FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Catholic Rites and Churches
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
The Ukranian-Catholic thread prompted me to look this up:

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/catho...urches.htm

All the rites in Communion with Rome....I had no idea there were so many or that they were so varied.  Amazing......how many do we have in the forum who are members of any of these rites?

Reading through this list and seeing:
-returned to Rome in 1781
-Reunited with Rome in 1930
-returned to Rome in 1692
-Returned to Rome in the 16th century
-resumed communion with Rome in 1628
-returned to Rome in the 17th century
-returned to Rome in 1861
-organized into a jurisdiction in 1996
-resumed communion with Rome in 1611
-returned to Rome in 1829
-returned to Rome in 1646
-resumed Communion with Rome at the time of the Crusades
-returned to Rome in 1697
-returned to communion with Rome in 1905
-reunited with Rome in 1596 and 1646
-reunited about 1595
-returned to communion with Rome in 1741
-returned to Rome in 1846
is so heartening to me, for some reason; plus it helps bring a little perspective to the recent return of some of the Anglicans. 

Western Rites and Churches

Immediately subject to the Bishop of Rome, the Supreme Pontiff, who exercises his authority over the liturgy through the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.


ROMAN/LATIN FAMILY OF LITURGICAL RITES


• Roman – The overwhelming majority of Latin Catholics and of Catholics in general.
• Mozarabic – The Rite of the Iberian peninsula (Spain and Portugal) known from at least the 6th century, but probably with roots to the original evangelization. Beginning in the 11th century it was generally replaced by the Roman Rite, although it has remained the Rite of the Cathedral of the Archdiocese of Toledo, Spain, and six parishes which sought permission to adhere to it. Its celebration today is generally semi–private.
• Ambrosian – The Rite of the Archdiocese of Milan, Italy, thought to be of early origin and probably consolidated, but not originated, by St. Ambrose. Pope Paul VI was from this Roman Rite. It continues to be celebrated in Milan, though not by all parishes.
• Bragan – Rite of the Archdiocese of Braga, the Primatial See of Portugal, it derives from the 12th century or earlier. It continues to be of occasional use.
• Dominican – Rite of the Order of Friars Preacher (OP), founded by St. Dominic in 1215.
• Carmelite – Rite of the Order of Carmel, whose modern foundation was by St. Berthold c.1154.
• Carthusian – Rite of the Carthusian Order founded by St. Bruno in 1084.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eastern Rites and Churches
The Eastern Catholic Churches have their own hierarchy, system of governance (synods) and general law, the Code of Canons for the Eastern Churches. The Supreme Pontiff exercises his primacy over them through the Congregation for the Eastern Churches.


ANTIOCHIAN FAMILY OF LITURGICAL RITES
The Church of Antioch in Syria (the ancient Roman Province of Syria) is considered an apostolic See by virtue of having been founded by St. Peter. It was one of the ancient centers of the Church, as the New Testament attests, and is the source of a family of similar Rites using the ancient Syriac language (the Semitic dialect used in Jesus' time and better known as Aramaic). Its Liturgy is attributed to St. James and the Church of Jerusalem.

1. WEST SYRIAC
• Maronite – Never separated from Rome. Maronite Patriarch of Antioch. The liturgical language  is Aramaic. The 3 million Maronites are found in Lebanon (origin), Cyprus, Egypt, Syria, Israel, Canada, US, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and Australia.
• Syriac – Syriac Catholics who returned to Rome in 1781 from the monophysite heresy. Syriac Patriarch of Antioch. The 110,000 Syriac Catholics are found in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, Canada and the US.
• Malankarese – Catholics from the South of India evangelized by St. Thomas, uses the West Syriac liturgy. Reunited with Rome in 1930. Liturgical languages today are West Syriac and Malayalam. The 350,000 Malankarese Catholics are found in India and North America.

2. EAST SYRIAC
• Chaldean – Babylonian Catholics returned to Rome in 1692 from the Nestorian heresy. Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans. Liturgical languages are Syriac and Arabic. The 310,000 Chaldean Catholics are found in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey and the US.
• Syro–Malabarese – Catholics from Southern India using the East Syriac liturgy. Returned to Rome in the 16th century from the Nestorian heresy. Liturgical languages are Syriac and Malayalam. Over 3 million Syro–Malabarese Catholics can be found in the state of Kerela, in SW India.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BYZANTINE FAMILY OF LITURGICAL RITES
The Church of Constantinople became the political and religious center of the eastern Roman Empire after the Emperor Constantine built a new capital there (324–330) on the site of the ancient town of Byzantium. Constantinople developed its own liturgical rite from the Liturgy of St. James, in one form as modified by St. Basil, and in a more commonly used form, as modified by St. John Chrysostom. After 1054, except for brief periods of reunion, most Byzantine Christians have not been in communion with Rome. They make up the Orthodox Churches of the East, whose titular head is the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Orthodox Churches are mostly auto–cephalous, meaning self–headed, united to each other by communion with Constantinople, which exercises no real authority over them. They are typically divided into Churches along nation lines. Those that have returned to communion with the Holy See are represented among the Eastern Churches and Rites of the Catholic Church.

