Roman Rite Catholic in Brooklyn NY, transferring to the Syriac Church in need of help (Open to Orthodox, and Catholic posters alike)

[East02West]

The lesson that I’m hoping to impart with the story is this: The question you have asked, East02West, is a good one in some ways, but perhaps only part of the story. I have no Coptic blood or cultural ties, but when I came to the church I was given my own kind of test in terms of my commitment to learning and being taught: What do you know about our faith and our history (read: are we starting from square zero or…)? What do you know about Orthodoxy, and from where (read: are we going to have to approach this person as someone who thinks that his RC-ism makes him essentially Orthodox, even though it doesn’t)?, etc. Basically, am I serious or am I slumming? Because I arrived with some basic knowledge (and the handy ability to read Coptic and Arabic at least well enough to be able to give responses), I kind of got to skip the stage that the Lutherans apparently came in at: Wondering about a bunch of preconceptions that aren’t really well-formed from the point of view of the Church I’m interested in.

Oh, I’m more than ready for that. I’m actually QUITE willing to learn my faith anew, hence my insistence on seeking a community which discourses through the Faith from a strictly Syriac (Western) theological patrimony. It’s lamentable that I don’t have a Western Syriac Catholic community nearest me (Oh Maronites, if you would but reclaim what is rightfully yours by birthright…), but alas I have to make due with what I do have. I don’t want to discourse as a Catholic with the aesthetic veneer of being Syriac, but discoursing through the phronema of the Latin Tradition (Just as valid. I am not downplaying it by any means.). If anything, I’m breathing with both lungs (After all, 25 years as a cradle Latin don’t exactly disappear into thin air.). However, to most properly do so, I must immerse myself within the other Tradition, it’s ecclesiology, it’s periods of fast, observances, etc. To express the same, One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Faith I now profess, but through the Tradition I now seek entry into.

So, without having tried to fit in with the Maronites myself, I would argue that the most important thing is not worrying about fitting in culturally, but approaching as befits someone who knows they’re stepping into a community with a theology, praxis, “phronema”, etc. that is fundamentally different than their own, and is to be respected and explored and learned and committed to on its own merits, if you are to integrate yourself into the worship of the community. You probably have less far to go than the Lutherans in my story would have had (as you have read some Syriac Fathers and the like), but there is of course no substitute for diving head first into liturgies, prayer, fasting, etc. together with the community, in consultation with that the community. That is enough to take on without worrying about cultural trappings. I still don’t fit in with the Coptic culture, and I’m glad. I am, after all, not Egyptian, and I don’t feel like trying to be anything I’m not. In fact, in recognizing that this part of being Coptic Orthodox (the “Coptic” part) is not an essential part for me (with the exception of as it relates to my part in the liturgy as a layperson, as I believe it is essential that I defend the integrity of the liturgy, same as anyone) is very helpful in finding my proper place in the church community. When people need a particular English word that they can’t think of, they come to me. When they want to know what the Latins do in comparison to their practices, they come to me. When they want to know why it’s wrong to use racial slurs towards black people in the middle of Costco or anywhere else (I swear, this came up two weeks ago), they come to me. When I want to know about naming conventions for saints in the church, or this or that finer point of Egyptian Arabic grammar or pronunciation, I go to them. It’s a very nice, sort of symbiotic relationship. I’m not just “the white guy” anymore (or so it would seem, as they absentmindedly greet me and dismiss me in Arabic since about three months ago) – I’m the white guy who can actually explain things about the wider Anglo and Hispanic cultures they’ve suddenly found themselves in. Who knows? Maybe one day we’ll have the liturgy in Spanish as they do in Mexico and Bolivia, or even in Navajo (I can’t help with that, though…hahaha).

To join an “ethnic” church from a particular place and be shocked or upset that it carries the cultural imprint of that particular place is foolishness, but so is caving into pressure to give up or suppress whatever it is you already are in a misguided attempt to fit in. There is neither Jew nor Greek, remember? So if I have to insist that, no, the way that I eat or dress is not wrong, but indicative of a different (non-Egyptian) cultural background, so I’m going to keep doing it…well, that’s a small bit of discomfort for a lot of benefit in being immersed in the true faith with people who, after all, want to see their church grow throughout the world. I don’t doubt that the vast majority of Maronites (or Chaldeans, or Melkites, or…) would agree with that. After all, they adjusted to America, Mexico, Brazil, Australia, and all these other places that aren’t Lebanon or Syria quite well, and yet remain Maronites and proud of that fact.

Cont’d…

 

[East02West]

It’s not that the cultural trappings bother me, it’s when those cultural trappings take center stage over the Faith that it bothers me. I agree with you. I will never been Levantine, North African (Well who knows what I have in me vis a vis the Spanish conquest of the Caribbean…), etc., I will always be Puerto Rican (Not that I wear it on my sleeve. It actually affords me the opportunity to embrace all people regardless of ethnicity, social class etc., because it’s reflected from within my own family, and culture (Quite different from Central, and South American Catholicism.).), and I’m glad of it. However, I’ve seen, and have heard when an ecclesiastical body is conflated with, and employed as a vehicle for catering to the needs of one given ethnic group,language community etc.,instead of being a neutral shared public space for the body of Christ. Again, I understand that communities are tight knit etc. given their respective histories, and circumstances, I honour, and respect that, but what happens when the casual/frequent Sunday visitor isn’t whom your Church is meant to draw in ? What happens when they stay, and not everyone in the parish is as welcoming of them, and aren’t afraid to let them know ? That some people will react that way is a given, and something outside of the person’s control. However, is it worth disturbing the peace within an already established community ? Doesn’t that to a degree effect Trinitarian ek-stasis ? What do you do if you’re confronted with a community that doesn’t want you at all (Wow, could I get a job as Devil’s Advocate at the Vatican…), but it is the liturgy that draws you in to deeper of contemplation of GOD ?

