Maronites?

[James_2_24]

What’s up with the Maronites? Why is it that their Mass seems so Roman? I spoke to a Deacon in the Melkite Catholic Church once and when I asked him about the Maronites he just laughed and said, “They are western, no longer eastern.”

So what did their liturgy use to look like compared to what it is now?

 

[Angel_Gabriel]

The Maronites are SLOWLY returning to their roots…I’m not a Maronite (although I wish I could be!) but they have adopted alot of Latin customs over the years, such as separating the Sacraments of Initiation. I think because they have been in communion with Rome alot longer than the other Eastern Churches, the Latin customs have had more time to invade the Maronite Liturgy. Also in the USA (I think, I could be wrong here) they have voted to not ordain married men anymore.

 

[Cluny]

One of the biggest burdens Eastern Catholics have labored under is the Western notion that the Roman Church and her rites are ALWAYS inherently superior to anything in the East, and the more an Eastern Church follows Roman praxis, the more “perfect” it is.

Alas, this is a burden that some Eastern Catholics have hastened to impose upon themselves.

Only in the last few decades have the Eastern Catholics–to say nothing about Roman Catholics–been freeing themselves from this foolish bondage.

The Maronite Church as been in active conscious union with Rome the longest of any Eastern Catholic Church. Consequently, it has more centuries of contact, and more opportunity to absorb (or impose) Latin customs.

 

[dzheremi]

I have yet to read any piece of literature on Maronite Church history that does not spend much space analyzing the very harmful effects of Latinization on the Church. May the Maronites be free of all foreign impositions and presuppositions soon. They, along with all of the eastern churches, certainly deserve much better than the treatment they’ve often received at the hands of Roman chauvinists.

 

[Gregory_I]

Actually, the Maronites needed Roman protection from their monophysite and monothelite neighbours, and they began to slowly assimilate Roman Practices on their own to distinguish them from the heretics surrounding them. They did it to themselves, it was not a “latinization.”

How LATINIZED are the Armenians, who have similar vestments, no Iconostasis, etc.

The maronites have a Distinct liturgy, distinct vestments, distinct iconography (where employed) and distinct liturgical language (The anaphoras or at least consecration or always in syriac/Aramaic).

I think if they just refined their church architecture and turned their altars back around they’d be more or less “Free.”

 

[Aramis]

How LATINIZED are the Armenians, who have similar vestments, no Iconostasis, etc.

Given that the Armenians look the same both Catholic and Orthodox…

 

[SyroMalankara]

A non-latinized Maronite Church would be the Syriac Catholic Church (which is itself somewhat latinized outside its homeland). The reason why the Maronites are so latinized is that they were influenced by the Crusaders in the Middle Ages and the French afterward… it was simply easier for them to assimilate than preserve and look so different from their Latin counterpart.

Thankfully the Maronites are appreciating their uniqueness and returning to authentic Tradition.

 

[malphono]

A non-latinized Maronite Church would be the Syriac Catholic Church (which is itself somewhat latinized outside its homeland).

Well … that’s not fully accurate. It would be like saying that all the Syriac Orthodox are liturgically identical, which of course, they are not.

The reason why the Maronites are so latinized is that they were influenced by the Crusaders in the Middle Ages and the French afterward… it was simply easier for them to assimilate than preserve and look so different from their Latin counterpart.

This is partially true.

Thankfully the Maronites are appreciating their uniqueness and returning to authentic Tradition.

One could only hope but that seems to be wishful thinking. Unfortunately (again as I’ve said in numerous other threads) the current state of the Maronite Church is one of Novus Ordo-inspired neo latinizationsl. And that new wave of latinizations is far more insidious than the “old” one ever was. In the “old” some externals (rubrics, vestments, church appointments, etc) were latinized. (It’s pretty much the same as was the case with the Syro-Malabars and, to a somewhat lesser extent, the Chaldeans.) At the same time, though, the liturgical structure and texts were essentially preserved.

