Engaging with the Eastern Orthodox liturgy

[LausTibiChriste]

Absolutely; but you have to realize that the current situation in the Church is something that has not happened in  its history; there is no "blueprint" for getting out of it, except waiting for a true Pope to occupy the See of Peter. Meanwhile the situation in Orthodoxy i.e. disunity, is the very essence of their rejection of a central supreme authority. There is a cure for our situation in the very constitution of the Church; their only solution is to convert to the Faith.

Indeed.

As Erick Ybarra tells people who feel tempted to go 'Dox, do it. Be a catechumen for a year.

You'll soon see it doesn't solve the "problem."

If you're jumping ship or going to the sui iuris rites as a "response" (ie. a negative) to the current issues in the Latin Church, you're going to have a bad time.

If you're going because of a genuine love of the East then go for it (Eastern Catholic, not Orthodox, of course).

[Bonaventure]

Agreed. Kind of like moving. Do it to gain something, not run away.

[LausTibiChriste]

Agreed. Kind of like moving. Do it to gain something, not run away.

Chances are if you move because you don't like the way the Latin life is treating you, the Easterns aren't going to be rolling out the red carpet for your arrival. You're a liturgical refugee and will be treated as such.

Chances too are if you have no real love for the East, you'll be back in a Latin church in no time (a la Matt Fradd).

[LausTibiChriste]

Michael Wilson is absolutely correct that only Catholics can be recognized as Saints. That schismatics like the heretic Palamas are recognized today (even by the Ukrainian Catholics) is a post Vatican-II novelty.

The following quote is from Professor Michael Petrowycz's (presently at Ukrainian Catholic University, L'viv Ukraine] dissertation "Bringing Back the Saints: The Contribution of the Roman Edition of the Ruthenian Liturgical Books (Recensio Ruthena, 1940-1952) to the Commemoration of Slavic Saints in the Ukrainian Catholic Church, p.363.

URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OKxWD8l4mTnnpPQtyBp-cOsULWh_DvKY/view?usp=drivesdk

...As mentioned above, even when the moral evaluation of a candidate was positive (even eminently so, as in the case of Metropolitan Phillip), the candidate was nonetheless disqualified when it was accepted beyond doubt that he or she had been out of communion with Rome. This means that the Commission accepted into the RR only saints that it believed to be, or presumed to be, in communion with Rome. The category of a "material schismatic, who did not provoke, but inherited the schism in good faith, and therefore, according to Jugie and St. Augustine, carried no responsibility for the schism, was not considered by the Commissions as a candidate for the RR and RV sanctorale.

RR = Recensio Ruthena (Ukrainian Catholic sanctorale)
RV = Recensio Vulgata (Russian Catholic sanctorale)

The above quote from Petrowycz's dissertation is quite clear. The Russian saints approved during the pontificate of Pius XII had to be in communion with Rome. Even hose who inherited the schism and were of good faith were not considered for sainthood in either the Russian or Ukrainian Catholic Churches.

That's all fine and well for saints who died in the 11-12th century, but how do you justify it for saints such as Sergius or Stephen of Perm, but of whom died at the very end of the 14th c? There is nothing to justify their adherence to Rome at the stage.

Of course, for those of us who are not sede this is a pointless argument as the East has been given way more leeway in venerating Orthodox saints. Allowing the East to be more authentically Eastern was the only silver lining of V2 in my humble opinion.
 

[EastWest7]

Agreed. Kind of like moving. Do it to gain something, not run away.

Chances are if you move because you don't like the way the Latin life is treating you, the Easterns aren't going to be rolling out the red carpet for your arrival. They're liturgical refugees and will be treated as such.

Chances too are if you have no real love for the East, you'll be back in a Latin church in no time (a la Matt Fradd).

Well said, LTC. And I have seen such situations first-hand.

I didn't realize that Matt Fradd had returned to a parish of the Latin Rite. Although it's been a while since I've watched any of his videos.

[LausTibiChriste]

Agreed. Kind of like moving. Do it to gain something, not run away.

Chances are if you move because you don't like the way the Latin life is treating you, the Easterns aren't going to be rolling out the red carpet for your arrival. They're liturgical refugees and will be treated as such.

