M
malphono
Guest
Oh Good Lord … that hideous thing.
It’s an embarrassment, but it does scream “Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinization” doesn’t it?
- Status
It’s an embarrassment, but it does scream “Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinization” doesn’t it?
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
Malphono, I just want to clarify something. By “Novus Ordo-inspired neo-Latinizations” do you mean the improper implementation of the reforms of the Roman Mass introduced by Paul VI, such as versus populem, God-aweful translations, the introduction of “hymn books” (if they even deserve that title) that contain banality throughout in both music and lyrics, etc., and the total abandonment of Latin? Or do you speak of the reforms of Paul VI generally? I get the impression that you mean the former rather than the latter, but I just want to be clear because I’m easily confused and have a tendency to over-analyze and over-react. I do not wish to presume on your true meaning.
I do agree with you (twice in one day!!!) that the Byzantinization of the Oriental Churches is just as bad as Latinization. I would love to know more about my Oriental brethren, their Liturgies, spirituality, and particularly their “private” devotions, but sadly lack of money prevents me from purchasing any books, and lack of time prevents me from reading them. I do hope to attend the Ge’ez parish here in D.C. in the very near future.
I do agree with you (twice in one day!!!) that the Byzantinization of the Oriental Churches is just as bad as Latinization. I would love to know more about my Oriental brethren, their Liturgies, spirituality, and particularly their “private” devotions, but sadly lack of money prevents me from purchasing any books, and lack of time prevents me from reading them. I do hope to attend the Ge’ez parish here in D.C. in the very near future.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
At least the iconography is nice. Otherwise I will have to agree, yet again, with Malphono.
(I seem to be making a habit of this 
)
M
malphono
Guest
When I speak of “Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinizations” I mean just that. And it’s pretty much what you thought I meant. It’s difficult, really, to explain without getting into very subtle nuances that have crept in over the past 20 years, but there are things like Novus Ordo-style “offertory processions,” introductory “remarks” just at the point the exist in the Novus Ordo, lay readers taking the deacon’s parts (even in the presence of a deacon!), eliminating nearly all the “low voice” priestly prayers and having some of them communally, tampering with the very structure of the Mass, changing texts even in the Anaphora (and in some cases, even playing around with the Syriac text), inclusive language, etc etc etc … you get the picture.
The so-called “reforms” of Paul VI themselves bear on the Latin Church, and I don’t claim that any of them have been directly expropriated for “Maronite” use, but the principles behind the Novus Ordo certainly have been. I don’t deal with the Novus Ordo at all in the Latin Church, preferring the Usus Antiquior. If I want the equivalent of the Novus Ordo, I can always go to the Maronite church.
Must be the incessant rain.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
Malphono, my friend, I believe you and I are actually on the same page, and possibly have been all along. It seems our only real difference is that I prefer a well-done Novus Ordo, properly celebrate, with good translations, Gregorian chant, and in continuity with the tradition of the Latin Church, over the Tridintine Mass. But that is merely a matter of preference. Given the choice I’d choose a Byzantine parish any day. And if I had to choose between a Latin parish and any one of the other Eastern or Oriental parishes, I would go Eastern or Oriental.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Yes. It exists, I know. The issue is, especially on this forum, is that many complain about it and call for more kneeling. Thats the point, people want to return to their traditions. Whether it is kneeling in the Latin Church, or standing and no pews in the Byzantine Churches. Not that we think kneeling is bad (although many Traditional RCs think that standing for consecration is disrespectful without minding the ECs feelings) but that it just has a different meaning in the Eastern tradition, thus not appropriate in that setting.
But truthfully I’m a bit in the middle of this debate. I understand that there can be cross-enrichment of the Rites wherein Latin practices can be introduced to the East while Eastern practices can be introduced to the West. But at this point given the history that some Latinizations were introduced not because it was an authentic cross-pollination or practices, but rather either a forceful infusion of Latin identity by the Latins, or the Eastern side uses it as a way to gain favor with the Latins. That should not be the case. As Alex pointed out, many Orthodox have adopted Latin devotions and practices, but this is not because they were forced to or because they thought they’d get better treatment from the Latin Church.
