Liturgical Ecumenism?

Something worth reading here.

7 Responses to Liturgical Ecumenism?

  1. Fr. John says:

    Having come from there, all I can say is that what I have seen in Orthodox Churches, and what I saw in post-Vatican II roman parishes, is as different as day and night.

    Scriptural translations are equally disgusting. From the ‘and they laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn’ of the AV, to they ‘placed him in a feed box, because there was no room for them in the place where travelers lodged’ clearly shows we traded our spiritual heritage for a ‘mess of potage.’

    Don’t even get me started on “Glory and Praise” instead of Gregorian chant…..

  2. Nathaniel Brown says:

    Fr. Taft seems to say that lowering the “age of first holy Communion from adolescence to the age of reason… destroyed the age-old sequence of the rites of Christian initiation” since first confession now precedes first communion in the Roman Rite. One way to overcome this problem is to give children communion.

    I thought the Orthodox Church followed the “age old” custom of communing children. Was this not practiced in the Early Church? If not, does anyone know when the practice was adopted? I am under the impression that it has been practiced for many centuries at least in the East. Was it never practiced in the West?

  3. Ad Orientem says:

    Can we Orthodox sue for slander?


  4. […] of rights for this on or that one, we could count on the Catholics as a whole. On the other hand, ecumenicalism does frighten us old (or young) […]

  5. What Phil and Ron said.

  6. Ron says:

    How exactly was the liturgical reform of Vatican II successful? By what standard? Mass attendance has plummetted. Yes, I know, there were other reasons for that beside the introduction of the Novus Ordo, but if keeping bottoms in pews is not the measure of success, then what is? All the studies I have seen suggest that most Catholics don’t believe in the Real Presence, or even know that they are SUPPOSED to believe in the real presence. My personal experience suggests that the standard of liturgical performance in the average American parish is painfully low. The current ICEL translations are not translations at all, but paraphrases geared toward the stupid. The same is true of the music. So what does Father Taft mean by success?

  7. Phil says:

    Jesuit Fr. Taft links the liturgical reforms of Vatican II to … Orthodoxy?

    “To attain this end, the council had to restore the rites ‘to the vigor they had in the tradition of the Fathers.’ And this, Fr. Taft points out, is ‘where the East came in.’

    “Liturgical pioneers drew inspiration from Russian Orthodox emigrés to France, who had fled from their homeland after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. …

    “Liturgists in the West, however, did not attempt simply to imitate existing Eastern usage, but interpreted and applied it in the light of the needs of Latin Christianity. And that is why the liturgical movement, which Vatican II essentially validated, was so successful.”

    I think that is very nearly the definition of “brazen.”

%d bloggers like this: