OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 25, 2014, 05:46:25 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   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: "Liturgical Reform"  (Read 4195 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« on: October 11, 2005, 12:22:33 AM »

I often hear, from different professors, laymen, and clergymen, of the need for "Liturgical Reform"  - as if it were some great idea permeating their minds; but then, as I delve deeper, I get different perspectives on the issue, so much so that many of them would probably be disgusted by the others' definitions of such.

I was just wondering what people have encountered along the lines of "Liturgical Reform," ideas, suggestions, comments.... whatever.  I have my ideas, but not the time at the moment to write them down (they'll come soon, I hope).
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,096


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2005, 12:58:36 AM »

I normally have a bad reaction when I hear that term. The term brings up the obvious question, what exactly is so wrong with the services that there needs to be an entire movement to reform them (as opposed to, say, each individual bishop correcting problems as he sees fit)? Don't get me wrong, if "reforms" are for God's glory or to facilitate our salvation, and not just being done for the sake of lazy 21st century humanity, then I'd be all for them (e.g., switching from choirs to congregational singing to stimulate awareness of what is actually being said and going on during liturgy)...
« Last Edit: October 11, 2005, 12:59:14 AM by Asteriktos » Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,441


« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2005, 02:14:27 AM »

To me, "Liturgical Reform" is doing the service right and not chopping it to pieces.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2005, 07:30:10 AM »

To me, "Liturgical Reform" is doing the service right and not chopping it to pieces.

Of course, that begs the question, "right by whom/when?" I mean, right by the 16th century will look different than right by the 12th century...

I actually agree with your statement, with qualifications... unfortunately, I'm supposed to be writing a paper for another class right now (due in 1 1/2 hours), so I think I'll work on that first.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2005, 09:50:42 AM »

Having watched the fallout from such "reform", I'd say that at this point it's pretty much impossible in Orthodoxy, especially with all the Protestants and Catholics pouring in who are trying to escape their versions of such reform. Maybe in another century....
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2005, 09:58:36 AM »

I think that Keble is on the money here.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,441


« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2005, 11:16:46 AM »

Of course, that begs the question, "right by whom/when?" I mean, right by the 16th century will look different than right by the 12th century...

I actually agree with your statement, with qualifications... unfortunately, I'm supposed to be writing a paper for another class right now (due in 1 1/2 hours), so I think I'll work on that first.

For example, not habitually skipping litanies left and right since one might think they are "extraneous" (i.e. between the Gospel/Sermon and Cherubikon) - they're not and have a reason for being there, not as a matter of practice skipping all the Trisagion prayers at the beginning of Vespers and starting with "Come let us worship..." (I've been told that you NEVER do anything without invoking the Holy Spirit), eliminating the use of all instrumental accompaniment (I guess certain instruments are allowed in the Coptic Rites though).  I'm sure there are plenty more examples as well.
Logged
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2005, 11:36:22 AM »

Liturgical reform is constantly going on.  Even on the Holy Mountain.  Now this is not Vatican II style "updating" but long before the evils of modernism, ecumenism and new calendarism (doesn't quite have the ring of rum, romanism and rebelion...).  I would assume that Greek, Russian, Serbian et al. practice were the same at one point or another, but obviously today they have diverged in small areas.  Yeah I think the radical ideas of Fr. Alexander Schmemman aren't good liturgical reform, but OTOH one doesn't want to become a russian Old Ritualist either. 
Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2005, 01:46:09 PM »

For example, not habitually skipping litanies left and right since one might think they are "extraneous" (i.e. between the Gospel/Sermon and Cherubikon) - they're not and have a reason for being there, not as a matter of practice skipping all the Trisagion prayers at the beginning of Vespers and starting with "Come let us worship..." (I've been told that you NEVER do anything without invoking the Holy Spirit), eliminating the use of all instrumental accompaniment (I guess certain instruments are allowed in the Coptic Rites though).

The thing is that it's one thing to talk about local touch-up of various practices and custom (and using instruments definitely comes under "custom"), but another thing entirely to talk about systematic reform. To a westerner-- almost any westerner-- Eastern "reform" is about as extensive as toenail trimming. The kind of retrospective reconsideration which is the foundation of western "reform" (a) is hard to even imagine, and (b) would potentially be a lot more devastating than anything done in the west. There's no getting past the fact that Eastern rites are much more evolved in form that Western rites, so that if you pick the right time period to use as a model, you could easily end up with something that no modern Orthodox would recognize as Eastern.

