I am interested in how the revisions will be introduced and maintained in the parish community. Do any of you have ideas, hopes, or advice you wish to share with others?

Wondering,

At this point, I'm waiting to see what is planned on an eparchial level in Passaic, and have a talk with my pastor and our other cantors. I know one of our choir has been waiting to see the textual changes so she can adapt the choir's existing harmonized music. (And apropos what Jim said - if parishes have music they have been using for years, I for one see no need to drop it (albeit texts may be adjusted, etc.); but cantors should also learn any settings that are new to them, and consider introducing them over time.)

Preparation and repetition in the introduction of new music is key, I think.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Wondering,

Eparchial level plans have not yet been revealed here either, so we wait. The music not on the MCI website that I alluded to elsewhere is for "Bless the Lord, O My Soul" and the "Beatitudes"- the Typica, in other words. We use a Russian Tone, the one used at the climax of the 1812 Overture I hope Jeff is correct about just adapting the music to suit the words. My life will be a lot easier if we get to do that. But for now, we wait.

FYI, a thread on implementation was also started within Kliros.

Am I allowed to post in the Kliros?

I find it strange that the liturgy was rolled out without any plans on how to address it. Are you sure there will be eparchial directives forthcoming or are you assuming it?

I know of one priest who did not know the New Liturgy was Promulgated until I told him. Interesting, their appears to be a lack of leadership on this issue.

Wondering,

There is no directive at this point, just the promulgation. Have you asked your pastor? Direction is apt to differ depending on book availability, etc. where you are.

Lack of leadership? In the Byzantine Catholic Church?

If there had been leadership, none of this fiasco would have happened. It is all because no one had the guts to tell the commission that their work wasn't good enough, the bishops didn't want to hurt their feelings. "They've worked so hard on this." "They've spent so much time, and so much money on this." "Having asked them to do it, now we have to promulgate it." "We don't have a choice."

The Bishops have mandated a new Liturgy, new rubrics, new musical settings. It is more than a Revision, it is a Revolution in the Liturgy. Where is the support to help our parishes through the ordeal? Where are the Bishops when they need to answer people's questions and anxieties.

Do they expect the priests to do this? Do they expect the priests to help their people to accept the revision of the Liturgy?

How can the bishops expect the priests to listen to the complaints, and help the people through this Revision, when most of the priests are against the Revision, don't want the change in rubrics, and oppose secular feminism and the inclusive language nonsense?

Lack of leadership?

Nick

Amen! This whole thing is so surreal. I feel like I am in the twilight zone (or should I say the revision zone). I still can't believe that the creed was feminized! I am very sad indeed.

May I suggest that those who have problems with the deletion of the word "men" from the Creed stop claiming that the Creed has been "feminized."? While very good objections are being made, I think the claim that it amounts to a "feminization" of the Creed is not fair. If the change were "for us women and our salvation", rather than simply to "for us and for our salvation" then you would be correct in saying the Creed has been feminized. I think the best argument against changing the Creed from "for us men and for our salvation" to "for us and for our salvation" is simply that such authority belongs solely to an ecumenical council. To exaggerate and claim that a feminization has taken place in the Creed when no grammatically feminine word has been added, does not help your argument and inclines people who are suspicious of male chauvinism to be even more so. I would also add that those who are suspicious of male chauvinism and bias against women within the Church often have good reasons for their suspicions-even if their arguments in favor of so-called "inclusive language" are highly problematic.
Ryan

Will Pittsburgh offer a webcast to communicate the logic behind the new Divine Liturgy and what we hope to accomplish? Perhaps a DVD with the hierarchs is in the works. Since this is such a radical change for our church I would expect a major communications campaign.

It has been said by one of the translators that terms like "men" and "mankind" are labeled as "sexist". Therefore, it does not appear to be unfair to state that the removal of "men" from the Creed is a "feminization" (in the wrong sense of that term) of the Creed. You are of course right to say that the best argument is that such a change belongs to an Ecumencal Council.

With respect to the change in the Creed, I would rephrase Thomas More's comment to Richie Rich..."but for the feminists?"

Yes. I agree with this. The Ecumenical council argument is the most legitimate. However, I still believe that the creed has been feminized by deletion.

