The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Galumph, Leon_C, Rocco, Hvizsgyak, P.W.
5,984 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 238 guests, and 46 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,389
Posts416,722
Members5,984
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 487
M
Member
OP Offline
Member
M
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 487
A catholic friend of mine spotted this on the web.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=1563818#post1563818

It appears to be the soon to be released revised liturgy.

Music is included as well as the translation.

If this is it, then those who say we've never seen the whole text may have to answer to this.

I only a had a chance to speed read it. It looks like what all of us who feared a chopped up feminized liturgy have had our fears confirmed.

But I need more time to read it and I'll let others see it here and judge what they see in the text and music.

Monomakh

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 856
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 856
Well, when compared with the people's text being used at the Metropolitan Cantor Institute and at the Cathedral for the past couple of years, this version omits quite a bit of material (the Sunday hymns, typical psalms and Beatitudes, variant music for the Cherubic hymn, the litanies marked as optional such as the Litany of the Catechumens and the Litany of Supplication, etc.) Other indications (such as the typos, rough layout, and inclusion of Pope Benedict's name) suggest it was prepared for a particular event.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,533
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,533
Likes: 1
Thank you for this post!

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070
J
Jim Offline
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070
It appears to be a weekday St. John Chrysostom Divine Liturgy, because of the antiphon texts, but it also appears to be specifically for use by the congregation, omitting major portions of the priest's prayers. In other words, nowhere nearly as complete as a revised liturgy would have to be in order to cover every day of the year, etc. especially for national distribution.

Joined: May 2005
Posts: 187
Orthodoxy or Death
Offline
Orthodoxy or Death
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 187
Yes, Jim, I would agree it looks like a "Revised" weekday Divine Liturgy. Maybe Professor Thompson can take a look at it to verify if this is the version we will see in the pews?

Cathy

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 402
Likes: 1
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 402
Likes: 1
This is not the Divine Liturgy as it will be published by the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia.

Prof. J. Michael Thompson
Byzantine Catholic Seminary
Pittsburgh, PA

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 1
Quote
Originally posted by Professor J. Michael Thompson:
This is not the Divine Liturgy as it will be published by the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia.

Prof. J. Michael Thompson
Byzantine Catholic Seminary
Pittsburgh, PA
How close is it to the revised liturgy?

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 21
J
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 21
If this is the music they have been pushing at the seminary I can understand why the priests are revolting. Awful does not describe how bad it is. No wonder they are trying to keep the new liturgy a secret until after it is mandated.

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 487
M
Member
OP Offline
Member
M
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 487
Quote
Originally posted by Professor J. Michael Thompson:
This is not the Divine Liturgy as it will be published by the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia.

Prof. J. Michael Thompson
Byzantine Catholic Seminary
Pittsburgh, PA
Prof. J. Michael Thompson

I couldn't help but notice that your answer raised more questions for me.

Is this or isn't this a portion of the music and text that will be published by the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia?

Has this text ever been used in the Seminary and/or the Metropolitan's Cantor Institute?

Is this a valid text that has or will be used or is this a bogus copy?

Monomakh

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
This can't be the final text. We were told at our Diaconal retreat (Passaic Eparchy) that "God-loving Bishop" has been re-inserted.

Dn. Robert

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390
W
Member
Offline
Member
W
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390
I followed the link above to the other thread about it and someone there said it looked to be the choir's text. Then the conversation became one about American politics between a priest (who didn't think the changes were substantial and so argued they shouldn't have bothered to make them) and another poster who seemed to not be bothered by the changes because they were minor. The conversation here already seems to be much more educational. smile

It feels so Hollywood-ish with all these people speculating over what is to be, and talk of leaked texts, and those in question waiting to announce the news until the time is right. Who would have thought that such intrigue and mystery and controversy and emotion would be coming out of the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church Sui Juris of Pittsburgh? biggrin Better than the Star any day. (Well, except that day they featured the whales that had been shrunk down to goldfish size so people could have a whole pod of whales in their home aquariums. That was neat.)

