When are the Byzantine Catholics going to De-Latinize?

[Crescentinus]

Ask them if they have the spears and spoons.

[Phillip Rolfes]

Originally Posted by rciadan

I know that, to you who have been born into this rite or entered into it long ago, there is much to be done; but, I would like to say that, to one who was raised as an Atheist, came into the Church at a "Charismatic" Catholic Church, and had to read the Fathers in order to even know that abuses to the Liturgy were abounding: who had to constantly debate with priests regarding flagrant abuses and go through being referred to as "too Catholic" and being told I was "no longer welcome" at the same parish at whichI had been received into the Church, finally finding a Tridentine Mass (EF these days) to attend, only to have it be suspended due to the lack of a priest to say the Mass, discovering the DL has been a Godsend!
I must say, the Byzantine Catholic Church I now attend, after reading some of these posts, fits into the "much more like Russian Othodox" category than the "seems like Rome" one. There is no kneeling at all (with a short explanation of why not before the liturgy begins, for those visiting from the Latin Rite), no musical instruments, all chant the plain chant (there is a Cantor, but he only leads while all attending chant), and other things I am sure but cannot list due to my lack of knowledge, which I am attempting to rectify. (ECF for adults will be starting soon at the parish and I will be attending...)
I must also add that, I began attending the DL before the suspension of the EF, and felt the attraction before any news of the EF situation even bent my ear. I can honestly say, that I am at the DL because I am positively impacted by it, not because I am negative toward any of the Latin Rites.

It sounds as though you've found a gem of a parish as well.

[Phillip Rolfes]

Just to sum up what everyone else is saying here, the de-Latinization of the Eastern Catholic Churches (Byzantine or otherwise) isn't really a corporate de-Latinization so much as a parish-by-parish effort. Some parishes are more amenable to the process than others. I have noticed that in the 20th Century there were two major trends in the process of de-Latinization. One trend, a more positive example, was that set by Archbishop Joseph Tawil and continued now by Bishop Nicolas Samra for the Melkites in the U.S. This trend seems to be an internal effort begun by our hierarchs with a proper explanation as to why this process must take place.

The second trend - more negative in execution - was set by Met. Andrew Sheptytsky in his efforts to de-Latinize the Ukrainian Catholics in Ukraine, and by extension the U.S. Internal conflict among the bishops abounded as to the extent de-Latinization should take place, if at all. Finally the conflict reached the crisis point and the bishops turned to Rome to solve the matter. Rome came down in favor of the restoration of authentic Byzantine liturgical praxis (and eventually spiritual and theological praxis as well) as shone forth in the Ruthenian Recension. This restoration was spearheaded in part by Met. Sheptytsky's friend, Fr. Cyril Korolevsky, and actually spilled over into the restoration of authentic Byzantine praxis for all the Churches of the Slavic-Byzantine tradition. Sadly, due to the outbreak of World War II and the cultural upheavals produced by the rise and fall of Communism, the reforms of Met. Sheptytsky and Fr. Cyril Korolevsky are really just now starting to take effect in Ukraine.

In both cases the emphasis is on faithfulness to our [Eastern] tradition being the only way that we as Easterners can effectively and authentically proclaim Christ's Gospel. Archbishop Tawil once made a comment along the lines of insofar as we are unfaithful to our tradition, we are unable to faithfully proclaim the Gospel.

[malphono]

Originally Posted by Phillip Rolfes

Just to sum up what everyone else is saying here, the de-Latinization of the Eastern Catholic Churches (Byzantine or otherwise) isn't really a corporate de-Latinization so much as a parish-by-parish effort. Some parishes are more amenable to the process than others. ...

In both cases the emphasis is on faithfulness to our [Eastern] tradition being the only way that we as Easterners can effectively and authentically proclaim Christ's Gospel.

OK, but let us not forget that what is counted as "latinization" among the Byzantines is mild, even paltry, when compared to the Oriental Churches. So, with respect to the several Oriental Churches, it seems to me that any process of de-latinization must indeed be global (or "corporate") else it will not work.

In particular to the Maronites, as I've said so often (probably ad nauseam...), the current trend of continuing Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinization is quite the opposite. The SCC is far less affected, but nonetheless has succumbed to a good amount of the same thing. The Syro-Malabars seem to have had some limited success in their efforts, but of course they are split between the "Oriental camp" (Changanacherry, etc) and the "Latinized camp" (Ernakulam, Thrissur, etc).

The only ones to have approached the matter on a "corporate" level seem to be the Chaldeans, who undertook a grand effort at restoration and de-latinization. OTOH, that effort seems to be thwarted in certain places by some obstructionist bishops who insist on maintaining some latinizations, mainly the post-concilar, Novus Ordo-inspired variety.

[Phillip Rolfes]

Originally Posted by malphono

OK, but let us not forget that what is counted as "latinization" among the Byzantines is mild, even paltry, when compared to the Oriental Churches. So, with respect to the several Oriental Churches, it seems to me that any process of de-latinization must indeed be global (or "corporate") else it will not work.

