The entrance hymn to the World Youth Day papal mass:
I find this a little more edifying than some of the sour attitudes expressed in this thread. A little liturgical dance might do you all good. Dominus Vobiscum!
I don't have a "sour attitude" at all. I'm a joyful person, but I also no longer buy into the neo-con attempts to justify the liturgical lunacy in the Roman Church. Honestly, the Roman Church seems to be trapped in the 1970s. In fact, the Roman Church of today looks an awful lot like the Episcopal Church USA of the 70s and 80s.
Why should the Orthodox Churches destroy their existing communion in order to enter into communion with Rome?
What would happen to the Greek and Antiochian Churches if they came into communion with Rome while the Roman Catholic liturgy is in utter shambles?
If their communion ended (in this hypothetical) it would be because another church chose to end it. Instances of informal sharing of the Eucharist are already well documented with no "destruction" of communion.
To answer your question - nothing. They could swap notes on organ maintenance with the Greeks, I suppose.
Again, why would some of the self-governing Orthodox Churches, all of which share a common faith and liturgical life within the Orthodox Communion, want to break up their existing communion in order to enter into communion with the Roman Church with all its problems, liturgical and otherwise?
As far as the organ is concerned, what decade are you living in? I have not heard the organ used in any one of the parishes that I have attended in the diocese of Oakland since I converted to Catholicism in 1988. Perhaps the Greek Orthodox and the Antiochians want to adopt the modern Roman Church practices of liturgical dance, the use of guitars and pianos, altar girls on roller skates, circus music used in Church, etc., but I do not see how any of those practices will enhance the spiritual life and growth of their members.
Again, you are equating sharing communion with one church as the cause that will break it with another. That is incorrect. If one church enters into communion with another, it may impel another church to decide to break communion because of this. The cause would come from the decision of that third church which felt it was necessary (why it would be necessary I can't imagine).
The GO cathedral I attended had a wonderful organ playing during the liturgy. I heard it well because nobody was singing besides the choir. The homily was at the end of the liturgy, after the Eucharist, I suspect to ensure that everybody who waltzes in for the Eucharist actually hears it. That was last month. I love that parish dearly and attended regularly for a long time and still visit, but let's get over the delusion that everything Orthodoxy does is pure and wonderful, and that a restoration of communion with the other ancient apostolic church would somehow end up with liturgy on roller skates.
What does liturgical abuse or fidelity have anything to do with my original post anyways?
The entrance hymn to the World Youth Day papal mass:
I find this a little more edifying than some of the sour attitudes expressed in this thread. A little liturgical dance might do you all good. Dominus Vobiscum!
I don't have a "sour attitude" at all. I'm a joyful person, but I also no longer buy into the neo-con attempts to justify the liturgical lunacy in the Roman Church. Honestly, the Roman Church seems to be trapped in the 1970s. In fact, the Roman Church of today looks an awful lot like the Episcopal Church USA of the 70s and 80s.
Nobody here is "justifying" liturgical abuse. The strawman is vanquished. Carry on.
Why should the Orthodox Churches destroy their existing communion in order to enter into communion with Rome?
Perhaps you are not able to read your own posts, but I am merely responding to your comment below:
Originally Posted by jjp
I've never understood why one Orthodox church needs the permissions of the others.
If the Greeks & Antiochians are disposed towards establishing communion, why not move ahead? If the Russians have a problem with it, let them run their church as they see fit. They only have a de facto veto if people let them.
Why would the various Orthodox Churches (in particular the two your mentioned) want to destroy their communion with the Russian Church (or the Bulgarian Church, etc.) in order to enter into communion with the Roman Church? That is, with a Church that they do not share a common faith and practice with. You are the one who brought up this notion, and I was merely pointing out (through my posts) how vapid the idea is.
The entrance hymn to the World Youth Day papal mass:
I find this a little more edifying than some of the sour attitudes expressed in this thread. A little liturgical dance might do you all good. Dominus Vobiscum!
I don't have a "sour attitude" at all. I'm a joyful person, but I also no longer buy into the neo-con attempts to justify the liturgical lunacy in the Roman Church. Honestly, the Roman Church seems to be trapped in the 1970s. In fact, the Roman Church of today looks an awful lot like the Episcopal Church USA of the 70s and 80s.
Nobody here is "justifying" liturgical abuse. The strawman is vanquished. Carry on.
It is not a strawman argument to point out the obvious, that is, that the Roman Church is experiencing a liturgical crisis. What Orthodox Church would want to come into communion (or even - contrary to their own doctrine - share communion with) a Church that is in liturgical collapse? It is not a strawman argument, it is a statement of fact that the Roman Church is liturgically in trouble. And who in the Roman Church started the ball rolling with the liturgical anarchy? None other than Pope Paul VI, who with a single signature replaced one liturgical rite with another rite written by a committee.
Finally, if there were to be any kind of liturgical sharing among Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics I have no doubt that the infection would spread. There are signs of that already in many Eastern Catholic Churches.
Why should the Orthodox Churches destroy their existing communion in order to enter into communion with Rome?
What would happen to the Greek and Antiochian Churches if they came into communion with Rome while the Roman Catholic liturgy is in utter shambles?
If their communion ended (in this hypothetical) it would be because another church chose to end it. Instances of informal sharing of the Eucharist are already well documented with no "destruction" of communion.
To answer your question - nothing. They could swap notes on organ maintenance with the Greeks, I suppose.
Again, why would some of the self-governing Orthodox Churches, all of which share a common faith and liturgical life within the Orthodox Communion, want to break up their existing communion in order to enter into communion with the Roman Church with all its problems, liturgical and otherwise?
As far as the organ is concerned, what decade are you living in? I have not heard the organ used in any one of the parishes that I have attended in the diocese of Oakland since I converted to Catholicism in 1988. Perhaps the Greek Orthodox and the Antiochians want to adopt the modern Roman Church practices of liturgical dance, the use of guitars and pianos, altar girls on roller skates, circus music used in Church, etc., but I do not see how any of those practices will enhance the spiritual life and growth of their members.
The GO cathedral I attended had a wonderful organ playing during the liturgy. I heard it well because nobody was singing besides the choir. The homily was at the end of the liturgy, after the Eucharist, I suspect to ensure that everybody who waltzes in for the Eucharist actually hears it. That was last month. I love that parish dearly and attended regularly for a long time and still visit, but let's get over the delusion that everything Orthodoxy does is pure and wonderful, and that a restoration of communion with the other ancient apostolic church would somehow end up with liturgy on roller skates.
I said nothing about Greek Orthodox Churches not using (contrary to their own tradition) the organ; instead, I said that the Roman Church no longer uses it in the parishes that I attend in Oakland (CA). So if the Greek Orthodox want to share with Roman Catholics they will have to adopt all new liturgical abuses.
Be that as it may, I wish the organ was still used in the Roman Church, because that would involve - at least in some cases in the Oakland area - doing away with the insipid soft rock music of the 1970s that is common "liturgical music" at this time in those parishes.
I've never understood why one Orthodox church needs the permissions of the others.
The Eastern Orthodox Churches are self-governing, but they are also a communion of Churches, and that is why it is contrary to their own self-understanding to simply "go it alone" as individual Churches. According to Orthodox ecclesiology each Church recognizes itself in the other Orthodox Churches within the communion, and they will act together because of that identification. If they decide to "go it alone" and enter into communion (or simply - contrary to Orthodox teaching - share communion with non-Orthodox Christians) they will create a schism in their own existing unity.
Originally Posted by jjp
If the Greeks & Antiochians are disposed towards establishing communion, why not move ahead? If the Russians have a problem with it, let them run their church as they see fit. They only have a de facto veto if people let them.
I should add that the "if" portion of your comment reveals its hypothetical nature. As it is, I have never come across Greek Orthodox or Antiochian Orthodox Christians who want their Churches to come into communion with (or share communion with) the Roman Church. I am sure that there may be a few such individuals, but I doubt there are that many.