Stepping up to the "there is a reason for them being there" issue is especially dangerous. This particularly a problem in the West now, because you can mean something by doing something, but you cannot make anyone else have it mean the same thing. Making changes is itself an act whose meaning cannot really be controlled-- see under "Nikon, Patriarch".
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2005, 03:07:33 PM »

For example, not habitually skipping litanies left and right since one might think they are "extraneous" (i.e. between the Gospel/Sermon and Cherubikon) - they're not and have a reason for being there,

See, here's the rub: those litanies were slowly removed when the evolved catecumenate vanished; the fathers and hierarchs felt that it was wrong to continue to do the petitions and prayers for the catecumens and those preparing for illumination just because they were there...  And remember, the prayers were not intended as "universal" prayers for all catecumens; they were specifically for the catecumens in that particular church.

I would have picked as an example how, say, in 99% of the Greek parishes I have been to, the hymn "Let my mouth be filled with your praise O Lord" (that comes after "...always now and forever" (right after communion) but before "Having partaken of the divine, holy, pure, immortal...") has been eliminated; and for that I can see no reason other than shaving time.

not as a matter of practice skipping all the Trisagion prayers at the beginning of Vespers and starting with "Come let us worship..." (I've been told that you NEVER do anything without invoking the Holy Spirit),

It is true that you should invoke the Spirit often; it is even part of the prayers read by the Priest and Deacon silently before the beginning of the Divine Liturgy.  But that prayer isn't part of every service; not even part of every Sacrament (maybe it was at one point, but I have yet to see manuscripts to show that).  Plus, I've often heard argued that some of the elements that appear in every service (other than litanies) are often later additions (like the Apolysis, or dismissal prayer, that begins "May Christ our true God, through the intercessions of...")

While I think the constant evaluation of our services is an important sub-question to "Liturgical Reform," I also think we should try to delve into the subject matter of the context of the services as well; for example, how each of the sacraments originally were done in the context of the Eucharist, and how we've gotten away from that; or how some clergy like to charge 'per sacrament' and how some people make their weddings and baptisms "invite-only."

Plus, I think Keble is on to something....

There's no getting past the fact that Eastern rites are much more evolved in form that Western rites, so that if you pick the right time period to use as a model, you could easily end up with something that no modern Orthodox would recognize as Eastern. 

Understanding this point, maybe we like to vilanize the idea of "liturgical reform" because of how the West has at time bastardized it, but we do need to understand that the Eastern Liturgies have undergone reform over their lifetime; they've just done it with a different "fronima" (the Greek word for mindset, way of belief/conducting oneself) than the West has.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2005, 03:51:55 PM »

Quote
See, here's the rub: those litanies were slowly removed when the evolved catecumenate vanished; the fathers and hierarchs felt that it was wrong to continue to do the petitions and prayers for the catecumens and those preparing for illumination just because they were there...  And remember, the prayers were not intended as "universal" prayers for all catecumens; they were specifically for the catecumens in that particular church.

The Litany of the Catechumens is not the only litany that is skipped. The Augmented Litany has also vanished, with its function seemingly taken over by the ridiculously extended Great Entrance, and, at least in the Antiochian churches I've been in, either the Litanies and Prayers of the Faithful are reduced to one, or skipped entirely.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2005, 06:21:51 PM »

The Litany of the Catechumens is not the only litany that is skipped. 

True.

The Augmented Litany has also vanished, with its function seemingly taken over by the ridiculously extended Great Entrance, and, at least in the Antiochian churches I've been in, either the Litanies and Prayers of the Faithful are reduced to one, or skipped entirely. 

Ridiculously extended?  I'm sorry - maybe you should read about how long the Great Entrance took in the period between the 5th and 16th centuries... But then, we are talking about Divine Liturgies that could take up 4 hours +, depending on where you were (Like Agia Sophia, with both the Patriarch and the Emperor present - yeah, those services could run longer than the 4 hours with no problem).

And as far as the Litanies of the Faithful and the 2 prayers of the Faithful, what about them?  I know that they were removed, but I'm not sure for what reason.  I know that it seems as if anything that was apparently redundant was taken out, but I'm not sure if that was the reason.

I don't want to react too strongly to your "ridiculously extended" comment, but I've heard enough about how the monks "tarnished the tradition of the Church" by "adding" to its services and changing things from the Cathedral Rite (this was all coming from the Emeritus Liturgics professor).  The Cathedral Rite actually took longer than the Monastic Rite.  So the comments about some parts being "extended" too much don't sit well with me... Nothing personal.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
BasilCan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 204


« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2005, 09:13:21 PM »

Liturgical reform has been an issue in the Greek and Russian Churches for almost 200 years.  Changes to Greek liturgical services occurred in both the early and late parts of the 19th century. The reason - the services were too long and people were not attending them. By the early 20th century, the Russians had also decided to "reform" (for the most part shorten) their services. But their reforms were interrupted by the Russian revolution. If you want to know what a typical Greek parish (and by "Greek parish" I mean all those churches that traditionally followed the Greek tyipikon - Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria) would have been like prior to 1828 (the date of the first great Greek reform) you could attend a monastery on Mount Athos or most of Fr. Ephraim's monasteries (which follow the Athonite typikon) or go to a traditional ROCOR parish to get a feel of such services.

