Question about Eastern Rite in Anglo-Saxon Church

[malphono]

Indeed.

I would argue, however, that those elements don’t likely reflect “Eastern influence” so much as they indicate a common history between all the various Rites. So it’s not as if any of the Eastern groups necessarily had anything to do with these various Western Rites, but merely that those Rites draw from the common Apostolic well, and some things that they preserved are not usually found in the Roman Rite specifically, but are found in some Eastern Rites.

Peace and God bless!

In general, yes, I agree, and is really why I put the word “Eastern” in quotes. But in the case of the traditional Ambrosian usage (not the recent – and depressing – Novus-Ordo clone) I suspect there truly is an Eastern (more so than Oriental) influence. And the Carmelite (moribund though it may be) has definite Eastern/Oriental features. I’ve head some say the same, to some degree, of the Dominican.

 

[S_J_Thaikattil]

Sorry, I have to “reply” to this post, because I cannot see how to “edit” my previous post.

Here is some info from the Good Shepherd Australian Orthodox Mission:

"The Celtic Church, by about A.D. 400-500 had its own distinct Liturgy. Today a number of geographical versions exist of that Liturgy from the first Millennium. All are local versions of the basic Gallican Liturgy, a Liturgy that was distinct from the Roman Liturgy and the Eastern Liturgies, but having strong elements from the latter.

A brief examination of the geography of the Celtic Church is helpful in discovering the roots of its Liturgies. There seems to be evidence that early Christians in England came from the East, possibly from Galatia. The Galatians were Celts and the Celtic tribal chain extended in an arc from Galatia through Southern Poland and Brittany to England, Scotland, Cornwall and Wales. So there was trade, intermarriage and cultural exchange along this arc.

Following the decisions of the Synod of Whitby (664) Roman usage was introduced into southern England and the Midlands. Scotland, Wales and Ireland seemed able to retain their Celtic-Anglo-Saxon forms of worship, as did Sherborne Abbey in the West of England. These Celtic liturgical customs were gathered into a local variant which eventually became known as the ‘Sarum Liturgy’. (Sarum being Latin for Salisbury). The Sarum Liturgy was first used in Salisbury Cathedral.

We may conclude that the Sarum Liturgy developed as the predominant Liturgy of the British after the Great Schism, it was however, essentially a pre-schism Liturgy. The Western Rite Liturgy used by the Antiochian Church today contains much wording from the Sarum Liturgy.

One person of particular interest from the pre-schism English Church is a Greek known as Theodore of Tarsus (602-690). He became Archbishop of Canterbury and during his time the English Churches were ablaze with Greek Iconography. The Iconastsis was called a ‘rood screen’ meaning ‘cross screen’. The Sarum Rite prescribed the reception of communion at the Royal Doors underneath the ‘Rood’ or ‘Cross’, which was above them. Many English Churches have retained this form of architecture until now."

Christianity is an Eastern religion, Israel being in the Middle East.
So any Eastern element in Christianity is perfectly natural. We know too that as Christianity spread and developed, it imbibed other philosophies (notably Greek) and cultures and practices depending on the local culture and practice. Therefore we see Greek thought, Roman culture and European religious practices in the way Christianity developed in Rome and spread in Western Europe and from there many centuries later to other countries during the colonial era. From the beginning Christianity also developed simultaneously and independently in other ways in the Middle East, East Europe, Asia etc, as a result of which we notice the impact of local cultures and thought in those parts.

There is no historical record of exactly when and how the Celts in Britain and Ireland first came to accept Christianity. But we do know about a well developed and unique Celtic Christianity that existed (primarily in monasteries) when the Roman Catholic Church introduced Christianity officially in Britain. Considering the political presence of Romans in Britain in the early Christian era, and the abundance of Christian converts in Rome where Apostle Peter and Paul preached and were martyred, it is not difficult to imagine how Christians could have reached Britain before Pope Gregory sent out missionaries much later. It is also not difficult to imagine that after introduction, the Celts developed Christianity in their own way, integrating their original beliefs and practices in the formation of a unique Celtic Christianity.

Here some additional information about the Celts:

channel4.com/history/microsites/H/history/c-d/celts08.html

channel4.com/history/microsites/H/history/c-d/celts09.html

channel4.com/history/microsites/H/history/c-d/celts07.html

 

[Ghosty]

In general, yes, I agree, and is really why I put the word “Eastern” in quotes. But in the case of the traditional Ambrosian usage (not the recent – and depressing – Novus-Ordo clone) I suspect there truly is an Eastern (more so than Oriental) influence. And the Carmelite (moribund though it may be) has definite Eastern/Oriental features. I’ve head some say the same, to some degree, of the Dominican.

I would tend to agree with you on these assesments, though I don’t know which elements of the Dominican Rite are influenced from the East (the Ambrosian and especially Carmelite certainly have direct connections with the East, the former being related to Byzantine Italy, and the latter deriving its inspiration directly from the East).

Peace and God bless!

 

[PrayForMeStJude]

**
I’m actually more than a bit skeptical. **

It is easily forgotten that Jesus Christ had 12 Apostles (one was chosen to replace Judas Iscariot) and Apostle Paul made the 13th one. All of them were extremely busy spreading the Gospel of Christ. There is nothing to suggest that they came together at regular intervals. Then we would have subsequent generations of the followers of Apostles forming new groups of Christians. So it is quite logical to conclude that Christianity must have developed in slightly different ways in different places, especially the form of worship, even if the beliefs remained exactly the same and some groups must surely have agreed to follow similar forms of worship. That is why we have so many different churches with different liturgies and same beliefs. So any claim that all Christian rites lead to Antioch is somewhat far fetched. Whether Aryans lived in Europe or not.

Okay, look:

I never said that all Christian rites lead back to Antioch. I simply said that I remember reading somehwere that the pre-Roman Gaulic liturgies were influenced by the Antiochian rite through their missionary activity.

You either need to read more carefully or stop reading into other people’s writings things that aren’t there.

 

[S_J_Thaikattil]

I’m not exactly clear about this, but i believe that much of Europe was actually evangelized by Christians of the Antiochian rite. A lot of Germanic people were also Arians and only later converted by Rome. These non-Roman Europeans probably celebrated the Divine Liturgy very differently than Rome did.

 

[S_J_Thaikattil]

Okay, look:

I never said that all Christian rites lead back to Antioch. I simply said that I remember reading somehwere that the pre-Roman Gaulic liturgies were influenced by the Antiochian rite through their missionary activity.

You either need to read more carefully or stop reading into other people’s writings things that aren’t there.

A reference would be the best way to clear up the misunderstanding because the theory you propose is not commonly known.

I try to read and understand as I can, not as I can’t. I have no problem with being corrected as long as the source of information provided is authentic or half way reliable. I’m here to learn and I do enjoy a good crossing of swords. I believe it can be done without attacking the person. Sometimes maybe I don’t realize people are taking my disagreement with a piece of information provided as a personal attack.