That the individual may not mind the cultural trappings of the community is one thing, but that they be received as disturbing the peace of the community by forcing the individuals to accommodate those outside of their culture, is also worth considering. The person is usually forced to conform/assimilate (ie Russian parish, non-Russian assimilates into Russian values, tastes etc.), leave/feel unwelcome, or observe as a social pariah (sole lived ecclesiology). This doesn’t solely apply to one’s ethnic trappings, but also to one’s theological world view. In the case of a Latin, I’d be the embodiment of Latinization (To a degree… shudders). Many transplant Latins have regrettably done such, when observing within a non-Latin Catholic Church, when they don’t have a Roman Church at their disposal, or the liturgy isn’t to their liking. I can understand preserving liturgical integrity, but a strong Pastor resolves that, not the people.

tl;dr version: Go for it! You’ll fit in in all the ways that matter if you are serious about this desire to actually become a Christian worshiper in a Syriac church, beyond reading books in your private devotion.

Which is precisely what I want to do. It’s fine to read books all day, browse the internet, and read about the Tradition (Not that there is really much published on it …cues ominous music.), but it is an entirely different ball game to go out there, and live the liturgy in community.

There are a number of reasons that I’m attracted to the Syriac Tradition, but it means nothing, unless I experience, and live it for myself.

I speak some Hebrew…, not sure how well that will go over… Yeah, I’ll keep that one to myself in conversation… I realize Arabic, Aramaic, and Syriac are all related to Hebrew (Western Semitic-Afro-Asiatic tongues), but given how I’ll get up on a soapbox, and start toying with shoreshes (tri-lateral roots), pointing out from whence a particular, and obscure Tradition in the liturgy draws it’s genesis from within Judaism (The fact that a Priest cannot step into the altar donning leather, etc. Why he garbs in what he garbs etc.) in the various passages from the Talmud etc., would get me labeled, with a few of the political connotations that come with a particular region in the Middle East, that I’d like to avoid…

 

[East02West]

Eastern Catholics have spread throughout the world for various social, economic and political reasons, and many have suffered greatly from being cut off from their home churches. In many parts of the world, their is a great deal of acrimony between the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholic counterparts. On paper there may be a peaceful coexistence, but out in the “trenches” could be different.

Switching rites without a nearby parish to be a part of is basically voluntarily putting yourself into exile. Living with an Orthodox parish may help treat the symptoms of the “homesickness”, but it is still not truly home. Even in Eastern Catholic parish of a different variety, being a West Syriac under its care could be difficult.

Humans were created to be a social species. I’d advice you to carefully consider whether self-imposed isolation is healthy for your spiritual life.

Fair enough, but I already do that amongst my fellow Cradle Latin Catholics, hence the desire for transferring.

 

[dzheremi]

Oh, I’m more than ready for that. I’m actually QUITE willing to learn my faith anew, hence my insistence on seeking a community which discourses through the Faith from a strictly Syriac (Western) theological patrimony.

Good, good. Only of course you wouldn’t exactly be learning the same faith you had, but the faith of the Syriac Christians (whichever you end up with), which of course is not the same as the Latin faith (different theological and ecclesiastical outlook, different praxis, different/local hagiographies and martyrologies, different hymnology, etc). This is why I was curious in my first post about going to a Syriac Orthodox Church…there it would be really different. At least with the Unia of Syriac origin there would likely be some concessions made to Latin norms, to put it in a nice way that won’t get me banned.

It’s not that the cultural trappings bother me, it’s when those cultural trappings take center stage over the Faith that it bothers me.

What makes you think that this is what you’ll find?

However, I’ve seen, and have heard when an ecclesiastical body is conflated with, and employed as a vehicle for catering to the needs of one given ethnic group,language community etc.,instead of being a neutral shared public space for the body of Christ.

Hmm. This is a little confusing. You want the Syriac spirituality, but without “catering to the needs of one given ethnic group, language, community”? The Syriac people are one ethnic group (sorry, Kaldaya, you’re in there, too), speaking (dialects of) one language, making up a relatively culturally distinct community. What is neutral about choosing to be in a Syriac church? Or for that matter a Latin church, or any other particular church? This is why I wrote earlier that it doesn’t make sense to go to an “ethnic” (ugh…there’s got to be a better word for this) church and be unhappy that it is an ethnic church. I may not be Coptic, but if I didn’t like the Coptic liturgies, or the Egyptian people who formed it to what it is today in concert with St. Mark (Libyan), St. Basil (Cappadocian), and St. Gregory (also Cappadocian), I’d be in the wrong place right now. Maybe I am wrong or misunderstanding your statement, but I don’t think you will find the neutrality you’re talking about in any church, Syriac or otherwise.

but what happens when the casual/frequent Sunday visitor isn’t whom your Church is meant to draw in ?

What do you mean? All our churches, whether we’re Catholic or Orthodox of any tradition, are meant to draw everyone in. If that isn’t your experience, then it is the fault of the particular people you’re dealing with (as in my story about the Lutherans; it is the fault of all of us here at St. Pishoy COC that they have not come back).

What happens when they stay, and not everyone in the parish is as welcoming of them, and aren’t afraid to let them know ?

Then they talk to the people, or to the priest, or whoever else they can to try to understand why they are being received that way. Either that or leave and find some other place to be, I guess. But 99.9% of the time, there is a reason, and it is often not obvious to you since you’re not from that culture. The other part of my joining the Coptic church that I didn’t include in my last posts is that when I first arrived some the women and the elderly were quite stand-offish, or so it seemed to me. Whereas some people were eager to embrace a potential convert, it seemed like a not insignificant number (keeping in mind we’re talking about about 40 people, total) seemed a little cold. They didn’t even say hi! It wasn’t until I had been to liturgy several more times that these people warmed up to me, and it was then that I learned that they were not being mean, they were just very shy because they do not speak English, so they didn’t feel comfortable or confident speaking to me, for fear that it would lead to a conversation that they could not understand or participate in. Now, 8 months later, I get a “hi” from almost everybody, and a non-verbal hello from the few who prefer to stay silent. I appreciate it and reciprocate. I am similarly uncomfortable speaking Arabic unless I absolutely have to (even though I have been trained in it, it was years ago and it was not geared to Egyptian specifically), so ma’alesh…it’s fine.

(cont’d)

 

[dzheremi]

What do you do if you’re confronted with a community that doesn’t want you at all, but it is the liturgy that draws you in to deeper of contemplation of GOD ?

For all the reasons I just listed, I find that very unlikely (and again must wonder why you think it may be so if you haven’t even attended a liturgy yet), but in the unlikely event, you go somewhere else where people aren’t jerks, or you stick it out and “bare one another in love”, as the apostle Paul counseled the Colossians. Maybe there are some people at church who don’t like me (I don’t know, and don’t care to know), but I’m not really there to make friends anyway. But if you are turned off or turned away, you may go elsewhere, as being treated poorly really shouldn’t be a required part of any conversion.

That the individual may not mind the cultural trappings of the community is one thing, but that they be received as disturbing the peace of the community by forcing the individuals to accommodate those outside of their culture, is also worth considering.

There is also the opposite view (the historical, dare I say Apostolic, view), that they and you share the Gospel in and among all nations and people. Occasionally this thought pops into my head too, as I am the only native English-speaker in my church, but the liturgy was already 75% English when I got here. They didn’t do that for me. They did that because they are in an English-speaking environment now, and having the true missionary imperative and the proper exposure to the language, they do what they can to integrate into the society. The Copts are really good at that on a diocesan level, I’ve seen. Other churches may have trouble with this due to very different circumstances (e.g., the Armenians, who were literally clinging to life when they were dispersed by the genocide), but that’s all the more reason to give thanks to God for the miracle of even having a Syriac church to go to, a Coptic church to go to, an Armenian church to go to, etc. None of us are owed a church of our choice that also functions as we’d have it function. Sorry to be so blunt about it, but it’s true.

The person is usually forced to conform/assimilate (ie Russian parish, non-Russian assimilates into Russian values, tastes etc.), leave/feel unwelcome, or observe as a social pariah (sole lived ecclesiology).

That’s just not true, in my experience. I love koshari, but I will go my whole life without eating cactus again, and I will not start wearing v-neck t-shirts, or liking Farid el-Atrash or Amr Diab, or getting tangled up in the endless debates over the Agape meal about Ubama and Roomney (I guess “no politics or religion at the dinner table” doesn’t really apply to Copts!). Not interested. To the extent that there are things I am already conservative about, I already share some values with most of the people in my parish (not all, though), but where we differ, we differ. If there is trouble with being your own person, then it might not hurt to be more assertive. Egyptians are always yelling about everything anyway… I refuse to be pushed around by anybody. God made me a non-Egyptian, so take it up with Him.

This doesn’t solely apply to one’s ethnic trappings, but also to one’s theological world view. In the case of a Latin, I’d be the embodiment of Latinization (To a degree… shudders). Many transplant Latins have regrettably done such, when observing within a non-Latin Catholic Church, when they don’t have a Roman Church at their disposal, or the liturgy isn’t to their liking. I can understand preserving liturgical integrity, but a strong Pastor resolves that, not the people.

I’m not sure what to make of this. If you are immersed in and take to Syriac spirituality, how can you be the embodiment of Latinization? The people know their faith, believe me. At least in the Coptic church. Before a trip back home to visit family (in a place where there are no OO churches), I expressed my desire to go to the OCA to observe their Nativity celebrations, and it was one of the nice aunties of the church who pulled me aside and told me very sternly: “We do not commune with Byzantines. Do not commune with them.” I haven’t even communed with Copts yet!

 

[East02West]

What makes you think that this is what you’ll find?

Think Latin National Parishes, and the aftermath of their collapsing into parishes with multi-lingual Liturgies offered. Not that it wasn’t always the case (Oh how it was.), but that it was confined to the respective Church. The Italians refused to worship with the Irish, the Germans didn’t want to be under a French Priest, and so on, and so forth.

Hmm. This is a little confusing. You want the Syriac spirituality, but without “catering to the needs of one given ethnic group, language, community”? The Syriac people are one ethnic group (sorry, Kaldaya, you’re in there, too), speaking (dialects of) one language, making up a relatively culturally distinct community. What is neutral about choosing to be in a Syriac church? Or for that matter a Latin church, or any other particular church? This is why I wrote earlier that it doesn’t make sense to go to an “ethnic” (ugh…there’s got to be a better word for this) church and be unhappy that it is an ethnic church. I may not be Coptic, but if I didn’t like the Coptic liturgies, or the Egyptian people who formed it to what it is today in concert with St. Mark (Libyan), St. Basil (Cappadocian), and St. Gregory (also Cappadocian), I’d be in the wrong place right now. Maybe I am wrong or misunderstanding your statement, but I don’t think you will find the neutrality you’re talking about in any church, Syriac or otherwise.