5
5Loaves
Guest
Agreed.Great disclaimer, but it is, as the expression goes, too little, too late. Personally, I do, in fact, find the entire post to be rather offensive, to say the least.
NOTE: We are Eastern and Oriental Churches
R
RyanBlack
Guest
In spite of your stated intentions, this post is among the most condescending and offensive I’ve ever encountered in these sort of East vs. West discsussions.
5
5Loaves
Guest
What is “Benediction of the Cross”? I take it this is not the services we have for the feast of the Exaltation of the Precious and Life-creating Cross.
I’d concur. I’m blest to be in a parish that has no apparent latinizations. There must have been some in the past. In old photos of the temple when we had the Miracle-Working Icon of Our Lady of Kazan there is a big statue of the Mother of God right in the temple next to the holy Icon.
C
chaldobyzantine
Guest
Maphono don’t get me started on what I saw last night on Noursat. I assume we both saw the same Melkite Divine Liturgy, and needless to say I was disgusted.Welcome to what I’ll call the “Maronite world” where Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinizations reign supreme, are ongoing, and are uncontested.
The same is pretty much true for the Chaldeans, but at least the Chaldean Holy Synod “saw the light” and did something about it.The Maronite Synod has at best adopted the ostrich position, and at worst is actively supporting its own demise.
And, of course, there’s the Maronite bishops adherence to the USCCB’s schedule for removing the more egregious non-translations (“And also with you” etc). Bet you dollars to doughnuts that Mar Ibrahim will go along with the USCCB later this year.
My suggestion? Don’t “go Byzantine” but rather fight for your own. The Byzantines (even the Melkites) aren’t all that unviolated either. Just last night I saw a broadcast of yet another Melkite DL from Lebanon versus populum (rather than ad orientem) in a church with not even a hint of an iconostasis, not even a so-called “portable” one. I just couldn’t take it and shut the thing off, so I don’t know what other innovations there may have been (other than very badly done music, that included a hint of “Western”).
If you’re in Detroit, why not go see Mar Ibrahim? Fight with him if necessary, but you have to make your presence and position known first. Trust me, you’re not the only Chaldo in the diocese to feel the way you do.
I do think I have become quite a bit Byzantinized, I consider my beliefs as Eastern Orthodox, and I don’t think I can abandon my love for the Byzantine rite to go back to only attending Chaldean parishes. 
Concerning the Maronite Church, I thought there was some positive effort started by HB Mar Nasrallah Sfeir towards the liturgy returning to its Syriac roots. I can only pray HB Mar Bechara Rai and the Maronite Synod to promulgate at the very least, the removal of the Vatican II Latinizations. Even if the Maronite Church or the Chaldean Church was returned to how it was before V2, would it still have been heavily Latinized?
Removing the V2 “reforms” from the Maronite and Chaldean Churches would be a good first step, but if the churches were still Latinized, I would still like to see a more extensive reform. I would love to go to Southfield and make my case with Bishop Ibrahim, but I wonder what I could do that the Patriarch and Synod haven’t already done…
P
pnewton
Guest
As a Church, we breathe with both lungs (JPII). I understand the OP’s desire and admit that it has tweaked my curiosity some. I am going to have to educate myself on some of those items. Perhaps one of the paths to a more general de-latinaztion of the Eastern Rites is an increased knowledge of Eastern practices in the Latin Church. As one post pointed out, many Catholics are ignorant on the history of the various rites and why we have these multiple rites.
M
malphono
Guest
Yep, that’s the one. Quite a revolting display, wasn’t it? Worst part is that it wasn’t the first time I’ve seen such things. (See my [post=7573723]post[/post] from February.)Maphono don’t get me started on what I saw last night on Noursat. I assume we both saw the same Melkite Divine Liturgy, and needless to say I was disgusted.
Is it that you dislike the Chaldean? Or just prefer the Byzantine?I do think I have become quite a bit Byzantinized, I consider my beliefs as Eastern Orthodox, and I don’t think I can abandon my love for the Byzantine rite to go back to only attending Chaldean parishes.
Ah, my bug-bear, the bad-old Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinizations. Have a look around at some of my posts about that in this forum.
There’s a big difference between the “old” Latinizations (mainly from the late 16th century) and the new crop. The comments I’ve made about that in this forum are generally about the Maronite usage, but for the most part also apply to the Chaldean. I’m obviously not against reform (as in removing at least the more egregious latinizations, but I am 100+% opposed to “reform” in the Novus Ordo sense), but one does have to be careful in attempting to remove things that have become tradition over nearly 500 years.
You might want to think about getting in touch with Fr Andrew in San Diego. From what I understand, he’s a good guy and he might just be able to guide you to the right people in the Detroit area. Just a thought.
BTW, (and this is really not my business), do you speak Ashuri at all?
M
malphono
Guest
The “Benediction of the Cross” that I referred to is not the service of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (the Syriac Churches have that too
). The reference was to a para-liturgical Lenten devotion that had existed among the Maronites (and which is based on a very similar Sicilian Lenten devotion) for some centuries.
5
5Loaves
Guest
So is it something similar to the Latin Church Stations of the Cross, or veneration of the Cross in the Latin Church? I’m not finding anything that describes it.The “Benediction of the Cross” that I referred to is not the service of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (the Syriac Churches have that too
I also see parishes listing “Maronite Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament”. Is that something like Eucharistic Adoration done in the Latin Church?
M
malphono
Guest
That’s about right, though I’m not altogether sure what the “veneration of Cross” you mentioned is. Do you happen to have a link?
Well … it’s more than “something like” it. It’s the same thing, ostensorium, humeral veil, and all, given a little twist here and there.
C
chaldobyzantine
Guest
I don’t dislike the Chaldean/Assyrian rite at all, I love it, but the manner in which it is currently done around here just annoys me to the nth degree. (and the local ACoE parish has too early of a schedule) Yet even if the Chaldean Church was free of Latinizations, I think I might still prefer the Antiochian Byzantine rite.
I’m Chaldean BTW, so I can kinda speak and read Syriac (Tel Keppe accent)
Can you speak/read Syriac too malphono? I get kinda glad when Maronites can speak more than what the liturgy has, and they’re not clergy
M
malphono
Guest
OK, now I think I’ve got it. All the more reason to get off your duff and try, at least, to get things moving in the right direction in Detroit. Give Fr Andrew a try. You never know …
That’s what I thought, and of course that’s why I asked the “none of my biz” question in the first place.I’m Chaldean BTW, so I can kinda speak and read Syriac (Tel Keppe accent)
Well … yes, sort of, at least in suryoyo (i.e. Western). Not that well in Eastern (I think I’ve heard it called surith), but I still can follow the Qourbana reasonably well.Can you speak/read Syriac too malphono? I get kinda glad when Maronites can speak more than what the liturgy has, and they’re not clergy
BTW, how many Maronite clergy do you know who (except maybe for the few monks in Ann Arbor, I think it is), who can manage the Mass in Syriac (and I don’t mean simply the “required” portions that they memorize blindly)?
C
chaldobyzantine
Guest
Just replace every O sound with an A sound (except for when the letter ‘waw’ is actually written) and you will be understood just fineWell … yes, sort of, at least in suryoyo (i.e. Western). Not that well in Eastern (I think I’ve heard it called surith), but I still can follow the Qourbana reasonably well.
BTW, how many Maronite clergy do you know who (except maybe for the few monks in Ann Arbor, I think it is), who can manage the Mass in Syriac (and I don’t mean simply the “required” portions that they memorize blindly)?
Then again I tried to follow a Syriac Orthodox DL and can only understand a quarter of the words spoken
Not that I know any Maronite clergy, but I assumed that they had to study Syriac in seminaries to understand the Maronite liturgy. I watch Noursat and see choirs singing long hymns in Syriac, I just can’t help but wonder if the language isn’t completely dead outside of church. ^ Otherwise people are just blindly saying words they can vaguely understand.
