WESTERN Rite kind of hokey?

GreekOrthodox · Dec 1, 2020

rusmeister said:
I just have to ask why people think they NEED it, and the response of "feeling comfortable with it" doesn't satisfy me. I remain skeptical, and lean towards accepting what has been preserved, rather than seeking anything for my comfort. I don't accept that the preserved EO Liturgies are like climbing Mt Ararat or Everest, that is, so horribly difficult and frightening vis-a-vis WR. We already have pews to make people feel comfortable, which I think have real and negative effects on worship.

Of course, I'm open to hearing other reasons.

We might say the same thing about Greeks / Russians in the west insisting on using Byzantine chant or Old Slavonic who don't understand a single word of even modern Greek. I was chanting in English and had some parishioner argue with me that English shouldnt be used in services. I asked him if he understood the Greek and he said no that he didnt speak Greek. He only wanted it in Greek because that's all he had grown up with.

Phronema · Dec 1, 2020

Justin-H.S. said:
Sounds like gerrymandering because neither of those jurisdictions are inherently “Western.”

The answer is, there no longer is an Orthodox Bishop of the West except Eastern Orthodox bishops residing in the west or western converts to EO. There is no organic Orthodox Bishop of the West as historically understood.

If there is Orthodoxy in the West, it’s due to EO immigrants or missions and neither of them were doing WR liturgies were they?

WR still sounds like a Larp.

Well, I think it's important to understand why the synods came to the conclusion to create a Western Rite in the first place. We've seen in this very thread from Hermit76 that it was successful in bringing his son, and daughter-in-law to Orthodoxy. The lack of a Western Patriarch is of a lesser importance, and not crucial to the goal that the Western Rite set out to achieve.

So, in my opinion the wisdom of the synods lies not in an attempt to recreate the Bishopric of the West, but to bring people to the correct doctrines through familiarity. Many Americans find the Eastern liturgies quite foreign as it's not what they grew up seeing, and hearing.

That said I attend a Greek Orthodox church which uses the Byzantine Rite, and I love it, but not everyone here in the US shares in my sentiment.

Justin-H.S. · Dec 1, 2020

Phronema said:
Well, I think it's important to understand why the synods came to the conclusion to create a Western Rite in the first place. We've seen in this very thread from Hermit76 that it was successful in bringing his son, and daughter-in-law to Orthodoxy. The lack of a Western Patriarch is of a lesser importance, and not crucial to the goal that the Western Rite set out to achieve.

So, in my opinion the wisdom of the synods lies not in an attempt to recreate the Bishopric of the West, but to bring people to the correct doctrines through familiarity. Many Americans find the Eastern liturgies quite foreign as it's not what they grew up seeing, and hearing.

That said I attend a Greek Orthodox church which uses the Byzantine Rite, and I love it, but not everyone here in the US shares in my sentiment.

Okay, gotcha. The whole purpose of WR is to offer an Orthodox alternative to Latin High Mass, so to speak.

That leads me to question whether the history behind the WR is fabricated in order to sound authentic.

Wherever you go around the world, Orthodox clergy look like Orthodox clergy. In Japan, Bishop Daniel looks like an Orthodox Bishop. In China, the priests wore what is recognized as Orthodox vestments. So, I'm wondering why "The West" needs its own rite and vestments in order to instill familiarity. Japanese Orthodox priests don't look like this:

I keep going back to Japan and China because both are culturally diametrically opposed to Christianity, and yet the Orthodox in both Asian countries felt no need to instill familiarity through Far Eastern vestments or Rites. They just received the Faith as it was presented to them.

But, I never was an Anglican or Roman Catholic so I never looked for liturgical familiarity when becoming Orthodox.

Justin-H.S. · Dec 1, 2020

Maybe it's because Japan and China were not introduced to Orthodoxy until well after the schism, so Eastern rites were the only rites they were exposed to?

