This morning during Divine Liturgy, I followed along in the red book (1965/64 Liturgikon).

I noticed that the rubrics say "Master Bless."

Why do the deacons say "Reverend Father give the blessing?"

Seems like we're not even following the existing liturgy we're supposed to be using.

What makes us think that folks will follow a new liturgy, if they we aren't even using the version we're supposed to have been using since 1965.

Exactly! I bet the Hierarchs never attempted to enforce the Red Book...so how do we know it won't fly?

But has it not been said that the deacons have been being formed in the new liturgy for some years now, and is it not the case in the new translation that despota is no longer "Master" but "Reverend Father" so that we no longer get confused between who is Christ and who is that fellow in the long robes at the altar.

Is this not the new way of backing away from the theology of alter Christos, in persona Christi? Is this not yet another example of horizontal inclusive language? Is this not right in line with the growing anti-clericalism and congregationalism that is observable in the Orthodox jurisdictions in the United States?

Are we not, in this way, now, even more as the Orthodox are, yet continuing to be in communion with Rome?

Eli

Check pages 32-33 of my now-famous book, particularly footnote 61.

Fr. Serge

Regarding "Master bless!", many Orthodox groups only say this when a bishop is present, and otherwise say "Father bless!" to a priest other times.

The thread asks "Will parishes embrace the new liturgy?" As with most things concerning the faith, it will be a matter for individual consideration, but I suspect that most people in my own parish will accept it as long as some catechesis takes place- even if it takes place as the new books begin being used!

What will have to be worked around possibly are musical settings that are too difficult for collective use, if there are any . After all, some of the music has been arrived at by compromise, after considering variations in local cantor usage. I have my doubts about how successful such music can be, remembering that a camel is a horse designed by a committee.

Practically speaking, "Reverend Father" is what I put on the face of an envelope when I am about to mail a letter to some priest or other.

Eli

Father Serge, bless,

Thanks for the reference.

It seems that some BCs don't want to embrace the fullness of our Eastern Christian Carpatho-Rusyn spirituality. Why?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jim:
Regarding "Master bless!", many Orthodox groups only say this when a bishop is present, and otherwise say "Father bless!" to a priest other times.

Spoken like a true Byzantine. :rolleyes: Using others downfalls to justify ours. I'm sure that we can find one Orthodox church out of 100 to use as an example of why we should have liturgy in under 55 minutes too.

The thread asks "Will parishes embrace the new liturgy?" As with most things concerning the faith, it will be a matter for individual consideration, but I suspect that most people in my own parish will accept it as long as some catechesis takes place- even if it takes place as the new books begin being used!

Will that catechesis explain why the Red Book was never enacted and has been and is being thrown away. Or will that be conviently left out. Oh that's right, we have to be out in under an hour, there's some Orthodox church somewhere that does this so there's the justification.

I guess two wrongs to make a right.

mc

Michael said:

My Mom, who is Roman Catholic, and now attends my Byzantine parish, has on a number of occasions complained about the length of the service. Ironically, our local TV station cut back from 60 minutes of Jeopardy per day to just 30 minutes, and she said she missed that first half hour durng which she was just getting warmed up!

When some of us were told a couple years ago that the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts had been revised, we FEARED it had been shortened. I haven't noticed a decline in the number of people in the pews since they added a couple more psalms.

I know that our families are busy, that many travel significant distances to and from church, and most also stay for ECF afterwards. But Sunday was to be a day of REST; there's nothing in the Bible about a day of RECREATION or catching up on the housework, homework, or yardwork.

God has been so generous in his gifts to us, including our time on earth. Why, then, are we so selfish in returning time to him?

Sophia

Lets hope the RC/Protestant pews were empty because they needed some space to do their Byzantine prostrations. I agree with you, some people dont do much in the 7 days of the week and complain about going to Church for an hour or so. Mind you having to wade through bad liturgy and/or boring sermons is very heavy going and is of putting.

Now, Jim, really. There are a lot of people in our parish that are NOT drinking the kool-aid. When will this catechesis take place? During the homily? Instead of the sermon? Before or after liturgy? If it's a separate event, who will really attend this "catechesis"? We have had some wonderful guest speakers & Day(s) of Recollection at our parish, and there have been only about 15 people from our parish present (the rest coming from the surrounding community churches -- RC and sister BC parishes). We KNOW for a fact only a handful of people read the bulletin, so forget that. Maybe an email would work better!

