OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 26, 2014, 11:25:25 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Changes in the Eastern Rite Catholic Liturgical Practices  (Read 20911 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Thomas
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,828



« on: February 21, 2007, 09:46:38 AM »

On a Byzantine Catholic website, I have read several times some concern that the Byzantine Catholic Liturgy has been changed by one of their bishops.  What were the changes and how significant are they?

Thomas
Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2007, 10:08:36 AM »

It seems to me they are fairly significant and a serious departure from the 64 Liturgikon (aka the Red Book)

My understanding is the changes are rougly as follows:

- A number of prayers formerly recited silently by the priest, must be recited aloud such as the first antiphon prayer.

- Some prayers are removed altogether such as the little litanies, and multiple verses are not aloud in other places.

- The revised liturgy includes the use of "inclusive" or "gender neutral" language in some places, and the creed is one of the things that has been altered to accomodate this form of language.

I'm sure there are some other changes as well.  I also believe they are severely curtailing the ability of parishes to use Slavonic if they so choose.

There are a number of reasons these changes came about.  My impression is the minority of "high church" i.e. Orthodox leaning Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics are absolutely horrified.  The majority of the church though I think will not really have an issue with the changes, and some of course laud them.

Hopefully !username will stop by and fill in the additional details.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2007, 10:09:51 AM by welkodox » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2007, 10:57:37 AM »

Unfortunately, the majority of the church had no idea this was happening until Metropolitan Basil sent out a letter letting every parish know that the new books will be delivered by the end of January and must be in place and in use by June (I think).  Most of the revision was done almost hush-hush.  The only people who really knew about it before the promulgation of Met. Basil's letter were the "high church" minded who strongly objected not only some of the revision, but also the process itself.

The good thing about it is that the music is printed in the new books, making it more accessible to visitors.  Some of the English translation is cleaned up to match the music more (part of the "good").  "Theotokos" is used now instead of "Mother of God".

The big problem for many is the translation of "anthropos" in the Creed.  The revised Creed now reads "for us and for our salvation", omitting "men".  Some people are in a huge uproar over this.  I can see their point about the faulty translation, but at the same time, they're bleating like donkeys, coming up with ridiculous reasons for opposing this translation, such as "it will confuse people who might think that "us" just refers to those present".  Anyone who can figure out that "us men" refers to all of humanity can also figure out that "us" refers to the same. 

That being said, I'm not a fan of the new translation of "anthropos".

The little litanies have, for the most part, been removed already, at least in the eparchy of Parma.

I haven't heard about curtailing Slavonic, which would be a shame.  It wouldn't surprise me, though.

Unfortunately for the Pittsburgh Metropolita, this revision will most likely cause a number of people to 'dox. 

BTW, you can see the new books in pdf form at the Metropolitan Cantor Institute's website.  The books themselves are put together quite nicely.  It's a shame that the commission had to muck around too much with the English translation Sad.  Otherwise, it would have been a welcome "revision".
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2007, 12:18:04 AM »

Anyone who is really interested can go to the Byzcath.org site to get much, much more information.  It's run by a layman in the Byzantine Catholic Church (i.e. the site is unofficial).  They have an entire subforum dedicated to the revised DL.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2007, 01:31:10 AM »

Well first of I would say none but a handful of parishes were following the 64 Liturgicon in the first place. 

In the new Liturgikon:

Prayers that must now be taken aloud:

Prayer of the First Antiphon

Prayer of Offering (Lord God Almighty who alone are holy...)

Anaphora (From It is proper and just...through Especially for our most holy...Theotokos)

Prayer of Intercession for the Living (Remeber O Lord this City...)

Prayer of the Litany of Supplication (To you O Master...)

Prayer of the Bowing of the Heads (We give thanks...)

Prayer of Thanksgiving (We thank you O Master...)

The Little Litanies are omitted, as they were before.
The Antiphons are one verse,  as most parishes only took one verse.
The Third Antiphon is mandated, it was not taken before.
The Beatitudes are included as an otion for the Third Antiphon.
The Litany of Catechumens is taken if there are Catechumens at the Liturgy, it was not taken before.
The Little Litanies for the Prayers of Faithful are omitted as they were before.
The Litany of Offering is omitted as it was before.
Teplota is mandated, it was omitted before.

They were minor translation changes here and there.
Theotokos is used rather than Mother of God.
The Filioque is omitted.
Minor horizontal inclusive languuage is used. The Creed reads "for us" rather than "for us men". "Brothers and Sisters" is used rather than "Brethren". "Lover of Mankind" is replaced with "Who loves us all".

The Music was reset to be truer to the Slavonic Prostopinje originals.

There has been no curtailing of Slavonic.

Surprisingly, or perhaps not so surprisingly, the majority of those most opposed and stating they are leaving (for other Greek Catholic or Orthodox Churches) are not cradles but transfers from the Latin Church.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Maksim
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2007, 03:20:36 AM »

Perhaps I shouldn't comment on the internal affairs of the Byzantine Catholics, but I am very surprised at the "inclusive language" aspect.

I wonder what the intended goal of this change is?  Most younger women I know consider "inclusive language" to be either simply outdated (a relic of 1970s feminism), or downright patronizing.  It seems odd that a traditionally-minded church would introduce it at this late date.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2007, 10:07:22 AM »

Thank you, Father Deacon, for the rundown.  I knew we could count on you.

I hadn't thought about it, but you're right.  Those bleating the most about leaving seem to be the canonical switches from the Latin church.

This is one convert that's sticking around, though!
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2007, 10:13:03 AM »

What I have sensed is people are most upset the use of inclusive language in the creed (a "minor" change of course is potentially major to somebody else) and that parishes that wish to take a fuller liturgy can no longer do that.  The revised liturgy AFAIK is the mandated standard which one cannot deviate from (even if only a minority were doing it before).  The prayers that must be read aloud would also bother me if it was my church.  The people who I have spoken with privately who are most disturbed and considering leaving are people who are born in to the church.  The number of those who will go though I surmise is fairly small.  Like I said, I don't think the majority will really mind for various reasons.

Maksim, the language aspect from what I have been told can at least in part be attributed to Fr. Taft in the Oriental Congregation.  He is a fairly influential figure.  There was a symposium in 1998 on the use of English in Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches which might give some background

Quote
The keynote address by the Reverend Professor Robert Taft, S.J., of the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome (himself an Eastern Catholic) dealt with translation problems with respect to liturgy, language, and ideology. He made known his dislike of “sacral,” “numinous,” or “archaic” liturgical English (as confusing obfuscation with mystery). He endorsed “horizontally” inclusive language, on the grounds that liturgical translations are for “people of today” and should be in an idiom and style most readily comprehensible to them.

He prescribed as axiomatic that the nature and style of liturgical translations should be determined by the nature of the recipient rather than the donor language, and that fidelity to the nature of the recipient language must take precedence over that to the donor. Whatever criticisms might be levied against the current International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) translation of the Latin Catholic liturgy into English, the members of the translation team had clearly set forth the principles on which they were to operate before embarking on their task—a thing unheard of among translators of Byzantine liturgical texts into English. He observed also that the very flexibility of the English language itself encouraged clumsy vocabulary and syntactical usage among people lacking a wide experience of reading and writing it.

As a problem of ideology he cited making shibboleths of mistranslations by reading into them matters of deep significance. Examples included “writing ikons” (instead of painting them), translating chram as “temple” rather than “church,” translating Theotokos as “Birthgiver” (an otherwise nonexistent English word; does one say “Good morning, Birthgiver” to one’s mother?), or basing a whole theology on the misunderstanding of “Orthodoxy” as derivative of orthos and doxa (i.e., right worship) rather than, as in truth, of orthos and dokeo (i.e., right teaching). On the issue of gender-inclusive language, he ended with the statement that it is because it gives power to the disenfranchised that it is feared and resisted by the clergy.

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-04-110-r

The last statement I bolded I think in particular shows what is at work here, and if you think it sounds like some of the stuff that's come out of the Roman Catholic Church, you're not alone.  I read comments from another priest in the BCC, known for his expertise on the liturgy, that essentially echoed Fr. Taft's statements.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2007, 10:14:31 AM by welkodox » Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2007, 03:10:55 PM »

The Music was reset to be truer to the Slavonic Prostopinje originals.

Well, some of the music has been changed outright.  For example, the "long Amens" after the words of institution that were found in all published variations of Subcarpathian Rusyn plainchant have been changed to "short Amens" because of a new overemphasis on the epiclesis. (There is also an unpublished innovation being implemented that the laity are to recite aloud the deacon's triple "Amen" after the epiclesis.)

Quote
There has been no curtailing of Slavonic.

Officially, no. But the new books, which have NO SLAVONIC in them at all, are replacing the old books which had all liturgical texts in both English and Slavonic in parallel. In other words, when the old books (which are now forbidden) are thrown out, Slavonic goes with them.
Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2007, 03:25:46 PM »

Anyone who is really interested can go to the Byzcath.org site to get much, much more information.  It's run by a layman in the Byzantine Catholic Church (i.e. the site is unofficial).  They have an entire subforum dedicated to the revised DL.

That particular subforum is run by an activist moderator who was placed there under the pretense of impartiality, as he is (evidently) a priest of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese. However, if you read his responses, he is hardly impartial towards the New Revised Liturgy; on the contrary, his posts consistently denounce it. That whole "Revised Divine Liturgy Forum" is woefully bereft of impartiality; its purpose is to slant lay opinion against the liturgical books (first, trying to stop the promulgation, now, to have it rescinded). The only thing that's worse than the blatant slant is the hysterical chicken-little postings of militantly-clueless Athanasios O'Donnelly-come-latelys who have been in the Byzantine Catholic "Metroplia" (sic, as one of the loudest and most obnoxious posters spells it) for all of about three months.

(See why I've been banned for life from the Byzantine Forum?  ha ha)

To be honest, I'd just as soon have the Byzantine American Catholic Church of Pittsburgh use the 1964 English translation (with a few necessary corrections of grammar and translation) and the rubrics of Ordo Celebrationis, but such is not our fate. I know, based on who prepared the Revised Liturgy, that it is a scholarly translation of not inconsiderable merit, and seems to be well within the authority of the hierarchs (whether ecumenically/inter-Byzantine Catholically ill-advised or not) to implement. But the heavy-handed way it's being accomplished makes me uncomfortable, and the lack of pastoral concern for those who are attached to traditional Rusyn Byzantine Christianity (in other words, doing it "our way" but in the best way, without trendy neoOrthodox innovations and without discarding our legitimate customs such as our entire body of paraliturgical hymnody), like me, only drives another wedge between hierarchy and the rank & file laity.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2007, 03:57:38 PM by Lemko Rusyn » Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2007, 04:01:17 PM »

Lemko Rusyn

Quote
That particular subforum is run by an activist moderator who was placed there under the pretense of impartiality, as he is (evidently) a priest of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese. However, if you read his responses, he is hardly impartial towards the New Revised Liturgy; on the contrary, his posts consistently denounce it.

“activist”???  I guess we have different views then.  I think the priest in question does a good job and doesn’t enter the fray in that subforum, and feelings there have been running hot.  That’s the business of a different board though, so I would suggest discussion of the particulars of another board should probably not happen here.  I mentioned it for informational purposes for anyone who might be seeking more information on the changes, so let’s just leave it at that.

Quote
To be honest, I'd just as soon have the Byzantine American Catholic Church of Pittsburgh use the 1964 English translation (with a few necessary corrections of grammar and translation) and the rubrics of Ordo Celebrationis, but such is not our fate.

I’ve talked to other people who hold the same view.  The hierarchs of that church seem to have a different view.

I also think you’re correct in your assessment of the fate of Slavonic.

