Have EC's Adopted Any Devotions From The Orthodox

[Hesychios]

Is your intent here to shows that if Eastern Catholics adopt post-schism Orthodox prayers then it shoul be okay for Eastern Catholics to adopt or continue use of post-union Latin ones? Because that is where it seems you are going.

Yes Father Deacon.

That is in part where I was going. Some people may be offended by my asking and they are of course free to answer (or not) as they choose, but I think it is a legitimate question.

In other words, you suspect Eastern Catholics to show in some general way a partiality toward the Orthodox, over and against the Latin?

If that is what you think, I am convinced that is not the case.

The EC are merely claiming their own patrimony. It is theirs and they want it…

God bless 'em.

Thank you for answering the question honestly and squarely, I respect that.

 

[Seamus_L]

I really wasen’t sure Hesychios. On one hand I’d think there are now some Eastern Catholics who would be very receptive to the idea, while on the other, I know EC-Orthodox relations in Eastern Europe have often been tempestuous.

 

[Diak]

Seamus,
Is your intent here to shows that if Eastern Catholics adopt post-schism Orthodox prayers then it shoul be okay for Eastern Catholics to adopt or continue use of post-union Latin ones? Because that is where it seems you are going.
Fr. Deacon Lance

Yes Father Deacon. That is in part where I was going. Some people may be offended by my asking and they are of course free to answer (or not) as they choose, but I think it is a legitimate question.

I suppose it also a very legitimate question to consider why anyone (especially someone who has identified himself as a "traditional Roman Catholic in other places on this Forum) would want to go against the explicit and repeated teaching and direction of the Magisterium of his Catholic Church and show disrespect to the intent of the hierarchs of the Eastern Catholic Churches, as well as question the statements and intent of the Unions themselves by such poking around.

By finally answering the question (I think ByzCath counted 39 posts) you have also well documented your own intent for lack of fidelity to the teaching and direction of the Magisterium by your persistence when these things have been pointed out to you on numerous occasions before this sordid thread even began.

Another question I have is why a Latin outside of our church would be so intent on meddling in such affairs that are not of his particular Church and clearly against the direction of our own hierarchy as well as Rome. As a very vivid reminder to anyone intent on such meddling, the last group in the Ukrainian Catholic Church to enforce such post-Union latinizations (the SSJ) as a regular part of the liturgical life of that particular group has been excommunicated by the UGCC, and Rome has upheld that excommunication.

 

[Seamus_L]

How to respond here without offending someone on a controversial subject may not be easy, but this is the computer age where it is not uncommon to offer lengthy opinions about political situations in countries we never intend to visit. Still I believe that since I am Catholic and have lived most of my life in one of the great centers of Eastern Catholicism in America, I should be at least entitled to , not so much an opinion, but rather to speak for those who’s voices are seldom heard.

                 On this forum I have been accused several times of supporting the "Latinization" of the Eastern Catholic Churches and of wanting to meddle in there affairs. In realty my statements have nothing to do with my or any other Roman Catholic's desire to make EC Churches mirror images of RC ones. This is not a Roman Catholic issue. This is about Eastern Catholics who have spent there entire lives in Eastern Catholic Churches and who were told "The crucifix on the wall as you enter, or the iconic stations of the cross, or the icon of the Sacred Heart, have to go because they're not part of our tradition".

                Over the years I've visited numerous Eastern Catholic Churches throughout the Great Lakes area, and as you can probably guess, I've put the question to them. And what did I find ? No offense Ladies and Gentlemen, but I found that the Eastern Catholics (with the exception of those of the Melkite Church) I spoke with, over 50, we're overwhelmingly opposed to de-Latinization. I even spoke with 3 people in Holy Orders, on different occasions, who spoke critically in varying degrees of de-Latinization. On one occasion, when I put the question to a UGCC priest his reply was "I'm all for de-Latinization, but my parishoners are not". 

