Sarx

Good for Goose AND Gander

15 July 2008 - 13 תמוז 5768 by Huw

AS ANYONE Thought of the possibility of Eastern Rite Anglicanism? Byzantine Praxis, without all the silly uberfrummery or ethnic quarrels and the latitudinal posture of liberal Catholicism to boot.

Just saying, is all.

Posted in church geekery, liturgy

10 Responses to “Good for Goose AND Gander”

on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 12:21 am1Donald Schell

Yes, there are those of us who have thought of it and ventured that direction. St. Gregory’s wasn’t trying to emulate an ideal moment or geography, but the frame was definitely the early stages of Byzantine liturgy - before the iconstasis and with the determined rejection of separating men and women with a curtain or other ways of prioritizing men’s participation over women.
on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 10:08 am2Huw

Donald - I was thinking of SGN when I wrote… but I was thinking more of Rick’s line that he didn’t ransack that warehouse enough! I was also thinking of New Skete’s liturgy rather than (eg) a full on Russian liturgy. And I know that the Byzantine Catholics have also come up with some resources. It’s certainly a higher liturgy than many Episcopalians use on a regular basis - and with a different focus.

I was thinking more from my own experiences of what was good in the rite and wondering how that rite would evolve and change within an Anglican context: specifically, without the EOC-traditional limitations of who does what, etc, or the freedom to access more recent liturgical scholarship. Essentially, coming at an SGN style from the East, moving west, rather than the other way around, if that makes sense.
on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 10:47 am3The young fogey

A non-Byzantine Eastern Rite Anglicanism already exists but AFAIK is conservative: during the British raj some Indians of the Malankara Church, part of the Syrian Church of the Oriental communion, tried to start a ‘Reformation’ there and after they were thrown out started the Mar Thoma Church which is in communion with but not a literal part of the Anglican Communion.

There used to be Anglo-Orthodox, likewise conservative, either a sub-set of Anglo-Catholicism or a thing unto themselves, trying to be Orthodox where they were and hoping for corporate reunion, encouraged by friendly Orthodox who said if all the Anglicans converted the clergy could be received in their orders. After the ordination of women as priests in the Church of England those in that church logically disbanded and converted.

Your old friend IIRC Canon Edward West used to suit up and do the Byzantine Liturgy in a side chapel at the Cathedral Church of St John the Divine, not to pass himself off as Orthodox (he was a friend of the local Orthodox) but for his own edification.

And there are those like SGN who pick and choose aspects of the Orthodox tradition on their own liberal-Protestant terms not Orthodoxy’s.
on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 11:05 am4Fr. Ernesto

Huw,

Over a year ago, you posted some photographs of a couple of Orthodox churches that had reduced the iconostasis to just four short columns with the traditional four icons on them. Perhaps you could repost them, as they are one example of how to change within the existing framework.

The problem with “more recent liturgical scholarship” is not the scholarship itself. It is the thought that just because it was done that way back then, we must therefore change today. We actually do change, there is no doubt of that. And, the scholarship can certainly help us in evaluating changes, when they happen. However, the whole tale of liturgical revision from Vatican Council II onwards is fraught with cautionary tales of what happens if you let scholars “make us more authentic.” What they did prove was what happens if you “monkey” with tradition in a non-organic fashion.
on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 11:06 am5Huw

I’m aware of the Folks in INdia - it was the reformation part that confused me. They seemed to be ultra-Protestants, still: one of their Bps came to SGN - and did well there :-) I wasn’t aware they were, properly, ER… Maybe! I just don’t remember much from their website.

Your memory of the rest of the history matches mine and certainly Canon West had a host of ER vestments and ER liturgical traditions. I remember a number of things I thought *very* odd when I saw them but later learned were ER. His ER influence on St John the Divine used to be quite evident - maybe still is, given that Bp Mark was an Archdeacon when West was living at the Cathedral.

In a sense using the full liturgical tradition of the church is the goal, although I admit the topic of the post was to suggest doing what a lot of folks (unjustly) accuse SGN of doing. The Eastern liturgical tradition is not “Orthodoxy’s” but rather the Church’s. Orthodoxy uses it as does SGN and this hypothetical idea I’m discussing - although certainly on different terms.
on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 11:17 am6Huw

Fr E - I’ve learned recently that the parish in question has since built a full iconostasis. There is also New Skete.

RE: Vatican II. I think you hit on an important issue. I think the problems with N.O. liturgy are inherent in Rome, herself. Is commanded liturgical change, from the top-down, really organic? The issue is not “must” change but “may/can” learn and grow from the knowledge.

We miss the point looking for “more authentic” if we define that only in terms of “more ancient” - organic growth from within a committed community *is* authentic. It’s the attempts at forced conformity that are not. Are such growths useful? salvific? etc? That’s a far better set of questions; a set that can’t be served by a legalistic answer.
on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 6:21 pm7Gregory Orloff

Father Ernesto may be thinking of the iconostasis at New Skete or the one at Saint Gregory the Theologian Church in Wappingers Falls, NY, photographs of which can be seen online here:

http://www.newsketemonks.com/images/monks/L1000200.JPG

http://www.oca.org/DIRlisting.asp?SID=9&KEY=OCA-WA-WAFSGC

Many newer churches seem to be tending toward more open, more minimal design in iconostases — and not only in America. I’ve seen photographs of very low, yet nicely done ones in Korean churches of the Church of Constantinople’s mission there and (suprisingly) even in a chapel of the Valaam Monastery in Russia.
on 16 July 2008 - 14 תמוז 5768 at 6:30 pm8Huw

Gregory: The picture I posted earlier was the one in Sacramento (which I linked in my comment, above). But, following on your comment, I’ve seen pictures of ones in Korea that are, essentially, low railings rather like in Hagia Sophia. I have to admit, that while I find the style beautiful - I rather like the New skete one (which I also linked in my post) - I prefer the upright, minimal style as shown in the other link above.

As I noted, I’ve been told that that parish has recently enclosed the altar in a full-sized Iconostasis which, I think, does damage to the style of the interior.

Coincidentally, I used the design of the Sacaramento parish as the basis for my final project in college on building churches.
on 17 July 2008 - 15 תמוז 5768 at 10:07 am9Fr. Ernesto

I really like that New Skete iconostasis. Thanks for posting it.

Huw, I am going to be controversial and say that the Turkocracia did more damage to Orthodoxy than most of us either recognize or admit. During the period of the Turkocracia, the Chrysostom liturgy was imposed by the Constantinopolan patriarch without synod or council. Thus the liturgical variation existant in Orthodoxy was reduced by fiat and not by Holy Tradition. Also, the iconostasis closed during this period, a development that I do not favor. There is some movement towards returning to more open iconostases, which is evident in various churches.

Unfortunately, it would not be “organic” to force Antiochians to return to their ancient liturgy, etc. However, I would like to see our hierarchs authorize the celebration of one of our ancient Antiochene liturgies as an option. I doubt it will happen, and I do like Chrysostom, so it is not a hot issue with me.
on 17 July 2008 - 15 תמוז 5768 at 8:01 pm10Fr. Greg Christakos

The iconostasis of our Metropolis chapel has what has to be my favorite altar screen - it is barely even there. This picture, of our Metropolitan introducing Cardinal O’Malley, gives you a good idea:

http://boston.goarch.org/gallery/main.php?g2_itemId=36225

Not sure when it was builit but I think sometime after the early 1980s.