Maronite Church: Knowledge, Encouragement, and Prayer

[yeshua]

Peace and God Bless, everyone,

I know that it is tiring for many to read my posts on Maronite identity. Know that my zeal comes from a wish for awareness on a tradition that is, in my opinion, fading. Right now, discussions are being had and talks are, supposedly, undergoing to return to tradition.

Before I show you the tragedy of the tradition, I want to give a heartfelt explanation on why this is important. It is so very easy to look down on the Maronites for upholding what they practice now, and granted, a lot of it is needed to fuel these discussions. However, the return to orthodoxy for the Maronites is important for not just themselves, but for other Catholics and Orthodox brothers alike.

The universality of the Church, Catholic and Orthodox, is important to each respective institution, by there own definitions. Yet for the Catholics, this is now a very important wish. The Catholic communion now comprises more than one church, and its modern revelation towards cultivating there idea of universal faith is something that I believe is becoming more honest. The will of Vatican II showed the Latins and the Eastern Catholic community this willingness. In order to meet that expectation, Rome is needed, but not just her clergy, but laity. The common observer needs to accept that what has happened to the Maronites is a tragedy, and accept that Latinizations are harmful. Know that removing them from the tradition is not rejecting them as valid. For those Latins who acknowledge this, I thank you, for those who don’t, please learn, read the history and what I have presented below, and see that these are atrocities and not merely unfortunate actions of a few priests and bishops here and there. How are we supposed to return to our traditions when our Latin brothers refuse to acknowledge the part that was played by their ancestors? We must move on, see the problem so it can be corrected, and pursue the true meaning of being the Universal Church.

 

[yeshua]

(continued)

As for the Eastern Orthodox, we are important to you as well. Yes, we are a tradition separate from not only your communion, but ritual practice. But remember our heritage, when there were Christians of separate tradition, not separate communions. We were once your brothers in faith, keepers of Orthodoxy in what is our homeland at the time. We shared a noble and ancient rite practiced by all Western Antiochean Christians, and provided an example of monastic orthodoxy that St. John Chrysostom recognized of our patron father. Remember the time when Syriac, Byzantine, Coptic, and Latin flourished by one another. The Orthodox keep proudly their history, but do not forget that we are a part of it. Circumstances of either theological or political isolated the Maronites from the rest of the Eastern peoples, and the communion between them was lost. There is hope that encouraging, rather than discouraging, the Maronite tradition might be encouragement for East and West relations. Granted, the role of the Uniates is gone and offensive to the Orthodox, an opinion I myself agree with the Orthodox on. Yet this is different. If the Maronites can reclaim tradition on their own accord and will, and if Rome will live up to her word, this example could serve for increased hope to reunion between communions. Idealistic, probably, a stretch, probably as well, but our return to tradition will be the tradition that our brothers shared the Eucharist in, before unfortunate history took it’s toll. Is that not a goal worth encouraging and learning?

And now I will show you what needs to be seen, what has to be reversed in order to live up to the expectations we as Maronites should have, the expectations other Catholics should accept, and the expectations that the Orthodox should admire.

 

[yeshua]

The following is an excerpt from an article written by Pierre-Edmond Gemayel. I believe this listing provides the best summary of Liturgical Latinization I have seen.

The Mass
Roman Liturgy and thought have progressively influenced the Maronite Mass. The First edition of the Maronite misssal published in Rome in 1592-94 was primarily concerned with the form of the eucharistic prayer. Instead of considering the eucharistic consecration as proper to the whole prayer, as the oriental tradition would have it, this edition emphasized the Institution Narrative at the expense of the consecratory sense of the Epiclesis. The result was an institution narrative translated literally from the Roman Mass into Syriac and inserted into the Maronite eucharistic prayer. The translation depended so heavily on the original Latin Narrative that the five words “Hoc est enim corpus meum” and “Hic est enim calix sanguinis…” were rendered in parallel Syriac words of equal number, whereas the natural tendency of the Semitic language would be to translate the five words by three. The Epiclesis itself was completely changed so as to avoid any danger of a consecratory epiclesis.