Quote
I know, based on who prepared the Revised Liturgy, that it is a scholarly translation of not inconsiderable merit and seems to be well within the authority of the hierarchs (whether ecumenically/inter-Byzantine Catholically ill-advised or not) to implement. But the heavy-handed way it's being accomplished makes me uncomfortable, and the lack of pastoral concern for those who are attached to traditional Rusyn Byzantine Christianity (in other words, doing it "our way" but in the best way, without trendy neoOrthodox innovations and without discarding our legitimate customs such as our entire body of paraliturgical hymnody), like me, only pushes another wedge between hierarchy and the rank &

Speaking as an outsider, it seems to me the hierarchs of the BCC think the Rusyn identity of the church is a dead end, and they are taking the relevancy tack – i.e. a liturgy accessible to “modern” and presumably non Rusyn people.  I have my own feelings about what the results of this will be.

I have also heard from some people that what may play in to all of this is a desire of the hierarchs to

A.   Distance themselves from the Orthodox
B.   Do something different than the Ukrainians

Also, in my opinion you could put an army of liturgical scholars together and come up with the most accurate, scholarly translation imaginable and still have it be a flaming disaster.  Whenever I read some of the scholarly arguments, thoughts, etc. such as the ones I posted by Fr. Taft I have to admit I get the same feeling that I do when I interview someone at work who has spent their whole professional career in academia.
Logged
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,389


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2007, 04:10:21 PM »

Liturgical "experts" can be very destructive, just look at the modern Roman liturgy.
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #12 on: February 22, 2007, 05:23:10 PM »

I have also heard from some people that what may play in to all of this is a desire of the hierarchs to

A.   Distance themselves from the Orthodox
B.   Do something different than the Ukrainians

On point A., the claim is out there that Metropolitan Nicholas of ACROD has reacted favorably to the whole thing (which I find doubtful). Regardless, I suspect that point A. is of little consideration to the Pittsburgh Metropolia hierarchy one way or the other.

On point B., it's an interesting, perhaps ironic, coincidence, that just a few short months ago the Synod of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church decreed that the 1942 Roman editions of the "Ruthenian" books were normative for the entire UGCC and that the 1944 Ordo Celebrationis is the universally-applicable rubrics for Matins, Vespers, and the Divine Liturgy.

Quote
Also, in my opinion you could put an army of liturgical scholars together and come up with the most accurate, scholarly translation imaginable and still have it be a flaming disaster.

Certainly true. While I'm sure the New Revised Liturgy is a solid scholarly translation, that doesn't mean it's necessarily a solid pastoral translation. Just the number of changes to the text of prayers alone (nevermind the huge change in music being implemented at the same time) ensures that this may be quite traumatic to many people. The newbies & casual occasional visitors probably won't have a problem with it, but it's going to knock a lot of people for a loop. In the long run, most of them won't care, certainly not about the essential distinctions between "substance" and "essence", how to "welcome" vs. "receive" the King of All, or "may our lips be filled" vs. "may our mouth be filled". But the whole style, sound, and feel of this liturgy is very different, and that may alienate more than a handful of the cerkovny ljude ("church people"), the cornerstones of the parishes. I have yet to hear many people express a real enthusiasm for it, but then, it's not really been used anywhere yet except the cathedral in Munhall (Pittsburgh).

In short, from this skeptic they get a "Lotsa luck!" from me and that's it.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2007, 05:26:36 PM by Lemko Rusyn » Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #13 on: February 22, 2007, 05:53:03 PM »

Quote
On point A., the claim is out there that Metropolitan Nicholas of ACROD has reacted favorably to the whole thing (which I find doubtful).

I haven’t heard anything one way or the other.  I certainly don’t think any such thing will ever be tried in the ACROD.

Quote
Regardless, I suspect that point A. is of little consideration to the Pittsburgh Metropolia hierarchy one way or the other.

Yes, I doubt they care one way or the other.  I do think all of this will contribute to the further separation of the BCC and the ACROD.

Quote
On point B., it's an interesting, perhaps ironic, coincidence, that just a few short months ago the Synod of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church decreed that the 1942 Roman editions of the "Ruthenian" books were normative for the entire UGCC and that the 1944 Ordo Celebrationis

Yes, I saw that and I have seen the UGCC mentioned as a possible refuge.  In my limited experience with them they seemed to place a lot of emphasis on the religion of Ukrainianism which I suppose may or not be an issue for people.

One other comment made a few times is that the people considering leaving are not the natives but the transplants.  In the end, I think it probably doesn’t matter who is discouraged by this or who is leaving.  Losing people is bad, no matter who it is.  It’s people out of the pews and money out of the plate.
Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 22, 2007, 06:06:59 PM »

One other comment made a few times is that the people considering leaving are not the natives but the transplants.

It's really hard to say. There are so few Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic "natives" who participate online in any Byzantine/Catholic/Orthodox forum/listserv, that those voices are rarely, if ever, heard. So of course, the "transplants" who tend to participate are the voices we hear about leaving.

Outside the cyber-world, there are still plenty of people who don't know anything about any of this. In a local parish here (metro DC) it hasn't been mentioned yet -- nothing in the bulletin, nothing from the pulpit!  Most of the online Metropolia parish bulletins seem to have nothing about it, either, which makes me think that it's going to be pushed off until the last moment in these parishes, or the priest has no intention of going through with it.

Quote
In the end, I think it probably doesn’t matter who is discouraged by this or who is leaving.  Losing people is bad, no matter who it is.  It’s people out of the pews and money out of the plate.

Agreed!  And more importantly, as a stodgy old Greek Catholic monsignor growled at me once, "these are souls that are at stake."
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2007, 07:43:11 PM »

Minor horizontal inclusive languuage is used. The Creed reads "for us" rather than "for us men". "Brothers and Sisters" is used rather than "Brethren". "Lover of Mankind" is replaced with "Who loves us all".

I have a question about that, if I may.  First, as you point out, it is *horizontal* language, that is, it is referring to human beings, not to any Member of the Trinity.  I know that in both Anglo-Saxon and Latin there are different words that mean "Human Being" "female person" and "male person"  In Old English it's "mann", "wif" and "wer"; "homo" "femina" and "vir" in Latin (iirc, I know little Latin and less Greek).  In Greek does "anthropos" mean "male people" or "human being"?  Are there different words in Greek for "male" and "female" persons?

Thank you in advance.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2007, 09:08:22 PM »

Ebor,

Anthropos can mean human generically or man specifically.  Gender specific words are aner for male and gyne for female.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
stosh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 66


« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2007, 02:32:47 AM »

This whole issue of the revised Divine Liturgy in the BCC just makes me feel better about being an Orthodox Christian. I've been Orthodox for four months now, and it seems much, much longer.

I've never felt better spiritually, and have absolutely no regrets about converting from the BCC, to the Orthodox church, and would never consider leaving Orthodoxy.

I have family and friends in the BCC, and pray that they can find peace in the church with the new liturgy.
Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2007, 10:20:11 AM »

It's really hard to say. There are so few Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic "natives" who participate online in any Byzantine/Catholic/Orthodox forum/listserv, that those voices are rarely, if ever, heard. So of course, the "transplants" who tend to participate are the voices we hear about leaving.

I do know one of your more recent additions is completely approving of the changes.

Quote
Outside the cyber-world, there are still plenty of people who don't know anything about any of this. In a local parish here (metro DC) it hasn't been mentioned yet -- nothing in the bulletin, nothing from the pulpit!  Most of the online Metropolia parish bulletins seem to have nothing about it, either, which makes me think that it's going to be pushed off until the last moment in these parishes, or the priest has no intention of going through with it.

That's not good, this is not the type of thing where I would think people would want surprises.  I thought they were mailing out information packs and videos?
« Last Edit: February 23, 2007, 10:20:49 AM by welkodox » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2007, 11:19:12 AM »

I do know one of your more recent additions is completely approving of the changes.

That's not good, this is not the type of thing where I would think people would want surprises.  I thought they were mailing out information packs and videos?

I believe the Metropolita mailed everything out, but it's up to the various bishops, and then do the various parish priests, to let their people know what's what.

For what it's worth, my parish in Baltimore was told about it as soon as the letter was promulgated.  From what I've heard, we're starting with the revised liturgy at the last minute, so to speak, for the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul (June 29, 2007).
« Last Edit: February 23, 2007, 12:45:21 PM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 752



« Reply #20 on: February 23, 2007, 01:57:33 PM »

Liturgical "experts" can be very destructive, just look at the modern Roman liturgy.
As the old joke goes:

Q.  What's the difference between a liturgical reformer and a terrorist?

A.  You can negotiate with a terrorist.
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #21 on: February 24, 2007, 12:13:07 AM »

Ebor,

Anthropos can mean human generically or man specifically.  Gender specific words are aner for male and gyne for female.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Thank you very much for the information.  That being the case, it would seem to me that the word "men" is not crucial to the translation.  Is it possible that people don't like having the word taken out because that is what they know and are used to? 

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #22 on: February 24, 2007, 01:44:57 AM »

I would agree with you somewhat but I think it is a valid point to say anthropos should be translated not omitted. So say "for us humans" if you don't like "for us men" but don't just edit out anthropos.  It is bad form.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #23 on: February 26, 2007, 08:15:15 PM »

Well first of I would say none but a handful of parishes were following the 64 Liturgicon in the first place. 


Why didn't you mention that parishes weren't allowed for many years even up until now to use the 64 Liturgicon?  Your statement is a specious one in that it misleads people here to think that not using the 64 Liturgicon was organic.  The Byzantine Catholic Church of America was in direct disobendience to Rome from the day the 64 Liturgicon was promulgated.  Now the powers that be want to once and for all finalize their chopped up and watered down version of the 64 liturgicon replete with feminized inclusive language.


Quote
There has been no curtailing of Slavonic.

The texts that I have seen don't have any Slavonic and the Archbishop Basil's letter of promulgation says that the new text is the only text allowed.  Why do you think that Slavonic is allowed?  I hope that you are right but what are you basing this on?

Quote
Surprisingly, or perhaps not so surprisingly, the majority of those most opposed and stating they are leaving (for other Greek Catholic or Orthodox Churches) are not cradles but transfers from the Latin Church.

Absolutely not true.  First of all, the Byzantine Church of America has done an abysmal job of evangelizing, so to try and make it like there are a plethora of converts is misleading.  There are some and some of those are disgruntled Latins.  Secondly, Stosh on this board is a cradle Byzantine who left, I am a cradle Byzantine who is considering at least leaving and going to another Eastern Rite or Orthodoxy.  I can find many many more examples of cradles who are upset that they have been deprived of Orthodox practices our whole lives and in spite of the Pope's calls to return to our Orthodox roots, our leadership is taking us farther and farther away from what Rome has told us.

If you want to believe that cradles are not upset about this, go to an OCA church and meet your fellow Byzantines who are either going to leave or already have had enough of the modernization and feminization of our leadership.

Monomakh
« Last Edit: February 26, 2007, 08:20:33 PM by Monomakh » Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #24 on: February 26, 2007, 09:00:33 PM »

Quote
the Byzantine Church of America has done an abysmal job of evangelizing, so to try and make it like there are a plethora of converts is misleading.  There are some and some of those are disgruntled Latins.

Thanks for chiming in Monomakh. On the point I quoted, I would say I don't quite agree with one part.  I personally would not consider Latins who change to the Ruthenian church converts, nor would I consider receiving such people evangelization (far from it actually).  To me it is akin to somebody changing jurisdictions in Orthodoxy, as you are already in communion with those people.

It has actually always surprised me that both sides (Latin and Byzantine) encourage the movement to one side or the other.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2007, 09:02:12 PM by welkodox » Logged
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #25 on: February 26, 2007, 09:19:07 PM »

Thanks for chiming in Monomakh. On the point I quoted, I would say I don't quite agree with one part.  I personally would not consider Latins who change to the Ruthenian church converts, nor would I consider receiving such people evangelization (far from it actually).  To me it is akin to somebody changing jurisdictions in Orthodoxy, as you are already in communion with those people.

