Eastern Catholic vs. Western Orthodox?

SubdeaconDavid

High Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
504
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tasmania Australia
Website
orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com
Sleeper said:
Fortunately, Orthodoxy is not about what's "necessary."  It's about the fullness of the Faith.  The Western liturgical tradition and spiritual heritage are part of Holy Tradition and they rightfully belong to Orthodoxy.

SubdeaconDavid, forgive me, but you just appear so...shifty and fickle in regards to the Western Rite.  One day you'll make posts about how you have no problem with it at all and want to see it thrive, and another day you'll say its "just not necessary."  I don't understand it.
Hmmm forgive me for sounding "shifty".  If I look at the WR overall I have no problem with the rejuvenation of Western Christian Orthodoxy - as like S. John of Shanghai, I accept the validity of it.  What I struggle with is the disingenuous position of those who try and pretend the Great Schism never happened, or those who think that by calling Anglican BCP Matins "Sarum" that it is OK even when BCP Matins is clearly a child of the Reformation.  

I struggle with the fact that you have WR groups with their own prayer books and a determination not to even let scholars in Western liturgy access them.  I struggle with the fact that you have a tiny congregation of Western riters with a priest in  an ecumenical meeting room my own city and my own 60 year old Russian Orthodox temple has no resident priest and we do not even celebrate feasts together.  That simply saddens me.

I am NOT inimical to Western Christendom.  I grew up an Anglican.  I made my confession believing them valid as an Anglican.  I made my communion, having fasted, said preparation prayers and believing tbem valid and the mass that I was attending valid.  However the bottom line is I was wrong about the validity of western orders and western Christian history post 1054.  

Western-rite not necessary?  If you understand that we can worship in English, using the same rite as 99% of Orthodoxy, then NO it is not necessary.  It is a liturgical relic - the DNA has been taken by WR clerics and people and brought back to life - of sorts, but it is not the same as the Orthodox experience of unbroken bishops and priests, unbroken community of believers worshipping and living the Orthodox rite of the 'East'.  

Western culture has never been homogeneous.  Rites based on Anglican worship have little cultural validity in Continental Europe, let alone in the East.  The Russian Church in China baptised thousands and ordained many priests - native Chinese, who learned Slavonic, used Chinese as well in worship and for whom the rite was simply 'the Orthodox rite'.
 

SubdeaconDavid

High Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
504
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tasmania Australia
Website
orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com
ialmisry said:
SubdeaconDavid said:
The quote from Iconodule says it all!  Yes, the WR has come down from the top, but it is simply not in my view necessary. 
Then don't go to a WRO Church. That's simple.

SubdeaconDavid said:
Orthodoxy is lived by generation after generation.  We have had Western Orthodox
You mean Eastern Orthodox in the West?
SubdeaconDavid said:
now worshipping in what the Western rite sometimes call the Eastern-rite for generations now.
Everyone calls it the Eastern-rite, or more correctly the Constantinopolitan rite.

And we have had Western Orthodox worshipping in the Western rite for 3-6 generations now.

SubdeaconDavid said:
We have the transmission of Byzantine Orthodoxy in Japan, Korea, Alaska and elsewhere for more than 100 years.
And the WRO for nearly a 140 years.

SubdeaconDavid said:
What was Byzantine is now simply "the Orthodox rite"
No, even the most vehement bishops opposing the WRO admit that if you are Orthodox, you can commune in the DL of SS. Gregory or Tikhon.

SubdeaconDavid said:
and it is as much the birth-rite of English, Japanese, Korean and many others as it is for the Greeks or Slavs.
No, it is not, any more than the Common Law, haikus and Daeboreum are the birth-rite of Greeks or Slavs.

SubdeaconDavid said:
Today in my Russian Church in Tasmania we had our Nativity Liturgy - served in Slavonic, Serbian and English, by a Serbian priest with a Russian and Australian choir, with Australian, Russian, Greek and Ethiopians and Serbs in the congregation.  Nothing foreign for us there at all.  It was simply Orthodox faithful sharing the timeless Byzantine liturgy celebrating together the Nativity. 
You are aware that the Ethiopians have their own liturgy, and it's not "byzantine," no?

And why wasn't it in Tasmanian?
Yes, I know the Ethiopians have their own liturgy but in the absence of an Ethiopian church here, some go to the New Calendar Greeks and some come to us. Church Slavonic and Serbian as well as English are part of the cultural languages of Tasmania and they still prayed for HM the Queen as well as for the Crown prince of Serbia!
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
SubdeaconDavid said:
Sleeper said:
Fortunately, Orthodoxy is not about what's "necessary."  It's about the fullness of the Faith.  The Western liturgical tradition and spiritual heritage are part of Holy Tradition and they rightfully belong to Orthodoxy.

