Dear Friends,

We are at my parish into the second Sunday of using the new books. I believe that it is going well, and would like to share how we have done it. The choir and the cantors have all practiced the new settings, and are well-prepared to sing it now. This, I think, is essential: whoever the good singers are in the parish, they ought to practice, preferably together.

Fr. Tom gave a brief introduction last Sunday, explaining some of the changes, the basic structure of the book, and that bar lines mean breath marks. Then he asked the congregation to forego singing for one Sunday so that they could pay attention to the book. The choir sang setting A of all the liturgy parts.

This Sunday, we did setting A again, and the people sang. It went rather well, in my opinion. Having a core of strong singers singing the music makes it go much better. We will do setting A for a few more Sundays, and then tackle setting B and so on. The choir has agreed to sing about three Sundays a month for the foreseeable future, in order to help us get the new text down.

I should note that I gave an excessive amount of page number announcements, a practice that I will back off from as we get used to the new book.

As for negative comments, I haven't heard any. I am somewhat of an official figure as choir director, however, and it may be that complaints are being made in other places.

Incidentally, we have been singing the Litany of the Catechumens, which we had never done before, since it is readily available in the new book. Our catechumen (we only have one at the moment) even sang his parts solo.

I'll update this thread as we go further along in the implementation.

Was home for this Sunday's liturgy. So far, only the Priest is using the new Liturgicon. The congregation is still using the Levkulic music and text. No mention about new books or the future purchase of said books. The parish has spent $2,000
on exterior physical plant improvements, which is a priority.


Xpucmoc Bockpece (last Sunday to sing Christos Voskrese!)
Ungcsertezs

I think you're right about complaints being in other places.

-katie g

One needs to bear in mind that this is the parish with the pastor who says outright and repeatedly that the Byzantine Church is being pruned and that once the pruning is finished then the Church will rise from the ashes like a phoenix.

Vivid imagery, yes. Appropriate for a conquering emperor, clearly.

But I am not so sure it is good shepherding policy for followers of Jesus Christ, Redeemer of souls.

Leave the tares, He said.

Are those who object to unnecessary and sometime deleterious liturgical change considered to be "tares" or dead branches? One wonders.

I pray that your experience remains a positive one good cantor.

I pray that those being pruned can find or make a place to call "home."

Mary

Hmmm. Good point.

I am also curious if your pastor was able to explain the neutralization of the Liturgy to the parish.

Our pastor mentioned it when we first implemented the new Liturgy. He called it political correctness.

Dear Mary,

Thank you for your prayers; certainly I need them.

As far as what Fr. Loya's opinions are on liturgical reform, why don't you ask him? He hasn't been silent on the matter.

You are welcome and I am deeply sorry that there is a need to be mindful of the origins of some of the less than pastoral approaches in our Church. I don't need to ask about them. I can go back through my files and read the epistles.

But if we do surely mourn and pray together for the loss of unity and charity and orthodoxy that is apparent in this time of trial, all will not be lost.

So...teach them well, but do not be deafened to any negative disturbance and do what you can to see that they not be "pruned."

Blessings....Mary

XB!
I appreciate your review of the RDL as a choir director. And I am glad that apparently from the musical side it went well.

I would be interested to hear a review about the acceptance of text of the RDL in your parish too.

In the end the music is "only" the carrier of the text. I don't want to understate the importance of correct music and singing - if not done right it would become more a distraction then the method to stress the message and beautify the worship. However it seems to me that most of the concerns that I am reading here are in regards of the textual changes.

Breathe on bar lines??? Aargh!!!

A minor point, to be honest. The DL of Pittsville has much bigger problems.

Yes, I think we all know that. But since the books have been sent and we have been directed to use them what is a faithful Priest and Cantor to do? Now we must look at our situation and use even this to glorify God and spread the Gospel to a lost world. Aren't Christians supposed to be masters at making lemonade?

CDL

What are the rules for obedience to legitimate authority?

In all things but sin...is that not correct?

Teaching against the fullness of the faith is sinful.

Obedience in all things but sin.

Mary

But what does one do when these lemons are wearing mitre, mandyas and panagias? Putting them in a juicer is not an immediate option.

We have had the new liturgy and the new music for awhile now. It is really bad. No one can stand it. It is the subject of endless jokes. People roll their eyes at the inclusive language. They chuckle out loud at the bad music and the really bad accents in the music. I used to love going to church. Now it is the last place I want to be. We should not be put in a position were the liturgy is a rotten lemon. There is always St. John's but it will be easier to find someplace closer to home.

Look, I don't care whether the new liturgy is implemented or not. The one thing more damaging than having a liturgy that really isn't up to par is that people whine and whine continuously about something about which they are not prepared to do anything. Even worse is to continue the mindset that all of our problems are someone elses. Many in our Church act as if they are on various forms of entitlements. You complain but do little or nothing. If something gets corrected you complain that someone else did not correct it properly.

The question that each of us should ask ourselves is this "Is what I'm doing advancing the Kingdom of God or repulsing those who might desire to be saved?" Life always throws us curves. Life always throws everyone curves. The redeemed take the worst of it and make a great victory out of it. The rest just whine. So far I've not seen much redemption.

If I chose to I could outwhine the best of you. But what's the point? What legacy are you leaving not only to your children, not only to the rest of us on this board, but to the world?

Lord, have mercy!

I thank God for Karl and his faithfulness to the Church. I thank God that despite his serious reservations about some aspects of this liturgy he is doing his best to present Christ to us every Sunday. I thank God for the others who are doing their best. But I have no respect for the whiners.

If you want to take a trip to Pittsburgh and lay out your complaints directly to the bishops then do it. As most of you know I tried to organize a meeting last summer but got nowhere. So I picked myself up and kept on walking forward towards God.

Do something and stop the da.mned whining.

CDL

I don't think the vast majority of the priests and faithful of this Church are in a position to join you in your care-less-ness.

And I do think you need to be able to grasp the difference between a legitimate concern and what you crudely call whining.

Our priests have an obligation to the people as well as to their bishops.

They dare not lead a people into a heterodox slide through the implementation of a flawed liturgy, even at the order of a bishop.

They are not called on to abandon any member of the flock or break the bruised reed.

Mary

Someone has suggested that even to use the liturgy at all is to support an evil. That seems a bit radical but how does one ignore ones bishop? If this is to be a protest with teeth how does one go about implementing it?

CDL

The question is still on the table and I'd like to read some answer or hear of some action being taken. If the liturgy is bad enough that you are convinced it will do harm to your soul and to the soul of the Church what are you going to do about it?

I'm accused on the one hand by Professor Thompson of unfairly opposing the liturgy. Father Serge had accepted my invitation to come and speak on the liturgy. In the midst of our early preparations I received a firestorm of protests of any number of chicken littles who while complaining about the liturgy didn't want anyone to actually do anything about it.

Now that the liturgy has been promulgated these same whiners are still complaining about the dreadful liturgy. It may be dreadful. But now I'm accused of having some conspiracy to destroy churches because I observe the obvious. To wit, the liturgy has been promulgated. What is it that you intend to do about it?

Karl has taken a Godly route. While he has some serious reservations he has taken his responsibility as a cantor and is leading our choir in as good an application of the liturgy as is possible, at least for the time being. Is there anyone anywhere who is proposing actually doing anything about this new liturgy except implementing it? Anyone? Or is this a board filled only with whiners?

CDL

Fr. Loya, since you have been a regular (and I might add very edifying) poster on this forum, as well as a pastor who has had to implement these changes, would you give us your thoughts on the new RDL?

Anna,

I hope Father responds. I hope also that those who think the implementation liturgy to be an evil would tell us what they are going to do about it and what they expect the rest of us to do.

CDL

Dear friends,

It seems to me that there are three choices:

1) join some other jurisdiction, either Catholic or Orthodox.

2) stay, and obey one's bishop.

3) stay, and disobey one's bishop.

For me, since I _don't_ think the RDL is heresy (and it should be remembered that accusations of heresy ought to be thrown around like freight trains--not easily), #1 and #3 are not possible. Ergo, I will do #2. I make no judgment on those whose consciences tell them to do #1 or #3. The point of this thread was for those choosing option #2. _If_ you are interested in implementing what the bishops have told us to implement, _then_ you might like to know how we are doing it.

There are other threads for the kind of discussion that has happened here. I should know, since I've contributed to them.

I think Fr. Loya said something about a Phoenix rising from the ashes of the Ruthenian church. It's on fire now. How many years will it take to rebuild?

I won't say that the implementation has been totally without stress. Certainly, Easter has presented some real challenges. Flipping from the basic liturgy to the music/text for the specific Sunday to "The angel proclaimed to her" magnification, etc., can be pretty stressful on both cantors and congregation.

We, too, have started out with Option A and have stuck with it now throughout Lent and Easter, and most of the people have got the general hang of it. Sometimes I find that it's easier to learn something entirely new than to make minor alterations, e.g., singing two half notes rather than the dotted half and quarter we were used to. It took 3 or 4 weeks, but almost everyone now sings "trampled" and "tombs" rather than "conquered" and "graves." While most people are singing along, they don't sound as strong as in the past. However, I believe that will come with time. We'll move on to Option B, and in a few months when we return to review Option A, there will be that wonderful moment when people think to themselves "Oh yeah, I remember that!"

One of the blessings of belonging to a parish where almost everyone came from somewhere else, is that we're all used to adapting.

Occasionally, if I notice that everyone is making the same error, I'll give a very short instruction before the opening hymn. Of course, the late-comers miss out on it, but oh well ... I agree that practice by the cantor/choir is extremely important. If we sound strong and confident, the people will follow. If we falter, the people will falter, too.

I believe that cantors and choir members are in a leadership position within the parish. Not only do we lead the singing, but we have the ability--and the responsibility--to influence positively how the congregation will respond to the changes. One of the things I've tried to focus on is how much has not changed at all and how much has changed very little.

