Cavaradossi, Roman Interloper, ftbond, NitaMacdonald1930, SOL, etomaria, Kostyantyn, Benny, Ivanov325, DocH, andria, Joe Smith, CanuckK8, AJG80, gzt
4464 Registered Users |
|
|
8 registered (antv, haydukovich, Slavophile, Sbdn. John, Pani Rose, john ford, Cavaradossi, 1 invisible),
178
Guests and
4
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
4464 Members
26 Forums
30146 Topics
373641 Posts
Max Online: 1087 @ 07/16/07 01:09 PM
|
|
|
#209487 - 10/26/06 12:19 PM
Re: Proposal: discontinue the revised liturgy topic
|
Member
Registered: 06/22/06
Posts: 5599
Loc: Dublin
|
Don't know the Patriarch's full schedule for Chicago, but there must be one - check with St. Nicholas Cathedral and Ss Volodymyr and Ol'ha Catholicon (His Beatitude could easily be planning to visit both of them).
Fr Serge
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209489 - 10/27/06 12:39 AM
Re: Proposal: discontinue the revised liturgy topic
|
Member
Registered: 03/24/02
Posts: 7168
Loc: Kansas/UGCC
|
"Also as far as few BCC clergy participating, I guess the fear of reprisal for voicing their opinion from their respective heirarch is what is holding them back."
Actually, most of them, at least in Pittsburgh either pay no attention to this forum or hold it in contempt because of the behavior of a few. I posted the proposed rubrical changes several years ago and have criticized the inclusive language in the new translation both here and elsewhere, never have I been reprimanded. Fr. Elias, I think can say the same.
Fr. Deacon Lance While I have never been officially reprimanded I have been threatened to be reported to my bishop on this Forum. I don't think that kind of coercion goes unnoticed, either. FDD
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#209490 - 10/27/06 12:43 AM
Re: Proposal: discontinue the revised liturgy topic
|
John
Member
Registered: 11/02/01
Posts: 5900
Loc: Virginia
|
Originally posted by Deacon Lance:
"Also as far as few BCC clergy participating, I guess the fear of reprisal for voicing their opinion from their respective heirarch is what is holding them back."
Actually, most of them, at least in Pittsburgh either pay no attention to this forum or hold it in contempt because of the behavior of a few. I posted the proposed rubrical changes several years ago and have criticized the inclusive language in the new translation both here and elsewhere, never have I been reprimanded. Fr. Elias, I think can say the same.
Fr. Deacon Lance Dear Father Deacon Lance, I agree that many clergy and laity have never heard of this Forum or, if they have, pay no attention to it. There is a sizable number of clergy that does follow the forum on a daily basis but never post. Part of this is general fear (people might miss a theological mistake in a homily but probably not in something written). Part of this is fear of retribution (probably unrealistic in most eparchies but that fear is real). Part of it is peer pressure (there are a few clergy in the pro-revision group who accuse those who do not support the reform of disloyalty). For these priests it is easier to remain silent then to speak. I communicate with numerous clergy on a regular basis (mostly to fulfill requests from them for something involving music). I never mention the Forum but they often do – and almost always with a lot of support and thanks for the Forum (in general). I am sure that there are some as you have described (who hold the Forum in contempt). My experience on an almost daily basis tells me that they are the minority. John / Admin 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#209491 - 10/27/06 09:44 PM
Re: Proposal: discontinue the revised liturgy topic
|
Member
Registered: 07/23/05
Posts: 2436
Loc: The Third Rome
|
Originally posted by Jim: You quote that you will be fasting, praying and giving alms, and that is an excellent idea and I pray that you will be able to fulfill it. That is probably the first spiritual idea that you have expressed in all the posts in this section.
Fr. Anthony, I think you are speaking in anger or frustration. I will pray for you. Dispassionate discernment for everyone involved here would work wonders, don't you think?
Also more Byzantine Catholic participation on this topic would help, but there are very few BCC clergy willing to post here. Some IEMC & the IELC members have been kind enough to speak within this topic on occasion. That leaves mainly BCC laity, and lots of others from outside the BCC who have no direct stake in the matter, which makes it harder for Byzantine Catholics to get to the heart of the matter here. Other groups operate by different rules which don't necessarily apply when looking at how the BCC works, democratic processes of decision-making for example.
There needs to be reinforcement from other channels to help whatever issues there are become clearer to everyone, which is where prayer, fasting, and almsgiving comes in.
I will be silent for a while, owing to a trip east to Pittsburgh and environs. Perhaps that will help some.  Dear Jim, The reason that "others from outside the BCC" are getting involved is because we DO have a stake here. Modernism and Renovationism are contagious diseases, like plagues, and we don't want our Churches to be infected by them. The first principle of epidemiology is to isolate and contain. Which is precisely why we are stepping in. As a side note, and I wouldn't even mention it if you had not repeated it 3 times in this topic, but you seem to have a strange way of showing respect for an Archmandrite: "Fr. Anthony, I think you are speaking in anger or frustration. I will pray for you. Dispassionate discernment for everyone involved here would work wonders, don't you think?" "Now tell us how you really feel." "Well, Fr. Anthony, frankly, many posters appear to be more interested in flexing their debate technique muscles than in arriving at consensus. Prayer, fasting, and alms giving can make a greater difference, now and in the long run. " I realize that you are on the left coast, and things are different there, but I, and I am sure others, find your tone disrespectful to Fr. Anthony. Alexandr
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index