www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization Greek Catholic Latinizations.

When I both read and scan the archives of this forum, there are many instances that I see of Byzantine people lashing out at Latinizations as un Orthodox. There are many calls, especially from bishops, to dispose of these things for good. But I also notice how these traditions are lovngly preserved by a great number of faithful who do not want to Byzantinize their parishes.

Although I am not Greek Catholic, let me seriously ask, why do you fellow want to get ride of these things anyway. After all, though you may have been part of Orthodoxy at one time, by becoming Catholic, you empraced a number of traditions upheald by the Roman Church because obviously they were felt to be more universal then just Latin in nature. Also, since the Pope has declared that Byzantines may no longer convert Orthodox, why then would you want to become fully Eastern then when instead you could pioneer the creation of your own distinct rite of the Church which combined the best aspects of both eastern and western expressions and liturgy for your common good?

After all, you no longer have to go about trying to win over the Orthodox so why be like them at all? Besides, your people feel a special attachment to these pius customs and rites and do not want to give them up for aspects of a spirituality they do not understand. Why one of my fondest memories is attending mid night mass at St. Nicholas Greek rite Church in Roebling New Jersey. They had many Latinizations but I felt a true traditional spirituality amongst the members of that parish that you just dont feel when you attend a church where everybody is doing this and that in order to try and be something there not.

THat wonderful mass will live with me untile my dying day. I still remeber the priest, Father Larry Wolf from the Basilian monastery in Matawan belowing out the liturgy in his wonderful voice (This man was meant to record a CD)! To me this was the Greek rite Church. Not Orthodox in communion with Rome, but their own people with their own customs preserved lovingly down through the ages. It dosent matter what it was meant to be, this is waht it is and you who are in it should be thanfull.
Robert K.

Dear Robert:

I don't think that the latinizations you mention are as prevalent as you may think (not all Byzantine Churches have Stations of the Cross).

Each parish and church is different, some have greater western tendencies others less.

Also these so-called latinizations in many cases are of recent origin.

Many of these pious practices were instituted by Basilians as a way of covertly making the Orthodox more Roman.

A priest friend of mine, who is in his sixties, still remembers his father, at the behest of the new Basilian Priest, on a ladder sawing off the lower bar of the cross on the Iconastas.

These practices are not as old as they seem.


It IS understandable that people should be attached to what they are used to, and if it brings them closer to God then there is nothing wrong with it.

As I see it, the only problem with latinizations are that they supplant the older indigenous traditions with things of more recent fashion.

Another issue is that the so-called latinizations do not necessarily make one less Orthodox.

St. Seraphim of Sarov had a great devotion to the rosary [The Rule of the Mother of God, 150 beads] and recommend it as the best prayer for all the faithful.

He also prayed before very distinctly Western [Roman] Icons.

None of these things made him less Orthodox or for that matter any more Roman Catholic.


But there is one thing that I have noticed in many posts, and I wonder if anyone else has picked it up, why does the title "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" so bother our eastern brothers?

Why is it that they seem to be so deathly afraid of the Greek Catholic Church being described as "Orthodox in Communion with Rome"?

It is apparent, that to their minds, this is either the greatest of oxymoron�s or the most dangerous of threats.

I should hope that people get used to the title for in reality, like it or not, that is exactly what the Church is, Orthodox in Communion with the see of Rome.


defreitas

In certain parts of Greece, the Orthodox Church is described as "the True Catholic Church," since these believers are convinced that the Orthodox Church is "the True Catholic Church." That is the conviction of these pure and truly Greek "Catholic" believers.

Therefore, I have no objection if Byzantine Catholics consider themselves to be "Orthodox in communion with Rome," since that is their conviction. Besides, imitation is the highest form of flattery.

However, the term can be a bit confusing for some, especially Byzantine Catholics who would prefer not to be associated with Orthodoxy. I also understand some Vatican officials and some Byzantine Catholic bishops are not too keen for the term.

ER

[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Ephraim Reynolds ]

Robert K.

The Greek Rite is ORTHODOX!

The Latinizations were not the natural, organic, acceptance of ritual and prayer that was more "universal" that we Orthodox merged into our own ways. They were the result of coercion and a deliberate policy of Rome to convert a "lesser" rite to the more "glorius and true" rite. The arrogant and pride of the Latins who perpetuated the praestantia ritus latini, the preminence of the Latin Rite, led to prejuidice and extreme alienation of the Ruthenian nation and culture under the rule of demogogues who worked for and with the Roman Church.

You ask why we want to return to our traditions. Why did the Irish wish to become free of British occupation? To be free, to maintain your identity and roots. For us it was all of the above and to be able to worship God in the traditions that converted our entire nation and is today the single most important pillar that defined our culture: Byzantine "Orthodox" Christianity. And Rome has always worked against that.

Your comments betray a profound ingnorance of history. I could take them as offensive and insensitive. But I would prefer to welcome you and ask you to read and learn more on this forum. But perhaps you could ask questions with a little more respect for a faith that has proven herself with the blood of martyrs?