When the patriarch and bishops were gathered in synod, they rejected this first edition “which changed tradition.” The papal legate, the Jesuit Dandini, convinced the bishops in another synod held at the Patriarchate in 1596 that the “Roman edition” was only temporary and that there would be a return to the former tradition. However, 120 years passed before a second edition was published (1716); it contained no changed in the translation of the Institution Narrative. As a matter of fact, the first translation has continued to be used up to the present time, even in the reformed Missal designated “ad experimentum” by the bishops in 1973-74. Furthermore, in 1974, due to the irony of fate or history,

In addition to this Romanization of the Maronite Mass, we should mention the translation and adaptation of the Roman Canon called “anaphora.” Originally “the Anaphora,” the form used by the vast majority of priests. Fortunately, the recently reformed Missal has dropped this Canon.

 

[yeshua]

Other details on the Latinization of the Mass include the following:

• liturgical vestments: As early as the period of the Crusades the Maronites received Roman liturgical vestments. Latinization, though gradual, was almost total. The Roman chasuble as well as the surplice were being worn in all the churches; today, sentiment favors a return to Maronite liturgical vestments that resemble very closely those of Syrian Orthodox Church.
• unleavened bread and communion under the single species of bread: Ever since the Crusades, Rome has required the use of unleavened bread, although enforcement of this law only dates back to the 17th century. Communion under both species gradually disappeared during the same century.
• liturgical gestures: In particular, genuflection, “modo latinorum,” was introduced into the Mass during the 17th century.
• liturgical language: Syriac translation in the liturgy paralleled the Latin texts. However, all translations into the vernacular were stopped when the Synod of Lebanon in 1736 applied the principles stated in the Council of Trent.

Sacraments and Sacraments
Suffice it to say that, as the second half of the 17th century, the ancient Maronite ritual was abandoned, little by little, and replaced by a translation of the Roman missal. It is only since 1942 that the ancient Maronite Ritual has been reinstated for the use in administering the sacraments. As for the Sacramental Ritual, it still remains a mixture of ancient Maronite and Latin formulations introduced over the years. Certain purely Latin rites are actually regarded by people as specifically “Maronite,” for example the imposition of ashes on the first day of lent.

 

[yeshua]

Liturgical Year
The Maronites adopted the Liturgical Year of Antioch which follows a weekly cycle devoted to the unfolding of the life of Christ. Beginning with the first coming of Christ (Advent-Christmas), it ends with His second coming (the Exhalation of the Cross in September), with Easter, naturally, as the high-point. To this temporal cycle the Roman calendar added all the monthly devotions: the month of the rosary (October), the month of St. Joseph (March), the month of Mary (May), the month of the Sacred Heart (june). Besides these monthly devotions there are also some special novenas.

Sacred art
Maronite churches had their own style of architecture, although it greatly resembled that of the Syrian churches. Because of storms, exile and misery, these churches were reduced to simple houses of prayer. Latin taste was especially influential with regard to church interiors: the replacement of the icon by an image, the multiplication of images, the introduction of statues, the arrangement of the alter facing the wall, confessionals etc.

Other
The following items were not discussed in the article, but are yet pronounced and popular Latinizations:

• The priest facing the congregation during Holy Qorbono: became popular in the West after Vatican II. Patriarch Cardinal Mar Sfeir has stated that the decision to face the congregation or not is left to the individual bishops.
• The words “who was crucified for us” was suppressed in the Trisagon, Holy Chrism is constructed from Latin formulas, Holy Communion is to not be given to little children (seems to be subject to geographical area, and was once enforced by Rome in the past).
• The inclusion of the filioque, though also enforced by Popes, however no longer officially enforced.

Conclusion
What I have shown here is an abstraction of the consequences of Maronite history since her official reunion with Rome in the 11 century. If so desired, I have a detailed article of the history of the Latinization of the Church, I will gladly email a copy; it is very thorough, and is quite fair. The above article was published again in 1974, originally written in 1965, how much has changed since then? Where is the Maronite Church going?

I am sorry if my intent has been confusing. The Maronite Church, while beautiful, is anything but orthodox to her tradition, and those of Beit Maroun now believe traditions which are not authentically theirs. We have to be honest about the Maronites, not blind ourselves with those few elements that make it authentically Syriac. The Maronite Trademark, Aramaic words of Institution are not even Syriac tradition, simply translated from Latin Missals! But we also have to recognize that however invisible it may be, there is no a greater chance than ever to change these tragedies. So please, encouragement, knowledge, and prayers, that is all I ask.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[Reader_Arsenios]

Yeshua, thank-you for this long and sad tale of woe as your Church was slowly swallowed by the Latins, promises not kept, and on and on… The Orthodox remain uncompromising in their relations with Rome, and what has happened with your Church is exactly what we will not allow to happen to Orthodoxy…

You mentioned that your clergy is the most adamant in clinging to the Latinization that has occurred… I wonder if your clergy are mostly trained in Latin institutions, or at least the ones elevated to positions of control [bishops]…

What is Rome’s position relative to your Church now? Do they simply want you to become another Roman Archdiocese with no Maronite Tradition at all??? Has it really been an ongoing “Creeping Latinization” of your Church from the very beginnings of communion with Rome in the 11th century?

Please send me the whole article…

Arsenios

 

[Genesis315]

While I am all for the Maronites returning to their liturgical roots if they so desire, I think we have to make sure we don’t fall into the over-zealousness that all things Latin are bad–antiLatinism can’t be the replacement for Latinization–just like we shouldn’t think that all things Eastern are bad. Likewise, sharing of our treasures is not necessarily a bad thing either. We are all members of one Body–we’re not federation of completely independent churches.

 

[yeshua]

While I am all for the Maronites returning to their liturgical roots if they so desire, I think we have to make sure we don’t fall into the over-zealousness that all things Latin are bad–antiLatinism can’t be the replacement for Latinization–just like we shouldn’t think that all things Eastern are bad.

Which is why I stated that removing Latinizations does not denounce their validity as Latin traditions. There are not, however, Syriac-Maronite traditions that Vatican II encourage the Maronites to pursue, are foreign, and should rightly be removed. I do not think you have anything to fear of antilatinism; these are Maronites we are discussing.

Likewise, sharing of our treasures is not necessarily a bad thing either. We are all members of one Body.

What traditions has Rome adopted from this “sharing?” Would you call all that is above sharing? I promise I am not being sarcastic, I would love to understand your point of view, that is all.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[yeshua]

The Orthodox remain uncompromising in their relations with Rome, and what has happened with your Church is exactly what we will not allow to happen to Orthodoxy…

All the more reason for Orthodox prayer and encouragement for the Maronite people. Thank you.

You mentioned that your clergy is the most adamant in clinging to the Latinization that has occurred… I wonder if your clergy are mostly trained in Latin institutions, or at least the ones elevated to positions of control [bishops]…

The Papal Legate personally sent to the Maronites to enforce the decisions of Trent decided to create a Maronite College in Rome. This institution became the seminary for Maronites. They were taught Latinized Maronite services, devotional, and culture, often time using these priests to translate Latin Missals into Syriac. The same was done for the Coptic Catholics, as it worked remarkably well for the Lebanese Christians, however, the Coptics were less welcoming of these priests. Thus tradition was redefined and taught as tradition and brought back to the homeland as authentic. Examples would be Ash Monday, the Rosary, intinction, the Maronite staple of the Aramaic words of institution. Today, many Maronite priests are trained by Maronite seminaries, many still in Rome, but these “traditions” are deep set that nobody knows or was willing to do otherwise. Supposedly, the Maronite Synod is to address these issues.