To be somewhat general here, most North American Antiochian services are based upon the 1956 Service Book which was a child of Metropolitan BASHIR who wanted all services to be no more than an hour (just like the Episcopalians). This is why, for example the Antiochian baptismal service has only one exorcism, the marriage services is greatly edited and early versions of the weekday Evening Divine Liturgy skipped the complete Litany before the Lord's prayer (as well as the Prayer of Fervent Supplication and those prayers that follow).

So, reform has generally meant "abbreviated services"  I'm not sure if abbreviated services are good or bad for one's spiritual life. It is interesting to note that those jurisdictions which tend to shorten services (like the Antiochian) tend to have pew/chairs that are required for long services. While those with longer services (like ROCOR parishes) tend not to have pews. I'd suggest that if we withdrew chairs from parishes with abbreviated services, this would be a good thing!  (Conversely, adding chairs to those with longer services would be a good thing too) I'm sure many would (and will) agree.

It is important that we worship our Lord and not the Liturgy.But, we must remember that the Liturgy leads us to the Lord. As we pray, so we shall believe. Any large scale "official reform" (aka shortening) should recall what happen to the Catholics after Vatican 2.

Basil



Logged
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2005, 11:31:32 PM »

Quote
Ridiculously extended?  I'm sorry - maybe you should read about how long the Great Entrance took in the period between the 5th and 16th centuries... But then, we are talking about Divine Liturgies that could take up 4 hours +, depending on where you were (Like Agia Sophia, with both the Patriarch and the Emperor present - yeah, those services could run longer than the 4 hours with no problem).

It's not the temporal length that I dislike -- the Great Entrance at Agia Sophia took so long because the place was so dang big and there was a lot of stuff to do. What I dislike is extending the commemorations (which were themselves a late addition) from commemorating the monarch, bishop, and faithful who are present, to a list of 50 names people have submitted, a list of the departed, references to current natural disasters and wars, current events, etc., i.e. the stuff that *should* go in the Augmented Litany.

Quote
And as far as the Litanies of the Faithful and the 2 prayers of the Faithful, what about them?  I know that they were removed, but I'm not sure for what reason.  I know that it seems as if anything that was apparently redundant was taken out, but I'm not sure if that was the reason.

The Litanies of the Faithful are redundant (in this, I agree with Fr. Schmemann), but the prayers certainly aren't. They're prayers asking for the congregation to be made worthy to participate in the mysteries that are soon to follow.

Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #14 on: October 11, 2005, 11:54:41 PM »

So, reform has generally meant "abbreviated services" I'm not sure if abbreviated services are good or bad for one's spiritual life. It is interesting to note that those jurisdictions which tend to shorten services (like the Antiochian) tend to have pew/chairs that are required for long services. While those with longer services (like ROCOR parishes) tend not to have pews. I'd suggest that if we withdrew chairs from parishes with abbreviated services, this would be a good thing! (Conversely, adding chairs to those with longer services would be a good thing too) I'm sure many would (and will) agree.

It is important that we worship our Lord and not the Liturgy.But, we must remember that the Liturgy leads us to the Lord. As we pray, so we shall believe. Any large scale "official reform" (aka shortening) should recall what happen to the Catholics after Vatican 2. 

I can agree with parts of your first paragraph.  But I would challenge the notion that reform means just "shortening," by stating that what they did in the 19th century was not true "reform" but rather reform in the Protestant sense.  So I think, for the purposes of this discussion, we need to expand our definition or view of true Liturgical Reform; I don't see truncating the services for time's sake as anything other than prideful barbarism.




It's not the temporal length that I dislike -- the Great Entrance at Agia Sophia took so long because the place was so dang big and there was a lot of stuff to do. What I dislike is extending the commemorations (which were themselves a late addition) from commemorating the monarch, bishop, and faithful who are present, to a list of 50 names people have submitted, a list of the departed, references to current natural disasters and wars, current events, etc., i.e. the stuff that *should* go in the Augmented Litany. 

See, I don't get much of this outside of the commemorations when the bishop is present, simply because in the Greek practice you're only supposed to have commemorations during the Great Entrance when the bishop is present.  Now when he is, I do think they get a bit long, but I think that is more to compensate for our weaknesses as people than for Liturgical pomp.  I think that many people only believe that one is being prayed for if they can hear the name read; I encounter the same attitude when it comes to Paraklesis, which has a place for commemoration of the living.  I've heard of people becoming livid if the priest decides to read the names quietly, thinking that he hasn't prayed for them at all if they couldn't hear it!  But some, truly, is because of the bishop's own sense of piety or whatever, and so the commomorations can get long.  (Add that to the time taken if the Bishop does actually finish the Proskomedia during the Cherubic Hymn where the rubrics tell him to do it).