I agree with P-A's statement about the gravity of the accusation of heresy. While implementing theologically ambiguous aspects could lead to such a thing, it has to be a solid repudiation of established dogma as received through the Councils to win such a distinction of infamy. One should not easily, however, dismiss the potential danger of such ambiguity.

I would disagree that de facto taking P-A's option #1 necessitates an accusation of heresy. For many this was not the only factor in making such a decision. While the liturgical changes have certainly prompted some to take action, people have moved around within and between Catholic churches sui iuris long before this came along, not involving accusations of heresy. Last time I checked it was still "one, holy, Catholic and apostolic" and one's choice to move to a new ecclesiastical home sui iuris for spiritual enrichment and growth within the Catholic communion is certainly recognized for the benefit of the soul in question.

Diak,

Well, yes. For me, #1 isn't an option, for a host of reasons, not just because the RDL isn't heretical (in my opinion). I'm sorry wasn't more clear--I plead the late hour.

I suppose, as CDL has suggested, that I am one of the "whiners". I will accept that label. I submitted four letters to Rome describing my objection to the reformed Liturgy and I have spoken with numerous priests of the Ruthenian Church but I'm sure that I could do more. One person has suggested that I sue the Metropolitan in ecclesiatical court.

Today I am guilty of being weary and feeling somewhat defeated. Currently, I attend a Ruthenian Catholic Church which has implemented the reformed Liturgy. I continue to sing the word "men" in the Creed and our priest continues to use "Lover of Mankind". The people sing half-heartedly as they fumble around the pages. It can be depressing at times. I am still in a discernment process as to whether I should convert to Holy Orthodoxy. I want to cry everyday.

The whiner,
Recluse

Dear Recluse,

For what its worth, you are certainly not one of the people I would have though of when reading that note (neither is lm); you've objectively stated your grievances, and been above-board about what you would want to change.

When reading Carson's note, I thought of the conversations like the following which I've had in person or on the Net over this:

"I don't like it. It's all bad, and no one sings."
"The people on either side of you were singing."
"Well, that's cause they don't understand how bad it is. It's all wrong."
"Which part of the music is wrong? Can you give an example."
"It's ALL wrong. No one can sing any of it; it's too complicated."
"Hmm... would this be better?" (sings something in Slavonic)
"Yes, we used to sing that all the time; I wish we still did."
"Is it too complicated?"
"Of course not."
"Umm.. the new melody in English is the same melody, except we repeated a note to accent a word properly."
"Impossible. The new music is ALL wrong. Someone has to stop making us sing this new Roman Catholic music we never sang before. Oh, and this Typical Psalms stuff is horrible, they do that at my aunt's parish, the Russian one. It's NOT Catholic! And the Beatitudes stuff, on my gosh; everyone knows you're supposed to sing that at Communion, not in the first part of the Mass!"

etc. Imagine another hour of this; THAT is whining. There are certainly substantive issues with the new books, but endless "I hate it, make it stop, Father/bishop/Cantor Joe is being mean to us." makes it hard to find out what the REAL problems are - when there are any. I think people here might be surprised to realize how very many complaints I've heard that the new books are "too Orthodox."

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

I certainly have not heard that one yet. I don't think the Orthodox probably think that of the changes.

Dear Father Deacon,

The point here is not what the Orthodox think (we were discussing "whiners") but our own people.

1. "Over at the Russian church, they say Theotokos, but Catholics should say Mother of God. And we have ALWAYS said by death Jeusu CONQUERED death, not trampled like the Orthodox; you mean Christ DIDN'T CONQUER death?"

2. "We KNOW that the consecration takes places when the priest says This is my body. How dare you try to change our belief by singing a plain Amen at those holy words, just so (you say) you can emphasize this "epiclesis" thing my uncle, who goes to some Synod parish, is always carping about?"

3. "Typical Psalms and Beatitudes, and those extra litanies - we never did that before, too Orthodox. We're NEVER gonna get out of church. And don't even get me STARTED about standing at Mass!! "

4. "How Orthodox and sanctimonious to sing 'God grant them many blessed years!' The proper word is 'happy', just like when we sing in our language. You're trying to make everything like the Orthodox have it."

I have HEARD these comments in our good old-fashioned Greek Catholic parishes. Unfortunately, some of them hear that there is disagreement over the changes, and have assured me that everyone is upset with turning away from our good Greek Catholic ways, and this "Orthodox" stuff is going to be rolled back. I have not yet heard a single complaint about 'inclusive language', though I was expecting them, but I heard all of the above.

No, it's certainly not what (educated) Orthodox Christians would say, or our own vostochniki, but I have heard all of the above. In brief, following the "usual Orthodox terminology", which might have pleased some of us (were they not upset over inclusive language), offends others. Obviously, there is work to do on SOMEONE's part convincing these folks as to why we OUGHT to do things "like the Orthodox". Otherwise, the cry of "we are moving away from the Orthodox!" will carry very little weight...

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

I would not necessarily consider you to be a whiner if my opinion counts for anything. You have taken action. Keep up the good work.

CDL

Jeff,

Thank you. You have stated the issue better than I did. That is what I was pointing to.

CDL

I just wish there was more I could do. At this point, I do feel like a whiner.

There is more than prayer?

You know that your words are heard. So use them prudentially and pray. And trust that your prayers will be answered in due course and it is His will that will be done. Hold fast for the time and use that internal suffering as a gift to be used for the good of the Church and her people.

There is nothing "more" or more important than that.

Mary

The Revised Liturgy will fail. It is already crashing and burning in the parishes that are doing it.

The new request for feedback about what people don�t like is insincere. The books are already printed. Change will not be allowed. Those who have tried to give feedback to Petras and Thompson are ridiculed to their faces for not having the degrees they have and for not appreciating their hard work. They are unwilling to hear any opinion other then their own. You can give them countless examples and they pretend they have not heard them.

The new Liturgy is nothing more than 1970s Roman Catholicism. The new music is nothing more than what a Roman Catholic thinks prostopinije should sound like. Let�s hope it doesn�t take out too many people as it crashes and burns.

Dear Dostojno Jest,

Actually, my requests for feedback over the past year or two have been entirely sincere. I hear "The music is bad! There are bad accents! It is nothing like real authentic (tm) prostopinije!" I would like to know exactly what people mean, in detail, but the debate keeps turning to "They don't mean it - they are foreigners - it's ALL bad - etc.". That hardly furthers any discussion or understanding.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Jeff,

Thanks for not including me among the whiners. I am not sure where my pastor or Bishop includes me, but I would say among the disobedient. Sometime after I had begun posting on this forum, I had been asked (by my Bishop via my pastor) to keep my mouth shut (ie don�t post on this forum anymore) regarding my observations about inclusive language.

At first I had agreed to keep quiet. Then my conscience began to bother me. After posting a few times, I wrote my Bishop an email, through my pastor, why I couldn�t be quiet. This happened after several discussions with others (including several priests) and much prayer. This was long after my initial letter to my Bishop about my objection to the new translation.

I have been directly involved in an outreach and also principally responsible for hosting a vocation retreat for young men, boys and their fathers. Last year we had over 100 attendees with over 65 young men and boys. The retreat was in wilderness of New Mexico on 460 acres of privately owned land and for three and half days this group lived a full liturgical life according to the mind of the Eastern Church. This was not a summer �camp�, it was a mini-monastic retreat. The young men and boys loved it. As did all the dads. At the retreat site, we built an outdoor iconostasis and a chapel which is yet unfinished but well along the way. One of the members of the liturgical commission was officially responsible for the retreat from the ecclesiastical side.

Then came the promulgation of the RDL. Although the outreach might have failed anyways, nonetheless, the individuals involved in the outreach were the ones hosting the retreat. And it involved an enormous amount of their time and energy in the planning and execution of the event. None of this exists here now. Now the Bishop and priests will blame the failure on �us.�

With the background, I set forth a response to CDL. How, with the new liturgy can you bring in new members to the Church? How with the new liturgy will you develop vocations? I can�t see how it will be done.

When the new liturgy was promulgated, I no longer, in good faith, could convince my friends (mostly Catholic) to join our Ruthenian Church officially and thus make the outreach here into a viable mission. Now these were a group of people (with lots of children) who would regularly travel 260 miles round-trip to attend a Divine Liturgy. Some would say they were simply fleeing the chaos of the Roman Rite here, but that does not make sense of the fact that they were hosting a retreat to develop vocations for the Byzantine Church or building a chapel. Furthermore, if these folks were just fleeing the chaos of the Roman Rite, one cannot blame them for not wanting to flee from chaos to chaos.

With the new liturgy, I could no longer think of developing vocations for my Church. Why? Because I think faith and reason are in fact complimentary and not at odds with one another. Inclusive language in the Creed and the Liturgy says that they are at odds. One argument I have been presented with says inclusive language is a good thing because that is the way people speak today. Sort of. They do in academia and in the law. But real people don�t, unless they are trained to speak that way by the so called �experts,� so as not to offend others who have been trained that way. Furthermore, there are a lot of things people do today that are wrong, so why worry about what the world is doing?

What I set forth above is the superficial argument that has been given for the defense of inclusive language. The more serious one is that terms like �men� and �mankind� are sexist. I respond, �Says who?� Not Benedict XVI, not John Paul II, not the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and not any real expert on language like Fr. Mankowski, S.J. The world says it. The two-bit theologians in the Catholic Church say it, but not anyone of real repute. And the reason the real teachers in the Church don�t say that such language is sexist is because it is not true. In fact, it�s so seriously flawed that the teaching Church has rejected it. When I see that our Bishops issue a public letter which explains why inclusive language is true, then I�ll have to take it more seriously. [Let�s start a petition asking them to do just that]. But of course they won�t because that would be to contradict Rome. Finally, I can�t look my children in the eye with a straight face and say this inclusive language and the liturgy which has adopted it really is a good thing.

