Latinizations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahimsa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
chrisb said:
How can one make this statement? Have you personal experienced ‘every personal devotion’? How can you state something with no practical means of validating it? 🤷

This seems more ‘emotive’ than anything…
Click to expand...
In his defense, he did add an “IMO.” 👍 That’s what brother John is drawn to, who are we to challenge what he’s devoted to so long as it isn’t heresy?

Alloho minokhoun,
Andrew
 
A few comments, speaking from a Byzantine Catholic perspective:

The Rosary is a Latin devotion. That is not to say it is not a fine prayer, but to deny that it was born in the Latin Church or that its prayer forms are Latin is as foolish as saying the Mass isn’t Latin but is Universal. The Byzantine tradition does not make use of the Apostles Creed but uses the Nicene Creed exclusively and the Our Father and the Hail Mary (Angelic Salutation) have different forms:

Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be
thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth
as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who
trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from evil. For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory, Father + Son, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and forever. Amen.

Hail, Mother of God, Virgin Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb; for you gave birth to Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of our souls.

Is it a Latinization if an Eastern Catholics use it? It depends. If it replaces the Divine Office, the Akathist, or Canons of the Theotokos yes, especailly since private devotion cannot be compared with the official Liturgical Prayer of the Church. If it is intergrated into ones prayer life without displacing anything else, then no. Unfortunately, those who are attached to it often seek to have it recited publically before Liturgy which is wrong because this is properly the time for Matins and/or the First and Third Hours or an Akathist or a Canon as all these are traditionally part of the rule of preparation for receiving Holy Communion and are officially prescribed by the Liturgical Books of the Byzantine tradition.

St. Seraphim didn’t pray the Rosary. He prayed 150 Byzantine Angelic Salutations on a chotki or lestovka, comparible to but not the same as the Dominican Rosary.

Fr. Deacon Lance
 
Deacon_Lance said:
A few comments, speaking from a Byzantine Catholic perspective:

The Rosary is a Latin devotion. That is not to say it is not a fine prayer, but to deny that it was born in the Latin Church or that its prayer forms are Latin is as foolish as saying the Mass isn’t Latin but is Universal. The Byzantine tradition does not make use of the Apostles Creed but uses the Nicene Creed exclusively and the Our Father and the Hail Mary (Angelic Salutation) have different forms:

Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be
thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth
as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who
trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from evil. For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory, Father + Son, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and forever. Amen.

Hail, Mother of God, Virgin Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb; for you gave birth to Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of our souls.

Is it a Latinization if an Eastern Catholics use it? It depends. If it replaces the Divine Office, the Akathist, or Canons of the Theotokos yes, especailly since private devotion cannot be compared with the official Liturgical Prayer of the Church. If it is intergrated into ones prayer life without displacing anything else, then no. Unfortunately, those who are attached to it often seek to have it recited publically before Liturgy which is wrong because this is properly the time for Matins and/or the First and Third Hours or an Akathist or a Canon as all these are traditionally part of the rule of preparation for receiving Holy Communion and are officially prescribed by the Liturgical Books of the Byzantine tradition.

St. Seraphim didn’t pray the Rosary. He prayed 150 Byzantine Angelic Salutations on a chotki or lestovka, comparible to but not the same as the Dominican Rosary.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Click to expand...
Many Years Father!
 
Hesychios said:
OK, I’ll share. I don’t feel smug and giddy.

I don’t personally know any Latins who recite an Akathist hymn of any sort. I am sure there are some, I just don’t know of them. It would be interesting to see some Pope make the Akathist a universal devotion, but that just doesn’t happen very often.

I am pretty sure the sign of the cross was introduced from the east, but that’s about it. I don’t feel smug about that either.

You make a good facilitator. 🙂
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict XIV granted on May 4, 1746 an indulgence to Catholics, for each recitation of the Hymn.

(see legionofmarytidewater.com/blog/2006/06/pray-the-akathist-daily)

Pope John Paul II asked western orders to make the Akathyst a part of their devotions. At the Pontifical college in the US, it is chanted at least annually.
 
Harpazo said:
In his defense, he did add an “IMO.”
Click to expand...
Touché.

Plus I have to admit that this discussion hasn’t turned into an endless cycle of “The rosary is the best … No it isn’t … Yes it is …” etc. like I thought I would. (I guess I’ve gotten a little jaded and/or pessimistic. :o)
 
My Church still has a few of the Latinizations mentioned above including: priest facing people, first communion and chrismation are delayed, suppression of liturgical hours.

