Why is it so easy for the Latin Church to lose its traditions while the Eastern Churches do not?

[Phillip_Rolfes]

I don’t have much to add to this thread, except to say that I’ve been to an Etheopian Orthodox liturgy and saw almost exactly this…

youtube.com/watch?v=F6EigDGD8J4 (wait for it…)

Consecration and recpetion of the Eucharist came well before this activity, early in the liturgy. This dancing was followed to a lengthy instruction in some aspect of the scriptures. By that time my host and I had left the Church and were in another building eating some of the spiciest food I had ever put in my mouth.

Some things don’t change. I understood the word “Maria” in the music and knew what was happening when bells started rining and people hit the deck. Everyone was extremely reverent. We removed our shoes and kissed the doorpost before entering the Church.

If you think your church uses alot of incense, you got nothing on these guys. My kids were totally bored until this dancing started, and then they were like, “These guys are crazy!”

-Tim-

Tim,

This is fantastic. I need to get to the Ethiopian Orthodox parish that’s up the street from me at some point in the near future. Every time I watch a video like this one or listen to the Ethiopian chant, I start getting all teary eyed. Their worship just seems so “earthy” and incarnational. I LOVE it!

 

[TimothyH]

Tim,

This is fantastic. I need to get to the Ethiopian Orthodox parish that’s up the street from me at some point in the near future. Every time I watch a video like this one or listen to the Ethiopian chant, I start getting all teary eyed. Their worship just seems so “earthy” and incarnational. I LOVE it!

The whole thing reminded me of the war chants in movie “Zulu”, the original version with Michael Caine. I know that they are from completely different parts of the continent from Etheopia, but thats what it reminded me of when I was at the Church.

youtube.com/watch?v=ODM1RJe4FvQ

There is a part in the video where the Zulu chant and the melodic singing of the British is juxtaposed around 4:40.

I can’t see how people want to stuff each other into spiritual boxes from other cultures. Our Church has a Haitian prayer service on Thursday night after Mass. After altar serving at Mass, I sometimes just go in and sit and listen to them sing. It’s so beautiful.

-Tim-

 

[TrueLight]

I don’t have much to add to this thread, except to say that I’ve been to an Etheopian Orthodox liturgy and saw almost exactly this…

youtube.com/watch?v=F6EigDGD8J4 (wait for it…)

Consecration and recpetion of the Eucharist came well before this activity, early in the liturgy. This dancing was followed to a lengthy instruction in some aspect of the scriptures. By that time my host and I had left the Church and were in another building eating some of the spiciest food I had ever put in my mouth.

Some things don’t change. I understood the word “Maria” in thhe music and knew what was happening when bells started rining and people hit the deck. Everyone was extremely reverent. We removed our shoes and kissed the doorpost before entering the Church.

If you think your church uses alot of incense, you got nothing on these guys. My kids were totally bored until this dancing started, and then they were like, “These guys are crazy!”

-Tim-

Hmmm.

More on this later.

 

[Celticnovice]

I don’t have much to add to this thread, except to say that I’ve been to an Etheopian Orthodox liturgy and saw almost exactly this…

youtube.com/watch?v=F6EigDGD8J4 (wait for it…)

Consecration and recpetion of the Eucharist came well before this activity, early in the liturgy. This dancing was followed to a lengthy instruction in some aspect of the scriptures. By that time my host and I had left the Church and were in another building eating some of the spiciest food I had ever put in my mouth.

Some things don’t change. I understood the word “Maria” in the music and knew what was happening when bells started rining and people hit the deck. Everyone was extremely reverent. We removed our shoes and kissed the doorpost before entering the Church.

If you think your church uses alot of incense, you got nothing on these guys. My kids were totally bored until this dancing started, and then they were like, “These guys are crazy!”

-Tim-

Hi Tim,

Is that a Coptic Orthodox service?

 

[PJM]

=tata888;9665581]Why is it so easy for western churches to lose their traditions when the eastern churches can hold onto theirs for such a long time?

They did not have Vatican II and all of its ramifications both bad and good to deasl with.

God Bless,
Pat /PJM

 

[TimothyH]

Hi Tim,

Is that a Coptic Orthodox service?