When will this catechesis take place? During the homily? Instead of the sermon? Before or after liturgy? If it's a separate event, who will really attend this "catechesis"?

When is a good question. As far as I know, the ordering of books has not begun in our eparchy or Pittsburgh archeparchy, if posters on the Forum are correct. Does that mean that it is not necessarily a done deal? You tell me.

As to when (or if) within the life of a parish catechesis would take place, don't you think that'll eventually get answered by each priest for his congregation? So far, I haven't seen much to be worried about, but other posters are supposed to be sending me stuff so I can begin to worry.

A series of emails might get to a wider audience than meetings. But, a gradual transition as has been done with traditions, etc. in recent years may be possible, too, depending on how much change is actually coming. Such things as the elimination of some of the congregational amen's during the consecration were done by instruction from the ambon for several Sundays, for example.

As to people not drinking the Kool-Aid, not everyone wants to handle or can handle change at the same rate. I'm hoping that the new book is introduced with as little stress as possible, if it is to be introduced.

---

Jim,

Glory to Jesus Christ!

There will be stress ... there already is.

We're Slavs ... we've been forged in the fire of stress.

There is a tough road ahead for our priests. Those that have come over to the East in the last few years are no fools. They are well read, intellectual and often have large families.

If this new liturgy is rolled-out, our priests will be in a bind. People will walk and will continue to walk. Our poor priests will have to explain this inclusive language business to women who will be insulted.

Still the real question remains on the table unanswered. When will the BCC get on with evangelization and real renewal?

I started writing a response about will parishes embrace the new liturgy, and concluded that the real interest is whether it will be issued or not, and if so when. And so far, nobody has an answer. Nobody.

JohnS wrote: <<Still the real question remains on the table unanswered. When will the BCC get on with evangelization and real renewal?>>

The very fact that this new text in its present deficient form is about to be promulgated is evidence that our BC Church and leaders are not serious about evangelization and real renewal.

The manner in which all this has taken place, with disregard for the thoughts of the clergy and people is proof.

Only fidelity to authentic tradition will help the advancement of our Church.

The matter here is not that people always find change difficult. This might be true, but why should people ever be expected to go along with change that is a departure from authentic tradition? All changes are not good, just because they are changes. Changes could be a sign of life, as in going from infancy, to childhood, adolescense, etc. But toxic poisonings also bring about changes, but for the weakening and the destruction of one's health.

Chemotherapy is also a kind of toxic poisoning. Often it is a cloud with a silver lining IN THE LONG RUN. Guess we have to wait and see.

Chemo is often a much needed procedure, and used only when it it urgently needed because of all its side effects. What is so urgent about imposing a defective liturgical text? What is so necessary that we are willing to risk the side-effects of such an imposition?

Have we not learned from our Latin brothers & sisters?

Eastern Catholics tend to learn from their Orthodox brethren more than their Latin ones, I figure, because of the stronger commonality.

As to whether there is a necessity for the new book or not, we are way beyond that if Forum posters are correct in their info about requests for book orders throughout 2 eparchies already. Two down, two to go.

---------

Our fragile church is growing in a few bright spots, but "rusting" away in most areas.

A few strong initiatives have brought forth good grapes, but the vine is still withering away.

Perhaps there is a feeling that something has to be done, so why not roll-out a new Divine Liturgy? Hmm ... why not craft a comprehensive plan for real, authentic renewal.

The sad thing is there are many good people in our parishes with plenty of talents to serve the church. People won't stay below deck on the Titanic forever though. Eventually, folks meander onto the deck to see what all the noise is about. That seems to be what is going on here now.

How sad that we've failed as a people to really be true to ourselves. Make no mistake, we've come a long way as a church.

But those last few steps to Christ are the hardest. We have to trust Him and let the Light of the East shine forth. It is our moment in history. The world needs us now more than ever.

In Christ,

John

John writes:

Tinkering foolishly with the Liturgy is only too easy. Crafting "a comprehensive plan for real, authentic renewal" - let alone carrying it out - is too much like work.

I hasten to add that real work on the Liturgy is not a contradiction in terms - but it is indeed work and requires the qualities and characteristics I've mentioned on other threads.

