I needed a laugh today

Most people, who read my ramblings, know that I'm no fan of Pr. Paul McCain, the LCMS' bloviator-in-chief and all around malcontent who appoints himself a modern day St. Athanasius against anyone who may point out the errors of the Lutheran school of thought.  That said, I actually do regularly read his blog to keep up with what's going on in the LCMS and it is a very good blog.  His blog is an excellent model which those who wish to start a blog should model.  Today, I got a good laugh from  this entry.

Pr. McCain calls (actually the author he quotes approvingly calls) the Lutheran church a liturgical church.  Now, I would certainly grant that there are Lutheran churches which use the historic liturgy, but to argue that the whole of Lutherans "knows and appreciates"(from the post; first paragraph) the historic liturgy is denial at best and hypocrisy at worst.  I don't have exact numbers, but I would venture a guess that half of all LCMS congregations do not use the historic Liturgy.  These are churches where contemporary and blended services are the norm and the rule.  Now, they may also offer traditional or historic services too, but those are often relegated to smaller parts of a church or at times when most people would prefer to sleep in rather than attend.  Eventually, those services are replaced by the blended or contemporary ones. 

And those churches that are "liturgical" are not using the historic Western Rite liturgy.  In the current LCMS service books, there are five (5) divine services to choose from.  The third is the most common and most "historic" of the five.  The fifth is a recreation of the "Deutsche Messe" penned by Lutheran which is historic, but only to the mid 16th century. The other three services are "blended" and cut and paste jobs from other Divine Rites including the Byzantine Rite.  Lutherans have never used the Byzantine Rite (save for some Ukrainians who converted to Lutheranism in the early 20th century and brought the Byzantine Rite with them; you can google for more information on this) and the reason most Lutherans don't use the Byzantine Rite is simply because the Byzantine Rite does not match the western Rite ethos of worship.  It is far too mystical and too long.  For those Lutherans who demand a strict hour of worship, the Byzantine Rite would never be considered...but I digress.

My point is that though there is a lot of movement back towards the confessions and the historic practice of Lutheranism in the golden age of Orthodoxy, I'm afraid it is too late for the LCMS.  The ship is still sinking and people are still jumping ship.  The ship may not be sinking as fast and maybe fewer people jumping, but the damage is done.  More and more people are abandoning the LCMS simply because for some 40 years now, the LCMS in its leadership and its seminaries and its ministries to young people had essentially made a bogeyman out of the Liturgy and traditional liturgical practice.  I know they paid lip service to the Liturgy in official pronouncements and such, but whenever the word "liturgy" was uttered, the word "adiaphoron" was not too far behind. (Adiaphoron is a Greek word which roughly translates to "open question."  Liturgy was good, but it was an open question whether or not that should be the norm despite the fact that the confessions strictly say the historic liturgy is the norm). And people like Pr. McCain then wonder aloud and condemn those who jump the sinking ship because people myself refused to go down with it and found ourselves a home by swimming up the Tiber or the Bosphorus.

Again, I do not deny that there are Lutheran churches that are liturgical, but they are not the majority. However, for someone to argue, today, that Lutheranism as a whole and its many branches, whether that be LCMS, ELCA, EDK or some other country's Lutheran church is liturgical and "knows and appreciates" the historic Liturgy is a joke and it needs to be called such.

More on the Western Rite

Several times on this blog, I have brought up the issue of the Western Rite. I have been asked by several people what my position on the Western Rite is.   There are so many questions and not any easy answers. For my part, I admit that I am somewhat torn on the issue. Orthodoxy is not just an Eastern phenomenon. If Orthodoxy is the fullness of the truth then that fullness is contained in both the East and the West. Yet, there can be no doubt that the West has suffered much at the hands of heresy and schism and the Rite which incorporates such schisms and heresies has been compromised.  After consideration of this issue, I must take the side that the Western Rite is simply  not suited for Orthodox theology or practice.

Many have written on the Western Rite:  Fr. Milovan Katanic at his blog, Again and Again, has reproduced an article with wonderful insights. Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon, last year at one of the Parish Life Conferences, shared his insights.  Though this essay does have praise for the Western Rite, it is approached with a high degree of caution, which should merit serious discussion. If the Holy Orthodox Church ever does manage to finally convene a Great Council of the Church, something that has been overdue for a long time, the issue of the Western Rite should definitely be on the agenda.

Here are my reasons for why the Western Rite, until debated by a Great and Holy Council, should be put on hiatus and the Eastern Rites of prayer and the Liturgy should be the norm for all Orthodox.  These are in no particular order.
1)  The Western Rite is an anachronism.  You will find that I agree with Fr. Patrick Reardon on this one.  Prayer and, in particular, the Liturgy must be organic and be living.  The Western Rite has not been used by Orthodox for a period of nearly 1000 years.  It simply cannot be brought back.  What was brought back was essentially a cut and paste job by the St. TIKHON, Patriarch of Moscow. He revised the Book of Common prayer, purged it of all "non-Orthodox" leanings, inserted an epiclesis and called it Western Rite.  The problem with this is that it codified the lowest point of development in the Western Rite.

Is the Western Rite Orthodox?

In an earlier post, I talked about how a friend of mine decided to complete his catechumenate in the Eastern Rite because so much of what he has been reading to educate himself in the catechism is rooted in the liturgics of the Eastern Rite. I also related how there is very little about embracing Orthodoxy via the Western Rite. It also doesn't help that the Western Rite is only approved by two jurisdictions in America (and probably the world), the ROCOR and the Antiochian.

Those who object to the Western Rite have good and valid arguments. This is one of the better objections I have heard of late made by Abba Seraphim of the British Orthodox Church, which is Coptic Orthodox, lead by Pope SHENOUDA III. It's a youtube video and you have to wait until about the sixth minute before he gets into the particulars of Western Rites. Nonetheless, his talk before that point should be of great interest to those of us who desire a true reunion of the Eastern and Oriental churches. Enjoy.

The future of the Western Rite in the Orthodox Church

A week ago I had a brief conversation with a friend of mine who is a catechumen at our sister church here in Omaha, St. Vincent of Lerins. St. Vincent is a Western Rite Parish of the Antiochian Archdiocese. Before, I get into what the conversation was about, let me give some background on the Western Rite.

Currently, only two jurisdictions in this country have Western Rite Vicariates, the Antiochians and the ROCOR (Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia). Most Orthodox Christians worship according to the Eastern Rite, which revolves around the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. Western Rite Orthodox Christians use either the Rite of St. Gregory the Great or that of St. Tikhon. The latter was an emended form of the Rites used in Anglican Churches. St. Tikhon saw nothing unorthodox about it but made some changes, most especially in the canon, and it was pronounced Orthodox. Thus, many Roman Catholics as well as High Church Episcopalians and Lutherans will find that the Order of Service for a Western Rite Orthodox Church is very familiar to their own rites.

The Western Rite is not without controversy. As I said, only two jurisdictions here in America (and probably for the world) offer the Western Rite. There are many, both cradle and convert, both layperson and clergy who feel that the Eastern Rite is the only Rite for Orthodox Christians. Some say that Western Rite Orthodox Christians have yet to embrace the fullness of the faith and the church. I shake my head at such accusations. We must remember that there were a number of "competing" liturgies even in the Byzantine Empire. It was not until the 8th century where the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom was made the "usual" practice thus sidelining the Liturgy of St. Basil the Great, which is now used only about 10 times a year. We must also remember that the West (as a whole) was Orthodox until about the 10th century when diversions from the true faith such as the filioque, azymes, different baptismal practices and the doctrine of papal infallibility would cause schism later. Nonetheless, the Western Rite, developed long before these innovations came into practice is Orthodox, in its theology, in its prayer. Granted, those innovations I mentioned crept into the prayers but those, for a modern Western Rite, can be easily excised.

That is not to say that I am all keen on the Western Rite. For instance, some ceremonies and feasts have been retained that lead not only to split between east and west, but also to the Reformation. The feasts of the sacred heart, the immaculate conception, corpus Christi have been retained and these are problematic.

Now, back to my conversation. My friend is an Orthodox catechumen. He was enrolled as a catechumen at St. Vincent of Lerins. Catechumens are required to go through an exhaustive preparation before they are received into the Church. This is done for their benefit. It is all the craze now to go "church shopping." The catechumenate exists so as to eliminate any doubt that this is just a passing thought in his/her mind. Anyway, as preparation, catechumens go to classes, attend the Liturgies and as many other services as they can to accustom themselves to the lex orandi, lex credendi of Holy Orthodoxy, and also read a lot of books. These catechumens are reading Bishop HILARION's (now Metropolitan) book "The Mystery of Faith." It is an excellent book, but like all books on the faith of the Eastern Orthodox, it relates the faith through the Liturgy of the Eastern Rite exclusively.

The Liturgy is our great teacher. It is not something we dispense with simply to go with something more hip and more "relevant." It is our great teacher and has been for a long time. The problem is that with all the books out there about the Eastern Orthodox faith, they all reference our faith through the lens of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom or Basil the Great. This poses a problem for our Western Rite catechumens who, desiring to learn the faith and process it and make it part of thesmeslves, cannot make connections between what they read and what they experience in the Western Rite.

Thus, there is a great need for books to be published on how the Orthodox faith can be grasped and apprehended through the Western Rite just as through the Eastern Rite. Sadly, nothing as yet exists. And, if there is no remedy, I fear that the Western Rite for Orthodox may disappear altogether. And that should not be allowed to happen.

As for my friend, he has decided to complete his catechumenate at St. Mary which uses the Eastern Rite. He was originally to be chrismated at Pentecost, a few short weeks away, but now his chrismation and his entry into the church will be delayed for a little longer. He has decided upon this course because, whether rightly or wrongly, he experiences the fullness of the faith only in the Eastern Rite. The lack of adequate reading materials to help him and others complete his journey in the Western Rite needs to be given great attention.

At the same time, I feel that this is not an isolated case. Western Rite parishes are very hard to start up and maintain here in America. And many Western Rite parishioners have come over to Eastern Rite churches because they feel that the Eastern Rite is, to them, "more Orthodox," whatever that may mean. It would be a great shame and sadness if the Western Rite were to disappear. I hope someone would take it upon himself or herself to write about how the Western Rite Liturgy is just as Orthodox as the Eastern Rite; to demonstrate how the Western Rite reflects and practices Orthodox spirituality through its Liturgy. That needs to happen sooner rather than later.