Ukrainian Catholic Catechetical Materials On The Liturgy

[MIKolbe]

and i thank you again.

pax.

[eustace scrubb]

Is it me, or did those seem to have a somewhat angry and patronizing tone?

Hopefully I'm just misreading them.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Aside from the world of difference between the Roman Rite per se (i.e. as it is in the rubrics) and what your pamphlets portray the Roman Rite to be...which is insulting, since you darn well know that the Roman Rite nowhere calls for guitar or banners about being the light of the world...and you also know darn well that the Roman Rite does use ancient traditions handed on, in both forms...

The pamphlets look like they were designed to lead the reader to the conclusion that the Roman Rite smells of elderberries, all the while telling them what the reader would only take as a patronizing joke that the two rites are equal. This is the equivalent to a straw man. Portray the Roman Rite in some ridiculous fashion and then shoot down the pathetic image of the rite and claim victory. Just because it's often poorly celebrated doesn't make the Roman Rite into what the pamphlets have made it.

I want to assume that this wasn't your intention, but the many offensive things you've said about the Western Church before don't support that assumption. If the assumption is, in fact, wrong, then as usual, Todd, you demonstrate your deep-seated contempt for the Western Church which has led you far from an appreciation of your own rite. One cannot appreciate his own rite of the Church while disparaging another. Any attack on any rite of the Church is an attack on the whole Church and will blind the attacker to the value of all rites, including his own.

I hope that my interpretation is incorrect, but I am getting awfully sick and tired of the superiority complex.

[Apotheoun]

Micah,

I did not create the pamphlet, I simply posted it after finding it on an official eparchial website of the Ukrainian Catholic Church in the United States, and so I see no reason for you to attack me as if I were its author. Be that as it may, I have no contempt for the ancient Roman liturgy, but I will openly admit that I do find the modern Roman liturgy rather banal. That is of course just my opinion and I have never said that other members of this forum have to agree with me on the issue.

Todd

P.S. - As far as your "getting awfully sick and tired of the superiority complex" is concerned, I cannot help you with that, since it is an interior disposition of your own mind.

Edited August 11, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Raphael' date='10 August 2010 - 09:16 PM' timestamp='1281496564' post='2155607']
. . . Any attack on any rite of the Church is an attack on the whole Church and will blind the attacker to the value of all rites, including his own.[/quote]
I doubt that the Ukrainian Catholic representatives who published this resource comparison see it as an "attack" upon the Roman Rite. Perhaps you are upset because some of what it says, at least from your own perspective, highlights certain problems in the modern liturgy of the Roman Church, and how it is often celebrated.

I sincerely doubt that the author of the pamphlet intends it as an attack upon anyone or anything.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Raphael' date='10 August 2010 - 10:16 PM' timestamp='1281496564' post='2155607']
I hope that my interpretation is incorrect, but I am getting awfully sick and tired of the superiority complex.
[/quote]

For what it is worth, in a private conversation Apo told me that he posted this because zz luled at it. zz, who has a very different understanding of the Roman Rite than the author of the pamphlet, thought that the characterization of the West was absurdly funny.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='10 August 2010 - 11:58 PM' timestamp='1281499106' post='2155628']
I doubt that the Ukrainian Catholic representatives who published this resource comparison see it as an "attack" upon the Roman Rite. Perhaps you are upset because some of what it says, at least from your own perspective, highlights certain problems in the modern liturgy of the Roman Church, and how it is often celebrated.

I sincerely doubt that the author of the pamphlet intends it as an attack upon anyone or anything.
[/quote]
Either they intended to caricature the Roman Rite or they know nothing of her traditions. Either way, this is a terrible expression of the Roman Rite and, as Rexi put it, absurd. I was simply saying that, in line with your frequently manifested sense of Eastern superiority which rejects even some dogmas (in opposition to the theological approach of authentic Eastern Catholic theologians), you most likely knew that this was a caricature of the Roman Rite and not representative of the rite itself, and posted it to that end. No, I can't judge you, but it does seem suspect. In any case, I feel the need to point out yet another instance in which you have taken an attitude harmful to the unity of the Church.

Authentic unity, as you know, is a relationship of respect, not back-stabbing. Shaking hands and saying, "we're equal," while making fun of your friend behind his back is misinformed at best and divisive at worst. This is the rough equivalent of two politicians shaking hands before a debate that one candidate has rigged with false information and unflattering advertisements of his opponent on the john. It's dirty pool.

You can't use specific instances to define a general term, especially when the specific instances chosen are so chosen specifically in light of how far they are from the general term. It's called overgeneralizing. The Roman Rite remains per se something that is often misrepresented in specific instances of liturgy. That doesn't make it right to say that those liturgical abuses inhere in the Roman Rite, which is precisely what this pamphlet claims. If 90% of Byzantine priests show up drunk for Divine Liturgy, I can't go saying that the Byzantine Rite calls for that.

[Resurrexi]

Quite frankly, I feel that the Eastern rites as celebrated in most places today are extrinsically superior to the Novus Ordo of the Roman rite.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='11 August 2010 - 12:24 AM' timestamp='1281500649' post='2155638']
Quite frankly, I feel that the Eastern rites as celebrated in most places today are extrinsically superior to the Novus Ordo of the Roman rite.
[/quote]
That is a valid opinion, but anyone still has to admit that the characterization of e Roman Rite in the pamphlet is a gross overgenerization. Just because it is poorly done in specific instances doesn't make the rite itself poor.