What is Rome’s position relative to your Church now? Do they simply want you to become another Roman Archdiocese with no Maronite Tradition at all??? Has it really been an ongoing “Creeping Latinization” of your Church from the very beginnings of communion with Rome in the 11th century?

I do not know where the Maronite people are going. It is in our hands now, and if my impression from the West is anything to make of it, I am deeply saddened.

Yes, Latinization has occurred since the time of the Crusades, the article I have is chronological, showing the use of Papal letters, decrees and legates to enforce the Latin traditions. I need to find a means to scan the article and then I will send it off to those interested. However, this is not a means to attack the Roman Church, simply a honest and unclouded look at the truth of a very tragic history.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[Genesis315]

What traditions has Rome adopted from this “sharing?” Would you call all that is above sharing? I promise I am not being sarcastic, I would love to understand your point of view, that is all.

Peace and God Bless.

Oh, I don’t know–probably not a lot yet (if any). But, that’s my point. I think it would be a good thing. I agree that forcing certain traditions was probably not the best idea–but I also think erecting walls so that there can be no “cross pollination” is also a bad idea. This cross-pollination helped the Church and the particular churches to really bloom for centuries–until probably the Great Schism when both sides became paranoid about the other side’s traditions.

Honestly, I have never been in a Maronite church, so I am not sure how similar they are to other Eastern or Oriental Catholic churches–but for example, I think it’s great to see icons in Roman churches and to see Roman catholics pray the Jesus prayer and likewise to see Eastern Catholics embrace the Rosary (saying that might get me in trouble in these parts! ) If this is the movement of the Holy Spirit, and not something forced artificially, then how can it be bad?

 

[Reader_Arsenios]

Yes, Latinization has occurred since the time of the Crusades, the article I have is chronological, showing the use of Papal letters, decrees and legates to enforce the Latin traditions. I need to find a means to scan the article and then I will send it off to those interested. However, this is not a means to attack the Roman Church, simply a honest and unclouded look at the truth of a very tragic history.

Peace and God Bless.

My Brother, the heaviness in your heart is palpable…

You have my prayers, and my promise to NOT use your pain to attack the Roman Church…

The history is lamentable…

Arsenios

 

[yeshua]

Oh, I don’t know–probably not a lot yet. But, that’s my point. I think it would be a good thing. I agree that forcing certain traditions was probably not the best idea–but I also think erecting walls so that there can be no “cross pollination” is also a bad idea. This cross–pollination helped to the Church and the particular churches to really bloom–until probably the Great Schism when both sides were paranoid about the other side’s traditions.

I think what you believe is noble. However, as always, it comes down to how these traditions operate within the given theological context. This is the exact conflict for Eastern Catholics in what to believe.

Honestly, I have never been in a Maronite church, so I am not sure how similar they are to other Eastern or Oriental Catholic churches–but for example, I think it’s great to see icons in Roman churches and to see Roman catholics pray the Jesus prayer and likewise to see Eastern Catholics embrace the Rosary (saying that might get me in trouble in these parts! ) If this is the movement of the Holy Spirit, and not something forced artificially, then how can it be bad?

OK, I can give an example, as it also deals with your first paragraph. I know I have mentioned this in I think two other threads, but here it is applicable.

In the first paragraph on the Mass in the article above, it states the following:

Instead of considering the eucharistic consecration as proper to the whole prayer, as the oriental tradition would have it, this edition emphasized the Institution Narrative at the expense of the consecratory sense of the Epiclesis. The result was an institution narrative translated literally from the Roman Mass into Syriac and inserted into the Maronite eucharistic prayer

