www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Maronite Liturgy

Not to be rude. Please don't take it the wrong way. But why does the Maronite Liturgy look more like the Novus Ordo Roman Rite Mass, instead of the liturgy of the Syriac Orthodox Church. Shouldn't they be similar. I noticed in the Maronite Liturgy the priest facing the people rather than God, and contemporary music vs chant. Is this also a Vatican 2 generated reform, like what happened to the Roman Rite. I read on the Maronite website about a reform of the Qurbono. http://www.stmaron.org/1qurbono.html

This is the Syriac Orthodox Liturgy


And this the Maronite

The Maronite rite has Antiochene origins but belongs to the West Syrian vs. the East Syrian family. Moreover, it has been subject to latinization since the 11th century, sometimes forced, sometimes self-inflicted. Many critical Maronite texts were destroyed, and when Rome directed the Maronites to restore their original liturgical tradition, there was very little from which to work. A great deal of scholarship has gone into the restoration, but with so many blanks there is a lot of guesswork. Maronite bishops to whom I have spoken have also expressed concern that the reforms not move too quickly for fear of upsetting the faithful, so what you see today is very much an interim product. There is still a lot of latinization, but it is slowly being replaced with more authentic Maronite practices.

The Maronite liturgy is a strange amalgam, I agree. Here in Roanoke the Maronite liturgy is beautifully chanted by the priest, but much of the music sung by choir and congregation is of the Marty Haugen/St Louis Jesuit style. It just doesn't fit together.

That is Maronite chant, although accompanied by organ, not contemporary music. The Latinizations are the placement of the Creed in the Liturgy, the Roman style intercessions, and the unleavened bread.

The Maronite liturgical reforms have actually restored a number of authentic Syriac elements and purged many of the overt Latinizations like Latin Vestments and use of the Roman Canon rather than the Syriac Anaphorae.

Fr. Deacon Lance

The parish priest of the local parish has said me that the original maronite vestments are simple in colours, not like syriac ones.

Maronites are Syriac - the original vestments of both are the same. The only difference, it seems to me, based on speculation, is that since the Syriac Orthodox have a very close link to India, they have imported many of the vestments and styles from there - in India it is much less costly to make, the Tradition is still strong, they look beautiful, and they fit.

Father, unless I am terribly mistaken, the entrance song in the video is very much a contemporary song, as well as one of the songs sung during communion.

Here in Roanoke the choir is usually accompanied by a guitar, and contemporary songs are often sung during communion--as I said, a strange and unsettling amalgam, though the congregation seems very happy with the blending. The priest chants the liturgy beautifully.

Now if Maronite priests (as well as every Catholic priest on the planet) could simply be broken of the habit of greeting the congregation at the beginning of the Mass: "Good morning, everyone." It's a liturgy-killer.

"Good morning, everyone." It's a liturgy-killer.

As is the following bit of liturgical dialogue, recently heard in this vicinity:

Priest: Peace be with you.
People: And also with you.
Priest: Thank you.

Madeleine L'Engle hated the contemporary liturgical response "And also with you." She once remarked L'lengle that the only proper rejoinder to this response is "likewise, i'm sure."

One wonders where they got it in the first place, since the response, "And with your spirit) is universal across all the ancient liturgies. To say it is a semitism meaning "and also with you" doesn't stand up to serious scrutiny, not the least because the response in the Assyrian liturgy (about as ancient and semitic as one can get), the response is rendered as "and with you AND your spirit".

Though "and also with you" has been suppressed in the latest ICEL translation, apparently old bad habits are hard to break.

Hi,


Please read Matthew 25. God is more present in His people than anywhere else.

St. John Chrysostom clearly warns that it is pointless to claim we recognize God in the Eucharistic gifts if we fail to recognize him in our brothers and sisters, especially those most in need.

It is not facing the people vs. facing God. It is facing the people vs. facing a wall (granted, there might be an Icon on the wall, which would make it much more than a wall).

I find both liturgical positionings valid: Gathered around the altar, everybody facing the altar, or gathered before the altar, everybody facing the altar.

In both cases, the centerpoint of the Liturgy is the altar.

Shalom,
Memo

Memo,

In theory, your observation is valid, but my experience has been that with the priest facing the people, the altar seems to become transparent (a really big altar, like at the Vatican, would be an exception), with the priest and people both looking past it at each other.

(Of course, a priest with a good sense of liturgy can indeed make this work, but such would be the exception rather than the rule.)


Peace,
Deacon Richard

I was trained in the versus populum orientation and for the first thirteen years of my ministry believed that it was the proper and right orientation. Why would the celebrant turn his back on his congregation? But eventually I had to reconsider my views. I now firmly believe that the adoption of the versus populum was the single biggest blunder of the post-Vatican II liturgical reform. Once you put the celebrant on the other side of the altar facing the congregation, the temptation to entertain becomes virtually irresistible. The priest assumes center stage in a way that he never did in the older liturgy. He is now the focal point. Every word, every inflection, every gesture becomes "meaningful."

The results of the versus populum have been disastrous for Catholic liturgy and no significant reform will occur until the versus orientem is restored.

100000000% agreed, Father.

Alexis

Fr. Deacon Richard,

I agree with your comment, however, I can only control what I believe and how I behave during the Liturgy.

What the priest believes and how he behaves is (usually) beyond my sphere of influence.

Shalom,
Memo