www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Sacred Heart, Way of the Cross and the East

Слава Ісусу Христу!

John C. Hathaway,

We are to eliminate western practices from the Eastern Churches not just re-vest them. Why is the chaplet of Divine Mercy permitted to use Eastern elements for the west?

Coming back to the original topic...

Can anyone, please, tell me if the following feasts still appear OFFICIALLY on any Eastern Catholic church, eparchial or parochial calendar?

1) Sacred Heart / Immaculate Heart of Mary
2) Immaculate Conception
3) "Rosary Sunday" -- I think the Maronites still have this
4) Christ the King -- I've actually come across a recording of a "Christ the King Divine Liturgy"
5) Corpus Christi (I believe that some Melkites still observe these)

Alex Roman's postings have been most thought-provoking. My own thinking on this matter is in flux, giving rise to inconsistencies in my posts. Instead of pontificating in my ignorance, permit me to ask some questions instead.

On one hand, we all agree that Eastern traditions must be kept in their fullness. On the other hand, by virtue of their having been practiced by Eastern Catholics for hundreds of years, are devotions and practices such as the Rosary, the Way of the Cross, Sacred Heart and -- most of all -- Corpus Christi, still merely "Latin", or are they now also fully Eastern as well? I think that this is a question that deserves to be fully explored, beyond all the "Latinization-versus-Byzantinization" rhetoric.

I think it might also be good to re-explore what Vatican II really meant when it called for the restoration of the Eastern heritage of the Eastern Catholic Churches. Did the Eastern hierarchs there understand themselves as somehow calling for the abolition of devotion to the Sacred Heart, adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, etc? Or were they simply calling for the restoration of authentic but forgotten Eastern practices without necessarily calling for the abolition or removal of the devotions of Western origin that had found a home among the Eastern Catholic faithful? Given the way Vatican II was so widely construed in an unwarranted radical sense, and in the spirit of the current re-examination of the true will of the Council, I think that this topic deserves serious consideration and discussion.

It is my understanding that Vladyka Andrey and the holy Joseph Slipyj were both deeply devoted to the Sacred Heart and to Eucharistic adoration. On the other hand, I am sure that no one will question the Catholicity of an Eastern Catholic who prefers to use only traditional Byzantine practices of piety. Are both "schools of thought" really incompatible? I am just asking.

I personally find it ironic that no one objects when the Jesus Prayer and Eastern monastic wisdom is promoted in Roman Catholic circles, but when we speak of Easterners saying the Rosary... oh, the trouble!

Last but not the least... I think that the question of Latinization is especially acute in non-Byzantine Eastern Catholic churches such as the Chaldean, Maronite, Armenian Catholic and Syro-Malabar, that have been so thoroughly "Latinized" for so long that one can argue that a reverse process of "Orientalization" for them may not be possible, since there really will be little for them to fall back on (e.g. the connection to their pre-Latinized past has been all but lost), and their identity has become closely identified with the Latin influences that they have received and (in many cases) embraced as their own.

One can see this especially in the Syro-Malabar Church, where the implementation of the re-Chaldeanized liturgy has received fierce resistance from the people and the clergy since the 1950's. And I don't think you can ask the Maronites to give up "Latin" devotions either.

In these churches, do we forcibly "Re-Easternize" them, or do we simply accept them as they are and work to prevent a further erosion of their unique identity and praxis?

Just asking.

Incidentally, the Catholic apologist Ben Douglass, who spent some time in the BCCA, has this anecdote in his website:

http://www.pugiofidei.com/2004-2005.htm

I can guarantee that they will not appear on the Melkite calendars.

These devotions that you mention never entered our Church. There may be many who have learnt through Latin Cathol schooling the value of the rosary itself--and we do pray it some times in procession--Rosary Sunday, etc., are unknown and not part of our experience or tradition.

At least that is the case here in the Middle East and here in Australia. I cannot speak for the US.

Asianpilgrim,

Those of their respective Churche may correct me but here is what I am aware of:

We Ruthenians retain the Feast of the Immaculate Conception on Dec 8.