Fr. Serge

I've been involved in four parishes in the Passaic Eparchy since 1970 (having come over from the RC's in the wake of the Novus Ordo revolution). I have noticed that, when the Bishop is present, after Communion, the cantors or choir will usually sing "For many years master, we have seen the true light"....or "Na mnohaja lita, Vladyko, vidichom svit istynnyj", whereas if it is just a parochial Liturgy, the choir or cantors will sing "we have seen the true light"....or "Vidichom svit istynnyj". This appears to have been a long-standing usage (with some departures, i.e., cantors singing "Na Mnohaja lita, Vladyko, at all times, regardless of the celebrant). I am, by no means an expert on Liturgy, and defer to those who are, but, in my Eparchy, it appears that the use of the term "Master" has been reserved for the Bishop, who is high priest, with the fullness of the role of "alter Christus". Of course, now when the Bishop is present, we are told not to use the term "Master", but "Most Reverend Bishop". IMO, that is unfortunate.

Dn. Robert

There will be a slight pause while I gag at the thought of anyone singing "For many years, Most Reverend Bishop" - the obvious solution is to keep it in Greek (Eis polla eti, Despota), as is the custom in most Orthodox and many Greek-Catholic Churches.

There. Thank you.

Now, a slight punctuation problem reminds me of something. Here's the problem: ""For many years master, we have seen the true light"...." In fact, "For many years, Master!" is an acclamation for the hierarch and stands by itself, but if written with a comma, it appears to modify what follows, so as to mean that "for many years we have seen the true light . . ." I once ran across an MA thesis which attempted to build a theological argument on that inaccurate reading.

Yet another reason to keep "Eis polla eti, Despota" in Greek. Just think of Paschaltide and imagine singing "for many years, Christ is Risen from the dead . . ." !!!

Fr. Serge

Fr. Serge,

It would probably be better to just translate it as "Many Years, Master! We have seen the true light...." Less confusion in the minds of the faithful. But, I also like running with "Eis polla eti, Despota". One possible "downside" of that may be the temptation to think in terms of "Despota" being analagous to the English term "Despot".
Dn. Robert

Well, Despota (or more accurately Despotis - Despota is the vocative) is in cold fact the root of the English word Despot, so what can we do? Other than remind people that words do change their meaning over time.

For those who cannot abide the thought of anything but English in this particular case, I would suggest a simple setting of "God grant you Many Years!" - and then a quite different setting of "We have seen the True Light" - different enough to make it absolutely clear that they have no logical connection; they just happen to occur together.

Except in extreme cases, one should avoid singing "Memory Eternal"!!!

Fr Serge

Father Serge bless me a sinner!

How is "Eis polla eti, Despota" pronounced?

Thanks!

Ees (as in "eek")

Poe (as in "hoe")

La (as in "tra-la-la"

et (as in the old-fashioned pronunciation of
"ate" - the past tense of "eat")

tea (some like tea with lemon, some not)

Dhes (the "Dh" sound does not exist in
English. But you know the difference
between "s" and "z". Similarly,
try saying "the" but making an actual
sound - almost like "z" with the "th"
while keeping the tip of your tongue
on the very tip of the front teeth)

poe (almost the same as before, but shorter,
nearly without the vowel sound -
unless the music gives it two notes)

ta (as in "ta - ra - ra boom -!).


The accent in DESpota is on the first syllable. Best to learn this phrase by heart, since it's used almost every time the hierarch gives a blessing.
Hope that helps!

Fr. Serge

There are a lot of people in our parish that are NOT drinking the kool-aid.

Besides the problem of accepting change, there are people who are unaware that the new book is coming down the pike (assuming it actually is). THAT is not good. An official, timely heads-up is a prudent thing to do. (Just call me a champion of the obvious, I guess.)

Jim,

That requires thoughtful leadership and change management. It requires individuals to realize that what may be organic, strategic change to some, is traumatic shock change to others.

Remember we are dealing with a jurisdiction who, at least in one eparchy, refuses to ask for forgiveness for very recently escorting elderly parishioners under armed guard out of a church after announcing the parish closure following services and discarding their memories into a dumpster - all with no warning of what was coming.

Change management is not exactly their speciiiialitee.

Also, without proactively communicating with the people in the pews communications will be reactive. Now, we need a crisis communications plan!

Father Serge bless!

Thanks for the help with the Greek.

refuses to ask for forgiveness for very recently escorting elderly parishioners under armed guard out of a church after announcing the parish closure following services and discarding their memories into a dumpster - all with no warning of what was coming.