The Litanies of the Faithful are redundant (in this, I agree with Fr. Schmemann), but the prayers certainly aren't. They're prayers asking for the congregation to be made worthy to participate in the mysteries that are soon to follow. 

True, and only one has been cut.  Now that is one that I happen to agree should be reinstated.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2005, 12:31:38 AM »

Quote
See, I don't get much of this outside of the commemorations when the bishop is present, simply because in the Greek practice you're only supposed to have commemorations during the Great Entrance when the bishop is present.  Now when he is, I do think they get a bit long, but I think that is more to compensate for our weaknesses as people than for Liturgical pomp.

In the Antiochian practice, the Great Entrance wends an entire circuit around the interior of the church, and dozens upon dozens of names are read. It completely breaks the liturgical moment of transferring the gifts from the prothesis to the altar, by turning it into a commemoration of everything one can think of.

Quote
I think that many people only believe that one is being prayed for if they can hear the name read; I encounter the same attitude when it comes to Paraklesis, which has a place for commemoration of the living.

If the people and events mentioned in the entrance were instead mentioned in the Augmented Litany, people would still hear them.
Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #16 on: October 12, 2005, 07:58:16 AM »

To be somewhat general here, most North American Antiochian services are based upon the 1956 Service Book which was a child of Metropolitan BASHIR who wanted all services to be no more than an hour (just like the Episcopalians).

I can't speak to the length of Anglican services in 1956. These days, in large part because of liturgical reform, they are generally longer than an hour. Antecommunion normally will take 45 minutes to an hour, and communion itself, from Sursum Corda to dismissal, takes about another half an hour. This assumes a normal eucharist with a reasonable sermon and with hymns.

To my ear Eastern services are very much talkier than Western services. It seems to take more words to get the same things done, and then there are all those (from the western viewpoint) extra litanies. The main solution to service length in both cases seems to be simply to talk a lot faster-- unless you are a Protestant.

Quote
It is important that we worship our Lord and not the Liturgy.But, we must remember that the Liturgy leads us to the Lord. As we pray, so we shall believe. Any large scale "official reform" (aka shortening) should recall what happen to the Catholics after Vatican 2.

Ah, but the whole topic of what thus happened is very controversial, and the content of that controversy is utterly germane here. There are at least three different versions of then/now:

  • The Official Reformers Version: Roman practice had fallen into a pattern of mindless Latin repetition surrounded by a raft of private devotion. Novus Ordo fixed all this by changing to the vernacular, pruning the excess verbiage, and making the liturgy more participatory.
  • The Arch-Traditionalist Version: There was nothing wrong with the old liturgy, and the new one has obviously spawned all sort of bad attitudes and in particular a modernist viewpoint that opens the church to every sort of heresy.
  • The Depressed Realist Version: '50s RC culture was a disaster waiting to happen-- and it did happen. Something had to be done, but in practice most of what was done perpetuated what was bad and damaged what was good. The whole thing needs to be done over again.

The deeper problem, I have come to realize, is that "as we pray, so shall we believe" isn't true in the way that liturgists want it to be true. You can't control what people believe by controlling the words they pray or the ritual acts they engage in. Jack Spong is the poster child for this. According to the BCP, he never had a Sunday service from the day he became an Episcopalian that didn't include recitation of the Creed, but it didn't stop him from apostacizing-- and continuing to say it. Western liturgy, by 1960, was due for reform across the board, and it was already headed for reform. The intent of that reform was to focus the liturgy specifically on the eucharist itself. To the extent that this was realized (and it was realized among the Episcopalians, and even to some extent among other Protestants), reform did prove to be a good thing.

BTW: I think we need to be honest here-- and as a high church Episcopalian I may certainly be numbered among the sinners-- that there is a certain machismo in having long services.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2005, 10:45:03 AM »

In the Antiochian practice, the Great Entrance wends an entire circuit around the interior of the church, and dozens upon dozens of names are read. It completely breaks the liturgical moment of transferring the gifts from the prothesis to the altar, by turning it into a commemoration of everything one can think of. 

We wind the circuit... and when the bishop is present, he commemorates names, but not "dozens"...

If the people and events mentioned in the entrance were instead mentioned in the Augmented Litany, people would still hear them. 