Since those who have fashioned the new liturgy and who are in power say it�s a good thing either directly and publically by defending it (these are very few) or by their silence (remember St. Thomas More maintained that silence means consent), there must be more changes of the same kind coming. If it is truly good, they must in fact make more changes in future translations of other liturgical texts and in the translation of Scripture as well. [While the term �children� has been an accepted translation in the beatitudes, it should have been corrected. The theology behind a correct translation in this day and age, is too important not to correct it.]

With Benedict XVI at the helm, there is no doubt in my mind that he is preaching that faith and reason go hand in hand. A Liturgy, a Creed and a Church that severs that relationship between faith and reason, by a purposefully false translation, is doomed to failure.

The gauntlet on inclusive language has been thrown down. It began at least in 1998 in Connecticut and should have been dealt with then. Our Church, if it really wants to be obedient to Rome on this issue, and if it wants to flourish, needs to do the right thing, even if those in authority have to eat some humble pie.

I note that Fr. Loya welcomes the �dissent� in his Church--true liberality at work. But orthodox dissent won�t be tolerated by many. There is a lesson in that. Fr. Loya has the right attitude about it because he sees it affects the truth, and being blind to the truth will only mean a loss of members�important ones. I dare say I have yet met a mother with lots of children who was demanding inclusive language in the Creed and Divine Liturgy. At best they can�t believe that princes of the Church fell for that one.

Would that Fr. Loya�s approach to the matter was the prevalent one. Then there would not be a loss of membership and there could be real organic change.

So how do priests implement the RDL? I would suggest that Father Loya is doing it the right way. He is not chasing the dissent away, he is welcoming it.

PS - One can do more than pray. Every laymen, male and female, young and old, can chant the real Creed (which is not the property of priests or Bishops) in the Liturgy as it should be chanted. That will speak volumes!

Jeff,

What do you think you can do about the bad music?

One priest said he marked up over 300 bad accents in the new pew book and gave it personally to both Bishop John and Archbishop Basil. If the bishops will not hear their priests what do you think you can do?

I�ve spoken to both Father David and to Mr. Thompson directly. Both treat any and all suggestions to improve their work as personal insult. What power do you have over them if the bishops will not direct them?

People have discussed the problems here. You and Thompson have treated all criticism as personal insult. You have labeled everyone who disagrees with the RDL as a whiner.

Our new music makes us sound like we just got off the boat. It is not a product of people who know English well.

We treat Boksaj as if it were canonical chant and the Liturgy as if we can do with it as we please. That is why it is crashing and burning.

DJ

Dear Dostojno Jest,

I beg your pardon, but I've never felt insulted by any comments about the music, here or elsewhere. I have asked repeatedly for specifics, back when the music was still being worked on; I'm continuing to ask since instructional material and so on is still in preparation. So far, all the accounts of "bad music" have been hearsay, such as the 300 bad accents you just mentioned.

I have never labelled ANYONE as a "whiner", and I was certainly happy to spend time at our two local parishes hearing people's comments, questions and complaints, as fielded by our pastor. I do know there are people who really feel that the ruthlessly simplified, 1960's settings of our chant are the only acceptable ones in English, but there have certainly been others side-by-side over the years that better maintained the old melodies.

If you have details, please send them to me. I'm interested.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

Yes. How silly of me.

Dear Dostojno Jest,

You have mistaken CDL's comments for ByzKat's.

Now, could you give an example of bad accents, as you see them? I'm interested, too.

"Everybody hates it" comments aren't helpful. And they certainly aren't true. Not everyone hates it.

I had stopped reading the Revised Liturgy posts because nothing new was being said. Then I saw this topic, which was supposed to be about "Implementing the New Liturgy: how we are doing it." Unfortuantely, like all the other topics under Revised Liturgy, it's turned back to the same old discussion about what's wrong or bad about the new liturgy and how to get rid of it.

Once again a possibly constructive thread has been hijacked by the same few people who have their heals dug in. I have read their posts and they're not saying anything that they haven't said over and over, ad nauseum.

PLEASE ... let's get back on topic -- how ARE we implementing the New Liturgy as it was promulgated? If your parish is implementing the new liturgy, and there are problems, what are you doing to resolve them -- other than dump the new liturgy. What steps are you taking to help the transition? Are any parishes offering on-going instruction or classes for the parishioners who want to learn the new music? Are any priests or deacons including discussion of the textual changes that bring the liturgy into conformity with the original Greek and Slavonic?

If you want to keep complaining, do it on the myriad other negative threads! Let those of us who are trying to implement the New Liturgy have ONE constructive thread!

Yes. I will always chant the Creed in the language in which it was intended to be chanted.

Only as a side note: I heard these kind of comments before the RDL. It got even to the ridicolous part that holding a candle at a Panahida was too Orthodox.

My way into Orthodoxy was paved by such anti-orthodox behaviours and comments. It was wearing me out because my main purpose in a church is not that I have to guard myself constantly because I appear to be too orthodox. So I finally left and I am at peace now.

Sorry if you thought I was hijacking the thread. I did not mean to. I was arguing that Fr. Loya was implementing the RDL in a way that was unique. He was welcoming dissent. He has publically encouraged people to write to their Bishops. That seemed to be a really positive and important part of the overall game plan of the implementation of the RDL. It means that there can be DIALOGUE within the community.

My apologies, and thanks Sophia.

Our two parishes in the Binghamton area began using the new books about two weeks into the Great Fast, with a minimal amount of preparation of the part of the people, and about 3 weeks preparatio n and coordination by the cantors involved.

We chose the settings closest to our "ordinary" melodies (we actually rotated through several in the past) and decided to stick to those for at least eight weeks. We used the same melodies at both parishes because many families attend both from time to time.

The pastor explained a little about the new books; for the first two weeks, the cantors announced more page numbers than we would have liked, but we could see from the choir loft that the number of people using the new books (about the same fraction as used the Levkulic pew books) were almost always on the correct page, at least for the ordinary parts of the Liturgy, by the third week, and we cut way down on announcements. In particular, we did NOT announce the page for the prokeimenon / Alleluia, since the page turns come very close together.

Many of those using the Byzantine Book of Prayer rather continued to do so; we heard later that they complained that there we no daily prayers, priests' prayers, etc. in the new People's Book, and seemed mollified to hear than a new edition of the prayer book was being prepared.

We continued to use the "old" Saint Basil melodies, but since those were usually sung only by the cantors, that didn't make a great deal of difference. By Holy Week, we actually started using the new Basil melodies and several people were singing them by the last time we used them; we'll return to them at Christmas.

Our priest announced that he was not pleased with everything in the new books, but reminded the faithful that the same sort of bobbles (and complaints) occured the previous five times we had switched to new texts and music over the past fifty years, and invited anyone with specific complaints to write to the bishop. He listened to all the complaints people made, and after Pascha held a question and answer session after EVERY Liturgy on a given Sunday; most of the complaints were about the physical use of the book (esp from people who did not realize what the page turn markers were), and about problems on the part of people who were hard of hearing. The pastor agreed to start putting page numbers for the current tone and propers in the weekly parish bulletin so people can find their places in advance.

Our pastor came back from the Passaic presbyteral meetings prepared to answer most of the questions people had about text changes; no one asked about inclusive language, but mostly about "Theotokos"; our pastor quoted the liturgy in Slavonic (from memory) to point out where the word was used and why.

We do continue to use a fair bit of Slavonic (as before) and hymns before the Liturgy and during Communion; several people asked when a complete hymnal would be available, and whether it would include Slavonic, especially for newcomers and children who don't have it memorized.

The cantors at our parish have talked about how to choose the next set of Sunday music; in the meantime, at our Binghamton parish, the cantor is starting to use other settings on weekdays. In particular, he says some of the music in the new book are from his old favorites in Slavonic, which before he was adapting to English from memory, and that he was glad to see them in print.

After about 4 weeks, people were regularly harmonizing at both our parishes, though the volume is only about 75% of what it was before. Honestly, some of that may be do the fact that the cantors are still a little more tentative, especially starting, than they were before. At both parishes, cantors have been downloading materials from the MCI website and using them - particularly for Sundays that mix several sets of propers, and for the Glory / Now and ever at the kontakia, to avoid several quick page flips.

We are talking about putting a bookmark in the books (colored card stock) noting which settings of the major Divine Liturgy hymns we are using on Sundays; we may try to implement this after Pentecost when we start using some new musical settings.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

I do not see the negativity. I see parishes beginning to question the "experts" as they become familiar with the implementation of the reformed Liturgy. I see a Church divided as the implementation takes hold. I pray that I can hold out for the rising phoenix.

Sorry...got to add my 2 cents even though I no longer have a "dog in this fight"

Jeff,

I think what you shared is right on the money!!! (I will only comment on the music.) I know when I made my journey from the BCC to ACROD the music was a big change (which I never in a million years expected)...unfortunately, from the Holy Trinity Community only 3 people joined ACROD (we did have people who went OCA and UOC-EP since the music was expected to be different so it didn't matter)...alot of it was due to the fact that they were expecting the BCC music that we were accustomed to...for those of us who "stuck with it"...that music is now the norm...Do I find myself fumbling at times, sure, but if you stick with it...it comes together...

Chris

There is absolutely nothing to prevent those who are most favorable to the RDL from coming on-line here and just flooding this general heading of the RDL with positive commentary and praise of the new liturgy and the catechesis that we've been offered thus far here concerning some of the changes.

I see no reason that anyone should be told not to speak.

Mary

Yes PLEASE!

If we are consistently going to hijack threads and take them off topic, then they are going to be either closed or the diverting posts deleted and action taken against the repeating offender(s). This is the last and final warning.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator

Is there an Index in the new book ??

Christ is ascended! Into heaven!

There is a complete index of every piece of music in the "Divine Liturgies" book contained at the rear of the "Cantor's Companion," published by and purchasable from the Byzantine Seminary Press, Pittsburgh, PA.

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

If Theotokos is supposed to be used throughout the RDL, why does the Irmos for the Feast of Ascension say "O Mother of God" instead of "O Theotokos"?