Unfortunately, this also happened back in the 30s when ACROD was created. I know people (who became Orthodox) who will never set foot in a Byzantine Catholic Church under any circumstances, whose relatives a generation ago were treated that way. Worse still, they were put in jail. Not only does such action hurt people in the present, but also for generations to come.

We needn't expect participative management techniques to be used. After all, the Church does not govern like a democracy. But, I hope and pray that efforts will be made to help people understand the changes before they are implemented. It will depend on how much leverage our priests are given.

Pray for all concerned.

Dear John,
You are most welcome; glad I could be of help.

Jim writes:

Quite true. But neither does the Church govern like a dictatorship; the Church has a government of laws, not rule by decree!

Fr. Serge

the Church has a government of laws, not rule by decree!

Well, someone enforces the laws, or not, depending. If they are not enforced, what consequences are there (in this life) for that someone's failure to do so?

Jim,
God works in His own good time - but He does indeed work. Trying to work against the Law of God and the divine "constitution" of the Church has a remarkable way of failing! If you would like a classic example, check out the history of the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate.

Fr Serge

One of the interesting things about eastern christians is their ability to reject official decisions from time to time, probably less so on the Catholic side. There are a few dead Constantinopolitan patriarchs who could speak from experience. Whether the new book is rejected or not will depend on how big the changes are perceived to be, but everyone is still expected to live lives of christian charity and humility in the process. That may well tip the balance toward tolerance. It's a matter of having to wait to see how it gets played out, because most churchgoers are not reading all this stuff written here.

Dear Jim,
You are correct - the Eastern Churches do have a knack of, let us say, allowing this and that to fall into desuetude without much comment. Actually Rome inadvertently encourages the process sometimes - for a case in point, wade through the "Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches", which presumes the existence of a vast juridical bureaucracy that simply isn't there.

When it comes to the Liturgy, though, another problem arises: when the faithful are not happy with major liturgical developments, the usual reaction is to stay away. Those who wish to make the effort will go elsewhere; those who are more lethargic will go nowhere. Neither is healthy for the Church.

This phenomenon of alienation is unfortunately encouraged precisely by the failure to give the faithful a sense of ownership in the process of liturgical change. Doing this to a community which is held together by its common Liturgy is not going to lead to any good end (unless, of course, one would want the faithful to go quietly away).

Fr. Serge

Bless, Father Sergius!

Your words remind me of the struggle over the Ukrainian Catholic Patriarchate of yesteryear . . . I know you remember it well, as do I!

Street protests and even a choir in Chicago that sang "Anaxios!" when a bishop, deemed by them to be disobedient to Patriarch Joseph the Hieroconfessor, was consecrated (he refused to go to Rome to receive the Patriarch's blessing, I believe).

But that situation just resulted in a poisoned atmosphere in the Church.

Happily, things are somewhat different now and we even have Basilian priests here that commemorate the "Patriarch!"

No, I'm not fibbing . . .

Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,

Alex

How true. Remember a few years ago when Cardinal Sodano (I beleive it was after some prodding by the Polish RC hierarchy)issued an "order" to all of the UGCC married priests in the Archeparchy of Peremyshl-Warsaw to "return" to Ukraine (I believe most had been born and raised in Poland), with the further brilliant observation that Polish RC priests could be trained to celebrate the Byzantine Liturgy, and serve the Ukrainian people in Poland. I remember that when Patriarch Lubomyr was told about this that his public reaction was "That's odd!". Bottom line: those priests are still serving in Peremyshl-Warsaw!

Dn. Robert

There is a flip side to rejection of official decisions- cases where no official decision gets made. What happens sometimes, if we're talking about service books or musical arrangements, is that materials may become available anyway unofficially, and some parishes decide to use them while others do not. I'm speaking in cases where there is no clear hierarchical instruction one way or the other. Not all parishes in the Metropolia use the same music sources currently, which sometimes causes confusion when talking about what works and what doesn't. Some music sources are well received around Pittsburgh, but rejected elsewhere possibly due to lack of official support. Then again....

Dear Jim,

In the UGCC, we already have a situation where there are two Ukrainian-language liturgical translations around and used by various parishes.

There is the translation of Patriarch Joseph, the older one and then there is the revised one.

A controversy broke out when the doxology, in the revised translation, read, "and unto the eternal ages" as opposed to the older one "and unto the ages of ages."