My point was that the names don't even need to be read aloud again at the augmented Litany... they were read at the oblation, which is enough.  But the people outside want to hear their dozens of names read aloud, and if it lengthens the service they want things cut from other places.  All this means is that we need to teach people about the nature of commemorations and when they should occur and whatnot.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2005, 10:49:53 AM »

The deeper problem, I have come to realize, is that "as we pray, so shall we believe" isn't true in the way that liturgists want it to be true. You can't control what people believe by controlling the words they pray or the ritual acts they engage in.   

I would have to agree with your first statement; but I think the second can be combated.  I think that, over the long-haul, it is possible to have people appreciate the ways in which the Liturgy can apply to life and how it expouds some of the greatest truths of the faith.  But this is a monumental task, one that can take much time, and much frustration.  Maybe it's my relative youthful innocence, to think that maybe this condition of lex orandi lex credendi can be reinstated.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2005, 10:54:46 AM »

Quote
My point was that the names don't even need to be read aloud again at the augmented Litany... they were read at the oblation, which is enough.

True, but reading them at the Augmented Litany allows the entire congregation to pray for them.
Logged
monkvasyl
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: UOC 0f USA
Posts: 653



« Reply #20 on: October 12, 2005, 11:00:00 AM »

Liturgical reform/ restoration via New Skete usage?  Or, maybe a return to the old Catherdral rite for parishes as opposed to the monastic usage?  Rome's mistake with its reforms was that the laity, as well as the clergy, were never educated.  Also, I remember in the seminary (when I was RC) that the reforms of Vatican II were a compromise between the liberals and conservatives.  A compromise that was a botched job.  The reforms were actually more drastic than what was put into effect, except that the conservatives were bent out of shape over them. ÂÂ
Logged

The unworthy hierodeacon, Vasyl
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #21 on: October 12, 2005, 12:04:09 PM »

Rome's mistake with its reforms was that the laity, as well as the clergy, were never educated.

Well, um, (a) I don't think the expectation of such education is really reasonable, and (b) even then it often doesn't "take" (see Spong again). You cannot control the meaning of the liturgy through education, at least not as much as you might think.

Quote
Also, I remember in the seminary (when I was RC) that the reforms of Vatican II were a compromise between the liberals and conservatives.

That's something of a different issue, but one perhaps we should address briefly. Opening up the door for reform is opening it for change in general; hence, the amount of excess change you get depends on the one hand on how much the instigators push, and on the other on how much the committee/synod/etc. resists. In practice, RC/Episcopal reform was heavily contaminated by three bad impulses:

  • the desire simply to shake things up
  • contempt for the old liturgy precisely as a symbol of the old "establishment"
  • theological adventurism and the opportunity to write it into the liturgy

Conservatism is a counterweight to these, but at least for the first two it is the wrong counterweight.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2005, 07:20:26 AM »

True, but reading them at the Augmented Litany allows the entire congregation to pray for them.

Very true.  But then again, one could argue that the entire congregation's prayers are manifest through their relationship with the Priest as well... as long as they maintain a good relationship with him, and as long as he continues in the tradition of Orthodoxy (if if he doesn't, and the people reject him, oh boy).  But I like the thought of saying them in the augmented Litany better (that is, of course, if you do them.  I don't think that the commemoration of those names even belongs in the Liturgy at that point... I think the commemoration at the oblation is good enough).
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2005, 07:26:31 AM »

Liturgical reform/ restoration via New Skete usage?  Or, maybe a return to the old Catherdral rite for parishes as opposed to the monastic usage?   

See, therein lies the debate... Do we go back to the old Cathedral rite, which not only had a different form, but also a different ethos, or do we use whatever the monastic tradition has brought to us.  Remember that even by the 12th century the strong monastic presence in Constantinople had affected the Cathedral rite.  Trying to integrate people into the old Cathedral rite would be a process of decades - changing the Liturgy overnight or even in the span of a few months would be so drastic that it would affect the health of the Church and its people.  But maybe the Liturgy does need to go back... who knows.  (This is why I wanted this thread, to debate the pros/cons of this kind of stuff).

I'm wondering, though - would the switch to the Cathedral Rite work?  I mean, remember also, the Cathedral rite included the concept of the Stational Liturgy: often the Matins would be done in one Church, with the community moving to another Church for Liturgy; the beginning of Liturgy would be in the Narthex, and then there would be a movement into the center of the Nave, and then the Clergy would later enter the sanctuary.  (We try and re-create this ethos every year here at Holy Cross for the Liturgy of St. James.)
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
monkvasyl
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: UOC 0f USA
Posts: 653



« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2005, 08:46:57 AM »

I'm wondering, though - would the switch to the Cathedral Rite work?ÂÂ  I mean, remember also, the Cathedral rite included the concept of the Stational Liturgy: often the Matins would be done in one Church, with the community moving to another Church for Liturgy; the beginning of Liturgy would be in the Narthex, and then there would be a movement into the center of the Nave, and then the Clergy would later enter the sanctuary.ÂÂ  (We try and re-create this ethos every year here at Holy Cross for the Liturgy of St. James.)

