If you ever do change sui juris Churches make sure that you do not put that little note into either letter to the Latin Bishop or the receiving Bishop, that is a sure way to get turned down on the change.
I’m Eastern Orthodox (not in communion with Rome), but I would definitely avoid insulting my Latin bishop if I were to convert!
No, there’s nothing in translation that predates the “old” latinizations. That would be pre 16th century.
but maybe someone else has the book handy and can supply them) probably from the 1930s, that contains the translated texts of all orders of the Oriental liturgies, along with some explanatory text.The only one that comes to mind immediately is Attwater’s Eastern Catholic Worship, in that it fits your criteria for being small, translations of the Oriental liturgies, with some explanatory note. However, it’s publishing date is 1945, shortly before King’s section on the Maronite Rite in The Rites of Eastern Christendom: Volume I was published in 1947. Certainly not small with perhaps too much explanatory text. As you know there are a myriad of translations, independent or otherwise, from that era, but few compendiums with the attributes you mentioned. I too will have to check my stock later.There is, though, a small book (sorry but I just can’t remember the author or title, and I don’t have the book at hand – yeah, I know, very helpful
Elusive is an appropriate word. Our history can often times be the proverbial elephant in the room. There is much disparity—at least between old world and new—in regards to what constitutes our identity. Unfortunately, Maronites in the States have for the most part developed into the “Roman Catholics who celebrate Mass funny.” Harissa also leads one to that conclusion back home. The most tragic aspect of this is that they don’t know otherwise, and with typical Lebanese pride, go to their graves defending what they and their parents, grandparents etc. have become.
Thanks … yes, I think that’s the one. Short, sweet, and to the point. I’ve seen King’s as well. Whereas I recall that the text was ok, I rather found his “explanatory notes” to be highly objectionable, being so biased as to fit the category of being derogatory. For that reason, I wouldn’t suggest it to anyone.
If I’m not mistaken, Attwater and King used the same source material, rather, King used Attwater. Rites of Eastern Christendom in it’s full two volumes is actually incredibly well known in liturgical studies, despite King’s occasional littering of racism and unsubstantiated bias. He’s no Fortescue, however. In regards to his section on the Maronites, it becomes “sketchy” when he portrays us as the bastard children of the Easterners, despite having exemplary scholarship. You do occasionally forget the author was Catholic himself, though. Later on, Attwater would echo the same nonsense that even those critical of Maronites would put to rest.
Thanks for the comments. You know, on second thought, I may have confused King with Fortescue.
Oops. Problem is I’m working from memory: I do have these books, but my library (such as it is) is elsewhere now, and I literally cannot put my hand on any of them.When reading the translated texts, just remember to focus on the texts and ignore what will appear to be the latinized (“old” style) rubrics. I think you’ll figure out which rubrics are which as you go along.
Considering that the Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinizations are getting worse by the day, (all the while under the false, Novus Ordo-inspired banner of “reclamation of tradition”), I tend to think that’s wishful thinking.
Doubtful, but I’d be thrilled if that Synod even accomplishes getting the propositions noted in the other thread recognized.
It’s no problem, easy to do considering the unfortunate rhetoric of that time.Thanks for the comments. You know, on second thought, I may have confused King with Fortescue.
So very true. I’ve mapped (within the best of ability and resource) the liturgical history, official or otherwise, of Maronites in this country, and as hard as it is to read through, what is happening today is far more depressing. Crying out for an honest Maronitic historiography is akin to doing so in a vacuum.
Of course, happy to help. I’m attempting to digitize as many of the materials I have collected as quickly and legally as possible, hopefully, to allow the texts to speak for themselves and demonstrate what is going on in our community. I am, as many on this board know, very zealous about my own perspectives on Maronitic history, theology, and practice. But I do believe (perhaps naively) that the source material over our history can and does stand to demonstrate our faults without loud mouths like myself echoing their arguments. It quite literally is that convincing, and at the risk of being condescending, obvious.
I would never recommend NOT reading Fortescue. As racist, pompous, and arrogant as he was, he was instrumental in shaping the perspective of Latins regarding their EC and OC brothers, and wrote some of the first materials in English on the subject. I would say, at high risk, that he actually held a rather descent opinion of the Easterners, just in an aire that is unfitting of academia (ideally), conversation, and sensibility today. Coupled with his dramatically colorful style, Frotescue makes a name for himself quite easily. To simply extend being the devil’s advocate one last time:
As much charity as we can expect from the man.
Oh yeah … and what’s happening in general in the Patriarchal Territories now is just as bad if not worse.