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 645
Likes: 1
S
Cantor
Member
Offline
Cantor
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 645
Likes: 1
Quote
Originally posted by Monomakh:
A catholic friend of mine spotted this on the web.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=1563818#post1563818

It appears to be the soon to be released revised liturgy.

Music is included as well as the translation.

If this is it, then those who say we've never seen the whole text may have to answer to this.

I only a had a chance to speed read it. It looks like what all of us who feared a chopped up feminized liturgy have had our fears confirmed.

But I need more time to read it and I'll let others see it here and judge what they see in the text and music.

Monomakh
Your statement regarding the confirmation of fears of a feminised liturgy BASED upon this particular document are confusing to me. Yes, I spent the time on my dial up connection to download all 12.4M of the file and read it over. Where in this document is there proof of "feminzed" Liturgy? Could you show evidence using this document only?

If the original poster/website owner had scanned the cover page it would be easier to identify.

It appears to be a version of the earlier proposed changes with antiphons for weekdays.It is not, as Prof. Thompson has said, the revised liturgy. Some parts of it are contained in the revision. Beyond this I know as little or as much as the rest.

Steve

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 645
Likes: 1
S
Cantor
Member
Offline
Cantor
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 645
Likes: 1
Quote
Originally posted by Java Joe:
If this is the music they have been pushing at the seminary I can understand why the priests are revolting. Awful does not describe how bad it is. No wonder they are trying to keep the new liturgy a secret until after it is mandated.
Java Joe,

While I am not an apologist for the revised Divine Liturgy, could you please elaborate on what specifically you find is "awful" about this music?

Steve

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Likes: 4
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
Likes: 4
I have withheld commenting on this subject, as I am normally loath to cause discord, but I have, over the past year, come to know, respect, and even love many Catholics as a direct result of this Forum. So it is not without a certain amount of distatste that I write the following words. IF the powers that be in the Byzantine Catholic Eparchy believe that these "innovations" in the Divine Liturgy will somehow bring them into closer relations with the Orthodox, well, someone's burning something other than Three Kings in the Cadilla! I am trying to be calm and trying to understand the reasoning behind it, but for the life of me, I cannot. This is, and this is not only my opinion, but the opinion of an Orthodox priest that also read it, for lack of a better word, an abomination. I can see why the BC priests and laity are in an uproar. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE DIVINE LITURGY!!!! This is the Eucharistic Service, the center of life in the Church because the Church is primarily a eucharistic community. The Eucharist is the completion of all of the Church's other sacraments and the source and the goal of all of the Church's doctrines and institutions! I'm sorry, but this looks like something coming out of the Anglicans or Presbyterians, NOT EASTERN CHRISTIANS! What's next, refering to God the Father in the feminine? Is the Church so afraid of offending the easily offended that it has the AUDACITY to change the Holy Divine Liturgy into some politically correct, watered down, truncated and weak kneed imitation of itself? As many of you know, I went to seminary in Jordanville. I am not "up" on the latest liturgical "trends" and fashions, but one thing I DO know, is liturgics. And brother, this is just not right. Who did the translation? Did they ever actually read it in the original languages? "Bless reverend father"? How does one translate Vladika to come up with reverend father? I have the Sluzhebnik (Moscow 1888) in my hands as I write this. It is pointless to point out the deviations. Suffice it to say that it is of itself, deviant! "Offering you from your own always and everywhere"???? You tell your bishop to send me his translators. I'll teach them how to read Church Slavonic. "Holy gifts to holy people" Need I go on????
I cannot believe that the Orthodox Catholics that I have grown to know on this forum will stand for this. This is nothing but Vatican II for Eastern Catholics. It looks like the bishops weres sitting around one day and came up with a way to drive more people away! "Hey guys, why don't we make the same mistake the Romans did? Lets change everything and make it more modern. That way we can close and sell off more churches!" I will bring this whole sorry state of affairs to the attention of not only my bishops, but to Bishop Nicholas of the ACROD. If the Eparchy goes through with this, I can assure you, there will be no more joint efforts on the part of the Orthodox in matters related to liturgics.
What really hurts, is that I have been on Orthodox Forums, defending my EC brothers, telling detractors how close we are and how proper and right many are, and how in some cases they are more Orthodox than the Orthodox. Well, I guess that I will soon be eating crow.

