A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
I don’t think you should ignore it!
- Status
S
smad0142
Guest
That rhetorical question was not meant for you Alex.
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
A
Aramis
Guest
TheMonk,
It’s well known that the Maronite liturgy as promulgated during the 20th Century has latinizations present; the Maronite Synod itself has acknowledged this. Therefore, to say that your monastery holds no latinizations sounds erroneous, as the Maronite liturgy as promulgated is pubicly admitted to have some already.
Further, some additional ones have crept in since VII into common Maronite praxis (in full view of the common people).
The most visible are (1) the use of Western style chasubles, which seems to be going away, (2) versus populem during the anaphora (which seems to be a new one to the Maronites since V II), (3) the lack of the traditional Syriac Curtain.
But there are other, less visible ones, which even the Maronite synod has not come to full agreement on whether they constitute Latinization, authentic development, both at once, or something else entirely.
It’s well known that the Maronite liturgy as promulgated during the 20th Century has latinizations present; the Maronite Synod itself has acknowledged this. Therefore, to say that your monastery holds no latinizations sounds erroneous, as the Maronite liturgy as promulgated is pubicly admitted to have some already.
Further, some additional ones have crept in since VII into common Maronite praxis (in full view of the common people).
The most visible are (1) the use of Western style chasubles, which seems to be going away, (2) versus populem during the anaphora (which seems to be a new one to the Maronites since V II), (3) the lack of the traditional Syriac Curtain.
But there are other, less visible ones, which even the Maronite synod has not come to full agreement on whether they constitute Latinization, authentic development, both at once, or something else entirely.
C
ciero
Guest
If those claiming to be from this monastery really are from this monastery…I dont think I’d want anything to do with them. 
S
smad0142
Guest
Ciero it would be nice to see what your objections are to some EC Patriarchs, Martyrs and Saints who favored Adoration.
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
Actually, from the true Orthodox POV, the greatest Latinization is really being in union with Rome and accepting it as NOT being in heresy over the Filioque and the Papacy especially.
This is why those who favour the title “Orthodox in communion with Rome” sound so very ridiculous in Orthodox ears.
Or so my Orthodox acquaintances, including not a few clergy, have related to me.
Bl. Basil Velichkovsky in his memoirs talked about the Orthodox in Volyn who joined the UGCC.
He asked them NOT to kneel for Communion etc. etc. as this would give a very bad impression of “enforced Latinization” to the Orthodox looking on.
“But what could I do?” wrote the Hieromartyr. “My converts knelt all the more when I told them to stay standing, loved the Stations of the Cross and Eucharistic Adoration . . . there was nothing I could do to stop them.”
My great-uncle, Archbishop Volodymyr Sterniuk C.Ss.R. succeeded Bl Basil as head of the underground UGCC and he too had similar “problems!”
Alex
T
The_Monk
Guest
Cicero: you sound very angry. Over what? The above quote. Referring to a priest as “this guy”. You didn’t answer any of the questions posed. If they are not factual, then say so. Just what spiritual direction are you getting? The Desert Fathers always urged one to be non-judgmental, even with those one disagreed with. They also counseled one to wage war against one’s own defects, not to engage in a crusade to “purify” the church from supposed Latinizations.If those claiming to be from this monastery really are from this monastery…I dont think I’d want anything to do with them.
It seems that your Orthodox sensibilities were upset. I’ve seen this anger before from Orthodox that I know. Its ultimate source appears to be the Caesaro-Papism for which the Orthodox are famous. The Church is not simply the religious or spiritual extension of the ethnos, but the Body of Christ. That is why we pray in the Creed, "I believe in ONE, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. " We don’t say, “I believe in MANY AUTOCEPHALOUS CHURCHES.”
Again: how do you define “Orthodox in communion with Rome”?
T
The_Monk
Guest
Well stated, Alex. Being in union with the Successor of St. Peter is the ultimate Latinization of which we are guilty.
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
Bless me a sinner, Father!
And, as they say, once you let one Latinization in, many more come rolling in, like a torrent!
For me, the term “Orthodox in communion with Rome” suggests an Eastern Catholic who strives hard to imitate his or her Orthodox counterparts in every which way, devotionally, theologically etc., SAVE for the difference that he or she is “with Rome” understood in a looser way than that of the Latin Catholic’s relationship to Rome.
I"ve no problem, for the most part, with that definition. However, I don’t believe that the EC Churches should not grow and develop.
Some might say that anything that approximates a Latin “thing” is not a proper “organic form of ecclesial/devotional development.”
Growth and development often takes from what is in one’s immediate environs based on either rational judgement calls (“this practice is a good one, let’s adopt it”) or on emotive grounds (“I/our people love this devotion, so we should adopt it”).