Chances too are if you have no real love for the East, you'll be back in a Latin church in no time (a la Matt Fradd).

Well said, TLC. And I have seen such situations first-hand.

I didn't realize that Matt Fradd had returned to a parish of the Latin Rite. Although it's been a while since I've watched any of his videos.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure he did. I don't listen to much of his tripe anymore except the odd interview.

[EastWest7]

Michael Wilson is absolutely correct that only Catholics can be recognized as Saints. That schismatics like the heretic Palamas are recognized today (even by the Ukrainian Catholics) is a post Vatican-II novelty.

The following quote is from Professor Michael Petrowycz's (presently at Ukrainian Catholic University, L'viv Ukraine] dissertation "Bringing Back the Saints: The Contribution of the Roman Edition of the Ruthenian Liturgical Books (Recensio Ruthena, 1940-1952) to the Commemoration of Slavic Saints in the Ukrainian Catholic Church, p.363.

URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OKxWD8l4mTnnpPQtyBp-cOsULWh_DvKY/view?usp=drivesdk

...As mentioned above, even when the moral evaluation of a candidate was positive (even eminently so, as in the case of Metropolitan Phillip), the candidate was nonetheless disqualified when it was accepted beyond doubt that he or she had been out of communion with Rome. This means that the Commission accepted into the RR only saints that it believed to be, or presumed to be, in communion with Rome. The category of a "material schismatic, who did not provoke, but inherited the schism in good faith, and therefore, according to Jugie and St. Augustine, carried no responsibility for the schism, was not considered by the Commissions as a candidate for the RR and RV sanctorale.

RR = Recensio Ruthena (Ukrainian Catholic sanctorale)
RV = Recensio Vulgata (Russian Catholic sanctorale)

The above quote from Petrowycz's dissertation is quite clear. The Russian saints approved during the pontificate of Pius XII had to be in communion with Rome. Even hose who inherited the schism and were of good faith were not considered for sainthood in either the Russian or Ukrainian Catholic Churches.

That's all fine and well for saints who died in the 11-12th century, but how do you justify it for saints such as Sergius or Stephen of Perm, but of whom died at the very end of the 14th c? There is nothing to justify their adherence to Rome at the stage.

Of course, for those of us who are not sede this is a pointless argument as the East has been given way more leeway in venerating Orthodox saints. Allowing the East to be more authentically Eastern was the only silver lining of V2 in my humble opinion.
 

I agree with your assessment regarding V2, LTC (its perspective of the Christian East). I've actually run into TLM-only folks who thought that the removal of such Latinizations in the Eastern Catholic parishes as Stations of The Cross, congregational recitation of the rosary prior to liturgy, use of statues and confessionals, etc in recent years was a result of some sort of liberalization process created by V2.

In my experience it took most Byzantine and Maronite parishes until shortly after Pope John Paul II's Orientale Lumen Apostolic Letter of 1995 to begin comprehensive implementation of Eastern liturgical art and worship structure. Although there are a couple of Byzantine parishes near me who, because of their respective pastors, started the process in the early 1970s.     

[EastWest7]

Sorry, a dupe.

[Michael Wilson]

That's all fine and well for saints who died in the 11-12th century, but how do you justify it for saints such as Sergius or Stephen of Perm, but of whom died at the very end of the 14th c? There is nothing to justify their adherence to Rome at the stage.

Of course, for those of us who are not sede this is a pointless argument as the East has been given way more leeway in venerating Orthodox saints. Allowing the East to be more authentically Eastern was the only silver lining of V2 in my humble opinion.

The document that Wenceslav posted is from at least the 1950's and therefore would include the saints of the 14C.So the cases that you are alluding to had to be in communion with Rome. When the Church holds up a person to be venerated by the faithful, it is for faithful as an example that they may imitate them in the practice of their virtues; how is it possible to hold up to imitation a person who objectively died outside the Church, and therefore did not save their soul? 

