Aramis:
- a bit of terminology: Mass is not used as a general term. It’s the proper term for the Divine Worship Service of the Roman Church, and the commonly used term in English for the Chaldean Church and Maronite Church Divine Worship Services, and I can’t spell their native term for it.
The Byzantines use Divine Liturgy, as do the Copts.
I don’t know the Armenian’s term.
In Syro-Aramaic, the term for Mass among the Maronites is “
qourbono” (“the offering” or “the oblation”). In the Arabic vernacular it is “
al-qudadas” (“the hallowing”). In the US, Divine Liturgy is generally preferred these days, mainly to reinforce the Eastern character of the liturgy, but yes, it is sometimes called Mass.
As for the Chaldeans, I know only the Chaldean-Aramaic word, which is “
qourbana” (again “the offering” or “the oblation”). I have no idea what word might be used in Arabic nor am I sure of what is done in English. The word “
qourbana” is also used in the Malabar Church, and there, I believe, it is the Aramaic word that is used locally in Malayalam and in English.
The Syriac Church used the Syro-Aramaic word “
qourobo” (“the drawing near”). Here again I am not sure what term is used in Arabic nor in English. The term “
qourobo” is also used in the Malankara Church, and again I believe, the Aramaic word is used locally in Malayalam and in English.
I know neither the Coptic word, (nor it’s Egyptian Arabic equivalent), used by the Copts, nor the Ge’ez word (or its Amharic equivalent) used by the Ethiopians. Nor am I familiar with what either would do in English. Ditto for Armenian.
Aramis:
I’m not so familiar with the Maronite, only having seen it on TV and the 'net, and read about it in books and online… However, keep in mind the difference in bishops. The Maronites have their own bishops and metropolitans, too. Also, while what I’ve seen looks fairly close to Roman, there are significant differences in the anaphora (canon). One of theirs even lacks an explicit institution narrative.
The Maronite certainly do have bishops (I know several of them personally) but I don’t believe there are actually any Metropolitan Sees other than the Patriarchate itself. In certain dioceses, one sometimes still sees “Archbishop” (
archévêque in French) which is the traditional usage, but those are rather like Washington, DC in so far as they have no suffragans.
I could go on for hours about Maronite liturgical practices, but will only briefly comment here on a few things:
- one reason it “looks fairly close to Roman” is most probably because of one particular post-conciliar, Novus-Ordo inspired re-latinization, i.e., the common use of the altar versus populum rather than the traditional ad orientem. That is not, however, a hard and fast rule, and there are some notable exceptions to it where ad orientem is used, but unfortunately none that I know of in the US.
- the structure of the entire qourbono is totally different than that of the Roman Rite. While the Anaphora is essentially the same as in the Syriac Church, what comes before it more or less uses the structure of the Divine Office, and is classically (in Syro-Aramaic) called “qawmo” (a “standing”) which is the same the term used for hours of the Office.
- There is really no Anaphora in Maronite usage which lacks an Institution Narrative. Peter III (also know as “sharrar” (Syro-Aramaic for “confirm” which is its first word) differs from the other West-Syriac Anaphorae in structure but does have an Institution Narrative, albeit a unique one because it is in the second person, addressing Jesus directly ("You took bread …). In structure, Peter III is rather similar to Addai and Mari which, in the Assyrian Church of the East, has no Institution Narrative. (The same anaphora is used by the Chaldeans, but an Institution Narrative was added.)