What do you mean? All our churches, whether we’re Catholic or Orthodox of any tradition, are meant to draw everyone in. If that isn’t your experience, then it is the fault of the particular people you’re dealing with (as in my story about the Lutherans; it is the fault of all of us here at St. Pishoy COC that they have not come back).

The Coptic Tradition indeed draws it’s genesis from within a particular jurisdictional territory etc (As do all Churches…)., as did the Roman Rite etc. However once it enters into the diaspora, outside the confines of it’s own historic geographic borders, the demographics will in turn change. At least theoretically they do/should through the process of evangelization etc. After all, that IS the purpose of the Church, to draw people in. That however is not necessarily the aim of certain, and particular communities. Some communities DO in fact persist as being limited to the needs of their given community, at the expense of evangelization. That has been the conflict for many an Eastern Christian community, the Church reaching beyond the communities that it Traditionally has served throughout it’s history. Some people are open to it, others aren’t. I’ve seen that in the context of the Latin Mass I used to attend, the local Church that offers the NO, etc. How does one break forth from the ghetto (ideological, ethnic, etc.), so as to embrace/minister to those around them, whilst preserving your own culture in the process ? Some people function through extremes, and cut off all ties to anything that will remotely disturb habitus. Others are flexible, and consider the future of the Church in question. Numerous Latin Churches have closed throughout the years (And it isn’t solely because of a change in Liturgy.), because the Churches were erected to serve the needs of a given National group, who ended up moving, and abandoned the Church. When newer immigrants came, they erected their own Churches, and so on, and so forth. After all, they sought to establish themselves as a group, and employ the edifice as a testament to their mark in the country/community. A Church which catered to their regional devotions, observances etc. When a group of Catholics with their own set of Traditions arrived, and they were no longer able to do so, you get alienation, and the forcing of groups to adopt devotions, modes of worship etc., that were particular to the previous group. After all, not every Priest was exactly willing to learn the traditions of his flock, or accommodate them for that matter. There are a number of studies conducted on the study of immigrant Catholic groups, and their establishing themselves within the US. I can recommend a few if you’re interested in the subject.

There is fine line between acknowledging the historic character, and continuity of a given groups history with the Church, and ethnophyletism (A defined heresy I might add.). Those two aren’t always so clear in the context of parish life.

 

[East02West]

QUOTE]Then they talk to the people, or to the priest, or whoever else they can to try to understand why they are being received that way. Either that or leave and find some other place to be, I guess. But 99.9% of the time, there is a reason, and it is often not obvious to you since you’re not from that culture. The other part of my joining the Coptic church that I didn’t include in my last posts is that when I first arrived some the women and the elderly were quite stand-offish, or so it seemed to me. Whereas some people were eager to embrace a potential convert, it seemed like a not insignificant number (keeping in mind we’re talking about about 40 people, total) seemed a little cold. They didn’t even say hi! It wasn’t until I had been to liturgy several more times that these people warmed up to me, and it was then that I learned that they were not being mean, they were just very shy because they do not speak English, so they didn’t feel comfortable or confident speaking to me, for fear that it would lead to a conversation that they could not understand or participate in. Now, 8 months later, I get a “hi” from almost everybody, and a non-verbal hello from the few who prefer to stay silent. I appreciate it and reciprocate. I am similarly uncomfortable speaking Arabic unless I absolutely have to (even though I have been trained in it, it was years ago and it was not geared to Egyptian specifically), so ma’alesh…it’s fine.

Yet that shouldn’t be negotiated through the Priest. At least I don’t think so, that’s meant to be negotiated via the people/community as a whole.

You were lucky that in time, you came to be accepted. But let’s say if for instance the individuals from within Costco (Of which I don’t have a context for what exactly occurred, so as to ascertain the reason for why X, or Y may, or may not have been warranted etc.) were to make it to your parish, how well would that go over ? Mind you, I’m not really asking you to answer that, just to ponder it for a bit. The Lutherans may have been ignorant, as are most Western Christians of the Christian East, but as you cited, that was the fault of the community, not the individual. Isn’t it a spiritual act of mercy to instruct the ignorant ? Isn’t that the key to evangelization, catechesis/dissemination of doctrine ?

For all the reasons I just listed, I find that very unlikely (and again must wonder why you think it may be so if you haven’t even attended a liturgy yet), but in the unlikely event, you go somewhere else where people aren’t jerks, or you stick it out and “bare one another in love”, as the apostle Paul counseled the Colossians. Maybe there are some people at church who don’t like me (I don’t know, and don’t care to know), but I’m not really there to make friends anyway. But if you are turned off or turned away, you may go elsewhere, as being treated poorly really shouldn’t be a required part of any conversion.

Now you hit the nail on the head.

I haven’t gone to Syriac Liturgies (Save for a Maronite one, with mostly Americans (A total of 15-18 in attendance) in English, the other liturgy in Arabic was offered at a later time.) , but I have attended liturgies within other Churches, and Ritual Traditions. I’ve also discussed at length with other friends on the subject. One friend recounted how he was told flat out by a lady there “What are you doing here ? You have your own Church.”. Is that really conducive to evangelization ? I don’t think it is, but it does occur whether we acknowledge it or not.

Whereas you were confused previously, I in turn am confused now. You stated that you’re not there to make friends (fine), and that if you’re in a community that you’re forced to bear being the social pariah, that you suck it up, and just do what you have to do. What then is community in the context of parish life ? Is it merely praying together at liturgy, and partaking of the Body, and Blood of Christ, or is it meant to flow elsewhere ? What constitutes community ? Merely attending liturgy in the same shared public space, or what ?

 

[dzheremi]

Think Latin National Parishes, and the aftermath of their collapsing into parishes with multi-lingual Liturgies offered. Not that it wasn’t always the case (Oh how it was.), but that it was confined to the respective Church. The Italians refused to worship with the Irish, the Germans didn’t want to be under a French Priest, and so on, and so forth.

Yes, and all those things were and are wrong. Ethnophyletism, as you mention later, is a heresy. But there is also a difference between that approach and the reality of a particular church being made up of primarily one ethnicity (or several related ethnicities or cultures) due to historical and geographical reasons. The latter situation does not necessarily (and should not) lead to the aforementioned heresy.

It should be pointed out concerning the Coptic tradition that there is a certain advantage that they have in these kinds of conversations, also as a result of their particular historical circumstances: As Alexandria became a sort of nexus point at which many different peoples met in pilgrimage to and imitation of the desert monks in the early centuries of Egyptian monasticism, there is absolutely nothing odd in their tradition about the meeting of many different cultures in the expression of the one faith. You can even see this in the naming of the Egyptian monasteries, which testify to the multi-ethnic character of the monastic life: In addition to the ones that you would expect (the monastery of St. Anthony, the monastery of St. Macarios, etc.), there are also those that indicate Roman habitation (Paromeos/Baramous, meaning “Monastery of the Romans”) and those that testify to the long history of Syriac presence (Monastery of the Syrians). What goes on today in the evangelization of many heretofore unreached parts of Africa, the Americas, and Oceania is therefore not an accomodation of the non-Coptic/Syriac/Ethiopian/Latin/whatever people (as though these should be the only fit to praise God), but the reaffirmation of the same guidance that originally brought the faith to Egypt, Sudan, India, Ethiopia, and all other places that are now more-or-less naturally associated with ancient forms of Christianity like those practiced by the Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and other traditional churches.

When a group of Catholics with their own set of Traditions arrived, and they were no longer able to do so, you get alienation, and the forcing of groups to adopt devotions, modes of worship etc., that were particular to the previous group.

I think this might be a difference between Catholics and Orthodox, or at least Catholics and Oriental Orthodox (the EO are, with all due respect, much more uniform in their externals, so what it might mean to adopt others’ devotions in that context isn’t clear to me; you mean celebrating the DL of St. John Chrysostom in another’s language? ). As an illustration, we have Ethiopians who attend the Coptic church here in NM, because indeed this is the Orthodox Church that exists at this locality under the Orthodox bishop who shepherds us within this diocese. So it would be wrong to set up an Ethiopian church in this same area just so that the Ethiopians would not have to worship with the Copts – the two churches share the same faith! Of course, the reality is often different (maybe if we had more Ethiopians, it’d be different here, too), but the principle is the same: You live at X location and are Orthodox, you’re under the bishop there even if he isn’t of your ethnicity. If I were a Copt living in Armenia, I would worship with the Armenians. The situation in America or other parts of the diaspora is not usual, thanks to the rapid growth of particular communities (who of course are concerned with setting up churches; they are Christians, after all), and due to the fact that America is not an Orthodox country in the first place, so it does not have the history that led to the natural evolution of this “one church for one people” type of situation that you find in the old world with historic national churches.

There is fine line between acknowledging the historic character, and continuity of a given groups history with the Church, and ethnophyletism (A defined heresy I might add.). Those two aren’t always so clear in the context of parish life.

I absolutely agree with you here.

 

[East02West]

There is also the opposite view (the historical, dare I say Apostolic, view), that they and you share the Gospel in and among all nations and people. Occasionally this thought pops into my head too, as I am the only native English-speaker in my church, but the liturgy was already 75% English when I got here. They didn’t do that for me. They did that because they are in an English-speaking environment now, and having the true missionary imperative and the proper exposure to the language, they do what they can to integrate into the society. The Copts are really good at that on a diocesan level, I’ve seen. Other churches may have trouble with this due to very different circumstances (e.g., the Armenians, who were literally clinging to life when they were dispersed by the genocide), but that’s all the more reason to give thanks to God for the miracle of even having a Syriac church to go to, a Coptic church to go to, an Armenian church to go to, etc. None of us are owed a church of our choice that also functions as we’d have it function. Sorry to be so blunt about it, but it’s true.

Yet that evangelatory imperative isn’t really always there.Some communities do it better than others do. I mean considering the position of the Catholic Church in the US, the efforts to evangelize to freed slaves following the Civil War were taken up by ONE man, and his efforts were shot from within, and from without of the Church. What response can we offer to that ? A number of historically Black churches of the evangelical Protestant variety, could have been home to Catholics, but our evangelatory efforts waned, as did the suppressing of the various Mission Uses employed throughout the US. After all, the desire was to become more ‘American’, and those Uses were to “Indian”.

Mind you, I’m speaking as a Latin Catholic on these issues, but you’d think after a few decades of being in the diaspora, that more Eastern Catholic Churches MIGHT spring up. I’ve noticed that trend amongst the Orthodox (At least the Antiochian Orthodox, and ROCOR amongst some of my friends who are converts to Orthodoxy in the US.), yet that never really has taken off amongst most Eastern Catholics.

I wouldn’t exactly say it’s true. Pardon my undermining your response, but I have my reasons for doing so. It is true that we are not “owed” a Church that functions by our design/desires, however who is ? No one is ever going to get their “ideal” Church, but the point of the Church, is that through the Liturgy, heaven is made manifest upon earth. Heaven is composed of ALL manner of individuals, all united to Christ. For practically EVERY Saint (with the exception of the Theotokos, and a few others) began as a sinner. Some even working to improve the Church in so far as evangelatory efforts, so that all might find a place within her. After all, in Christ taking upon Adam, He united Himself to ALL mortal flesh in the process. Perhaps I have a different perspective on the matter, given Spanish colonial rule, and the fiasco surrounding the humanity of the indigenous of the Americas (The Valladoid Debates, etc.), and the various Bulls issued after the fact. Where would they have been, and their descendants without figures like Fray Bartolome de Las Casas ( I believe he’s been beatified.), etc. who dared to defy the abuses of the period ?

There is something very powerful, and moving about the theology of the Incarnation, in that it elevates the dignity of ALL mankind, regardless of sex, ethnicity, class, etc. It is most often the more difficult to swallow for many engaging with Christianity. How could Christ unite Himself to someone who isn’t like me ? etc.

 

[East02West]

That’s just not true, in my experience. I love koshari, but I will go my whole life without eating cactus again, and I will not start wearing v-neck t-shirts, or liking Farid el-Atrash or Amr Diab, or getting tangled up in the endless debates over the Agape meal about Ubama and Roomney (I guess “no politics or religion at the dinner table” doesn’t really apply to Copts!). Not interested. To the extent that there are things I am already conservative about, I already share some values with most of the people in my parish (not all, though), but where we differ, we differ. If there is trouble with being your own person, then it might not hurt to be more assertive. Egyptians are always yelling about everything anyway… I refuse to be pushed around by anybody. God made me a non-Egyptian, so take it up with Him.

Which may, or may not be a deal breaker.

Remember when I said that I speak Hebrew, but would attempt to keep those things to myself (Save for perhaps discussions with say a Priest, or something) ?

Some people are open minded, some aren’t, but in my experience saying you speak Hebrew, needs to be attached with, but I’m not Israeli…Even then, it makes people suspicious. Not saying that’s my experience with any given community, but I have been told by friends “DON’T mention that you speak Hebrew.” That’s just one example.

It’s a matter of what the community, is, and isn’t willing to put up with. I’m my own brand of “blunt”. Not in the rude, and vulgar way, but rather in the more diplomatic sense, wherein I say what I say to a person as it is, but often do so in a manner that preserves their dignity, and mine. That doesn’t go over to well, at least in my experience when you undermine a person’s worldview (I don’t really like doing that, but when push has come to shove, it’s gotten to that point.).I am direct, as I am stubborn, yet flexible enough to entertain the opposing view, whilst retaining my own, or nuancing. A pet peeve of most people who speak with me, is my employing “yes, and no” when engaging with an argument. I don’t see things in black, and white, but attempt to engage with all facets of a given structure etc.

I can’t say I have Aramaean, Syrian, Lebanese etc. roots, and that should be okay in so far as extra ecclesiastical activities are concerned. Yes I like kibbeh, lahambajn etc., but I can’t be something, and someone I’m not. I can’t speak of when my family’s involvement in the Lebanese Civil War, Mid-East politics etc. My historic ties are elsewhere, as are my experiences, yet for some reason or another, I’m called to the Church/Rite in question. GOD knows what He does.

I’m not sure what to make of this. If you are immersed in and take to Syriac spirituality, how can you be the embodiment of Latinization? The people know their faith, believe me. At least in the Coptic church. Before a trip back home to visit family (in a place where there are no OO churches), I expressed my desire to go to the OCA to observe their Nativity celebrations, and it was one of the nice aunties of the church who pulled me aside and told me very sternly: “We do not commune with Byzantines. Do not commune with them.” I haven’t even communed with Copts yet!

Some transplant Latin Catholics (Usually Traditionalists, but not exclusively.), over time come to congregate within a given parish, when they do not have a TLM at their disposal. Whilst some are willing to respect the integrity, and value of non-Latin Traditions, not all are like that. Some will make demands that force the parish to latinize. They assume that being Catholic, means expressing things in Scholastic terms, etc. When they see that people don’t kneel for the Eucharist, don’t employ statues, attend Vespers, and not Sunday Liturgy etc., many are up in arms about how “unorthodox” these Churches are etc.

So while I’m not like that, I can only imagine what it’s like for all parties involved. The Priest, and parish that is overjoyed to receive new parishioners, but parishioners who desire to essentially have a Tridentine form of the DL, and all things associated with the Tridentine Liturgy.

 

[dzheremi]

Yet that shouldn’t be negotiated through the Priest. At least I don’t think so, that’s meant to be negotiated via the people/community as a whole.

The priest is not a separate member of the community, but anyway…I meant you talk to everybody, so far as that’s possible. And there are legitimate reasons why you might want to talk to the priest specifically – not to the exclusion of others but, say, in the situation I brought up in which certain people were nervous about English conversations. That’s probably best handled privately if necessary rather than being a matter of public (English-language) discussion, given the nature of the situation. I’ve had similar situations happen concerning me, by the way, as it is apparently not considered rude in Egyptian culture to talk about someone in front of them without including them in the conversation. That takes some getting used to.

