Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The Liturgy of St Peter the Apostle


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 J. A. McIntyre

J. A. McIntyre

    Retired member, no longer active on forum

  • Guests
  • PipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 03 November 2006 - 05:50 PM

"...also called the Liturgy of St. Gregory the Great, as Preserved in Old England, i.e., the Sarum Mass"
http://www.odox.net/Liturgy1-Sarum.htm

Any thoughts?

#2 Kosta

Kosta

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 06:33 AM

This is one of those "western rite" liturgies with roots in the pre-schism church.
With that said, i may offend some, but regardless if its a western rite under Antioch or one of the old calendarist groups , i dont think highly of them.

The "so called" Liturgy of St. Tikhon actually has nothing to do with St Tikhon; who never sanctioned it. Its simply a protestant rite liturgy with corrections made by the MP.

The other so called liturgies of St. Gregory are not in their original forms and have gone under many revisions in the west after the schism.

The only true western rite service of our Church is the Liturgy of the Pre-Sanctified Gifts by St Gregory the great.

#3 Rostislav M-P

Rostislav M-P

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 7 posts

Posted 19 February 2008 - 09:17 PM

This Liturgy of St. Peter was supposedly uncovered by a ROCOR Priest who had obtained an Old Believer Liturgikon from an Old Rite community in turkey. It specifically is the Aachen mass attributed to St. Gregory the Great, Pope of Rome, but its earliest forms follow him by 200 years, ie the Gelasian Sacramentary. As a frankish rite, it is as suspect as most of the work which came out of their schools, qv these theological schools introduced azymes, deleted large tracts of existing liturgies, destroyed some, and created hybrids which were theretofore nonexistent, stood for iconoclasm and filioque, and went so far as to call the Orthodox "heretics" for not using azymes, their rites, for not reciting filioque and for venerating icons. These rites were used pre-schism but not with Orthodox oversight or input. As such, they should be reviewed and edited by Orthodox liturgists.

Rome, during the lifetime of St. Gregory, was a predominantly Greek speaking city due to large influxes of Hellenic refugees fleeing upheavals in the East. During his period, it is believed the Liturgy was even celebrated in Greek. Rome and N Africa shared a common bond in theology and liturgics. Their rites reflected this and were principally part of the Alexandrian school of liturgy. Hence to look at a variant of the Old Roman mass in toto, one could get a good idea of its true form by reviewing the Liturgy of St. Mark. The Roman Canon defaced by the franks even alludes to it.

Mind you, the rite of Rome WAS NOT the main rite or even a MAJOR rite of the West: it was shared by Rome and her satellite cities which one could count on ones hands. By far the most common liturgical expressions in the West were Antiochian in origin, Milanese, Gallican, Mozarabic. These rites were similar to the Liturgy of the Apostles/Liturgy of St. James (non-Coptic). At the Western imperial capitol of Ravenna, the Liturgy of Milan (Ambrosian) was used.

After the founding of the frankish empire, their reforms stamped Europe with an iron fist. Thus, this liturgical form. There was a Slavonic school of this Western liturgy centered in Dubrovnik. It was descended from the missionary work of SS Cyril & Methodius whose missions were driven by the germans to use a Western rite. Dubrovnik is where this mass was preserved in Slavonic for centuries, but whose range had once reached as far as NE Poland.

Since there were interchanges between Muscovy and the Western Slavs, qv Jerome of Prague, it is possible that this mass may have been presented to the pre-Nikonian Russian church. More likely is the circumstance that Old Rite refugees fleeing to turkey had obtained a copy of the Dubrovnik missal old enough to satisfy their standards of "authenticity."

During the Kievan period, the prevalent liturgy in use in Rus' was that of St. Basil, as it was amongst all Orthodox Slavs, Balts, Finns, and Romanians. The western form, frankish mass, was identified with the germans, hungarians, and the crusaders. It was not viewed as Orthodox. One must remember that to the Slav, Romanian, etc. the title "Pravoslavnyi" was chiefly driven by the notion of "lex orendi, lex credendi." Thus, the heretical latins and their rites were rejected.

Later the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom gained more frequency, driven by Athonite enthusiasm and authentication of liturgical books (late XIII - XIV centuries). This liturgical emphasis indeed spread to Russia at first under the auspices of St. Maxim the Greek et al and the Stoglav Council and later in an almost authoritarian way under nikon in the North (and by Greek prelates and missionaries in Litovskaja Rus' before and after florence).