The Ukrainians retain the Feast of Corpus Christi as the Feast of the Holy Eucharist and the Feast of the Sacred Heart as the Feast of Christ the Lover of Mankind.

The Melkites retain the Feast of Corpus Christi as the Feast of the Divine Body of Christ and that of St. Joseph on Mar 19, according to Byzantine Daily Worship which may have been superceded.

The Chaldeans retain the Feasts of the Sacred Heart, Our Lady of Perpetual Help, Our Lady of Sorrows, and the Immaculate Conception according to the website if the Eparchy of St.Peter: http://www.kaldu.org/WeeklyNews.html

The Maronites retain the Feasts of the Immaculate Conception on Dec 8 and St. Joseph on Mar 19 according to the website of the Eparchy of Our Lady of Lebanon: http://www.usamaronite.org/heritage/calender.html

Fr. Deacon Lance

Not surprising since most of our bishops are somewhat Latinized to begin with. I can think of one who is not.

An incomplete post that was sent too soon.

I don't know where this quote originated, but I would consider most of our bishops to be somewhat Latinized. One is not. It seems to me that certain rosary fanciers jump through many hoops to get everyone else to pray it, too. If it floats your boat, then do it. However, I don't think it should replace genuine eastern devotions. If I am going to be eastern, I would rather have true eastern devotions, not warmed-over western ones. Otherwise, why not just abandon the east and go western?

Asian Pilgrim,

Let me put out simply my personal view. This is derived mostly from my own sense, but also a bit from then-Cardinal Ratzinger's "Called to Communion", as well as a book called "The Meaning of Typikon" (available from Alexander Press) which is a good expression of how I view things.

On or around 0 AD, there were several Jewish communities who built emerged (the people who left the Dead Sea scrolls being one), developing rules of prayer based on things such as (most appropriately) the Psalter. Doing this was apparently part of John the Forerunner's ministry. The Son of God did likewise - He and His diciples participated in the Temple worship, gathered together for their own pray, and the disciples even asked for their own rule of prayer, to which He gave them the "Our Father".

This continues after Pentecost. Each Christian community (i.e. local church or diocese) at first has its own rule of prayer. After many centuries these get codified regionally - in the "Byzantine" communion there are several Typika, in the Latin countries each diocese has its own variant of the Mass and Liturgy of the Hours prior to the 1300s. Later on, this is narrowed down even more, to the point today that each Rite has many different dioeceses and essentially one common rule of prayer.

The core of the prayer of the Church in each case is the Psalter. At the same time, along with the official prayer of the church, is room for private devotion and spirituality. This is the way a monastery works, this is they way a well functioning parish or diocese should work.

In the Byzantine Church, we have a set "schedule" if you will for the Psalter, called the Liturgy of the Hours, which includes various prayers from other places intermixed with the psalter. This constant prayer at all times and at all hours is our communion with God. Of course, not every parish can pray the full Liturgy of the Hours every day, however in the Byzantine tradition Vespers and Orthros are most important. On Sunday, it is especially important as we re-live the Resurrection as preparation for the eucharistic meal of the day. I'd personally think that without the vigil, prayer, and preparation that begins at sundown Saturday night and continues in the morning, we cannot truly understand the significance of the Divine Liturgy and that thereby we would be missing out on the "spiritual benefit" of the eucharist - save for the fact that with God all things are possible.

This is why, in some ROCOR parishes for instance, attendance at the (Vespers+ Orthros) Vigil is mandatory for Communion. I think that's the right way to do things, though I will be the first to admit my flaws, though I would be wary of its uncritical application in other jursidictions, and finally NEVER would recommend that anyone apply that in their own lives without talking with one's pastor [and I say this merely as an opinion of the ideal. I don't mean to throw rocks at anyone's ministry. Pastoral work is an incredibly difficult and frequently thankless task and I give the presbyterate lots of leeway].