The epiclesis is tremendously important to Syriac theology, as evidenced by the other Syriac churches and the old Maronite Missal that the Latins had altered. It is reflective of our relationship with God, as during the Anaphora heaven and earth are one and there is no closer point with God than here. This theme is seen in our Mystery of Christmation (also altered by Rome) and the Incarnation. It deals directly with how we interact and are overshadowed by God. It limited the overshadowing to simply the offering, not the people. And the people are very important to the theology, as they are temples with alters (their hearts) themselves; a tradition emphaized by St. Ephrem. This alteration has become Maronite tradition, and the Aramaic words are now used to somehow advertise the Maronite Church’s “orthodoxy.” Now, the Maronite Synod had a chance to remove this and return to tradition, but decided not to. It was, as you call it, an ‘embrace’ of the narrative because it allied them with their Latin brothers; all at the expense of their ancient and noble theology. This is why embracing one another’s traditions is very risky and damaging. To them, an embrace of the words were a sign of their mutual Catholicity, and yet it reduced their own theology and orthodoxy.

I hope this helped, I have other examples if need be.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[Hesychios]

Peace and God Bless, everyone,
…

Yeshua,
Thank you for the magnificent heartfelt testimony.

And no…I never tire of learning about the Antiochian Christians in all of their beautiful traditions, cultural manifestations, spiritual heights and depths, brave histories and surely as well the bittersweet tales.

Thanks for enlightening us!

May God bless you always…

Michael

 

[Catholig]

Yeshua,

I didn’t read all of your posts, however I would like to make a comment.

I don’t mind the maronites or other eastern catholic rites - as long as they hold they same theology, and obey the pope I don’t care if they have a different liturgy. Or a different calendar. In fact - I am planning on attending a Maronite Ordination next month, and possibly a liturgy this Sunday if I can.

One question though is that the Maronites originally broke off the Church because they believed (heretically I think) that Christ only had a divine will and not a human will - if so did St. Maron or St. Rita support this position? And if they did how could they be saints?

Thank you,

Catholig

 

[yeshua]

I don’t mind the maronites or other eastern catholic rites - as long as they hold they same theology, and obey the pope I don’t care if they have a different liturgy. Or a different calendar.

I think we should leave these comments and its potentially heated discussion for another thread. But I would encourage you to read what I have posted.

One question though is that the Maronites originally broke off the Church because they believed (heretically I think) that Christ only had a divine will and not a human will - if so did St. Maron or St. Rita support this position? And if they did how could they be saints?

In all truth and fact, there is nothing that survives of Mar Maroun’s teachings, except that found in the oral tradition passed down in the monasteries. Also, the heresy became popular far after the death of Mar Maroun. Remember, St. John Chrysostom spoke of Mar Maroun very highly, and the Maronites were known for being a bastion of the Catholic Orthodox faith for some time. As for St. Rita, the same, we do not know what either Saint believed.

But this brings up a very valid, and expected, concern. On one hand history says that the Maronites embraced heresy, as accounted by some observers during the time period. In that case, would a return to tradition involve this acceptance of a universally understood heresy? On the other hand we have the position of the Maronite Church, that the Church did not fall into heresy, but was misunderstood, similar semantic claims like those told by Roman Catholics and Coptic Orthodox. In this case, a return to tradition is in line.

In my opinion, the Church honestly believes that they did not ever prescribe to the heresy. With this, they are in commonality with the other Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, and if the semantics issues between the Orientals and Roman Catholics are resolved, there should not be an issue here either. To Maronites, and to their apostolic brothers, they are in tradition with this particular matter, and regardless if the heresy was embraced or not, it is something that is not going to be recalled. And even if the heresy was embraced, in our hindsight it is historically known that the adaptation came far after our patron father and time afterward. A stretch can say we have already returned to tradition in that fashion.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[Ghosty]

Beautiful thread, Yeshua! Let me just say that I’m extremely impressed with the effort you’re putting forth here. You are so patient and charitable just to share the information, but to respond to tough questions as well is simply wonderful!

I look forward to reading what you have to write (I’ve only read the first post and others’ comments and your responses at this point).

I do not think you have anything to fear of antilatinism; these are Maronites we are discussing.

