Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Eastern churches
Are the Ruthenian Catholics to be further Novus Ordo-fied liturgically?
Господи, помилуй!

Such is scaring their high-church minority well as the Roman Rite traditionalist refugees among them. I haven’t seen this rumoured ‘revised liturgy’ online so I don’t know if any of this is true.

Some claim that the latest self-revisions not only shorten/drop things but have ‘inclusive language’. I have some of their existing books for the office that have this problem. They don’t try to neuter or feminize God but it’s still annoying and a bad sign. To be fair, in the context of a rite that is obviously still full-strength and ‘unreformed’ it’s a relatively minor problem in itself.

In 1944 Rome issued a liturgical book for them that follows Orthodox usages (no filioque in the Creed for example* among many other things) but it has never been implemented. They didn’t want to be traditional and Eastern then or now.

A feminist article coming from them seems to suggest that regrettably much of what’s going on there is really just an ethnic version of the Novus Ordo.

And on the lighter side:

Would Prince Michael of Kent make a good tsar?
He’d have to repudiate Freemasonry but he’s related to the Russian royals (and even looks like the last Tsar), likes the culture and speaks the language

*Which a lot of their churches now have done, possibly partly because it’s a gesture that’s hip in academic ecumenical circles.

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment