FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: attending an "orthodox" liturgy
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
My good friend's little brother died in a dirtbike accident (requiescat in pace) and he is russian orthodox the whole senior class basically skipped school for the funeral. It was beautiful of course being eastern and upon stepping into the church I almost cired. Unilt I saw the painting of mark of ephesus on the wall behind the iconostasis. And like most eastern churches saint Joseph doesn't exists apparently. (No icons of our Lords foster father).
Did I sin by attending a schismatic mass? A friend who goes there says I'm welcome any time but I don't think canon law allows that for me.
Its a shame tho their liturgy is so beautiful and the church so beautiful but yet a catholic church in town is blank inside. I was so mad at that.
(05-10-2010, 07:28 PM)randomtradguy Wrote: [ -> ]My good friend's little brother died in a dirtbike accident (requiescat in pace) and he is russian orthodox the whole senior class basically skipped school for the funeral. It was beautiful of course being eastern and upon stepping into the church I almost cired. Unilt I saw the painting of mark of ephesus on the wall behind the iconostasis. And like most eastern churches saint Joseph doesn't exists apparently. (No icons of our Lords foster father).
Did I sin by attending a schismatic mass? A friend who goes there says I'm welcome any time but I don't think canon law allows that for me.
Its a shame tho their liturgy is so beautiful and the church so beautiful but yet a catholic church in town is blank inside. I was so mad at that.


I think you are allowed to passively attend funerals in such places.

(05-10-2010, 07:28 PM)randomtradguy Wrote: [ -> ]And like most eastern churches saint Joseph doesn't exists apparently. (No icons of our Lords foster father).

I have witnessed the Melkites I have known to be an exception to this. The Melkite parish I have most visited is indeed named after St. Joseph. Of course the Melkites are Catholic so that might be the reason for that.

We are willing to look upon the foster-father of God, who had original sin but still had authority over Christ. We are also willing to recognize an office of dignity and divine proclamation that has been full of some of the best and some of the worst men in human history. Something the Schismatic East simply cannot stand.
(05-10-2010, 07:28 PM)randomtradguy Wrote: [ -> ]And like most eastern churches saint Joseph doesn't exists apparently. (No icons of our Lords foster father).

My experience is limited to having been a neighbor of a Greek Orthodox mission chapel, and bcoming acquainted over a period of time with the visiting priest and presvytera who served it twice a month.  On reflection it seems that there is not quite as much attention paid to St. Joseph as in the Roman Catholic Church.  On the other hand, there are likewise common saints who receive more attention in the Orthodox Church.

But, St. Joseph certainly isn't ignored, and I'm not sure EVERY Roman Catholic church (even pre VII) had a shrine to St. Joseph.

Here is a link to an icon of the nativity, with St. Joseph
http://www.goarch.org/special/listen_lea...e/nativity

I have also seen Orthodox articles speaking of the importance of St. Joseph, particularly as a protector of the Theotokos and of Our Lord.
(05-10-2010, 07:28 PM)randomtradguy Wrote: [ -> ]Did I sin by attending a schismatic mass?

I believe the most common pre-Vatican II belief was that passively attending weddings and funerals at non-Catholic services is okay because these are also civil services.

Think about it this way: if it wasn't the case, then Catholic wedding planners and funeral directors in America would be out of business.
The Orthodox have valid Sacraments and valid Orders, so I don't see why.  I think funerals are generally given more leeway than weddings anyway as far as permissibleness of attending.

The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is a wonderful thing, regardless.  (I attend a Ukrainian Catholic parish around here, so I've seen it.  It kicks the pants off of my local Latin rite parish.  (And just before anyone starts, I'm not responding to any comments posted about whether I should be at a TLM or NO or whatever.) )
(05-11-2010, 12:13 AM)JesusFreak84 Wrote: [ -> ]The Orthodox have valid Sacraments and valid Orders, so I don't see why.  I think funerals are generally given more leeway than weddings anyway as far as permissibleness of attending.