Unfortunately many folks here may not be familiar enough with the Maronites to understand this statement, but it cracked me up! A truer statement has never been made about the Maronites on this forum; anyone who is concerned about anti-Latinism coming from the Beit Maroun can rest assured that you’re more likely to hear it coming from the Vatican.

Don’t confuse reclaimation of authentic (and Apostolic) Maronite-Syriac tradition with an anti-Latin agenda; one of the reasons such a reclaimation is picking up steam at all is because the Vatican has been insisting on it so much (if insistance didn’t repeatedly come from the Pope, I doubt many Maronites would take a reclaimation seriously; thankfully the current Maronite Patriarch seems to know how to mobilize this “push”).

You really don’t get much more Catholic than the Maronites; the tragedy is that in the past this zeal has led to an abandonment of authentic ancient Catholic traditions, traditions we can ALL benefit and learn from; that is a testament (however dark) to the Catholicity of the Maronites; Latins have much more to fear from their own.

I just want to provide one image that might underscore the importance of de-Latinization:

At John Paul II’s funeral several Eastern hierarchs of various non-Latin traditions gathered around his casket and chanted in their own respective languages the funeral rites of their traditions. It was one of the most beautiful moments in a beautiful Liturgy, IMO. If these people had been entirely Latinized, we wouldn’t have the image of a Universal Church coming to pay honor to such a great man and leader of us all. What’s more, we wouldn’t have such a wide base of truly Catholic tradition present, but merely a one-sided and small presentation of our Faith.

The more these Churches are de-Latinized (of course without destroyng the fundamental bond of unity between themselves and Rome, and all the other Catholic Churches), the greater our Communion is, like many different voices joined in a choir.

Peace and God bless!

 

[obadiah]

I have a question about the Eucharistic Bread, does the Maronite Church use the Holy Leaven?

 

[yeshua]

I have a question about the Eucharistic Bread, does the Maronite Church use the Holy Leaven?

Greetings,

No, the Maronites claim their tradition as the West Syriac Tradition (Syriac Orthodox), the Holy Leaven is an East Syriac Tradition (Assyrian).

The traditional Maronite reception of the Eucharist (as in prior to Rome’s mandate of a separation of species and intinction) was like the modern day Syriac Orthodox reception, since the Maronites kept the traditions of the Church of Antioch at the time of their isolation and remained such until the Crusaders first brought in a separation of species.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[obadiah]

Greetings,

No, the Maronites claim their tradition as the West Syriac Tradition (Syriac Orthodox), the Holy Leaven is an East Syriac Tradition (Assyrian).

The traditional Maronite reception of the Eucharist (as in prior to Rome’s mandate of a separation of species and intinction) was like the modern day Syriac Orthodox reception, since the Maronites kept the traditions of the Church of Antioch at the time of their isolation and remained such until the Crusaders first brought in a separation of species.

Peace and God Bless.

If it not too much trouble, do you have access to the Anaphora originally used by your Church before the extensive Latinizations?
Also did your Church use the Liturgy of the Apostles?

 

[yeshua]

If it not too much trouble, do you have access to the Anaphora originally used by your Church before the extensive Latinizations?
Also did your Church use the Liturgy of the Apostles?

Greetings,

I personally do not have access to the Anaphoras, and I do doubt that the original Maronite ones exist. A part of the enforcement by the Council of Trent Papal Legates was the destruction of those Maronite services and liturgical books that did not correspond to the Roman tradition. If you compare a Syriac Orthodox service with a modern Maronite service you can see the effect. Over time, the only acceptable liturgical books became those only issued by Rome and we have today what was done.

The Syriac Orthodox use some of the same Anaphoras (obviously they do not have the Anaphora of St. Sixtus Pope of Rome and such ) and probably in their near original form. They have near 80 anaphoras I believe, the Maronites at one time had as many if not more. I would advise looking up the Syriac Orthodox Anaphoras if you are still interested.

The Liturgy of the Apostles is an East Syriac liturgy.

Peace and God Bless.