Western Rite Orthodoxy

[“Paisios”]

Out of curiosity, does Western Rite Orthodoxy exist outside of North America? Are Western Rite Orthodox Churches canonical? Under what jurisdiction (e.g. OCA, ROCOR, GOArch, Antiochian, etc.) do Western Rite Churches fall under in North America, or are there Western Rite churches in multiple Orthodox jurisdictions?

Thanks for any responses.

 

[All4Christ]

Out of curiosity, does Western Rite Orthodoxy exist outside of North America? Are Western Rite Orthodox Churches canonical? Under what jurisdiction (e.g. OCA, ROCOR, GOArch, Antiochian, etc.) do Western Rite Churches fall under in North America, or are there Western Rite churches in multiple Orthodox jurisdictions?

Thanks for any responses.

I can’t answer all of this, but the western rites under ROCOR and the Antiochian Churches are canonical.

 

[TheLostCoin]

Out of curiosity, does Western Rite Orthodoxy exist outside of North America? Are Western Rite Orthodox Churches canonical? Under what jurisdiction (e.g. OCA, ROCOR, GOArch, Antiochian, etc.) do Western Rite Churches fall under in North America, or are there Western Rite churches in multiple Orthodox jurisdictions?

Thanks for any responses.

There are canonical Western Rite Orthodox Churches under Antioch and ROCOR, whose websites you can find here - on said website there is a directory of parishes.

https://www.rocor-wr.org/
Western Rite | Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese

As far as I can tell, Antioch only has Western Rite parishes in North America, but ROCOR has parishes outside of North America, including the United Kingdom, Germany, and Scandinavia.

There are also some canonical Benedictine Monasteries, "Ladyminster" under Antioch, and for those under ROCOR, you can find on their website.

I think that there's also one parish under OCA
Western Rite Orthodoxy Edmonton
OCA Branches out into Western Rite Orthodoxy

 

[Anhelyna]

As far as I know there are a few ROCOR Western Rite Orthodox Parishes in the UK - mainly in England I believe

 

[☦Marius☦]

Canonical yes, is their existence justified?... Meh

Most Western Rite parishes I've seen flirt too hard with RC. Instead of continuing to try to reconstruct the old rite (which what is the point really), they just adopt more and more Tridentine traditions.

What I don't understand is why they can't just use the liturgy of St John Christostom, but have the exterior culture (like garments, chant, and church design) be more Western. That would make them like 50x more legitimate then trying to patch together a liturgy based on Anglican services and the Tridentine mass.

But that's my opinion.

 

[ArmyMatt]

as others have said, Antioch and ROCOR have most of the WR parishes.

 

[All4Christ]

Canonical yes, is their existence justified?... Meh

Most Western Rite parishes I've seen flirt too hard with RC. Instead of continuing to try to reconstruct the old rite (which what is the point really), they just adopt more and more Tridentine traditions.

What I don't understand is why they can't just use the liturgy of St John Christostom, but have the exterior culture (like garments, chant, and church design) be more Western. That would make them like 50x more legitimate then trying to patch together a liturgy based on Anglican services and the Tridentine mass.

But that's my opinion.

Yet that wasn’t the only liturgy prior to the break...As St John Shanghai said, the venerable liturgy of the west is far older than her heresies.

I see your point - but the concept of only one liturgy being acceptable is not an ancient tradition of the Church.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Yet that wasn’t the only liturgy prior to the break...As St John Shanghai said, the venerable liturgy of the west is far older than her heresies.

I see your point - but the concept of only one liturgy being acceptable is not an ancient tradition of the Church.

Yes but unlike the liturgy of St. Peter, we have complete copies of the Liturgy of St. John. We do not know the original Liturgy of St. Peter which is why it has been stitched together from other churches, with attempts at just "removing the heresy". Except we don't know which parts of the modern Tridentine and Anglican masses existed before the schism, and which were added later. Not to mention the fact that the W.R. uses modern Catholic liturgical garments instead of pre schism, as well as Latin crosses with Christ's feet crossed and various other Latin inventions.