And since England was once Orthodox, that's why there is a movement to go back to what was done prior to the schism?

I'm just trying to understand WR as to whether it is authentic or not. If the history of it is legit, then I think it's a novel rite within Orthodoxy. If not, then it seems kind of....protestant-y. I hope that's not the case.

Phronema · Dec 1, 2020

Justin-H.S. said:
That leads me to question whether the history behind the WR is fabricated in order to sound authentic.

Wherever you go around the world, Orthodox clergy look like Orthodox clergy. In Japan, Bishop Daniel looks like an Orthodox Bishop. In China, the priests wore what is recognized as Orthodox vestments. So, I'm wondering why "The West" needs its own rite and vestments in order to instill familiarity. Japanese Orthodox priests don't look like this

I understand the skepticism. From what I've briefly read was that the WR recreation has been approved by different canonical synods, and Patriarchs at different times. My understanding is that it stemmed from Julian Overbeck who originally was intending for the Western Rite to specifically be used in the British Isles. Later, St. Tikhon of Moscow also played a role in having it looked at a second time, and for it to be used for Episcopalians in the US.

Overall, I trust that our bishops are not leading us astray, and ultimately I believe other bishops would identify the error if there were one.

As for the vestments I believe that is also an issue of familiarity for those that I've named above. I think you're correct in regards to the Far East, and how it was introduced to them. They likely just see the Eastern vestments as normal as it's what they know.

rusmeister · Dec 1, 2020

GreekOrthodox said:
We might say the same thing about Greeks / Russians in the west insisting on using Byzantine chant or Old Slavonic who don't understand a single word of even modern Greek. I was chanting in English and had some parishioner argue with me that English shouldnt be used in services. I asked him if he understood the Greek and he said no that he didnt speak Greek. He only wanted it in Greek because that's all he had grown up with.

This seems to completely miss my point, my concern, and be irrelevant to it. I see a world of difference between a form being used continuously, and one that has not been used for a thousand years. No one is arguing that a service should be done in a language foreign to the people; this is not done in the Eastern Divine Liturgy that WAS preserved. We have English, and Greek, and Slavonic, and people who (justly) complain about not understanding foreign liturgies in the US.

I am saying that the only criteria seems to be that people unfamiliar with Orthodoxy are sometimes more comfortable with the Catholic-seeming and therefore relatively more familiar form. I don't think that is serious criteria. I am certainly glad for cases like Hermit's son, though question whether it is really and specifically the Latin form that we should adopt that is entirely the reason (and if it is, it is not a great reason).

I am seeing a significant movement of ecumenism and of dismissing any significance to the split with the Roman Catholic Church among our intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals, and think that embracing Latin forms to be a greater risk in supporting that than appealing to crypto-Catholics with an abandoned Liturgy is a boon.

Nick T · Dec 1, 2020

I think there is a difference between allowing for a western rite as a means of reception for Catholic/Anglo-Catholic parishes who desire to become Orthodox, and trying to resurrect a long-dead liturgy whole-cloth out of a belief that westerners have some inherent connection with the Latin rite.

The latter I agree seems a bit off and LARP-y, not least because most westerners today (including most Christians) have no more connection with a traditional Roman Liturgy than they do with that of St John Chrysostom. This is especially true in historically protestant countries like the UK and the USA.

The former I think makes more sense though, since apart from azymes and modes of baptism I don't think liturgical differences have ever been identified as an issue in the schism. I can easily see why a Synod might therefore allow converting parishes to retain their traditional rites, with suitable oversight of course.

At the end of the day of course it is a matter for the Bishops to decide, and if they support it then that's all we need to know. But I don't think there is anything wrong with discussing things among ourselves in a friendly manner all the same.

Justin-H.S. · Dec 1, 2020

If familiarity is the only reasoning to push WR on former Catholics or Anglicans, what then should we do for former Southern Baptists? They seem to have no issue converting to and taking part in the Eastern Rites as it is presented to them.