If I remember correctly New skete did that with the liturgy sometimes beginning at the old temple and processing to the new temple.  With the situation in America of so few orthodox churches is some areas, this might be something that might be dropped.  Tho, in areas of a larger orthodox presence, on some feasts this might be a way of encouraging orthodox unity.  Some day I really have to find the time to attend the Liturgy of St. James.
Logged

The unworthy hierodeacon, Vasyl
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2005, 11:18:11 AM »

Quote
as long as they maintain a good relationship with him, and as long as he continues in the tradition of Orthodoxy (if if he doesn't, and the people reject him, oh boy).

Oh come on!  You know that is not how we do it in the GOA, we only lock out the priests that are upholding Orthodoxy. 
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,441


« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2005, 11:46:48 AM »

See, here's the rub: those litanies were slowly removed when the evolved catecumenate vanished; the fathers and hierarchs felt that it was wrong to continue to do the petitions and prayers for the catecumens and those preparing for illumination just because they were there...ÂÂ  And remember, the prayers were not intended as "universal" prayers for all catecumens; they were specifically for the catecumens in that particular church.


I want to get back to this.  How has the catchechumenate "vanished"?  My parish has continuously had at least a couple of catechumens over the past 5 years or so.  Are you saying you never have any?  Aren't you a convert yourself?  We also add the "preparing for illumination" litanies when it is close (e.g. <1 month before) the cathecumens are going to be Baptized/Christmated.
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,441


« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2005, 11:47:38 AM »

Oh come on!ÂÂ  You know that is not how we do it in the GOA, we only lock out the priests that are upholding Orthodoxy.ÂÂ  

 Grin
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2005, 11:55:35 AM »

I want to get back to this. How has the catchechumenate "vanished"? My parish has continuously had at least a couple of catechumens over the past 5 years or so. Are you saying you never have any? Aren't you a convert yourself? We also add the "preparing for illumination" litanies when it is close (e.g. <1 month before) the cathecumens are going to be Baptized/Christmated. 

I never said the "catecumenate" vanished, I said the "developed catecumenate" vanished; we don't make our catecumens go through the same training as the Church once did, just like (more often than not) we don't have the catecumens leave the liturgy.  The Divine Liturgy is not an instrument for conversion, but a gathering of the converted.  But the whole developed catecumenate did vanish from the Church, which is why the litanies of the catecumens and those preparing for illumination did disappear - that is historical fact.  Now if in your church you have a very involved and tested catecumenate, then bless you - you have a need for those litanies, then.

{edit}
Of course we have catecumens - and they go through a process.  But the bishop hasn't deemed it necessary to re-add the petitions.  Am I a convert?  We ALL are - so don't ask a question like that.  Just because I "converted" when I was 6 months old doesn't change things - all that changed is that I got my catechism after baptism rather than before it.  I really don't like the question "are you a convert" (as if you can't tell).  I think it is nothing but divisive and is unnecessary - if you want to ask the same question, ask me at what age I converted.  My baptismal birthday is August 15, 1981 (six months short eight days).
« Last Edit: October 13, 2005, 11:59:39 AM by cleveland » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,441


« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2005, 12:37:37 PM »

Sorry, Cleveland no divisiveness intended, but I there is a different mindset between those with established "ethnic" parishes that never have cathecumens and those there are more diverse that do.

Most of our cathecumens actually leave - and not at the request of the priest.  This certain family over 5 years back started the trend.  They heard "Cathecumens depart!", thought to themselves "Well that's us! Bye!" and most of them since have just followed suit.  My priest tells them of the intention (behind the deacon's proclamation) and gives them a choice.  If they do leave, he has some cathechism materials for them to read.
Logged
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #30 on: October 13, 2005, 02:15:21 PM »

Quote
But I like the thought of saying them in the augmented Litany better (that is, of course, if you do them.  I don't think that the commemoration of those names even belongs in the Liturgy at that point... I think the commemoration at the oblation is good enough).

The Russian usage always has the Augmented Litany. It's place in the Liturgy mirrors its place in vespers and matins, as a counterpart to the Great Litany. The latter contains general prayers, and the former contains prayers specific to the congregation.

Quote
But the whole developed catecumenate did vanish from the Church, which is why the litanies of the catecumens and those preparing for illumination did disappear - that is historical fact.