St Seraphim of Sarov prayed before an Italianate icon of the Mother of God, making it the most famous icon of Russia, especially during the communist years. He prayed the Rosary as well.
St Dmitri of Rostov, St Peter Mohyla and others adopted many RC devotions via Paris and Rome as a way to OPPOSE what they saw was the real “Latinization” - leaving the Eastern Orthodox Church for Roman Catholicism.
St Tikhon of Zadonsk had life-size images of a Way of the Cross in his cell, advocated frequent Holy Communion and assiduous reading of the New Testament, as well as continual praying of the Jesus Prayer.
Also, what is “Latin” is also always in a state of flux. There are various devotional strands of Latin prayer forms, some which replace others etc.
Bl. John Paul the Great himself practiced the Jesus Prayer, loved serving Eastern Liturgies and read the works of Eastern saints such as St Theophan the Recluse.
There is more than one spirituial fountain and we may drink deeply of one another’s waters. They all give the nourishment and spiritual refreshment that makes the life in Christ fulfilling and exciting.
Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,
Alex
T
The_Monk
Guest
Alex,
You have written well on your previous posts. I have many Ukrainian Catholic friends and feel a special kinship with them. Ukrainian Catholics and Maronite Catholics have suffered much throughout history because of their fidelity to the See of Peter. In my mind, Ukrainian Catholics deserved an especially high place in the Kingdom of Heaven because of what they have suffered and continue to suffer from the “Ecumenitis” currently in vogue. I pray that Pope Benedict grants the Ukrainians a Patriarchate.
Historically, the Maronites have had close connections with the French and thereby have been more influenced by the Latins then perhaps the other Eastern Churches. I too am saddened that our Liturgy is done in the versus populum orientation, which to me is a break with Eastern tradition, both Catholic and Orthodox. I pray that we go back to versus Domini. Versus Populum, incidentally, is not a “Latinization” since the traditional Roman Rite never had it. It is a “Modernization” since its inspiration comes from the European “Enlightenment” and not traditional liturgical theology. In the meantime, I obey the Church’s authority.
I greatly admired your former Metropolitan Sheptiscky , archbishop of L’viv. My apologies if I spelled his name wrong.
You have written well on your previous posts. I have many Ukrainian Catholic friends and feel a special kinship with them. Ukrainian Catholics and Maronite Catholics have suffered much throughout history because of their fidelity to the See of Peter. In my mind, Ukrainian Catholics deserved an especially high place in the Kingdom of Heaven because of what they have suffered and continue to suffer from the “Ecumenitis” currently in vogue. I pray that Pope Benedict grants the Ukrainians a Patriarchate.
Historically, the Maronites have had close connections with the French and thereby have been more influenced by the Latins then perhaps the other Eastern Churches. I too am saddened that our Liturgy is done in the versus populum orientation, which to me is a break with Eastern tradition, both Catholic and Orthodox. I pray that we go back to versus Domini. Versus Populum, incidentally, is not a “Latinization” since the traditional Roman Rite never had it. It is a “Modernization” since its inspiration comes from the European “Enlightenment” and not traditional liturgical theology. In the meantime, I obey the Church’s authority.
I greatly admired your former Metropolitan Sheptiscky , archbishop of L’viv. My apologies if I spelled his name wrong.
C
ciero
Guest
I’m glad the Ecumenical Patriarch is not in this camp!
I had lunch with Pat. Bartholomew when I was in Constantinople a few years ago. He stated to me how important it is for us Greek Catholics to be Orthodox in communion with Rome…and to do this by living Orthodox lives and Orthodox praxis fully and authentically while remaining in communion with the Pope.
C
ciero
Guest
Smad…as I have said over and over to you…my problem is not with Eucharistic Adoration per say.
As a Greek Catholic IMO we have an obligation ( as Rome has been telling us since Vatican II as well as a number of our bishops) to re-cliam and preserve our patrimony WITHOUT Latinizations. Even if SOME Orthodox have picked up these same Latinizations.
We Eastern catholics by being in communion with Rome have a duty to follow the directions of Rome (or why be in communion with them?). I believe one of the biggest witnesses we as eastern catholics have to the Orthodox is that Orthodoxy CAN be lived in communion with Rome, and that if and when they do come into communion with Rome they need not fear that they too will be Latinized. So once again I will say I have no real problem with these Latin traditions within the Latin church…but they do become problematic when we try to incorporate them into the other eastern churches.
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
Bless Father!
I am deeply blessed and privileged by your spiritual words of wisdom. I pray that I may one day visit your Holy Monastery and meet you in person!
Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,
Alex
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
There are great Orthodox leaders, such as His All-Holiness, who sees a kinship in those EC’s who emphasize the Eastern Church’s traditions.I’m glad the Ecumenical Patriarch is not in this camp!
I had lunch with Pat. Bartholomew when I was in Constantinople a few years ago. He stated to me how important it is for us Greek Catholics to be Orthodox in communion with Rome…and to do this by living Orthodox lives and Orthodox praxis fully and authentically while remaining in communion with the Pope.
If he is not offended by the term, “Orthodox in communion with Rome,” then I applaud him.
But he would be in a minority.
From the Orthodox POV, when one is in communion with an heretical body of any kind, one ceases to be “Orthodox.” Actually, that is a very true and valid principle.
His All-Holiness was doubtless using the term “Orthodox” in terms of “Orthodox ethos” which I have heard Orthodox theology professors use when speaking about the Uni . . . ah, Eastern Catholics.
Three times in my life, I have opposed the use of “Orthodox in communion with Rome” on prayerbook publications a group I belong to wanted to use.
All three times I have been personally thanked by Orthodox Christians who knew of it for doing so.
The point is, we EC’s can call ourselves what we like. I would rather NOT give offense to my Orthodox brothers and sisters in this way if I don’t have to.
Alex
C
ciero
Guest
My experience is quite different. Most of the Orthodox I come in contact with (mostly abroad in traditional Orthodox countries) see us Uniates as Orthodox, and do not see the Catholic church as a heretical body. In Romania, Greece yes even on the Holy Mountain, Russia and throughout the Middle East MOST Orthodox I have had contact with (no small number) see the catholic church as their Western brethren and also pary for the day of re union. That is not to say that these Orthodox don’t see problems in the Latin church…but the problems are considered surmountable.
I have said many times…I see a BIG difference in the attitude of Orthodox who live in a place where Orthodoxy is the majority and not a small minority as here in north America.
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
Well, to be the devil’s advocate here, how are we truly “Orthodox” when we acknowledge that the Filioque is not a heresy (otherwise, why would we be in communion with Rome).
Are we really not “under Rome” rather than “in communion with” it? Are we really just like the Orthodox autocephalous Churches in this regard? If we are, I must have missed the press release!
Can our churches canonize their own saints like the Orthodox do? Any recently?
You mean there are no problems with having married priests?
And then there is the matter of papal jurisdictional primacy. Do you mean we recognize that (have we any choice in the matter?), but pretend it is otherwise?
I think pretending is great fun. But it doesn’t speak to the realities of actual praxis.
The Orthodox are who they are because they are themselves. This is why the adoption of this or that Latin practice in Orthodoxy doesn’t threaten them - their Orthodox ecclesial praxis is established.
It is because we are NOT in the same situation that we are NOT Orthodox and so we tend to bicker about what the Orthodox would consider to be irrelevant issues such as Eucharistic Adoration.
We should wake up to the fact that there is no such thing as “Orthodox in communion with Rome” … unless we wish to engage in more pretending.
I am not against Orthodoxy. I have only learned to recognize it where it actually does exist. The rest is just pretending.
Alex
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
C
ciero
Guest
Alex…I believe that this attitude is what keeps us Uniates.
Until we except for ourselves that we are Orthodox…we never will be. I couldn’t tell you how many Orthodox I know wish they had the structure that we have in Rome. Talk to anyone in the OCA lately?
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
Well, look, I’m not infallible - only Ukrainian!Alex…I believe that this attitude is what keeps us Uniates.
Until we except for ourselves that we are Orthodox…we never will be. I couldn’t tell you how many Orthodox I know wish they had the structure that we have in Rome. Talk to anyone in the OCA lately?
I see we’re talking at two levels here. Yes, I agree with you that we need to see ourselves as “Orthodox” in terms of liturgy, theological traditions and the like.
At the same time, we don’t need to go on “Latin-hunts” when these things are also shared by the Orthodox. Adoration of the Eucharist won’t make us more or less “Orthodox.” It has nothing to do with that. In fact, I believe such Adoration was made explicit in the Orthodox Confession of Dositheus (against the Calvinists).
In terms of structure, I don’t know about you, but the UGCC is trying to establish her own Patriarchal Synod’s authority.
If the OCA are jealous of what we “Uniates” have in Rome - they are more than welcome to it!
I also believe that we need not offend our Orthodox “brothers and sisters” (some of them don’t consider us “friends”).
In my experience, Ukrainian Orthodox don’t like UGCCers calling themselves “Orthodox” period. Neither do the Russians.
If yours is different, then more power to you, Big Guy!!
Alex
- Status