Christos po sredi nas!

Ungcsertez

..but that's not being consistent, no?

Christos po sredi nas!

Ungcsertezs

My comment was tongue in cheek.

CDL

...another error?

Christos po sredi nas!

Ungcsertezs

Ung,

Since you frequently include Slavonic in your sig, I has assumed you could read it, at least a little. The irmos uses the words "Mater Bozhiju". As has been mentioned here before, the liturgical commission translated the various titles of the Blessed Virgin consistently; I wish you'd stop claiming that every distinction is some kind of error.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

I am going to insist that if you want to debate the translations or its consistency, that the other existing threads be used. The subject that was laid out in the initial post in this thread was Implementing the New Liturgy: how we are doing it? Let us stay on topic.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator

I kind of like the idea of bookmarks. These could be printed out on card stock and left on the greeting table for people to pick up as they entered. They could tell the parishioners which options--A,B,C, etc.--were going to be used. Of course, this takes some planning ahead, but it might be less intrusive that vocally giving page numbers, and it would also help where there are some pages that have multiple options on them.

I noted that we sang more beautifully today than ever before. When I enquired why, I learned that we most often sang as we knew rather than as was written. Whatever the reason, it seemed nice today and I sang the Creed as it is supposed to be with all of the nouns. My concern was that the stray dogs and cats might think that our Lord came down to save them.

CDL

I thought it sounded quite nice today too. Although, most folks are still tripping on some of the words. For my part, I follow along in the pew book.

It might be helpful to learn some more of the history behind our plainchant. For example, some parts of the Liturgical chant are Rusyn and some Galician.

I enjoy our hard working choir, but there is something splendid when all of our people sing together ...

I inserted bookmarks into the pew books for our vesper liturgy yesterday. They included notes that we would be using Holy God B, Cherubic Hymn D, Our Father Samolahsen 6, etc. I also included a note to sing Be Exalted instead of We Have Seen the True Light and May Our Mouth Be Filled. Even a couple visitors who came in a little late didn't seem to have problems finding their way through the liturgy.

We, too, seem to be singing better. We don't sound quite so much like we're struggling to pick out the notes, and our phrasing is therefore getting better.

I'm going to say my piece and go...
I've been a cantor since the age of 17 when I was taken under the wing of the late Professors Frank Kostelnik, and Michael Kurtz. I've followed the direction of my pastor and I have learned this RDL. I have, at his direction implemented it to the point of completion two weeks ago.
I cried after a liturgy for the very first time. I watched people closing the books, then closing their mouths, until the only sound was my priest, myself, and no more than 15 people participating... the other 90 just stood there... going through motions, silent.
Am I resistant? perhaps, but I am following directions like a good do-bee.
I have a few questions that I would like answered...

To the Heirarchs: WHAT were you people Thinking? Did you honestly believe that ramming this down people's throats was a great idea? That the backlash would just be a few moans? I must admit.. I honestly DO pray every day that God intervenes and Rome Slaps SOMEBODY upside the head for this travesty that's being called a REVISION.

To the Translator(s): Can you PLEASE explain to me just WHAT you were translating from? I've spoken to no less than 4 Native Rusyn speaking old world Cantors/immigrants who have seen the revisions and really can't figure out where you got your translational skill since apparently some of the phrasing used it STILL wrong.

The Music.... I'll leave my comments out on this topic other than to note that if it was sought to leave the liturgy completely devoid of any spiritual emotion.. it succeeded.. and don't even tell me that you get out what you put in. You need to have something to put it in to get anything out.

Don't bother challenging me to a duel at 10 paces.. I've spoken my piece, and as soon as I can find an Orthodox church that suits me... I'll be going there.. Maybe they need a cantor who loves the liturgy as much as I did.

Unless it's an ACROD church, brace yourself! I'm still trying to get used to the OCA music. But I take comfort in the fact that I get the full liturgy every Sunday that the revisionists in the BCC seem to feel that their faithful don't need. Hospodi Pomiluj!

A reply to the Topic..


Physically:
Our pew book holders don�t fit two, so we have books on the end also. It�s not as clean looking as it once was.

Communication:
We use the standard ECBulletin service, and on the back page above the weekly colored box there is a list of Pages/Tones for the Liturgy.

Implementation:
More or less, as soon as it was "official" (I think early January) our Priest started to post same parts of the changes in the weekly bulletin. He hosted a few meetings during the week to help facilitate also. After a month or so, we started to use the new books on Sunday. Unfortunately, the (former?) cantor (who happens to be my Great Aunt) started to pick out new tones which we, the parish, wasn�t ready for. So not only did we have to change the words we where taught to pray, but as well as the melodies. This, of course, didn�t go over well, so our Priest brought in a paid professional cantor, which in return insulted our (former?) cantor and she refuses to sing IF the paid cantor is there. She still does so on the weekdays.

The paid cantor takes five minutes to jibber-jabber in front of the parish and tries to help us along, but she has no Byzantine experience and sometimes chants the wrong response and often blows into a pitch-toner (or whatever they are called) before starting. She uses an answering machine which we can call and listen to the upcoming weeks Tropar/ Kontakion.

As for the tones, we have also picked one tone for the whole Liturgy (Tone A) and are trying to master that before we embark any deeper. So many changes have overwhelmed us as a whole. More often then not, we sound like a chicken with it�s feathers being plucked out ready to be boiled without first being dispatched!

The Fallout:
The (former?) cantor, as far as I know, is the only causality of war which our parish can claim. She still attends, but doesn�t chant. There are rumblings within the oldest generation of my family (whose parent�s where founding members back in 1915) of leaving for one of the local Roman Catholic Parishes, but it hasn�t happened yet. Although, when it was announced of the changes, we had one semi-regular Roman Catholic guest to seem VERY concerned and hasn�t been here in months. A direct result? I don�t know.

How is this working:
The glass is half-full/half-empty. I think, as most people do, it�s ironic that the Byzantine Faith claims to be �Deep in Tradition� while it changes the translation in such a manner that those who where born in to the Faith stumble along now. It�s been a good six months and it�s still a mix of ..

�When you shall come into your Kingdom�
�When you come in your Kingdom�

..and the creed itself.. Well we start off good, BUT, Tone A has a physical page flip and it throws us off each time and the stumbling resumes.

St. Michael Toledo

I find it amusing that any of us who comment upon the musical settings in terms of their emotional content are told that we don't understand the heart and soul of our eastern Chant because we do not understand the dour nature of eastern music that is alien to the western ear.

I've listened to Greek Chant, Lebanese Opera, and African and Asian music for over 40 years, so my ear has no western "expectations" that over-ride all else.

Some of our current settings, the selection and the adjustments, are horrid at a very visceral level and the people will react to them, and they won't sing them, and good cantors will adjust those which cannot be avoided, once again...if there's still a Church around to adjust in.

What a waste.

Mary

That is the one million dollar question!

In our Church when we sang the liturgy (A) for the first time we pretty much all sang. The cantor told us which pages to mark before the liturgy and we turned to them. We did not have much problem. This, however, is the midwest. The difficult thing is the change in the words. In one year it should all work out.

How many people go to confession each week in the Church that closed its books? Sanctity is the point, not auditory pleasure. No, people don't believe in confession any more. (I know that this doesn't address the complaints listed but if no one's going to confession than all the pretty music in the world is nothing but a superficial exercise in self-absorbtion in the worship of the great ME that Americans are so good at.)

The angry tone of some of the criticisms and complaints [as opposed to the spirited critiques proferred by Elijahmaria/Mary], the threats to leave, the refusal to learn the music, remind me of a comment I made to a bishop about the nuptial relationship between a priest and the Bride of Christ, the people.

In a spritual sense, the priest, in the person of Christ, is married to the Bride of Christ, his church. I asked the bishop, "What if a seminarian learns that his bride to be is a screaming shrew who can never be pleased? Wouldn't it be best if he ran away?" The bishop laughed.

Those who do not participate in the beautiful sacrament of confession, must examine their consciences. Grace will bring them back. You are correct--that is irrelevent to this discussion.

As far as this reform: I have been a musician for 38 years. I can read music. In my opinion, the changes were unnecessary. It is too complicated for a Church who had the old tones written on their hearts. It has nothing to do with refusal to learn.

As far as your accusation of threats: Those of us who have had their consciences pierced by this poor and inclusive reform, have lost a sense of peace. Yes Rufinus, externals and internals are important. We are a physical and spiritual people. Beisdes, who would be threatened by my conversion to Holy Orthodoxy--certainly not our reformers!

Recluse,

I couldn't agree with you more that the external and internal are important. Your loss of peace is evidence of this.

The quote I gave from "The Way of a Pilgrim" was not a generalized comment of my opinion on Old Believers. It was only, as you noted, to remind us that BOTH the external and internal are important. Indeed, both are one. (This quote always bothered me, by the way. Somehow, I think the distincition is philosophically faulty.)

I was going to follow up this up with a post of how chant unites the external and internal into one in the act of praying the psalms - how the intellect and will become united by chanting. I was then going to use the writings of the Fathers on the self-disciplining of the passions as being uniquely effected by chanting in the act of prayer. The moderator and others, however, seem intent on using any discussion of chant as a means of challenging the RDL. Thus, any pedagogical discussion of chant is thwarted. I also was interested in the experiences people had - which were their favorite chant forms, etc.

I wrote a nice long bit on this but the forum is closed. I shall hold what I wrote "in pectore."

Although I share your concern about the inclusive language, I found great comfort in seeing that the psalms were protected from this. You may want to wait to see how the new Orthodox study bible turns out before you make your decision. I think that you might be mistaken to think that any denomination is protected from the use of "vertical inclusive language." I haven't looked into this but keep your eyes wide open.

I highly recommend the website "ancient faith radio". You might like it.

Above all else - pray, pray, pray. Stay close to Jesus. He will help you. I will pray for you tonight.

