Considering the Byzantine community were the liturgical coordinators, I don’t think so. Interestingly, they were swinging an empty thurible. The hotel ballrooms do not allow incense because the smoke detectors are too sensitive.
Essentially, it’s a Mass (usually, I hope, valid) where the celebrant and congregation dress as poor imitations of circus entertainers (usually none of them actually are clowns). That’s at least one meaning.
Yet the Byzantines, I’m sure, saw no need to incorporate liturgical novelties in an attempt to appeal to the masses.Actually, the Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix sponsored a booth this year at the Exhibitor’s Hall and they coordinated a Byzantine Divine Liturgy on Saturday, which was presided over by the Most Rev. Gerald Dino. I also met a really nice Slovakian Byzantine priest who told me and gave some pamphlets about the International Theological Institute in Austria.
Objectively this is true; however, I sympathize with those whose faith has been challenged by the state of the liturgy in much of the Latin Church. It does scandalize the East and we should be seeking to remove obstacles to unity, not make excuses.
I think you misunderstand what a Latinization is. They include many venerable and holy traditions of the Latin rite which simply do not belong to our rite. They include such traditions as Stations of the Cross, Eucharistic Adoration, the use of confessionals, the use of unleavened bread, the Filioque, and Holy Water fonts at the entrance to the church. None of these is a “novelty in an attempt to appeal to the masses”. Each of these is perfectly acceptable, in its proper place. The proper place is not in a Byzantine church.If you’ve talked to a few Byzantines, some of them don’t take kindly to what they call “Latinizations,” of their rite which they consider “novelties in an attempt to appeal to the masses.”
Indeed, they are poor reasons, but I can understand their frustration and motivation. Bad liturgy hurts the church! Lex orandi lex credendi lex vivendi!
Indeed.