www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Western students reflect on visit to BC Church

TG,

The sad answer is, I doubt it. RC's have become so Protestantized in our area that it is hard to find any really reverent Church buildings. His comments seem Zwingilian like many of the RC Churches.

Continuing from the same fellows paper: (By the end see if you can guess what grade I did not give him.)

"The third difference I noticed was the Orthodox attitude toward acceptance. In the Catholic Church and most other Christian denominations, everyone is welcome." (Do you see the slippery slope?) "Most Churches are inclusive to anyone regardless of faith. This Sunday I learned that Eastern Orthodox Churches are exclusive,..." (Let's hear a 'Praise the Lord!") meaning that anyone who does not believe as they do is not welcome." (And to hammer home the point) "I had two friends with me who were not Christian and they were quite put off when the priest told them they were not welcome. The irony was that we were forced to atend in the first place.

This weekend I learned that you were a member of this Church. I had assumed that you were Catholic because you teach a Catholic theology course." ("Light from the East" went over his head. But then it did in Israel 2000 years ago.) "This does explain a lot to me though, because there were times during class when I thought to myself, 'Wait a minute, that's not right.' When in fact you were right, you just were not referring to Catholicism."

I do have my work cut out for me...but someone has to do it.

Dan Lauffer

Just to clarify one point.

A few students commented on how friendly and welcoming the Church was. However, a few others commented, as this student did, about how off putting the Church is.

Father Loya's comments about everyone not being welcome referred to the Eucharist and was made within the context of the sermon as part of his explanation of Christian worship.

This student has no understanding that if one is not a Christian that one is not in communion with Christ and is not to pretend that he is by receiving the precious Body and Blood of our Lord. I suspect he has never been taught better or perhaps he has and didn't listen any better to his priest than he did to me or Father Loya.

For what it's worth I pray that my "red" comments on his paper will help him understand a little better.

Dan Lauffer :rolleyes:

I almost hyper-ventilated on that one!!

Then I had to laugh! It sounds to me like a veiled attempt at ridicule. Perhaps some people are repulsed by what they perceive as "alien", I don't know. Perhaps some of the students were hitting the panic button when they felt their core values threatened. Clearly many did not want to understand that it was a Catholic parish.

Keep up the good work Professor Dan!

Something you expose these people to now will resonate with some of them later. Father Tom went the extra mile to help these visitors get a glimpse of the nature of our belief and worship.

Those things needed to be said, at least they will know that an ecclesia exists to truly worship God as community, there is no limit to ones efforts in that regard, and it is a SACRED liturgy, not a show!

This should be a good starting point for anyone to understand the nature of "Christian church and worship" and a good measure against which all other efforts can be compared.

In Christ
Michael

Dear Prof. Dan,

My university chaplain was a liturgical scholar and a member of the Holy Spirit Order.

After our Byzantine Liturgy, I told him about the negative comments I was hearing.

He told me, "Alex, Alex - wonderful as those people are, but they wouldn't know liturgical beauty if it jumped up and bit them on the nose in broad daylight!"

Alex

It's funny, my girlfriend and a common friend of ours both went to the same religious education classes in the same parish when they were growing up. When I introduced my girlfriend to Eastern Christian worship, she loved it. In fact, quite on her own initiative, she decided to worship at the local Ruthenian church when she is at home, although when she's upstate at school, she usually goes to the Latin church (although she prefers the OCA church that I attend when I'm up at school--we usually go together to both).

Our other friend, however, was first introduced to Eastern Christian worship, and she thought it was "pretty" and "colourful", and she liked the music (we were visiting OCA parishes), but I guess she perceived it as too theatrical, staged, rigidly orchestrated, etc. Now, I was not surprised by her liking the music, but I was surprised by her impressions of the rites as theatrical in a not so good way, especially since she is a drama major. To be fair, I may have misunderstood her partly or entirely, but I don't think so. She prefers the post-Vatican II rites because they are more "conversational", in that there is dialogue between the priest and the people (she noted the same exists in Orthodox liturgy, but she wasn't too keen on how EVERYTHING is sung--hence the "conversational" aspect of Roman Catholicism), and she didn't like the whole ad orientem thing because she feels more involved in the service if the priest is facing the people (another aspect of that whole "conversational" thing again). Also, the Roman liturgy could be adapted to the people, versus the rigidity of the Eastern liturgy, which she likes about the Roman services because "people are different". When I told her that the Roman Church hasn't been doing things like this for very long, and that perhaps even her mother's generation remembers things a little differently, she didn't have much to say other than to express happiness that things changed.

I was at first annoyed by the fact that I had finally met someone who simply did not have a taste for Eastern liturgy (I don't often meet such people unless they are Protestants), but that quickly passed (after all, why should I be annoyed at that?), and I became (and remain) perplexed by the whole thing. Granted, education is necessary, but even after I attempted a bit of that over time, it still wasn't sinking in. Was her experience (and the experiences of those Dan is quoting here) particular to the individuals, or is this sort of thing the changing face of tradition? Did the Roman liturgical reforms (and I do not mean this as an insult, but am asking a sincere question) inadvertently create a "new" tradition, to be passed down through the generations?

Dear Qathuliqa Mor Ephrem,

You are right indeed - I believe that about 12 Protestant liturgists were involved in the development of the Novus Ordo.

One reason for it was to make Protestants feel at home in the Catholic Church - there was a lot of enthusiasm and almost a naive belief at the time that making these liturgical changes would help bring the Protestants into the Church.

Apologists for the Novus Ordo tended to come up with what we now know are pretty naive ideas about liturgical development.

Having a "shortened Mass," for example, was said to best reflect the early Church services.

And we know that the early Church served very long services.

In fact, in the Eastern Church, the pattern is the opposite - the Liturgy of St James, the earlier liturgy, is longer than the St Basil Liturgy and the later Chrysostom Liturgy is the shortest of all.

I guess we'll still have to wait and see.

Alex

Mor Ephrem,

"Did the Roman liturgical reforms (and I do not mean this as an insult, but am asking a sincere question) inadvertently create a "new" tradition, to be passed down through the generations?"

Whether intentional or not it is clear to me that they have created a new tradition. This one pulls them away from Eastern Christianity and further toward Deism...er...Protestantism.

Alex,

"You are right indeed - I believe that about 12 Protestant liturgists were involved in the development of the Novus Ordo."

Is this literally true? It would not surprise me.

Dan Lauffer

Michael,

I was PO'd by his comments as well. But I don't think we can blame him too much given how the RC's have gutted their liturgy. He doesn't know any better. Liturgy must express our Theology and vis a versa. If in fact it does one wonders what a typical RC member actually believes. My ocassional contacts with the NO makes me ever more convinced that the Eastern way is the proper way.

It must be added that most of the students are very favorably impressed. One RC ligurgist is on the verge of quitting the RC's and coming East. But then, he has to feed his family. What sickens him the most is the contrast between reverence and integrity of the Eastern liturgy and the insistence by his RC priest that he never use the Gregorian chant and always use the syrupy stuff that passes for hymns in the RC Church.

DanL

Dear Professor Dan,

I once had a book with that matter outlined - but I've since lost it as I allowed myself to have it borrowed out a while ago.

I believe it is a certainty that Protestants were called on to help with the Novus Ordo liturgy - we discussed this in religion class when I was in Catholic high school. The priest explaining this then said, "But there's nothing wrong with that, you know."

I guess your posts here show that there could be . . .

Alex

Funny you should be talking about western students reflection on visit to BC church. This Sunday evening, because of morning activities that prevented us from attending our usual BC church, I went to a Life Teen Mass at a local RC church. I barely recognized a Mass. There was not one song (can hardly be called hymns) I recognized. Even the Creed was modernized into a question: Do you believe..., (and ended with amen, amen, amen, we do believe). Will be extremely happy and grateful to return to my beloved BC church next Sunday.
denise

Hi,

One of the great temptations of our time is precisely to draw this artificial line between Church stuff and "Real" stuff, as if what we do in the Church was not real, or as if what we do outside the Church is completely unrelated to what we do in the Church.

Yes, it is true that the true perfect form of worship is that which the Son of God performed by offering Himself to the Father as a Holy Oblation.

