The Western Rite, Saint John of SF, and ROCOR

[drewmeister2]

Exactly what aspects of the Western tradition is kept? I converted from Catholic and I don't see anything of their Western rites that I would consider Orthodox. I follow the Orthodox tradition. I left all the Western rites behind. The Eastern Orthodox tradition is the only true rites of Christ's Church.

Well, there are some similarities between the Tridentine and the Divine Liturgy. In each, the priest faces East, reverent articles are used for the Eucharist, modern music isn't used, and I'm sure there are some other things. The Novus Ordo and the DL however, have little in common, IMHO (although, many people who favor the Novus Ordo often say that the NO and the DL closely represent each other).

[The Apostate]

I strongly disagree that the restoration of the WRite is liturgical archaeology.

The Anglican Book of Common Prayer of 1662 is still widely used in the Church of England, and variations of are used elsewhere in Anglicanism. The American BCP of 1928 is also in common use in ECUSA and also in many churches in the Anglican Continuum.

These rites are based on the Sarum Rite. They are victims of the protestant reformation, in which much soundness went out the window, but they retain many of the traditions, customs and theology of the Sarum Rite. In fact, many of the prayers come directly from the Sarum Missal, which is almost identical to the Western Rite that was used in the British Isles up to, and after the unpleasantness of 1054.

Many Anglicans have grown up with traditions and a spirituality that is based on elements of the Sarum Rite. The Sarum chants are still used in many churches. The sanctuary arangement is still to be found in many Anglican parishes. The use of riddel posts and curtains, two lights only the altar, but many more on the riddel posts and around the altar. Cushions instead of a missal stand. the liturgical colours and other practices peculiar to the English Uses of which Sarum was one. These are all living traditions, which come from the Sarum rite.

The Sarum Rite has been doctrinally corrected (the filioqueremoved and the epiklesis made more explicit) and restored to use within Orthodoxy. This is not liturgical archaeology - this is simply restoring the proper context of these living, continuing practices within the fulness of Orthodoxy Faith.

There is also the Liturgy of St Gregory, which is a doctrinally corrected form of the Tridentine Mass. Again, this cannot rightly be referred to as archaeology, as the Tridentine Rite is still used in Roman Catholicism and some Anglican circles as well. The Tridentine Rite, like the Sarum rite, is a valid form of the Western Rite which existed, in various local forms, in the pre-schism Orthodox West.

The Ely Forum is perhaps the best place to discuss these issues, although his is also a good resource.

[The Apostate]

I doubt of the "western Orthodoxy" and its "western Rites" they are really a great fall for who practice it and this is demonstrated by its serial failures.

Most of those rites are not the true rites that existed before the Great Schism in West but a medley of all kinds of things that they didn't keep any tradition with respect to Western Church previous to the Great Schism.

I doubt of the orthodoxy of these "western orthodox"

Priest Siluan

With the greatest of respect due another person and a priest, Father, I must disagree with both your sentiment and the (I assume unintentional) misrepresentation of the rites.

You would have been correct if you had said that none of the rites currently in use within WRite Orthodoxy are identical to the rites which existed in the pre-Schism Orthodox West. That is because this was never the intention, but I cannot agree with your statement that they don't keep any tradition of the Western Church prior to the Great Schism.

The point of the WRite is to restore the Orthodox Faith to the peoples of the western world using a litugical form that is accessible to them and faithful to Western Orthodox tradition. It is not about liturgical archaeology - resurrecting rites that died from use 1000 years ago. All liturgy develops and evolves. This has been the case with the ERite as well. The Liturgy of St John Chrysostom as served today is not the same as it would have been 500, 1000 years ago, and that is a living tradition.

What we have in the West today is many different Christian groups who have their liturgical and spiritual roots in developments on the classical Western liturgical shape that has its origins in Orthodoxy. We cannot resurrect the old pre-Schims rites because they are dead rites. They are not part of a living tradition with their own living spirituality and traditions as practised by the faithful. However, many, many elements of these traditions live on. For example, the Anglican Book of Common Prayer has its roots in the Sarum Rite, which is itself a development of the Liturgy of St John the Divine, which was the liturgy used in the West before the Schism. Even this Liturgy of St John the Divine was done differently in various times and places. Different dioceses in England each had their own traditions, and practices, which were different from each other and from those on the continent. In Italy, the Tidentine Rite was used, which is another organic development of the pre-Schism Orthodox Liturgy of St John the Divine. Yet all were Orthodox and all were united in the Faith of the Apostles.

What the WRite is doing today, is taking the surviving elements of those traditions - the ones which have remained practised as part of a living faith, and are perfectly consonant with the Orthodox Faith, and using them in the context of rites which are genuine developments of those which were used in the pre-Schism West.

How many Anglicans and Roman Catholics have I heard say that they would like to explore Orthodoxy further, if only it didn't seem so foreign to them, if only the esoteric liturgy were not so far removed from anything they know of Christianity?

I think the ERite is beautiful, but it does not speak to the British psyche in the same way that the WRite does, and if this is an unnecessary barrier to people coming home to the Faith, then there is no reason why we cannot use Orthodox Western Rites.

Rites like the Divine Liturgy of Sarum, the English Liturgy and the Divine Liturgy of St Gregory are all organic developments of the pre-Schism Liturgy of St John the Divine, which developed naturally over time, with their own traditions and piety. All we have done is to correct the very few doctrinal errors that had accrued over time.