In Christ,
Ality

Uh oh....

"Katy, bar the door!"

Robert,

We are not supposed to convert individual Orthodox. But we are trying to prepare the way for corporate reunion with Orthodoxy. Once that happens, we will be reintegrated into the Orthodox patriarchates (because they will be in communion with Rome).

As such, how much sense does it make to create some weird hybrid rite?

As far as your comment that people might not be spiritual in Byzantine Catholic parishes that are trying to return to more Byzantine practice, that is simply not the case. We are not "too busy" trying to be something we're not. We are just following what's in the book! And the people love it!

Why do we need Latin influences like the Rosary when we have Akathists? Everything the Latins have, we have.

And by the way, Rome herself has ordered us to return to our Eastern traditions. Before you post anything else, I suggest you read "Orientale Lumen" and "Ut Unum Sint" by Pope John Paul II. They are available in the file library at www.ewtn.com [ewtn.com]

if you don't read those documents, you are basically going on your own assumptions and not the Church's teaching.

In Christ,

anastasios

Dear ER:

Before the modern concept of the word "Catholic" came to be regarded as meaning "Roman Catholic" the term was used to describe all right-believing christian peoples, including it might surprise you Greek Catholic Christians.

If you were to ask people in the villages of Galicia what they called themselves they would have said more often than not "Greek Catholic".

This is more than just a personal or group conviction it is an actual fact.

I don't question the belief that the Orthodox in Greece consider themselves to Orthodox, it is an apparent thing.

I also find it strange that you should say "imitation is the highest form of flattery", how does one immitate oneself?, Orthodox is Orthodox.

As to Vatican personages and certain Greek Catholic Bishops having trouble with the term, these are the same people also would also have trouble with many other ancient Christian concepts.

In the long run these people are of little concern.


defreitas

[But there is one thing that I have noticed in many posts, and I wonder if anyone else has picked it up, why does the title "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" so bother our eastern brothers?]

Because, as has been explained before, it relegates our faith to one that is based primarily on ritual rather than belief (dogma). To us, it seems to imply that our faith is only secondary in importance to our ritual. Nothing could be further from the truth. For the only thing we share with you is similiar ritual. Your beliefs are no longer Orthodox, but as part of the Roman Patriarchate, you are required to share the same dogma as the Church whose authority you are now under.
We, who can trace our ancestory back to the Unia, also see it as being purposely deceptive in nature. Designed to confuse those in areas of Eastern Europe which still identify themselves as 'Pravoslavnie' even though they are under the final authority of Rome. Many of us can't understand why you are so reluctant to identify yourselves with the Roman Catholic Church since your ancestors became apostates to Orthodoxy to join the RCC. Why it is so offensive to you when you are identified with the RCC in any way, shape, or form? You should be proud to be identified as members of the Roman Patriarchate rather than insulted by it, as you seem to be. It reminds many of us, including myself, of the many people in our parishes who have passed on telling us how they had no idea they were not Orthodox in the 'old country'. They didn't become aware of it until they came here.
Since this is Holy Thursday for you, I was reluctant to respond. But, in the long run, I think an honest question deserves an honest answer. So, if my honesty offends you in any way, forgive me. And accept my best wishes for a glorious Pascha celebration in spite of it.

OrthoMan

>>>We, who can trace our ancestory back to the Unia, also see it as being purposely deceptive in nature. Designed to confuse those in areas of Eastern Europe which still identify themselves as 'Pravoslavnie' even though they are under the final authority of Rome.

Bob, Rome denied the first petition of the Ukrainian bishops to become Uniates. It was the Polish King that forced the thing for political reasons, not to confuse anyone. If subsequent Uniates did try to confuse the Orthodox, then please by all means condemn them. But don't make blanket statements that are clearly historically refuted.

>>>Many of us can't understand why you are so reluctant to identify yourselves with the Roman Catholic Church since your ancestors became apostates to Orthodoxy to join the RCC.

Bob, one cannot be an apostate to Orthodoxy. One can be a schismatic or heretic, perhaps. BUT apostasy equals leaving faith in Christ. When poor Ukrainians became Uniates to stop their people from either becoming Latins or being discriminated against, I fail to see where the apostasy lies.

>>>Why it is so offensive to you when you are identified with the RCC in any way, shape, or form? You should be proud to be identified as members of the Roman Patriarchate rather than insulted by it, as you seem to be.

We don't object to being identified with our sister Church, the Roman patriarchate. But the Pope is NOT our patriarch, you "Russian-Rite Greek Orthodox, under Bartholomew the spiritual head of the world's Orthodox Christians"!


>>>It reminds many of us, including myself, of the many people in our parishes who have passed on telling us how they had no idea they were not Orthodox in the 'old country'. They didn't become aware of it until they came here.

Reminds me of the people who left for the Russian Metropolia from us when St. Alexis Toth told them, "of course you're still Catholic." (obviously meaning the with Rome variety).