It has actually always surprised me that both sides (Latin and Byzantine) encourage the movement to one side or the other.

Welkodox,

yeah, convert is the wrong term.  I meant to say a person who goes from East to West (whatever that is).  But you'll appreciate this.  I know a Byzantine priest who makes Roman Catholics who join the church he is at go through the same education as Protestants and other Christian converts.  But if say an Orthodox marries a Byzantine and wants to become Byzantine he doesn't require them to do the same.  Needless to say the church he serves is actually orthodox in union with Rome rather than a quasi-orthodox church like most Byzantine churches.  Unfortunately he is one of the few traditional priests that we have.

Monomakh
Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #26 on: February 26, 2007, 09:41:18 PM »

I know a Byzantine priest who makes Roman Catholics who join the church he is at go through the same education as Protestants and other Christian converts.  But if say an Orthodox marries a Byzantine and wants to become Byzantine he doesn't require them to do the same.  Needless to say the church he serves is actually orthodox in union with Rome rather than a quasi-orthodox church like most Byzantine churches.  Unfortunately he is one of the few traditional priests that we have.

 Cheesy
Hmmmm.  I wonder what the bishop would say if he caught of wind of that.

What has this priest said about the changes?
Logged
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #27 on: February 26, 2007, 09:58:17 PM »

Cheesy
Hmmmm.  I wonder what the bishop would say if he caught of wind of that.

What has this priest said about the changes?


This priest obviously deplores the changes and is doing all that he can to not only preclude the changes, but to continue the Byzantine rite as a whole back to it's authentic self.  His goal is a church that is truly orthodox and in union with Rome.  Archbishop Basil has given talks where he says that the Byzantine Catholic Church should be an authentic place of worship, yet he promulgated something that is anything but authentic and caters to the whims of modern society.  I've seen some of this in Orthodoxy , but at least with the Orthodox it is the exception rather than the norm.  In the Byzantine Church currently and unfortunately it is the exception to be orthodox and the norm to appeal to secularism.  Too bad.

Monomakh
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2007, 02:02:12 AM »

Monomahk,

"Why didn't you mention that parishes weren't allowed for many years even up until now to use the 64 Liturgicon?  Your statement is a specious one in that it misleads people here to think that not using the 64 Liturgicon was organic.  The Byzantine Catholic Church of America was in direct disobendience to Rome from the day the 64 Liturgicon was promulgated.  Now the powers that be want to once and for all finalize their chopped up and watered down version of the 64 liturgicon replete with feminized inclusive language."

Until 64, the 1905 Lviv Liturgicon was the norm.  How is dropping what had been the norm for 60 years organic?  I'm not saying the 64 isn't better but all this talk of organic is ridiculous.  Hierarchs decide to make a change and they do it.  That is how liturgical change happens.  You may like or dislike the change but it is hardly ever organic, despite the musings of todays liturgical scholars.

You also consistently ignore the fact that some people would be just as upset if the 64 Liturgicon were mandated without any abbreviation.  Are you concerned if they leave?

In either case, I believe both sides represent about 10% of an average parish.  The average parishioner (and I mean regular Sunday attender) just doesn't care about this.  The music is more likley to upset than the rubrics or translation, and I don't now that that is going to upset all that many. I can sing the old stuff and I can sing the new stuff. If I can, anybody can.

"Why do you think that Slavonic is allowed?  I hope that you are right but what are you basing this on?"
Common sense

"Absolutely not true.  First of all, the Byzantine Church of America has done an abysmal job of evangelizing, so to try and make it like there are a plethora of converts is misleading.  There are some and some of those are disgruntled Latins."

I never said we have a plethora of converts.  We do have plenty of Latins.  But my comment were based on what I've seen stated at byzcath.  Most who have stated they left or leaving becasue of the promulgation are Latin or Latin transfers.  They say so in their posts usually going something like this: I left the Latin Church because of bad translations, inclusive language, etc. I never thought I would see it enter the Byzantine Church but now that it has I cannot in good conscience stay.  In my own parish not a single person has left or threatened to leave over the promulgation but at least two have told me they will leave if we try making them Orthodox. 

Fr. Deacon Lance

Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
stosh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 66


« Reply #29 on: February 27, 2007, 03:17:47 AM »

Deacon Lance, this whole thing is a crock!

I was a cradle Byzantine. I never had a 65 Liturgicon liturgy in my parish.  Yet, I visit a friends parish and lo and behold RED BOOK!!! My parish was a GREEN BOOK parish the whole time I was in it! 

Can you explain why one parish can be red book, and another be green book. Why should one cradle Byzantine in the same diocese be deprived of something another cradle Byzantine is getting in another parish?

I highly doubt ANYBODY would leave if the 65 Liturgy was promulgated. Most of the people 65 and older remember the Liturgy when it was red book, IN SLAVONIC!!

I MIGHT have stayed Greek Catholic, IF the red book was mandated, but my soul longed for the CORRECT expression of the Byzantine Rite. Thank God I found it in the Orthodox church.
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #30 on: February 27, 2007, 11:07:41 AM »

I would agree with you somewhat but I think it is a valid point to say anthropos should be translated not omitted. So say "for us humans" if you don't like "for us men" but don't just edit out anthropos.  It is bad form.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Well, that sounds entirely reasonable to me.  Smiley  Perhaps there needs to be more people trained in both translations and graceful writing in their own language.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 27, 2007, 11:35:30 AM »

Most of the people 65 and older remember the Liturgy when it was red book, IN SLAVONIC!!

Gosh, I don't think I've even HEARD of a Slavonic liturgy in the Pittsburgh Metropolia being celebrated with anything other than the 1905 L'viv Sluzhebnyk.

Except the last few years at the Uniontown otpust they've tried to conform it to the Pataki liturgikon, which is comical to watch.

(One of the co-authors of the Pataki liturgikon, God rest his soul, rewrote the Slavonic books in his own parish in New Jersey to fit what he saw as the future of our liturgy. Let's just say all those who are rending their garments now ought to give thanks that his liturgy never got any farther than what of it made it into the Pataki liturgikon.)
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,363


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #32 on: February 27, 2007, 06:24:55 PM »

Gosh, I don't think I've even HEARD of a Slavonic liturgy in the Pittsburgh Metropolia being celebrated with anything other than the 1905 L'viv Sluzhebnyk.

Except the last few years at the Uniontown otpust they've tried to conform it to the Pataki liturgikon, which is comical to watch.

(One of the co-authors of the Pataki liturgikon, God rest his soul, rewrote the Slavonic books in his own parish in New Jersey to fit what he saw as the future of our liturgy. Let's just say all those who are rending their garments now ought to give thanks that his liturgy never got any farther than what of it made it into the Pataki liturgikon.)
The liturgy at the Byzantine parish here in New Mexico is often a mixture of English, Spanish, and Old Slavonic.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #33 on: February 27, 2007, 07:11:56 PM »

"I was a cradle Byzantine. I never had a 65 Liturgicon liturgy in my parish.  Yet, I visit a friends parish and lo and behold RED BOOK!!! My parish was a GREEN BOOK parish the whole time I was in it!"

The Altar Litrugicon is not actually red but black and this the English Litrugicon everyone uses whether they are using 05 Lviv, Grey, Green, Blue or Red Book rubrics or any of the accepted abbreviations. 

"Can you explain why one parish can be red book, and another be green book. Why should one cradle Byzantine in the same diocese be deprived of something another cradle Byzantine is getting in another parish?"

There is an old Russian Orthodox proverb: "As the priest goes so the typicon goes."

"I highly doubt ANYBODY would leave if the 65 Liturgy was promulgated."

Then you don't understand many of the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia.
 
"Most of the people 65 and older remember the Liturgy when it was red book, IN SLAVONIC!!"

As Lemko relates if the Liturgy was in Salvonic it was likley from a 1905 Lviv Liturgicon.

"I MIGHT have stayed Greek Catholic, IF the red book was mandated, but my soul longed for the CORRECT expression of the Byzantine Rite. Thank God I found it in the Orthodox church."

There is only one correct expression?  The Russians, Old Rite Russsians, Greeks, and Ruthenians all have differing expressions.  I believe they are all correct and acceptable to God.


Fr. Deacon Lance

Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #34 on: February 28, 2007, 01:49:35 AM »


Until 64, the 1905 Lviv Liturgicon was the norm.  How is dropping what had been the norm for 60 years organic?  I'm not saying the 64 isn't better but all this talk of organic is ridiculous.  Hierarchs decide to make a change and they do it.  That is how liturgical change happens.  You may like or dislike the change but it is hardly ever organic, despite the musings of todays liturgical scholars.

Father Deacon, you need to reread my post regarding how I used organic because what I wrote was: 'Your statement is a specious one in that it misleads people here to think that not using the 64 Liturgicon was organic.' 
I agree that all the talk of organic is ridiculous.  By the way, the person using the phrase 'organic' the most on the byzcath board has been Fr. David Petras.  I hope that you pass your sentiments on to him instead of misdirecting them at me because I agree with you that this talk of 'organic' is incorrect.  I'd be more than happy to dig out his quotes where he goes on about defending the new liturgy because of organic developments.

Quote
You also consistently ignore the fact that some people would be just as upset if the 64 Liturgicon were mandated without any abbreviation.  Are you concerned if they leave?

The 64 Liturgicon is what Rome instructed our church to use and yet this instruction was blantantly disobeyed from the first day.

I do not ignore the fact that no matter what happens somebody somewhere will be upset.  That is yet another reason to follow what Rome told us to do and follow the 1964 Liturgicon.

Furthermore, you know as well as I do that the Liturgical Instruction clearly states the following:

"21. The ecumenical value of the common liturgical heritage
Among the important missions entrusted especially to the Eastern Catholic Churches, <Orientalium Ecclesiarum> (n. 24) and the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (can. 903), as well as the Ecumenical Directory (n. 39), underscore the need to promote union with the Eastern Churches that are not yet in full communion with the See of Peter, indicating the conditions: religious fidelity to the ancient traditions of the Eastern Churches, better knowledge of one another, and collaboration and fraternal respect of persons and things. These are important principles for the orientation of the ecclesiastical life of every single Eastern Catholic community and are of eminent value in the celebrations of divine worship, because it is precisely thus that the Eastern Catholic and the Orthodox Churches have more integrally maintained the same heritage.

In every effort of liturgical renewal, therefore, the practice of the Orthodox brethren should be taken into account, knowing it, respecting it and distancing from it as little as possible so as not to increase the existing separation, but rather intensifying efforts in view of eventual adaptations, maturing and working together. Thus will be manifested the unity that already subsists in daily receiving the same spiritual nourishment from practicing the same common heritage.[26]"

What part of the Liturgical Instruction do you disagree with and why?



Quote
"Why do you think that Slavonic is allowed?  I hope that you are right but what are you basing this on?"
Common sense

If common sense were prevalent we wouldn't even be discussing this debacle of a new liturgy.  The letter from Archbishop Basil says that only the new text can be used.  The new text does not contain Slavonic.  What are you basing your belief that Slavonic can still be used?  Believe me when I say that I hope that you are correct that Slavonic is still allowed.  You may be interested to know that I know of at least one priest in the greater Cleveland area who is not in favor of Slavonic at all and is using the new liturgy as an excuse to purge his parish of it for good.  He also plans on implementing the new liturgy starting in April.   Maybe he doesn't have any common sense?


Quote
  In my own parish not a single person has left or threatened to leave over the promulgation but at least two have told me they will leave if we try making them Orthodox. 

Trying to make them Orthodox, that's hilarious, they should be so lucky.


Monomakh
« Last Edit: February 28, 2007, 01:59:46 AM by Monomakh » Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 28, 2007, 02:54:15 AM »

You may be interested to know that I know of at least one priest in the greater Cleveland area who is not in favor of Slavonic at all and is using the new liturgy as an excuse to purge his parish of it for good.