              Sadly, I expect the usual comebacks about old people who were never properly catechized and who are unsure of there own spiritual identities. However, 5 years ago these folks were EC's and not Episcopalian, and 5 years from now they'll still be EC (if they're alive) and not OCA.  

            It's a real pleasure to be able to relate to people who worship a bit differently then you, but still think and act as Catholics.

 

[bpbasilphx]

It’s a real pleasure to be able to relate to people who worship a bit differently then you, but still think and act as Catholics.

---

Are you meaning to imply that the Latin Church is somehow the standard for Catholicism, and the more an Eastern Catholic resembles a Latin, the more Catholic he is?

 

[Diak]

How to respond here without offending someone on a controversial subject may not be easy, but this is the computer age where it is not uncommon to offer lengthy opinions about political situations in countries we never intend to visit. Still I believe that since I am Catholic and have lived most of my life in one of the great centers of Eastern Catholicism in America, I should be at least entitled to , not so much an opinion, but rather to speak for those who’s voices are seldom heard.

On this forum I have been accused several times of supporting the “Latinization” of the Eastern Catholic Churches and of wanting to meddle in there affairs. In realty my statements have nothing to do with my or any other Roman Catholic’s desire to make EC Churches mirror images of RC ones. This is not a Roman Catholic issue. This is about Eastern Catholics who have spent there entire lives in Eastern Catholic Churches and who were told “The crucifix on the wall as you enter, or the iconic stations of the cross, or the icon of the Sacred Heart, have to go because they’re not part of our tradition”.

Over the years I’ve visited numerous Eastern Catholic Churches throughout the Great Lakes area, and as you can probably guess, I’ve put the question to them. And what did I find ? No offense Ladies and Gentlemen, but I found that the Eastern Catholics (with the exception of those of the Melkite Church) I spoke with, over 50, we’re overwhelmingly opposed to de-Latinization. I even spoke with 3 people in Holy Orders, on different occasions, who spoke critically in varying degrees of de-Latinization. On one occasion, when I put the question to a UGCC priest his reply was “I’m all for de-Latinization, but my parishoners are not”.

Sadly, I expect the usual comebacks about old people who were never properly catechized and who are unsure of there own spiritual identities. However, 5 years ago these folks were EC’s and not Episcopalian, and 5 years from now they’ll still be EC (if they’re alive) and not OCA.

It’s a real pleasure to be able to relate to people who worship a bit differently then you, but still think and act as Catholics.

In the Our Father we pray “Thy will” and not “my will”. There is something to be said for obedience to the direction of the Patriarch, Synod, bishops and the Magisterium rather than following self-appointed factfinding crusades based on subjective and self-fulfilling “findings”.

As a Ukrainian Catholic deacon who minsters regularly to the people you claim to know, you really don’t seem to know them at all. Yes, some may grumble or complain. That is a standard part of human existence. But they will never abandon their church simply if Vespers or a Moleben are added, especially when the words of their venerated hierarchs like Metropolitan Andrey, Patriarch Josyp and many of the blesseds like Mykola Charnetsky and Vasyl Velychovsky regarding these things are explained to them.

Ultimately they will pray whatever devotions at home anyway if they feel that to be such an important part of their prayer life. But they will most certainly not go against the hierarchy of their Church that continued to minister to them in some of the darkest times of history.

Your response now takes a suspicious turn towards a purported “sympathy” for our people, and it still does not answer the question why someone would be purposefully working around the Magisterial teaching and directions of the Eastern Catholic hierarchs for his own ends.

Sadly, I expect the usual comebacks about old people who were never properly catechized and who are unsure of there own spiritual identities. However, 5 years ago these folks were EC’s and not Episcopalian, and 5 years from now they’ll still be EC (if they’re alive) and not OCA.

When it comes to catechetical issues, those again are not yours to decide but rather the Synod of the particular Church in question. We have a Patriarchal catechetcical commission that is finishing up the first particular non-Latin cathecism to ever be promulgated. I do agree with you on one thing - they will still be EC, and God-willing they will be able to share more of the rich liturgical life their grandparents knew (and sometimes knew from heart) rather than that which was foisted on them outside of their tradition.

