427
edits
Changes
no edit summary
I have a better solution, Father Ben.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 14:12, August 25, 2008 (UTC)
==ROCOR English Liturgy==
To quote from the 'Saint Colman Prayer Book, 2003, Tasmania: the title page for the English liturgy reads "The English Liturgy According to the Western Rite, derived from the Sarum, 1549, 1718 etc., adapted using the rules authorised by the Holy Synod of Russia." The title page for the Sarum rite is listed simply as "The Divine Liturgy (Sarum) Usus Cascadae." The Foreward by Vladyka Hilarion (Kapral) states "The present Saint Colman Prayer Book was begun as a project in 1996 and has taken seven years to bring to this point." In the section on Notes Regarding the English Liturgy: "The English Liturgy is essentially set out in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the Comission of the Holy Synod of Russia in 1904-07 at the request of Saint Tikhon (Belavin). Those guidelines have here been applied to the Liturgies of 1549 and 1718, themselves, both truncated versions of the Sarum original, and here including much of the Sarum Canon." --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 18:02, August 25, 2008 (UTC)
"Sarum, 1549, 1718 etc., adapted using the rules authorised by the Holy Synod of Russia." The Holy Synod said nothing about the Sarum rite but the BCP. There is no 1549 Sarum, and no 1718 Sarum. These are editions of the BCP. We are talking about a modified version of the BCP and both of you know it.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 05:42, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
The citations are provided. The English Liturgy is primarily based on the Sarum rite (including the Sarum canon) with some items from one BCP - the 1549 'Catholic' version, as well as the 1718 Non-Juror Usager liturgy (not a BCP liturgy), the York rite, the Gothic Missal - but not from any other BCP besides the original 1549. Those who do follow the BCP do not see it as a BCP or 'Anglican service'. The Roman rite was approved twice by the Russian Synod (and also by Constantinople) - no specific Use was required, and thus various local or monastic uses of the Roman rite have been used in the Russian Orthodox Church - all adapted according to the rules put forth by the Holy Synod (for that matter, not only is adaptation of the Roman rite and some BCP services - but also the Gallican/Celtic rite.) Any problem with it - take it up with Vladyka Hilarion whose project it was, and whose blessing it has. Or, with all sobriety: do contact Bishop Elect Fr. John R. Shaw and ask him the basis for the Western Rites in the Russian Orthodox Church (specifically the Sarum.) Fr. John R. Shaw is a valuable resource - and soon one of the Metropolitans vicar bishops. I do not think Fr. Benjamin Johnson and I agree often (nor have I heard from him in nearly a year), but I would not attack him as he is a member of the true Orthodox clergy. --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 11:35, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
I see you are practicing your baits well! ("I would not attack him as he is a member of the true Orthodox clergy"-- that didn't stop him from trying to get a priest of his own jurisdiction "censured" on this Wiki, BTW) As for your teamwork with P. Ben Johnson, it's been well documented here (nominating each other for mod was a stroke of genius, really).
However, you can't escape two simple facts which I shall note here again before my edits:
The "English Liturgy" has been referred to repeatedly as "following the dictates of the Russian Synod's recommendations". Since the Russian Synod made recommendations on two liturgies-- the Tridentine (positive) and the BCP (negative) the rite can only be derived on one of the two. For the reasons below, it can only be consider an "Anglican" rite.
The introduction of the rite says "Sarum, 1549, 1718, et cetera"-- meaning it uses at least three liturgies-- that of Sarum, that of the 1549 BCP (which is NOT Sarum, period), and that of 1718 (the liturgy of the Non-Jurors). Add to this of course the parts from the Byzantine liturgy that were placed in. It also includes, per the text itself, part of the Gothic Missal, a French, pre-schism variation of the Roman Mass.