SubdeaconDavid, forgive me, but you just appear so...shifty and fickle in regards to the Western Rite.  One day you'll make posts about how you have no problem with it at all and want to see it thrive, and another day you'll say its "just not necessary."  I don't understand it.
Hmmm forgive me for sounding "shifty".  If I look at the WR overall I have no problem with the rejuvenation of Western Christian Orthodoxy - as like S. John of Shanghai, I accept the validity of it.  What I struggle with is the disingenuous position of those who try and pretend the Great Schism never happened, or those who think that by calling Anglican BCP Matins "Sarum" that it is OK even when BCP Matins is clearly a child of the Reformation.  

I struggle with the fact that you have WR groups with their own prayer books and a determination not to even let scholars in Western liturgy access them.  I struggle with the fact that you have a tiny congregation of Western riters with a priest in  an ecumenical meeting room my own city and my own 60 year old Russian Orthodox temple has no resident priest and we do not even celebrate feasts together.  That simply saddens me.

I am NOT inimical to Western Christendom.  I grew up an Anglican.  I made my confession believing them valid as an Anglican.  I made my communion, having fasted, said preparation prayers and believing tbem valid and the mass that I was attending valid.  However the bottom line is I was wrong about the validity of western orders and western Christian history post 1054.  

Western-rite not necessary?  If you understand that we can worship in English, using the same rite as 99% of Orthodoxy, then NO it is not necessary.  It is a liturgical relic - the DNA has been taken by WR clerics and people and brought back to life - of sorts, but it is not the same as the Orthodox experience of unbroken bishops and priests, unbroken community of believers worshipping and living the Orthodox rite of the 'East'.  

Western culture has never been homogeneous.  Rites based on Anglican worship have little cultural validity in Continental Europe, let alone in the East.  The Russian Church in China baptised thousands and ordained many priests - native Chinese, who learned Slavonic, used Chinese as well in worship and for whom the rite was simply 'the Orthodox rite'.
When I joined this thread it was mostly out of curiosity. The whole notion of a Western Orthodox church has always seemed unnecessary to me as well, not that my opinion on the subject really matters. It seemed to me Patriarch St. Tikhon, and perhaps others, were looking for a way to reach out to Protestant Americans in particular, and they thought the long services in Slavonic were perhaps something of a hindrance. Since the common language of Orthodoxy in the US is now English, even as various jurisdictions continue to worship in other languages, it would seem the context has changed rather radically from St. Tikhon's time.

After reading the comments and participating in the discussion, I've learned to respect my Western Rite brothers and sisters (as well as fathers and mothers) in a new way. I bought one of the prayer books--the one prepared by Fr. Aidan--and have been going through it. I have both Anglicans and Roman Catholics in my family and was a professional church musician for many, many years, so the content of this particular book is fairly familiar. I believe anyone who feels at home in the Anglo-Catholic tradition, or even, perhaps, in the pre-conciliar Latin church, would be comfortable with the liturgies in that book.

But the issues remain. First, it feels like something that was assembled, rather than something that evolved. Once in awhile I find myself with a little bit of a "greatest hits" feeling. Second, I return to some of the debates I participated in a couple of months back: There is simply no basis for asserting that we know how liturgy was celebrated in any Western church before 1054 (or even long after 1054), and there are no extant primary sources for the Sarum Rite before the 12th Century. I know many proponents of the rite disagree with this assertion, but so far no one has offered any actual primary sources to refute it. Certainly, references exist, even individual texts and musical "settings." But nothing like the volume of material that would be needed to put together a Rituale with rubrics for a single liturgy, let alone the entire church year. Now, of course it is reasonable to assume that the material from the 12th-Century sources would reflect earlier practices, so the challenge might be valid if these slightly later sources were missals, for instance, or a complete set of all the material used by an 11th-Century English monastic choir. But these later sources are one Gradual and two Antiphonaries. None of those books is meant, even today, to be used as a stand-alone source for all liturgical practice, and nor do the two books combined contain everything necessary.

So, without in any way questioning either Fr. Aidan's bona fides or his scholarly qualifications, which are far, far superior to my own, I do, nevertheless, feel the question of provenance is a valid one that requires more study.

The other thing in my view is the need for the rite itself. I understand it's been authorized in some jurisdictions, so in a sense my comments are superfluous and irrelevant. But I come back to the feeling I had before I started reading the comments here. I've been deeply moved and inspired by the faith and sincerity of the people here who've shared their love for the Western Rite. But I can't get past the nagging little voice that says loving it isn't enough. The Tridentine Mass is a beautiful liturgy, too, and if one experiences it being celebrated, whether in all the splendor of a European Gothic cathedral or in the simplicity of a rustic mountain chapel, it can be truly awe-inspiring. An Anglican Evensong, sung of a summer evening, perhaps at Ely (or Salisbury itself), is another beautiful spiritual experience. When I open the Western Orthodox prayer book and see the great hymn Veni Creator Spiritus, it is like being greeted by an old, old friend. But we are not talking about a spiritual experience, even less of an aesthetic one. We are talking about "true theology," as the Canon before Communion calls it. We have an ancient liturgy that embodies, expresses, IS this true theology. I'm not persuaded (not that anyone needs to persuade me) that anything other than this ancient liturgy is needed or even desirable, however much one may love this "other," or however beautiful it may be.