In the “new” wave of latinizations, it’s all fair game. Oh, Syriac-style vestments were restored, but the cuffs are generally ignored. Often even the chalice veil is absent. In general, the liturgy is done versus populum (although in the Patriarchal Territories the option for ad orientem exists and is sometimes used). The structure of the liturgy has been “simplified” (for lack of a better term that I can use here) in such a way as to be only partially recognizable. The texts are in the same sorry state. I could go on and on but would only be repeating more of what I’ve said before.

One has to assume that James_2:24 in the OP was saying that his experience with the Maronites was recent. Which means, that what he saw were the detrimental effects of the Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinizations.

 

[Gregory_I]

Liturgical cross-pollination is normal…the tridentine mass has gallican elements, the gallican mass byzantine elements, the liturgy of st. john chrysostom is basically a paraphrase of the liturgy of st. james, the lhorra stowe missal has roman and celtic and byzantine elements…

there is no regionally pure liturgy, NONE. Possible exception is the liturgy of Mar Addai and Mar Mari.

 

[Cluny]

<<How LATINIZED are the Armenians, who have similar vestments, no Iconostasis, etc.

The maronites have a Distinct liturgy, distinct vestments, distinct iconography (where employed) and distinct liturgical language (The anaphoras or at least consecration or always in syriac/Aramaic).>>

The Armenians, to my knowledge, never had an Iconostas.

This seems to be a feature of the Byzantine and Coptic Churches.

OTOH, the West Syriac Churches (including the Maronite) should have a curtain across the sanctuary.

At one time–and it wasn’t that long ago–Maronites used Latin vestments.

And you’re right. The different churches have always borrowed from each other, sometimes even across Christological barriers.

I’ll go one step further: NO liturgy has ever been “pure” in the sense that it was celebrated in one century EXACTLY the same as in the previous century.

 

[malphono]

The Armenians, to my knowledge, never had an Iconostas.

This seems to be a feature of the Byzantine and Coptic Churches.

OTOH, the West Syriac Churches (including the Maronite) should have a curtain across the sanctuary.

The Alexandrene Tradition is not my forte, but I tend to think that the Copts borrowed the Iconostasis from the Byzantines. Perhaps mardukm will have something to add about that.

As for the Syriac Churches, yes, there should be a curtain. The Maronites abandoned it long ago and trust me when I say there are no prospects of its restoration. Quite the contrary. The Syriac CC is hit-and-miss about it: some churches do, some don’t. The Syriac OC (in general, at least) maintains its use. As, I believe, do the Syro-Malankara, both CC and OC.

The curtain is also used in the East Syriac Tradition. It’s use was recently restored by the Chaldeans.

If I’m not mistaken, the Armenians also use the curtain. At least they did some years ago when I visited St Vartan Cathedral (Armenian Apostolic).

 

[SyroMalankara]

The Syro-Malabar Church is also returning to the use of the curtain, the symbolism is powerful and is now being better understood

 

[SyroMalankara]

As for the Syriac Churches, yes, there should be a curtain. The Maronites abandoned it long ago and trust me when I say there are no prospects of its restoration. Quite the contrary. The Syriac CC is hit-and-miss about it: some churches do, some don’t. The Syriac OC (in general, at least) maintains its use. As, I believe, do the Syro-Malankara, both CC and OC.

Brother Malphono,

Check out this Maronite Church in Texas… curtains restored…
ourladysmaronite.org/ordination-msgr-don.htm

although the celebrant seems to be facing the wrong way… =0) ]

vox-nova.com/2008/08/03/my-pictures-of-the-maronite-catholic-church-in-austin/

 

[malphono]

Brother Malphono,

Check out this Maronite Church in Texas… curtains restored…
ourladysmaronite.org/ordination-msgr-don.htm

although the celebrant seems to be facing the wrong way… =0) ]

vox-nova.com/2008/08/03/my-pictures-of-the-maronite-catholic-church-in-austin/

Well, I had a look and I noticed that there was no pic of the curtain closed, so it’s not clear how (or even if) it’s actually used in that particular place or is just there as decoration. Beyond that really cannot comment, except to say that I know that the matter of restoring the curtain has come before the Synod more than once and the Synod has repeatedly refused to deal with it.

