Post by Voxxkowalski on Dec 26, 2016 17:07:08 GMT -5
more detail to see where Im coming from:
www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/346037/Priestly%20Society%20of%20St%20Josapha
In a thread from 2001 about the PSSJ in Ukraine...a member Robert Horvath had this to say...and it is spot on so Im posting it here...highlights are from me...:
I am only dealing with the reality of latinization as a good, as byzantinization of the Latin Rite is also a good--as is evidenced by the Pauline Missal and its expression. We are well aware of the byzantinizations, falsely called protestantizations, in the Latin Rite--use of the laos in the liturgy, participation, use of both kinds, concelebration etc. I am only critiquing the commonly held belief of latinization as a bad. When in reality the sharing of traditions is common in all Apostolic Churches.
Some common myths about Latin devotions used by our faithful are almost abounding in our Church, amongst many clergy and people, who seek to be like the Eastern Orthodox in faith and praxis. The rosary is not a Latin tradition, it was given to the Universal Church by the Blessed Virgin Mary Herself. The Scapular is not a latinization is was given also by Mary for the totality of the Catholic Church. Stations were imported from the Jerusalem Church. Benediction is important for the Universal Church not only because of the countless conversions, miracles and recommendations by Our Lady and other Saints, attributed to this devotion, but countless Pontiffs have recommended it for the Universal Church--the thesis that the Eastern Church never had to deal with Protestants is false, benediction is useful for our Churches to defend our faith in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Statues also have a history in the Church in Constantinople as the museums there attest, these cannot be seen as solely latinizations. And conversely, Ikons, Akathists, use of the Jesus Prayer, and other byzantinizations and orientalizations have been recommended for the Latin Church by Popes and Saints as well.
There is -no- pure Constantinopolitan Tradition free from other Traditions,--the same with other Traditions as is evidenced by modern liturgical scholarship. The innovation of protecting a Tradition from other Traditions, from another Church of another Rite, is not healthy. If the laos and the clergy of a particular Church desire to import traditions from another Church than it is a good.
All of the Traditions within Holy Tradition are the Life of the Holy Spirit. To segregate people of one Tradition from another is an abuse-- not so-called latinization or byzantinization--this arrogance or pride, of some of our people and clergy, only makes one Tradition seem to be superior to another, which is false. It is not latinization which removes our identity as an autonomous ritual Church, nor byzantinization the identity of the Latins, but a lack of love for each other and not showing forth the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity. Our identity is not ethnic, national or even the idolatry we give to so-called "pure ritual traditions." Our true identity is rooted in our connection not only to the Church Universal, but as a Church which negates that which stresses a divisive mentality--We are Catholics who share in faith, hope and charity communion with the Pope of Rome. I can see the importance of imposing a de-latinizing policy for those who desire to see us be pure ritual artifacts on the curios shelf of the Church Universal, but we are a living Church, with living members, and we are not to think of our Traditions as superior to that of the Latins of whom we are falsely mandated to separate ourselves in devotion and faith by the pro-Orthodox, some might say de facto 'schismatic' faction of our Church. We are not the Church of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. We are the Church of the 21 Ecumenical Councils along with the Latins--we must not only be honest as to who we are ecclesiologically, but in that honesty move forward toward authentic Church Unity.
I understand the desire to "purify" our Church to be like the Eastern Orthodox. But, we have a right to exist apart from them as Churches in our own right, perhaps this is the mindset behind the Revised Divine Liturgy--which did not seek a consensus of all the Eastern Churches before making such radical changes. When I came back into the Byzantine Catholic Church from the OCA, I immediately understood that I would have to come to terms with the real status of our Churches in light of the ecclesiology of the Church of Rome at the time of the Unias, which fundamentally was that we are Catholics of the Church of Rome who use the Slavic-Greek Rite. Later, as union was more solidified canon law was modified to create ritual Churches of an autonomous nature, which basically means that they are churches within the One Roman Church, but fundamentally and all Eastern Orthodox theologians understand this, our Churches can be nothing other than Roman Catholic Churches of differing ritual traditions. A Mother Church cannot create a Sister Church, it can only create a Daughter Church. In essence a Mother Church of a certain tradition cannot create a Church of another Tradition, it can only reproduce what it is and allow its faithful to use other traditions. It is in this sense that our Eastern Catholic Churches are Roman Catholic, more precisely Eastern-Roman Catholic and the Latins are Western-Roman Catholic. But, the truth hurts and our pro-Orthodox theologians and faithful will hear none of this, even the Eastern Code of Canon law is basically fundamentally the same as the Latin Code and by using the term ritual Church it proclaims the true status of our Churches as sub-groupings of ecclesial realities that are not only in communion with Rome, but dependent on it for their ontological existence.
Some common myths about Latin devotions used by our faithful are almost abounding in our Church, amongst many clergy and people, who seek to be like the Eastern Orthodox in faith and praxis. The rosary is not a Latin tradition, it was given to the Universal Church by the Blessed Virgin Mary Herself. The Scapular is not a latinization is was given also by Mary for the totality of the Catholic Church. Stations were imported from the Jerusalem Church. Benediction is important for the Universal Church not only because of the countless conversions, miracles and recommendations by Our Lady and other Saints, attributed to this devotion, but countless Pontiffs have recommended it for the Universal Church--the thesis that the Eastern Church never had to deal with Protestants is false, benediction is useful for our Churches to defend our faith in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Statues also have a history in the Church in Constantinople as the museums there attest, these cannot be seen as solely latinizations. And conversely, Ikons, Akathists, use of the Jesus Prayer, and other byzantinizations and orientalizations have been recommended for the Latin Church by Popes and Saints as well.
There is -no- pure Constantinopolitan Tradition free from other Traditions,--the same with other Traditions as is evidenced by modern liturgical scholarship. The innovation of protecting a Tradition from other Traditions, from another Church of another Rite, is not healthy. If the laos and the clergy of a particular Church desire to import traditions from another Church than it is a good.
All of the Traditions within Holy Tradition are the Life of the Holy Spirit. To segregate people of one Tradition from another is an abuse-- not so-called latinization or byzantinization--this arrogance or pride, of some of our people and clergy, only makes one Tradition seem to be superior to another, which is false. It is not latinization which removes our identity as an autonomous ritual Church, nor byzantinization the identity of the Latins, but a lack of love for each other and not showing forth the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity. Our identity is not ethnic, national or even the idolatry we give to so-called "pure ritual traditions." Our true identity is rooted in our connection not only to the Church Universal, but as a Church which negates that which stresses a divisive mentality--We are Catholics who share in faith, hope and charity communion with the Pope of Rome. I can see the importance of imposing a de-latinizing policy for those who desire to see us be pure ritual artifacts on the curios shelf of the Church Universal, but we are a living Church, with living members, and we are not to think of our Traditions as superior to that of the Latins of whom we are falsely mandated to separate ourselves in devotion and faith by the pro-Orthodox, some might say de facto 'schismatic' faction of our Church. We are not the Church of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. We are the Church of the 21 Ecumenical Councils along with the Latins--we must not only be honest as to who we are ecclesiologically, but in that honesty move forward toward authentic Church Unity.
I understand the desire to "purify" our Church to be like the Eastern Orthodox. But, we have a right to exist apart from them as Churches in our own right, perhaps this is the mindset behind the Revised Divine Liturgy--which did not seek a consensus of all the Eastern Churches before making such radical changes. When I came back into the Byzantine Catholic Church from the OCA, I immediately understood that I would have to come to terms with the real status of our Churches in light of the ecclesiology of the Church of Rome at the time of the Unias, which fundamentally was that we are Catholics of the Church of Rome who use the Slavic-Greek Rite. Later, as union was more solidified canon law was modified to create ritual Churches of an autonomous nature, which basically means that they are churches within the One Roman Church, but fundamentally and all Eastern Orthodox theologians understand this, our Churches can be nothing other than Roman Catholic Churches of differing ritual traditions. A Mother Church cannot create a Sister Church, it can only create a Daughter Church. In essence a Mother Church of a certain tradition cannot create a Church of another Tradition, it can only reproduce what it is and allow its faithful to use other traditions. It is in this sense that our Eastern Catholic Churches are Roman Catholic, more precisely Eastern-Roman Catholic and the Latins are Western-Roman Catholic. But, the truth hurts and our pro-Orthodox theologians and faithful will hear none of this, even the Eastern Code of Canon law is basically fundamentally the same as the Latin Code and by using the term ritual Church it proclaims the true status of our Churches as sub-groupings of ecclesial realities that are not only in communion with Rome, but dependent on it for their ontological existence.