Rufinus,

Beautiful post. I think I owe you an apology.

Would you please write and publish your reflection?

I think it could be of use to many.

Mary

Thank you Rufinus. You have certainly identified my problem. I cannot delve further into the internal, if I am not at peace with the external. The language and new music does not give me peace, and so I must be in a place where I can recover that peace. I have been praying for discernment for a very long time (since well before the promulgation). Again, I appreciate your prayers. I will pray for you also.

Recluse

Mary,

Thank you for your kind post. Ouuuu! I nearly withdrew from the forum.

I will put my reflections on another forum to protect it from the outbreaks of sectarian violence of this forum. It's quite long. So, I am trying to break it up into three or four sections. I keep finding quotes.

As to your questions about certain words, I recognize the immense amount of research that must be done to answer you. It isn't just a matter of looking something up. It is really a matter of gaining first the way of thinking about the world that people had long ago. For example, I do not think anyone can spout off without looking the definition of the "soul." Nor, can people explain the differences between the following words - substance, nature, essence. This requires an understanding of the metaphysics of Aristotle, Plato and the medieval philosophers. It really does require a new way of thinking, an experience which is most akin to learning and understanding the concept of limits in Calculus. I trust that the Bishops and the Vatican are much more capable than I in addressing these issues. So, I trust them.

Your questions, however, give us an opportunity to learn. I stay out but read with interest forums like "anaphora".


Rufinus

It is good that you stayed. The fathers often recommend remaining in charity...



To speak of "sectarian violence" is a little too strong for what goes on here. It's like my son wailing "Mom, stop screaming at me!!" ...when all that I was doing was disagreeing with his desire to do something that was not permitted.

You might say that some of us are most disagreeable, but I don't think "violence" tells the tale accurately.



My good guess is that some of the issues that have been brought to light here which have some strong theological substance were not discussed here or in Rome. You see, many things can slip under the radar when there is no one there to challenge.

The Latin rite is clear example of that happening, over and over again. Only when it became abundantly clear that the local bishops were NOT going to manage the liturgical difficulties on their own, but only add to them, did Rome then step in and mandate change.

So your assertion about bishops and Rome is clearly some idealized version of reality.

Besides, many of us have provided historical commentary and Scripture to support our contention that there's a "new" theology for this new Byzantine order. And many of our priests recognize those problematic "moments" in the liturgy as well and will be avoiding error, which is their responsibility as priests.



I have been most grateful for the help of one of our ordained men in the Metropolia in keeping my comments on track and adding substance to the position which I believe is the most accurate and the one most faithful to Scripture and Tradition.

I am very glad that you have changed your mind about writing your reflection for us.

Mary

And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.



______________________
Glory to Thee, O Lover of Mankind

I am aware that there are some parishes which have not yet instituted the RDL and others which have not yet purchased the books (whether for monetary or other reasons). Tomorrow is the imposed deadline. Does anyone know if there are repercussions for those parishes not in compliance?


_____________________________
Glory to Thee, O Lover of Mankind

Yes, several churches in several deaneries of the Archeparchy have not purchased them yet. Just as there are many parishes that hold daily Divine Liturgies during Lent and refuse to hold Presanctified Liturgies during the Great Fast, this will be another mandate that won't be fully enforced, so it seems.

Ungcsertezs

OR in another scenario, a parish may find itself without the services of a priest for failing to comply. Food for thought.

Four parishes in a Central PA Deanery share one priest. Two parishes are served one weekend, the other two the following weekend. RDL is not a priority. If it was, at least two of these parishes would have recited liturgies. The would be an outrageous result of the RDL mandate.

Ungcsertezs

There was an analogous situation in the first year of the reign of Anne Boleyn's daughter Elizabeth. A certain Sunday was set for the mandatory use of the slightly revised 1552 Book of Common Prayer, replacing the Mass.

Several large churches in London and elsewhere continued to have Mass right down to the wire. The bishops and many priests - to say nothing of lay people - then withdrew from the "Church of England".

Fr. Serge

Well, I wish I could say to one and all, happy feast of the great apostles, Peter and Paul.

But for many of us, the date of June 29 has a bitter taste in our mouths. We've been praying that the bishops would come to their senses, and take back their letter of promulgation, admitting the many flaws and errors in the new books.

But, as we have seen in the United States, over the past decades, whatever else you want to say about our bishops, they will do anything but admit their mistakes. Maybe their hats are too tight, but they just won't admit to doing anything wrong, ever.

June 29th, a very sad day for our Church. But the bishops rise above it all, and just don't see the problems.

sigh,

Nick

Is it not because of bishops and/or the actions of the church in the past that our people found other churches?

Let's look at the ramifications of Ea Sempre in 1907 and Cum Data Fuerit in 1929...

Let's remember the immortal words of George Santayana: "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Rusyn31

An entire Orthodox church was started because of Cum Data Fuerit. (ACROD)...

For the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, we sang the A series. Our cantor gave short simple instructions. "We're singing the A series and the propers are found on page 338. Put a ribbon on these pages..." Short, simple, to the point. The liturgy then began.

One thing became immediately apparent - the cantor had practiced a lot. His singing was strong, clear, and confident. His singing wasn't rushed. It was well paced. The Troparion, Kontakion, Magnification and Prokeimenon were perfect. Each note was carefully placed and sung. For the first time since our use of the new liturgy, he seemed to be unafraid to sing in a relaxed manner. (I sang along but was flat because of allergies.)

Our cantor's confidence created a calmness in the people. 30-40 of the 60 people kept their books open to the end and sang along. Our cantor took the creed at a moderate tempo that permitted us to keep up. I didn't know which Our Father we sang but maybe I'll catch this next week. The cantor is extremely important and our little Church in Indiana is very lucky to have this guy. He is shaping our attitude and probably doesn't realize how grateful I am for his rehearsing the music.

I prayed for everyone on this list through out the liturgy. I offered up with prayers my own mistakes and trepidation for the cantors of the BCA.

Do what I have done if you do not like the RDL (and I see that many of you DO NOT), start a petition to return.

I gave the RDL a fair shake, I tried the RDL. I did not like it one bit. This is not the Liturgy brought to this country by my ancestors!!! My ancestors are truly turing in their graves, along with Bishops Takach, Ivancho, Dudick, Bilock and Kosicko!

The only time I sang today is when we did Dostojno Jest in traditional Carpatho-Rus' Prostopinije!!!!!! Funny, there is not one #&$*% word of Slavonic in these great new books, yet the congrgation sang it better, stronger, and with more heart-felt feeling than the "forced RDL".

I only got to a portion of the congregation and already have 40 signatures. When I get a majority of parishioners (we have approx. 300 families, I will submit it to our pastor and tell him that the people have spoken!) It probably will not work, because of the authoritarian style reign of the bishops, but I must try, and if I fail, at least I spoke up for what I BELIEVE IS RIGHT!!!

I see people that are conforming because they say, "What can I do, I am just one person?" Wake up folks, this is just the beginning of the end! This is not Communist Eastern Europe when our Church was liquidated, you have a say in the matter! Is it not the Church of the people? Without the people, there is no Church!

One person who is in favor of the RDL asked if I went to the Archeparchial conferences and meetings on the RDL, and I simply stated, "NO. I didn't need to! Why should I go to a conference where they are going to dictate to me on how to pray and worship. It would have made any difference to attend because of the authoritarianism of the conferences." I further added that everything that I need to know about the Divine Liturgy I read in Msgr. Basil Sheregy's book, "The Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom." published in 1970 by the Byzantine Seminary Press. I knew Msgr. Sheregy as an Altar Boy and he was a great man! We need more people like him, and not those who conform just because...

My great-grandparents did not come to this country to compromise their rich Rusyn and Slavonic traditions, why should I?

There are two Ukrainian churches across different parts of the road where I go (McKees Rocks, Holy Ghost). Our ancestors made it a point to start and keep their own church, not conform to anyone's standards.

Sorry to say this, but bishops can be wrong as well.... Look at the bishops in Europe that tried to Magyarize, Ukrainianize and Slovakize our people (bishops of Mukacevo: Pocsy, Pankovic, de Pastelyi, in Presov: Toth, Valyi, Novak, Hirka, Babjak)...were they right in doing so, or was there another factor in this change after centuries?

Even in America, bishops have not always done the right thing, to say that they do just because they are bishops is not right. Do I need to reinform you about the American Roman Rits Bishops that have covered up abuses of their priests? Were they right in doing so?

In addition, was Bishop Ireland right when he scoulded St. Alexander Toth (an Orthodox Saint), who prompty became Orthodox and took 30,000 faithful with him? Were the Roman Rite bishops right for trying to Americanize and Latinize the Eastern Rite through the "Elko Reformation" of the 1950's? Was Bishop Elko right in accepting this "Americanization" by telling parishes to trash iconostas's and everything that defined our Eastern Rite?

I say pray for the people who do not want this RDL, they ARE in the majority. Pray that they have the fortitiude to continue to complain and fight this wrong!!!

Rusyn31,

Say good bye to congregational singing. Todays 'Rocks broadcast seemed as if only Fr. Larko and the cantor were singing the English parts. And yes, it seemed as if the parish faithful only sang the Slavonic parts.

U-C

I am listening to the Recording from St John's Cathedral in Parma at present and I will admit that at the beginning there certainly
was reasonable congregational singing at the beginning.

I will post my comments tomorrow .

Dear Rusyn,

I fail to see how the above post is on topic as to "What Are We Doing to Implement the RDL." Rather, it is "What Are We Doing to Undermine the RDL." There are other threads in this Forum in which you can continue your campaign to bring down the RDL. Speaking for those of us who are trying to make it work in our parishes, we would appreciate if you would kindly post such comments on those other threads rather than here.

Au contrair Sophia, we are implementing the RDL by trying to rid ourselves of it.

I do not want to undermine anything, I just want to keep what is rightfully ours.......what is being undermined is the integrity of the Carpatho-Rus' Prostopinije that has been handed down to us.