[Michael Wilson]

Here is a group of Ukrainian Byzantine priests that are opposed to the "de-Latinazation" of the Bizantine rites (at least the forcible de-Latinization);

Priestly Society of Saint Josaphat
   
Josaphat Kuncevyc, patron saint of the society

The Priestly Society of Saint Josaphat Kuntsevych (SSJK) is a society of traditionalist priests and seminarians originating from the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church which is led by the excommunicated priest Basil Kovpak. It is based in Riasne, Lviv, Western Ukraine.[1] In Lviv, the society maintains a seminary, at which currently thirty students reside, and takes care of a small convent of Basilian sisters.[2] The SSJK is affiliated with the Society of St. Pius X and Holy Orders are conferred by the latter society's bishops in the Roman Rite. The SSJK clergymen, however, exclusively follow a version of Slavonic Byzantine Rite in the Ruthenian recension.
Seminary

The seminary of the SSJK is dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Our Lady and currently is attended by thirty seminarians. The seminary, the society says, is intended to be a modest support in the conversion to Catholicism not only of Ukraine, but of Russia as well. Devotion to Our Lady of Fatima and fidelity to traditional Catholic theology (with an emphasis on pre-conciliar theological emphases) are considered important.
Relations with the sui iuris Ukrainian Catholic Church and the Holy See
Opposition to de-Latinization
See also: Eastern Catholic liturgy

The SSJK rejects the de-Latinization reforms currently being strongly enforced within the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which is in full communion with Rome. These reforms began with the 1930s corrections of the liturgical books by Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky. According to his biographer Cyril Korolevsky, however, Metropolitan Andrey opposed the use of force against liturgical Latinizers. He expressed fear that any attempt to do so would lead to a Greek Catholic equivalent of the 1666 Schism in the Russian Orthodox Church.[3]

The de-Latinisation of the UGCC gained further momentum with the 1964 decree Orientalium Ecclesiarum of the Second Vatican Council) and several subsequent documents. This resulted in the Latinisations being discarded within the Ukrainian diaspora. The Soviet occupation of Western Ukraine had meanwhile forced Byzantine Catholics into a clandestine existence and the Latinizations continued to be used in the underground. After the prescription against the UGCC was lifted in 1989, numerous UGCC priests and hierarchs arrive from the diaspora and attempted to enforce liturgical conformity.

In his memoir Persecuted Tradition, Basil Kovpak has accused the UGCC hierarchy of using intense psychological pressure against priests who are reluctant or unwilling to de-Latinize. He alleges that numerous laity, who have been attached to the Latinizations since the days of the underground, would prefer to stay home on Sunday rather than attend a de-Latinized liturgy.

The SSJK for instance opposes the removal of the stations of the cross, the rosary, and the monstrance from the liturgy and parishes of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. In rejecting these reforms, they also reject the right of the Church authorities to make these reforms; thus who controls the formate of liturgy becomes an important point of debate.

Critics[who?] of the SSJK point out that their liturgical practice favours severely abbreviated services and imported Roman Rite devotions over the traditional and authentic practices and ancient devotions of Eastern Tradition and particularly the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. Proponents counter that these "Latin" symbols and rituals, borrowed from the Latin liturgical practices of their Latin Catholic Polish neighbours, have long been practised by Ukrainian Greek Catholics, in some cases for centuries, and that to suppress them is to deprive the Ukrainian Catholic faithful of a part of their own sacred heritage. The central point in the dispute is over what constitutes 'organic development'.

The Holy See, however, has argued since before the Second Vatican Council that Latinization was not an organic development. Frequently cited examples of this are Pope Leo XIII's 1894 encyclical Orientalium dignitas[4] and Saint Pius X's instructions that the priests of the Russian Catholic Church should offer the liturgy "no more, no less, and no different" (nec plus, nec minus, nec aliter) than the Orthodox and Old Ritualist clergy.
Church Slavonic
Vladimir the Great. The society declares that one of its main goals is conversion of Russia and Ukraine to unity with the Catholic Church.

The SSJK also opposes the abandonment of Church Slavonic, the traditional liturgical language of the Slavic Churches (both Orthodox and Greek-Catholic) in favour of the modern Ukrainian in the Liturgy of the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The society holds that Church Slavonic is essential to stress necessary Catholic unity among all Slavic peoples, and to avoid nationalism which has for a long time divided Slavic Christians.