I daresay Father Progressive is way behind the curve.  Haven't you heard, "there are no more Ruthenians" and "we've been in this country for over 100 years!"  I can't step into a Pittsburgh Metropolia church for more than two minutes until it becomes crystal clear that the former is absolutely correct (for the Pittsburgh Metropolia, anyhow), and the latter they are still trying to prove, as if they really don't believe that's we're American (enough) yet, as if nobody prayed in English before St. Judson Procyk descended from heaven to save us pagan Slavs from our spiritual, liturgical, and moral death.

Yeccchhhhhhh. The further away I stay from the clergy/hierarchy, the closer I feel to God.

Preterpivyj za nas strasti, Isuse Christe, Syne Božij, pomiluj nas...
« Last Edit: February 28, 2007, 02:55:41 AM by Lemko Rusyn » Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #36 on: February 28, 2007, 03:02:17 AM »

Trying to make them Orthodox, that's hilarious, they should be so lucky.

What I really wish for is to be able to continue to pray in a Pittsburgh Metropolia church the way the God-beloved people in Mahanoy City, in Saint Clair, in McKees Rocks, in Rus'ka Dolina, in south Philadelphia, in Hawk Run, in Clarence, in Sykesville, in Windber, in Brooklyn, taught me to pray by their quiet yet unwavering example.

Most of those dear people would probably cringe at the thought that they might be, or should be, Orthodox.

But you know what?

They already are.
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #37 on: February 28, 2007, 05:23:27 AM »

Unfortunately, the majority of the church had no idea this was happening until Metropolitan Basil sent out a letter letting every parish know that the new books will be delivered by the end of January and must be in place and in use by June (I think).  Most of the revision was done almost hush-hush.  The only people who really knew about it before the promulgation of Met. Basil's letter were the "high church" minded who strongly objected not only some of the revision, but also the process itself.

The good thing about it is that the music is printed in the new books, making it more accessible to visitors.  Some of the English translation is cleaned up to match the music more (part of the "good").  "Theotokos" is used now instead of "Mother of God".

The big problem for many is the translation of "anthropos" in the Creed.  The revised Creed now reads "for us and for our salvation", omitting "men".  Some people are in a huge uproar over this.  I can see their point about the faulty translation, but at the same time, they're bleating like donkeys, coming up with ridiculous reasons for opposing this translation, such as "it will confuse people who might think that "us" just refers to those present".  Anyone who can figure out that "us men" refers to all of humanity can also figure out that "us" refers to the same. 

That being said, I'm not a fan of the new translation of "anthropos".

The little litanies have, for the most part, been removed already, at least in the eparchy of Parma.

I haven't heard about curtailing Slavonic, which would be a shame.  It wouldn't surprise me, though.

Unfortunately for the Pittsburgh Metropolita, this revision will most likely cause a number of people to 'dox. 

BTW, you can see the new books in pdf form at the Metropolitan Cantor Institute's website.  The books themselves are put together quite nicely.  It's a shame that the commission had to muck around too much with the English translation Sad.  Otherwise, it would have been a welcome "revision".

While many people are vowing to leave for the Orthodox Churches I pray they do so for spiritual reasons.    While it is obvious taking the word men from the creed and changing "Lover of Mankind" to "God who loves us all" was a bow to the feminist-humanistic pressures, I would pray that if people do leave they do it because they accept Orthodox teachings and are following the will of God.
Logged

username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #38 on: February 28, 2007, 05:27:42 AM »

What I really wish for is to be able to continue to pray in a Pittsburgh Metropolia church the way the God-beloved people in Mahanoy City, in Saint Clair, in McKees Rocks, in Rus'ka Dolina, in south Philadelphia, in Hawk Run, in Clarence, in Sykesville, in Windber, in Brooklyn, taught me to pray by their quiet yet unwavering example.

Most of those dear people would probably cringe at the thought that they might be, or should be, Orthodox.

But you know what?

They already are.

How are they Orthodox?  They are Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic.  Mind you I am not showing disrespect, I was Greek Catholic so I have a fairly good understanding of both sides of the fence.  I still have many many many good friends that are Byzcath, one of them is my spiritual brother. 
Logged

Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #39 on: February 28, 2007, 09:20:20 AM »

"What part of the Liturgical Instruction do you disagree with and why?"

None.  But it depends on what Orthodox one wishes to mirror.  From my point of view ACROD is the only Orthodox we have to worry about and they utilize the same abbreviations we do.  The new music is seen by their hierarch as an improvement and Metropolitan Nicholas is sending his seminarians to Pittsburgh to learn it.   

However, many seem to want to imitate the OCA which follows the Russian Recension and where Prostopinje is all but forgotten in most of the parishes that were formerly or were splits from Greek Catholic parishes. 


"Maybe he doesn't have any common sense?"

Nor pastoral sense for that matter.

Fr. Deacon Lance


Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #40 on: February 28, 2007, 09:44:33 AM »

Quote
From my point of view ACROD is the only Orthodox we have to worry about and they utilize the same abbreviations we do.

I would have to go through the list, but we certainly are not making silent prayers be read aloud, using inclusive language or altering the creed.  Our pew books also give the options for doing additional things such as the reading of the beatitudes if the parish custom is to do so.  So people can have a fuller liturgy if they wish.

Here is the text for anyone that wants to compare. http://aggreen.net/liturgics/C-R_Div_Lit.html
« Last Edit: February 28, 2007, 09:49:12 AM by welkodox » Logged
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #41 on: February 28, 2007, 09:57:30 AM »

"What part of the Liturgical Instruction do you disagree with and why?"

None.  But it depends on what Orthodox one wishes to mirror.  From my point of view ACROD is the only Orthodox we have to worry about and they utilize the same abbreviations we do.  The new music is seen by their hierarch as an improvement and Metropolitan Nicholas is sending his seminarians to Pittsburgh to learn it.   

However, many seem to want to imitate the OCA which follows the Russian Recension and where Prostopinje is all but forgotten in most of the parishes that were formerly or were splits from Greek Catholic parishes. 


"Maybe he doesn't have any common sense?"

Nor pastoral sense for that matter.

Fr. Deacon Lance




First of all, ACROD is not going off on a path of feminized inclusive secular language and we are going off on our own tangent, this flies in the face of the Liturgical Instruction.  But I will say this, it is consistent with our churches history of being disobedient and isolationist.

Second of all, you are correct of how many OCA parishes exist in this country that were former Greek Catholic Churches.  I can personally e-mail to you many many photos I have seen of the cornerstones of OCA churches that say Greek Catholic on them.  But to dismiss them as irrelevant in this is strange.  Should we do the same with our Ukrainian Greek Catholic brethern because they have different chant than us?   Are you saying that if the split with ACROD were remedied or never took place then the Liturgical Instruction regarding Orthodoxy would not be needed?  That's laughable.

I've said on the other board and I'll say it here, this translation moves us further away from not only Orthodoxy but from our own Greek Catholic brethern as well when instead we should be moving towards them.  Why should we be the ones doing the most moving, because in nearly every case it is us who have moved away in the first place.


Monomakh
« Last Edit: February 28, 2007, 10:05:38 AM by Monomakh » Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #42 on: February 28, 2007, 10:05:45 AM »

Quote
Most of those dear people would probably cringe at the thought that they might be, or should be, Orthodox.

But you know what?

They already are.

There can be confusion with the terms.  Normally when someone uses the word "Catholic", they mean someone in communion with the Roman Pontiff who accepts the dogma, councils, etc. of that church.  When someone says "Orthodox" they generally mean someone in communion with the Eastern patriarchates who accepts the dogma, councils, etc. of that church.

The cornerstone on my parish says "XYZ Orthodox Catholic Church" which is of course true.  We are both fully Orthodox and fully Catholic in the real sense, meaning we possess the fullness and rightness of faith.  So I could call myself "Catholic", but I would imagine that would confuse people.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2007, 10:07:00 AM by welkodox » Logged
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #43 on: February 28, 2007, 10:24:07 AM »

In my own parish not a single person has left or threatened to leave over the promulgation but at least two have told me they will leave if we try making them Orthodox. 

Father Deacon,

knowing the part of the country you are from (PA) and knowing that there is still unfortunately animosity to this day in Byznantine Churches regarding the ACROD split, I'd be willing to bet that this feeling of not wanting to be made Orthodox is personal rather than Liturgical.  I don't know the people at all you are referring to, but I'd be willing to put a lot of certainty into my above assumption.  And while we're on this topic, the bishop who is the driving force behind this new Liturgy is known to share these sentiments as well.  It's ashame to see our church veer off into this feminized and modernized manner at all, let alone because of personal animosity.

Quote
However, many seem to want to imitate the OCA which follows the Russian Recension and where Prostopinje is all but forgotten in most of the parishes that were formerly or were splits from Greek Catholic parishes. 

Rome must be one of these people who want to imitate the vast majority of our Slavic Orthodox brethern because the Liturgicon they told us to use in 1964 did not coincide with ACROD.  Once again, it followed much more closely to the vast majority of our Slavic Orthodox brethern.  I'm really puzzled why you seem so determined to battle Rome on this subject. Huh


Monomakh
« Last Edit: February 28, 2007, 11:16:01 AM by Monomakh » Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 28, 2007, 12:31:41 PM »

How are they Orthodox?  They are Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic.  Mind you I am not showing disrespect, I was Greek Catholic so I have a fairly good understanding of both sides of the fence.  I still have many many many good friends that are Byzcath, one of them is my spiritual brother. 

To clarify what I meant:

I think we all (well, Papist, you're excused) agree here that Orthodox Christianity is the "best" Christianity: liturgically, doctrinally, morally, socially, culturally.

All of those "Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics" I've known whom I hold up as exemplars of faith and teachers by example were and are in their liturgical-prayer life, their doctrinal belief, their moral lives, their community life, and their cultural lives--fully integrated, the "best" Christians. They lived lives in Christ. In my mind that is Orthodoxy and that is whom I want to emulate.

I'm sure nobody will agree with this, but that's how I see them and that's what "Orthodoxy" is to me. Which bishops and patriarchs they are in communion with matters not a whit to me if they don't have the other stuff right. And these folks did and do have it right.

(The Pittsburgh Uniate hierarchy seems to have a different model now: morally "do as I say, not as I do", liturgically "emulate an abstract arbitrary Orthodoxy but you can't use the word Orthodox", and socially-culturally "if you're something other than generic American, or Hispanic, leave it at home, don't bring it into the church".)
« Last Edit: February 28, 2007, 12:34:16 PM by Lemko Rusyn » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,363


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #45 on: February 28, 2007, 12:36:26 PM »

There can be confusion with the terms.  Normally when someone uses the word "Catholic", they mean someone in communion with the Roman Pontiff who accepts the dogma, councils, etc. of that church.  When someone says "Orthodox" they generally mean someone in communion with the Eastern patriarchates who accepts the dogma, councils, etc. of that church.

The cornerstone on my parish says "XYZ Orthodox Catholic Church" which is of course true.  We are both fully Orthodox and fully Catholic in the real sense, meaning we possess the fullness and rightness of faith.  So I could call myself "Catholic", but I would imagine that would confuse people.
I have to be careful too. I have pointed out that I am an orthodox Catholic before, meaning that I actually hold to the teachings of the Church and People thought that I meant that I was an Eastern Orthodox Christian.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #46 on: February 28, 2007, 01:25:35 PM »

I'm sure nobody will agree with this, but that's how I see them and that's what "Orthodoxy" is to me. Which bishops and patriarchs they are in communion with matters not a whit to me if they don't have the other stuff right. And these folks did and do have it right.

Well, I think I'm pretty much a proponent of Afanassief's view of what constitutes the church, so I can see at least part of your statement as being something I could agree to.  In the case of the people you're speaking of though, they are in communion with a church that says who you are in communion with and subject to defines not only ones "orthodoxy" but the nature of the church itself.  Because of that, and for other reasons, I think to say one is "Orthodox" but in the Roman Communion at the same time is an untenable statement and simply contra reality.  That certainly doesn't stop people from saying or thinking such things though.