So, the bottom line, I'd say that the Rosary, Way of the Cross, or the Jesus Prayer, etc. are essentially private prayers for one's private, nonliturgical prayer time. It's fine to pray them in a group, in Church, with clergy, but they are not the liturgy of the church and should NOT be used as substitutes. The function of the Church is to pray the liturgy of the hours in its various forms, with the Divine eucharistic liturgy at appropriate times. And for that matter Vatican II's proclamations on the Latin liturgy I believe backs up this statement.

Of course, if something's already established in a parish, it's very hard to change things. Many people's idea of tradition is "what we did when I was a kid" or "what we did ten years ago" and the amount of disruption, rumor mongering and the like that comes from change can be enormous. Enormous enough that one must tread very carefully.

Anyway, my opinion only. Sorry this is disjointed- I'm writing late at night, and need to take off.

Слава Ісусу Христу!

Who is going to tell these people their faith is tainted by statues?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-UuEc8fd_E

Dear MarkosC:

I have absolutely no disagreement with what you have said, although I'd like to emphasize that even in the Roman Catholic Church, the Rosary and Way of the Cross are also considered as non-liturgical. While it is true that these have, by and large, become the average lay Catholic's substitute for the Liturgy of the Hours (yes, we have that too!), this is not the ideal, which is that even the lay faithful should pray at least some of the Liturgy of the Hours, especially Sunday First and Second Vespers.

One of the reasons why the Roman LOTH was greatly revised and abbreviated in the early 1970's was precisely to make it more friendly for people with very busy schedules (the "active" and missionary clergy mostly, but also for the devout lay faithful). Unfortunately, the LOTH as a prayer for the laity remains largely unknown in the Western Church.

Coming back to the topic: I am not at all advocating that the Rosary and the Way of the Cross overthrow or replace the Eastern Liturgy of the Hours. Frankly, I can't think of any serious and devout Catholic who would want that!

The question here is: is it really "un-Eastern" for Eastern Catholics to say the Rosary and be devoted to the Way of the Cross and the Sacred Heart -- not as a substitute for the liturgy, but in addition to it and as part of their private lives of piety? And is it "un-Eastern" for Eastern Catholic hierarchs to adopt some feasts of Western origin, such as Immaculate Conception and Sacred Heart?

My own thoughts on these matters have careened from "left" to "right" and, at present, I am content to just ask without questioning anyone's integrity and orthodoxy.

By the way, I like ROCOR too! I'm just amazed at how so many people look to ROCOR as some sort of "Golden Standard" for Orthodox piety and liturgical practice in the diaspora.

Dear Fr. Deacon Lance,

In fact, there is no consistency in the UGCC with respect to these feasts.

"High Church" Eastern parishes will not have the feasts of "Christ the Lover of Mankind," nor Corpus Christi, Christ the King. They will celebrate the "Conception of St Anne" on Dec. 22/9.

Other "Low Church" Latin-style parishes will even add celebrations like Our Lady of the Rosary for all of October.

With respect to Asianpilgrim's post above, I think that one can and should isolate the theological reality of what is celebrated liturgically and then see if the form of its celebration is: a) Latinized b) authentically Byzantine/Eastern c) can become authentically Byzantine/Eastern with a little liturgical "tweaking."

It could very well be that the theological reality is entirely Latin and so in that case the only argument capable of being made for its retention is that of "pastoral prudence" (or the people like it too much to go on to something else in a hurry).

The Stations of the Cross is a case in point. It is celebrated as a paraliturgical devotion in western Ukrainian Catholic and UAOC parishes. Historically, it can be said to have inspired the Passia from the time of St Peter Mohyla (who developed this service, along with many others). It also inspired, the argument can be made, the Akathist to the Passian by St Innocent of Odessa (who, in his original, also included troparia in honour of the Five Wounds of Christ - something that was kept by the Greek-Catholic Akathistnyk of 1893 that I have in my possession).

St Dmitry of Rostov and others simply took Western devotions they found attractive, including Immaculate Conception devotions, veneration of the Sorrows of the Mother of God and even the hourly Hail Mary of the West, and put them into private prayer-books to be prayed by whoever wanted to.