I don’t even know. I wasn’t even aware that there were different Etheopian Churches when I went. It was about four years ago.

My host has gone back to Etheopia and the Church appears to have moved or built another building. I can’t tell which Church it is based on searching the websites of the Ethiopian Churches in Atlanta.

-Tim-

 

[una_fides]

Why is it so easy for western churches to lose their traditions when the eastern churches can hold onto theirs for such a long time?

IMHO, a lot boils down to the Church’s adoption of masses completely in the vernacular rather than sticking to what Vatican II taught concerning Latin. sites.google.com/site/prayinglatin/why-pray-in-latin
There was a certain division within the Church and there was and still is a particular camp that has a certain suspicion and animosity towards anything that took place prior to Vatican II. Change for the sake of change was their objective, and they used an obscure “spirit of Vatican II” to justify their many innovations and abuses that popes have been lamenting for the past 40 years. Pope Benedict’s book *The Spirit of the Liturgy *puts some liturgical matters into perspective, and I think his overall theme for a “reform of the reform” is very slowly inching the Church towards correcting and addressing some of these issues. Overall what is needed is a distinct Catholic identity, a unity in the absolute fidelity to the Church, her teachings, and her traditions and heritage.

In comparison with the Eastern Churches, they never had a Vatican II. They, like all other religions in the world at that time, did not experience the great falling out of the faith, as the Catholic Church did. Whether someone argues that the Council was the cause or was not, the resulting chaos is undeniable and its effects are still being felt today wherever liturgical abuse and innovation is found. (Which for me sadly is in the majority of the churches in my diocese…)

(I haven’t read through everything in this thread so I apologize if any of these things were already said or discussed.)

 

[Melchior_1]

In comparison with the Eastern Churches, they never had a Vatican II. They, like all other religions in the world at that time, did not experience the great falling out of the faith, as the Catholic Church did.

People from the East can correct me if I’m wrong here; the Eastern Churches had a Vatican II because they’re, you know, fully Catholic. Although it sounds like “they, like all other religions” makes it sound like think the Eastern Churches are a different religion than “Roman Catholicism”.

And I’m pretty sure other religions had a dip in their numbers too.

 

[una_fides]

People from the East can correct me if I’m wrong here; the Eastern Churches had a Vatican II because they’re, you know, fully Catholic. Although it sounds like “they, like all other religions” makes it sound like think the Eastern Churches are a different religion than “Roman Catholicism”.

And I’m pretty sure other religions had a dip in their numbers too.

You would think so, but they didn’t. Look it up. And my reference to eastern Churches was regarding the liturgical experimentation that took place with the Novus Ordo and such. Eastern liturgies and practices were left alone.

 

[ConstantineTG]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd....0x720/297365_370149416388360_1261299933_n.jpg

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

You would think so, but they didn’t. Look it up. And my reference to eastern Churches was regarding the liturgical experimentation that took place with the Novus Ordo and such. Eastern liturgies and practices were left alone.

This is really only half true. Eastern liturgies and practices were left alone by the reforms of the Mass that took place under Pope Paul VI after Vatican II (not at Vatican II or because of Vatican II). This is because the reforms of Paul VI were only for the Roman Church, not for the other particular Churches sui iuris that make up the Catholic Church.

Many Eastern Catholic Churches sui iuris have indeed undergone their own reformation of the Liturgy. Are you not familiar with the recent (past decade) reforms of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom that took place in the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church? Or what about the reforms of the Qurbono that took place in the Maronite Church? Even the Melkites have undergone minor reforms and permitted certain experimentations (albeit those experimentations are rarely “toyed with” in this country). I assure you that these reforms have been met with a great deal of hostility and disappointment by a large number of the Eastern faithful - particularly among the Ruthenians - many of whom have simply left for greener pastures (whether in Orthodoxy or in Roman Catholicism or in another particular Church sui iuris that hasn’t lost its liturgical identity).

Trust me, the grass is not greener on the Eastern side of the Catholic fence. Nor, I’m given to understand, is it greener on the Orthodox side.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

You would think so, but they didn’t. Look it up. And my reference to eastern Churches was regarding the liturgical experimentation that took place with the Novus Ordo and such. Eastern liturgies and practices were left alone.

