We are all catholic. We are all defective

[phil19034]

Also, there’s a difference between “Rites” and “sui juris churches.” I’m pretty sure that it would be possible to preserve the liturgical integrity of the Eastern Rites without maintaining the ecclesiologically problematic structure of parallel “sui juris churches” in one place.

Ironically, I oppose the “separate but equal” policies currently operative in the Catholic Church with regard to the Eastern Rites precisely because I am, as Peter J surmised, a big fan of Eastern Christianity. Forget worries about “Latinization”–I want the entire Western Church to be Easternized! (Not in the sense of losing our identity altogether, but in the sense of taking on a lot of things that we might think of as “Eastern.” Roman Catholics–in the specific, narrow sense of the word–could start by making Eucharistic Prayer IV the primary one used at Sunday Masses!)

Curious. Why do you like Eucharistic Prayer IV as the “standard” and/or consider it “eastern”?

I have no issue with what you are saying, I’m just curious.

Thanks

 

[Contarini]

Curious. Why do you like Eucharistic Prayer IV as the “standard” and/or consider it “eastern”?

I have no issue with what you are saying, I’m just curious.

Thanks

If you compare it with the Eastern prayers, especially the Prayer of St. Basil, I think the parallels are pretty clear. They were models for the liturgists who drew it up. See this website for a brief account.

I like it because it’s the most “narrative,” and also because of the grandeur of its language. Eucharistic Prayer I is majestic, but it focuses very much on the idea of offering a sacrifice to God, rather than narrating the whole saving work of God from creation to the present, as most early Christian liturgies did and as Eucharistic Prayer IV does. I can’t help but think that there’s something truncated in Western spirituality as a result (or that the truncation was already there in Roman Christianity and is reflected in the prayer). Prayers II and II just don’t seem substantive enough to me. I know this may seem disrespectful (bear in mind that I’m still Episcopalian!) and I’m not questioning the orthodoxy or legitimacy of any of the prayers. I’m simply saying that for regular usage in the worship of the Church, the ideal Eucharistic Prayer will encapsulate the Gospel, as the prayers of St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil in the Byzantine tradition do.

Edwin

 

[phil19034]

If you compare it with the Eastern prayers, especially the Prayer of St. Basil, I think the parallels are pretty clear. They were models for the liturgists who drew it up. See this website for a brief account.

I like it because it’s the most “narrative,” and also because of the grandeur of its language. Eucharistic Prayer I is majestic, but it focuses very much on the idea of offering a sacrifice to God, rather than narrating the whole saving work of God from creation to the present, as most early Christian liturgies did and as Eucharistic Prayer IV does. I can’t help but think that there’s something truncated in Western spirituality as a result (or that the truncation was already there in Roman Christianity and is reflected in the prayer). Prayers II and II just don’t seem substantive enough to me. I know this may seem disrespectful (bear in mind that I’m still Episcopalian!) and I’m not questioning the orthodoxy or legitimacy of any of the prayers. I’m simply saying that for regular usage in the worship of the Church, the ideal Eucharistic Prayer will encapsulate the Gospel, as the prayers of St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil in the Byzantine tradition do.

Edwin

Thanks.

BTW - You said “still Episcopalian!” Are you considering come home to the Catholic Church? Are your trying to determine whether to do so and what Rite or Use you would attend? If so, remember this little jingle “No matter the Rite, Catholics are right!”

God Bless and thanks for your thoughtful (name removed by moderator)ut

 

[Contarini]

Thanks.

BTW - You said “still Episcopalian!” Are you considering come home to the Catholic Church? Are your trying to determine whether to do so and what Rite or Use you would attend? If so, remember this little jingle “No matter the Rite, Catholics are right!”

God Bless and thanks for your thoughtful (name removed by moderator)ut

No, not trying to determine what Rite, for the reasons I gave above. However, my emphasis on the local parish has been one of the things that has kept me Episcopalian.

I have been thinking about becoming Catholic since some time before I became Episcopalian (first seriously talked about becoming Catholic in 1995; became Episcopalian in 1998).

I make Newman look positively hasty

What I am trying to determine is how I can be in communion with Rome without renouncing anything that is good and true in what I have known and practiced up to now. I think that this is much more difficult than most converts make it sound. (And if anyone responds with a post that includes the word “Ordinariate” in the singular or plural, I will know that you have no clue what I am talking about)

Edwin

 

[KDamgirl]

Also, there’s a difference between “Rites” and “sui juris churches.” I’m pretty sure that it would be possible to preserve the liturgical integrity of the Eastern Rites without maintaining the ecclesiologically problematic structure of parallel “sui juris churches” in one place.

Ironically, I oppose the “separate but equal” policies currently operative in the Catholic Church with regard to the Eastern Rites precisely because I am, as Peter J surmised, a big fan of Eastern Christianity. Forget worries about “Latinization”–I want the entire Western Church to be Easternized! (Not in the sense of losing our identity altogether, but in the sense of taking on a lot of things that we might think of as “Eastern.” Roman Catholics–in the specific, narrow sense of the word–could start by making Eucharistic Prayer IV the primary one used at Sunday Masses!)

What are these things you deem eastern that you would like the western church to adopt?
And why not simply become orthodox?

 

[Contarini]

What are these things you deem eastern that you would like the western church to adopt?
And why not simply become orthodox?

Oh, I’ve thought about it, believe me. But the bottom line is that I believe the Papacy is essential to the Church.

Another way of putting it is that I think Catholicism is really Catholic and Orthodoxy is really Orthodox.

Or, yet again: Orthodoxy best defines the core; Rome best defines the periphery.

Edwin