East/West Reunification- a consideration

  • Thread starter Thread starter Surnaturel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In the event of a reunification we’d have to reconsider the ecclesiology. Nicaea never considered this possibility that there would be multiple Liturgical Rites with over 1000 years of history behind them when they said that one city must only have one bishop. The solution could still be one bishop per city, but perhaps several proto-presbyters per Rite under the one bishop to care for the needs of each Rite.

I don’t know, I’m just thinking out loud and freely here.
 
ConstantineTG said:
In the event of a reunification we’d have to reconsider the ecclesiology. Nicaea never considered this possibility that there would be multiple Liturgical Rites with over 1000 years of history behind them when they said that one city must only have one bishop. The solution could still be one bishop per city, but perhaps several proto-presbyters per Rite under the one bishop to care for the needs of each Rite.

I don’t know, I’m just thinking out loud and freely here.
Click to expand...
Interesting thoughts. I wonder, does your church(es) allow the vernacular in any part of the liturgy in say Asia or Africa?
 
ConstantineTG said:
In the event of a reunification we’d have to reconsider the ecclesiology. Nicaea never considered this possibility that there would be multiple Liturgical Rites with over 1000 years of history behind them when they said that one city must only have one bishop. The solution could still be one bishop per city, but perhaps several proto-presbyters per Rite under the one bishop to care for the needs of each Rite.

I don’t know, I’m just thinking out loud and freely here.
Click to expand...
My personal pet idea is the use of Auxiliary bishops from various rites serving under the main bishop (of whatever rite).
Of course given the small sizes of some rites in some areas you’d have to have auxiliary bishops serving multiple bishops, but unplanned for situations call for odd solutions.

But I digress.
 
Surnaturel said:
Interesting thoughts. I wonder, does your church(es) allow the vernacular in any part of the liturgy in say Asia or Africa?
Click to expand...
The vernacular has been the historic norm for the liturgy, although in several countries the language of the church hasn’t kept up with the speech of the people, which is why a lot of places use obsolete versions of their languages. But nonetheless…
 
Nine_Two said:
The vernacular has been the historic norm for the liturgy, although in several countries the language of the church hasn’t kept up with the speech of the people, which is why a lot of places use obsolete versions of their languages. But nonetheless…
Click to expand...
So in Africa or Asia do they speak their native tongue in the Divine Liturgy?
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Frankly, I think the video portrays an inaccurate view of the Roman Mass. I have worshiped many times in Catholic parishes and cathedrals and have never seen anything like that Clown Mass. The Western Church has put the emphasis on reaching out to the people, making the experience at Mass as meaningful as possible.

No doubt the Orthodox Liturgy is quite beautiful but for many Christians it is too weighed down in ritual. How many times can a person cross themselves?

Please, no offense but the Eastern Church represents a different era in my opinion. That is neither good nor bad.
Click to expand...
I must disagree, because the liturgy is neither about relevance, nor about the experience being meaningful. As Fr. Taft put it, the liturgy is about the inestimable privilege of worshipping God. We do not offer in our worship things vulgar and common (the very things which are used in attempts to “reach out”), but things which are special and set aside for the worship of God. To demand that there be something to take out of it is to miss the point of the liturgy, as its meaningfulness is to be found exactly in its propriety and suitability for worshipping our Lord.
 
byzancatholic said:
Why wouldn’t the model consist of the Orthodox churches remaining sui iuris, as the Eastern rite churches? With retention of the Eastern Canon Code applicable to unified Orthodox and current uniate Eastern rite eparchy peoples?
Click to expand...
If the Orthodox would agree to it then great! :hmmm:
 
benjohnson said:
Ok… I was going to stick up for my Catholic friends and say that there’s going to be liturgical abuse . But that carnival procession with the roller skating angels is actually too much.
Click to expand...
Ya think? It made me want to puke. With the procession I was also going to defend it on the basis of cultural preference, but the roller skating angels and circus music is a complete affront to the liturgy, to say the least. Unbelievable.
 
Cavaradossi said:
I must disagree, because the liturgy is neither about relevance, nor about the experience being meaningful. As Fr. Taft put it, the liturgy is about the inestimable privilege of worshipping God. We do not offer in our worship things vulgar and common (the very things which are used in attempts to “reach out”), but things which are special and set aside for the worship of God. To demand that there be something to take out of it is to miss the point of the liturgy, as its meaningfulness is to be found exactly in its propriety and suitability for worshipping our Lord.
Click to expand...
Well said. I agree completely.
 
Liturgically: I think we can all agree that the Eastern churches avoided that rough patch the Romans went through after Vatican II, and before JPII and Benedict drew a hard line on it.
 
Surnaturel said:
So in Africa or Asia do they speak their native tongue in the Divine Liturgy?
Click to expand...
There is a Russian Orthodox parish in Thailand. They still use mostly Slavonic, but have started inserting some Thai. A friend has attended there, I’m not sure to what extent the Liturgy is in Thai.
 
L_Marshall said:
Liturgically: I think we can all agree that the Eastern churches avoided that rough patch the Romans went through after Vatican II, and before JPII and Benedict drew a hard line on it.
Click to expand...
We’ve had our own Liturgical issues. Many changes came about during the Turkish yoke, and then the Russians tried to follow the Greeks and a schism occurred in Russia between those who resisted the changes (now known as Old Believers) and those who accepted it (the canonical Russian Orthodox Church).

There were also Latinizations that occurred due to the growing influence of Rome and while the Orthodox were mostly under the Turks. Scholasticism advanced in the West while the East became suffocated by the yoke. So Russia tried to advance by adopting from the West.
 
IgnatianPhilo said:
Except the Pope will never give up his claim to power.
Click to expand...
Hopes for reunion will be stymied because the Orthodox do not accept papal infallibility and the Roman Catholic Church teaches that papal infallibility is an unchangeable and essential doctrinal teaching.
 
Tomdstone said:
Hopes for reunion will be stymied because the Orthodox do not accept papal infallibility and the Roman Catholic Church teaches that papal infallibility is an unchangeable and essential doctrinal teaching.
Click to expand...
That indeed is the biggest roadblock. It is possible (albeit unlikely) that the Orthodox can accept Papal Supremacy and even Infallibility as an ecclesiastical development, but never as a dogma.
 
Tomdstone said:
Hopes for reunion will be stymied because the Orthodox do not accept papal infallibility and the Roman Catholic Church teaches that papal infallibility is an unchangeable and essential doctrinal teaching.
Click to expand...
Yeah pretty much.
 
Tomdstone said:
Hopes for reunion will be stymied because the Orthodox do not accept papal infallibility and the Roman Catholic Church teaches that papal infallibility is an unchangeable and essential doctrinal teaching.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, when we’re looking to improve relations, the first step is simply to stop worsening them.

Indeed, the Vatican has already indicated that some past actions, e.g. the Union of Brest and other proselytizing actions and policies, were wrong and won’t be repeated in the future.

I don’t know what the next step will be, but I’m sure there will be one.
 
L_Marshall said:
It is important to recognize that Rome did not “eat” the smaller, regional child churches. When the Roman Missal was implemented, older Rites were still allowed. Unfortunately, most Christians abandoned the older Rites in favor of the Missale Romanum.

You can still find some support for the older Rites in their places of origin. For instance: the Mozarabic Rite is still practiced in a few places in Spain.
Click to expand...
But only allowed in places that had been using them for 200 years or more!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top