In particular to the Maronites, as I've said so often (probably ad nauseam...), the current trend of continuing Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinization is quite the opposite. The SCC is far less affected, but nonetheless has succumbed to a good amount of the same thing. The Syro-Malabars seem to have had some limited success in their efforts, but of course they are split between the "Oriental camp" (Changanacherry, etc) and the "Latinized camp" (Ernakulam, Thrissur, etc).

The only ones to have approached the matter on a "corporate" level seem to be the Chaldeans, who undertook a grand effort at restoration and de-latinization. OTOH, that effort seems to be thwarted in certain places by some obstructionist bishops who insist on maintaining some latinizations, mainly the post-concilar, Novus Ordo-inspired variety.

Thanks for offering the Oriental perspective here, Malphono. Would that I knew more of the Oriental Catholic Churches and their situation, but my knowledge is, admittedly and shamefully, VERY limited. Hopefully soon I'll be able to remedy that.

[dcointin]

Are the Orthodox western-rite churches "Byzantinized"?

I would like to offer some a comparison that you might find interesting. I'm Eastern Orthodox, in the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America, and in a western-rite parish. We use what's been named "The Liturgy of St. Tikhon", which is a revised form of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. The goal of the Eastern Orthodox western-rite is to "baptize" the liturgies of those churches who, while not being Orthodox, are closer in spirit to us to enable converts to retain the heritage they're familiar with as much as possible. It is intended principally for groups of people who convert along with their priest, and not the reception a communion of churches. There is alot of variety in practices and usage from one parish to another, and my direct experience is confined to my own tiny mission parish, so please bear that in mind.

Are the Orthodox western-rite churches "Byzantinized"? Yes! Eastern Catholics are *not* the only ones with elements of other traditions present in their liturgical life. Here are some examples I've experienced:

1. Removal of the "Filioque" clause from the Nicene Creed
2. Use of Byzantine Icons
3. No use of statuary
4. Addition of Byzantine prayers in the Eucharistic Liturgy (e.g. "I believe O Lord, and I confess, that thou art the Christ"), despite the simultaneous usage of the Anglican "Prayer of Humble Access" just prior)
5. Addition of Byzantine prayers in devotional books (e.g. "St. Aiden Prayer Book"
inclusion of the Trisagion)
6. No extra-liturgical eucharistic devotions
7. Celebration of Easter according to Orthodox dating
8. Use of the Orthodox Study Bible (Old Testament based on Septuagint text)
9. Governed by Eastern bishops unfamaliar with and unable to celebrate according to western usage
10. Leavened bread in the Eucharist
11. Making the sign of the cross in the Orthodox manner (i.e. right to left, thumb and first two fingers joined)

I don't intend this list to be exhaustive, nor do I intend to debate whether the changes were appropriate or not, only that they exist.

Compared to this, would you say that the Latinizations you experience in Eastern Catholic churches are better, worse, or about the same?

[Peter J]

Not meaning to get off on a tangent, but is it accurate to say that the Vatican ordered them to de-latinize?

Originally Posted by Phillip Rolfes

The second trend - more negative in execution - was set by Met. Andrew Sheptytsky in his efforts to de-Latinize the Ukrainian Catholics in Ukraine, and by extension the U.S. Internal conflict among the bishops abounded as to the extent de-Latinization should take place, if at all. Finally the conflict reached the crisis point and the bishops turned to Rome to solve the matter. Rome came down in favor of the restoration of authentic Byzantine liturgical praxis (and eventually spiritual and theological praxis as well) as shone forth in the Ruthenian Recension.

Thanks, I was having trouble understanding the "Vatican ordered" part.

[John of Patmos]

Originally Posted by dcointin

Are the Orthodox western-rite churches "Byzantinized"?

I would like to offer some a comparison that you might find interesting. I'm Eastern Orthodox, in the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America, and in a western-rite parish. We use what's been named "The Liturgy of St. Tikhon", which is a revised form of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. The goal of the Eastern Orthodox western-rite is to "baptize" the liturgies of those churches who, while not being Orthodox, are closer in spirit to us to enable converts to retain the heritage they're familiar with as much as possible. It is intended principally for groups of people who convert along with their priest, and not the reception a communion of churches. There is alot of variety in practices and usage from one parish to another, and my direct experience is confined to my own tiny mission parish, so please bear that in mind.

Are the Orthodox western-rite churches "Byzantinized"? Yes! Eastern Catholics are *not* the only ones with elements of other traditions present in their liturgical life. Here are some examples I've experienced:

1. Removal of the "Filioque" clause from the Nicene Creed
2. Use of Byzantine Icons
3. No use of statuary
4. Addition of Byzantine prayers in the Eucharistic Liturgy (e.g. "I believe O Lord, and I confess, that thou art the Christ"), despite the simultaneous usage of the Anglican "Prayer of Humble Access" just prior)
5. Addition of Byzantine prayers in devotional books (e.g. "St. Aiden Prayer Book"
inclusion of the Trisagion)
6. No extra-liturgical eucharistic devotions
7. Celebration of Easter according to Orthodox dating
8. Use of the Orthodox Study Bible (Old Testament based on Septuagint text)
9. Governed by Eastern bishops unfamaliar with and unable to celebrate according to western usage
10. Leavened bread in the Eucharist
11. Making the sign of the cross in the Orthodox manner (i.e. right to left, thumb and first two fingers joined)

I don't intend this list to be exhaustive, nor do I intend to debate whether the changes were appropriate or not, only that they exist.