Who is we? Seems as if there are more against the RDL than accepting of it.

In addition, would the administrators of this bulleting board (mostly being priests) be accepting to allow a thread against the RDL?!?

Rusyn31,

In answer to your question, YES. This an open discussion section dedicated to discussing the topic of the RDL, not just one side of it.

Sophia is right though, certain comments on this thread are off topic and should be posted on the appropriate existing threads. Any further off-topic comments on this thread will be deleted.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator

Let me correct myself before I get even further in trouble...

...In addition, would the administrators of this bulletin board (mostly being either priests, other clergy, or those that do not want to upset the hegemony of the church and therefore do not want to make waves even though they really think otherwise) be accepting to allow a thread against the RDL?!?

If they will post a thread for those who want to show their extreme dismay against the RDL (without being deleted, unallowed, banned or otherwide), then post one.

It's wonderful to hear a parishioner acknowledge the time and effort of his cantor. Many people don't realize that cantoring is actually hard work. Leading is a lot different than sitting in the pews and following. It takes practice both at home and before liturgy, and it takes guts to stand up there, not always sure that what's going to come out of my mouth is what my brain is telling my mouth to sing!

And it's even harder when one of the people out front is singing something other than what's on the page in front of them or think they can continue to sing without a book at all. When that happens, I start questioning whether I'm doing something wrong, and that can throw everything off! For that reason alone, it might be a good thing that not everyone out front is singing yet. Hopefully, they are listening and absorbing the new music, and when they feel comfortable, they will join in.

At my parish we began implementing the new music as soon as it was promulgated and we received the books. We started slowly, with all Option A. But after less than 6 months, we have branched out into other options. I cantor our Saturday vesper/liturgy, and many of the people are regulars. They were already used to singing the samolahsen tones, so we now do all eight tones of the Our Father corresponding to the tone of the week. We can also do the podoben Tone 4 Our Father. A few weeks ago, we also began chanting the psalms/alleluias instead of singing aliturgical Eucharistic hymns.

I prepare small "bookmarks" (printed 8 to a legal size page) with page numbers/options and place them next to the pew books on the greeting table at the back of the church. Several people have told me they are quite helpful. Calling out page numbers is an alternative, but I find that it is more helpful for the people to know the next page number ahead of time and be prepared to join in immediately. This is especially true for the Cherubic Hymn. They can find the proper page while we're still doing the Litany, and then concentrate on actually setting aside "all earthly cares."

Based on my experience at the vesper/liturgy I cantor, I can say that our people ARE singing the new music - at least those who used to sing the old music and we're all getting stronger every week!

Rusyn31,

Speaking of trouble, guess what? You are pushing it here. Your comments are unfounded. Either retract them as both sides have been allowed to post their opinions equally or your posting rights will be suspended.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator

I retract my statement.

My comments may have been unfounded so I will retract them.

What I do not retract is my dedication to my Carpatho-Rus' Prostipinije, my Rusyn heritage, Slavonic Liturgy and what I think is being done to it. I do have a right to speak up about that.

Rusyn31,

Fine that is within your right, but both sides of the issue have equal say on the subject here. Certain topics are dedicated to certain points and that has to be understood.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Adminstrator

Fr. Anthony,

I did not mean to personally upset anyone, for that I am sorry.

Rusyn31
aka Dean Poloka

I understand.

Now that we're back on track, and before the substantive posts get lost ...


It's wonderful to hear a parishioner acknowledge the time and effort of his cantor. Many people don't realize that cantoring is actually hard work. Leading is a lot different than sitting in the pews and following. It takes practice both at home and before liturgy, and it takes guts to stand up there, not always sure that what's going to come out of my mouth is what my brain is telling my mouth to sing!

And it's even harder when one of the people out front is singing something other than what's on the page in front of them or think they can continue to sing without a book at all. When that happens, I start questioning whether I'm doing something wrong, and that can throw everything off! For that reason alone, it might be a good thing that not everyone out front is singing yet. Hopefully, they are listening and absorbing the new music, and when they feel comfortable, they will join in.

At my parish we began implementing the new music as soon as it was promulgated and we received the books. We started slowly, with all Option A. But after less than 6 months, we have branched out into other options. I cantor our Saturday vesper/liturgy, and many of the people are regulars. They were already used to singing the samolahsen tones, so we now do all eight tones of the Our Father corresponding to the tone of the week. We can also do the podoben Tone 4 Our Father. A few weeks ago, we also began chanting the psalms/alleluias instead of singing aliturgical Eucharistic hymns.

I prepare small "bookmarks" (printed 8 to a legal size page) with page numbers/options and place them next to the pew books on the greeting table at the back of the church. Several people have told me they are quite helpful. Calling out page numbers is an alternative, but I find that it is more helpful for the people to know the next page number ahead of time and be prepared to join in immediately. This is especially true for the Cherubic Hymn. They can find the proper page while we're still doing the Litany, and then concentrate on actually setting aside "all earthly cares."

Based on my experience at the vesper/liturgy I cantor, I can say that our people ARE singing the new music - at least those who used to sing the old music and we're all getting stronger every week!

Implementing the new DL: A four-week report

Glory be to Jesus Christ!

I�d just like to share some comments about my parish�s experience changing to the new Green books. Please feel free to comment.

Week One: The first week we used the new books, our pastor was out of town and so another priest celebrated liturgy for us. Overall, there was general confusion, too many page turn announcements, etc. However, overall no one expressed disgust or anything of the sort. Many people had positive comments. For example, one woman asked me about the different melodies and was happy to learn that we might try to expand our parish repertoire in the future by using different options (currently, we decided to use the melodies closest to the ones we were already singing, so we�re all over the place in different settings). At the end of Liturgy, I distributed about 6 CDs to the parish�s strongest singers with the music for the melodies that we use.

Week Two: We had a baptism this Sunday, so for the Enarxis the books were not even used. By the time it came to �All you who have been baptized,� everyone was pretty much caught up in the action of the baptism and chrismation, so we sang the melody with the old words. At the Gospel, we had a big problem singing �Glory be to...� instead of just �Glory to...� Also, the change from �And with your spirit� to �And to your spirit� was very messy. At the end of Liturgy, I distributed another 11 or 12 CDs.

Week Three: We had another baptism this Sunday, and the same thing happened at �All you...�- same melody, old words. This week at the Gospel, more people sang �Glory to...� instead of �Glory be to...� The Cherubic Hymn was a bit messy still (as it was the past two weeks), but by the third repetition of it before the Great Entrance people were essentially singing it fine. This week, the Creed sounded much better than the past two weeks. Before, about three-quarters of the people were still using the old wording, so there was a lot of clash. At the end of the Liturgy, our pastor made an announcement about using a card that I made as a guide for the books, and told the people that although we shouldn�t be keep our noses in the books normally, we should do so for the next couple of weeks in order to get used to using the new books and the new music/wording. People seemed generally receptive to this.

Week Four (earlier today): We had a special practice an hour before liturgy. We went over the music for the hymns for the day (all the Tone 5 propers) and the whole liturgy itself. Besides the cantors, some of the parish�s other strong singers were present. We plan to have another one of these next week at the same time.

No baptism this week. At the Enarxis, the people sang the first verse of each antiphon, and the cantors sang the second and third, to which the people responded with the refrain (the first week there was confusion over the antiphons, with the result that the first was sung with three verses and the other two with only one). We are still waiting for the Antiphon/Small Litany supplement from the MCI for our parish�s use. The �Holy God� was a bit slower than normal today, but picked up by the end of the second repetition. The absence of the �be� during the doxologies and before/after the Gospel was no longer really a problem. About 90% are no longer singing �be.� The Cherubic Hymn sounded much better. There was a tremendous improvement with the Creed. The Anaphora went off without a hitch, as did most of the rest of Liturgy. The worst point musically is still right before the people receive communion- people are still singing �God the Lord� instead of �The Lord is God�. We used a new melody for �Blessed be the name� (C instead of A as we did before).

I'd like to know who gave you permission to use additional antiphon verses; only one verse is given in the New Rite text and the directive in the foreward is very clear: I repeat Sole, as that is what The Book says.

I am quite serious about my question as I was clearly directed (the last time I served in a Ruthenian parish, that is) to take only exactly what was in the New Rite books and nothing outside of those books. After having sung the Antiphons with all of the provided verses for years as a cantor, as well as taking the Little Litanies in between as a deacon (as I do now in my UGCC parishes), I want to know if I was not given accurate and honest information.

Again, I will repeat that if any variation is allowed by the hierarchy, then the absolute value of "sole liturgical text" comes into serious question.

Father Deacon,

Glory be to Jesus Christ!

I can't answer you for sure. All I know is that when it came time for the second/third verses of each antiphon, the cantors intoned the verses as they have done ever since they started to serve as cantors at our parish.

Perhaps they decided to continue as before since various people at the MCI have promised to release an antiphon-supplement type booklet.

In regards to the whole question of "sole liturgical text", I'm really not competent to answer or debate this. My only purpose in posting my mini-report was to share with members of the community certain problems we have encountered thus far with the new text and music, some of the steps taken to solve the problems, and how our parish has progressed since week one.

Mark T.

Mark, thanks, I didn't mean to put you "on the spot", but it seems the new book is quite clear about "sole text". I am trying to determine if that provision is being enforced equitably and if, in fact, it is the SOLE TEXT.

We're implementing it quite well, thank you.

BTW, again we may be getting off the topic of "implementation" of the RDL. In an attempt to get back on course, when our parish began to phase in usage, we started with introducing approximately 10-20 pages per Sunday. This included stating beforehand where to place ribbons and announcing pages during the liturgy. Of course there was some confusion because people were getting accustomed to a new book, revised text and some changed music.

Presenting the similarities between the music presented in the new book to the music we were using at our Slavonic liturgy I believe has made the conversion easier. I also believe the congregation in general is happier to now have books which include the musical notation.