Those who attacked the former said that it suggested an heretical tenet that the ages are "eternal" when they are not etc.

Even though the revision had the approval of the UGCC Synod - many parishes continue to use the translation of Patriarch Joseph because: 1) they are loyal to his memory and this is one way of expressing that loyalty; 2) the new translation sounds "funny" and because it has so much modern Ukrainian it just doesn't sound right - some priests are also afraid that it too closely approximates the Ukrainian Orthodox liturgy and they feel they must guard against too close relations with the Ukr. Orthodox - what if Ukie Catholics begin to go over to them? 3) the liturgical experts find a number grave errors in the translation that affect theology, as above.

The UGCC parishes are used to doing their own thing, as a rule. There is one parish here, the one I attend, that has a virtual liturgical moat around it . . .

And if you attend a parish that has the older translation then you are branded a "traditionalist" or a "nationalist" or what-not.

When our bishop learned of the parish I attended, he commented how surprised he was that I taught religion in English . . .

I told him that I keep that as quiet as possible and try not to think about it myself too often . . .

But if you attend a parish that uses the revised liturgy then you are either "Canadianized," "liberal," or else "Latinized."

So take your pick . . .

Ultimately, liturgical revision, in order to be acceptable to all, would have to be done with a joint committee involving people from both sides of the Pond!

So you BC's have it rather easy . . .

Alex

This new liturgy is going to divide our church big time. No one wants a Divine Liturgy revised according to 1970s liberal Roman Catholic principles. And the music they are trying to push is awful. Our pastor has forbidden our cantors to participate in that so called MCI organization. Our catechists were told not to go to the workshop because all they were planning was more propaganda on how wonderful the new liturgy is. A skunk covered with incense is still a skunk.

Dear Father Deacon,

Yes, who listens to Rome in these matters anyway?

We had three married priests suspended up here for . . . being married priests.

They went on to serve parishes until, finally, Rome decided to drop the suspensions and sent them certificates informing them of the matter.

Many UGCC parishes and people firmly believe that Rome has NO business in our internal affairs.

In fact, many of us feel that Rome has plenty of work on its hands to better manage ITS own internal affairs.

As a Church with a developed consciousness of being a Patriarchate - which we are - it is time for Rome not only to acknowledge the fact but to also acknowledge that we've taken the matter of our communion with Rome into our own hands, are defining it ourselves and are also drawing the lines of demarcation with respect to Roman jurisdiction over us.

And those lines basically say, "We can do it ourselves, grazie bene!"

Rome go home, leave us alone!

Alex

Dear Alex,
In a sense it's worse than that. In Ukraine they've produced yet another translation. At my advanced age I'm still using Patriarch Joseph's, and will be happy to continue to do so.
Part of the reason for this donkey derby is that Certain People wanted a sweet revenge on Patriarch Joseph, and undercutting his translations was a handy way to do it.

Most recently, the Ukrainian Orthodox - at least the ones in Ukraine - are coming to appreciate Patriarch Joseph's translations. Artful of them!

MANY parishes have a virtual litugical moat around them!

But you mention that "if you attend a parish that has the older translation then you are branded a "traditionalist" or a "nationalist" or what-not". Since our parish uses sthe older translation, can I be a what-not?

Tell the Bishop that you teach religion in English so as to avoid the controversy over which Ukrainian translation to use!

Finding a liturgical revision acceptable to all is impossible without first establishing criteria acceptable to all. Since such criteria are lacking, don't hold your breath!

Fr. Serge

When a Church has Patriarchal status, the only legitimate reason for Rome to interfere in the internal affairs of that Church is to correct "out of control" aberrational situations which the Patriarch and his Synod of Bishops is unable, or unwilling to do. Pope St. Clement did this in Corinth (while St. John the Theologian was still alive).This assumes that there is a living out of the very "Catholic" principle of subsidiarity. I do like the way that Patriarch Lubomyr handled Cdl. Sodano, who, in my opinion, is indeed "odd". While Sodano was hot to punish married Greek Catholic priests for being....married, he, at that very same time, was hot on regularizing the status of Hans Kung, a heretic if ever there was one. So, the message sent was that it is OK to deny major "De Fide" dogmatic teachings, but don't dare challenge the authorities on disciplinary matters (and, as far as I know, "cum data fuerit" was never intended to be applied to Poland!)!

Dn. Robert

Bless, Father Archimandrite Sergius!