Anyway, as many have pointed out, wiser heads than mine have already ruled, and since those heads also wore miters, their decisions bind. LOL
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
SubdeaconDavid said:
Sleeper said:
Fortunately, Orthodoxy is not about what's "necessary."  It's about the fullness of the Faith.  The Western liturgical tradition and spiritual heritage are part of Holy Tradition and they rightfully belong to Orthodoxy.

SubdeaconDavid, forgive me, but you just appear so...shifty and fickle in regards to the Western Rite.  One day you'll make posts about how you have no problem with it at all and want to see it thrive, and another day you'll say its "just not necessary."  I don't understand it.
Hmmm forgive me for sounding "shifty".  If I look at the WR overall I have no problem with the rejuvenation of Western Christian Orthodoxy - as like S. John of Shanghai, I accept the validity of it.  What I struggle with is the disingenuous position of those who try and pretend the Great Schism never happened, or those who think that by calling Anglican BCP Matins "Sarum" that it is OK even when BCP Matins is clearly a child of the Reformation.  

I struggle with the fact that you have WR groups with their own prayer books and a determination not to even let scholars in Western liturgy access them.  I struggle with the fact that you have a tiny congregation of Western riters with a priest in  an ecumenical meeting room my own city and my own 60 year old Russian Orthodox temple has no resident priest and we do not even celebrate feasts together.  That simply saddens me.
Why is their fortune your misfortune?

SubdeaconDavid said:
I am NOT inimical to Western Christendom.
You just want to deny its existence, and replace it with Eastern Christendom, sort of like the Latin Empire of Constantinople being the same as the Roman Empire of the East.

SubdeaconDavid said:
I grew up an Anglican.  I made my confession believing them valid as an Anglican.  I made my communion, having fasted, said preparation prayers and believing tbem valid and the mass that I was attending valid.  However the bottom line is I was wrong about the validity of western orders and western Christian history post 1054.
The correct date is 1009, btw., if not 867.

SubdeaconDavid said:
Western-rite not necessary?  If you understand that we can worship in English, using the same rite as 99% of Orthodoxy, then NO it is not necessary.  It is a liturgical relic - the DNA has been taken by WR clerics and people and brought back to life - of sorts, but it is not the same as the Orthodox experience of unbroken bishops and priests, unbroken community of believers worshipping and living the Orthodox rite of the 'East'.
In the East. What you advocate would argue for chucking the Patrimony of the Patriarchate of the West-indeed, for chucking the patrimonies of the patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem,  and Georgia, as that of Constantinople has been imposed on them-rites, saints, patristics and all.

You don't seem to concerned by the transplants of the Nikonian reformation. Defintely not an organic growth.

And look at the apostolic succession at Constantinople, the line with which you anchor the whole ark of the Church. EP Eusebius of Nicomedia didn't try to reverse Nicea I?  EP Macedonius I preached Orthodoxy and the Fathers of Constantinople I-and hence Our Creed-were mistaken?  The schism during EP Arcacius' patriarchate didn't happen?  EP Nestorius (who established, its seems, the DL of St. John Chrysostom at Constantinople) a link in that "Orthodox experience of unbroken bishops and priests, unbroken community of believers worshipping and living the Orthodox rite"? Which do you side over the Henotkon, with EP Acacius, or EP John I?  EP Sergius I save you from the liturgical relics of Popes SS. Martin and Agatho?  EP Anastasios protect you from the heterodox statues of Pope SS. Gregory II and III?

No, the Orthodoxy of the Ecumenical Patriarchate did not survive on the merits of Constantinople, but because the Orthodox episcopate is one, and what was strong elsewhere (including at Rome, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem) strengthed and healed what was infirm at Constantinople. Why the divine grace, which always heals what is weak and makes up for what is lacking was able to do so in Constantinople, but powerless in the West, you have yet to explain.

It's not like taking DNA a la Jurassic Park. It's like a skin graft, which restores healthy tissue.

SubdeaconDavid said:
Western culture has never been homogeneous.
But it has always been Western. And since the East have never been homogenous, what was your point?

I have no use for Ultramontanism, whether across the Alps or across the Taurus.

SubdeaconDavid said:
Rites based on Anglican worship have little cultural validity in Continental Europe, let alone in the East.
That leaves still leaves a lot


SubdeaconDavid said:
The Russian Church in China baptised thousands and ordained many priests - native Chinese, who learned Slavonic, used Chinese as well in worship and for whom the rite was simply 'the Orthodox rite'.
Gee, why doesn't Russia just annex China?  Btw, the Jesuits did far better embracing Chinese culture. And with a western Rite.
 

SubdeaconDavid

High Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
504
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tasmania Australia
Website
orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com
Jesuits vs. Russian Orthodox?  I don't think so.  For the Chinese Orthodox, nationality became of less consequence to them than their Orthodoxy.  Nothing in that about being annexed by Russia or necessarily losing their Chinese identity.  Jesus Christ and the Holy Orthodox faith was of greater importance than notions of race and nation.  This is the story of Orthodoxy.  National identity is less important than Orthodox identity.  This happened for the Chinese Orthodox.  It happened for the Aleutian-Alaskan Orthodox.  It happened for the Japanese Orthodox and it is happening now for the Indonesian Orthodox, the Western Orthodox converts and so many more. 

