Talk:Liturgy of St. Gregory

From OrthodoxWiki
Revision as of 23:52, August 24, 2008 by Willibrord (talk | contribs) (SASB - moderation needed)
Jump to: navigation, search

Uh, I'm rather new to Wiki editing, but this article needs a little help! I'm unsure why, for instance, "The Preparation" links to the article for the Byzantine "proskomede" and "Offertory" links to the "Anaphora" article. In fact, the only rough equivalent to the Byzantine prothesis in the Roman Rite is the Offertory (the elements are prepared and offered in the middle of the Mass, not the beginning). Likewise, the Roman Mass's "Canon" is the equivalent of the "Anaphora" of the Eastern Liturgies.

Well, it sounds like you're the person to help! This article is rather new and has barely been touched at all. Plus, I'd guess that most people here aren't familiar at all with Western liturgics. Please feel free to change the links. And to add a cleanup tag, just put in {{cleanup}} at the beginning. Oh, and signing your comments with 4 ~s makes the discussion pages so much clearer. Thanks. Gabriela 20:27, January 3, 2007 (PST)

I think that the internal links in the two instances mentioned should simply be removed unless a small section is added to the Byzantine article noting differences in the Western practices. Or one could simply removed the links and add content to the outline in the Western article. It isn't uniformly the case, however, that the preparation in the Western rites is done at the time of the offertory. Some Roman religious usages did the preparation before the mass began, and the ROCOR version of the Roman liturgy prepared by Dom Augustine Whitfield and others provides for either practice. Fr Lev 05:22, January 4, 2007 (PST)

Making up history

We need to be clear about this. The Liturgy of St Gregory was based on the Tridentine -- it is full of materials that were not present in the "ancient" Roman Mass. Nor is it identical to the liturgy approved by Moscow for Overbeck, nor with what the Polish Church used, etc. --Fr Lev 17:38, February 13, 2008 (PST)

Difference between the Orthodox Missal and the St Andrew's Service Book

Since a point has been made on a couple of different pages now that most parishes of the AWRV use the Orthodox Missal rather than the St Andrew's Service Book, perhaps the person making the point could elaborate on the differences. What significant differences are there? --Fr Lev 17:52, February 13, 2008 (PST)

The Provenance of the Liturgy of St Gregory

It is false to claim that the basis of the Liturgy of St Gregory is the ancient liturgy of Rome, as the Orthodox editors began with the Tridentine rite. This is true of both Jospeh Overbeck's work in the 19th century and that of the Basilians in the 20th, the latter being the direct source for the Antiochian version of the liturgy. The details of the many features of the Liturgy of St Gregory that were not a part of the Roman rite before the Schism are detailed in the review essay on the SASB published in St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly referenced in the article. --Fr Lev 02:30, August 3, 2008 (UTC)

Title Change in Order

I can't find any official source that refers to this AWRV Mass as "The Liturgy of St. Gregory the Great." The liturgy is referred to in the Orthodox Missal as "The Mass according to the Rite of St. Gregory," although the term "The Divine Liturgy of St. Gregory, commonly called the Mass" is found in another publication. "Mass of St. Gregory" and/or "Liturgy of St. Gregory" are commonly accepted shorthand. Although the saint in question is Pope St. Gregory the first/the Great/the Dialogist, I have not found any Mass text add any of these titles to its name. I'm not certain how to change the title of this entry to reflect the accurate name, though.--Willibrord 15:58, August 22, 2008 (UTC)

To change the name of an article, use the "Move" tab at the top of the page. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 19:45, August 22, 2008 (UTC)

SASB - moderation needed

The SASB, published a year after the Orthodox Missal, was published by the Antiochian Archdiocese with a letter from Metropolitan PHILIP referring to it as "authorized" liturgies. The SASB is used by at least some AWRV parishes. To claim that the OM is the "only" authorized text betrays an interest in promoting something other than the facts. This matter is not settled. Neither Pistevo nor a subdeacon's thesis trumps the Metropolitan of the Antiochian Archdiocese. IS Willibrod claiming that the SASB was not published by the Antiochian Archdioces? Is he claiming that the letter from Metropolitan PHILIP is a forgery, or that the Metropolitan doesn't have the authority to make such an authorization? Is he claiming that the AWRV parishes that use the SASB are using "unauthorized" liturgies in defiance of the Metropolitan? These are not matters of opinion; these are simple, straightforward, matters of fact. --Fr Lev 16:12, August 24, 2008 (UTC)--Fr Lev 16:12, August 24, 2008 (UTC)

As noted on the Admins' page, Pistevo settled the question of OM vs. SASB authorization on the Liturgy of St. Tikhon Talk page. This is a straightforward matter of fact. --Willibrord 21:07, August 24, 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe Pistevo said that the SASB was not an authorized text of the AWRV. I missed that one, and if you could clearly cite that and show Fr Lev where this was resolved.--JosephSuaiden 21:50, August 24, 2008 (UTC)

Yes, he did. Feel free to read them for yourself. --Willibrord 23:52, August 24, 2008 (UTC)