Compared to this, would you say that the Latinizations you experience in Eastern Catholic churches are better, worse, or about the same?

Honestly an interesting and thought provoking comparison. Locally, I don't think the Byzantines have many if any at all "Latinizations".
My Latin Parish has Andrey Rublev's "Trinity" in it, with a few more Icons in the Sacristy.
So, I guess we have a little "Byzanitization" going on!
anything with "-zation" on the end no longer sounds like a word, but I digress

[John of Patmos]

Originally Posted by dcointin

11. Making the sign of the cross in the Orthodox manner (i.e. right to left, thumb and first two fingers joined)

I just remembered, I have made the Sign in the Orthodox manner before at my Roman parish.

[malphono]

Originally Posted by Phillip Rolfes

Thanks for offering the Oriental perspective here, Malphono. Would that I knew more of the Oriental Catholic Churches and their situation, but my knowledge is, admittedly and shamefully, VERY limited. Hopefully soon I'll be able to remedy that.

While you're still in the DC area, why not head to OLOL on Alaska Ave some Sunday? (There are (or lat least were) quite a number of people from Falls Church/Tyson's Corners, etc who do). It'll give you a good idea of what goes on. If and when you do move back to Michigan there are, of course, several possibilities in the metro-Detroit area, including several Chaldean parishes, along with several Maronites ones (plus two in Windsor and one in Leamington), and one SCC.

[THE_ENCORE]

Originally Posted by Jaime Miller

I am Catholic but one set of my grandparents are Russian Orthodox so I’ve visited their church a number of times when I was growing up so I know the Orthodox Church pretty well. A few weeks ago we were on vacation and decided to go to Saturday anticipated divine liturgy at the nearby Byzantine Catholic parish before going out to dinner. I had expected it to be just like the Russian Orthodox divine liturgy. But it was more like the Roman Catholic Mass. There were some similarities but they were very different. Is this a leftover from the latinized days? Has there been any real effort to de-latinize the Byzantine Catholic liturgy and make it more like the Orthodox liturgy like the Vatican ordered? Or are the Byzantine rite Catholics keeping it more like the Roman Catholic Mass on purpose because it makes them more Catholic?

If one were to enter my church without knowledge of it being a orthodox or catholic church, 9 out of 10 times there guess would be an orthodox church. Everything is done in the eastern style of worship, IDK I guess some Byzantines haven't De-latinzed but here in Canada our Byzatine churches have a very eastern feel to them.

[ziapueblo]

Originally Posted by John of Patmos

I just remembered, I have made the Sign in the Orthodox manner before at my Roman parish.

I do that all the time at my Roman Catholic parish!

ZP

[ConstantineTG]

Let us also remember that actions in Liturgy and other Liturgical services are just the beginning of deLatinization. When the spirituality we live is still the Roman Catholic spirituality rather than an authentically Eastern one, then we're just Roman Catholics with an authentic Eastern Liturgy. If we don't follow the fasting cycles of the Eastern calendar, we don't celebrate the Feasts, we still see sin as offenses rather than sickness, then we are still Latinized.

[Vico]

To illustrate the post of ConstantineTG, from St. John Chrysostom, The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch Homily VII:

But God, quite on the contrary, when He finds a sinner, considers not how He may make him pay the penalty, but how He may amend him, and make him better, and invincible1359 for the 394 future. So that God is at the same time a Judge, a Physician, and a Teacher; for as a Judge He examines, and as a Physician He amends, and as a Teacher He instructs those who have sinned, directing them unto all spiritual wisdom.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf109.xix.ix.html

[ConstantineTG]

Originally Posted by Vico

To illustrate the post of ConstantineTG, from St. John Chrysostom, The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch Homily VII:

But God, quite on the contrary, when He finds a sinner, considers not how He may make him pay the penalty, but how He may amend him, and make him better, and invincible1359 for the 394 future. So that God is at the same time a Judge, a Physician, and a Teacher; for as a Judge He examines, and as a Physician He amends, and as a Teacher He instructs those who have sinned, directing them unto all spiritual wisdom.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf109.xix.ix.html

Thanks

What I mentioned is a small sample of the total picture of Eastern spirituality that we all need to authentically live. Again, this is not about one spirituality being better than the other, or that there is something wrong with the other one. If we want to live the spirituality of the Latin Rite, then we must do that the absolute best way possible. If we live the Eastern spirituality, then lets do that the absolute best way possible. Mixing and matching little things distort the overall spiritual life. Every action, every word, every tradition of each Rite is built upon centuries and centuries of teachings and traditions by Fathers, Confessors, Saints, etc. To reach the full potential of the praxis, we must be faithful to it in all aspects.

That is what I have come to learn.