[dominicansoul]

whoever the author of this pamplet is, he obviously has never worshipped with the Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist... they neither have banners, sing with guitars at Mass, (although they have been known to have a mini orchestra during the Solemnities...) the architecture of their chapel DOES NOT convey "modernism." Their prayers are the simply beautiful psalms of the Liturgy of the Hours, and they chant in Gregorian, sing in polyphony, Their art is beautiful, they are beautiful, because they embrace what the Holy Spirit has given to the Church in these times... they neither have a superiority complex, nor do they look with disdain on the other rites of the Church... they are the epitome of the Roman Rite... in all it's glory

to look upon the western Church as if it's the bad black sheep of the family is pretty lamo, and it gets old time and again.. i've experienced the superiority complex from several eastern riters in my lifetime, so much so, i thought it was part of the tradition of the East to be so... but then, i am guilty of generalizations, just like the author of this pamphlet!

hey Micah, have you ever heard the phrase, "Eastern Rite, Roman wrong!" An Eastern Rite Dominican brother used to looove to use this line all the time at the Dominican house of studies where I visited with my Sisters back in the day... he seemed so bitter and angry... not very attractive at. all. sorry, but I didn't recognize Jesus in that attitude...and I never do, when someone rears their pride and superiority over others using God, the Church, and their beliefs...

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Raphael' date='11 August 2010 - 12:26 AM' timestamp='1281500788' post='2155639']
That is a valid opinion, but anyone still has to admit that the characterization of e Roman Rite in the pamphlet is a gross overgenerization. Just because it is poorly done in specific instances doesn't make the rite itself poor.
[/quote]

I believe it is and is not an overgenerization depending upon the parish. There are many parishes which are just like (some 'worse') what is described in the characterization. Such parishes who's practices are supported by the faithful, priests and bishops of those parishes.

For myself personally it has been very hard to find a N.O. parish not like that which is described. I love the NO when it is practiced properly. Though I believe the TLM to be extrinsically superior to the NO. I have just as recently as this weekend found a parish I never knew existed that is NO parish but is not like what is describe in the characterization.

Because there are so many parishes like what is described in the characterization, and because such parishes which practices are supported by the faithful, priests and bishops of those parishes, although we understand it is a mischaracterization of a true and proper NO Mass, those outside our Rite will have great difficultly in understanding what the West truly believes as with concerns with its Liturgy.

Edited August 11, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I read this pamphlet a while back, before visiting Ukraine, and I feel the same as many others here.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='11 August 2010 - 12:45 AM' timestamp='1281501932' post='2155643']
I believe it is and is not an overgenerization depending upon the parish.
[/quote]
I don't think you understand my meaning. Even if every parish had kazoo Mass with clown vestments, that wouldn't make it right to define the Roman Rite by that. In fact, those things are abuses of the Roman Rite, negations of its goodness. The pamphlets take things that are actually abuses of the Roman Rite and say that those things define the Roman Rite. No, those things may be present in liturgy as abuses of the Roman Rite, but they are violations of it and never could be called parts of it. A liturgical abuse keeps the Mass from being fully according to the Roman Rite. So a number of the things the pamphlets list are specifically the opposite of the Roman Rite.

The Roman Rite itself is something altogether separate from any specific celebration of it. If the pamphlets want to compare rites, they should compare Eastern Divine Liturgy with what is called for in the texts of the Roman Rite, not with abuses of the rite, no matter how common. For instance, gregorian chant has pride of place, but one of the pamphlets says that Easterners consider the voice most important while Romans have music from various instruments. That's not what the Rite says! The pamphlet makes other similar liturgical and theological errors.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Raphael' date='11 August 2010 - 01:16 AM' timestamp='1281503798' post='2155650']
I don't think you understand my meaning. Even if every parish had kazoo Mass with clown vestments, that wouldn't make it right to define the Roman Rite by that. In fact, those things are abuses of the Roman Rite, negations of its goodness. The pamphlets take things that are actually abuses of the Roman Rite and say that those things define the Roman Rite. No, those things may be present in liturgy as abuses of the Roman Rite, but they are violations of it and never could be called parts of it. A liturgical abuse keeps the Mass from being fully according to the Roman Rite. So a number of the things the pamphlets list are specifically the opposite of the Roman Rite.

The Roman Rite itself is something altogether separate from any specific celebration of it. If the pamphlets want to compare rites, they should compare Eastern Divine Liturgy with what is called for in the texts of the Roman Rite, not with abuses of the rite, no matter how common. For instance, gregorian chant has pride of place, but one of the pamphlets says that Easterners consider the voice most important while Romans have music from various instruments. That's not what the Rite says! The pamphlet makes other similar liturgical and theological errors.
[/quote]

I know there abuses, yet when we have so many abuses through out the Latin Rite today, with faithful, clergy and especially Bishops do or seem supportive those abuses, and claim their part of the Latin Rite. Those outside our Rite looking in at these abuses are going to get the wrong idea about what really is in the Latin Liturgy. Certainly when Latin Bishops support Masses and ugly Churches like what is describe in the pamphlet it is going to cause great confusion in those in the East who maybe ignorant of the True Latin Rite, instead of what is pretending to be the Latin Rite.

Edited August 11, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Raphael' date='10 August 2010 - 10:18 PM' timestamp='1281500300' post='2155637']
Either they intended to caricature the Roman Rite or they know nothing of her traditions. Either way, this is a terrible expression of the Roman Rite and, as Rexi put it, absurd. . . .
[/quote]
It is absurd if you are talking about the Roman liturgy celebrated according to the older missal, but in my more than 20 years as a Catholic it is not an inaccurate portrayal of the way that the modern (i.e., the 1969) Roman liturgy is celebrated.

I am sure that it would be quite easy to post videos of the modern liturgy celebrated in a manner that is reflected in the Ukrainian Church's catechetical document. Sad as it is to say, the presentation in the pamphlet is not far off base when compared to the liturgies I have attended here in the SF Bay Area since 1987.