1. ARMENIAN
Considered either its own Rite or an older version of the Byzantine. Its exact form is not used by any other Byzantine Rite. It is composed of Catholics from the first people to convert as a nation, the Armenians (N.E. of  Turkey), and who returned to Rome at the time of the Crusades. Patriarch of Cilicia of the Armenians. The liturgical language is classical Armenian. The 350,000 Armenian Catholics are found in Armenia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Greece, Ukraine, France, Romania, United States and Argentina. Most Armenians are Orthodox, not in union with Rome.

2. BYZANTINE
• Albanian – Albanian Christians, numbering only 1400 today, who resumed communion with Rome in 1628. Liturgical language is Albanian. Most Albanian Christians are Albanian Orthodox.
• Belarussian/Byelorussian – Unknown number of Belarussians who returned to Rome in the 17th century. The liturgical language is Old Slavonic. The faithful can be found in Belarus, as well as Europe, the Americas and Australia.
• Bulgarian – Bulgarians who returned to Rome in 1861. Liturgical language is Old Slavonic. The 20,000 faithful can be found in Bulgaria. Most Bulgarian Christians are Bulgarian Orthodox.
• Czech – Czech Catholics of Byzantine Rite organized into a jurisdiction in 1996.
• Krizevci – Croatian Catholics of Byzantine Rite who resumed communion with Rome in 1611. The liturgical language is Old Slavonic.  The 50,000 faithful can be found in Croatia and the Americas. Most Croatians are Roman (Rite) Catholics.
• Greek – Greek Christians who returned to Rome in 1829. The liturgical language is Greek. Only 2500 faithful in Greece, Asia Minor (Turkey) and Europe. Greek Christians are almost all Orthodox, whose Patriarch is the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople.
• Hungarian – Descendants of Ruthenians who returned to Rome in 1646. The liturgical languages are Greek, Hungarian and English. The 300,000 faithful are found in Hungary, Europe and the Americas.
• Italo–Albanian – Never separated from Rome, these 60,000 Byzantine Rite Catholics are found in Italy, Sicily and the Americas. The liturgical languages are Greek and Italo–Albanian.
• Melkite – Catholics from among those separated from Rome in Syria and Egypt who resumed Communion with Rome at the time of the Crusades. However, definitive union only came in the 18th century. Melkite Greek Patriarch of Damascus. Liturgical languages are Greek, Arabic, English, Portuguese and Spanish. The over 1 million Melkite Catholics can be found in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Canada, US, Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina and Australia.
• Romanian – Romanians who returned to Rome in 1697. The liturgical language is Romanian. There are over 1 million Romanian Catholics in Romania, Europe and the Americas. Most Romanian Christians are Romanian Orthodox.
• Russian – Russians who returned to communion with Rome in 1905. The liturgical language is Old Slavonic. An unknown number of the faithful in Russia, China, the Americas and Australia. Most Russian Christians are Russian Orthodox, whose Patriarch is the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow.
• Ruthenian – Catholics from among those separated from Rome in Russia, Hungary and Croatia who reunited with Rome in 1596 (Brest–Litovsk) and 1646 (Uzhorod).
• Slovak – Byzantine Rite Catholics of Slovakian origin numbering 225,000 and found in Slovakia and Canada.
• Ukrainian – Catholics from among those separated from Rome by the Greek Schism and reunited about 1595. Patriarch or Metropolitan of Lviv. Liturgical languages are Old Slavonic and the vernacular. The 5.5 million Ukrainian Catholics can be found in Ukraine, Poland, England, Germany, France, Canada, US, Brazil, Argentina and Australia. During the Soviet era Ukrainian Catholics were violently forced to join the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Their hierarchy, which continued to exist outside the homeland, has since been re–established in Ukraine.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALEXANDRIAN FAMILY OF LITURGICAL RITES
The Church of Alexandria in Egypt was one of the original centers of Christianity, since like Rome and Antioch it had a large Jewish population which was the initial object of apostolic evangelization. Its Liturgy is attributed to St. Mark the Evangelist, and shows the later influence of the Byzantine Liturgy, in addition to its unique elements.