Like the Augmented Litany, the Litany and Dismissal of the Catechumens never disappeared from the Russian usage.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #31 on: October 13, 2005, 04:10:22 PM »

Sorry, Cleveland no divisiveness intended,

I figured as much; just wanted to be careful with the terminology and such.

but I there is a different mindset between those with established "ethnic" parishes that never have cathecumens and those there are more diverse that do. 

I don't know if I'd say "never have catecumens" - but rather say that maybe they get them and drive them away, or don't keep them long enough.  And I still don't like the "more diverse" comment... but that's me; I think it is applicable in the context - I just don't like the reality that there are "more diverse" and "less diverse."

Most of our cathecumens actually leave - and not at the request of the priest. This certain family over 5 years back started the trend. They heard "Cathecumens depart!", thought to themselves "Well that's us! Bye!" and most of them since have just followed suit. My priest tells them of the intention (behind the deacon's proclamation) and gives them a choice. If they do leave, he has some cathechism materials for them to read. 

Now this is refreshing.  I do firmly believe that the Divine Liturgy is not a teaching tool, nor a way to bring people into the faith.  You can use Vespers, Matins, classes, love, reading materials, relationships, activities, the Holy Spirit; but the Liturgy was never intended to be used to preach to the non-Christian.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2005, 04:11:42 PM by cleveland » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #32 on: October 13, 2005, 04:15:13 PM »

The Russian usage always has the Augmented Litany. It's place in the Liturgy mirrors its place in vespers and matins, as a counterpart to the Great Litany. The latter contains general prayers, and the former contains prayers specific to the congregation.

Like the Augmented Litany, the Litany and Dismissal of the Catechumens never disappeared from the Russian usage.

And I'm glad they didn't, then.  But in the Liturgical tradition of the EP, they did; it is the right of the local Church to do such a thing, in connection with its synod of bishops.

(I'm not a fan of Liturgical uniformity, and think that maybe the standardization of the Liturgy of St. John, while benefitial and helpful, may not have been the right thing in the long-haul; of course, in this thought, I get dangerously close to questioning the work of the Holy Spirit - Who always prevails with the Church, even if not with its people.)
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,441


« Reply #33 on: October 13, 2005, 05:57:48 PM »

I figured as much; just wanted to be careful with the terminology and such.
No prob

I don't know if I'd say "never have catecumens" - but rather say that maybe they get them and drive them away, or don't keep them long enough.ÂÂ  And I still don't like the "more diverse" comment... but that's me; I think it is applicable in the context - I just don't like the reality that there are "more diverse" and "less diverse."
Sorry, but I don't know how else to put it.

Now this is refreshing.ÂÂ  I do firmly believe that the Divine Liturgy is not a teaching tool, nor a way to bring people into the faith.ÂÂ  You can use Vespers, Matins, classes, love, reading materials, relationships, activities, the Holy Spirit; but the Liturgy was never intended to be used to preach to the non-Christian.
While in principle you may be correct and have a valid point, in reality I just don't think it works and the Liturgy MUST serve as a teaching tool.  Two reasons:

1) Children - My priest makes the point that, what better way to teach our children than by having them experience the Divine services.  We have a short "Sunday School" with various age groups, which starts at the end of the Liturgy every Sunday.  The choir sings "Blessed Be the Name of the Lord" 3x, the goes directly into Psalm 33 and we have a mini-dismissal/blessing by Priest for the kids and teachers.  They have a lesson which lasts about 20-30 min during the rest of the Dismissal, announcements, "God Grant you..." for whomever/whatever, any "Memory Eternal"'s, etc. and then they join everyone else in the hall for lunch as usual.

2) As the Protestant Reformation moved the Liturgy (for the sake of simplicity) from a Eucharistic orientation unto an emphasis on the Word, this is what "the West" knows - they got to church to here the Gospel preached (us to, but that's besides the point of course).  What are these other "teaching" services you speak of?  They are of an utterly different phrenoma per se.  Come discover the Ancient Church in Orthodoxy!  Visit us for Wednesday morning Matins!  Huh?!?  We may both know that the majority of the special melodies, church festal cycle teachings, etc. are in the weekday services, but potential converts wouldn't have a clue nor many Orthodox for that matter.  Going to church on Sunday, the Lord's Day, is what they know.