The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is a wonderful thing, regardless.  (I attend a Ukrainian Catholic parish around here, so I've seen it.  It kicks the pants off of my local Latin rite parish.  (And just before anyone starts, I'm not responding to any comments posted about whether I should be at a TLM or NO or whatever.) )

Do you mind my asking what valid sacraments have to do with the permissibility of passively attending a non-Catholic wedding or funeral? I don't think that there is generally a grave and urgent cause to receive Holy Communion at a non-Catholic wedding or funeral.
You don't sin in general by going to a funeral or wedding or such, but you aren't supposed to receive Communion.  You should kneel or bow, whatever the custom, at consecration since it is a valid consecration and Christ is present.

Don't be swayed by smells and bells.  They are in schism.  It doesn't matter if the liturgy is more beautiful than any Catholic Mass - don't go there except for weddings, funerals, etc.  It is a poison.

As far as St. Joseph, he was not given the full dulia he receives now by the Catholic (Latin Rite) Church for a very long time either.  You may be shocked at exactly how late it was, and how long St. Joseph was treated rather inconsequentially.  Part of the reason the Eastern Churches do not give him the same level of dulia was that the Latin Church did not until after the Great Schism.  The ironic part is that the East at first gave him a lot more reverence than the West.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm

Joseph was "a just man". This praise bestowed by the Holy Ghost, and the privilege of having been chosen by God to be the foster-father of Jesus and the spouse of the Virgin Mother, are the foundations of the honour paid to St. Joseph by the Church. So well-grounded are these foundations that it is not a little surprising that the cult of St. Joseph was so slow in winning recognition. Foremost among the causes of this is the fact that "during the first centuries of the Church's existence, it was only the martyrs who enjoyed veneration" (Kellner). Far from being ignored or passed over in silence during the early Christian ages, St. Joseph's prerogatives were occasionally descanted upon by the Fathers; even such eulogies as cannot be attributed to the writers among whose works they found admittance bear witness that the ideas and devotion therein expressed were familiar, not only to the theologians and preachers, and must have been readily welcomed by the people. The earliest traces of public recognition of the sanctity of St. Joseph are to be found in the East. His feast, if we may trust the assertions of Papebroch, was kept by the Copts as early as the beginning of the fourth century. Nicephorus Callistus tells likewise — on what authority we do not know — that in the great basilica erected at Bethlehem by St. Helena, there was a gorgeous oratory dedicated to the honour of our saint. Certain it is, at all events, that the feast of "Joseph the Carpenter" is entered, on 20 July, in one of the old Coptic Calendars in our possession, as also in a Synazarium of the eighth and nineth century published by Cardinal Mai (Script. Vet. Nova Coll., IV, 15 sqq.). Greek menologies of a later date at least mention St. Joseph on 25 or 26 December, and a twofold commemoration of him along with other saints was made on the two Sundays next before and after Christmas.

In the West the name of the foster-father of Our Lord (Nutritor Domini) appears in local martyrologies of the ninth and tenth centuries, and we find in 1129, for the first time, a church dedicated to his honour at Bologna. The devotion, then merely private, as it seems, gained a great impetus owing to the influence and zeal of such saintly persons as St. Bernard, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Gertrude (d. 1310), and St. Bridget of Sweden (d. 1373). According to Benedict XIV (De Serv. Dei beatif., I, iv, n. 11; xx, n. 17), "the general opinion of the learned is that the Fathers of Carmel were the first to import from the East into the West the laudable practice of giving the fullest cultus to St. Joseph". His feast, introduced towards the end shortly afterwards, into the Dominican Calendar, gradually gained a foothold in various dioceses of Western Europe. Among the most zealous promoters of the devotion at that epoch, St. Vincent Ferrer (d. 1419), Peter d'Ailly (d. 1420), St. Bernadine of Siena (d. 1444), and Jehan Charlier Gerson (d. 1429) deserve an especial mention. Gerson, who had, in 1400, composed an Office of the Espousals of Joseph particularly at the Council of Constance (1414), in promoting the public recognition of the cult of St. Joseph. Only under the pontificate of Sixtus IV (1471-84), were the efforts of these holy men rewarded by Roman Calendar (19 March). From that time the devotion acquired greater and greater popularity, the dignity of the feast keeping pace with this steady growth. At first only a festum simplex, it was soon elevated to a double rite by Innocent VIII (1484-92), declared by Gregory XV, in 1621, a festival of obligation, at the instance of the Emperors Ferdinand III and Leopold I and of King Charles II of Spain, and raised to the rank of a double of the second class by Clement XI (1700-21). Further, Benedict XIII, in 1726, inserted the name into the Litany of the Saints.

One festival in the year, however, was not deemed enough to satisfy the piety of the people. The feast of the Espousals of the Blessed Virgin and St. Joseph, so strenuously advocated by Gerson, and permitted first by Paul III to the Franciscans, then to other religious orders and individual dioceses, was, in 1725, granted to all countries that solicited it, a proper Office, compiled by the Dominican Pierto Aurato, being assigned, and the day appointed being 23 January. Nor was this all, for the reformed Order of Carmelites, into which St. Teresa had infused her great devotion to the foster-father of Jesus, chose him, in 1621, for their patron, and in 1689, were allowed to celebrate the feast of his Patronage on the third Sunday after Easter. This feast, soon adopted throughout the Spanish Kingdom, was later on extended to all states and dioceses which asked for the privilege. No devotion, perhaps, has grown so universal, none seems to have appealed so forcibly to the heart of the Christian people, and particularly of the labouring classes, during the nineteenth century, as that of St. Joseph.

This wonderful and unprecedented increase of popularity called for a new lustre to be added to the cult of the saint. Accordingly, one of the first acts of the pontificate of Pius IX, himself singularly devoted to St. Joseph, was to extend to the whole Church the feast of the Patronage (1847), and in December, 1870, according to the wishes of the bishops and of all the faithful, he solemnly declared the Holy Patriarch Joseph, patron of the Catholic Church, and enjoined that his feast (19 March) should henceforth be celebrated as a double of the first class (but without octave, on account of Lent). Following the footsteps of their predecessor, Leo XIII and Pius X have shown an equal desire to add their own jewel to the crown of St. Joseph: the former, by permitting on certain days the reading of the votive Office of the saint; and the latter by approving, on 18 March, 1909, a litany in honour of him whose name he had received in baptism.

(05-10-2010, 07:28 PM)randomtradguy Wrote: [ -> ]My good friend's little brother died in a dirtbike accident (requiescat in pace) and he is russian orthodox the whole senior class basically skipped school for the funeral. It was beautiful of course being eastern and upon stepping into the church I almost cired. Unilt I saw the painting of mark of ephesus on the wall behind the iconostasis. And like most eastern churches saint Joseph doesn't exists apparently. (No icons of our Lords foster father).
Did I sin by attending a schismatic mass? A friend who goes there says I'm welcome any time but I don't think canon law allows that for me.
Its a shame tho their liturgy is so beautiful and the church so beautiful but yet a catholic church in town is blank inside. I was so mad at that.

It's definitely true about St. Joseph in the East, are focus is almost entirely on Jesus and the Theotokos.  However, I'm not sure how much this means, but traditionally, the Liturgy of St. James is only offered anymore, in the few places it is still offered, on the feast of St. James (Oct. 23) and the first Sunday after Christmas (feast of St. Joseph).
Ordinarily, the Byzantine rite burial service does not include a Divine Liturgy/Mass (although many Byzantine Catholics insert the Divine Liturgy into the service, in imitation of Latin practice) so I'm surprised to see that you describe the service as a Mass.

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/200...ntine.html
Pages: 1 2