|
1 members (1 invisible),
680
guests, and
98
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,521
Posts417,614
Members6,171
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 15
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 15 |
Ben, I should apologize for my large amount of typos in my post from last night...thanks for you comments.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
I'm still recovering from an English translation of the Divine Liturgy of Saint Basil (published in Brookline), which reads: "We have seen the typos of Your Holy Resurrection"!
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658 |
I am quite sure that this parish probably still exists in the United States, many Hispanics joined the OCA Southwest Diocese. The icon of Our Lady of Guadalupe is venerated by Orthodox and Catholics so this is not surprising.
I say i agree with AngloOrthodox about the Roman Mass. I will always love the Greek Liturgy because most of it is indeed taken from the Scripture, but the Roman Mass is also a treasure of the Church, as it comes from the Apostolic Tradition.
The Anglican liturgy I find its use in the Universal Church less legitimate because it's less connected to the past and it was the work of Protestants who tried to emasculate this liturgy depriving it of the sacrificial nature. Even if it was corrected by Orthodoxy or Catholicism (Anglican Use), why using a liturgy which had to be corrected? Instead of using a liturgy that does not have errors, like the Roman Mass?
If we accept the Anglican Lituurgy could we also accept the Novus Ordo Liturgy to attract former Catholics?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 80
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 80 |
As to a couple of things you mentioned, it is true that certain forms of vestments and chant have changed, and would not be 100% identical to what we would find in 1100 Italy. The same is true of the Byzantine Liturgy, what is seen today is not 100% identical to 1100 of 1453 Byzantium! Organic development does not mean that the liturgy of today is to be exactly the same as if was one thousand years ago! If the development occurred outside Orthodoxy how organic can it be? Another question is why would two Antiochian Orthodox priests, Fr Theodore Pulcini and Fr. Elias Yelovich attend Fr Raphael Matthew Johnson's ordination? For all I know they may have shaken Archbishop John's hand! It was because of this that I was under the impression that Fr. Raphael is not a quack... I will continue educating myself on the liturgy and traditions of the western church.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 80
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 80 |
Low Mass originated in the early Middle Ages as a shortened or simplified form of Solemn Mass. Catholic practice had been that there was (at most) one Mass in a monastery or parish church each day. However, over time it became necessary for a variety of reasons to celebrate more than one on the same day. It also became customary for monasteries to ordain most of their monks, though originally monks were almost all laymen, and for every priest to say a daily Mass. For a while, concelebration, whereby several priests took a full priestly part in offering Mass, provided all with the possibility to celebrate Mass each day, but this custom died out. Low Mass is considered to be a necessity that falls short of the ideal, which is Solemn Mass.
The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1913 describes the result as follows:
... concelebration was in the early Middle Ages replaced by separate private celebrations. No doubt the custom of offering each Mass for a special intention helped to bring about this change. The separate celebrations then involved the building of many altars in one church and the reduction of the ritual to the simplest possible form. The deacon and subdeacon were in this case dispensed with; the celebrant took their part as well as his own. One server took the part of the choir and of all the other ministers, everything was said instead of being sung, the incense and kiss of peace were omitted. So we have the well-known rite of low Mass (missa privata). This then reacted on high Mass (missa solemnis), so that at high Mass too the celebrant himself recites everything, even though it be also sung by the deacon, subdeacon, or choir. Is this Organic development? Can I expect to find all monks ordained as priests so that they can have separate private celebrations (missa privatas) spoken in inaudible voices in their private radiating/side chapels? Is this Western Orthodoxy?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,437 Likes: 1
Administrator Member
|
|
Administrator Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,437 Likes: 1 |
I have just had time to review this thread. The tone of which I find quite questionable along with its content. Therefore the thread is being closed.
In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator
Everyone baptized into Christ should pass progressively through all the stages of Christ's own life, for in baptism he receives the power so to progress, and through the commandments he can discover and learn how to accomplish such progression. - Saint Gregory of Sinai
|
|
|
|
|