Also, I believe we're supposed to avoid the "U" word here as some people get upset by it.

Don't shoot the messenger.
Logged
stosh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 66


« Reply #47 on: March 01, 2007, 01:48:07 AM »

"There is an old Russian Orthodox proverb: "As the priest goes so the typicon goes."

Fortunately, since I've become Orthodox, all the priests in parishes I've visited follow the same typicon... Keeps the head clear of nonsense...
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #48 on: March 01, 2007, 03:48:39 AM »

.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2007, 03:51:15 AM by username! » Logged

AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #49 on: March 01, 2007, 10:24:29 AM »

.

I disagree.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,363


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #50 on: March 01, 2007, 12:12:21 PM »

.
By far the most outrageous post I seen since I have been a member of OC.net Wink
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #51 on: March 01, 2007, 12:40:36 PM »

He's out of control and must be stopped.  Why just the other day he called me a

;

Then said I should just

#

Then he said this board is all

%

I just said "hey, settle down, and oh by the way" -

^
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #52 on: March 02, 2007, 01:19:15 AM »






                                           v
Logged

username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #53 on: March 02, 2007, 01:21:53 AM »

He's out of control and must be stopped.  Why just the other day he called me a

;

Then said I should just

#

Then he said this board is all

%

I just said "hey, settle down, and oh by the way" -

^


How can you not see my point, I clearly stated it,  "."  which says it all in one tiny little dot.  Clearly you must be adhering to the heterodox views of the argument set forth in the claim of "," 
Say Three Bohodrice Divos and sing Petry'pivy ten times for your transgressions against the position of  "."
Logged

dantxny
OC.net Mineshaft gap
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian
Posts: 769



« Reply #54 on: March 02, 2007, 02:07:43 AM »

Quote
heterodox views of the argument set forth in the claim of "," 

I know that I certainly do, but only the dogma of the Oxford ,
Logged

"If you give the average Frenchman a choice between a reforming president who would plug the country's huge deficit and a good cheese, he would probably opt for the cheese." - Stephen Clarke
I think the French may be on to something here.
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #55 on: March 02, 2007, 02:54:29 AM »

Ah yes the great controversy between Webster's "," and Oxford's ","  But the fact that both lead to the same end argument of "/" it doesn't matter which side a person agrees with.

Be careful me and Weldox will make you eat halupki at our next meeting in defence of the orthodox position of ","
« Last Edit: March 02, 2007, 02:58:45 AM by username! » Logged

Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2007, 03:05:21 AM »

Say Three Bohodrice Divos

That's Bohorodice Divo.

Quote from: username!
sing Petry'pivy ten times

That's preterpivyj.

Oh, and by the way:

^.

 Tongue
Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #57 on: March 02, 2007, 12:39:20 PM »

Be careful me and Weldox will make you eat halupki at our next meeting in defence of the orthodox position of ","

Or we'll throw you in the pierogi press until you scream "&!".
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #58 on: March 02, 2007, 01:54:28 PM »

That's Bohorodice Divo.

That's preterpivyj.

Oh, and by the way:

^.

 Tongue
  Ok,ok there is a ' somewhere in preterpivy.  And I did forget to o in Bohorodice Divo.  If even gets harder when you're used to the Slovak alpahabet version and then you end up with a lemko/polish translieration, hefty usage of the letter w.

And no, the ultimate proclaimation according to Dan Brown is V
If it was in a movie or a book it has to be true Wink

Therefore, for correcting me with both the v and the evil ^ you must say ten Bogorodice Divos, saying them all with the g and not the h.


Logged

Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #59 on: March 02, 2007, 03:47:42 PM »

  Ok,ok there is a ' somewhere in preterpivy.  And I did forget to o in Bohorodice Divo.  If even gets harder when you're used to the Slovak alpahabet version and then you end up with a lemko/polish translieration, hefty usage of the letter w.

The ' is redundant and it is not actually transliteration as it is supposed to represent the letter ÑŒ but in "preterp'ivyj" it does not represent a letter. Etymologically speaking in Slavonic you would never write претерпивый, nor претерпьивый, only претерпѣвый. It would be OK to write preterpjivyj, as "ji" is understood as the Rusyn & Ukrainian pronunciation of Ñ£. Same thing with the word Дѣво.  "D'ivo" would imply that it's spelled Дьиво, which it isn't. Better that it be written as Djivo. But whatever.

Quote
Therefore, for correcting me with both the v and the evil ^ you must say ten Bogorodice Divos, saying them all with the g and not the h.

Well now I'll have to say Bogorodice Djevo to be consistent. Oy. No thanks, I'll just be a good Byzantine American Pittsburgh Catholic and say it in English.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2007, 03:48:32 PM by Lemko Rusyn » Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #60 on: March 03, 2007, 03:30:53 AM »

So if you are going to be a good byzcath of the pittsburgh metrpolia and just use english, why be so adament about the proper spelling of a language you don't care to use?  hehe. 
Logged

stosh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 66


« Reply #61 on: March 03, 2007, 03:45:25 AM »

How about the chopped up Pre-sanctified Liturgy I attended last night at the BCC?

All I can say is:

&*^%! Huh
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #62 on: March 05, 2007, 11:57:37 PM »

Compared to what?  What was chopped up about it?  Please tell me.  Deacon Lance can attest to the fact that the appropriate text for the Pre-sanctified liturgy according to the Rusyn tradition is very much complete.  I was Byzantine Catholic, I'm American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox now.  I am completely familiar with both and they are very similiar, with differences, but essentially very close.
I'm interested to know what was chopped up?  Which book did you use, the Metropolia of Pittsburgh or the Passaic book?
Logged

The Shadow
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Church of America
Jurisdiction: Ruthenia
Posts: 2


« Reply #63 on: March 06, 2007, 05:17:23 PM »


The new music is seen by their hierarch as an improvement and Metropolitan Nicholas is sending his seminarians to Pittsburgh to learn it.   


This is truly an amazing quote and development if true.

Now Professor J. Michael Thompson was once Father J. Michael Thompson under ACROD and Metropolitan Nicholas.  Metropolitan Nicholas removed him and defrocked him.  I'll spare the details of why, but the main point is that I find it very surprising and hard to believe that Metropolitan Nicholas would send his priests to learn music from someone who he removed.

Can someone verify that Metropolitan Nicholas is actually sending his seminarians to learn under J. Michael Thompson?

The Shadow
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #64 on: March 06, 2007, 05:22:09 PM »

I would like to know as well.  The Levkulic Book that my parish, and probably most in Pittsburgh, uses has only a few abbreviations: only one Pslam is taken for each kathisma, Pslam 141 and 129 are omitted, At Psalm 140 only 3 stichera are taken.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #65 on: March 06, 2007, 06:29:29 PM »

Now Professor J. Michael Thompson was once Father J. Michael Thompson under ACROD and Metropolitan Nicholas.  Metropolitan Nicholas removed him and defrocked him.

Greetins' Shadow. 

There appears to be a vastly different version of this same story.

http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/221760/page/5/fpart/1#Post221760
Logged
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #66 on: March 06, 2007, 07:17:49 PM »

Greetins' Shadow. 

There appears to be a vastly different version of this same story.

http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/221760/page/5/fpart/1#Post221760


I've always wondered why the webpage with descriptions of the faculty on the Byzantine Catholic Seminary website is absent of any information of Professor Thompson's time as a priest in ACROD and l'ECOF (the Western French Orthodox Church).  Here is a link of what I'm talking about and as of this posting there is no info about his prior clergy time in his description (Professor Thompson is at the bottom of the webpage): 

http://www.byzcathsem.org/about/faculty.php

I wonder why?

Monomakh
« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 07:19:18 PM by Monomakh » Logged
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #67 on: March 06, 2007, 07:32:42 PM »

This is truly an amazing quote and development if true.

Now Professor J. Michael Thompson was once Father J. Michael Thompson under ACROD and Metropolitan Nicholas.  Metropolitan Nicholas removed him and defrocked him.  I'll spare the details of why, but the main point is that I find it very surprising and hard to believe that Metropolitan Nicholas would send his priests to learn music from someone who he removed.

Can someone verify that Metropolitan Nicholas is actually sending his seminarians to learn under J. Michael Thompson?

The Shadow


It's my understanding that if he is a defrocked priest he is forbidden by Canon Law from 'forming new clergy', meaning he should not be on the staff of the seminary.   If this is so how does the Metropolia get away with it?


Monomakh
Logged
stosh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 66


« Reply #68 on: March 06, 2007, 07:54:15 PM »

Compared to what?  What was chopped up about it?  Please tell me.  Deacon Lance can attest to the fact that the appropriate text for the Pre-sanctified liturgy according to the Rusyn tradition is very much complete.  I was Byzantine Catholic, I'm American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox now.  I am completely familiar with both and they are very similiar, with differences, but essentially very close.
I'm interested to know what was chopped up?  Which book did you use, the Metropolia of Pittsburgh or the Passaic book?

Let's put it this way. I went to an OCA parish last week and this priest had to do the most complete pre-sanctified I'd ever seen, down to closing the curtain half way at communion. I was physically exhausted from doing so many poklons.

The BCC pre-sanctified otoh, was nothing but kneeling, sitting, no poklons, and inclusive language. (Loves us all, instead of loves mankind). This was in the Parma eparchy. The latter seemed like a travesty compared to the former. Makes me glad I'm now Orthodox. Should have done it years ago. Grin
« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 08:04:15 PM by stosh » Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #69 on: March 06, 2007, 08:41:45 PM »


I've always wondered why the webpage with descriptions of the faculty on the Byzantine Catholic Seminary website is absent of any information of Professor Thompson's time as a priest in ACROD and l'ECOF (the Western French Orthodox Church).  Here is a link of what I'm talking about and as of this posting there is no info about his prior clergy time in his description (Professor Thompson is at the bottom of the webpage): 

http://www.byzcathsem.org/about/faculty.php

I wonder why?

Monomakh

Must be a clerical error.
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #70 on: March 06, 2007, 09:46:32 PM »

Let's put it this way. I went to an OCA parish last week and this priest had to do the most complete pre-sanctified I'd ever seen, down to closing the curtain half way at communion. I was physically exhausted from doing so many poklons.

The BCC pre-sanctified otoh, was nothing but kneeling, sitting, no poklons, and inclusive language. (Loves us all, instead of loves mankind). This was in the Parma eparchy. The latter seemed like a travesty compared to the former. Makes me glad I'm now Orthodox. Should have done it years ago. Grin

Well many seemed unpleased about the "God who loves us all" stuff, but besides that you are juggling a Russian tradition with a Carpatho-Russian tradition.  I don't judge how appropriate worship is according to if the priest used the curtain (not a Rusyn tradition, we don't even have curtains).  See, you say you are glad to be Orthodox now, but does that mean I am less Orthodox because my diocese has a different pre-sanctified tradition than your Orthodox diocese? 
I'm glad you liked the OCA event and it was prayerful, and I do agree with your distaste for the inclusive language. 
Logged

stosh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 66


« Reply #71 on: March 06, 2007, 10:21:14 PM »

Well many seemed unpleased about the "God who loves us all" stuff, but besides that you are juggling a Russian tradition with a Carpatho-Russian tradition.  I don't judge how appropriate worship is according to if the priest used the curtain (not a Rusyn tradition, we don't even have curtains).  See, you say you are glad to be Orthodox now, but does that mean I am less Orthodox because my diocese has a different pre-sanctified tradition than your Orthodox diocese? 
I'm glad you liked the OCA event and it was prayerful, and I do agree with your distaste for the inclusive language. 

Hold up a minute. I'm not saying one Orthodox jurisdiction is better than another. I was only comparing the BCC to the OCA, (which as most know was made up of former Byzantines and their descendents.).  The OCA is light years ahead of the BCC as far as rubrics go. I can say so with confidence because I am a former Byzantine.

