Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => The Sacred: Catholic Liturgy, Chant, Prayers => Topic started by: Cryptinox on June 29, 2020, 06:39:12 PM
-
I have been told the Ukrainians and tha Maronites changed their rites. I plan on going to a Syro Malakanra church for confession some time soon so I would like to know what eastern rites have changed in substantial ways.
-
There were no substantial changes. Maronites messed with their Mass in terms of facing the people, having lay readers, even altar girls in many places, etc. but it's still a valid Mass, despite many Novus Ordoisms in terms of custom. Ukrainians are nearly unchanged except for some chant melodies.
-
So the Maronite ordinations and episcopal consecrations are valid? They're not the same as the Novus Ordo?
-
So the Maronite ordinations and episcopal consecrations are valid? They're not the same as the Novus Ordo?
I could be wrong, but I don't believe they changed those substantially. With the Mass, they did move to vernacular, allowed various other reforms like lay participation, but they kept their Canon intact, including the immediate passage around the consecration being spoken in Aramaic. I wouldn't want to attend one because of all the modernizations, but I have no reason to believe it's invalid. With these Eastern Rites, they just didn't have the resources to set up a large commission to study changing everything and come up with a new version ... like the Roman Rite Bugnini commission ... and they really had no real reason/motivation to change them.
-
I could be wrong, but I don't believe they changed those substantially. With the Mass, they did move to vernacular, allowed various other reforms like lay participation, but they kept their Canon intact, including the immediate passage around the consecration being spoken in Aramaic. I wouldn't want to attend one because of all the modernizations, but I have no reason to believe it's invalid. With these Eastern Rites, they just didn't have the resources to set up a large commission to study changing everything and come up with a new version ... like the Roman Rite Bugnini commission ... and they really had no real reason/motivation to change them.
Thanks for your response. It's helpful in case I ever have the only option to assist at a Maronite Mass or receive Sacraments from them.
-
Thanks for your response. It's helpful in case I ever have the only option to assist at a Maronite Mass or receive Sacraments from them.
The Maronite church was already rather westernized before V2 and they adopted some of the N.O. externals.
Unless you're in a Lebanese community, odds are there will be other Eastern liturgies around that look less like the N.O.
-
The Eastern churches are not free of the effects of Vatican II. See JPII's 1990 Code of Canon Law for the Eastern Churches:
http://www.jgray.org/codes/cceo90eng.html (http://www.jgray.org/codes/cceo90eng.html)
The Religion of Ecuмenism is alive and well in the Eastern arm of the Novus Ordo....even if the orders are valid.
-
The Maronite church was already rather westernized before V2 and they adopted some of the N.O. externals.
Unless you're in a Lebanese community, odds are there will be other Eastern liturgies around that look less like the N.O.
I have all sorts of eastern churches near me Ruthenian, Ukrainian, Romanian, Syro Malakanra, Maronite, Melkite, Chaldean, and Syriac
-
There were no substantial changes. Maronites messed with their Mass in terms of facing the people, having lay readers, even altar girls in many places, etc. but it's still a valid Mass, despite many Novus Ordoisms in terms of custom. Ukrainians are nearly unchanged except for some chant melodies.
Do the Ukrainians have any masses done in honor of the heretic Palamas?
-
Do the Ukrainians have any masses done in honor of the heretic Palamas?
I've not heart of it.
-
The Eastern churches are not free of the effects of Vatican II. See JPII's 1990 Code of Canon Law for the Eastern Churches:
http://www.jgray.org/codes/cceo90eng.html (http://www.jgray.org/codes/cceo90eng.html)
The Religion of Ecuмenism is alive and well in the Eastern arm of the Novus Ordo....even if the orders are valid.
Would you like to cite any particular Canons? No one has the time to read the entire Eastern Code. "Ecuмenism" isn't actually even a precise term. When people criticize "Ecuмenism" it's more about the implicit theology of religious indifferentism.
-
Would you like to cite any particular Canons? No one has the time to read the entire Eastern Code. "Ecuмenism" isn't actually even a precise term. When people criticize "Ecuмenism" it's more about the implicit theology of religious indifferentism.
All one has to do is search for some of the typical offensive words/terms associated with the Vatican II/ JPII's 1983 Code of Canon Law theology/ecclesiology like "full communion" or "dialogue" or "unity".