I wonder if any Maronite efforts are being done to promote the Syriac language here in the U.S., or in Lebanon…
D
dzheremi
Guest
Hi Chaldobyzantine,
Not to butt in too much or answer for Malphono, but since the position of Syriac relative to the various communities in Lebanon is something I have spent a little bit of time studying, I can say that it’s rather bleak for the Maronites in particular. Ray Mouawad’s article from “Hugoye”, while being 11 years old by now, seems to be a fairly accurate assessment of the situation, and I would be incredibly surprised to find that it has gotten any better since 2000. I say this as a non-Syriac Christian with no sectarian issues regarding any of the communities involved, but I really agree with Mouawad’s point in the article when he writes:
I am subscribed to the electronic bulletins of the “Friends of the Syriac Language” association in Beirut (mentioned in the article) and it does seem like they’ve always got something going on or planned, though I couldn’t tell you how popular their various programs are.
Not to butt in too much or answer for Malphono, but since the position of Syriac relative to the various communities in Lebanon is something I have spent a little bit of time studying, I can say that it’s rather bleak for the Maronites in particular. Ray Mouawad’s article from “Hugoye”, while being 11 years old by now, seems to be a fairly accurate assessment of the situation, and I would be incredibly surprised to find that it has gotten any better since 2000. I say this as a non-Syriac Christian with no sectarian issues regarding any of the communities involved, but I really agree with Mouawad’s point in the article when he writes:
This is one of the many, many, many reasons I am always blathering on about the importance of Syriac, despite not being of that persuasion myself. Anyway, he also stresses that in terms of the attitude of the people (separate from their access/knowledge) Syriac seems to be seen as increasingly important, so perhaps things will eventually get a little better.
I am subscribed to the electronic bulletins of the “Friends of the Syriac Language” association in Beirut (mentioned in the article) and it does seem like they’ve always got something going on or planned, though I couldn’t tell you how popular their various programs are.
A
AJV
Guest
I suppose it may be a bit different for Churches which have significant Eastern counterparts because restorations mean shared practices and also a visible guarantee against future Latinization.I feel that as Eastern Christians, we should return to our roots for each of our particular sui iuris churches and remove Latin devotions and practices from our parishes. I do not mean to offend those in the Latin rite, and I will always encourage them to practice (and bring back) their Latin practices.
But at the parish level, how can those who want their parishes to return to the practices of their particular rite have progress against the odds?
For example, replacing daily masses or the rosary with daily matins and vespers, replacing Stations of the Cross with Akathists and Presanctified liturgies, replacing eucharistic adoration with Great Compline or Moleben, remove the filioque, etc.
I recall asking a UGCC parish member what services were offered during Holy Week, and he responded that the Stations of the Cross were still being celebrated. Surprised, I asked him why his parish still did that, and his response was that it was very popular.
So how can we defenders of Orthodoxy (Oriental and Eastern) change the mindset of parish congregations and priests who have not responded to Rome’s call to return to our traditional roots?
I hope this thread can be civil.
God Bless
But looking back at the debates in the Syro-Malabar Church (the Assyrian Church in India is not exactly a counterpart), I’m not sure whether de-Latinzation is any more “authentic”, in a certain sense. Now on one hand, there’s no doubt that some of the bishops are thoroughly Latinized and trained in the Latin ways of doing things. And some Latinizations (abbreviations, facing the people) do not have any great benefit.
On the other hand, for things that have popular appeal especially in the devotional sense, for e.g. given the large fighting that broke out when they floated stopping the elevations, and introduced the strange Eastern “Benediction-but-not-benediction” — those I do not see any benefit in. They are authentic devotions that have nourished people’s spirituality. It seems rather high handed to waltz in and tell people that they’ve got it wrong. And evidently people feel that way, because when it’s stopped in the Syro-Malabar, they go to the Latins. In fact, I think some introductions are actually beneficial…for example, the introduction of paintings of the saints into churches which is not the practice of the Assyrian Church.
I do see the benefit in restoring traditions of each Church where they were abolished alongside the popular devotions. But I’m not sure of the approach that seeks some kind of “purity” in a rite. For example, the Armenians borrowed many things from Latins and many things from the Byzantine church. What is the “Armenian tradition”? And this back and forth borrowing among liturgies was quite common in the early centuries. So perhaps a litmus test is to see how entrenched they have become in the popular consciousness instead to seeking some purity. Otherwise de-Latinization becomes as high handed as Latinization was.
- Status