Are you meaning to imply that the Latin Church is somehow the standard for Catholicism, and the more an Eastern Catholic resembles a Latin, the more Catholic he is?

I think that is exactly where this is heading, and in the process continuing to ignore much of the Magisterial teaching on the Eastern Catholic Churches since Leo XIII.

 

[Diak]

Over the years I’ve visited numerous Eastern Catholic Churches throughout the Great Lakes area, and as you can probably guess, I’ve put the question to them. And what did I find ? No offense Ladies and Gentlemen, but I found that the Eastern Catholics (with the exception of those of the Melkite Church) I spoke with, over 50, we’re overwhelmingly opposed to de-Latinization. I even spoke with 3 people in Holy Orders, on different occasions, who spoke critically in varying degrees of de-Latinization. On one occasion, when I put the question to a UGCC priest his reply was “I’m all for de-Latinization, but my parishoners are not”.

You are apparently not familiar with the history of the largest Ukrainian Catholic parish outside of Ukraine, Sts. Volodymyr and Olha in Chicago. If that experience teaches us anything, it is that our people in the end actually care far more for the integrity of the received tradition rather than the latinized accretions.

In any case as a man with free will you are free to choose to ignore the direction from Rome and the hierarchy of the particular Church in question. That to me is far more indicative of what it means to be a “good Catholic”.

 

[Hesychios]

Over the years I’ve visited numerous Eastern Catholic Churches throughout the Great Lakes area, and as you can probably guess, I’ve put the question to them. And what did I find ? No offense Ladies and Gentlemen, but I found that the Eastern Catholics (with the exception of those of the Melkite Church) I spoke with, over 50, we’re overwhelmingly opposed to de-Latinization.

This is similar to my experience, although to be frank I hadn’t had much luck striking up a conversation with Ukrainians after liturgy, Catholic nor Orthodox.

Most of my exposure was with Ruthenians, Maronites and Melkites and your observation stands.

I even spoke with 3 people in Holy Orders, on different occasions, who spoke critically in varying degrees of de-Latinization. On one occasion, when I put the question to a UGCC priest his reply was “I’m all for de-Latinization, but my parishioners are not”.

This I have also seen.

In fact I have been to ACROD parishes and Ukrinian Orthodox parishes where people are still clinging to some Latinizations acquired during the several centuries their ancestors/predecessors were under the Pope in the Unia. Their own priests would like to move them along but the laity will have none of that.

Sadly, I expect the usual comebacks about old people who were never properly catechized and who are unsure of there own spiritual identities. However, 5 years ago these folks were EC’s and not Episcopalian, and 5 years from now they’ll still be EC (if they’re alive) and not OCA.

There is a strong attachment to the ceremony of the church of one’s origin and youth, that is only natural.

It is why so many Roman Catholics cling to the church after it changed so much, many going so far as to attend illicit Masses (until Rome finally relented and allowed bishops to give indults). It is why Pope John Paul II (of Blessed Memory) conceded to the Anglican Use in his Pastoral provision. Nostalgia is a powerful thing. It is also why so many older Episcopalians are still attached to their parishes, in spite of what has happened to the theology of that once noble church!

What the older folks in the Byzantine churches remember and sometimes miss is a hybrid (their own grandparents and great-grandparents probably would not have agreed with them). But this has been a Trojan Horse to those churches, because the apparent similarity between the Latin and Byzantine churches has helped to cripple the smaller Byzantine rite parishes. Third and fourth generations rarely continue in their ancestral traditions, the BCC in particular does not benefit much by immigration and it is in many places collapsing. The UGCC fares better, but mostly because new immigrants help replace the third generation Ukrainians who mostly have left for the Latin church, thus obscuring the problem.

              It's a real pleasure to be able to relate to people who worship a bit differently then you, but still think and act as Catholics.

This is not a justified opinion.