I believe, per the nature of this Liturgy's formation, that this qualifies-- very correctly-- as a pastiche.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 16:53, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
Its not 'baiting' Joe. I wouldn't say 'teamwork' either. Fr. Benjamin and I have somewhat of a gentelmanly rivalry. I think the last time we communicated directly was last may (then only to check if my email was still active.) So - the conspiracies aren't there (and, again - thank you for impugning my motives.) The simple facts: the documents pertaining to the Western rite in the Russian Orthodox Church are *still* in the possession of the Russian Orthodox Church. Vladyka Hilarion has these documents, and Saint Petroc has these documents - as do others. The Roman rite, adaptation of the BCP, and Gallican were all approved (and still are!) The Observations, by the way, were not negative - they simply left the implementation to the local diocesans in the West (which was acted upon by Vladyka Hilarion over a decade ago.) The English liturgy does not purport to be 'Sarum' or 'Old Sarum' but simply the English liturgy. The definition of a 'pastiche' is an explicit imitation: which the English liturgy is not, nor does it purport to be. (A pastiche would be something calling itself Sarum or Old Sarum which is not the original. The issue with Sarum use, of course, is its diversity. There are also 'Sarum' uses that have their own proper names though 'After the use of Sarum': eg, Aberdeen, Winchester (the basis of the LoBue English Monastic liturgy), York, etc. The ROCOR Divine Liturgy (Sarum) is one of these - Cascades Use, after the use of Sarum. Precision in language matters, and words have specific meanings. (For that matter - the Gothic Missal is *Gallican*, and - there are no Byzantine items in the English Liturgy.) --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 23:12, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
== Availability of Saint Colman Prayer Book? ==
Is the ''Saint Colman Prayer Book'' available for purchase in the US? I'd be interested in obtaining a copy. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 18:15, August 25, 2008 (UTC)
FrLev, it will likely be when the hardcover printing is arranged for. At this time editing from the first edition (looseleaf) has been completed, and the quiring of the whole is in progress. I do know some have gotten copies in the US. I had to travel to the UK for mine (as far as I know, only two printings have been made of the 'beta' version - the first in Australia, the second in the UK.) Contact Fr. Michael of Saint Petroc Monastery for more details. --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 11:35, August 26, 2008 (UTC) Thanks! --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 17:14, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
== Dom Augustine ==
I don't think that details of Dom Augustine's personal circumstances belong on a page dedicated to the Sarum. However, I do think that Dom Augustine's contributions merit a page of his own. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 17:13, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
-
Technically, Fr Augustine did not bring back the Sarum rite either, so the question of whether he belongs on this page at all is debatable. Since Aristibule put thought his contribution worthwhile, I placed it in the same paragraph as the Milan usage, since Fr Augustine, in the end, is under the spiritual care of a priest of the Milan Synod.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 18:15, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
Fr Lev - yes, true. Of course, Fr. Augustine is still ROCOR, though retired. He has contact with people from various jurisdictions and non-Orthodox but he remains ROCOR (as he insists.) He has no antimins from Milan Synod, and does not consider himself so: he should remain in the paragraph describing ROCOR Sarum. Please pray, as he has suffered some from Tropical Storm Fay. His contribution to the Sarum use in ROCOR is important, as he and his monks produced a translation of the Sarum use into English a few decades ago. At one of the ROCOR hermitages a few years ago, we used this Mount Royal Old English (Sarum) for Holy Week services. So, his contribution is still active (and even provides the basis for the Saint Colman Prayer Book - which built upon Fr. Augustine's work within a Sarum framework.) A ROCOR hieromonk has prepared the Mount Royal Old English rite as a .doc file if you are interested. --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 23:03, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
Aristibule attempted to argue with me over the phone that "Father Augustine has a ROCOR antimens and he commemorate Metr Hilarion in services"; he seemed unaware that Fr Augustine doesn't CELEBRATE services, and goes to services with Fr Cuthbert (Pierce), a hieromonk of the Milan Synod. Fr Augustine left ROCOR (we have his letter to that effect), he went to L'ECOF after ROCOR banned Western Rites in 1975, and other places before finally retiring in Florida, where he began to communicate at Holyrood House in Florida. (Father Michael falsely claims that this is a ROCOR dependency of St Petroc's.) Aristibule is making up a story, and it's time for the stories to stop. They are taking advantage of a venerable hieromonk's age to manipulate the truth. --[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 00:39, August 27, 2008 (UTC)