Isn’t it a spiritual act of mercy to instruct the ignorant ? Isn’t that the key to evangelization, catechesis/dissemination of doctrine ?

As a catechumen, I certainly hope so!

Now you hit the nail on the head.

“What are you doing here ? You have your own Church.”. Is that really conducive to evangelization ? I don’t think it is, but it does occur whether we acknowledge it or not.

No, it’s not. Such ignorance is pitiful. It is also not characteristic of any given church, as I’m sure you know.

Whereas you were confused previously, I in turn am confused now. You stated that you’re not there to make friends (fine), and that if you’re in a community that you’re forced to bear being the social pariah, that you suck it up, and just do what you have to do. What then is community in the context of parish life ?

I think I didn’t express myself clearly, then. What I meant is that you have options in such a situation: You resign yourself to not making friends because that’s not the point; You bear it all in love, knowing that all must do the same on account of their own weaknesses; You address it with people to try to fix it and/or get to the bottom of it; etc. Usually, you do all of these to some degree, all the time. It’s part of being a person, whether you are with people who are like you or not. That’s essentially what the community is: People of various backgrounds, opinions, attitudes, and proclivities, coming together to worship as one. Whatever else it is, it is that at a very basic level.

 

[dzheremi]

Remember when I said that I speak Hebrew, but would attempt to keep those things to myself (Save for perhaps discussions with say a Priest, or something) ?

Some people are open minded, some aren’t, but in my experience saying you speak Hebrew, needs to be attached with, but I’m not Israeli…Even then, it makes people suspicious. Not saying that’s my experience with any given community, but I have been told by friends “DON’T mention that you speak Hebrew.” That’s just one example.

If I were you, I’d stop listening to my friends and worrying about these extraneous issues. Unless Hebrew is the language of the liturgy or the people, I’m not sure why it would come up. Well, I take that back: I was asked by Fr. Marcus (one of the two priests from AZ who serves us) if I spoke Hebrew, but apparently because he was confused as to how I knew the Arabic and Coptic responses. (I guess he thought I must know Hebrew if I know Arabic. Not sure how that works.)

I would guess that the Egyptians are more anti-Israeli than the Syriacs, so I wouldn’t worry about this.

I can’t say I have Aramaean, Syrian, Lebanese etc. roots, and that should be okay in so far as extra ecclesiastical activities are concerned. Yes I like kibbeh, lahambajn etc., but I can’t be something, and someone I’m not. I can’t speak of when my family’s involvement in the Lebanese Civil War, Mid-East politics etc. My historic ties are elsewhere, as are my experiences, yet for some reason or another, I’m called to the Church/Rite in question. GOD knows what He does.

You don’t have to talk about or have any experience with any of that stuff, though. That doesn’t have anything to do with joining a Syriac church. Maybe if you were trying to join the Ouwet or something, but you’re not in Lebanon, so who cares about all that stuff.

So while I’m not like that, I can only imagine what it’s like for all parties involved. The Priest, and parish that is overjoyed to receive new parishioners, but parishioners who desire to essentially have a Tridentine form of the DL, and all things associated with the Tridentine Liturgy.

Yeah, but that’s not you, and they’ll see that’s not you when you don’t do those things. So no problems there.

 

[East02West]

The priest is not a separate member of the community, but anyway…I meant you talk to everybody, so far as that’s possible. And there are legitimate reasons why you might want to talk to the priest specifically – not to the exclusion of others but, say, in the situation I brought up in which certain people were nervous about English conversations. That’s probably best handled privately if necessary rather than being a matter of public (English-language) discussion, given the nature of the situation.

I guess I have a rather different view of the role of the Priest. Namely that whilst a member of the community (Ideally he would be drawn from the community itself, as opposed to being shuffled about, or brought in from elsewhere. Then again, I also hold to the pipe dream of an apprenticeship based Priesthood, where a few individuals study under a Priest/Bishop. I’d go so far as hand picking them, but that’d solely work in a Parish where the Priest is intimately involved with EVERY member. That’s not really possible in a Church with 200 + members as is common to Latin Parishes.), he also exists in a semi removed position, granting him the opportunity to avail himself to all. I hope that make sense, but I’ve seen the disasters that occur when a Parish with 300+ parishioners per community, where the Priest favours a given community, over the needs of another community he is meant to serve in tandem. Maybe that is particular to Latin parishes, which never really got to integrating all the communities through the liturgy, whilst preserving their particular observances etc.

As a catechumen, I certainly hope so!

That’s essentially what the community is: People of various backgrounds, opinions, attitudes, and proclivities, coming together to worship as one. Whatever else it is, it is that at a very basic level.

I guess my question is, what is our responsibility each, to the other in the context of the parish ? See, in the instance you cited wherein you were told NOT to commune with the Byzantines, that to me constitutes community, because the person in question sought to ensure what they believed to be your spiritual best interests in mind. I haven’t exactly experienced community life as a Latin Catholic, even when I went to a rather small Traditional Latin Mass community. I didn’t really have much of a choice in terms of communities, given that it was the only parish that offered it.

If I were you, I’d stop listening to my friends and worrying about these extraneous issues. Unless Hebrew is the language of the liturgy or the people, I’m not sure why it would come up./QUOTE}

Well I only mentioned it “coming up” in the context of what brought about my interest in the Tradition. Knowing a bit of Hebrew is what facilitated it in the context of my interest with this particular liturgical Tradition. I think most of my friends told me not to mention it, given that most of the individuals in question, would likely be Lebanese, and Syrian, and their relationship with Israel isn’t exactly the best. Some people can put those differences aside, not everyone can, so it was more of there looking out for me I guess.