Do Roman Catholics and Anglicans, and to some extent Lutherans get the special treatment of having a WR available for their own comfort levels?

Edit: Like @Nick T mentioned, WR seems to make sense in the case of an entire Anglican parish becoming Orthodox, but to just start a WR parish due to a misplaced sense of nostalgia that was never there in the first place is pretty LARPy.

Nick T · Dec 1, 2020

Justin-H.S. said:
If familiarity is the only reasoning to push WR on former Catholics or Anglicans, what then should we do for former Southern Baptists? They seem to have no issue converting to and taking part in the Eastern Rites as it is presented to them.

Do Roman Catholics and Anglicans, and to some extent Lutherans get the special treatment of having a WR available for their own comfort levels?

I guess because the Roman rite was a rite of the church, and I don't think there is much evidence of substantial change at least up until Trent. I suppose the question would be- if this rite was approved in the past and has never been condemned, then why not allow those who wish to retain it to do so?

Justin-H.S. · Dec 1, 2020

Nick T said:
I suppose the question would be- if this rite was approved in the past and has never been condemned, then why not allow those who wish to retain it to do so?

I agree with WR in these cases, but to just start a WR parish "just because" sounds like nothing more than novelty-chasing, with a bit of individualism sprinkled in.

Justin-H.S. · Dec 1, 2020

If an Anglican Church of America parish were to become Orthodox (and fall under a local Orthodox bishop), it would make sense to practice the WR due to it being more economical to do so (don't have to build a new iconostasis, etc.).

GreekOrthodox · Dec 1, 2020

rusmeister said:
I am seeing a significant movement of ecumenism and of dismissing any significance to the split with the Roman Catholic Church among our intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals, and think that embracing Latin forms to be a greater risk in supporting that than appealing to crypto-Catholics with an abandoned Liturgy is a boon.

I guess my thing is that I've been in some "GREEK" churches where I was made to feel completely unwelcome. I was doing some reading on the history of the Oxford Movement in 19th century England which is where the WR sprang from. I doubt that there were even decent translations of the Byzantine liturgies and probably nothing when it came to music. Where would you want to begin in bringing disaffected Anglicans to the Orthodox church? When I started chanting, which was 3 weeks after being chrismated, I started with what I knew, the Lutheran Hymnal, which used the 1928 BCP as its music.

Phronema · Dec 1, 2020

Justin-H.S. said:
If an Anglican Church of America parish were to become Orthodox (and fall under a local Orthodox bishop), it would make sense to practice the WR due to it being more economical to do so (don't have to build a new iconostasis, etc.).

This is precisely what happened in the past though I believe they were Episcopalians which is quite close to Anglican. Truly I don't believe this is an attempt at individualism, or anything like that. I'd recommend googling the topic, and I think you'll find that the origins of the Western Rite are really quite harmless, and not a threat. In addition in the modern era I can understand that some such as Rus are skeptical of a potential link to, or rise in ecumenism, etc, but in the era that the Western Rite came about I don't believe that ecumenism was really a thought in most peoples minds at that time.

I'd just add that I really don't think it's "LARPy". If anything I think that the intention originally was to bring Anglicans/Episcopalians into the church via the Western Rite, and now it is being used as a way to attract people to Orthodoxy who wouldn't give it a second look for being foreign. Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with that so long as people are careful to avoid heresies like ecumenism, but that's up to the bishops.

abacabb3 · Dec 1, 2020

Here are my unsolicited opinions:
-WR has a bit of a culty culture from what I can tell. But, maybe this is simply defensiveness because so many people hate WR. In any event, WR does not like critiques of their rite.
-We have saints that had no issue with foreign liturgical forms. In fact, we have allowed major reforms (particularly from St Peter Mogila) which are in fact invasions from RC forms. Point is, God is flexible with this when the intent is to do the same thing.
-The Church should have diversity and WR is part of it. But, even without a monolithic Papal institution, we have attained far more liturgical uniformity than any other body. My opinion of this is that the Antiochene Liturgies are simply superior and it makes doing the other Liturgies less compelling. I am sure Cricket is a fun game, but wouldn't you rather play baseball?