If I may add--I have never met a Catholic or Orthodox female who was offended by the usage of the word man, mankind, or brethren to depict both male and female. This includes my wife, family members and friends. I do however, know those females (including my wife) who are offended by it's deletion (by reasoning of secular inclusive language).

To my knowledge, only the radical feminist minority is offended by such language and it seems that the commission has appeased this minority. For that, I am scandalized!!!

Dear Recluse:
Let me expound a bit on my concerns. It has been my experience that there are those I would not at all consider "radical feminists" who feel marginalized by what they consider to be gender-exlusive language. Historically, masculine terms such as "man" and "men" can be used grammatically either in an exclusive manner, or they can be used to refer both to men and to women. For someone to argue that words like "men" or "mankind" have not functioned for several centuries as gender-inclusive terms are simply ignoring history. What I think lies behind the drive in some quarters for the use of "inclusive language" is the belief that the use of masculine terms such as "man", "mankind", and "men" is the creation of a world in which the masculine was/is considered normative for all humanity-in other word, the product of a chauvinistic mindset. Of course you are free to disagree with such a perspective, which may ultimately be wrong. I personally think a good case can be made for this claim, but I'm by no means certain that it is correct. However, I do think that we are called to be charitable towards those who hold this position-even if they are wrong. By saying that we should be charitable, I'm by no means trying to silence anyone, but I also think that the rhetoric being used by some on this Forum with respect to this question demonstrates a troubling lack of charity. I'm also concerned that it is a serious mistake to trivialize or minimize the injustices that many women have experienced over the centuries simply because they are women and I think that anyone who denies that such injustices have occurred is as guilty of ignoring history as are those who would deny that "man", "men", and "mankind" have historically served as gender-inclusive terms.
Sincerely,
Ryan

Forum members are expecting implementation procedures quicker than they are being provided. Many of us work or have worked in the corporate world where a prompt response is commonplace and mandatory, as well as a complete project timeline, etc. Patience would appear to have to be the order of the day, however. When the Church is ready to move to another step, it will say so, without necessarily doing it when some of us would like to see it done. After all, we are not the decision makers on that.

Greetings Ryan
It is not my intention to be uncharitable and if my post was taken as such I apologize and ask your forgiveness. I believe that some of the revisions are necessary: such as "substance" being changed to "essence". However, it is truly difficult for me to accept the tinkering of the creed. I witnessed and experienced the subtle dangers of inclusive language as a Latin Catholic. I am genuinely scandalized by this and find myself in a scenario where I am seriously contemplating holy Orthodoxy. Presently, I find myself in a spiritual confusion of sorts and it is not a fun place to be.

Prayers and blessings to you,
Recluse

Jim,

Good point. I can't help but wonder how long we wait before deciding it is up to us, considering the dead-line which has been imposed.

You do what is best for your parish based on your own pastor's approval once you have the books, don't you think?

Dear Recluse:
Thank you for your kind words, and blessings to you also. I hope in this time in which you feel scandalized and in a state of spiritual confusion-as you have put it-that our heavenly Father will comfort and guide you. Perhaps it is in the Orthodox Church that you will find peace, as well as a place where you can serve the Lord through service to the Church. I do not know if this is the case and it is certainly not my intent to tell you what is or is not God's desire for your life. However, I will add that I believe that if you are a member of one of the Orthodox Churches (or one of the Catholic Churches-I'm Catholic myself), then you are a member of the true Church and are joined by the Holy Spirit to our great Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ.
In peace,
Ryan

Thank you Ryan. Those are words of comfort for me.

Yes, Jim. I agree completely. My question was more of a rhetorical one to point out the illogicality of promulgating a highly contentious project, mandating a compliance deadline, then offering no guidance to the clergy or the parishes in how to go about implementing something so very large and emotionally charged. Obviously, each parish will end up doing whatever its priest decides is best. I find that implementation scheme to be incongruous with the entire stated purpose of the new liturgy, that being unity and standardization among the parishes.

Amen! I think that it won't be that different, each priest will still do as he feels best (or what he feels like doing).

Key is sensitivity to the feelings of the whole congregation. Making changes as easily as possible, and as sparingly as possible, ought to help ease any frustration and pain associated with getting used to the book somewhat. For example, if there is a version of the Cherubic Hymn in the new book which your congregation knows, continue using it while they learn other new music where necessary.