Eastern Orthodox life has been an organic development always - imperfect at times in application, but arguably nurtured by so many saints and holy people of God.  Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.  It is only Eastern Orthodoxy that has breathed the Spirit of God into the spiritually bankrupt West.  We western converts owe our spiritual lives on those saints and missionaries from Greece, Russia and the Middle East.  The Western-rite itself is the product of the benevolence of Eastern Orthodoxy. 

Of course the negatives of the West have hugely impacted on Orthodox societies and contemporary culture.  That Orthodox Christian kingdoms like Greece and Serbia are now secular republics is a product of the anti-monarchical and anti-Orthodox spirit of modern post French Revolution western thinking. Even Russia today is yet to make peace with God in the restoration of the Orthodox Tsars.  The New Calendarist modernism owes much to the spirit of contemporary Western pseudo-scientific and entirely secular thinking. That is why the Julian calendar itself is so important because it serves as a signal separation of the Orthodox from non-believers.

That the English monarchy has preserved albeit via a heterodox Church of England so much Orthodox notions of the relationship between the monarchy and God is a sign of the residue of Orthodoxy in some places of the Western psyche. May God grant that Orthodoxy, Eastern and Western will convert the West anew.



 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
SubdeaconDavid said:
Jesuits vs. Russian Orthodox?  I don't think so.  For the Chinese Orthodox, nationality became of less consequence to them than their Orthodoxy.  Nothing in that about being annexed by Russia or necessarily losing their Chinese identity. Jesus Christ and the Holy Orthodox faith was of greater importance than notions of race and nation.  This is the story of Orthodoxy.  National identity is less important than Orthodox identity.  This happened for the Chinese Orthodox.  It happened for the Aleutian-Alaskan Orthodox.  It happened for the Japanese Orthodox and it is happening now for the Indonesian Orthodox, the Western Orthodox converts and so many more.
Before we go into that, are you Chinese? Have you met any Chinese Orthodox?

SubdeaconDavid said:
Eastern Orthodox life has been an organic development always-
The Novella of Justinian, the Byzantinization of Pat. Balsamon "of Antioch," the Reformation of Nikon, the Spiritual Regulation of Czar Peter....you skip over, or have substantial gaps in, significant parts of the history of the Orthodox Church.

SubdeaconDavid said:
mperfect at times in application, but arguably nurtured by so many saints and holy people of God.  Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
This assertion has been made before, and it has failed yet, as far as I have seen, to be substantiated.

As for not producing saints, what you should mean is that the Orthodox Church cannot, at least at present, glorify saints that the West produced after the schism. What you have said is that virtue evaporated from the West

Do get your facts straight, and state straightforward what you mean by "that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas ."

SubdeaconDavid said:
It is only Eastern Orthodoxy that has breathed the Spirit of God into the spiritually bankrupt West.
Oh, the East hasn't been the land of plenty you are portraying.  Had it been, we would not have experienced the Western Captivity of the Church.

SubdeaconDavid said:
We western converts owe our spiritual lives on those saints and missionaries from Greece, Russia and the Middle East.  The Western-rite itself is the product of the benevolence of Eastern Orthodoxy.
Your point?

SubdeaconDavid said:
Of course the negatives of the West have hugely impacted on Orthodox societies and contemporary culture.  That Orthodox Christian kingdoms like Greece and Serbia are now secular republics is a product of the anti-monarchical and anti-Orthodox spirit of modern post French Revolution western thinking.
The Spiritual Regulation of the Holy Governing Synod of the Russian Empire was issued long before the French Revpolution.

SubdeaconDavid said:
Even Russia today is yet to make peace with God in the restoration of the Orthodox Tsars.
As much as I am a monarchist, Russia is under no obligation of God to elect a Tsar nor restore the Romanovs.

SubdeaconDavid said:
The New Calendarist modernism owes much to the spirit of contemporary Western pseudo-scientific and entirely secular thinking. That is why the Julian calendar itself is so important because it serves as a signal separation of the Orthodox from non-believers.
So you have to disavow science to reject secularism?  I prefer to follow the Fathers, and accept that the spring equinox occurs on March 21, Revised Julian Calendar.

SubdeaconDavid said:
That the English monarchy has preserved albeit via a heterodox Church of England so much Orthodox notions of the relationship between the monarchy and God is a sign of the residue of Orthodoxy in some places of the Western psyche. May God grant that Orthodoxy, Eastern and Western will convert the West anew.
And in the process convert the East anew.
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
 Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
 

SubdeaconDavid

High Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
504
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tasmania Australia
Website
orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com
Our Lord did indeed show love for the most fallen.  I have met an Anglican monk, the late Dom Anthony Damron from the Benedictine Abbey at Three Rivers in Michigan whom  I would consider a man with many saintly qualities, recognised I imagine by God Himself.  Nonetheless, Dom Anthony was outside the Body of Christ and this separation colours everything as it does for all in every country who are outside the Orthodox Christian faith. Fr. Anthony has long left his body, however I cannot imagine God not welcoming him into Paradise: a monk who prayed the hours and lived the Benedictine Rule most of his adult life.