I have never heard from anyone in the Church of France (ECOF) that Dom Augustine was ever connected with it. I would be quite surprised to find out if this were in fact true. Joseph, can you tell me what years you believe Dom Augustine was part of the French Church? I would be happy to check with Bishop Germain. When I corresponded with Dom Augustine while working on my dissertation, he didn't mention the French Church. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 01:39, August 27, 2008 (UTC)
As I understand he was loosely affiliated with them in the late 70's. I am not sure of the dates. What I *am* sure of, however, is that he was not considered a priest of ROCOR, and was not included in any ROCOR directories after 1975 (I am not sure he was in any beforehand either). Apparently after the Western rite prohibition in ROCOR, Bishop Gregory, who was secretary at Synod until the 80's, officially denied Fr Augustine's existence, let alone membership or priesthood.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 01:48, August 27, 2008 (UTC)==ROCOR English Liturgy==
To quote from the 'Saint Colman Prayer Book, 2003, Tasmania: the title page for the English liturgy reads "The English Liturgy According to the Western Rite, derived from the Sarum, 1549, 1718 etc., adapted using the rules authorised by the Holy Synod of Russia." The title page for the Sarum rite is listed simply as "The Divine Liturgy (Sarum) Usus Cascadae." The Foreward by Vladyka Hilarion (Kapral) states "The present Saint Colman Prayer Book was begun as a project in 1996 and has taken seven years to bring to this point." In the section on Notes Regarding the English Liturgy: "The English Liturgy is essentially set out in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the Comission of the Holy Synod of Russia in 1904-07 at the request of Saint Tikhon (Belavin). Those guidelines have here been applied to the Liturgies of 1549 and 1718, themselves, both truncated versions of the Sarum original, and here including much of the Sarum Canon." --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 18:02, August 25, 2008 (UTC)
"Sarum, 1549, 1718 etc., adapted using the rules authorised by the Holy Synod of Russia." The Holy Synod said nothing about the Sarum rite but the BCP. There is no 1549 Sarum, and no 1718 Sarum. These are editions of the BCP. We are talking about a modified version of the BCP and both of you know it.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 05:42, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
The citations are provided. The English Liturgy is primarily based on the Sarum rite (including the Sarum canon) with some items from one BCP - the 1549 'Catholic' version, as well as the 1718 Non-Juror Usager liturgy (not a BCP liturgy), the York rite, the Gothic Missal - but not from any other BCP besides the original 1549. Those who do follow the BCP do not see it as a BCP or 'Anglican service'. The Roman rite was approved twice by the Russian Synod (and also by Constantinople) - no specific Use was required, and thus various local or monastic uses of the Roman rite have been used in the Russian Orthodox Church - all adapted according to the rules put forth by the Holy Synod (for that matter, not only is adaptation of the Roman rite and some BCP services - but also the Gallican/Celtic rite.) Any problem with it - take it up with Vladyka Hilarion whose project it was, and whose blessing it has. Or, with all sobriety: do contact Bishop Elect Fr. John R. Shaw and ask him the basis for the Western Rites in the Russian Orthodox Church (specifically the Sarum.) Fr. John R. Shaw is a valuable resource - and soon one of the Metropolitans vicar bishops. I do not think Fr. Benjamin Johnson and I agree often (nor have I heard from him in nearly a year), but I would not attack him as he is a member of the true Orthodox clergy. --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 11:35, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
I see you are practicing your baits well! ("I would not attack him as he is a member of the true Orthodox clergy"-- that didn't stop him from trying to get a priest of his own jurisdiction "censured" on this Wiki, BTW) As for your teamwork with P. Ben Johnson, it's been well documented here (nominating each other for mod was a stroke of genius, really).
However, you can't escape two simple facts which I shall note here again before my edits:
The "English Liturgy" has been referred to repeatedly as "following the dictates of the Russian Synod's recommendations". Since the Russian Synod made recommendations on two liturgies-- the Tridentine (positive) and the BCP (negative) the rite can only be derived on one of the two. For the reasons below, it can only be consider an "Anglican" rite.
The introduction of the rite says "Sarum, 1549, 1718, et cetera"-- meaning it uses at least three liturgies-- that of Sarum, that of the 1549 BCP (which is NOT Sarum, period), and that of 1718 (the liturgy of the Non-Jurors). Add to this of course the parts from the Byzantine liturgy that were placed in. It also includes, per the text itself, part of the Gothic Missal, a French, pre-schism variation of the Roman Mass.