One way to overcome the division that exists between the Roman Church and the Orthodox Churches would be for Rome to renounce its second millennium innovations (doctrinal and ecclesiological). That is a quick solution to the present situation, but sadly so far that has not happened. Personally I would be all for Rome taking that step towards communion with the Orthodox.
The entrance hymn to the World Youth Day papal mass:
I find this a little more edifying than some of the sour attitudes expressed in this thread. A little liturgical dance might do you all good. Dominus Vobiscum!
I don't have a "sour attitude" at all. I'm a joyful person, but I also no longer buy into the neo-con attempts to justify the liturgical lunacy in the Roman Church. Honestly, the Roman Church seems to be trapped in the 1970s. In fact, the Roman Church of today looks an awful lot like the Episcopal Church USA of the 70s and 80s.
Nobody here is "justifying" liturgical abuse. The strawman is vanquished. Carry on.
Why should the Orthodox Churches destroy their existing communion in order to enter into communion with Rome?
Perhaps you are not able to read your own posts, but I am merely responding to your comment below:
Originally Posted by jjp
I've never understood why one Orthodox church needs the permissions of the others.
If the Greeks & Antiochians are disposed towards establishing communion, why not move ahead? If the Russians have a problem with it, let them run their church as they see fit. They only have a de facto veto if people let them.
Why would the various Orthodox Churches (in particular the two your mentioned) want to destroy their communion with the Russian Church (or the Bulgarian Church, etc.) in order to enter into communion with the Roman Church? That is, with a Church that they do not share a common faith and practice with. You are the one who brought up this notion, and I was merely pointing out (through my posts) how vapid the idea is.
You missed where I corrected the "destruction" part. It won't, but I don't feel like typing the same thing over.
It is not a strawman argument to point out the obvious, that is, that the Roman Church is experiencing a liturgical crisis. What Orthodox Church would want to come into communion (or even - contrary to their own doctrine - share communion with) a Church that is in liturgical collapse? It is not a strawman argument, it is a statement of fact that the Roman Church is liturgically in trouble. And who in the Roman Church started the ball rolling with the liturgical anarchy? None other than Pope Paul VI, who with a single signature replaced one liturgical rite with another rite written by a committee.
Finally, if there were to be any kind of liturgical sharing among Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics I have no doubt that the infection would spread. There are signs of that already in many Eastern Catholic Churches.
My comment was regarding one Orthodox Church entering communion with the Catholic church regardless of the opinion of other Orthodox churches (specifically some Orthodox churches holding the process hostage for political reasons).
Liturgical abuse has nothing to do with that. I get that it's a thing of yours and that's fine, but it's non sequitur to the topic. It's very worthy of a separate thread, where I'll likely agree with most of what you say.
I've never understood why one Orthodox church needs the permissions of the others.
The Eastern Orthodox Churches are self-governing, but they are also a communion of Churches, and that is why it is contrary to their own self-understanding to simply "go it alone" as individual Churches. According to Orthodox ecclesiology each Church recognizes itself in the other Orthodox Churches within the communion, and they will act together because of that identification. If they decide to "go it alone" and enter into communion (or simply - contrary to Orthodox teaching - share communion with non-Orthodox Christians) they will create a schism in their own existing unity.
Well, since it's already happened, I suppose there is some schism-ing to get done, no?
Originally Posted by jjp
If the Greeks & Antiochians are disposed towards establishing communion, why not move ahead? If the Russians have a problem with it, let them run their church as they see fit. They only have a de facto veto if people let them.
Quote
I should add that the "if" portion of your comment reveals its hypothetical nature.
It was my intention for the reader to recognize this from the outset.
Quote
As it is, I have never come across Greek Orthodox or Antiochian Orthodox Christians who want their Churches to come into communion with (or share communion with) the Roman Church. I am sure that there may be a few such individuals, but I doubt there are that many.
I didn't intend to limit my hypothetical to the people you've met.
Well, since it's already happened, I suppose there is some schism-ing to get done, no?
Which specific (no longer hypothetical) Eastern Orthodox Churches have intercommunion with the Roman Church?