The ACROD as you know is also from the BCC and made up of Rusyns, as is the majority of the OCA. It's just that the OCA follows mostly Russian usage, while the ACROD kept most of the BCC tradition intact. So it's really unrealistic to compare the two. The only thing that really counts is that we're both Orthodox regardless of jurisdiction. S'nami Boh!
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #72 on: March 09, 2007, 03:17:13 AM »

Hold up a minute. I'm not saying one Orthodox jurisdiction is better than another. I was only comparing the BCC to the OCA, (which as most know was made up of former Byzantines and their descendents.).  The OCA is light years ahead of the BCC as far as rubrics go. I can say so with confidence because I am a former Byzantine.

The ACROD as you know is also from the BCC and made up of Rusyns, as is the majority of the OCA. It's just that the OCA follows mostly Russian usage, while the ACROD kept most of the BCC tradition intact. So it's really unrealistic to compare the two. The only thing that really counts is that we're both Orthodox regardless of jurisdiction. S'nami Boh!

Read the little blurb above my picture on the left of the screen.  Look up my recent posts.  The Byzcath Pre-Sanctified is sooooooooo close to the ACROD. 
I held on for a minute Wink
« Last Edit: March 09, 2007, 03:17:57 AM by username! » Logged

AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #73 on: March 19, 2007, 08:47:42 AM »

I'm not sure if this is a new or old change, but it appears at least one EC Church in this country allows lay people to distribute communion during the liturgy.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #74 on: March 19, 2007, 10:04:26 AM »

Never heard or saw that before.  Where's this church?
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #75 on: March 19, 2007, 03:58:55 PM »

Schultz, I believe it was here in the People's Republic.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #76 on: March 19, 2007, 04:02:12 PM »

Hm, interesting.  As I said, I've never heard of that happening and, as far as I know, that's something that our heirarchs haven't authorized.

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #77 on: March 19, 2007, 05:22:24 PM »

The Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh has authorized it but it is far more restricted than what you will find in Latin Church, in fact it is probably in line with what Rome envisioned when it was first allowed in the Latin Church.

From: THE NORMS OF PARTICULAR LAW OF THE BYZANTINE METROPOLITAN CHURCH SURI IURIS OF PITTSBURGH, U.S.A.

Canon 709 §2

§l. In cases of true necessity, deacons may distribute the Divine Eucharist.

§2. In the same cases, even minor clerics and members of the laity can be designated to distribute the Divine Eucharist.

1o. A parish may have one person designated for this purpose plus another for each 75 communicants at the Liturgy.

2o. The metropolitan Liturgical Commission is to prepare a program of training that includes theological and spiritual formation, the selection process for candidates and a practicum.

3o. Those persons may take communion to those who, by reason of illness, infirmity or age, cannot attend the Divine Liturgy regularly.

4o. If any priest or deacon is present at the Liturgy, in any capacity whatever, he is to make himself known to the principal celebrant and shall distribute the divine Eucharist, vested insofar as possible, and taking precedence over any minor cleric or lay person present.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2007, 05:23:15 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #78 on: March 19, 2007, 11:09:49 PM »

The Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh has authorized it but it is far more restricted than what you will find in Latin Church, in fact it is probably in line with what Rome envisioned when it was first allowed in the Latin Church.

From: THE NORMS OF PARTICULAR LAW OF THE BYZANTINE METROPOLITAN CHURCH SURI IURIS OF PITTSBURGH, U.S.A.

--which was first promulgated in 1999, but Eucharistic Ministers have been serving in parishes in the Pittsburgh Archeparchy at least since the early 1990s, with hierarchical approval where the priest had requested it because of his own physical challenges. (One of these priests was basically immobile and sat on a chair at the Holy Table for the whole liturgy. For him to even sit at the ambo to distribute communion would have been impossible.)
Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #79 on: March 19, 2007, 11:32:26 PM »

Hm, interesting.  As I said, I've never heard of that happening and, as far as I know, that's something that our heirarchs haven't authorized.

If anyone here knows me you also know that I've "been around" the eastern parts of the Metropolia more than many people (for historical research purposes) and I've seen eucharistic ministers in at least six? parishes, in some of them going on about 8 years now -- they started as soon as the Particular Law was promulgated & went into effect.

As far as the discussion going on at that "other board" today about this, I think it would help things tremendously if subdeacons were ordained for parish liturgical ministry instead of as a waystation to diaconate or priesthood. At least if a cleric of some sort were distributing the Eucharist it wouldn't seem so... American. Tongue

And well... if you want to talk about what else I've seen, "altar girls" aren't just an isolated aberration. Some "Ruthenian" and Ukrainian parishes have had them for 10-15 years or more. Officially it's not allowed, but when the Metropolitan Archbishop of Philadelphia published a clarification about the practice (that it is NOT allowed) in The Way about 12? years ago, the practice seemed to have increased, not decreased, among the Ukrainians at least. The Pittsburgh Metropolia's Particular Law also prohibits it, but still it continues...
« Last Edit: March 19, 2007, 11:35:49 PM by Lemko Rusyn » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,363


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #80 on: March 20, 2007, 10:52:28 AM »

Why don't people just do what they are told?  Smiley
« Last Edit: March 20, 2007, 10:52:57 AM by Papist » Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
The Shadow
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Church of America
Jurisdiction: Ruthenia
Posts: 2


« Reply #81 on: May 30, 2007, 04:49:54 PM »

This is truly an amazing quote and development if true.

Now Professor J. Michael Thompson was once Father J. Michael Thompson under ACROD and Metropolitan Nicholas.  Metropolitan Nicholas removed him and defrocked him.  I'll spare the details of why, but the main point is that I find it very surprising and hard to believe that Metropolitan Nicholas would send his priests to learn music from someone who he removed.

Can someone verify that Metropolitan Nicholas is actually sending his seminarians to learn under J. Michael Thompson?

The Shadow


Did anyone ever find out anything on this?

I keep hearing the Metropolitan Nicholas (ACROD)  is sending his seminarians to the Byzantine seminary to learn the new music.

Once again, this is amazing since I seem to remember Metropolitan Nicholas defrocking J. Michael Thompson once upon a time.  I just can't see the Metropolitan sending any of his future priests to Sts. Cyril and Methodius Byzantine Seminary.

Awaiting what anyone else has heard.

The Shadow
Logged
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #82 on: June 05, 2007, 01:11:50 PM »

Yes, considering the circumstances, I don't think Metropolitan Nicholas would do such a thing.  I think he is just being polite.

Ungcsertezs
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #83 on: June 05, 2007, 02:00:04 PM »


Did anyone ever find out anything on this?

I keep hearing the Metropolitan Nicholas (ACROD)  is sending his seminarians to the Byzantine seminary to learn the new music.

Once again, this is amazing since I seem to remember Metropolitan Nicholas defrocking J. Michael Thompson once upon a time.  I just can't see the Metropolitan sending any of his future priests to Sts. Cyril and Methodius Byzantine Seminary.

Awaiting what anyone else has heard.

The Shadow

My best friend is an ACROD priest. I'll contact him.
Music? Perhaps. But I would not imagine any reason he would short-circuit his own active seminary in Johnstown, PA - none whatsoever. Given his track record of the last 15 or so years (or more) of de-Latinizing ACROD, I find this conjecture unbelievable.

Αριστοκλής
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Monomakh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Just South of Nowhere
Posts: 9


« Reply #84 on: June 05, 2007, 06:01:07 PM »


Did anyone ever find out anything on this?

I keep hearing the Metropolitan Nicholas (ACROD)  is sending his seminarians to the Byzantine seminary to learn the new music.

Once again, this is amazing since I seem to remember Metropolitan Nicholas defrocking J. Michael Thompson once upon a time.  I just can't see the Metropolitan sending any of his future priests to Sts. Cyril and Methodius Byzantine Seminary.

Awaiting what anyone else has heard.

The Shadow

Shadow,

I've always wondered why the webpage with descriptions of the faculty on the Byzantine Catholic Seminary website is absent of any information of Professor Thompson's time as a priest in ACROD and l'ECOF (the Western French Orthodox Church).  Here is a link of what I'm talking about and as of this posting there is no info about his prior clergy time in his description (Professor Thompson is at the bottom of the webpage): 

http://www.byzcathsem.org/about/faculty.php

I wonder why?


It's my understanding that if he is a defrocked priest he is forbidden by Canon Law from 'forming new clergy', meaning he should not be on the staff of the seminary.   If this is so how does the Metropolia get away with it?


Monomakh
Logged
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #85 on: June 05, 2007, 06:58:59 PM »

I believe it is the case of "don't ask, don't tell" policy that is being practiced.

U-C
Logged
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #86 on: June 21, 2007, 01:18:08 PM »

Eight days and counting... And yet so many parishes of the Ruthenian Metropolia have not even purchased the new RDL books! Cheesy

Ung-Certez
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #87 on: June 21, 2007, 01:52:50 PM »

We have them but they're still in boxes as far as I know.  We'll be using them next Friday for the first time. 

Won't that be fun... Wink
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #88 on: June 21, 2007, 04:28:46 PM »

Sorry to hear that, you have my sympathy! Cheesy

Ung-Certez
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #89 on: June 21, 2007, 04:39:25 PM »

It's a shame, too, because every visiting priest who concelebrates always says the same thing:

"It's been a long time since I've heard singing like that!  So strong and so full of life!"
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #90 on: July 02, 2007, 01:24:34 PM »

Shultz,

How bad/good was your new-and- improved-politically-correct-feminist RDL yesterday? Cheesy

Ung-Certez

Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #91 on: July 02, 2007, 01:49:39 PM »

I didn't go to my regular church yesterday, as I had a late Saturday night and decided to sleep in a bit.  I ended up at the local Ukrainian church which is in, of course, Ukrainian.  That was strange in its own right (rite?) and not because of the language...I'll get to that in a bit.

I was, however, at Patronage for the feast of SS Peter/Paul on Friday and that wasn't so bad.  I mean, yes, the translations are horrible and the music is unfamiliar, but we have a strong and good cantor who knows the new music well enough to steer us.  There are some times when he slips into the "old" music within the new setting, especially near the end of some phrases, but overall he's done a great job in bending us the mandated way.

However, I now have a very strong dislike for the priest's prayers being taken aloud.  It brings the liturgy to a grinding halt.  I don't mind the Anaphora being taken aloud so much, as our priest has done it here and there (it being an "official" option in Passaic for some time now).  It's the other prayers now being taken aloud that just totally ruin the flow of the liturgy. 

My parish seems to have taken an attitude of non-revolutionary dislike.  There are some who like it.  But most find it unnecessary.  We're lucky to have two cantors who have taken the time to know the new settings and who care enough to teach it to us, at least for the time being.  As far as I know, they're not the greatest fans of the new music but find it more important that we all sing together as a congregation even if it can be grating to our ears.  We've always had strong vocal participation in our parish.  In fact, many visiting priests comment on it.  It's not as strong as it used to be, but it's also not weak (like in Munhall) either.  I have a feeling that as people get used to it, more voices will join.

There are, however, some who have left.  I saw at least one of our older ladies at the Ukie church on Sunday.  As I wrote above, that was a strange experience in itself.  I have experienced recited DLs in English at this church before, probably due to the fact that the priest is not very fluent in English and I don't think they have a cantor who can sing the liturgical music in English.  However, this weekend I was "treated" with a strange recited/sung hybrid in Ukrainian.  The litanies were all recited.  There was no incensation, at least none outside of the sanctuary.  Most everything else was sung with the exception of the Creed.  Is this hybrid at all common in Ukrainian Catholic churches?