I believe, per the nature of this Liturgy's formation, that this qualifies-- very correctly-- as a pastiche.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 16:53, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
Its not 'baiting' Joe. I wouldn't say 'teamwork' either. Fr. Benjamin and I have somewhat of a gentelmanly rivalry. I think the last time we communicated directly was last may (then only to check if my email was still active.) So - the conspiracies aren't there (and, again - thank you for impugning my motives.) The simple facts: the documents pertaining to the Western rite in the Russian Orthodox Church are *still* in the possession of the Russian Orthodox Church. Vladyka Hilarion has these documents, and Saint Petroc has these documents - as do others. The Roman rite, adaptation of the BCP, and Gallican were all approved (and still are!) The Observations, by the way, were not negative - they simply left the implementation to the local diocesans in the West (which was acted upon by Vladyka Hilarion over a decade ago.) The English liturgy does not purport to be 'Sarum' or 'Old Sarum' but simply the English liturgy. The definition of a 'pastiche' is an explicit imitation: which the English liturgy is not, nor does it purport to be. (A pastiche would be something calling itself Sarum or Old Sarum which is not the original. The issue with Sarum use, of course, is its diversity. There are also 'Sarum' uses that have their own proper names though 'After the use of Sarum': eg, Aberdeen, Winchester (the basis of the LoBue English Monastic liturgy), York, etc. The ROCOR Divine Liturgy (Sarum) is one of these - Cascades Use, after the use of Sarum. Precision in language matters, and words have specific meanings. (For that matter - the Gothic Missal is *Gallican*, and - there are no Byzantine items in the English Liturgy.) --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 23:12, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
== Availability of Saint Colman Prayer Book? ==
Is the ''Saint Colman Prayer Book'' available for purchase in the US? I'd be interested in obtaining a copy. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 18:15, August 25, 2008 (UTC)
FrLev, it will likely be when the hardcover printing is arranged for. At this time editing from the first edition (looseleaf) has been completed, and the quiring of the whole is in progress. I do know some have gotten copies in the US. I had to travel to the UK for mine (as far as I know, only two printings have been made of the 'beta' version - the first in Australia, the second in the UK.) Contact Fr. Michael of Saint Petroc Monastery for more details. --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 11:35, August 26, 2008 (UTC) Thanks! --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 17:14, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
== Dom Augustine ==
I don't think that details of Dom Augustine's personal circumstances belong on a page dedicated to the Sarum. However, I do think that Dom Augustine's contributions merit a page of his own. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 17:13, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
Technically, Fr Augustine did not bring back the Sarum rite either, so the question of whether he belongs on this page at all is debatable. Since Aristibule put thought his contribution worthwhile, I placed it in the same paragraph as the Milan usage, since Fr Augustine, in the end, is under the spiritual care of a priest of the Milan Synod.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 18:15, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
Fr Lev - yes, true. Of course, Fr. Augustine is still ROCOR, though retired. He has contact with people from various jurisdictions and non-Orthodox but he remains ROCOR (as he insists.) He has no antimins from Milan Synod, and does not consider himself so: he should remain in the paragraph describing ROCOR Sarum. Please pray, as he has suffered some from Tropical Storm Fay. His contribution to the Sarum use in ROCOR is important, as he and his monks produced a translation of the Sarum use into English a few decades ago. At one of the ROCOR hermitages a few years ago, we used this Mount Royal Old English (Sarum) for Holy Week services. So, his contribution is still active (and even provides the basis for the Saint Colman Prayer Book - which built upon Fr. Augustine's work within a Sarum framework.) A ROCOR hieromonk has prepared the Mount Royal Old English rite as a .doc file if you are interested. --[[User:Aristibule|Ari]] 23:03, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
Aristibule attempted to argue with me over the phone that "Father Augustine has a ROCOR antimens and he commemorate Metr Hilarion in services"; he seemed unaware that Fr Augustine doesn't CELEBRATE services, and goes to services with Fr Cuthbert (Pierce), a hieromonk of the Milan Synod. Fr Augustine left ROCOR (we have his letter to that effect), he went to L'ECOF after ROCOR banned Western Rites in 1975, and other places before finally retiring in Florida, where he began to communicate at Holyrood House in Florida. (Father Michael falsely claims that this is a ROCOR dependency of St Petroc's.) Aristibule is making up a story, and it's time for the stories to stop. They are taking advantage of a venerable hieromonk's age to manipulate the truth. --[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 00:39, August 27, 2008 (UTC)
I have never heard from anyone in the Church of France (ECOF) that Dom Augustine was ever connected with it. I would be quite surprised to find out if this were in fact true. Joseph, can you tell me what years you believe Dom Augustine was part of the French Church? I would be happy to check with Bishop Germain. When I corresponded with Dom Augustine while working on my dissertation, he didn't mention the French Church. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 01:39, August 27, 2008 (UTC)
As I understand he was loosely affiliated with them in the late 70's. I am not sure of the dates. What I *am* sure of, however, is that he was not considered a priest of ROCOR, and was not included in any ROCOR directories after 1975 (I am not sure he was in any beforehand either). Apparently after the Western rite prohibition in ROCOR, Bishop Gregory, who was secretary at Synod until the 80's, officially denied Fr Augustine's existence, let alone membership or priesthood.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 01:48, August 27, 2008 (UTC)
==Removing "Old Sarum Rite Missal" again==