We(Maronites) use the liturgy of St. James so some of your others examples do not really apply to us.
 
jimmy said:
My Church still has a few of the Latinizations mentioned above including: priest facing people, first communion and chrismation are delayed, suppression of liturgical hours.

We(Maronites) use the liturgy of St. James so some of your others examples do not really apply to us.
Click to expand...
Interesting… thats a “latinization” we Latins are struggling with, as well.
 
belgianwaffles9 said:
Interesting… thats a “latinization” we Latins are struggling with, as well.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is strange. I think the problem with us though is that the west changed its direction of worship and the Maronites immediately followed. The Maronites are now trying to remove latinizations but it will take a long time.
 
jimmy said:
Yes, that is strange. I think the problem with us though is that the west changed its direction of worship and the Maronites immediately followed. The Maronites are now trying to remove latinizations but it will take a long time.
Click to expand...
All of the rubrics in both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms of the Latin Rites assume the priest is facing the same way as the people.

Hopefully we will soon be rid of this “facing the people” nonsense, in any rite.
 
belgianwaffles9 said:
All of the rubrics in both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms of the Latin Rites assume the priest is facing the same way as the people.

Hopefully we will soon be rid of this “facing the people” nonsense, in any rite.
Click to expand...
I recently heard Mass at the Feast of the Transfiguration where the Priest was facing east but I found it odd when he was saying “Peace be with you” toward the congregation while facing away from them. How can this be addressed? Should the Priest had, for that moment only, turned around to offer peace? 🤷
 
chrisb said:
I recently heard Mass at the Feast of the Transfiguration where the Priest was facing east but I found it odd when he was saying “Peace be with you” toward the congregation while facing away from them. How can this be addressed? Should the Priest had, for that moment only, turned around to offer peace? 🤷
Click to expand...
yes; the missal states that the priest turns to the congregation to say that.
 
jimmy said:
My Church still has a few of the Latinizations mentioned above including: priest facing people, first communion and chrismation are delayed, suppression of liturgical hours.
Click to expand...
Yes. Even though I’m aware of the Maronite Church being very latinized – including inserting the filioque into the creed – it’s still surprising that you have liturgy versus populum. After all, even in the Latin Church that’s only been around for, what, 4 decades?
 
jimmy said:
My Church still has a few of the Latinizations mentioned above including: priest facing people, first communion and chrismation are delayed, suppression of liturgical hours.
Click to expand...
Does the Maronite Church at least follow the traditional order (baptism, chrismation, eucharist)?
 
Peter_J said:
Does the Maronite Church at least follow the traditional order (baptism, chrismation, eucharist)?
Click to expand...
Actually I should correct what I said. First communion is delayed. Chrismation is done at the time of baptism I think.

It is strange that we do versus populum. I gues that shows how truely latinized we are. When the latins allowed the option of versus populum within the western liturgy the Maronites conformed to the ways of the west. I think they need a little pride in who they are.
 
Peter_J said:
Yes. Even though I’m aware of the Maronite Church being very latinized – including inserting the filioque into the creed – it’s still surprising that you have liturgy versus populum. After all, even in the Latin Church that’s only been around for, what, 4 decades?
Click to expand...
They do because I’ve attended a Maronite Liturgy as a Lebanese Parish is a mile away from my house.

I did enjoy the Liturgy though regardless. :o
 
jimmy said:
Actually I should correct what I said. First communion is delayed. Chrismation is done at the time of baptism I think.

It is strange that we do versus populum. I gues that shows how truely latinized we are. When the latins allowed the option of versus populum within the western liturgy the Maronites conformed to the ways of the west. I think they need a little pride in who they are.
Click to expand...
Also, if I recall correctly, the Latin practice of communion before chrismation predates versus populum – though only by a few decades, so maybe that’s not really a factor.
 
p.s. Now that I think about, I guess it makes a lot of sense the way events unfolded. What I mean is, Latin Catholics were already doing things differently than Maronites in regard to baptism and chrismation/confirmation (having them at two different times vs. at the same time). So then when 20th century Latins started doing chrismations after first communion, there was no reason for the Maronites to follow suit (such a change would make no sense unless they first adopted the Latin practice of having baptism and chrismation at separate times).
 
Just a comment:

No curtain behind the Royal Doors is NOT a latinization, per se.

It is a Russification.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top