Furthermore, as society becomes increasingly secular, we have a much different situation with respect to converts than in the past.  As one of our deacons pointed out during a talk he gave last Tuesday after Vespers, we have a much different ballgame today.  To a large extent, we are not dealing with converts from an established tradition, but the unchurched.  The Deacon pointed out that (in the Hapgood service book, for example) there are tons of renunciation prayers/exorcisms for various sects, heresies and Protestant denominations, but if someone doesn't know what they believed before, then what good is it to do these?  The Liturgy will always be the big draw.  Whether the established faithful need to be educated and encouraged to attend the weekday services or converts/cathecumens likewise, it will always be secondary in nature.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #34 on: October 18, 2005, 05:50:44 AM »

1) Children - My priest makes the point that, what better way to teach our children than by having them experience the Divine services. We have a short "Sunday School" with various age groups, which starts at the end of the Liturgy every Sunday. The choir sings "Blessed Be the Name of the Lord" 3x, the goes directly into Psalm 33 and we have a mini-dismissal/blessing by Priest for the kids and teachers. They have a lesson which lasts about 20-30 min during the rest of the Dismissal, announcements, "God Grant you..." for whomever/whatever, any "Memory Eternal"'s, etc. and then they join everyone else in the hall for lunch as usual. 

I guess that the Liturgy should be teaching us all a thing or two each time we participate in it... if it doesn't, are we really participating?  I meant the comment as "the Liturgy was not intended to be used to teach the non-Orthodox (catecumens or otherwise) about the faith; the Liturgy was only intended for those who are already baptized and chrismated."

In reality, the kids will learn more about the Liturgy by being there than by hearing about it in "sunday school," but there needs to be an element of connection made by the teachers and such once the Liturgy is over - so the model your Church uses (which is similar to the one mine does) can be effective if done right.

2) As the Protestant Reformation moved the Liturgy (for the sake of simplicity) from a Eucharistic orientation unto an emphasis on the Word, this is what "the West" knows - they got to church to here the Gospel preached (us to, but that's besides the point of course). What are these other "teaching" services you speak of? They are of an utterly different phrenoma per se. Come discover the Ancient Church in Orthodoxy! Visit us for Wednesday morning Matins! Huh?!? We may both know that the majority of the special melodies, church festal cycle teachings, etc. are in the weekday services, but potential converts wouldn't have a clue nor many Orthodox for that matter. Going to church on Sunday, the Lord's Day, is what they know.

Furthermore, as society becomes increasingly secular, we have a much different situation with respect to converts than in the past. As one of our deacons pointed out during a talk he gave last Tuesday after Vespers, we have a much different ballgame today. To a large extent, we are not dealing with converts from an established tradition, but the unchurched. The Deacon pointed out that (in the Hapgood service book, for example) there are tons of renunciation prayers/exorcisms for various sects, heresies and Protestant denominations, but if someone doesn't know what they believed before, then what good is it to do these? The Liturgy will always be the big draw. Whether the established faithful need to be educated and encouraged to attend the weekday services or converts/cathecumens likewise, it will always be secondary in nature. 

I don't have the energy to comment at the moment... but it will come soon, don't worry!
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,953


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #35 on: October 20, 2005, 12:35:47 PM »

Do ing some research I came across this article:
http://www.analogion.com/CathedralRite.html

The Romana Capella with Bishop Kaliistos presiding actually served the Vespers in the Byzantine Cathedral Rite.  An interesting note is that contrary to what is usually stated the Cathedral Rite's music is actually simpler than the monastic.  Below is the outline.

VESPERS (LYCHNIKON) ACCORDING TO THE RITE OF THE GREAT CHURCH FOR THE EVE OF
THE FATHERS OF THE 1ST ECUMENICAL COUNCIL AT NICAEA

[Procession of the Hierarch from his residence to his throne by the
Beautiful Doors (at the West of the nave) with acclamations]


Blessing: Blessed is the Kingdom...
Litany of Peace
Prayer of the First Antiphon
First Antiphon (Ps. 85 with refrain 'Glory to You, O God))
Little Litany
Prayer of the Final Antiphon
Final Antiphon (Ps. 67) with refrain 'Alleluia'

Ps. 140 with Refrain (Kekragarion) 'We glorify your saving resurrection,
Lover of humankind'.

Entrance of the Hierarch into the Sanctuary

(conclusion of Ps. 140)

Prokeimenon: (The Lord is King)

Ektene

The Three "Little" Antiphons:

1. Little Litany/Prayer/Ps. 114 with refrain 'At the prayers of the Motherof God...
2. Little Litany/Prayer/Ps. 115 with refrain 'O Son of God, risen from the dead...'
3. Little Litany/Prayer/Ps. 116 with the Trisagion as refrain


Litany of the Catechumens w/ Prayer
2 Little litanies with Prayers of the Faithful
Litany with Aiteseis (Let us complete our supplication)
Prayer of Dismissal

Descent to the Lower Throne at the Western (Beautiful) Doors of the Nave

Festal OT Readings from the Ambo
Festal Troparion with Psalm Verses
Prayer of Inclination
Dismissal (Deacon: Let us depart in peace!)

[Procession of the Hierarch from his throne by the Beautiful Doors (at the
West) to his residence with acclamations]

Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Tags:
Pages: 1   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 0.137 seconds with 62 queries.