One other thing. Are you also unaware that the Eastern Catholic bishops had a HUGE voice and role in the deliberations and resulting documents that came out of Vatican II? The Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch along with his brother Melkite bishops were particularly vocal at the Council. To say that the East did not have a Vatican II is to ignore the influence that the East itself had at Vatican II.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

IMHO, a lot boils down to the Church’s adoption of masses completely in the vernacular rather than sticking to what Vatican II taught concerning Latin.

There’s a part of me that agrees and a part that disagrees with you here. I agree in the sense that the documents of Vatican II are very clear in stating that Latin ought to be retained as the primary language of the Mass, along with the fact that pride of place ought to be given to Gregorian chant for music at the Mass. But I disagree that Mass in the vernacular is the primary factor in the West’s supposed loss of tradition as opposed to the East’s retention of its own tradition.

The tradition of the East - at least the Byzantine East - has always been Liturgy in the vernacular. Now whether it is some archaic or some colloquial form of the vernacular we could argue ad nausiam, but the tradition has been for the vernacular nonetheless. It seems that that has really been a matter for each particular Church sui iuris to tackle. So, for example, among the Melkites in the Middle East, a formal version of Arabic is used; whereas in Romania they have always preferred to use modern Romanian to the point that they have a commission that meets regularly to update translations to ensure that they are in the modern parlance while at the same time being faithful to the original Greek and/or Slavonic texts. That being said, we also have due respect for the ancient liturgical languages. Among the Slavic Byzantines you will find that they will switch rather comfortably between the vernacular and Church Slavonic. The Melkites here in the U.S. sway beautifully from English to Arabic to Greek, and the Romanians from Romanian to English with a little Greek thrown in here and there (I’ve even heard some Romanians throw in a little Spanish).

So, long story short I really believe the introduction of the vernacular into the Roman Mass has little to do with the liturgical abuses that one sees today at a good number (perhaps majority) of Roman Masses. The use of the vernacular to the exclusion of liturgical Latin, I would say, is more a symptom than a cause of the so-called loss of tradition.

 

[una_fides]

One other thing. Are you also unaware that the Eastern Catholic bishops had a HUGE voice and role in the deliberations and resulting documents that came out of Vatican II? The Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch along with his brother Melkite bishops were particularly vocal at the Council. To say that the East did not have a Vatican II is to ignore the influence that the East itself had at Vatican II.

I was initially really thinking more along the lines of eastern Churches not in union with Rome that did not have a Vatican II at all, and the ones in union with Rome didn’t seem have as much chaos as the western Churches, but you do make some good points. The eastern Churches certainly had a great influence on Vatican II’s documents concerning collegiality and the decentralization of power away from the curia and to bishops’ conferences. I would say that these changes have had devastating effects on the faith of the Church as a result of many of the things these groups have implemented since the Council, but those specifics are really more of a discussion for another thread.

 

[lssanjose]

This is really only half true. Eastern liturgies and practices were left alone by the reforms of the Mass that took place under Pope Paul VI after Vatican II (not at Vatican II or because of Vatican II). This is because the reforms of Paul VI were only for the Roman Church, not for the other particular Churches sui iuris that make up the Catholic Church.

Many Eastern Catholic Churches sui iuris have indeed undergone their own reformation of the Liturgy. Are you not familiar with the recent (past decade) reforms of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom that took place in the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church? Or what about the reforms of the Qurbono that took place in the Maronite Church? Even the Melkites have undergone minor reforms and permitted certain experimentations (albeit those experimentations are rarely “toyed with” in this country). I assure you that these reforms have been met with a great deal of hostility and disappointment by a large number of the Eastern faithful - particularly among the Ruthenians - many of whom have simply left for greener pastures (whether in Orthodoxy or in Roman Catholicism or in another particular Church sui iuris that hasn’t lost its liturgical identity).

Trust me, the grass is not greener on the Eastern side of the Catholic fence. Nor, I’m given to understand, is it greener on the Orthodox side.

Speaking to this, I found out Old Testament readings were more or less taken out of divine liturgies, or most of the lectionary, some years ago, in both Eastern Orthodox, and Eastern Catholic jurisdictions. Although, I do know an Orthodox friend who said the parish priest, there, decided to retain Old Testament readings in Vespers. I don’t know how it is for your jurisdiction, Phillip. But, I do find this change a little disheartening, in that I won’t get a real feel (in my mind) for the Byzantine lectionary tradition/cycle.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Speaking to this, I found out Old Testament readings were more or less taken out of divine liturgies, or most of the lectionary, some years ago, in both Eastern Orthodox, and Eastern Catholic jurisdictions. Although, I do know an Orthodox friend who said the parish priest, there, decided to retain Old Testament readings in Vespers. I don’t know how it is for your jurisdiction, Phillip. But, I do find this change a little disheartening, in that I won’t get a real feel (in my mind) for the Byzantine lectionary tradition/cycle.

If by “some years ago” you mean the First Millennium, then yes.

Much like the Latin Mass, the Divine Liturgy only contains one Epistle reading and then the Gospel. Old Testament “Prophesies” are read as part of other Liturgical services, but not the Divine Liturgy itself. Back in the day it was expected of people of a town to be in Church for Vespers, then in the morning for Matins and then Divine Liturgy, as well as praying the Hours.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I was initially really thinking more along the lines of eastern Churches not in union with Rome that did not have a Vatican II at all, and the ones in union with Rome didn’t seem have as much chaos as the western Churches, but you do make some good points. The eastern Churches certainly had a great influence on Vatican II’s documents concerning collegiality and the decentralization of power away from the curia and to bishops’ conferences. I would say that these changes have had devastating effects on the faith of the Church as a result of many of the things these groups have implemented since the Council, but those specifics are really more of a discussion for another thread.

Still you are wrong. Secularism has affected all Churches. Again, the Eastern Churches have their own issues, their own problems. Just because they don’t have the same exact problems as the Roman Catholic Church, it does not mean they do not have any problems at all.

 

[lssanjose]

If by “some years ago” you mean the First Millennium, then yes.

Much like the Latin Mass, the Divine Liturgy only contains one Epistle reading and then the Gospel. Old Testament “Prophesies” are read as part of other Liturgical services, but not the Divine Liturgy itself. Back in the day it was expected of people of a town to be in Church for Vespers, then in the morning for Matins and then Divine Liturgy, as well as praying the Hours.

No, I don’t think so. My friend, I believe, was referencing 30, or so, years back. I’m mainly referring throughout the lectionary cycle for the year; and, not so much what’s read during liturgy (though, he might have referred to that, too). But, I’ll be sure to double check with him, as he’s quite astute when it comes to liturgical history. His mention of Coptic liturgical dance (I think during weddings) is intriguing enough for me to see how they do it, as opposed to how some conservative Latin rite Catholics look down on liturgical dance during the mass (something I’ve never witnessed personally).

 

[ConstantineTG]

No, I don’t think so. My friend, I believe, was referencing 30, or so, years back. I’m mainly referring throughout the lectionary cycle for the year; and, not so much what’s read during liturgy (though, he might have referred to that, too). But, I’ll be sure to double check with him, as he’s quite astute when it comes to liturgical history. His mention of Coptic liturgical dance (I think during weddings) is intriguing enough for me to see how they do it, as opposed to how some conservative Latin rite Catholics look down on liturgical dance during the mass (something I’ve never witnessed personally).

If you are talking about the Coptic Liturgy, I wouldn’t contest. I know nothing about the Coptic Liturgy save for a video I watched on YouTube.

But if you are talking about the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom as used by the Chalcedonian Orthodox Churches and the Catholic Churches of the Byzantine Rite, then I can assuredly say that the Old Testament readings have dropped away permanently in the 8th century. This is from Fr. Lawrence Farley’s book on the Divine Liturgy, “Let us attend!” where he explains all the parts of the Divine Liturgy including the history of its development.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

One other thing. Are you also unaware that the Eastern Catholic bishops had a HUGE voice and role in the deliberations and resulting documents that came out of Vatican II? The Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch along with his brother Melkite bishops were particularly vocal at the Council. To say that the East did not have a Vatican II is to ignore the influence that the East itself had at Vatican II.

To add to that, unlike the First Vatican Council (where Orthodox were invited to observe, but declined to attend), there were ample number of Orthodox observers present for the Second Vatican Council.