The Ukrainian Basilian Father Ireney Nazarko once quoted writings from St Dmitry of Rostov to indicate the Orthodox also honour the Sacred Heart of Christ!

Also further to Asianpilgrim, St Vladimir's Press publication of St Nicholas Cabasilas' work on the Divine Liturgy has an interesting discussion about the differences between the Western devotion to the "Heart of Jesus" and the Eastern worship of the Heart of Christ.

I've read that article several times and if anyone can explain to me the differences, I would be most grateful!

Alex

Exactly. The Liturgy of the Hours, regardless of Rite, should "trump" all private devotions.

I know it's ridiculous to say that the Rosary is too complicated, but that's what a lot of laity think. "I can't keep all those mysteries straight." I mean, that's the kind of spiritual laziness we're dealing with from most people.

I certainly don't have a problem with the Rosary per se, I think the prayers are beautiful and when I was Catholic I enjoyed saying it. I do think, though, that there is a sense in which it is too complicated, at least from an eastern perspective. The idea of meditation on the mysteries, in the sense of forming a vision in one's mind about various New Testament events, is very foreign to the teachings of the ancient ascetical desert fathers. According to the fathers, we should be suspicious of all mental images and visions. That is why I think praying before the icon is helpful. The icon focuses are sight and our vision so that we do not conjure up imaginary visions in our mind. Anyway, this is just my opinion for what its worth (which may not be much).
Joe

I personally can't understand how the tradition of Sunday Vespers and the daily chanting of the Office in cathedrals suddenly disappeared in the West in the past 80 years. At present, only a very few cathedrals still have the weekly recitation -- much less the daily public chanting -- of the Office. Even St. Peter's Basilica has abandoned the daily singing of the Office since Paul VI. To his credit, Pope Benedict XVI is taking pains to have the Sunday Second Vespers in St. Peter's turned into 45 minutes of musical glory.

For that matter, another thing that I have observed is the loss of much of the great treasury of devotions of the Western Church and their replacement by just the Rosary and Way of the Cross and occasional litanies and novenas. Many modern prayerbooks contain, not tried and true devotions, but all sorts of new prayers fabricated ex nihilo.

In my own country, the Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary was sung everyday in most parishes until the close of the 19th century, and there was a rich treasury of hymns, chants and "serenades" for various kinds of processions. Today all of these have disappeared (except in some remote / provincial places) from processions, to be replaced by the recitation of the Rosary and Litany of Loreto at all times and the singing of a tiny repertory of Marian hymns.


It is actually licit to say 5 or even 15 decades of the Rosary while meditating on just one Mystery. It is also licit to meditate on the mysteries in random order. What is important is that one PRAYS.

However, I agree that the kind of spiritual laziness you indicate is often incompatible with the strength of heart necessary to maintain the life of prayer.

A response to a few random sentences since my last post.

Father Deacon Lance - I by no means meant to imply that the Rosary &al. are liturgical in the Latin Rite. I agree 100% that the Latin liturgy of the hours should be the norm, though it's probably buried among all that text.

I personally would not recommend that anyone drop (or not do) the Latin devotions from their private prayer simply because they are "Latin" and one wishes to be "Eastern". However, that's someone's spiritual director's call.

As for ROCOR - well I'd look to my parish as a standard for Liturgy here in the US . But of course I'll admit ROCOR parishes are frequently very good.

Asianpilgrim,

My impression is that the Latin Church took the Liturgy of the Hours and made it a private devotion in the immediate post-Tridentine era. Or that's what the major English liturgical history books imply. I know in Hispanophone nations the influence of the religious orders has been stronger. I think what you describe of the Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary is wonderful.

By the way, when is Vespers at St. Peters?

Markos

Rather than complicated, I find some of these Latin devotions to be simplistic and dripping with sentimentality. Perhaps that explains some of their popularity. I don't think adding the extra "mysteries" was such a great idea, either. What's next, Jesus has lunch with John the Baptist? I guess that would be part of the mundane mysteries. This idea of meditating on mysteries is a bit foreign to the eastern mindset, or so it seems to me. You are correct that the Liturgy of the Hours is what we should all be doing.