Saturday, September 18, 2004
Churches?
Message: 18
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 05:29:23 -0000
From: "xxxxxxxxxxx"
Subject: Re: Eastern Rite
Hi Richard,
I don't post very much since I'm new to the group and am still trying to
get my bearings. This thread is several days old so you may have moved on
to other topics.
There are some twenty Rites that make up the Catholic Church. The
Latin is, by far, the largest. I believe the Roman Communion is the only
ancient body of Christians that has representatives from all the
liturgical families. The others tend to be limited to a single Rite.
While there are some other Latin traditions, today the Latin Rite is
practically alone in representing the West. What you call the Eastern
Church or Rite are really all the remaining Rites of the Church combined,
with the Byzantine being the largest.
If you think of the Church apart from schisms/heresies all the
ancient churches basically fall into Latin, Antiochian, Alexandrian
and Jerusalem traditions. Had it not been for the advances of Islam, the
Antiochian would still be large, having given birth to the East & West
Syrian liturgical families. The Alexandrians might well also have
continued to evangelize deep into Africa, as they did among Ethiopians,
etc.
Unfortunately, the 5th C. Christological debates hived off large
chunks of the Great Church which later succumbed to the Muslim
advance. The Nestorians split off around 431. They would largely be the
East Syrian Tradition which ended up in Iran, Iraq, India and, I think,
China. They are the smallest of the surviving liturgical families. The
Jersalem Tradition is, practically speaking, lost to us although it
influenced all other families and they all returned to the Holy City.
Monophysitism broke off the Alexandrian and Armenian Traditions
around 451. The so-called Photian and later 11 C. split with the
Byzantines, hardening after the sack of Constantinople and it's final
collapse, give us the final massive break of the Great Church into
Orthodox and Catholic. The split with the daughter churches of Byzantium,
among the Slavs, is not as pronounced as today's Orthodox would have us
believe. They seem to have come in and out of communion with us over the
centuries. The western Ukraine restored communion formally but was driven
underground only to emerge after the fall of Communism. The Byzantines
(now Orthodox & Catholic) are a West Syrian Tradition.
Armenians would be part of the West Syrian Tradition. Antioch was
the hardest hit, being affected by all the major splits so that there are
Orthodox, Catholic, Monophysite and Nestorian Christians there today.
At various points in history, parts of all these Churches came back
into communion with Rome. The Maronites (West Syrians) are the only
Eastern Church that entirely returned to (or as they sometimes say, never
intentionally left) Catholic Communion.
The liturgical families and Rites are characterized by their
Liturgical Calendars including different disciplines of feast and
fasts, monastic traditions, architecture, etc. Obviously, for
catholicism, most of these are secondary matters that do not affect
the unity of Faith.
The structure of the Eucharist is different. Although they all have the
words of Institution (some claim the East Syrian Addai & Mari is missing
these because they don't appear in some manuals). The intercessions may
be split or combined. The invocation of the Holy Spirit (Epiclesis) may
be explicit or implied and there may be a single or double invocation
framing the Eucharistic prayer. The recitation of G_d's mighty deeds will
take different forms, developing some themes over others. The schema may
be more explicitly Trinitarian (I think the Byzantine is like this,
possibly the Liturgy of St. Basil) or less developed as is the Latin Rite.
The Latin Rite itself won out in the West not because of Rome but
because of the Carolingians reforms attempting to standardize usage
in the Germanic domains, later re-imposed on Rome, which actually
surrounded the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer or Anaphora) with
traditions found outside of Rome. The small or defunct western
traditions (Gallico-Mozarabic & Ambrosian) seem to have West Syrian
connections (if memory serves). The Celtic is lost.
There is much more to say on the matter but I think the finest source is
Louis Bouyer's "Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic
Prayer" which a sweeping account of the Liturgy from its Jewish roots
through all the liturgical families that created today's Rites in all the
ancient churches. Published around '66 I don't know if it's still
available. In any case, I believe you're one of the members who can't
keep such materials lying around.
Sorry if this is long-winded.