Therefore, this "Mass of St. Peter" was most probably not part of the Russian church's observance.

As an aside, up until the time of pius ix, there was a "Liturgy of St. Peter" celebrated in Rome once a year. It essentially was the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom with a latin ordo, probably a survival from the era of St. Gregory the Great, ironically. pius ix served it, termed it "barbaric," and forbad its further use.

Malleev-Pokrovsky

Edited by Rostislav M-P, 19 February 2008 - 09:55 PM.


#4 Fr Stephen Maxfield

Fr Stephen Maxfield

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 24 October 2009 - 08:54 AM

This is one of those "western rite" liturgies with roots in the pre-schism church.
With that said, i may offend some, but regardless if its a western rite under Antioch or one of the old calendarist groups , i dont think highly of them.

The "so called" Liturgy of St. Tikhon actually has nothing to do with St Tikhon; who never sanctioned it. Its simply a protestant rite liturgy with corrections made by the MP.

The other so called liturgies of St. Gregory are not in their original forms and have gone under many revisions in the west after the schism.

The only true western rite service of our Church is the Liturgy of the Pre-Sanctified Gifts by St Gregory the great.


The only true western rite service of our Church is the Liturgy of the Pre-Sanctified Gifts by St Gregory the great.[/ This is nonsense! The Liturgy of the Pre-sanctified Gifts may wll bear the name of a Western saint - St Gregory (who had been posted to Constantinople for some years) but the rite itself is not "western" in the slightest. It is Byzantine vespers with a brief communion rite attached plus some extra, very Byzantine priest's prayers. If we were true to the Canons of the Quinisext Council it would be served on every weekday in Lent, which is an intersting indication that in Constantinople at least the laity were encouraged to receive communion every day in Lent in the 7th century.

#5 M.C. Steenberg

M.C. Steenberg

    Former Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,843 posts

Posted 25 October 2009 - 07:55 AM

Dear Father Stephen,

I'm grateful for your comments, with which (for what this is worth) I quite agree. Whatever one may or may not think of the question of 'Western Rites' in Orthodoxy, I can think of no Orthodox liturgist who would consider the Divine Liturgy of St Gregory (i.e. the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts) to be 'Western'. It is a thoroughly Byzantine Liturgical rite, which is itself a mingling together of various other 'Byzantine' divine services: Vespers, the Hours, and the Divine Liturgy already known in the form we attribute to St John.

This is an important qualification since, as your post rightly implies, the inclusion of St Gregory's name in its title leads many people to characterise it - quite wrongly - as a kind of 'western' rite.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

#6 Bryan J. Maloney

Bryan J. Maloney

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 30 March 2011 - 12:14 AM

The only true western rite service of our Church is the Liturgy of the Pre-Sanctified Gifts by St Gregory the great.


Forgive me, since I am not a holy hermit, nor any sort of spiritual elder, nor a Bishop, nor Priest, nor Deacon, nor Reader, nor even a member of a choir. I am merely an Orthodox sinner. If Orthodox hierarchs deem a liturgy to be acceptable, I would not overrule them. How do you come by your authority?

#7 Enoch325

Enoch325

    Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 17 August 2013 - 10:57 PM

The Liturgy of St. Peter is found in Slavonic, Greek, and even Georgian manuscripts from the 11th century. St. Euthymios ithe Athonite from the 11th century is quoted as stating that many were still celebrate, though St. James is the original Liturgy of Greece, etc.  It seems, however, the Liturgy of St. Peter fits into the same mold as many other Eastern formats.  You will have a generally similar 'ordinary' (forgive for the use of the word), but, things like the Anaphora, and a few other matters (in this case, the including of the Great Doxology, or Gloria, into the Liturgy after the Antiphons, as opposed to being sung at the end of Orthros).  This is undoubtedly the view of many of the old fathers in taking certain 'distinct' features, and fitting them into an existing structure. The Liturgy of St. Basil is, to an outward appearance, similar to the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, unless you are a priest, in which case you notice a great deal more than the Narration Words sung out loud, or the change in Hymn to Theotokos (but, the current majority Orthodox practice is for the priest to say these things while Litanies, the Tersanctus, etc, are being done).

 

In Christ,

 

Fr. Enoch






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users