Oh, BTW, yes, the celebration is being done facing the wrong way. As I’ve said before, that’s rather de rigeur in Maronite churches in the US, where the bishops are both on record as being in love with versus populum, mainly because it’s what the Latin Church does. (Apparently they’ve missed that even some Latin bishops have changed their tune about it, but I digress.) Again, as I’ve noted in other threads, there are, though, a few Maronite priests who actually do celebrate ad orientem (at least when the bishops are not present) despite that.

 

[John_Larocque]

Hey, you left out the introduction of unleavened bread, which was an “Armeniazation” of the Latin rite. Strange but apparently true. Of course, as soon as the Latins picked up the practice, all the arguments the Byzantines used to hurl at the Monophysite Armenians were then reused… against the Latins.

 

[Formosus]

I think the use of unleavened bread developed separately in west. Not connected with the Armenians. I don’t know for certain but if you have something backing it up then please share it : ). The Byzantines though did use the same arguments against it as they did against the Armenians though.

 

[ag_vn]

First, I would like to say Hello. I’m new to this forum.

I wondered when and why the Maronites, the Syriac Catholics and the Chaldeans started using western mitres, if they are not part of the respective tradition. This is a picture from the visit of Pope Benedict XVI in Jordan and Palestine this year.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Also, why the Syriac Catholic Patriarchs don’t wear the traditional turban, but something like a Greek kamilavka? These are pictures from the visit of Patriarch Ignace Youssef III Younan in India last month.

 

[malphono]

I wondered when and why the Maronites, the Syriac Catholics and the Chaldeans started using western mitres, if they are not part of the respective tradition.

I believe the use of the mitre dates back to the 15th century. Bishops of the Coptic CC have also adopted the mitre, as have the Syro-Malabars. Also, note that Armenian bishops (even the Armenian Apostolics) use a mitre as well, and that practice may date from the 12th century.

Also, why the Syriac Catholic Patriarchs don’t wear the traditional turban, but something like a Greek kamilavka?

It would seem to be merely something to distinguish the Syriac CC from the Syriac OC.

 

[GIR]

While desire to be rid of imposed customs is good, I feel that this animosity toward western peculiarities can and does often go too far. This, unfortunately, is to be expected. If a group who was once oppressed becomes free, often times the oppressed group adopt the opposite extreme in some way (it happens with heresies that in a person’s zeal to expunge a heretical idea, they often invent another heresy that denies the first one.) I’m not accusing any side of heresy here, but just giving an example of how things like this go.

I think cross pollination is a good thing and should be encouraged. Think of a Latin church with icons and no musical instruments, chanting the mass (readings and all) but also a byzantine church that has adoration and prays the rosary, for example. In a truly universal church, this would happen naturally, in my opinion.

 

[Barry_Gabriel]

One of the biggest burdens Eastern Catholics have labored under is the Western notion that the Roman Church and her rites are ALWAYS inherently superior to anything in the East, and the more an Eastern Church follows Roman praxis, the more “perfect” it is.

Alas, this is a burden that some Eastern Catholics have hastened to impose upon themselves.

Only in the last few decades have the Eastern Catholics–to say nothing about Roman Catholics–been freeing themselves from this foolish bondage.

The Maronite Church as been in active conscious union with Rome the longest of any Eastern Catholic Church. Consequently, it has more centuries of contact, and more opportunity to absorb (or impose) Latin customs.

Foolish bondage? Perhaps you don’t know that within the Catholic Communion, the Eastern rites take precedence. Nothing was imposed in the east as far as I know.