Yes, your post brings back a number of memories!

As for the "what-not," you can be whatever you say! You know I and your international "Father Serge Fan Club" will always endorse and support you!!

While I'm at it, just wanted to make an act of public gratitude to you, Reverend Father Archimandrite, for your crucial assistance to me as my mentor when you were in Toronto.

I've not forgotten what you taught me, I try to live it daily (apart from my tantrums on this forum, but you've seen what one has to put up with here at times ) and I remember you daily and thank God that our paths crossed!

Please accept my deep spiritual bow.

I have the honour to be your devoted servant,

Alex

Father Deacon Robert,

First of all, you know you would always be welcomed with open arms in the UGCC!

You've the stuff of which great priests are made and I think you know yourself about that to which God is truly calling you!

A friend of mine who is thinking about becoming an Eastern Catholic (he is a lapsed Anglican - I'll resist the temptation to say anything further about that . . . ), once joked about how in the Catholic Church one could be a heretic and the like and not be chastised by the authorities for years.

But if the issue of married priests came up . . . then it is a quick, "Now see here - we have RULES you know!"

It is a great blessing to have made your acquaintance, Sir, and the power of the Spirit comes through loud and clear in just your posts on this forum.

I'd probably have to wear tinted glasses if I were privileged to meet you in person!

Seriously, though, I wish you the very best. The BCC is lucky to have you - they should be carrying such a Deacon on their shoulders!

Alex

Dear Alex,

You are too kind. But, I do have a lot of "warts".

BTW, I have a friend who was raised in UGCC who, in turn, is a good friend of Fr. Roman Galadza. For some time, we've been trying to put together a trip to St. Elias, Brompton. If , and when, this occurs, I'll be sure to let you know. Rest assured, there would be a lot to talk about.

Dn. Robert

Dear Alex - I trust we are both devoted servants of the Lord Jesus Christ!

So come visit Ireland sometime.

Fr Serge

Bless, Father Archimandrite!

Well, I don't compare myself to you!

I'll definitely work on coming out to see you in the Emerald Isle, the Isle of Saints, or just plain "Holy Eire!"

Slainte!

Alex

Dear Father Deacon,

Let me know indeed! Fr. Roman is related to me by marriage.

I'd love to meet you in person!

Cheers,

Alex

Your arrival will be a great joy. A couple of cautions:

1. do not come for new-calendar Xmas (we use the old calendar, of course); plane fares are outrageous and everything, but everything, is closed.

2. do not even consider coming for 17 March - Dublin is absolutely frozen that day; nothing can move.

3. after yesterday and today this requires no explanation - do NOT fly via England. There are direct flights to Dublin from Boston and New York, take that route.

Also, of course, don't fly at peak season, when the fares are ridiculously high!

Fr Serge

Well, as usual I have come into this knowledge late. Life exacts a toll from me in that I don't always keep up with what is happening around me.

The original question was "Will parishes embrace the new liturgy?"

Having not actually seen the wording, but having read posts in this area, I get the distressing feeling that the Liturgical rubrics are about to be feminized for the sake of being PC.

If that is the case, I most likely will become a burr under the bishop's saddle as I vocally oppose such nonsense.

WHAT were the leaders of this community thinking to do such a thing? I surely didn't leave the heresies and general nonsense of Protestantism just so I could be confronted with yet more nonsense from people who should know better.

I hope that at St. Ann's we have enough MEN with large enough cajones that we retain the old form and tell the bishop politely to go pound sand.

Perhaps we should ask the bishop if the names Fr. Ireland and Fr. St. Alexis Toth ring a bell with him!!!!

Brother Ed

I'm not certain how one would go about feminizing the rubrics (apart from deleting the rubric which reminds us that women do not enter the Altar and do not function as acolytes). If anyone knows how to feminize the rubrics, please don't tell me; the problem is serious enough already.

That problem consists in the "feminization" - or rather the neutering - of liturgical texts. It is reasonably permissible to do that to an animal, such as a cat, but doing the same to a man OR a woman is not acceptable: the Lord did not create neuter persons, He created mankind, all the member of which are men and women (allowing, of course, for terminology applicable to children; we do not address grown-ups as "boys and girls" when we are speaking formally and politely). This even applies, for example, to castrati - such an unfortunate person is still genetically male, as the physicians will readily assure us.

"If's not nice to fool Mother Nature!"

Fr. Serge