Frank
St. Peters, MO
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 05:29:23 -0000
From: "xxxxxxxxxxx"
Subject: Re: Eastern Rite
Hi Richard,
I don't post very much since I'm new to the group and am still trying to
get my bearings. This thread is several days old so you may have moved on
to other topics.
There are some twenty Rites that make up the Catholic Church. The
Latin is, by far, the largest. I believe the Roman Communion is the only
ancient body of Christians that has representatives from all the
liturgical families. The others tend to be limited to a single Rite.
While there are some other Latin traditions, today the Latin Rite is
practically alone in representing the West. What you call the Eastern
Church or Rite are really all the remaining Rites of the Church combined,
with the Byzantine being the largest.
If you think of the Church apart from schisms/heresies all the
ancient churches basically fall into Latin, Antiochian, Alexandrian
and Jerusalem traditions. Had it not been for the advances of Islam, the
Antiochian would still be large, having given birth to the East & West
Syrian liturgical families. The Alexandrians might well also have
continued to evangelize deep into Africa, as they did among Ethiopians,
etc.
Unfortunately, the 5th C. Christological debates hived off large
chunks of the Great Church which later succumbed to the Muslim
advance. The Nestorians split off around 431. They would largely be the
East Syrian Tradition which ended up in Iran, Iraq, India and, I think,
China. They are the smallest of the surviving liturgical families. The
Jersalem Tradition is, practically speaking, lost to us although it
influenced all other families and they all returned to the Holy City.
Monophysitism broke off the Alexandrian and Armenian Traditions
around 451. The so-called Photian and later 11 C. split with the
Byzantines, hardening after the sack of Constantinople and it's final
collapse, give us the final massive break of the Great Church into
Orthodox and Catholic. The split with the daughter churches of Byzantium,
among the Slavs, is not as pronounced as today's Orthodox would have us
believe. They seem to have come in and out of communion with us over the
centuries. The western Ukraine restored communion formally but was driven
underground only to emerge after the fall of Communism. The Byzantines
(now Orthodox & Catholic) are a West Syrian Tradition.
Armenians would be part of the West Syrian Tradition. Antioch was
the hardest hit, being affected by all the major splits so that there are
Orthodox, Catholic, Monophysite and Nestorian Christians there today.
At various points in history, parts of all these Churches came back
into communion with Rome. The Maronites (West Syrians) are the only
Eastern Church that entirely returned to (or as they sometimes say, never
intentionally left) Catholic Communion.
The liturgical families and Rites are characterized by their
Liturgical Calendars including different disciplines of feast and
fasts, monastic traditions, architecture, etc. Obviously, for
catholicism, most of these are secondary matters that do not affect
the unity of Faith.
The structure of the Eucharist is different. Although they all have the
words of Institution (some claim the East Syrian Addai & Mari is missing
these because they don't appear in some manuals). The intercessions may
be split or combined. The invocation of the Holy Spirit (Epiclesis) may
be explicit or implied and there may be a single or double invocation
framing the Eucharistic prayer. The recitation of G_d's mighty deeds will
take different forms, developing some themes over others. The schema may
be more explicitly Trinitarian (I think the Byzantine is like this,
possibly the Liturgy of St. Basil) or less developed as is the Latin Rite.
The Latin Rite itself won out in the West not because of Rome but
because of the Carolingians reforms attempting to standardize usage
in the Germanic domains, later re-imposed on Rome, which actually
surrounded the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer or Anaphora) with
traditions found outside of Rome. The small or defunct western
traditions (Gallico-Mozarabic & Ambrosian) seem to have West Syrian
connections (if memory serves). The Celtic is lost.
There is much more to say on the matter but I think the finest source is
Louis Bouyer's "Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic
Prayer" which a sweeping account of the Liturgy from its Jewish roots
through all the liturgical families that created today's Rites in all the
ancient churches. Published around '66 I don't know if it's still
available. In any case, I believe you're one of the members who can't
keep such materials lying around.
Sorry if this is long-winded.
Frank
St. Peters, MO