• Coptic – Egyptian Catholics who returned to communion with Rome in 1741. The Patriarch of Alexandria leads the 200,000 faithful of this ritual Church spread throughout Egypt and the Near East.  The liturgical languages are Coptic (Egyptian) and Arabic. Most Copts are not Catholics.

• Ethiopian/Abyssinian – Ethiopian Coptic Christians who returned to Rome in 1846. The liturgical language is Geez. The 200,000 faithful are found in Ethiopia, Eritrea,  Somalia, and Jerusalem.
The Church was never intended to be one liturgical tradition or one style but one Church. Much like how the Eastern Schismatics are mostly united under one communion which includes (but not limitted to) the OCA, ROCOR, the mainline Greek Orthodox, and the Russian Orthodox, as well as the Japanese Orthodox and a few others, but they have no central patriarch they can point to as head of the church. In fact the Greeks and Russians have two different patriarchs. The Catholic (and true) Church on the other hand actually have eleven patriarchs all together that are in communion with eachother, but only six of these function in a similar fashion to His Holiness without the sacramental authority afforded him by being in the Chair of Peter. The Pope is the first among equals among these eleven. So in effect the Catholic Church can be called simply the Catholic communion. (like the Anglican communion includes Episcopalians and a few others).

But, there is a strong difference. All those in communion with Rome must submit to the Chair of Peter as the supreme head of the Church and the Vicar of Christ. He is the first among equals, but he can also speak Ex Cathedra and his authority is supreme in all areas and all rites of the Church. Any church in communion with Rome must agree to this and all other Catholic dogma. So although their particular rites or liturgical traditions are not inferior or controlled by the Roman Rite, they are still underneath His Holiness's authority, even if not under the authority of any other Roman bishop. Technically the Vatican's Cardinals try to act as if they have authority over these non-Roman Catholic churches but they do not have such authority unless given to them by the Pope or by each individual church's patriarch/metropolitan/head bishop.
All this diversity of approved rites testifies the ever present catholicity of the Church. However, I'd like to see a push towards more uniformity, especially under the Roman Rite which is the rite of the Pope.
That's a bad idea, one I have argued with to many "Conservative" Catholics who do not like that Eastern Catholics often use a different calendar. Spreading universal devotions like the Rosary is always good but causing liturgies to lose their specific expression and language is not so good. "Unity" and "Catholicity" does not mean "conformity." Unity of Faith is what is key here, and obedience to tradition. These liturgies (that have not been romanized) are very obedient to their respective tradition. When they become romanized it tends to have bad results (priests facing vox populi, Roman bishops trying to take charge over something that is not their jurisdiction, liberalized Eastern seminaries, confused flock, etc.)

The Pope, being the vicar of Christ and the successor of Peter, is the Head of the Church. But liturgically he is Patriarch of the West. He could step in to the other patriarchates in the East and make them more uniformed, but it shows a trust in the other Patriarchs that he does not do that. Nor is it allowed for Western Bishops to try to do such a thing.

The last time this happened it caused such an outrage that the Society of St. Josaphat has been fighting tooth and nail to keep their tradition alive without being absorbed into the Roman Rite or the liberalized Ukrainian Orthodox. It was the Vatican spirit of Ecumenism that has been trying to destroy their tradition. Do you believe that it is discouraged to pray the Rosary in the majority of Ukrainian Catholic churches in Ukraine now? Why? Because it might scare of ecumenical relations we have with Ukrainian Orthodox churches. That's what happens when the Vatican's influence goes where it should not.
(01-04-2010, 12:44 PM)WanderingPenitent Wrote: [ -> ]Do you believe that it is discouraged to pray the Rosary in the majority of Ukrainian Catholic churches in Ukraine now? Why? Because it might scare of ecumenical relations we have with Ukrainian Orthodox churches. That's what happens when the Vatican's influence goes where it should not.

Precisely. Their disdain towards the Holy Rosary is another fruit of Vatican II. That's what happens when modernism and rebellion take hold of the eastern catholic churches. Most of them have become nothing but schismatic "orthodox" in disguise, as far as I can see. All the hard work of previous centuries has been blown to dust just in a few decades.