Indeed I am sure Dom Anthony had much less need of the mercy of God than me.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
SubdeaconDavid said:
Our Lord did indeed show love for the most fallen.  I have met an Anglican monk, the late Dom Anthony Damron from the Benedictine Abbey at Three Rivers in Michigan whom  I would consider a man with many saintly qualities, recognised I imagine by God Himself.  Nonetheless, Dom Anthony was outside the Body of Christ and this separation colours everything as it does for all in every country who are outside the Orthodox Christian faith.
No country is outside the Orthodox Christian Faith.  Were the smallest country outside it, the Orthodox Christian Faith would not be that of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Do you include Tamania/Australia as inside the Orthodox Christian Faith, or outside it?
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Hermogenes said:
Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
Were the West totally bereft of God, how is it that the Latin/Venetian Lorenzo Scupoli wrote his "Spritual Combat," such that St. Theophan the Recluse took it up and adapted it to Orthodoxy while translating it into Russian as "Unseen Warfare," whence it became a classic of Orthodox spirituality?

It is only one of many borrowings before and after the schism, and not the only good borrowing either.

So yes, I'm as disturbed as you are about the statement.
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
ialmisry said:
Hermogenes said:
Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
Were the West totally bereft of God, how is it that the Latin/Venetian Lorenzo Scupoli wrote his "Spritual Combat," such that St. Theophan the Recluse took it up and adapted it to Orthodoxy while translating it into Russian as "Unseen Warfare," whence it became a classic of Orthodox spirituality?

It is only one of many borrowings before and after the schism, and not the only good borrowing either.

So yes, I'm as disturbed as you are about the statement.
Bad logic.

Where there are no sacraments, there is no genuine spiritual life possible.

What you are adapting is chaff.  In fact according to the logic you have used elsewhere, these adaptations will open doors to the demonic.

 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
elijahmaria said:
ialmisry said:
Hermogenes said:
Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
Were the West totally bereft of God, how is it that the Latin/Venetian Lorenzo Scupoli wrote his "Spritual Combat," such that St. Theophan the Recluse took it up and adapted it to Orthodoxy while translating it into Russian as "Unseen Warfare," whence it became a classic of Orthodox spirituality?

It is only one of many borrowings before and after the schism, and not the only good borrowing either.

So yes, I'm as disturbed as you are about the statement.
Bad logic.

Where there are no sacraments, there is no genuine spiritual life possible.

What you are adapting is chaff.  In fact according to the logic you have used elsewhere, these adaptations will open doors to the demonic.
If you ever want to have an interesting experience, hang out for awhile with a group of monks from a variety of different traditions and religions. What is interesting is that the monks all seem to have more in common with one another, no matter what path they are treading, than they do with the lay people of their own denominations. An Anglican Franciscan, a Zen Buddhist sensei, and a Greek Orthodox Hieromonk seem to have a bond that goes beyond boundaries.

The early Fathers learned from all kinds of sources.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Hermogenes said:
elijahmaria said:
ialmisry said:
Hermogenes said:
Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
Were the West totally bereft of God, how is it that the Latin/Venetian Lorenzo Scupoli wrote his "Spritual Combat," such that St. Theophan the Recluse took it up and adapted it to Orthodoxy while translating it into Russian as "Unseen Warfare," whence it became a classic of Orthodox spirituality?

It is only one of many borrowings before and after the schism, and not the only good borrowing either.

So yes, I'm as disturbed as you are about the statement.
Bad logic.

Where there are no sacraments, there is no genuine spiritual life possible.

What you are adapting is chaff.  In fact according to the logic you have used elsewhere, these adaptations will open doors to the demonic.
If you ever want to have an interesting experience, hang out for awhile with a group of monks from a variety of different traditions and religions. What is interesting is that the monks all seem to have more in common with one another, no matter what path they are treading, than they do with the lay people of their own denominations. An Anglican Franciscan, a Zen Buddhist sensei, and a Greek Orthodox Hieromonk seem to have a bond that goes beyond boundaries.

The early Fathers learned from all kinds of sources.
Yes. If you read their writings, you seem then winnowing the wheat from the chaff, following the Apostolic injunction "Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things." Phil. 4:8. If they could do so from pagan and heathen Rome, why not Ultramontanist Rome?

Hermogenes said:
What you are adapting is chaff.  In fact according to the logic you have used elsewhere, these adaptations will open doors to the demonic.
Care to quote me on that?
 

Shlomlokh

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
1,356
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Roanoke, VA
elijahmaria said:
ialmisry said:
Hermogenes said:
Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
Were the West totally bereft of God, how is it that the Latin/Venetian Lorenzo Scupoli wrote his "Spritual Combat," such that St. Theophan the Recluse took it up and adapted it to Orthodoxy while translating it into Russian as "Unseen Warfare," whence it became a classic of Orthodox spirituality?