-
All one has to do is search for some of the typical offensive words/terms associated with the Vatican II/ JPII's 1983 Code of Canon Law theology/ecclesiology like "full communion" or "dialogue" or "unity".
Still need context. "Dialogue" and "unity" are legitimate terms and depend on context. "Full communion" can be also understood in a number of different ways. So, with a quick glance, the first use of the term constrasts the baptized with catechumens, stating that the baptized who profess the faith are in full communion, but that catechumens are united to the Church (in less than full communion due to lack of Baptism). This is not illegitimate, as Catholics theologians have referred to catechumens having a partial or imperfect membership in the Church. So it's not enough to find a buzzword to establish your case.
This shoot-from-the hip hurling of heresy accusations is one of the worst aspects of dogmatic sedevacantism.
-
Still need context. "Dialogue" and "unity" are legitimate terms and depend on context. "Full communion" can be also understood in a number of different ways. So, with a quick glance, the first use of the term constrasts the baptized with catechumens, stating that the baptized who profess the faith are in full communion, but that catechumens are united to the Church (in less than full communion due to lack of Baptism). This is not illegitimate, as Catholics theologians have referred to catechumens having a partial or imperfect membership in the Church. So it's not enough to find a buzzword to establish your case.
This shoot-from-the hip hurling of heresy accusations is one of the worst aspects of dogmatic sedevacantism.
Ah, so you're now decided I am a dogmatic sedevacantist and you've accused me of making "shoot from the hip hurling of heresy accusations". No, not shooting from the hip, but thanks for your shooting from the hip accusations.
How about you just do a search for those words for the context you so sorely need. It's simple.....CtrL F.
It is interesting how you're so quick to defend a JPII Code of Canon Law. Do you really think the 1983 version is the only one infected with Vatican II theology? Do you really think that if he promulgated this code that the correct understanding of those words is being used?
-
So the Maronite ordinations and episcopal consecrations are valid? They're not the same as the Novus Ordo?
I am told that somewhere in the Maronite mass there is a prayer for the conversion of the Holy Father.
-
Ah, so you're now decided I am a dogmatic sedevacantist and you've accused me of making "shoot from the hip hurling of heresy accusations". No, not shooting from the hip, but thanks for your shooting from the hip accusations.
How about you just do a search for those words for the context you so sorely need. It's simple.....CtrL F.
It is interesting how you're so quick to defend a JPII Code of Canon Law. Do you really think the 1983 version is the only one infected with Vatican II theology? Do you really think that if he promulgated this code that the correct understanding of those words is being used?
You've mentioned that you won't go to an una cuм Mass, which is a dogmatic SV stance. And, yet, even the Dimonds say that it's OK to go to an una cuм Mass, so you're now to the right of them on that issue.
Searching for "words" is insufficient, since, as I pointed out, those words have legitimate meanings even if they've been abused by the Modernists.
-
You've mentioned that you won't go to an una cuм Mass, which is a dogmatic SV stance. And, yet, even the Dimonds say that it's OK to go to an una cuм Mass, so you're now to the right of them on that issue.
No, a "dogmatic" stance would be to say that anyone who does assist at an una cuм mass is not Catholic. The post you are referring to I made it quite clear that this is not what I believe.
Ladislaus, do you assist at a liturgy of the Eastern Rite?
-
There were no substantial changes.
I find it interesting that no one ever says that there were no changes. The claim is always that there were no substantial changes. It seems that anyone who has knowledge of the Eastern Rites agree that there have been changes.
-
Ukrainian and Palamas. Here's from the current office
-
As to the Maronites, they butchered the liturgy by essentially translating popular Arabic hymns and texts. They sort of did the equivalent of using the st Joseph sunday missal as official liturgical text. The reformers of the Maronite liturgy were not modernists like those of the Latin rite. They were essentially Syriac iliterate Arabs who 'inriched their tradition with harmless drivel. They had faith so hell, sin, evil and damnation as well as sacrifice, and the true teaching about the Eucharist are contained in the liturgy unlike the NO
-
The ordination liturgy contains the proper formulae as well as an ancient form combined with triple statement of ascription to the office given publicly as is normative