in both dimensions. The RDL, for instance, swings wildly between excessive (and unnecessary) literalism to pure paraphrase, and in neither case do the translators demonstrate any really felicity with the English language.

Liturgical translation is an art, one which requires one to be fully fluent both in English and in the original language, as well as having a grasp of the intricacies of liturgics. Above all, since liturgy is poetry, one must also be a poet.

Too many people trying to do liturgical translation lack ability in one or more of these areas. And some of the most prominent lack ability in all of them.

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 569
Likes: 2
E
Member
Member
E Offline
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 569
Likes: 2
It is impossible to overestimate the contribution Bob Taft has made to liturgical studies over the past fifty years. My wish for my dear old friend and kindly mentor is best expressed by Dylan Thomas, "Do not go gentle into that good night,/ Old age should burn and rave at close of day;/ Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 10
G
Member
Member
G Offline
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 10
Originally Posted by Epiphanius
The one item in particular that had me scratching my head was this one:
Quote
Papa Francesco is good for everything, including liturgical renewal. When he first celebrated Mass in the Sistine Chapel he had them toss out the altar facing away from the congregation that his predecessor had installed.
Is he actually saying that *no* oriented altar existed in the Sistine Chapel until Pope Benedict added one?
With all due respect, Fr. Taft needs a new pair of glasses.

Here is a photograph of the Sistine Chapel where His Holiness Francis celebrated his first Mass as Pope: Link. [i30.photobucket.com]
You can clearly see that the altar where His Holiness Benedict XVI would celebrate Mass had obviously not been "tossed out".

Did Fr. Taft forget that His Holiness Francis would later celebrate Mass for the feast of the Baptism of the Lord on the altar that he allegedly had thrown out?: Link. [hocsigno.files.wordpress.com]

I am surprised that Fr. Taft would make such a blunder.
Happy retirement!

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405
Likes: 39
Member
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405
Likes: 39
Carefuld Griego!

Honey Badgers can be dangerous! smile

Alex

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Administrator 

Link Copied to Clipboard
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 - 1996-2026 (Forum 1998-2026). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.1