It is only one of many borrowings before and after the schism, and not the only good borrowing either.

So yes, I'm as disturbed as you are about the statement.
Bad logic.

Where there are no sacraments, there is no genuine spiritual life possible.

What you are adapting is chaff.  In fact according to the logic you have used elsewhere, these adaptations will open doors to the demonic.
Wow. Isa basically commented your church and saints and you took it as an opportunity to spit back in his face? Classy. :(

I agree with both Isa and Hermogenes. There are very holy men and women after the schism, but from the Orthodox perspective, they if they are to be read, it should be done under the direction of a spiritual father (as should all spiritual reading, from what I understand).

In Christ,
Andrew
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Shlomlokh said:
elijahmaria said:
ialmisry said:
Hermogenes said:
Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
Were the West totally bereft of God, how is it that the Latin/Venetian Lorenzo Scupoli wrote his "Spritual Combat," such that St. Theophan the Recluse took it up and adapted it to Orthodoxy while translating it into Russian as "Unseen Warfare," whence it became a classic of Orthodox spirituality?

It is only one of many borrowings before and after the schism, and not the only good borrowing either.

So yes, I'm as disturbed as you are about the statement.
Bad logic.

Where there are no sacraments, there is no genuine spiritual life possible.

What you are adapting is chaff.  In fact according to the logic you have used elsewhere, these adaptations will open doors to the demonic.
Wow. Isa basically commented your church and saints and you took it as an opportunity to spit back in his face? Classy. :(

I agree with both Isa and Hermogenes. There are very holy men and women after the schism, but from the Orthodox perspective, they if they are to be read, it should be done under the direction of a spiritual father (as should all spiritual reading, from what I understand).

In Christ,
Andrew
And many people have benefitted from writers such as Thomas Merton, Dorothy Day, Teillhard de Chardin, Henri Nouwen, etc., Just as Westerners have benefitted from "post-Schism" our saints.
 

elijahmaria

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
irenikontheskete.blogspot.com
Hermogenes said:
elijahmaria said:
ialmisry said:
Hermogenes said:
Even the fact that for the Western European peoples that Orthodox saints stopped after the Schism - that Western society produced no saints once Western society was outside the Church has had a huge impact on the spiritual lives of Europe, the Americas etc.
I am Orthodox and consider myself devout, yet I cannot tell you how disturbing I find this statement. We are all imperfect children of the Triune God, but the West has produced many godly and holy people since 1054, whether or not they have been glorified by Orthodoxy. To see it otherwise is to impoverish our own spiritual life. Naturally,the writings of people like Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, or John of the Cross need to be used with much discretion and under the direction of a spiritual advisor. But to consider them worthless, or the many other spiritual classics of the West, seems very, very myopic. Our Lord sat, discussed, and broke bread with everyone, and He did so in love.
Were the West totally bereft of God, how is it that the Latin/Venetian Lorenzo Scupoli wrote his "Spritual Combat," such that St. Theophan the Recluse took it up and adapted it to Orthodoxy while translating it into Russian as "Unseen Warfare," whence it became a classic of Orthodox spirituality?

It is only one of many borrowings before and after the schism, and not the only good borrowing either.

So yes, I'm as disturbed as you are about the statement.
Bad logic.

Where there are no sacraments, there is no genuine spiritual life possible.

What you are adapting is chaff.  In fact according to the logic you have used elsewhere, these adaptations will open doors to the demonic.
If you ever want to have an interesting experience, hang out for awhile with a group of monks from a variety of different traditions and religions. What is interesting is that the monks all seem to have more in common with one another, no matter what path they are treading, than they do with the lay people of their own denominations. An Anglican Franciscan, a Zen Buddhist sensei, and a Greek Orthodox Hieromonk seem to have a bond that goes beyond boundaries.

The early Fathers learned from all kinds of sources.
I know that very well.

However there is a breach in the logic of the on-going approach that I mentioned above and I was noting it. 
 

Shlomlokh

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
1,356
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Roanoke, VA
Has anyone who ordered their copy of the prayerbook received it yet? I sent away for it 2 weeks ago and no word yet.

In Christ,
Andrew
 

Shlomlokh

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
1,356
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Roanoke, VA
Shlomlokh said:
Has anyone who ordered their copy of the prayerbook received it yet? I sent away for it 2 weeks ago and no word yet.

In Christ,
Andrew
Bump!
 

Shlomlokh

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
1,356
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Roanoke, VA
Sleeper said:
This seems to be a common occurrence...
Did it happen to you as well? Did you get your money back? I hope it wasn't a scam. :(

In Christ,
Andrew
 

Sleeper

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
1,350
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
U.S.
No, not to me, but I was very interested in obtaining one until I found several others who had never received their book. It's not a scam as much as, I don't know, perhaps laziness or an inability to fulfill the order for some reason? I hope it works out for you...
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Shlomlokh said:
Has anyone who ordered their copy of the prayerbook received it yet? I sent away for it 2 weeks ago and no word yet.

In Christ,
Andrew
Which prayer book?
 

Shlomlokh

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
1,356
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Roanoke, VA
Hermogenes said:
Shlomlokh said:
Has anyone who ordered their copy of the prayerbook received it yet? I sent away for it 2 weeks ago and no word yet.

In Christ,
Andrew
Which prayer book?
The Old English prayerbook that Hieromonk Aidan compiled and is put out by his printing press under the ROCOR. I sent away for it over 4 weeks ago and I even contacted Hieromonk Aidan by email to see what the story was. No word. I'd rather it be negligence as Sleeper said and not a scam.

In Christ,
Andrew
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Shlomlokh said:
Hermogenes said:
Shlomlokh said:
Has anyone who ordered their copy of the prayerbook received it yet? I sent away for it 2 weeks ago and no word yet.

In Christ,
Andrew
Which prayer book?
The Old English prayerbook that Hieromonk Aidan compiled and is put out by his printing press under the ROCOR. I sent away for it over 4 weeks ago and I even contacted Hieromonk Aidan by email to see what the story was. No word. I'd rather it be negligence as Sleeper said and not a scam.

In Christ,
Andrew
How odd. I got mine in about a week. I bought it in November, I think.
 

SubdeaconDavid

High Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
504
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tasmania Australia
Website
orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com
ozgeorge said:
SeanMc said:
They are liturgically foregin to the East
No, the Sarum Rite is also liturgically foreign to the West.
Where was it maintained as a living tradition after the Schism?
And where is there even a complete pre-schism manuscript of the Sarum Rite missal and beviary?
Don't turn this into East vs. West.
It's about Living Tradition vs. re-inventing tradition.
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
 

SubdeaconDavid

High Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
504
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tasmania Australia
Website
orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com
Shlomlokh said:
Hermogenes said:
Shlomlokh said:
Has anyone who ordered their copy of the prayerbook received it yet? I sent away for it 2 weeks ago and no word yet.

In Christ,
Andrew
Which prayer book?
The Old English prayerbook that Hieromonk Aidan compiled and is put out by his printing press under the ROCOR. I sent away for it over 4 weeks ago and I even contacted Hieromonk Aidan by email to see what the story was. No word. I'd rather it be negligence as Sleeper said and not a scam.
I know the St. John of Kronstadt Press have the book listed in stock and they are an excellent and efficient mailer.
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
SubdeaconDavid said:
Shlomlokh said:
Hermogenes said:
Shlomlokh said:
Has anyone who ordered their copy of the prayerbook received it yet? I sent away for it 2 weeks ago and no word yet.

In Christ,
Andrew
Which prayer book?
The Old English prayerbook that Hieromonk Aidan compiled and is put out by his printing press under the ROCOR. I sent away for it over 4 weeks ago and I even contacted Hieromonk Aidan by email to see what the story was. No word. I'd rather it be negligence as Sleeper said and not a scam.
I know the St. John of Kronstadt Press have the book listed in stock and they are an excellent and efficient mailer.
Amazon usually has it available, too.

I've been making the argument you made about Sarum rites since I joined this thread. Prepare to be--well, not  shouted down, people here are pretty kind anf respectful. "Corrected" might be the word. LOL
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
SubdeaconDavid said:
ozgeorge said:
SeanMc said:
They are liturgically foregin to the East
No, the Sarum Rite is also liturgically foreign to the West.
Where was it maintained as a living tradition after the Schism?
And where is there even a complete pre-schism manuscript of the Sarum Rite missal and beviary?
Don't turn this into East vs. West.
It's about Living Tradition vs. re-inventing tradition.
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
The DNA point is interesting and calls up a recent anecdote. My son is a microbiologist and we exchanged emails the other week about a report on Japanese researchers attempting to 'recreate' a mammoth from DNA strands of a frozen mammoth found in Siberia and other DNA aspects from modern elephants, a species closely related to the extinct mammoth. I observed to my son that while they might end up with an animal from this process, while it might be an animal, it surely would really be neither mammoth nor elephant. It might be worth the effort to try, but the scientists would not end up with that which they started to seek.
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
SubdeaconDavid said:
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
Why the Bishops dead 1000 years ago are wiser that those alive now? Why aren't we allowed to start new tradition or new rite?
 

Shlomlokh

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
1,356
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Roanoke, VA
Michał Kalina said:
SubdeaconDavid said:
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
Why the Bishops dead 1000 years ago are wiser that those alive now? Why aren't we allowed to start new tradition or new rite?
Well, technically the Sarum liturgy/rites are not new at all. :)

In Christ,
Andrew
 

Sleeper

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
1,350
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
U.S.
SubdeaconDavid said:
ozgeorge said:
SeanMc said:
They are liturgically foregin to the East
No, the Sarum Rite is also liturgically foreign to the West.
Where was it maintained as a living tradition after the Schism?
And where is there even a complete pre-schism manuscript of the Sarum Rite missal and beviary?
Don't turn this into East vs. West.
It's about Living Tradition vs. re-inventing tradition.
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
This is only an issue if one insists an authentic Western Rite has to be pre-Schism. The Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate would say (correctly, IMHO) that this is not so. Hence their reasoning behind adapting existing Western liturgies which have been kept alive.