Less announcements have been needed each week and we have gone to handouts downloaded from the MCI for the propers (this results in less page flipping). Also printed were card stock bookmarks which indicate which versions of hymns (with page numbers) that will be used for the approx. eight weeks between July 29th and the Feast of the Dormition.

Time again for me to poke my nose out from under my rock....

I have an amazing amount of energy I am dying to expend on this topic, but, since I am quite sure it will have me permanently banished from the forum... I'll save my queries for Outpust when I am sure there will be plenty of people to ask the same questions....

my current pondering? Just how many people will actually sing at any of the services .. other than the Rusyn Slavonic liturgy on Sunday morning... well, that is unless they take that away from us too.

my rebel statement? Sit quietly in your pews... pray with your priest... and wait for Rome to slap some sense, and reason into a few people. I'm still wondering just what was in the Hookah pipe during the RE-translation and addtion of politically correct trash.

Help!

I just spent last evening talking to my family up north. Since this is a thread about implementing the new worship, I have some questions.

My aunt's cousin was a cantor in a Byzantine Catholic church I guess. he no longer is. They were upset at the heavy handed way the cantors were instructed by their church to follow the new liturgy and accompanying hymn book or else.

Their church published a hymn book that includes only those hymns they are allowed to sing before and after the worship service(?). Many of the hymns they were used to singing all the years are now forbidden. My aunt said that they were hymns sung in Slavonic too that they learned growing up.

During a seminar a few months ago, the instructor told them thta if they didn't want to follow it they could leave. My aunt's cousin was greatly upset. They felt like a bunch of children being disciplined.

Their pastor ignores it all and still worships as he wishes. When visiting priests are there he changes things to the way his church demands. When they are gone he goes back to they way he has been doing it before the mandate.

My aunt is greatly upset. the hymn book they received doesn't even have notes in it. They sang a Latin hymn from it yesterday.

Whta to do? How to counsel such people? Is this how it is being implemented elsewhere?

Administratr/Moderator: If this is considered not in line with the topic of the thread, please feel free to create a new thread.

Eddie

Dear brother in Christ, Eddie,

The bishops and the music commission decided to release the new service book without a collection of hymns; I have been told that they were worried that a hymnal section would make an already large book TOO large. On the other hand, the existing hymns (text only) in the old Lekvulic service book had no music, and contained a variety of typos and even grammatical errors, etc., in the Slavonic.

The hymns we are talking about are not part of the Divine Liturgy itself (the service the new book is for), and were certainly not forbidden (though I can understand why people were confused). The official Cantor's Companion states "The custom of singing hymns before and after the Divine Liturgy is greatly beloved by the faithful of the Byzantine Catholic Church, and is encouraged." The hymns in the last section of the new book were chosen precisely because there are from other parts of the Liturgy, or are based entirely on Scripture.

A hymnal with essentially all the hymns in the Lekvulic book is in preparation, with music in both English AND Slavonic.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Jeff,

is there an approximate date as to when this will be released?

I'm going to confirm it in the next few weeks, but I've been told that at the Lakewood, OH parish, since the new books have goine in, the priest has discarded all the other books (i.e. the hymns to the Mother of God, etc.) and replaced them with his own hymn book. The book that he made has all of the hymns from the Lekvulic and Marian Hymn books combined but ONLY in English. See, this priest is using the RDL books as a way to justify eradicating Slavonic once and for all. This probably was an uninteded consequence by the folks in Pittsburgh, but still, not having any Slavonic in the RDL books is giving those who wish to remove Slavonic from our churches the 'justification' to do so. Very sad.

Monomakh

I don't know if this was an "unintended consequence"...

Chris

Dear Monomakh,

I am hoping to see a draft before the end of the month, at which point the Music Commission would be going over it to decide whether to publish it formally. If not, I would expect the individual hymns (and possibly a collection) to show up on the MCI website.

And before anyone asks again the selection of hymns in the "interim hymnal" in preparation is basically identical to that of the Levkulic pew book's; the English text is unchanged except in one or two cases where the a retranslated text is already included in the Green Book; the Slavonic text is corrected where some typos were made in Levkulic, and the melodies are from the 1970 Byzantine Liturgical Chant, or Father Sokol's books from the 1950's.

Chris,

I note that the Johnstown (ACROD) Divine Liturgy book dropped Church Slavonic years ago, and yet Slavonic remains in use there. I think you would be off track in assuming in either case that Church Slavonic was being suppressed.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Jeff. Thank you in clarifying a few things. My relatives are still upset about how they were talked down like little children. They mentioned how one of the approved hymns for before and after the Divine Liturgy is a Roman Catholic hymn. is the Byzantine Catholic church now introducing Roman Catholic hymns into their worship? The Roman Catholics who attended worship loved it and sang loudly. The Byzantine Catholics were surprised and remained silent. It was odd for them not to sing a hymn in their own church thta their guests were able to. Will there also be Protestant hymns too? I can recommend a few if you would like.

Eddie

Ed,

I'd be interested in knowing the name of the hymn. In my parish, for example (near-century old Greek Catholic church), we occasionally sing "Immaculate Mary", "Holy God, we praise thy name" (for Sundays when the Holy Name meets), and one or two hymns in honor of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. (We also sing a lot of Slavonic.)

The Music Commission may change their minds, of course, but as far as I know the interim hymnal will not include "Immaculate Mary," or "O Jesus Lord, we ask you to bless us (who love Your Sacred Heart divine)." (And there will likely be complaints about not including those two.) The closest thing to a Roman Catholic hymn in the proposed hymnal is Kol Slaven Nas - if in fact it the melody was originally a setting for Tantum Ergo. (The Kol Slaven text is unrelated though.)

Jeff

Perhaps they are referring to the Great Doxology which resembles the "Gloria" from the Roman Catholic liturgy.

Will the new book include the hymn "O Marije mati Boza Precista"? Thats one of the nicest Marian hymns of the Rusyn tradition.

Sorry, I just had to ask...

Yes And it is.

Jeff

Jeff...I appreciate your comment however knowing Metropolitan Nicholas and knowing the internal workings and history of the American BCC...I think it is like comparing grapes and watermelons...

Chris

Jeff,

The reference to a Roman Catholic hymn being used could be the entrance hymn for the Feast of Ss. Peter and Paul. I think it was set to "Joyful, joyful, we adore thee ..." / "Ode to Joy".

Zeeker,

That's altogether possible; that's why I was asking for the name of the hymn. Its wonderful that Roman Catholics would have come to one of our churches on a holyday that's not one of their "holydays of obligation", and I'm glad they sang along, whatever it was.

Jeff

Not to be overly negative, but I realized when following along that the choir seemed not to be reading the same music as I was at times. I am a musician, of sorts, but not a singer (although I have had training in musical theatre). I thought, "hmmm, this is funny: we already have a mismatch and these books are brand new." Then I realized: "hmmm, it's actually that someone is singing the 'old' version and everyone else is following.

I can't help feel a little like a Protestant. Honestly, I still follow along using a book printed in 1948 - long, long before I was born. It is an old family prayer book and I just like to use it. A lot more mismatch now, though.

I've noticed that, as well. Sometimes our cantors, who I must say are doing their best to sing the new music and lead us, slip into the "old" way in mid-hymn.

That is why I call it, "The Ruthenian Reformation".

My pastor said the music is bad so he just made his own pamphlet with the new words and put them in the pews. So far it is still weird.

Rusyn31,

Tuned in again this morning to Holy Ghost liturgy broadcast, very disappointing. How small is the attendance post-RDL? Very sad, indeed!

Ungcsertezs

Ungcertezs,

The attendance is about the same, but nobody participates...As I said before, many of us used to help cantor, but now we don't. I do not pick up the green monsters. I put them in another pew because of the "pew" they are making (pun intended).

We have our big 100th anniversary in a few weeks. I think after that is done, people may start leaving (I am seriously considering leaving as well). We just spent a lot of money renovating the church for our anniversary, it looks great! It would be a shame if our 100th anniversary is overshadowed by this travesty!

I have approx. 50% of the active membership on my petition.

Those that did not sign the petition are either the converts from other churches that do not know our Slavonic-Rusyn Liturgy or those that really don't care either way and are so apathetic to it.

Some like the changes, but they are few and far between the rest of us. They are the ones that have successfully been indoctrinated by the proponents of this change.

Again, how traditional can a Liturgy be when you need a Master's Degree in Music to read the notes? Isn't it strange that we need music all of a sudden? Why is it that the old books did not need music?

Things that make you go......hmmm.

I am shocked and sadden by all the negative talk about the Liturgy. I grew up in PA as an Orthodox married a Byzantine Catholic, over 50, cannot read music and cannot carry a turn but I attended Liturgy last night and was able to follow in the book (easier than the old, it tells you what page to go to) and also attempted to sing with the 2 cantors and 20 people that were in church. We did make mistakes but I came away feeling good inside because I was in my church. We should go to church because of the Love of God and prayer. Do the words and melody changes really mean that much that you must be so cruel in your hearts? Many of the songs before the changes are not the same as I grew up with but that did not stop me from being an active member of my current church. Life goes on, stop the negative feelings and put joy in you life. If you are truly a Byzantine Catholic you love the Church, the Body and Blood of Christ, the Liturgy, the icons, the smell of incense and you will stay and you should participate. I cannot understand how a NJ priest can say the music is bad so he just made his own pamphlet with the new words(shame on him and the Bishop should be aware of his attitude.)
Do I think we should have used the time, resources and money for something more important, in my opinion yes, maybe the 6th, 7th, 8th and High School God With Us series for ECF completed, but that will come. How many versions of the Stars Spangle Banner have you heard but that did that stop you from going to the Pirates or Steelers games or worse leaving the US. Speaking of changes, I wish all the churches would clean up their websites and teach the parishioners why we do not have "First Communion". Children learn from the parents and all the negative adults are sending the wrong message to the young children and teens. Hope the Pittsburgh ByzanTEEN rally this week has a positive attitude toward the Liturgy. A church friend and I went to a Melkite church for a Holy Day, we participated in the Liturgy, sang the different melodies and came away feeling like we were at home there. In the whole scheme of life
the changes are minor as compared to the world, let�s not have an internal war over this.