However, the thing doesn't end there. By calling each and every one of us to participate, not only of His Royal Priesthood, but rather of His very Divine Nature, Our Lord is actually inviting us to make our whole lives an integral part of that Eucharistic life of the Church, which is His Life, and Death and Resurrection.

So don't trivialize anything. Singing a song, embracing your children, providing care for the poor and elderly, all of those things, united to the One True Sacrifice of the Cross, by doing them our of the Life we receive from the Eucharist are true acts of worship.

Remember what the Holy Apostle James wrote about what is the true religion.

Remember also the warnings from our Holy Father John Chrysostom about attempting to find and worship Christ in the Eucharist without recognizing Him "out there".

Shalom,
Memo.

Dan,

I think these kinds of comments are what "PO" Latin posters here. There is a strong sense of superiority in your post, although I wholeheartedly believe that you did not intend such.

The "Eastern way" is certainly no better than the "Western way." Application of the "Eastern way," however, might very well be "the proper way."

Logos Teen

Logos Teen,

I suspect that most of the RC posters here are somewhat frustrated with the "application" of the New Order Mass. I don't know enough about how it was formulated or even what it is supposed be like but the way I've seen RC masses offered leaves me wondering what it is that is being communicated.

The proper response is to pray that God will guide both are Churches and leave it at that. When going to a RC mass I try to limit my visit to a few select parishes that show by their performance that they respect what they are doing. For my needs those aren't hard to discern.

St. John Cantius sets the Liturgical standards for the RCC in our area.

Dan Lauffer

Dan,

Thanks for the great posts.

On Sunday we endured the baptism of my nephew at a Congregationalist Roman Catholic Church. There were no icons, statues, kneelers, holy water fonts, stations of the cross, candles or any evidence of Christianity as an "incarnational" religion. In the spirit of Calvin and Zwingli, Catholicism was cast aside. Even the Eucharist was no where to be found.

Our daughter -- ever the evangelist -- kept asking where Jesus and Mary were. The truth was they were no where to be found in this affluent church.

A relative wanted to ask the priest if the church was finished. The cornerstone stated it was built in 1992.

It was sad. After the wonderful Divine Liturgy and Chrismation at Annunication we endured baptism at a parish that is truly ashamed to be Catholic. In terms of language, worship and architecture it is Protestant like so many other Roman Catholic parishes. What a shame.

John

Memo,

You are right. Fr. Alexander Golitzen talks about the Liturgy of the Heart (the sacrifice of our lives) being in tune with the Liturgy of the Church on Earth, which is in turn attuned to the Eternal Liturgy of Heaven. Alternately, the Sacrifice of Christ in us, united with the Sacrifice of the Liturgy, united with the Sacrifice of the Lamb as presented in Heaven.

The problem here is that this entire concept is missing. The concept so often now understood and put into practice/prayer is precisely what another posted called congregationalist. There is no concept of trancendence, of sacrifice, of heavenly worship--no of this. Rather, it is a closed circle of 'community'. They may have (in some places) moved on from the super-sappy platitudes of the seventies, the closed-circle (notice the priest facing the people) community ultimately worships itself. For example many of the songs sung in today's churches. Many would say that they don't like them because of poor musicianship, but the biggest problem is the lack of worship with self-congradulation in its stead. There is little concept of, as St. John Chrysostom says, Heaven descending to earth and earth ascending to Heaven.

One of the biggest problems, IMHO, is that a very American legal perspective, erroneously, was applied to the interpretation of the NO rubrics. In American law, the underlying principle (to speak very generally) is that anything not prohibited is permitted. This is not proper to the interpretation of liturgical directives. The proper approach is, in the absence of explicit directives, continue as done before. In other words, whenever the NO rubrics didn't explicitly say what to do, the proper approach would have been to do as always done in the 'Tridentine' Mass. However, this principle is foreign even to most 'conservative' priests in the R.C. today. It is unfortunate.

Had this principle been put into effect, things would not be nearly so bad. While there would still be questionable aspects to the NO (e.g. the anaphora for consecration of a baptismal font turned into a simple blessing as of a sacramental), the NO would still have been able to maintain a more or less traditional liturgical experience.

While this is a matter of implementation, it is one that will take much more than an instruction or two on the GIRM.

Justin