I must say that I am getting better at reading Cyrillic, though. Smiley
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #92 on: July 03, 2007, 09:58:42 AM »

However, I now have a very strong dislike for the priest's prayers being taken aloud.  It brings the liturgy to a grinding halt.  I don't mind the Anaphora being taken aloud so much, as our priest has done it here and there (it being an "official" option in Passaic for some time now).  It's the other prayers now being taken aloud that just totally ruin the flow of the liturgy.

Having heard it both ways, I agree.  I find the sotto voce prayers (including the Anaphora) being recited aloud breaks up the flow of the liturgy and I dislike it.  Some are absolutely maniacal about the necessity of reciting them aloud though.

Quote
However, this weekend I was "treated" with a strange recited/sung hybrid in Ukrainian.  The litanies were all recited.  There was no incensation, at least none outside of the sanctuary.  Most everything else was sung with the exception of the Creed.  Is this hybrid at all common in Ukrainian Catholic churches?

Sounds like a low mass.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #93 on: July 03, 2007, 10:11:17 AM »

How is this 'returning to their traditions"?
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #94 on: July 03, 2007, 11:17:14 AM »

How is this 'returning to their traditions"?

There ARE a few good things about the new mandated liturgy.

Apparently, for some people, the actual music is more representative of old prostopinije. I wouldn't know, I'm not that old nor have I experienced enough DLs totally in Slavonic to be in the know.  How the English translations of the lyrical content of the hymns/prayers/whathaveyou work with the music is hotly debated.  Some of the wording just sounds really strange to my ears, especially since it's supposed to be in "modern American English".

The use of teplita has been mandated.

Kneeling has been eliminated, at least in theory.  The rubric in the People's Book reads "Standing is the proper liturgical posture".  Personally, I was very pleased to see this and also see everyone in my parish actually doing it, even the one elderly lady who is our resident Roman Catholic refugee for the past 40 years.

I think that's the extent of the "good".
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #95 on: July 03, 2007, 11:38:58 AM »

There were people not cutting the wine with teplota before?
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #96 on: July 03, 2007, 11:41:09 AM »

There were people not cutting the wine with teplota before?

Yep.  My parish has (at least since I've been attending it) but I know there are other places, especially within Western PA, that simply did not do it.

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
stosh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 66


« Reply #97 on: July 03, 2007, 01:17:17 PM »

Yep.  My parish has (at least since I've been attending it) but I know there are other places, especially within Western PA, that simply did not do it.




I'm not 100% positive, but I think that not using the teplota goes back to the days of Bishop Ivancho in the BCC. Roll Eyes
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #98 on: July 03, 2007, 01:57:43 PM »


I'm not 100% positive, but I think that not using the teplota goes back to the days of Bishop Ivancho in the BCC. Roll Eyes

It at least goes back that far. According to page 63 of the Ordo Celebrationis of 1944, the "use of the hot water is left to the discretion of the Bishop...This practice is excluded in our diocese by the wish of His Excellency". I have a feeling that Bishop Ivancho didn't just come up with this idea on his own which leads me to believe that it was the custom in at least some of the parishes in Carpatho-Rus'. As is noted in the footnote, this practice is mentioned in the Roman edition of the Liturgikon. 

Do Russian Old Believers practice the use of the teplota?
« Last Edit: July 03, 2007, 01:58:50 PM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #99 on: July 03, 2007, 02:24:38 PM »

Kneeling has been eliminated, at least in theory.  The rubric in the People's Book reads "Standing is the proper liturgical posture".  Personally, I was very pleased to see this and also see everyone in my parish actually doing it, even the one elderly lady who is our resident Roman Catholic refugee for the past 40 years.

This is one of the things I have the biggest problem with. The statement as printed is incorrect, for several reasons:

1) To my knowledge there is no canon law, synodal decree, whatever, that addresses this except to say that there should be no kneeling on Sundays and during the Paschal season (until the kneeling prayers of Pentecost).

2) Whoever came up with this is blatantly ignorant of the fact that the roots of our Church are Central European. We did not come from predominantly Orthodox countries (where kneeling may or may not be practiced). We came from areas where East and West mingled, and it is natural that some of our piety and practice is influenced by the Western Church. If you go to a GC or Orthodox church in Carpatho-Rus' (except perhaps for a Russified monastery), the people kneel during the consecration, the elevation, and at the "Jedin svjat". The people kneel - period. When Rusyns today come the the USA they maintain this practice and until very recently, they had no trouble fitting in in our churches where the same practice was kept. In fact it is clear that many of them believe very strongly that not kneeling is an offense against Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist. This is just one more way that the powers-that-be are pulling up the welcome mat for Rusyn immigrants from our churches.

3) "proper" according to whom? Even among Orthodox Slavs there is no uniform practice with respect to kneeling. I've been to ACROD parishes where they kneel during the Our Father on Sundays, and in some OCA and ROCOR parishes they kneel during the Great Entrance! Nevermind what various Ukrainian, Serb, and other Slav Orthodox do...

We presumably would generally stand for the entire liturgy were we in a pewless, open church, but I don't see the Pittsburgh Metropolia going that direction any time soon (unless they want to totally destroy everything that's left of it).
« Last Edit: July 03, 2007, 02:27:18 PM by Lemko Rusyn » Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #100 on: July 03, 2007, 02:31:25 PM »

We've always had strong vocal participation in our parish.  In fact, many visiting priests comment on it.  It's not as strong as it used to be, but it's also not weak (like in Munhall) either.

It's never acknowledged on that "other" forum, but the people at St. John's Cathedral in Munhall have been dead wood since way before the RDL was even a twinkle in the eye of Met. Judson Procyk. In fact, I attended Mass (twuddn't no Divine Liturgy) at the cathedral several times in the early 1990s with then-rector Msgr. Procyk and I was amazed at how horrible the liturgical practice was on the part of the celebrant and the congregation. Maybe the RDL is partially to blame there, but they weren't doing so well before that, either.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #101 on: July 03, 2007, 02:46:24 PM »

It's never acknowledged on that "other" forum, but the people at St. John's Cathedral in Munhall have been dead wood since way before the RDL was even a twinkle in the eye of Met. Judson Procyk. In fact, I attended Mass (twuddn't no Divine Liturgy) at the cathedral several times in the early 1990s with then-rector Msgr. Procyk and I was amazed at how horrible the liturgical practice was on the part of the celebrant and the congregation. Maybe the RDL is partially to blame there, but they weren't doing so well before that, either.

I've heard that as well.  When my wife and I were discussing about moving back to Pittsburgh (at least for me) a few years ago, I remember asking some people about the cathedral and they all told me not to go there unless I had to.  Everyone told me to move to Aliquippa and go to St. George's where Fr. Elias had made that parish a model one.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,999


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #102 on: July 04, 2007, 10:54:23 AM »

The omission of teplota goes back to the Synod of Zamosc in 1720. Teplota and the sponge were forbidden and the Filioque and commemoration of the Pope were required.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #103 on: July 05, 2007, 09:48:06 AM »

The omission of teplota goes back to the Synod of Zamosc in 1720. Teplota and the sponge were forbidden and the Filioque and commemoration of the Pope were required.

Thanks, Fr. Deacon!

That also reminds me...the Filioque is gone from the entire Metropolita.  It was still being used in various places, but now it's totally removed from the service books.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #104 on: January 20, 2008, 12:30:25 AM »

This is truly an amazing quote and development if true.

Now Professor J. Michael Thompson was once Father J. Michael Thompson under ACROD and Metropolitan Nicholas.  Metropolitan Nicholas removed him and defrocked him.  I'll spare the details of why, but the main point is that I find it very surprising and hard to believe that Metropolitan Nicholas would send his priests to learn music from someone who he removed.

Can someone verify that Metropolitan Nicholas is actually sending his seminarians to learn under J. Michael Thompson?

The Shadow

It has been reported that J.Michael Thompson has been removed from his his postion with the Ruthenian Metropolia.  How does that affect the use of the green RDL books now?

Ung
Logged
Joseph-James
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 40

tonsured reader


« Reply #105 on: January 20, 2008, 06:41:49 PM »

DO look over the RDL stuff on byzcath.org . The RDL was in the works for well over a decade, and was delayed/interrupted by the death of one of the BCC metropolitans. There were actually 2 different committees that worked on it, one for liturgy, and one for music, with an eventual intereparchial group to finalize it. The RDL covers mostly the St. John Chrysostom and the St. Basil Divine Liturgies. The books are in English only, and the music strives to be of the Carpatho-Rusyn prostopinije tradition. In some parishes, however, slavonic is still in use, and in other parishes only music from the new book is allowed, causing major learning curves for the laity for "new" music.

While I was in the BCC, I personally had no problem with the book itself. I did, however, perceive a lack of a creative spirit at work in their church, and a continuing failure to live up to all of the challenges from Rome to restore their traditions, such as in JP IIs encyclical "Orientale Lumen". There is definitely something non-Orthodox about claiming to be Orthodox in communion with Rome, I guess. Smiley
Logged

Jim
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #106 on: January 20, 2008, 08:26:00 PM »

While I was in the BCC, I personally had no problem with the book itself. I did, however, perceive a lack of a creative spirit at work in their church,

Could you please elaborate?

After all, some feel that it is exactly a "creative spirit" that resulted in this RDL mess. And with respect to the music and the practices being introduced into the newly-minted certified cantor caste, the gutting of centuries-old practices that have nothing to do with Latinization is surely the work of a "creative spirit" (I'm tending to think of the evil kind).
Logged
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #107 on: January 20, 2008, 10:40:35 PM »

Lemko Rusyn,

You mean the suppression of the tradtional Rusyn para-liturgical hymns,  Nativity carols, and Lenten hymns, only to be replaced by newly-created para-liturgical "weekly" hymns?

Ung
Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #108 on: January 20, 2008, 11:17:48 PM »

Lemko Rusyn,

You mean the suppression of the tradtional Rusyn para-liturgical hymns,  Nativity carols, and Lenten hymns, only to be replaced by newly-created para-liturgical "weekly" hymns?

Ung

I don't know what you're talking about  Roll Eyes

Oh, you mean those Polish RC customs! They are so offputting and confusing to newcomers. We don't want to be seen as favoring the Polish ethnicity over all others, so all that katolicki stuff must go!  laugh

Otherwise stated as "we won't be following the Pope's wishes to be true to ourselves until our practices are identical with ROCOR's (except for stuff that the Metropolitan Cantor Institute just makes up -- that's just fine)".
Logged
Joseph-James
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 40

tonsured reader


« Reply #109 on: January 21, 2008, 10:10:14 AM »

Could you please elaborate?

After all, some feel that it is exactly a "creative spirit" that resulted in this RDL mess. And with respect to the music and the practices being introduced into the newly-minted certified cantor caste, the gutting of centuries-old practices that have nothing to do with Latinization is surely the work of a "creative spirit" (I'm tending to think of the evil kind).

I may have made a poor choice of words. What I mean by "creative spirit" is a willingness to use good music as long as the text is acceptable. When the RDL was introduced, you could say the baby got thrown out with the bath water. Some parishes found themselves unable to use truly fine service music (works by Bortniansky, others), because it didn't conform to the latest committee definition of Carpatho-Rusyn prostopinije. That's what I mean by a lack of a creative spirit. Maybe I should have said a lack of a good musical understanding instead. I say this as a trained musician, who tends to be very tolerant of all kinds of music for church use, as long as text and emotion are carefully presented without slipping into secular values.

Further, the BCC used to have regular minor orders that included perpetual cantors, readers, and subdeacons, but when the American Latin rite dropped minor orders as the norm, so did the BCC (I am led to believe this may not be true in eastern Europe, however.) . Minor orders bestow a charism for the work done that is no longer understood by BCC clergy in the U.S.- an indication of a loss of Spirit, but of a more significant kind. That's the sort of mistake that leads Orthodox to say a group is no longer Orthodox, because it follows the letter of the law, not the spirit. The reactions of BCCers can be read in much more detail, with all their angst and sadness, at byzcath.org  .
« Last Edit: January 21, 2008, 10:16:36 AM by Joseph-James » Logged

Jim
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #110 on: January 21, 2008, 03:35:47 PM »

I may have made a poor choice of words. What I mean by "creative spirit" is a willingness to use good music as long as the text is acceptable. When the RDL was introduced, you could say the baby got thrown out with the bath water. Some parishes found themselves unable to use truly fine service music (works by Bortniansky, others), because it didn't conform to the latest committee definition of Carpatho-Rusyn prostopinije. That's what I mean by a lack of a creative spirit.

