Society of St. Josephat - Traditionalists

[dixibehr]

I was referring to attacks in a very general sense i,e Priestly celibacy is intrinsically wrong, etc.<<

It’s not intrinsically wrong, but not an intrinsic part of the priestly vocation, either.

 

[Hesychios]

            My own belief is that the promotion of extreme distinctions actually runs contrary to our Catholicity, and will lead to eventual polarization. In formulating various dogmas, the universal Church has relied heavily on the writings of theologians of both the East and West. To hear some Orthodox in Communion types though, you'd never get that impression.

Unity has no fear of diversity.

These “extreme distinctions” as you call them are native to these churches. These are the true expressions of the spirituality of these churches.

The days of what was called “Latinization” are over, yet the view from cyberspace is that all that originated in the West is somehow toxic and still prevents us from having Molebens, Hours, Matins etc. My obvious question would be, “What’s now stopping you from practicing these devotions” Please don’t suggest it’s because some 80 year old cradle Ukrainian Catholic is quietly mumbling the rosary.

The question over Latinizations is an internal one to be addressed within those churches. Naturally there are those from the most recent generations who have been raised with these and have a strong sense of nostalgia for them. It is difficult to return to the authentic tradition of the church and also be pastorally sensitive to the needs of everyone. The process of change has to be slow in many parishes.

Yet, they do have this more recent mandate from Rome to restore their Traditions. So the hierarchs in those churches have their marching orders whether they like it or not.

The eastern Christians come to internet forums to discuss these issues and Latin Catholics (who get a chance to read about it all in cyber-space) somehow get offended over it. The eastern churches are not arguing to de-Latinize the Latin church, and they are not arguing to abolish mandatory clerical celibacy in the Latin church. They are chiefly concerned with restoring their own traditions, naturally their own public is divided and it is a debate that will continue for some time.

Unfortunately, the Latin church has a long history of interfering in the internal operations of these other traditional churches, and it seems some internet-posting Latins are no different than their predecessors. That means, often enough, that a minority of recalcitrant Latinized eastern Catholics will publicly challenge these restorations (bemoaning the loss of statues, and angry over the end of public rosary before mass) and then get sympathetic support from some Latins who come later to the issues and do not appreciate what is at stake.

 

[Seamus_L]

Hesychios

                     I'd say what it comes down to for me is that I support Eastern Catholics who want to remain exactly that, and who I feel I share a common faith with, instead of those who want to be Orthodox in Communion, and who look to groups like the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia for inspiration, who talk of "doxing" if the need ever arises (sorry, but I didn't invent the expression) and who seem to believe the Pope is only infallible when he tells them to de-Latinize. 

                    Contrary to what you may believe, I have great respect for the Eastern Catholic Churches and over the years, I've worshipped with and had long conversations in person with Ukrainian Catholics, Ruthenians, Maronites, Chaldeans, Armenian Catholics etc. I love the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom and have no desire to see it turned into the Latin Mass, if that were somehow even possible. I just plain and simple believe that one cannot be fully Orthodox and in communion with Rome, unless of course they turn a blind eye to the obvious differences. Sadly, a good many more Orthodox Christians seem to realise that, then do Catholics.

 

[dixibehr]

The very existence of Latinisms in the Eastern Churches seemed proof to the Orthodox that there was an agenda behind the formation of Uniate Churches (as they were then called by both sides): namely to slowly Romanize the Eastern liturgies, assimilate them as much as possible to the Latin rite, and then totally suppress them.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

It is so sad how some Latin Catholics measure catholicity as acceptance and practice of Latin devotions and traditions.

Very narrow minded and uninformed.

 

[dixibehr]

As an aside the forced imposition of clerical celibacy in the 20th century was largely due to the outfall and influence of one Latin bishop, Ireland, who has been rightly called “the father of American Modernism” by several authors.<<

More than one wag has called Bp. Ireland the father of American Orthodoxy, just as Cum data fuerit, Cum episcop, and Ea semper (“We’ve always done it that way”) are the papal documents that established it.

 

[Aramis]

The very existence of Latinisms in the Eastern Churches seemed proof to the Orthodox that there was an agenda behind the formation of Uniate Churches (as they were then called by both sides): namely to slowly Romanize the Eastern liturgies, assimilate them as much as possible to the Latin rite, and then totally suppress them.

that over a half-dozen magisterial documents from 1700-1900 make it explicit that the goal was to eventually make the orthodox latin rite catholics via the ECCs makes it PROOF that it was happening. Don’t have the cites to hand, but I’ll see if I can dig a few up tomorrow.