B
BVMFatima
Guest
What are some devotions the Latin Church has that the East does not have, and what are some devotions the East has that us Latins dont have?
All of themWhat are some devotions the Latin Church has that the East does not have
Noneand what are some devotions the East has that us Latins dont have?
What about the prayer rule of the Theotokos? It is extremely similar to the Rosary yet predates the Rosary by centuries.All of them
None
The Latin concept of devotion is alien to the East and any devotion you find in the East is a Latinization.
Sorry, what I meant was devotions is seen as an entirely different thing in the East and thus Latin devotions do not fit our spirituality the same way our devotions do not fit the Latin spirituality. Even the use of Prayer Rules has a different application to Eastern spiritual life than it does with Latin prayers such as the Rosary or the Divine Mercy Chaplet.What about the prayer rule of the Theotokos? It is extremely similar to the Rosary yet predates the Rosary by centuries.
Which is a Latinization. Or should I say, a Byzantinization of the Sacred Heart. But a Latinization nonetheless.The Eastern Catholic Churches have many beautiful Akathists and Molebens. My favorite is probably Jesus Christ Lover Of Mankind.
Isn’t a certain degree of sharing acceptable? I’ve often see Eastern icons in Latin churches, for example.Which is a Latinization. Or should I say, a Byzantinization of the Sacred Heart. But a Latinization nonetheless.
None of these are devotions. Monasticism is a way of life. People in religious orders are, to some degree, considered monastics. Though monasticism in the East is indeed different from Western spiritual life in religious orders. Though there are some Western orders that are very close to Eastern monasticism, like the Trappists. All in the East are called to be monastics to some degree, even lay people. It is not exclusive to those who are tonsured and live in the mountains, caves, or desert. Though they might be sometimes called true monastics as opposed to most lay persons who have only a certain degree of monastic life in them.Yet in the East there is the Jesus Prayer, Monasticism, Hesychasm etc.
Spirituality isn’t Lego where you can take different blocks and build something out of it. Every piece is more like a picture puzzle where they should fit with each other and build a complete picture. Inserting a foreign piece will not produce the right complete picture, it may not even fit anywhere on the puzzle. And it goes both ways. I doubt that icons in the Roman Catholic Church is seen in the same way it is in the Eastern Churches. Sometimes icons are there because they are seen as religious art, even though Eastern Christians don’t see icons as merely religious art.Isn’t a certain degree of sharing acceptable? I’ve often see Eastern icons in Latin churches, for example.
It is not about one side being superior to the other. But as I mentioned in a previous post, spirituality isn’t just something you can jumble up and you can pick and choose however you want to do it. The Church isn’t a spiritual buffet where you can choose what to have on your plate. It’s not about being right or wrong, but being compatible in the bigger spiritual picture. Every practice is meant to build upon a spirituality based on one’s tradition. If we are going to mix and match East and West, why not mix and match with other faith practices as well? That is dangerous territory.While it may seem that the Latin has more well known devotions per se; that doesn’t mean that one side is superior to the other.
I’m starting to believe that this two-lung theory is wrong at its very core. Or maybe we are not understanding it the way it was meant. It suggests that the East, with 5 Rites, is lumped together as one lung, regardless with our own variation in traditions. That is one thing wrong with it. The other is the inferrence that each Tradition is not complete on its own and must take in other traditions to be complete. There is great danger in that understanding. It means for the most part of our history we only practiced half of Christianity? We each only have Christianity Lite instead of having the fullness of Apostolic Faith expressed in different ways?Especially considering that each lung is a part of the body of Christ. The Latin lung had to deal with the rise of scientific thought and Luther. The East had to deal with the rise of Nestorianism and then Islam. Then through in politics (ie EGO) and voila schism.
Perhaps i’m mistaken after all this is just my opinion.
Like who?Eastern Catholics in places like Ukraine, Ruthenia, Czech Republic, etc practiced both Eastern and Western devotions, Adoration, Sacred Heart, Rosary, etc. Some of them may be declared Saints in the near future. They ‘mixed and matched’ as some now call it, and instead of it leading them into ‘dangerous territory’ it brought them great personal holiness.
No tradition developed in a vacuum. East has influenced West and vice versa for the entire history of Christianity. Perhaps you don’t mean this in the way that I’ve interpreted it, but it seems arrogant for either “side” to presume that the spirituality of the other has nothing to offer unless one takes it as a whole.It is not about one side being superior to the other. But as I mentioned in a previous post, spirituality isn’t just something you can jumble up and you can pick and choose however you want to do it. The Church isn’t a spiritual buffet where you can choose what to have on your plate. It’s not about being right or wrong, but being compatible in the bigger spiritual picture. Every practice is meant to build upon a spirituality based on one’s tradition. If we are going to mix and match East and West, why not mix and match with other faith practices as well? That is dangerous territory.
There was actually a vacuum of 500 years after the Great Schism and before any of the unions. Surprisingly, this is when most of what we recognize as the faith is today developed and “finalized”, for the lack of a better term.No tradition developed in a vacuum. East has influenced West and vice versa for the entire history of Christianity. Perhaps you don’t mean this in the way that I’ve interpreted it, but it seems arrogant for either “side” to presume that the spirituality of the other has nothing to offer unless one takes it as a whole.
True - but there was certainly a lot of cross-sharing during the first thousand years. Benedictine monasticism, the core of Western religious life, ultimately traces its origins to the Desert Fathers of the Coptic tradition…as does Byzantine monasticism.There was actually a vacuum of 500 years after the Great Schism and before any of the unions. Surprisingly, this is when most of what we recognize as the faith is today developed and “finalized”, for the lack of a better term.
That sounds really nice and I know there’s this wish to purge all the Eastern churches of Latinizations. But realistically, people love the devotions and there’s only so much purging you can do before you insult or hurt people.The Latin concept of devotion is alien to the East and any devotion you find in the East is a Latinization.