However, critics[who?] claim that the essence of Eastern liturgical practice is to pray in a language which is understood by the people, and that Church Slavonic has ceased to be such a language, becoming a pale imitation of the Western practice of using Latin to promote unity. The Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church has a large presence in many non-Slavic countries, with numerous eparchies and parishes in the diaspora, exacerbating the problem of parishioners not understanding what is being celebrated as well as raising issues of assimilation.
Ecumenism

The Society of Saint Josaphat condemns ecumenism with the Orthodox currently practised by both the Holy See and the Ukrainian Catholic Church. Instead the society promotes Catholic missionary activities among the Orthodox, who are not in communion with the Holy See. In Persecuted Tradition, Basil Kovpak cites numerous examples of the UGCC turning away Orthodox clergy and laity who wish to convert. In many cases, he alleges, this is because the converts are not ethnically Ukrainian.
Attempted excommunication

In 2003, Cardinal Lubomyr Husar excommunicated SSJK superior Kovpak from the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. Kovpak appealed this punishment at the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota in Vatican City and the excommunication was declared null and void by reason of a lack of canonical form.
Ordinations in 2006

On 22 November 2006, Bishop Richard Williamson who was then a member of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), ordained two priests and seven deacons in Warsaw, Poland, for the SSJK, in violation of canon 1015 §2, and of canons 1021 and 1331 §2 of the Code of Canon Law, and the corresponding canons of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. An SSPX priest who was present remarked, "We were all very edified by their piety, and I myself was astonished by the resemblance of the atmosphere amongst the seminarians with that which I knew in the seminary – this in spite of the difference of language, nationality and even rite."[5]

Archbishop Ihor Vozniak of Lviv (the archdiocese in which Kovpak is incardinated) denounced Williamson's action as a "criminal act" and condemned Kovpak's participation in the ceremony. He stressed that the two priests that Williamson had ordained would not receive faculties within the archeparchy.[6] Officials of the Lviv archdiocese said that Kovpak could face excommunication, and that "'he deceives the church by declaring that he is a Greek (Byzantine) Catholic priest,' while supporting a group [SSPX] that uses the old Latin liturgy exclusively, eschewing the Byzantine tradition, and does not maintain allegiance to the Holy See."[7] Accordingly, Kovpak's excommunication process was restarted by the hierarchy of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church and confirmed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on 23 November 2007.[8]

Father John Jenkins, a priest of the Society of St. Pius X, said in 2006 that the new archbishop of Lviv declared that his main task for the following year was to eradicate the "Lefebvrists" from his territory.[9]
Position of the society

Although the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, with the backing of the Holy See, had thus declared Kovpak excommunicated and the Society of St. Josaphat lacking faculties for a ministry within the Catholic Church, they themselves maintain that, though they are in dispute with Lubomyr and, presumably, with his successor, Sviatoslav Shevchuk, and through their association with the Society of St Pius X, indirectly in dispute with the church hierarchy, they are loyal to the Pope and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, and are merely resisting what they consider to be modernism, indifferentism, and liberalism.[citation needed]

[LausTibiChriste]

Yes one of them is a priest in Moscow.

If you want Latinization just go Latin.

[EastWest7]

Yes one of them is a priest in Moscow.

If you want Latinization just go Latin.

An understatement, LTC.

[Michael Wilson]

As the article states, some of the "Latinizations" such as the stations of the Cross, are centuries old; the same for the Rosary. Plus these priests have not lost the missionary spirit. Finally the use of the Old Slavonic as an antidote to the nationalism that plagues the Eastern Rites and to a greater extent the Orthodox is probably a good idea.

[Bonaventure]

Yes one of them is a priest in Moscow.

If you want Latinization just go Latin.

It depends.

Some of the arguments of the "de-Latinization" promoters are the same things the Novus Ordo Cranmerites pushed. The Bugnini Holy Week, etc.

Liturgical archaeologism is almost never good.

[LausTibiChriste]

Yes one of them is a priest in Moscow.

If you want Latinization just go Latin.

It depends.

Some of the arguments of the "de-Latinization" promoters are the same things the Novus Ordo Cranmerites pushed. The Bugnini Holy Week, etc.

Liturgical archaeologism is almost never good.

Not the same at all.

And I agree, liturgical archeaologism is terrible