My final thoughts.
As an Orthodox Christian, who was hoping for renewed cooperation with the EC's, with the goal of eventual reunification, well, it was nice while it lasted. If this is the way the EC hierarchs think and believe, well, May God have mercy on them. Thanks, but no thanks. I'll remain true to the Liturgy as it has always been. Oh, and by the way, to those EC's who still believe in the Liturgy as something sacred, Liturgy Sunday morning at my Orthodox Church is 9:30 am.

Alexandr

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 564
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 564
Dear Alexandr,

I post, so that you may understand, the words of our own Fr. David Petras, who says that we Ruthenians may act on our own because, well, the Orthodox don't like us.

Here are his words, lest anyone accuse me of misrepresenting. The quote is long, but worthwhile for the light it sheds on motivation:

Quote
The next problem I would address is that of ecumenism. In general, the See of Rome wants us to be as faithful as possible to our Eastern heritage, so that the Orthodox will not be scandalized by latinizations. Again, I have no difficulty in fidelity to Orthodoxy, but since becoming actively involved with the official dialogue (the North American Orthodox Catholic Theological Consultation) since 1983, I have acquired a new sensitivity to our relationships with the Orthodox Churches. On the ecumenical level, the method of uniatism to unite our two churches has been disavowed. This means, certainly, no piecemeal unions with parts of Eastern Churches and no proselytism. It does not mean that the Eastern Churches in union with Rome must cease to exist, nor, and this is important, cease to act for the spiritual needs and welfare of their own faithful. The original vision of Rome saw us as a tool to unity, as a bridge to Orthodoxy, but the �bridge theory� has fallen with the disavowal of uniatism, if, indeed, it could have ever been effective with the bulk of the Orthodox Church. There is, of course, a variety of opinions about the Eastern Catholic Churches among the Orthodox, and all of these opinions are more or less negative. The most negative is that we Eastern Catholics are a betrayal of Orthodoxy, an abomination upon the face of the earth, and that any attempt to look like Orthodox is the tool of proselytism on our part. We should simply become the Roman Catholics that we are. Other more moderate Orthodox are much more realistic. They know that the present-day �Uniates� are not the ones who betrayed Orthodoxy, and they look forward to our return to Orthodoxy. The first group, naturally, would be totally uninterested as to what we do liturgically, its all a sham, Roman Catholicism in Orthodox clothing. The second group are often interested in the liturgical life of our churches, but it would never form a motivation for their reunion with Rome. So this vision, that if we are good and faithful to our Orthodox heritage, we will foster reunion, is completely baseless. To put it in common language, �it ain�t gonna happen.��

Dialogue with the Orthodox is very difficult for Eastern Catholics. Sometimes even moderate Orthodox want nothing to do with us, and barely tolerate our presence. Nothing that we can do will help reunion, except for us to voluntarily disband. Why, then, should we be faithful to our Eastern heritage? I find the answer in that all-important second principle: we have the right to act for the spiritual needs and welfare of our people. We should be faithful to our Eastern tradition because it is our heritage. We should be faithful because it is good and true and beautiful and the expression of our spiritual health. Rome has often seen us as a tool, but we have a dignity in ourselves, we are nobody�s tool. This means, on a practical level, we can act for our own welfare in liturgical matters. Don�t worry, it will neither hurt not harm ecumenism. In fact, it might be the best possible course of action, because at least then the Orthodox will see we have a dignity in our faith, that we are a Church that can make Christian decisions. We also have the advantage of excellent scholarship on liturgical matters, which can be used for our advantage. My conclusion is that the most Orthodox thing we can do is act for our own spiritual welfare. However, what it seems to me is that there are some who want to take away our independence and enslave it to a vacuous and ineffective ecumenical program. By not allowing for our own dignity, they make us the ultimate �uniates,� a self-proclaimed tool to try to win over the Orthodox.
Here's the link to Fr. David\'s page. [davidpetras.com]

Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2023). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5