Now Jim, Obikhod Ressurectional tone 1 is a very nice tone! I think about The tropar for the Exaltation of the Cross, that tone 1 is just superb!
Yes, and it was used in the 1812 overture because the national anthem was sung to it at the time (if memory serves correct). So you hear the French national anthem too.. some other country as well (can't remember).

Yes, the 1812 includes "God Save Our Noble Czar" as well. But, our Liturgy currently just has the Obikhod tone, which apparently has to go back to Russia, because it is not Carpatho-Rusyn. Reminds me of the time an OCA choir couldn't sing "Carol of the Bells" at Christmas, because it was Ukrainian. That's the East for ya.

Everyone has been buzzing about the new service books. Have deacons and priests actually received the new liturgikons for the liturgies?

I have not.

Fr. Deacon Lance

And it also has nothing to do with the Nativity or any of the other religious feasts of this season.

LOL!!

Один пункт дла нашего Украинского брат!

Александр

Спасибі!

The thread "New Liturgy is Promulgated" has a link to a copy of Bishop John of Parma's own letter supporting the promulgation in detail for his eparchy. The 3 page read should also give others in the metropolia an indication of what may be coming their way as well, depending on episcopal approval.

Besides the service book and the liturgikons, what is going to happen with the Presanctified Liturgy? It is not in the new books, but will require revision in order to agree with the translations of the creed, etc.

Do you have a new book (or know someone who does) to be sure it is not in there?

Prof. Thompson is coming to the St. Stephen's pro-cathedral in Phoenix next Saturday, Feb. 3rd, to lead a session on the new service book from 9 to 4. The session is on rather short notice, but that was unavoidable at this point. My own parish is widely publicizing this session, encouraging everyone to attend if possible. The more people who get to work with the new pew book firsthand, the more likely we can address questions back at the parish effectively, I think.

Professor Thompson is a regular reader and poster on this Forum. I'm sure that he can set the record straight as to his qualifications, as well as who sang for the tapes/CDs.

When possible, one should try to get the facts from the source.

Glory to Jesus Christ!

The only reason I am even answering this is to demonstrate how much inaccurate information shows up on the Forum, claiming to be fact.

I am not--I have never been--a priest in the Roman Catholic Church.

The choir that did the compact discs for the recording of "The Divine Liturgies of our holy fathers John Chrysostom and Basil the Great" is the Schola Cantorum of Saint Peter the Apostle. That choir is not a Roman Catholic choir, either--it is a professional choral ensemble. The Schola (which I direct) was selected by the Inter-Eparchial Music Commission to do the recording of the prostopinije because (1) the choir has extensive experience singing prostopinije and (2) they had the ability to do the massive amount of recording in a limited amount of time.

The Schola was also selected by the committee which created the Ukrainian Cathoic "The Divine Liturgy: An Anthology for Worship" to record THEIR teaching recordings to accompany their book. THe Schola's track record stands for itself.

The fathers of the church exhort us, in our interactions with each other, to constantly seek to put the best construction on every situation. It is disheartening to see people making untrue or unsubstantiated statements without first trying to discern the truth.

I am happy to say that quite a few calls have already come in from priests and cantors about how helpful they find the compact discs to be.

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

Glory to Jesus Christ!

In response to Jim's post:

The Divine Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts (and all of its attendant propers) has been translated by the Inter-Eparchial Liturgical Commission. The Inter-Eparchial Music Commission has not yet begun work on the LPG.

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

Excerpt from www.litpress.org.

..."Schola Cantorum of St. Peter the Apostle; J. Michael Thompson, Director

The Schola Cantorum of St. Peter the Apostle (formerly the Schola Cantorum of St. Peter's-in-the-Loop), Chicago, Illinois, sang for the first time on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul in 1988 at Solemn Evening Prayer. Since that first service, the men and women of the Schola have sung for Solemn Eucharists, Solemn Evening Prayer, Communal Penance Services, weddings, priest's first Masses, simple and solemn professions, oridinations to the diaconate and priesthood, and various other services. Made up of professionally trained musicians the Schola is dedicated to the principles enshrined in the documents of the Second Vatican Council as elaborated by the Bihops' Commission on Liturgy to lead the faithful in the singing of the Eucharist and the Liturgy of Hours, to preserve the treasury of sacred music, and to enlarge the repertory of choral music."...