Originally Posted by jjp
It was my intention for the reader to recognize this from the outset.
Quote
As it is, I have never come across Greek Orthodox or Antiochian Orthodox Christians who want their Churches to come into communion with (or share communion with) the Roman Church. I am sure that there may be a few such individuals, but I doubt there are that many.
I didn't intend to limit my hypothetical to the people you've met.
Yes, I spoke about the real world, and you spoke of a fantasy. I do not foresee intercommunion between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches. Will Roman Catholics go to Orthodox Churches and try to take (and sometimes even receive) communion? Sure. But that act is actually contrary to Orthodox practice. ** The Roman Church may not be opposed to indifferentism, heck many in the Roman Church would probably support intercommunion with Anglicans and even Muslims (after all a lesbian Buddhist was given communion in the Washington area some time ago by an "extraordinary minister", and the priest who had refused to give her communion was reprimanded). Indifferentism is rampant among Roman Catholics, but the vast majority of Orthodox still take doctrine seriously, and they recognize that unity of faith and practice is a prerequisite to the restoration of communion.
** I should point out that I do attend Orthodox liturgies on occasion, but when I go to an Orthodox parish I respect their position on the matter of who is qualified to receive holy communion, which is why I never ask for communion.
It is not a strawman argument to point out the obvious, that is, that the Roman Church is experiencing a liturgical crisis. What Orthodox Church would want to come into communion (or even - contrary to their own doctrine - share communion with) a Church that is in liturgical collapse? It is not a strawman argument, it is a statement of fact that the Roman Church is liturgically in trouble. And who in the Roman Church started the ball rolling with the liturgical anarchy? None other than Pope Paul VI, who with a single signature replaced one liturgical rite with another rite written by a committee.
Finally, if there were to be any kind of liturgical sharing among Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics I have no doubt that the infection would spread. There are signs of that already in many Eastern Catholic Churches.
My comment was regarding one Orthodox Church entering communion with the Catholic church regardless of the opinion of other Orthodox churches (specifically some Orthodox churches holding the process hostage for political reasons).
Liturgical abuse has nothing to do with that. I get that it's a thing of yours and that's fine, but it's non sequitur to the topic. It's very worthy of a separate thread, where I'll likely agree with most of what you say.
And my comment was simply to point out that any Orthodox Church that did that would end up in schism from the other Orthodox Churches within that communion of Churches. Why enter into communion with Rome while it still does not confess the same faith as the Eastern Orthodox Churches? Has Rome secretly told the Orthodox Churches that it has rejected its second millennium doctrinal innovations? I haven't heard about this? Does the pope still claim universal jurisdiction, which is contrary to Orthodox teaching? Does Rome still teach that the Son is - with the Father - the cause of the Holy Spirit's origin? If the Roman Catholic Church has abandoned these and many of the other things that separate it from the Eastern Orthodox Churches then I would agree with you that intercommunion could happen, but if Rome continues to teach the things that Orthodox reject why would any single Orthodox Church (even the Greek Church) abandon the Orthodox faith for communion with Rome?
I mean this is what my (real world) Orthodox friends keep telling me, some of whom are former Roman Catholics, and that is why they don't agree with or participate in Roman Catholic liturgies. In other words, they don't just avoid Roman Catholic services because they are often bizarre (e.g., with liturgical dance, roller skating altar servers, etc.), but because they do not agree with Rome's doctrinal and ecclesiological views.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the reason why dialogue between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches has been proceeding at baby step pace with long stand-by phases is to be found in the Orthodox playing field, characterised by reservations and divisions. . . .
That is an interesting opinion piece, but I think an Orthodox Christian might have a different spin on the situation.
An Orthodox Christian could say that the restoration of communion could come quickly if only Rome would abandon its doctrinal and ecclesiological innovations and accept the Orthodox faith. That would certainly change the ecumenical status quo.
I just thought I would state what no one else here seems to want to say, just to stir things up.
The Byzantine Forum provides
message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though
discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are
those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the
Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the
www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial,
have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as
a source for official information for any Church. All posts become
property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2024). All rights
reserved.