In Christ,

anastasios

Dear Anastasios:

Thanks, couldn't have said it better.

But just two things for our brother Orthoman:

1.
The Pope is not the Roman Patriarch, but Patriarch of the West [or at least that's what the ecumenical council said].

2.
Thanks for the Easter wishes but they are a bit premature, at Saint Elias we are on the old calender.


defreitas

Maybe Patriarch of Rome and all the West is appropriate.

Antioch has all the East, and Alexandria, Africa.

Jerusalem, and Constantinople....shouldn't something similiar be added to their epitaphs?

In IC XC
Samer

I believe Greek Catholics would agree that the Orthodox in communion with Rome are truly attempting to return to the pristine Orthodoxy of their pre-unia ancestors.

I certainly am aware of the fact that there has been extensive latinization of Eastern Christians in union with Rome and these latinizations, including, and especially, the Vatican I dogma of papal infallibility, are rejected by those who adhere to the Greek Catholic consensus of faith.

Those who adhere to the Greek Catholic consensus of faith would only point out that both the addition to and deletions from the Greek Catholic consensus would set the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" outside of normative and canonical orthodoxy and place them in a position of adhering to dogmas and practices that are foreign to Greek Catholicism.

Obviously, there are many within the "Orthodox in communion with Rome," community who do not think of themselves as 'Orthodox' at all. The truth is, they despise the very idea of being "Orthodox."

I attended a Ruthenian parish for almost two years and many of the parishioners of Slovak and Ukrainian ancestry and ethnicity would have been appalled at being--even just verbally or conceptually--associated with Orthodoxy.

The Slovak Byzantine Catholics of Europe despise the very idea of being associated with Orthdooxy. This is a well known fact. There are other Byzantine Catholics, even among the Melkites, who are not keen on being associated with the Orthodox. These are just facts that are descriptive of a reality one must live with and not become delusional about.

However, I believe Greek Catholics should be sympathetic to those linked to the Roman communion who are striving--sometimes with difficulty--to purify their faith and practice to the point that it is representative of the Orthodox faith their ancestors practiced prior to the Unia.

BTW: The 'Greek Catholics' of the Byzantine era would have referred to themselves as 'Romans,' not Greeks. Nice bit of irony, there.


ER

[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Ephraim Reynolds ]

I don't usually respond to these kind of threads, but I do believe a very important point needs to be made.

The Byzantine Tradition, like the Roman Tradition, is not a loose collection of rituals and beliefs. It is a very complex, intertwined, and comprehensive theology. You cannot separate the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom from the Liturgy of the Presanctified. You cannot separate these liturgies from the Divine Office. You cannot separate these practices from a life of spiritual prayer. They comprise a unified whole, a way of understanding one's relationship God. They, together, constitute a LANGUAGE OF WORSHIP. When the unity of the Tradition is fractured, (for example, Presanctified is replaced by Stations of the Cross), the depth of understanding, the depth of communication is lost. One replaces spiritual nourishment with one that is emotional (i.e the Stations of the Cross may bring one to tears, but do they help a Byzantine Christian understand, really understand, the Passion the way our Lenten services do? Do they lead from one Sunday Liturgy to the next? In short, do they add depth to the Lenten experience or just emotion?)*

One of my friends describes this hybrid Church concept as the manufacturing of a "junkyard dog." "And you know how everyone feels about a junkyard dog!" (His words).

On NPR last week they had a story about the importance of preserving Native American languages. On many reservations there is an attempt to teach the children their native tongues. However, their parents and grandparents do not speak these languages any more. The old people who do, lament the fact that even though the children know the words, they do not use them properly. Their sentence structures are awkward and primitive. I recognized a similarity to our Byzantine Catholic condition. Many of those people embracing the Latinizations no longer understand why we venerate icons the way we do. They do not know why we are silent during the Great Entrance of the Liturgy of Presanctified. They are embarrassed by the frequent refrain: "Christ is Risen, Indeed He is Risen!

In my opinion, they have given up very very much.


John

*The Stations of the Cross, however, do add to the spiritual depth of the Roman Catholic. It is part of their language of worship, part of their unified whole. It does fit with their Lenten journey. Unfortunately, we humans are limited by space and time. We can only travel one path at a time. Every choice requires that when something is chosen; something else is lost.

Robert,

Is it a matter of winning over the Orthodox or just being who you are? What can be said about the fact that our liturgical services, which were on the books for centuries and centuries, were totally ignored in an attempt to be something we were not?

Cantor Joe Thur

And now for some appropriate biblical quotes, (in honor of Cantor Joe):

He is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways... (James 1:8)

Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double-minded. (James 4:8)

How long will you limp between two opinions? (1 Kings 18:21)

Christ Jesus is not yes and no. (2 Cor 1:19)

An elder must not be self-willed. (Titus 1:7)

They trusted in themselves that they were righteous (Luke 18:9)

Cursed is he who trusts in man (Jer. 17:5)

Many a man proclaims his own loyalty (Prov. 20:6)

John