The issue then would be whether or not we should "reject" something simply because it was not maintained by the Orthodox Church. And if you're going to take this line of reasoning, you're going to run into some problems.

The fact is, there wasn't nearly as much "damage" to the Western Rites as some like to think and they were quite easily adjusted to once again live as authentically ancient Western expressions of the Holy Catholic Faith.

There is no "resurrecting" going on within the AWRV. Restoration would be more accurate.
 

James2

High Elder
Joined
Jul 9, 2003
Messages
753
Reaction score
0
Points
16
SubdeaconDavid said:
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
Sarum is a use of the Roman rite, not a rite itself.  There is no pre-schism Sarum use, because it developed following the Norman conquest.  The pre-schism Anglo-Saxon church also used the Roman rite.  By the time of the Norman conquest the Roman rite had already evolved to a point that it strongly resembled what later became known as the "Tridentine" rite.  Sarum and other medieval uses were fairly minor variations on the Roman rite.  Thus, the AWRV Liturgy of St. Gregory is an appropriate adaptation of the historic Western liturgy for use in present-day Orthodoxy.
 

Papist

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
13,771
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
39
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Hypothetically, if the Pope were to say, hey, we are gonna joining the Eastern Orthodox Church now, and the Catholic faithful followed (I know that wouldn't happen, but just say it did), would Latins be allowed to maintain the Tridentine Liturgy?
 

James2

High Elder
Joined
Jul 9, 2003
Messages
753
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Papist said:
Hypothetically, if the Pope were to say, hey, we are gonna joining the Eastern Orthodox Church now, and the Catholic faithful followed (I know that wouldn't happen, but just say it did), would Latins be allowed to maintain the Tridentine Liturgy?
Sure, as long as they dropped the Novus Ordo!
 

Monk Vasyl

High Elder
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
623
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
Boston
Website
www.ukrainianorthodox.org
Michał Kalina said:
SubdeaconDavid said:
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
Why the Bishops dead 1000 years ago are wiser that those alive now? Why aren't we allowed to start new tradition or new rite?
I agree with you 100%, Michal.
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Monk Vasyl said:
Michał Kalina said:
SubdeaconDavid said:
This is one of the best succinct arguments in favor of the Byzantine rite.  If we do not have a complete pre-Schism Sarum mass rite and breviary, then those who rely on Sarum elements in the 1549 Anglican Book of Common Prayer are relying on fragments 490 years after the West had departed from the Orthodox Church into schism.  This is not an issue of the superiority of East over the West.  It is about living tradition, guarded by the episcopal wisdom of the Church, protected by the Holy Spirit vs. a well-meaning attempt to take the DNA of pre-Schism Western Orthodoxy and revive it in the late 20th and 21st centuries.
Why the Bishops dead 1000 years ago are wiser that those alive now? Why aren't we allowed to start new tradition or new rite?
I agree with you 100%, Michal.
It seems to me--I hope this doesn't sound grandiose--that the goal is to lead us to God through Christ.If the Western Rite can help do that within a valid Orthodox liturgical theology, then I don't see any reason to oppose it. I doubt it would be for me, but it might be just the job for someone else.
 

Sleeper

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
1,350
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
U.S.
It was good enough for St. Benedict, St. Patrick, St. Columba, St. Dunstan, St. Etheldreda and countless others, why wouldn't it be good for us today?
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Papist said:
Hypothetically, if the Pope were to say, hey, we are gonna joining the Eastern Orthodox Church now, and the Catholic faithful followed (I know that wouldn't happen, but just say it did), would Latins be allowed to maintain the Tridentine Liturgy?
no, they would have to adopt the rite of St. Gregory.
 

Achronos

Toumarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
13,265
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
House Of Balloons
Papist said:
Hypothetically, if the Pope were to say, hey, we are gonna joining the Eastern Orthodox Church now, and the Catholic faithful followed (I know that wouldn't happen, but just say it did), would Latins be allowed to maintain the Tridentine Liturgy?
I look forward to the day when you become Orthodox, in fact it's predicted in Revelation. Wouldn't that be something if the Pope of Rome decided that his church became Orthodox, I couldn't imagine the uprise it would cause for the Catholic faithful.
 

James2

High Elder
Joined
Jul 9, 2003
Messages
753
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Aposphet said:
Papist said:
Hypothetically, if the Pope were to say, hey, we are gonna joining the Eastern Orthodox Church now, and the Catholic faithful followed (I know that wouldn't happen, but just say it did), would Latins be allowed to maintain the Tridentine Liturgy?
I look forward to the day when you become Orthodox, in fact it's predicted in Revelation. Wouldn't that be something if the Pope of Rome decided that his church became Orthodox, I couldn't imagine the uprise it would cause for the Catholic faithful.
It would upset their many modernists even more.
 
Top