Thank you, Joseph-James, for your explanation and other additional comments.

From my perspective I think a huge part of the problem is that many of those who have acquired positions of prominence see the Carpatho-Rusyn spiritual musical tradition as one that, while having some value, is very shallow and even superficial. And so they are very willing to try to create new things where they feel the existing tradition is lacking. In a sense, I agree with what you have said (that part I quoted above). Unfortunately, I feel that the "faithfulness" that they have proclaimed their own work to have is so myopic as to render the entire tradition, and those who have practiced it in community in this country for several generations, a grave disservice and have wrought destruction. Their new creations, I feel, are of dubious value and were these "authorities" more open to the original tradition in its breadth and depth, would never have been necessary. The end result is alienating people from their own church and will, over time, destroy what remained of the tradition in this country.
Logged
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #111 on: January 21, 2008, 09:03:43 PM »

Lemko Rusyn,

That was a good synopsis of what has happened.  Then again, I don't believe the "Sui Juris Metropolitan Byzantine Church of America" is interested in preserving authentic liturgical chant tradition and that is sad!

U-C
Logged
Lemko Rusyn
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Православно-католицька віра нашых вітців
Jurisdiction: Русиньска ґрекокатолицька церьков свого права
Posts: 118


Пресвятая Богородице Повчанская, спаси нас!


WWW
« Reply #112 on: January 22, 2008, 11:23:45 PM »

From my perspective I think a huge part of the problem is that many of those who have acquired positions of prominence see the Carpatho-Rusyn spiritual musical tradition as one that, while having some value, is very shallow and even superficial. And so they are very willing to try to create new things where they feel the existing tradition is lacking. In a sense, I agree with what you have said (that part I quoted above). Unfortunately, I feel that the "faithfulness" that they have proclaimed their own work to have is so myopic as to render the entire tradition, and those who have practiced it in community in this country for several generations, a grave disservice and have wrought destruction. Their new creations, I feel, are of dubious value and were these "authorities" more open to the original tradition in its breadth and depth, would never have been necessary. The end result is alienating people from their own church and will, over time, destroy what remained of the tradition in this country.

I've been challenged by a friend to explain some of my comments above. And since through no doing of mine they have gained an audience elsewhere, I hope the visitor who chose to share them with another forum might add these thoughts there as well.

I'm going to paraphrase my friend's commentary. I trust he won't mind me sharing some of his thoughts in that format to push this discussion a bit further along.

To start, let me clarify that my comments above conflate several phenomena and may inaccurately suggest that responsibility for some of what I am reacting to rests entirely on the Pittsburgh Metropolia's cantor institute. For example, the cantor institute did not direct us to stop using the Christmas greeting and stop singing carols once we reach vespers on December 31 (i.e., the liturgical leave-taking of the Nativity). But officially we have been instructed to cease these parts of our traditional Christmas practice (which in some places would continue until Feb. 2! but at the very least until the eve of Theophany), and so our carols are effectively heard by most of our regular churchgoers only at most on two occasions: Nativity Eve/Nativity and the Sunday After the Nativity. Assuming most people don't sing in their families at home anymore, and don't go out in caroling groups in the days that follow, you can pretty much kiss our traditional Carpatho-Rusyn carols goodbye in the next 10 years unless we do more to cultivate them.

Quote
There have been complaints posted online about a newly-composed Theophany hymn that some parishes sang this year, which is essentially "O Come All Ye Faithful" with a few lyrical changes. It is certainly within the realm of tradition to borrow popular melodies. Is there a taboo against this now? I don't see the problem.

In principle, I didn't have a problem with what they did there. I thought what they came up with was silly and ill-advised, but I likewise recognize that "To Jordan's Water" (a paraliturgical hymn for Theophany sung in many parishes that was "canonized" by its inclusion in the old recently-retired pew books found throughout the Metropolia) was written no more than maybe 30 years ago by +Fr. Basil Kraynyak using a well-known melody (that of the Rusyn and Ukrainian carol "Nebo i zemlja"--"Heaven and Earth"). He actually did way back then what the cantor institute director had very recently done for all the Sundays of the year by writing all new lyrics to an established traditional melody of ours, so the cantor institute director hardly blazed that trail. I have a sheet somewhere of similar things that Msgr. Russell Duker wrote in the same vein, especially for Theophany (which he erroneously referred to as "ščedrivki", which in actuality are not Theophany hymns).

Quote
Do we need to be making new lyrics so that the hymn text is coupled to the day's readings? That is a novelty that I could live without, but could also live with if the lyrics were better. But then again, the lyrics of some of the older English renditions of our traditional paraliturgical hymns were equally, if not more, banal.

I think some of one of those cantors' later work, to the extent that it strove for at least a more accurate English rendition of the actual original text (rather than the 1970s questionable invented lyrics that bear little relation to the original text), stood out as an improvement on the older corpus of English hymns (also "canonized" by inclusion in the old pew book). Professor John Kahanick of blessed memory did his own English versions of our hymns with accuracy as a higher concern... unfortunately most of his work was never used outside of northeastern New Jersey.

Quote
Perhaps the issue is that we are challenging the musical capabilites of the present generation. Maybe we just can't sing, or learn anymore. I am skeptical. So please tell me, in your opinion, what is being destroyed? What original tradition is at risk?

You are right, singing for most of us is a big problem; we don't sing at home and hardly ever do we sing in community the way our past generations did, Americans across the board of whatever ethnic group.

What do I feel is being destroyed or is at risk under the new paradigm of liturgical (and paraliturgical) singing in the Pittsburgh Metropolia today?

1) Local traditions and melodies in the "old country" (i.e., the immigrant-founded communities in the rust belt towns of PA, NJ, OH, NY, CT, etc.). I think the musical needs of a parish in Phoenix, Arizona or Roswell, Georgia are quite different from those in Nanty Glo, Pa., or Roebling, New Jersey. And if the Brooklyn chapel (a largely immigrant-Rusyn, Rusyn-speaking, Church Slavonic-praying community, suppressed about 8? years ago) were somehow still a going concern, I can't imagine how they would be expected to respond to the mandate(s). Maybe the people in the Hillsborough (Manville), NJ, parish are young enough and their substantial European-born Rusyn contingent is now assimilated enough that they won't be so traumatized. Probably parishes in upstate PA and isolated parts of Ohio are more "selo" parishes ("village" parishes, where most of the people's families have lived there for generations and who all came from the same villages/local region in the European homeland) than parishes in New York City or Yonkers (or Cleveland, or Bridgeport, etc....) would be today, especially since the immigrants don't seem to be flocking to them, even in cities such as those named where there are such immigrants.

2) The cantor institute director spent probably a good year or more writing all those "new" hymns, but how many newly-published hymns from the cantor's institute were translations & arrangements of material in the Uzhhorod pisennik or of the (non-Ukrainian) stuff in Pap's Grekokatolicki duchovni pisni, or of some newer Rusyn hymns from eastern Slovakia sung the last 10-15 years by Rusyn immigrants attending the Uniontown pilgrimage? None! A prominent former Pittsburgh-area cantor has a lot of this work done already but outside his cantor school alumni, probably few people have it and for the most part it isn't available online anywhere. Where perfectly fine and aesthetically & spiritually pleasing hymns exist in the corpus of our own tradition (that perhaps are, God forbid, not yet in English) we should be translating these hymns and arranging them in English before we start inventing new hymns.

3) The recently-issued (and official?) cantoring directives of the cantor institute put such heavy restrictions on which paraliturgical hymns can be sung and when, and put them at lowest priority after psalmody (even outside the Liturgy proper) that our traditional, even our most well-known paraliturgical hymns will be sung rarely at best. And yet they are publishing new paraliturgical hymns for each nth Sunday after Pentecost that will be sung at most once a year and whose text will essentially have to be re-learned and sung from printed sheets year after year. Do they expect that anyone will develop any kind of emotional attachment to the hymn text? How will this happen? (In any case, I don't think that this is their goal. Regardless, it represents a rupture with our traditional spirituality and piety as represented by our traditional paraliturgical hymns, which are primarily of a more-popular, dare I say, "western", piety; they do express theology, but they do it simply and without telling an elaborate story such as these new "Gospel of the week" hymns now being distributed by the cantor institute.) The traditional Rusyn paraliturgical hymns are a significant part of my spirituality, and I love to immerse myself in them, and yet I find that I'm singing them so rarely now in church (or merely once a year at a pilgrimage, as the cantoring directives point out as the most appropriate place & time for them) that even I am forgetting many of the lyrics to them.

That's where I'm coming from.

To further illustrate what I feel we have either lost or have no interest in recapturing, please take a look at the photos (at least the 1st few pages' full) here:
http://www.lemkowyna.net/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=750&Itemid=2

This is a village parish in the Carpathian Mountains of southeastern Poland; the people are Lemko Rusyns who returned to the area since the 1960s after being deported in 1947 to other parts of Poland.

For what reason should our parishes and pilgrimages not look like this? These are our people and they are following our religious traditions. Even if those people were singing entirely in English, even if nobody was in traditional dress, I can't think of anywhere I've been in the Pittsburgh Metropolia, with perhaps one partial exception (a "selo" parish in upstate PA), where I would think we belonged to the same church as those folks. (Technically we don't -- they're 'Polish' Orthodox, and rather than prostopinije or Galician plainchant they were probably singing Russian or Ukrainian choir music but almost certainly were singing our paraliturgical hymns. And their village is less than 10 miles from the border with Slovakia, where even though because the former were in a historically Galician eparchy and their music was a bit different, the people speak the same language & dialect and know the same customs and recognize no difference between the people who live on one side of the border and those on the other, except for an artificial political boundary between them.)

I could easily find photos of similar events in eastern Slovakia or the Transcarpathian district of Ukraine that would look entirely the same as in the link above, but would likewise look very different from what our religious practice looks like here. If we value our past and are still striving to return to our traditions, why are we more concerned about ostensibly "authentically-eastern" -- i.e., Greek and Russian -- practices than aligning our ways back to those folks where we actually came from?
Logged
Joseph-James
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 40

tonsured reader


« Reply #113 on: January 25, 2008, 04:17:35 PM »

It has been reported that J.Michael Thompson has been removed from his his postion with the Ruthenian Metropolia.  How does that affect the use of the green RDL books now?

Ung

Actually, it has only been reported unofficially that Prof. Thompson is no longer working in his various capacities for the Metropolia of Pittsburgh. To say that he has been removed is probably misleading, and implies some sort of involuntary termination, which is most unlikely. It is also true that he has had some working relationship with Bishop Nicholas of ACROD related to prostopinije, which has probably been documented on byzcath.org or one of the official church websites for the metropolia or ACROD. It is also entirely likely that Prof. Thompson is going to a better salary somewhere else, be it professional choir directing or teaching, than he could have made in his positions with the Metropolia. I hope his job change is of his own making, and helps him pursue additional career opportunities. He is, after all, an exceptionally hard working and multi-talented musician.
Logged

Jim
Ung-Certez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51

Vind'ber Selo


« Reply #114 on: January 26, 2008, 12:26:23 AM »

A deacon reported the story after his priest informed him.  I don't think the good deacon would be making this story up  just because he disagrees with the RDL.  I don't believe the BCW is going to print such a story.  We will have to wait and see if an "official" announcement is made by the BC Seminary and the Archeparchial Chancery.

U
Logged
Tags: Modernism inclusive language 
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.308 seconds with 143 queries.