I must say that I have reservations about the Liturgy of St Tikhon, because it isn't an organic development but rather a piecemeal mix'n'match of rites with no traditions of its own. It is a valid Liturgy of the Church and so I would have no problem going to such a Liturgy but I wouldn't encourage its use. However, the others are true developments as the Liturgy grew in different places.

There is more on this here and here.

I hope this helps.

[尼古拉前执事]

Great Lent Fasting Typicon according to the Orthodox Western Rite

Here are the the old (Orthodox) Western fast rules for Lent. These are slightly different from the Eastern Orthodox fast rules which prevail in the Eastern churches. Also, not all WR Orthodox use the old Western fast rules. Caveats completed:

Clergy and monastics start the Lenten abstinence on Shrove Monday

Everyone else starts the Lenten abstinence on Ash Wednesday ('the Head of the Fast').

The Lenten abstinence is: no meat, fowl, dairy, or eggs, nor anything made from those. Basically, nothing made from animal products.

We continue the Lenten abstinence without exceptions until the morning of Pascha.

When the Fast begins (Ash Wed.), every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday we fast strictly until evening if possible. Nowadays, some people only fast till 3 p.m., and some people even fast a little briefer than that. "Fast" here means taking no solid food at all.

On Saturdays and Sundays, there is no "fasting" but there is still the Lenten abstinence (no meat or dairy).

Originally in the West, Saturdays were included as fast days with Mon.-Fri., but this was forbidden by the Sixth Oecumenical Council, so we don't fast strictly on Saturdays these days.

Slightly modified, from a post made by Fr Aidan to the Occidentalis (Occidentalis@yahoogroups.com) list, March 3, 2003

[Priest Siluan]

Excerpt from the Protocols of the Bishop's Sobor of the Russian
Orthodox Church Abroad, 1978:

"Decision of the same date [September 5/18, 1978] concerning the
so-called Western Rite:

"Resolved:
The Western Rite in its present form was introduced after the falling
away of the West from Orthodoxy and does not accord with the liturgical
life of the Orthodox Church which has developed over the course of
many centuries. It [the Western Rite] does not reflect Her liturgical
Tradition. Therefore it does not satisfy those who have accepted
Orthodoxy, once they have become more deeply acquainted with it, and it
has not enjoyed success anywhere. In consequence of what has been
stated above, the Bishops' Sobor does not consider it possible to
permit [use of] the Western rite within the Russian Church."

Also, I have heard from good source that ROCOR anathematized particularly one of those "Western Rites" in times of Holy Matrepolitan Philaret, that one is so-called "Gallican" Rite.

[spiridon]

Well first of all , I would suggest the studies of the different rites that have been performed by Church fathers, for much can be learned if you keep an open mind to it- reguardless that isnt the reason anathemas or depositions were issued...the reasons they were issued was for heresy- if the Latin church hadnt commited its new dogma, including the Philoque, leavened/unleavened bread, pergutory and those that later came . they would still be o.k. reguardless of there Rite of Celebration
You know in the old days, even St.john Chrysostom was thrown out of the Church and it was The Coptic/Abyssynians who vouched for him and rejoiced when he was allowed to come back...
The different Rites arent the issue at hand...The Latin Rite is older I believe then the Byzantinian Rite and there isnt good enough records to prove one from the other as far as which was there first- the Mass of the Latins was already being perfected when St.John Chrysostom was being born, and it doesnt matter, according to the Acts of the Apostles, there was different things going on in different placess-
Glory to God for all things-

[Priest Siluan]

Well first of all , I would suggest the studies of the different rites that have been performed by Church fathers, for much can be learned if you keep an open mind to it- reguardless that isnt the reason anathemas or depositions were issued...the reasons they were issued was for heresy- if the Latin church hadnt commited its new dogma, including the Philoque, leavened/unleavened bread, pergutory and those that later came . they would still be o.k. reguardless of there Rite of Celebration
You know in the old days, even St.john Chrysostom was thrown out of the Church and it was The Coptic/Abyssynians who vouched for him and rejoiced when he was allowed to come back...
The different Rites arent the issue at hand...The Latin Rite is older I believe then the Byzantinian Rite and there isnt good enough records to prove one from the other as far as which was there first- the Mass of the Latins was already being perfected when St.John Chrysostom was being born, and it doesnt matter, according to the Acts of the Apostles, there was different things going on in different placess-
Glory to God for all things-

Well, you cannot refuse that many rites have been "contaminated" to be cut of the Church by modifications made by heretics. This maybe is the case of the Latin Rites and the monophisites.

On the other hand, I am not against the rites used in the Church before the Great Schism as Gallican (French), Old Sarum, Mozarabic etc. But we should agree that the modern "Gallican", "Old Sarum", "Mozarabic", etc. are not the same rites used in the old Church, because only small percentages of these rites have survived until our days, and the rest was "completed" with other tradictions by modern men. For instance the modern "Gallican Rite" was "completed" with parts from the Latin Rite and the Bizantine-Russian Rite.

On the other hand the rites and Liturgy that remained always in the Church as the r Bizantine rites and liturgies as Liturgies of St. Chysostomos, San Basil, San Gregory the Dialogue (Presanctified), hours etc. They have never been "contaminated" by heretics, neither "adulterated" by modern men. but they have remained "alive" always in the Church. I think that this was the point for which the ROCOR bishops banned the "Western Rites" in 1978 and I share their opinion completely.