ArmyMatt · Dec 1, 2020

if the WR is good, the Church as a whole will affirm it. if not, it will fizzle.

if it's just because we're Western and we think we deserve it and we think we can demand it, I dare say it will fizzle.

ArmyMatt · Dec 1, 2020

fun fact, St Nektarios of Aegina actually adapted the Coptic Liturgy of St Mark for our use.

Hermit76 · Dec 2, 2020

I want to say a few things about WR, my kids, etc. I'll get the difficult point out of the way. If you have really harsh feelings about WR it would be good to remember that: a) You aren't required to go to one b) Since they are in place because of the decisions of bishops we should watch how we address them in discussion. Disagreement and questioning are both healthy. Harsh rhetoric is not.

Regarding my kids. Yes, the WR was instrumental in their conversion. I would say this is truer to my daughter in law than my son. I have zero idea if she would have converted to ER. I will never know because the ER parish near them didn't respond to my Orthodox son (younger) when he tried to find out how to sign up for one of their Covid slots. He has been attending the ER since he started college a year and a half ago. To tell you the truth he has been largely ignored for the entire period. One Sunday he had to get a ride to Liturgy. He felt like he was imposing. The parish is just a few miles from the campus. After coffee hour he called an Uber for a ride home because the priest was having meetings and he felt like others didn't want to take him home. I had even encouraged the priest and others there to engage my oldest son but they didn't follow through. This is not an ER problem, it is a local parish problem. However, it plays into their conversion. When my Orthodox son questioned what he should do, I encouraged him to try the WR parish since it was adjoining campus. The people there are warm, engaged in serious daily Orthodox living, and attentive to inquirers. My Orthodox son was helping them build an iconostasis some time later and asked his older brother for help. He showed up one Saturday and found an open door for beginning a conversation towards conversion. He was Anglican at the time. The warmth of the people got my DIL over the hump into attending. Honestly the liturgy was somewhat familiar to her since they attended a traditional Anglican parish. However it was not the only key to her attendance. My son is inquisitive about teaching, history, and doctrine. My DIL needed a relational connection to move past her hesitance. She was raised Calvary Chapel. The usual roadblocks were there for her. My oldest son was raised to seek truth wherever it may be found. So, together their needs were met at this local parish. Even my Orthodox son has grown tremendously there. A couple in the church took him in and gave him a place to live rent free (their house is where the church is located. It is quite large) instead of having to be in the horrendous atmosphere of the dorms. They knew he was struggling and had compassion. So, truthfully, the daily Orthodoxy of the people at the church made the biggest difference for my two oldest sons and my daughter in law.
Do I wish they were ER? Yes. My 19 year old prefers ER. Would I have that parish change to ER if it meant losing their integrity in daily Orthodoxy? No! Do I expect my kids to eventually move closer and attend the ER with us? Yes, and I don't think it will have any negative effects on my DIL.
Something really drove home the value of THIS local WR parish to me the other day. My oldest son was talking about their conversion and noted something his wife had said. She told him. "If I come across anything I disagree with in Orthodoxy, I just assume I'm wrong." All of us who have been in The Church for a bit of time know this is a very mature and important place for converts to arrive. Many, unfortunately, never do. So, I keep holding to the point that this local parish has helped her get to an important stage rather quickly. This speaks highly of them. For this reason alone I believe that the local parish does not hinge on which rite they use.

All of that being said... I find the most depth in the Eastern Rite. My wife and I would never seek out a WR Parish.

rusmeister · Dec 2, 2020

Hermit76 said:
I want to say a few things about WR, my kids, etc. I'll get the difficult point out of the way. If you have really harsh feelings about WR it would be good to remember that: a) You aren't required to go to one b) Since they are in place because of the decisions of bishops we should watch how we address them in discussion. Disagreement and questioning are both healthy. Harsh rhetoric is not.

Regarding my kids. Yes, the WR was instrumental in their conversion. I would say this is truer to my daughter in law than my son. I have zero idea if she would have converted to ER. I will never know because the ER parish near them didn't respond to my Orthodox son (younger) when he tried to find out how to sign up for one of their Covid slots. He has been attending the ER since he started college a year and a half ago. To tell you the truth he has been largely ignored for the entire period. One Sunday he had to get a ride to Liturgy. He felt like he was imposing. The parish is just a few miles from the campus. After coffee hour he called an Uber for a ride home because the priest was having meetings and he felt like others didn't want to take him home. I had even encouraged the priest and others there to engage my oldest son but they didn't follow through. This is not an ER problem, it is a local parish problem. However, it plays into their conversion. When my Orthodox son questioned what he should do, I encouraged him to try the WR parish since it was adjoining campus. The people there are warm, engaged in serious daily Orthodox living, and attentive to inquirers. My Orthodox son was helping them build an iconostasis some time later and asked his older brother for help. He showed up one Saturday and found an open door for beginning a conversation towards conversion. He was Anglican at the time. The warmth of the people got my DIL over the hump into attending. Honestly the liturgy was somewhat familiar to her since they attended a traditional Anglican parish. However it was not the only key to her attendance. My son is inquisitive about teaching, history, and doctrine. My DIL needed a relational connection to move past her hesitance. She was raised Calvary Chapel. The usual roadblocks were there for her. My oldest son was raised to seek truth wherever it may be found. So, together their needs were met at this local parish. Even my Orthodox son has grown tremendously there. A couple in the church took him in and gave him a place to live rent free (their house is where the church is located. It is quite large) instead of having to be in the horrendous atmosphere of the dorms. They knew he was struggling and had compassion. So, truthfully, the daily Orthodoxy of the people at the church made the biggest difference for my two oldest sons and my daughter in law.
Do I wish they were ER? Yes. My 19 year old prefers ER. Would I have that parish change to ER if it meant losing their integrity in daily Orthodoxy? No! Do I expect my kids to eventually move closer and attend the ER with us? Yes, and I don't think it will have any negative effects on my DIL.
Something really drove home the value of THIS local WR parish to me the other day. My oldest son was talking about their conversion and noted something his wife had said. She told him. "If I come across anything I disagree with in Orthodoxy, I just assume I'm wrong." All of us who have been in The Church for a bit of time know this is a very mature and important place for converts to arrive. Many, unfortunately, never do. So, I keep holding to the point that this local parish has helped her get to an important stage rather quickly. This speaks highly of them. For this reason alone I believe that the local parish does not hinge on which rite they use.

All of that being said... I find the most depth in the Eastern Rite. My wife and I would never seek out a WR Parish.

I suppose that, even if it IS iffy, THIS is why it’s not a hill I’m willing to die fighting on. I see bigger issues that worry me more, especially Meliorism, members “knowing better” than the Church across space and time, that threaten the authority of the Church. This clearly doesn’t do that.

All4Christ · Dec 2, 2020

“Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern. The West was Orthodox for a thousand years, and her venerable liturgy is far older than any of her heresies.” - St John Maximovitch

Anhelyna · Dec 2, 2020

Hmmm - I wondered who would quote that

WESTERN Rite kind of hokey?

Psalti Chrysostom

Orthodox Christian

Member

Member

Orthodox Christian

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian

Lurker

Member

Lurker

Member

Member

Psalti Chrysostom

Orthodox Christian

Newbie

Regular Member

Regular Member

You can call me Paisios

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian

✙ The Handmaid of God Laura ✙

Handmaid of God

Similar threads