Posted on

The Concept of Merit in the Western Rite

By Fr. David McCready

Today, by the mercy of God, as we celebrate the feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos, she who merited to bear Our Saviour,[1] I begin this study, asking that, through her prayers, what I write may be true and in accordance with the Orthodox Faith, the Faith revealed to us by her Divine Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom be all glory for ever. Amen.

+

Introduction

In the sacristy of one of the churches of the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate, there exists an altar missal from which a careful hand has excised every mention of the word ‘merit.’  Such an assault on the venerable liturgical heritage of the Elder Rome appears contrary to the Orthodox phronema, which is ever respectful of what has been handed down to us by tradition (1 Corinthians 11, 23). But merit language is not simply part of our liturgical patrimony: it is part of the theological and spiritual inheritance which we have received from the great Fathers of the Latin church, including St Cyprian, St Ambrose, St Leo, St Benedict, and St Gregory the Dialogist. Shall we also take a pen and strike through their writings? Continue reading “The Concept of Merit in the Western Rite”

Posted on

Western Rite Orthodoxy: An Apologia — Part 2

By Fr. David McCready

In the first part of this article we saw that the Fathers, who are the teachers of our holy Orthodox faith, not only recognized the variety of different rites which prevailed in the early church, but actively extolled this diversity. Our conclusion, therefore, was that of Fr Schmemann: ‘Orthodoxy has no objection to the Western Rite as such.’1

In this part, I want to look at the question as to whether or not the rites actually practiced today in the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate are Orthodox. Continue reading “Western Rite Orthodoxy: An Apologia — Part 2”

Posted on

Western Rite Orthodoxy: An Apologia — Part 1

By Fr. David McCready

Part 1: The Witness of Tradition

Cet animal est très méchant. Quand on l’attaque, il se défend. I was reminded of this old French saying the other day, when, in what was quite a stark critique of the western rite, a certain priest-blogger accused those who questioned his theses of being overly defensive! In his hostility to the western rite, this blogger represents, I believe, only a small minority of Orthodox; as a western-rite priest, and, before that, as a western-rite seminarian, I have in general encountered nothing but warmth and welcome from hierarchs, clergy, and lay-people alike, both in the Antiochian Archdiocese, and in other jurisdictions as well. This said, there are some folk who do have honest concerns and questions about the western rite, and it is them especially that I want to address. I shall begin by looking at how Tradition vindicates the principle of a western rite, looking at the witness of the Fathers, at the post-patristic period, and at the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Continue reading “Western Rite Orthodoxy: An Apologia — Part 1”

Posted on

Reclaiming All Paul’s Rs: Apostolic Atonement by Way of Some Eastern Fathers

In this essay, Edith M. Humphrey, seeking to recapture a holistic view of the atonement,  focuses on the way that key Pauline texts (especially Colossians 1, Galatians 3 and 2 Cor 5) were read by fourth- and fifth-century interpreters. She argues that a full picture of the atonement needs to emerge that incorporates redemption, reparation, representation, righteousness, rescue, recapitulation, reconciliation, and revolutionary recreation. This full picture is drawn from the entirety of what Christ was, is, and did pro nobis,  and with some surprises for those who draw too strict a line between “Western” and “Eastern” interpretations of Paul. Over against N. T. Wright’s insistence that atonement needs to be reimagined, Humphrey argues rather that it needs to be retrieved. In the patristic commentators, Humphrey demonstrates, we can find such a vision of the atonement.

Continue reading “Reclaiming All Paul’s Rs: Apostolic Atonement by Way of Some Eastern Fathers”
Posted on

Forming the Soul With Western Culture

This essay is an edited version of “Forming the Soul”, which appeared in The Orthodox Word Vol. 19 #1-2, 1983, St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, Platina, CA.

By the Sisters of St. Xenia Skete

To come to Orthodoxy from the world of today is to come from emptiness to riches, from shallowness to depth, from shams to a reality so all-encompassing that it can, at times, leave one quite uncertain as to the possibility of existing both in the Church and in the “real” world.

Continue reading “Forming the Soul With Western Culture”
Posted on

Original and Ancestral Sin: A Church Dividing Issue?

When asked about the topic of Original Sin, many Orthodox Christians will proudly claim the Orthodox Church does not believe in Original Sin. They explain they believe in “Ancestral Sin,” instead. Some even go so far as to call Original Sin, as understood by the Roman Catholic Church, “a heresy.” This, again, is a typical response from many Orthodox Christians, especially those who have a negative attitude towards anything “western.” But is this the official teaching of the Orthodox Church, and do all subscribe to that understanding? Has the Orthodox Church ever condemned or denied Original sin in favor of Ancestral Sin? 

Continue reading “Original and Ancestral Sin: A Church Dividing Issue?”

Posted on

Aquinas in the Orthodox Tradition

A talk given at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota on October 2, 2014. By Marcus Plested

I’m going to begin by taking you back in time to the 12th of December 1452, to Constantinople, and to the great Church of The Holy Wisdom, Hagia Sophia, in Constantinople. These were dark days for the Byzantine Empire.  Little remained of the Byzantine Empire apart from the city of Constantinople itself, held in a strangle-hold by the Turks. It seemed inevitable that the city would fall, sooner or later, despite its great wall. For one thing, the Byzantines were lacking the men to man the wall, and in desperation, the emperor, the last emperor of Rome  —  (the Byzantines never called themselves Byzantines, you know; they were always Romans living in “New Rome” which is Constantinople) — the Byzantines were desperate for help, desperate for help even from the wicked West with all its theological errors, and in a sort of last-ditch attempt, on the 12th of December 1452 they formally proclaimed the union that had been established, at least at a formal level, between the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches at the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438-39). There it was ratified officially. At the time it was only proclaimed in Constantinople until the end of 1452. 

Continue reading “Aquinas in the Orthodox Tradition”
Posted on

St. Gregory Palamas and Thomas Aquinas: Between East and West

A talk given at St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University Conference in Moscow on May 10, 2016. By Marcus Plested

My title is “St. Gregory Palamas and Thomas Aquinas between East and West.” The notion of East/West opposition, as you are doubtless aware, has been a prominent feature of Orthodox theology since at least the time of the Russian Slavophiles in the early-to-mid 19th century. With this overall paradigm of opposition, one of the distinctive feature of 20th century Orthodox theology in particular, especially in the Russian diaspora, has been the elevation of St. Gregory Palamas to the status of a kind of archetype of the Christian East to set against Thomas Aquinas understood as an archetype of the Christian West. In other words, Orthodox neo-Palamism has emerged as a conscious counterweight to Catholic neo-Thomism. So what I want to do in this paper, which is based on the research I did for my book on Orthodox Readings of Aquinas, is to not only trace the contours of this development but also to demonstrate its inadequacy and inaccuracy.

Continue reading “St. Gregory Palamas and Thomas Aquinas: Between East and West”
Posted on

Original Sin and Ephesus: Carthage’s Influence on the East

I have argued elsewhere that the doctrine of original sin as defined at the Council of Carthage in 418 is just as authoritative in the East as it is in the West because of the inclusion of the canons from Carthage in Canon 2 of the Council in Trullo (692, also known as the Quinisext or Penthekti Council). At first glance, this case may appear significantly overstated; yet another wooden canonical reading by an Internet pedagogue. After all, Trullo has long been understood in the East to be merely administrative in function: a standardization of various canonical norms. Surely, one might propose, Trullo did not intend to take on so weighty a theological matter as original sin!

Continue reading “Original Sin and Ephesus: Carthage’s Influence on the East”