[quote=DominvsVobiscvm]First off, “Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” is not a specific title for the Roman Mass; it’s simply a title for the Holy Sacrifice using typical Roman terminology.
Ditto for Byzantines and the “Divine Liturgy.” Although the phrase is Byzantine, it applies just as well to the Roman Mass.
The “Divine Liturgy” and the “Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” are one and the same thing. If you want to go into specifics, I think it’s proper to speak of Rites (Roman Rite, Byzantine Rite, Armenian Rite, etc.)
Of course, the Catholic communions themselves are called “Churches,” not “Rites.” Rite is a form of worship, Church the communion one belongs to.
That having been said, the Byzantines in this county have their fair share of abuses. Perhaps most of them are heavily Latinized, and their Liturgies are a living joke to any Orthodox (or Oriental Orthodox, or “Nestorian”) who goes and witnesses them. There are many notable exceptions, but they have yet to become norm.
It’s their abusive way of celebrating the Divine Liturgy that is such a stumbling block to many Orthodox today.
You are very sadly mistaken.
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass most certainly is a specific title for what you term the “Roman Mass.”
Second, the Liturgies of Sts. John Chrysostom, Basil and others are most certainly termed the Divine Liturgy of
You comments about churches/rites seem oddly out of place, and certainly they are uneeded.
There are no liturgical abuses in the Ruthenian Catholic parish I frequent. None.
This is not 1955 – “Latinization” is quite UNcommon today in ALL the Eastern Catholic Churches. To suggest that Eastern/Oritental Orthodox Liturgies are any “purer” than Eastern Catholic liturgies is to live in the past. The very distant past.