It just seems like an awful lot of risk just to make some people comfortable. I think the ROCOR and Antiochians should just focus more on reviving Gregorian chant and giving it to English speaking parishes.

 

[TheLostCoin]

Yes but unlike the liturgy of St. Peter, we have complete copies of the Liturgy of St. John. We do not know the original Liturgy of St. Peter which is why it has been stitched together from other churches, with attempts at just "removing the heresy". Except we don't know which parts of the modern Tridentine and Anglican masses existed before the schism, and which were added later. Not to mention the fact that the W.R. uses modern Catholic liturgical garments instead of pre schism, as well as Latin crosses with Christ's feet crossed and various other Latin inventions.

It just seems like an awful lot of risk just to make some people comfortable. I think the ROCOR and Antiochians should just focus more on reviving Gregorian chant and giving it to English speaking parishes.

Speaking of which:

Orthodox Hymns in Gregorian Chant, by The Choir
Orthodox Hymns in Gregorian Chant Vol. 2, by The Choir

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

Check These Out :

 

[☦Marius☦]

Check These Out :

Notice the feet of Christ on the corpus in the second video.

 

[TheLostCoin]

Notice the feet of Christ on the corpus in the second video.

I'm all for respecting Tradition and keeping track of the minor details, which is what Saint Paisios said we ought to do, but...

IMHO I think that there's some permitted iconography which is WAY more problematic than Triclavianism.

This, from a 13th century English Psalter :

Is much better than this Russian icon:

I would kiss both icons, but undoubtedly the first one if more fitting to the criteria of an Orthodox icon.

 

[TheLostCoin]

To me, it seems a little hypocritical when a problem such as Triclavianism would warrant a demonstration of why an entire Liturgical Use ought to be invalid, when this icon is allowed the be displayed at the highest point of the central cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church.

 

[AMM]

Notice the feet of Christ on the corpus in the second video.

What's the issue with having feet crossed?

 

[TheLostCoin]

What's the issue with having feet crossed?

Triclavianism.

Around the time from the 13th century onward, Roman Church artists began depicting Christ with one nail on both feet rather than a nail on each foot, eventually becoming the primary depiction of Christ's Crucifixion in the West, to the point that the Jesuits' logo actually has three nails on it, and there's a province of Slovakia whose Coat of Arms is three nails.

Compare:

In Orthodox iconography, Christ is always depicted with his feet separate with four nails, like the latter image.

It's a small detail which, unless you are aware of it, you won't really notice.

 

[All4Christ]

To me, it seems a little hypocritical when a problem such as Triclavianism would warrant a demonstration of why an entire Liturgical Use ought to be invalid, when this icon is allowed the be displayed at the highest point of the central cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church.

I was just about to mention something like this. Honestly I never heard anything about the nails in feet being a violation of theology in relation to iconography. Depicting God the Father is much more clear contradiction to accepted iconography practices.

 

[AMM]

Triclavianism.

Around the time from the 13th century onward, Roman Church artists began depicting Christ with one nail on both feet rather than a nail on each foot, eventually becoming the primary depiction of Christ's Crucifixion in the West, to the point that the Jesuits' logo actually has three nails on it, and there's a province of Slovakia whose Coat of Arms is three nails.

Compare:

In Orthodox iconography, Christ is always depicted with his feet separate with four nails, like the latter image.

It's a small detail which, unless you are aware of it, you won't really notice.

Okay but like, to put it crassly, why does this matter?

 

[AMM]

I was just about to mention something like this. Honestly I never heard anything about the nails in feet being a violation of theology in relation to iconography. Depicting God the Father is much more clear contradiction to accepted iconography practices.

Agreed. Even when I was Lutheran I wasn't a fan of depictions of the Father. But the number of nails seems, well, not that big of a deal

 

[TheLostCoin]

Okay but like, to put it crassly, why does this matter?

Making sure that there's consistency in iconography.

I mean, I think it's quite a minor mistake in iconographic consistency (I mean really really minor), but still...

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

Notice the feet of Christ on the corpus in the second video.

Oh yeah I noticed that too. I think I read in the comments somewhere that it wasn't their church. I think that they were actually using a Roman Catholic Church. Someone in the comments section mentioned that also.