These eastern churches need to be heavily purged when the Holy Roman Church recovers her senses and, frankly, I don't see any harm in trying to bring some more uniformity to the different rites of the universal Church. The roman rite is the rite of the Pope, so it's only natural it should take precedence over the others and it's only desirable to some extent that the others may become more latinized with time, especially to get rid of any schismatic stench that may have unfortunately become attached to their rites.

The only unblemished see, faithful guardian of the deposit of faith, divine guarantee of Catholic unity, is the Holy Roman See. The Roman Rite is the largest rite of the Church and I don't see any harm whatsoever that the eastern rites may become more alike with the rite of the Pope. Do they value their local traditions more than the tradition of the Roman See?
(01-04-2010, 01:47 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]The only unblemished see, faithful guardian of the deposit of faith, divine guarantee of Catholic unity, is the Holy Roman See. The Roman Rite is the largest rite of the Church and I don't see any harm whatsoever that the eastern rites may become more alike with the rite of the Pope. Do they value their local traditions more than the tradition of the Roman See?

This question is completely unneccesary.  Before the East-West Schism, there were plenty of Eastern Christians who had no problem being in communion with Rome while maintaining their own traditions.  Why throw the baby out with the bath water?  There is nothing inherently schismatic within the various Eastern rites, so there is no reason that they should be suppressed or even diluted.  As I said in the other thread, to dilute authentic Catholic traditions, just because they aren't Latin, is to deny, by your actions, the universality of the Catholic Church. 

But, if you would like liturgical uniformity, perhaps we could try this?  Maybe the Pope should ban the Roman rite altogether, and adopt the Byzantine rite.  That way, the Eastern churches would be using the rite of the Pope, the Byzantine Catholics could hold onto their own liturgy and spirituality, and the Latins would have the desired liturgical uniformity.  Would that be a fair compromise?
The Eastern Rites did not schism because of liturgical differences. If this were the case then the Maronites would have seperated millenia ago (but they never have). The Rite of the Pope is all of them, for they are under the Papacy. The Roman Rite is not superior, nor should it be treated as such. It is merely larger. Liturgy should not be equated with authority.

I may have the wrong impression, but it sounds like what you want is more than unity, but conformity and a dissolving of distinctions. Was not the majority of the Early Church's liturgy (even in Rome for the first century) in Greek? It is unfair to demand conformity of liturgical practices, but not unfair to demand consistency. The Roman Rite is not the standard that all other liturgies should be based on, even if the Pope's authority is that standard. The Roman Rite and the Pope's Authority are not the same thing, despite their conjunction. The Holy See includes Cardinals that are Patriarchs of other non-Roman Rites of the Church (example, the Chaldeans). So the Holy See is not just Roman but includes other parts of the Catholic Church outside the specific Roman Rite. This is less about local tradition and more about following the authority of their patriarchs, many of which are successors to apostles as well.

Should practices be put more in line with consistency within the Church? Certainly. But I do not believe that means "latinizing" them. The Maronites survived millenia without Latinization and have always been loyal to the Papacy. Their distinct liturgy has never cause "schismatic stench." If there is schismatic elements in a liturgy, it should be pushed out. But I do not believe that necessarily requires a "Latinizing" of such a liturgy.
(01-04-2010, 02:03 PM)WanderingPenitent Wrote: [ -> ]Should practices be put more in line with consistency within the Church? Certainly. But I do not believe that means "latinizing" them. The Maronites survived millenia without Latinization and have always been loyal to the Papacy. Their distinct liturgy has never cause "schismatic stench." If there is schismatic elements in a liturgy, it should be pushed out. But I do not believe that necessarily requires a "Latinizing" of such a liturgy.

Actually, the Maronites are the most Latinized of Eastern Catholics.  Their liturgy today looks more often like a Roman mass than their own authentic tradition.
From what I know that was mostly a recenty, post-Vatican II change. But I understand that it is not what it once was. Still some of the most loyal Catholics we have to the Papacy tend to be Byzantine Catholics from what I know.

And the kindest Catholic communities I have ever met were either SSPX or Melkite.
(01-04-2010, 02:01 PM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]But, if you would like liturgical uniformity, perhaps we could try this?  Maybe the Pope should ban the Roman rite altogether, and adopt the Byzantine rite.  That way, the Eastern churches would be using the rite of the Pope, the Byzantine Catholics could hold onto their own liturgy and spirituality, and the Latins would have the desired liturgical uniformity.  Would that be a fair compromise?

Don't be ridiculous.

Besides being the Vicar of Christ, the Pope is the bishop of Rome. His rite is the rite of the Roman see, the unblemished guardian of the faith, not the rite of the see of Constantinople.
Pages: 1 2