I just wanted to add my two cents in addressing the original OP. It’s not that Eastern Catholics things Roman. Many of us very much love and respect them. It’s just that we don’t think they belong in our public liturgical life. Things like the Rosary or Divine Mercy chaplet, etc. are all great and wonderful (my wife and I frequently pray the Divine Mercy chaplet together), but what many people bemoan is the replacing of our own public traditions such as Matins/Orthros or one of the Lesser Hours before the Divine Liturgy with a public Rosary. Or the replacing of the singing of the Akathist hymn during Great Lent with the Stations of the Cross. It’s not that we see those other devotions as bad, it’s just that they aren’t ours. Plus, Rome has been call for us for a couple of centuries now to return to our own authentic heritage and to de-Latinize those things which have been Latinized. So in returning to our own traditions we are not only being true to our own identity, we are also being obedient to Rome.
One example of a (pseudo)-Latinization was the insistence by Rome that our Liturgies be celebrated in a “liturgical/sacred” language. Now I won’t speak for the Oriental tradition, but among the Byzantines there is no real such thing as a “sacred” language. Our custom has always been to celebrate the Liturgical services of our Church in the language of the people. The then Archimandrite Joseph Raya (Melkite - eventually Archbishop) received much flack from Rome for translating our services into English for the sake of non-Arab people who were attending his parish out of curiosity. The concern at the time was that his parish would be flooded with disgruntled Roman Catholics who liked the fact that they could understand what was being sung at Abouna Joseph’s parish. Fr. Raya wrote a letter enumerating why he was celebrating the Liturgy in English and how this was justified according to the Byzantine tradition. The Melkite Patriarch (Maximos IV I believe it was) intervened and told Fr. Raya he would handle things from there. Two months later Raya’s position was completely vindicated. Incidentally this was one of the first occasions among Eastern Catholics that the Liturgy was celebrated in English in the U.S.
As to the argument that the push for de-Latinization comes primarily from “converts” to Eastern Christianity from Roman Catholicism, I would say that this isn’t quite fair. Sometimes converts are the breath of fresh air that a Church needs for revitalization and even return to tradition. Where would the Catholic Church in the U.S. be without such amazing converts as Scott Hahn, Jimmy Akin, and a good many people from Catholic Answers? Likewise in my experience it isn’t people who grew up with the Extraordinary Form that are clamoring for its return, it is “converts” to the Extraordinary Form from the Ordinary Form who are it’s strongest advocates. These are obviously generalizations and aren’t true across the board, but such seems to be true in most cases. As with anything, however, sensitivity and pastoral care are needed. In parishes that are heavily Latinized any de-Latinization will not be over night, and may even take generations.
I would also point out that, at least among the Melkites, it is our own hierarchs that are pushing for de-Latinization and that got the process started to begin with. So whether the people on these forums are “converts” or not, we are only being true to our identity, obedient to the Pope, and most importantly we are being obedient to our own bishops and Patriarch.
, but then neither was the Sacred Heart devotion or Stations of the Cross.
