www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Ruthenian latinizations

Actually, Latin Churches had icons. I've been to Rome, and I've see frescos and mosaics in ancient churches dating from the 4th to the 9th centuries. Ever been to Ravenna? Most of the surviving pre-iconoclastic icons of the world are found in the West, not the East, because the iconoclasm never reached the West.

By the same token, there was pre-iconoclastic Byzantine statuary (though bas reliefs were far more popular), but most of it was destroyed in the iconoclasm (it's hard to hide a large and heavy statue, easy to hide an icon on a panel of wood.

Post iconoclastic Byzantine liturgical art therefore tended to develop in 2-dimensional forms, and in accordance with canons developed after the Seventh Ecumenical Council--a Council which, in the worlds of Pope Benedict XVI, the West did not fully understand or receive. In the West, liturgical art continued in parallel with that of the East until well into the 12th century. The motifs and compositions are recognizably from a common canon, while the materials and the style of execution are distinctively Western. But, because it was not guided by the Christological principles that underlaid the canons of sacred images used in the East, liturgical art in the West went off into a different direction, and degenerated into "religious art" executed in a secular manner based on secular, artist-centered motifs.

So, let's not be silly here. If you want to talk about byzantinizations in the Roman rite, we can do so. But icons is a stupid place to begin, to be brutally honest. Why not talk about things such as the multiplication of Eucharistic Prayers in the reformed Missal? Eastern liturgies have multiple anaphorae, but traditionally the Roman rite had but one--the Roman canon. So, where does the notion of multiple Eucharistic prayer come from, other than being an imposition from the Christian East (presumably because we are so much cooler, you know?). By the same token, most of those new Eucharistic prayers include an explicit descending epiclesis, whereas the Roman Canon, because its antiquity predated the pneumatological controversies that affected the East, never had one (my objection to the WRV inserting one into their Liturgy of St. Gregory (essentially the old Tridentine rite) is an explicit example of byzantinization, and so is the Latin inclusion of several different ones in the New Mass.

I could probably think of others, but there is no need, because Taft already covered that ground in his essay. As he notes, liturgies--rites--are like languages. Some languages have articles, others don't. A language is neither inferior or superior because of their presence or absence, but attempts to insert articles into languages that lack them, or vice versa, does not enhance the language, merely destroys its integrity and causes it to degenerate into pidgin.

Some discernment and discretion is needed, as opposed to knee-jerk reactions on both sides.

So you would say that a Ruthenian Catholic would see an Orthodox mirror of him or herself culturally and historically in the Autocephalous Church of Poland and vice versa?

I think that is a bit of a stretch.

Not a stretch at all, if you understand the "Polish" Orthodox Church is made up largely of Lemkos, a portion of which also identify as Rusyn.

Here [flickr.com] is a picture my wife took of the chapel at Camp Nazareth this summer. Here [upload.wikimedia.org] is a picture of a similar church in Poland. Formerly Greek Catholic, but now Orthodox.

Most Ukrainian Catholics I know have a real sense of kinship with both the Ukrainian Orthodox in America and the UOC-KP. They do not feel the same kinship with the UOC-MP, whom they consider "Russian Orthodox."

Thanks Deacon Tony and Stuart for your comments.

If the RC's are happy with icons and such in their churches, I'm all for it. I sometimes get tired of the religious 'McCarthyism' that gets posted.

Christ is amongst us!

So I can find online the many panels and conferences that the Ruthenian Catholic Church has held with its sister Polish Orthodox Church?

I don't mean to digress too much, but this is nothing like the relationship that Melkites have with their Antiochian Orthodox counterparts.

I'm really just trying to understand why Ruthenians tend to be more latin-leaning than other Eastern Catholic churches. I already fully believe that it is a problem, but for me, the best way to understand a problem is to be able to reason how it came about.

Stuart asks: "Why not talk about things such as the multiplication of Eucharistic Prayers in the reformed Missal? Eastern liturgies have multiple anaphorae, but traditionally the Roman rite had but one--the Roman canon. So, where does the notion of multiple Eucharistic prayer come from, other than being an imposition from the Christian East (presumably because we are so much cooler, you know?)."

It could also be considered a borrowing from Mozarabic and Ambrosian sister Latin Rites. The Ambrosian Canon has a proper preface for everyday, the Mozarabic Canon has not just a proper preface, but proper post-sanctus, and post-institution prayers for everyday.

The Ruthenian, Slovak and Ukrainian Catholic Churches, ACROD, UOC-USA, UAOC, and the Polish Orthodox Church all share a common heritage.

As to Latinization I would say the Ruthenians are actually middle of the road, but further along than many. The Melkites are alone in the vanguard. The Ukrainians are a mixed bag some very Eastern, some very Latinized. Other Eastern Catholics are much more Latinized than the Ruthenians.

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Dear Fr. Deacon Lance (btw, is your first name really Deacon? I've really been wanting to ask you that lol)

Why:

?

In all the threads and posts I have read thus far, I do think this is evident. But why? Is it because of their relationship with the AOC? Do the Melkites and the Antiochians have the best Catholic-Orthodox relationship? Is it because of their dual persecution by the Muslims that under persecution they have such a close relationship? (I'm starting to muse as to the reason now. So I think I'll stop and let you answer.)

Kyrie eleison,

Manuel

Glory forever!

My first name is Lance, I am a deacon in the Archeparchy of Pittsburgh.

I don't know if it has to do with their relationship with the AOC so much as historically they have been blessed with some of the best hierarchs the Church as a whole has ever seen.

If I may ask, why Fr. ? Are you planning on becoming a priest?

Is that Archeparchy Ruthenian (sp?) ?

I am reading the book "Melkites at Vatican II". That Patriarch really seemed courageous and wise.

Kyrie eleison,

Manuel

Fr. Deacon is the traditional address of a Byzantine deacon. Yes, the Archeparchy of Pittsburgh is Ruthenian.

"Sisterhood" I think is a term with more meaning on the Catholic side. Anyway, the Polish AOC has only existed for about a half century as a formal entity. The point is if you want to find a church with the closest shared traditions to the Ruthenian BCC, it would probably be found among the Rusyn/Lemko elements of the Orthodox churches of Poland and Slovakia. It *seemed* as though that was what was being asked. I have no idea what panels/conferences exist in general for these sorts of things.

If you want to get rid of the "Latinizations", I would start by going back to the traditional church calendar.

Really? No one at my parish has told me this and we have what, 4 deacons. lol.

Kyrie eleison,

Manuel