Are perspectives on Latinization very EO driven? Could there be a positive form?

I'll start with an anecdote from an old Professor of mine. His words follow:

"When I was in university many moons ago, i'd have occasion to watch members of the student body argue about any topic under the Sun. Naturally, with a religious inclination, i was bound to encounter the Polemics surrounding the Catholic/Eastern Orthodox Split. This is old ground for many of us: Aquinas vs. Palamas, NeoScholasticism vs. NeoPalamism, Essence-Energies, Hesychasm, Filioque, etc. While the Debates themselves were a poor way to understand just what was going on, they did express at least the.....unmitigated Fervor/Zeal that people had for such topics.

Never really paid much attention to the debating group until one day i stumbled upon something that was *very* novel to me: an EO debating an Ethiopian Orthodox exchange student. On one side, our Ethiopian guest cut a dashing figure: tall, muscular, and the ladies found him quite handsome, with a broad smile that would put you at ease. Meanwhile our EO fellow was an expert debater and possessed a wealth of knowledge, though perhaps he was a bit lacking in terms of Optics being an average Greek fellow.

To my surprise though, the debate occuring was not focused on fundamental theology or metaphysics.

Nope - rather it was on Pork, or rather Pork Consumption.

Our resident debater, so used to arguing with the Catholics about those topics i mentioned earlier, seemed a bit out of sorts with this topic. He knew which passage of Acts of the Apostles to cite, but he was wholely unprepared for our guests Jovial retort and his command of Jewish dietary practices and how they linked to his faith.

Naturally at some point the man went with the "Judaizing Christian" lever, while our guest calmly fired back at his "Nestorianism".

I bring up this funny anecdote as a means of pointing out that the Preoccupations of one group of churches may mean very little to another set of churches. Different circumstances, different concerns.

I don't deny for one instance, that the Byzantine Rite churches, inheriting much from their Eastern Orthodox brethren, have credibly claims about Latinization occurring in their churches and the efforts to roll back those alterations. Much of this probably has to also do with the "Great Debate" between East and West, on conflicting views and expressions of theology which adds kindling to the fire.

My current sojourn amongst the Oriental Orthodox derived Churches though presents a variety of different perspectives that don't always fit into the "Latinization bad" category.

They ultimately seem less Preoccupied with it, in the way that the Byzantine Churches are perhaps because they don't share the same History nor does the weight of Post-Chalcedonian theological debate affect them.

Of all the OOs, it seems the Syro-Malabars may have a similar outlook to the Byzantine Churches on the topic, although the alteration of their Rites has much to do with Catholicism coming hand in hand with Colonization efforts.

The Maronites seem to be in the process of reconstructing their ancient Liturgy, but i've been cautioned by several members of that Church not to see all things coming from the West as "signs of Latinization." They related an anecdote to me about how, lacking Vestments for their priests, Rome provided for them. Although they were not the traditional clothing, they were treasured nonetheless.

"You have to make a distinction with the term Latinization. If its something Enforced from the Outside, of course anyone would bristle. But if its something, that -we- adopted of our own accord, why would it be seen as a negative?"

I've seen similar sentiments among the Armenian Apostolics and some of the EC Armenians i'm starting to get to know. The Apostolic OOs tell me that there's this kind of sentiment to be had by some of the EOs (Athonites i suppose) that their Rite is somehow "debased" because of contact with Rome. Meanwhile, they'd flip that idea on its head saying "But the Rite Draws from many different Rites, East and West. What they call a "Flaw" we think of as a Feature."

I'll pass over the commentary i've seen from the Ethiopians for now.... suffice to say, though "Why should i listen to the Nestorians? That's their issue to choke on." is a cheeky response i've heard on occasion.

Any thoughts you may have i'd like to hear - as i'm still in the "fact finding" mode of all this.. (haven't visited the Chaldeans yet for instance).