By this standard the ACROD and UOC members I mentioned above would still be thinking and acting like Catholics. In fact they would overwhelmingly agree with you, they have always been Catholics since before the Unions and in spite of rejecting the power the papacy later.

Ditto for Anglo-Catholics.

In short, these attachments are no measure of Catholicity nor Orthodoxy whatsoever, they are reflections of a human weakness for nostalgia and in some cases phyletism.

One important point to consider is that these Traditions need to be revived in total in order to give the people the benefit of their own traditional spiritualities, and their own unique perspective on theology.

If this is not done, there is really no justification for them to exist at all! For if the Tradition is only represented by a change of clothes on the priest, and a slightly different order to the Mass, or slightly more exotic decorations it is nothing but a superficiality and does not deserve all the efforts that have been exerted to sustain them. Seeing it that way, exactly as you see Byzantine Catholics, is why so many Orthodox think that the Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox in communion with Rome but are closet Latins playing church. And the opinion* of those Orthodox* is often held to be that once the papacy admits this and removes them from the scene (dissolves as well as absorbs the EC into the Latin church) ecumenical dialog may proceed on an honest footing.

I personally think that would be a disaster, but if your own opinion was shared and held sway in Rome, it is possible that would happen one day.

 

[Diak]

It seems some Latins have a vested interest in the perpetration of these kinds of overt latinizations and hybridizations, and want to continue to use our Churches as back-alley chapels of convenience or reservations for the preservation of their own subjective ideas of what “traditional Catholicism” is supposed to look like since our Liturgies are not the Novus Ordo. That might explain to some extent why the desire to hold onto or even promote the latinized devotions when Rome and the hierarchies are directing the opposite way. It sadly appears some would even take advantage of the simple naivety of some of our people who have nostalgia for the recent latinized accretions for their own ends, rather than respond to the direction of Rome and the hierarchs of the particular Eastern Catholic Churches.

As the late Holy Father wrote:

…And conversion is also required of the Latin Church, that she may respect and fully appreciate the dignity of Eastern Christians, and accept gratefully the spiritual treasures of which the Eastern Catholic Churches are the bearers, to the benefit of the entire catholic communion…

If you “fully appreciate the dignity” you should respect the desire of any and all of the particular Eastern Catholic Churches to return to a more authentic expression of the fuller received tradition as well, rather than the hybridized concoctions of the more recent past.

 

[malphono]

I wasn’t going to get back into this fray, but I couldn’t stand it.

Still I believe that since I am Catholic and have lived most of my life in one of the great centers of Eastern Catholicism in America, I should be at least entitled to , not so much an opinion, but rather to speak for those who’s voices are seldom heard.

And what location would that be? Chicago IL? Detroit MI? Crookstron, MN? Your user ID is silent on location. All you said in your post is “Great Lakes area” and that, as they say, ain’t all that small. Nor is it homogeneous. Location, not to mention the particular Churches involved, does indeed make a difference.

In any case, it seems a bit presumptuous for a Latin Rite Catholic to speak for anyone else. Are we Easterners/Orientals unable to speak for ourselves?

On this forum I have been accused several times of supporting the “Latinization” of the Eastern Catholic Churches and of wanting to meddle in there affairs. In realty my statements have nothing to do with my or any other Roman Catholic’s desire to make EC Churches mirror images of RC ones. This is not a Roman Catholic issue.

Oh but it is a “Roman Catholic issue,” as you put it. You, and others, have made it so, precisely by meddling in Eastern/Oriental affairs.

This is about Eastern Catholics who have spent there entire lives in Eastern Catholic Churches and who were told “The crucifix on the wall as you enter, or the iconic stations of the cross, or the icon of the Sacred Heart, have to go because they’re not part of our tradition”.

Here, even I will admit you have a point. But what this describes is the aftermath of latinizations that Rome “persuaded” the East/Orient into accepting several hundred years ago. Further, there’s a big difference between an icon of the Sacred Heart (or a statue or even one of those awful photo-lithos) and a substantive latinization. What I mean is that the Sacred Heart icon (or whatever) is a minor para-liturgical devotional practice, whereas other latinizations are substantive (theologically & liturgically) and those, I’m afraid, do present a serious problem to the very identity of the East/Orient. I have said many times in other threads that while they are alien, practices such as the Way of the Cross, e.g., are essentially harmless. (I respect Ste Margeruite-Marie, but all the same I’m not a big fan of Sacred Heart devotions even in the Latin Church, so I’m not about to use that as a paradigm.) OTOH, latinizations that were, for all practical purposes imposed by Rome in the Holy Liturgy and other Sacraments are not at all harmless. The former, in most cases, were adopted and adapted to Eastern/Oriental custom. The latter are much deeper: they pervert Eastern/Oriental custom to conform to that of the Latin Church.

Over the years I’ve visited numerous Eastern Catholic Churches throughout the Great Lakes area, and as you can probably guess, I’ve put the question to them. And what did I find ? No offense Ladies and Gentlemen, but I found that the Eastern Catholics (with the exception of those of the Melkite Church) I spoke with, over 50, we’re overwhelmingly opposed to de-Latinization. I even spoke with 3 people in Holy Orders, on different occasions, who spoke critically in varying degrees of de-Latinization. On one occasion, when I put the question to a UGCC priest his reply was “I’m all for de-Latinization, but my parishoners are not”.

Sadly, I expect the usual comebacks about old people who were never properly catechized and who are unsure of there own spiritual identities. However, 5 years ago these folks were EC’s and not Episcopalian, and 5 years from now they’ll still be EC (if they’re alive) and not OCA.

I suspect that what you found were the reactions of people who were (a) improperly chatechized in the first place (whether you want to believe that or not), and (b) likely responding in particular regard to para-liturgical services (Way of the Cross, Sacred Heart Devotions, etc) and/or church decorations (statues, paintings, whatever), and not to the deeper issues. For a variety of reason which I am not about to go into here or elsewhere, I have never been a big fan of the Melkites, but I will give them credit for, among other things, having done a better job of chatechesis than most other Eastern/Oriental Churches. And by the way, I am well over 50 so the “age thing” doesn’t hold water in my book.

It’s a real pleasure to be able to relate to people who worship a bit differently then you, but still think and act as Catholics.

And herein lies the crux of the problem: what is “think and act as Catholics” supposed to mean?

I have to again agree with [post=5438754]Diak[/post].

 

[marymol]

Thank you for the above response which seems to recognise better the diversity in the culture and traditions - even between the Eastern Churches - this even including ethnic identity which serves as a protective shield for some , from too many getting confused in where they belong ! !

What could be somewhat prophetic and revealing here may also be even the name of the Patron Apostle St.Thomas , ’ the twin ’ or double …as though God had forseen how His children would be humble and hospitable enough to accept what is deemed good and worthy -of East and West …and not concerend about the labeling of where exactly it is from …

Hospitality is also another venerabel tradition of the Kerala people …tradition again says how she was one of the few places in the world where Jewish people were accepted with respect , never persecuted …and some would even go as far as to say how this has been one reason why she was spared from all major wars …

Again…may be the Holy Spirit was preparing hearts may be …so that when the Mother of The Lord is sent to this world with her messages , they too are accepted , in that same sense of hospitality …and reverence …

same with His other prophetic voices …

and may be that again has helped her to be spared the rule and overtake of the fear based kingdoms - Islam , communism …

And , we can trust the leaders who have been entrusted her care to speak clearly on such if at all there is need for caution …

May her leaders continue in wisdom and humility …in the Light of truth !

Peace !

 

[marymol]

P.S - among the so called alien or ’ newer ’ devotions, atleast one, the ’ Way of the Cross’ is said to be , by tradition , develeped by Bl.Mother herself, while in Ephesus…and thus very ’ Eastern ’ ( for those who want such a label …)

The fidelity to the exhortation to 'go back ’ to traditions …may be it is very prophetic too …to take the children all the way back …to the promised land …of true unity …

Peace !