Peace Begins With You

I agree. I am shocked and saddened too. It is all such a waste of time and effort, that could have been put to positive use elsewhere!

Where are the threads on evangelization, where is the outreach for starting new missions and new parishes? Think of what could have been done with that money and time and effort.

But the fact remains, there is a lot of negative talk about the new Liturgy, because it is really really bad. It is a sloppy translation, with so many mistakes and errors in it. It is a shame!

Negative talk is bad, but there would be none of it, if we hadn't been handed this terrible corruption of our Liturgy.

Nick

I feel sad that those few younger Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics
(like those attending the Teen Rally at Camp Nazareth) have to deal with the RDL and not a full Ruthenian Recension liturgical experience. It is sad to know that their Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church could become extinct before they reach adulthood! If only the monetary resources spent on the RDL would have been spent on evangelization and new missionary activities.

U-C

No one likes to see negativity at any level. With the RDL I've seen it. But what is even more sad is the level of APATHY that I've seen. Many have given up or just moved on to another rite or Orthodoxy, etc. Apathy is what should concern us all. At least negativity shows there is some concern and emotion left out there. But time after time I see those who simply don't care and are moving on and not looking back, and the way they see it, they aren't leaving their church, their church left them. There is no plan of evangelization anywhere that I've seen (I'd love to have someone point it out). We have been a church in contraction, that contraction is continuing and now is even being accelerated by the RDL. How are we back filling these departures?

Another subject that hasn't been discussed on this board is that now that Pope Benedict has given permission for the Latin Mass, our best 'evangelization' tool is gone. The people who couldn't stand the Novus Ordo now have a place to go and those who were going to leave will now stay. So there's less people that will be coming over and a few Latins will probably return.

The bottom line is that this cannot be sustained. Pittsburgh and Parma Eparchies will face major closing of their churches unfortunately sooner than most think. Go to the parishes in these eparchies, look at the congregations, add 20 years, what do you see? I don't know how this all ends but it doesn't end well.

How sad, an evangelization effort really needed and needs to occur, instead we are spinning our wheels with 1960s whims in our Liturgy.

Monomakh

Kellie,
Thank you for your great post. I agree with the above. Especially this:

This is a very deep spiritual insight.

Nevertheless, even seemingly difficult people who rant need our unconditional love. To paraphrase St. Therese of Lisieux - there are many flowers in God's garden and some of us are prickly pears.

You will note that some of these complainers began their campaign well before the Revised Divine Liturgy was issued. You will also see how patiently their complaints have been answered by the HEAD of the Cantor Institute, priests and others. Do you know of any other Church where the people in charge would take so much time to answer so many questions?

We must contribute in positive, concrete acts of love to lead others to Christ. Do I teach? Do I pray? Liturgy is "the work of God." It shouldn't be automatic drive time when we go to the Divine Liturgy. I've learned a lot by reading both the complaints and the answers but this forum has become a tape-loop.

I agree with you. I thank you. I applaud you.

Pravda!

U-C

Kellie wrote:

And Rufinus responded:

Note the tactics that Kellie and Rufinus are using. Instead of responding to the real issues that have been raised for discussion they respond as if the issue is one of personal attack against those who have prepared the revision. To say that one�s work must be accepted as is because to disagree with it is cruel to the person who has worked hard is absurd. Most of us in the real world are judged not by how hard we have worked but by the quality of our work. Those who prepared the liturgical revision (rubrics, texts and music) are talented, worked hard and meant well. But they worked without consulting pastors, cantors or laity. Few saw the changes before they were promulgated. The bishops are not now open to hearing their concerns and do not answer letters. Of course the people are going to vent. The bishops have forced upon them major changes to the primary way they relate to God. They are being forced to abandon the prayers and melodies they have prayed for a lifetime and to relearn something that was prepared by a committee who feels that their Ruthenian recension is so inferior that it cannot be allowed to be prayed in full. Is it any wonder the entire Church is in an uproar?

--

The reforms should be opposed because they are wrong. Rome was correct in instructing us to restore the Ruthenian Liturgy according to the official books. We need to finally accept it and pray it, in a translation that is accurate and not full of mistakes and agendas. If we pray it fully it will form us and restore our Church. [The authentic Ruthenian Liturgy works everywhere it is prayed. The first rounds of the reforms in 1988 in Parma and in 1995 in Passaic are responsible for people leaving, and this has been demonstrated.]

The RDL is nothing more than a deformation of Liturgy. It impedes the Liturgy�s power to uplift and transform our souls and bodies.

Thank you for the voice of reason. I once worked with a man in sales who was excellent at bringing new business to the company. However, he was losing clients out the back door as fast as he was bringing them in the front door. Guess what??? He was fired. The quality of his work was below par -- in the "real" world it does matter. And it should matter, even more, in the church world.

Let me address this with some examples from my parish... We have one lady who walks with a walker but still rides the bus for an hour and a half just to attend Divine Liturgy. She has stopped attending because of the music...

We have one gentleman who just turned 80 yrs old this past Sunday. He has stopped attending because he cannot listen to the music any longer...

We also have someone who is in a time of discernment concerning service to the Lord. This person knew of the changes however did not think they would be as bad as they are. She is discerning whether or not to remain in our church at all or to move on the Orthodox church...

And you ask if the music and words are REALLY that important???

I've attended the Divine Liturgy in the Greek Orthodox Church as well as the Byzantine Catholic Church and I haven't noticed too much of a difference. I'm happy that the filioque has been removed and that Theotokos has been restored.

I'm not being judgemental, just curious. Why does it make you happy the filoque has been removed and Theotokas restored? Again, I'm not being judgemental, just curious.

Tim

When did she disappear???

It is the Eastern Christian tradition to not include the filioque and to acknowledge Mary as Theotokos. Removing latinizations from the liturgy is a good thing.

I've been told time and time again that the purpose of the RDL is to grow our churches. Pisankar points out that people are leaving because of this chopped-up liturgy. What good will it serve us to have people walking in the front door, and others walking out the back door. Here's a news flash -- we're not growing our church that way, we're simply swapping parishioners. Obviously the RDL was not thought about on this level. And, on a more serious note, who will account for those lost souls?

The thing is - where are these lost souls going ?







are they actually going anywhere ? or are they just going nowhere ?

Dear Tim,

You ask why one might be happy that the Filioque is removed from the Creed, and the [term] Theotokos is restored [to liturgical use}. I'll try to address these two matters:

a) the Filioque - this word is an interpolation into the Nicene-Constantinoplitan Symbol of Faith and has never acheived ecumenical consent - to the contrary, the Eastern Churches unanimously refused it. Oddly enough, so did Rome for several centuries (it first appeared in Spain); at least two Popes expressed themselves against it in the clearest possible language. Its appearance, therefore, in some Eastern Catholic editions is "uniatism" at its worst; Khomiakov was not wrong when he called it "fratricidal". To see it printed as part of the Creed or to hear it sung as part of the Creed is painful to those who know its history. So to be rid of it becomes, then, joyful.

b) Theotokos is a canonical term, defined by the Council of Ephesus and reinforced by the Council of Chalcedon and many other "magisterial" pronouncements. Vatican II and John Paul II have laid particular emphasis on this term and its importance; the Eastern Churches (except, of course, the Assyrian Church of the East, which does not receive the Council of Ephesus) have always remained faithful to this term. The term itself is rich, with a long and honorable history. So restoring this term to use among Eastern Catholics is, again, joyful.

Hope that responds to your query.

Fr. Serge

It makes sense to me. Thank you very much for the response and the observations. I have no problem with saying "Theotokas" instead of the Mother of God. It doesn't flow with the music as well. But since they've changed the music, I guess that doesn't matter anymore!

Tim

Administrator,

Let me get this right - you are saying that a call to unconditionally love people is an "attack"? Oh, come on!!!

There is, however, some ambiguity to my post. Words are important. Music is important. The spiritual insight in Kellie's post is that in standing up vigorously for any truth we should not let bitterness and resentment enter our hearts. This is attested to by the Patristic Fathers. It is something that Christians need to keep in mind.

But you are right that I did not address the points being discussed. One point in particular I disagree with. Why should the Bishops have consulted the people? I do not think this would have been a good thing for them to do. I don't feel slighted that they did not consult me. The Bishops have the spiritual authority to make these decisions as they see fit.

At the RDL this weekend I asked that God bless all on this list.

Back to the topic -

We use a sheet that tells us where to put the ribbons. This weekend (post Transfiguration) I was lost. It would have been nice to have all of the music (troparion, kontakion, etc.) on a separate sheet of paper as we did before the RDL. But we made it through.

Your response is a good example of the tactic you are using. Instead of discussing the questions that have been raised (regarding the quality of the texts, rubrics and music of the Revised Divine Liturgy) you once again change the topic by calling for unconditional love. A call for unconditional love is valid but it is not an appropriate or reasonable response to every question.


Although you do not have enough respect for other posters to answer the questions put to them I will show respect to you and answer yours.

The theological reason is Sensus Fideilum. See Lumen Gentium #12 for starters, though there are many, many references.

The pragmatic reason is that people have a choice where they worship. If they don�t like it they will not stay. That does not mean that one revises worship to make it entertaining (the Mega Evangelical Churches do that and while it brings in people they don�t stay for long because they are not really fed). It does mean that should change be necessary such change should be introduced over great lengths of time so that people are not spiritually hurt by the change. In this case the people have been forced to relearn both the texts and music they had memorized after 40 years. The very way they speak to God has been changed and they had no say. Appeals to obedience to bishops because they have the authority to make these decisions might keep people from complaining but such appeals will not keep them in the Ruthenian Church.