Ungcertezs

I would also like to remind folks that the MCI website already has audio recordings of the music for the new service book available to listen to. For those who do not yet have the CDs or the books themselves, this can be very helpful in determining what is in store.

Prof. Thompson,

Thank you for the clarification that you were never a Roman Catholic priest. I for one would have been very surprised if that were true.

I seem to remember you in other jurisdictions, maybe you could clarify these.

Were you ever a priest in the American Carpatho Russian Orthodox Dioscese of the U.S.A.?

and,

Were you ever a priest under Bishop Germain of l'ECOF?


Thanks in advance for clarifying my memory. I'll await your answer and in the meantime look for any documentation I have regarding these two questions to confirm that my memory is correct.

Monomakh

I object to the 'witch hunt' atmosphere that is growing around here.

The professor dismissed an unsubstantiated attribution about his background in the Latin church. That was the complaint, whatever else he has done or has not done is immaterial. There are very few among us who have not been on a spiritual journey of one sort or another, and the man's talent is awesome!

Let us please allow this man some personal space, he is committed to the Ruthenian Metropolia, these days a more and more thankless task. What more could anyone really ask?

I for one am becoming more amazed that anyone would work so hard for the BCC anymore, the backbiting is ferocious. There is no hidden agenda, everyone is doing the best they can under the circumstances. Pray for those who serve the church.

Pray for the priests, pray for the seminary, pray for each other and yes, pray for the bishops and the professionals who assist them.

Michael

Michael,

I second that. Thank you!

+3. There are a lot of things I find objectionable about the alleged translation. Nevertheless - and I don't mean to single anyone out - I think there's been a bit of hysteria in a lot of the threads in this sub-forum. This is especially true when we start talking about personalities.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh Lord although I desired to blot out
With my tears the handwriting of my many sins
And for the rest of my life to please thee through sincere repentance;
Yet doth the enemy lead me astray as he wareth
Against my soul with his cunning.
Oh Lord before I utterly perish do thou save me!

Originally posted by Michael R:
"My priest said last night that he is upset. That all the priests are upset. I do not know this Professor Thompson but my priest told me that he is a former Roman Catholic priest. So it is clericalism all the way around. Why did the bishops hire a former Roman Catholic priest to be in charge of our music? My priest also told me that the bishops hired a Roman Catholic choir from Chicago to make the tapes of how to sing the New Divine Liturgy. Why are the bishops bringing in Roman Catholics to teach Byzantine Catholics how to sing? I guess that shows that the bishops think that Roman Catholics are better. We sing very well in my parish thank you. "

Though tonight your priest now indicates he learned of PROF Thompson's past with the Johnstown Orthodox Diocese. Your priest, like many on this board unfortunately repeated incorrect information without bothering to verify it. It is such behaviour that has fueled such distrust and disagreement within our church. In this age of instant communication such misinformation spread about carelessly while not slanderous in intent has the same effect upon the individual as delliberate slander. Once slander gets out, it becomes harder to rectify the slander even when evidence clearly shows the misinformation.

While we have dislikes, disagreements, and discussions about the "RDL","NDL","revisionist" liturgy here, we should not use it as a platform for scapegoating or defamation.

Mr Petach,

I would suggest that before you go spouting off about defamation and legalities, maybe you should do some of that research you so freely tell others to do. A quick look at the ACRY Annual for 1988 would show you that now MR J Michael Thompson was a priest of ACROD assigned to two different parishes. If you would like more I will be able to get someone that is more technologically savvy to make an electronic copy for posting.

The Insider

So what if he was? Just means he's even more in touch with our Carpatho-Rusyn heritage. For all the work Prof. Thompson has done for the Carpatho-Rusyns, he is a real pravoslavny. He's a scholar who has contributed much to the life of this Church.

Those that have a problem with the new Liturgy take it to your Bishop and Rome. Don't blame Prof. Thompson for the Liturgy and the problems in our long suffering Church.