 

[dzheremi]

I guess I have a rather different view of the role of the Priest. Namely that whilst a member of the community he also exists in a semi removed position, granting him the opportunity to avail himself to all.

If I’m understanding you correctly, this is kind of what I am appealing to in singling out the priest as a person to talk to in case of problems (though I would not say that he is in a “semi-removed position”). Especially in a situation when you are new and not integrated into the community…well, who is more likely to have a fair and knowledgeable perspective on the community than the priest? Even in our tiny Coptic community here in NM, there are some (friendly but relatively constant) disagreements between particular individuals that might make the community seem more contentious than it actually is, especially to outsiders who aren’t used to the Egyptian way of discussing things. But if you ask the priest, who after all loves everyone and does not get into such conflicts, he’ll tell you “yes, so-and-so and so-and-so like to pick on each other; It is like this because X, Y, Z” (things that aren’t obvious to outsiders). 99.9% of behavior that doesn’t make sense to people from outside the ethnic/cultural group is explainable, even if it isn’t defensible (such as asking why you’re here if you’re not of X ethnicity). I’m assuming you’ll want to hear these explanations to try to make sense of what’s going on, and if it’s worth your time to try to integrate yourself into the community where some people are like this.

I hope that make sense, but I’ve seen the disasters that occur when a Parish with 300+ parishioners per community, where the Priest favours a given community, over the needs of another community he is meant to serve in tandem. Maybe that is particular to Latin parishes, which never really got to integrating all the communities through the liturgy, whilst preserving their particular observances etc.

At the Latin church I was received into, the Anglo and Latino communities had separate liturgies, separate priests (!), and were generally kept separate as a result. The homilies even differed between the two (the only time I’ve ever wanted to yell at a priest was when I had the extreme displeasure of sitting through a homily whose moral was essentially “the white people are serious about Catholicism because they donate more money than we do; You should all be more like the white people”). At the Coptic church, we have Copts, Jordanians, Ethiopians, Sudanese, and white people (me), and have apparently in the past have had Armenians. We all worship in common because we all believe in common and are nourished by this particular Orthodox expression of the common faith. I cannot generalize from my particular experiences, but having lived through both these situations, I know which one I am more comfortable with, and it is not the one I would have expected.

Well I only mentioned it “coming up” in the context of what brought about my interest in the Tradition. Knowing a bit of Hebrew is what facilitated it in the context of my interest with this particular liturgical Tradition. I think most of my friends told me not to mention it, given that most of the individuals in question, would likely be Lebanese, and Syrian, and their relationship with Israel isn’t exactly the best. Some people can put those differences aside, not everyone can, so it was more of there looking out for me I guess.

I see. Well, in the end you’ll whatever you feel is best regardless of anyone’s advice, and that might not be a bad thing. You probably wouldn’t, after all, want to feel like you have to walk on eggshells lest you disrupt some Lebanese or Syrian person’s idea of the world. As you’ve already mentioned, you can only be who you are. I would think if that includes and interest in Hebrew, any offended person would just have to deal with it. I know that I have had arguments (of an educational nature, of course ) with some people from church regarding Mexican culture, as they’re generally even more ignorant of it than I am, and since we’re in New Mexico it’s right over there. So occasionally I do have to remind them that not only are certain preconceived notions about Mexicans personally offensive to me (my grandmother came from Mexico, and she was legal, and she successfully attended medical school and worked as a very competent and beloved school nurse for 40 years, thank you very much), they are also just plain wrong. Syrians and Lebanese can also be wrong…that is, if you’re comfortable enough within the community to say so when necessary.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Hi there,

I am a member of the Syro-Malankara Exarchate in the USA, under the omniphor of His Excellency Aboon Mor Eusebius Thomas.

Please feel free to private msg me with questions. An excellent resource for your questions can be found at ByzCath.org - there are many Eastern Catholics and Oriental/Eastern Orthodox there. Neil, one of the admins there also maintains a pretty accurate list of Eastern Churches.

The Syro-Malankara Liturgy is more close to the Syriac Orthodox and Malankara Orthodox, than is practiced today by the Maronites. While the Syriac Catholic should be the same as ours, they have had a tendency in the Americas to imitate the Maronite, probably due to cultural and familial influences. This not uniform, however, as I have attended a traditional Maronite Qurbono, priest facing East, etc - almost the same as the Syro-Malankara, save for number of candles, color of altar dressing, and the altar veil - In Detroit of all places! - A bearded, traditional, young Married priest no less!

 

[malphono]

This not uniform, however, as I have attended a traditional Maronite Qurbono, priest facing East, etc - almost the same as the Syro-Malankara, save for number of candles, color of altar dressing, and the altar veil - In Detroit of all places! - A bearded, traditional, young Married priest no less!

A married Maronite priest in Detroit offering ad orientem??? I am unaware of any married Maronite clergy serving other than on an ad-hoc basis anywhere in the US, much less one who isn’t equally wedded to the versus populum table. If you wouldn’t mind, I’d appreciate if you could PM me some details.

 

[malphono]

A married Maronite priest in Detroit offering ad orientem??? I am unaware of any married Maronite clergy serving other than on an ad-hoc basis anywhere in the US, much less one who is not wedded to the versus populum table. If you wouldn’t mind, please PM me some details.