Why did Metropolitan Archbishop Basil Schott OFM, Bishop Andrew Pitaki, Bishop William Skurla, and Bishop John Kudrick accepte inclusive language on behalf of their church members in the RDL hymnal?

These are the names in the foreward (page 3) of the RDL hymnal, not any committee members listed earlier. The committee members were just functionaries to its adoption. Several of those members have died, one has quit his job, and one visits this forum often but failed to answer my questions. Since this was primarily an episcopal job, it would be fruitless to pursue answers with committee members.

The ones responsible are those who are ultimately responsible and who have the authority to go along with it. They are the ones whose names are given in the RDL hymnal.

So, why did they accept inclusive language and alter Holy Writ to suit such needs? How long will the clergy continue using it? My aunt states that her church is slowly ignoring it. She feels that someday the lack of enforcement in the parishes will collide with the wishes of their chief shepherds. Unless there is already talk about canning it. She heard a rumor (and it is only a rumor) that the RDL is on its last legs in some places. It only takes one bishop to dump it to get the dominoes going.

Ed

Ed why not write to them and ask?

Eparchy of Parma
1900 Carlton Rd.
Parma, OH 44134
Phone: (216) 741-8773
Fax: (216) 741-9356
Email: viscom@parma.org

Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
66 Riverview Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15214
Phone: 412-231-4000
Fax: 412-231-1697

Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Passaic
445 Lakawanna Avenue
West Paterson, New Jersey 07424
Phone: 973-890-7777
Fax: 973-890-7175

Ed,

It does not seem to me that any one bishop can do so. Its adoption, however ill- or well-advised, was within the prerogatives of the Council of Hierarchs, the governing authority of the Metropolia. Neither the eparchies nor the eparchs are individual entities in such matters, as the Metropolia is a functional entity comprised of its parts.

Many years

Hiding behind the group.


If they don't feel they have to answer Byzantine Catholics, membes of their own church, what makes you think they will answer me? Someone got what they wanted.

Ed

Good point. Many have written to Rome (including myself). But has anyone written to the bishops? And if you have, did you receive a response?

Hiding behind the group, a.k.a. "Groupthink", is a very bad way to do business.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

I ask a humble question to those who dislike the currently promulgated liturgy. Rather than requesting the hierarchs to rescind, in its entirety, what is currently the approved liturgy. Has anyone tried to ask, or campaigned for changes to only the translations and/or rubrics which they believe are incorrect (with supporting reasons and suggested replacement)? Has it been considered that taking the proverbial “throwing the baby out with the bath water” approach or complaining about lack of enforcement of RDL could result in the removal of priests and the closing of parishes?

I wonder this because I have a feeling that history may indicate that when those in authority are continually pushed or criticized, their reactions might be even more severely consequential to those who would be agreeable to less radical changes. I’m curious if people feel there is an acceptable compromise position for the Metropolia considering how long, if ever, it would take for all faiths of the Rescension to agree on one common liturgical translation and practice.

I'm guessing that a compromise would be very questionable considering the enormous amounts of money that was spent on the new aqua books.

White elephants have a bigger say on what stays than pesky little mosquitos.
Ed

Really Ed, if that is what you are intent on charging them with... well the genius of it is that there really is no great way to refute or defend against it.

Are there any other churches to which you do not belong that you follow so closesly and opine so liberally about?

SS,

Would you like to take a stab on my topic in the first post? or do you want to continually make it an issue with me? As far as I know, others besides Byzantine Catholics can post here.

Ed

I agree with you Ed. It seems simple sinner is simply following your posts to argue and isn't offering any vaild commentary. I urge the admins to issue a warning since the flow of angst is across many threads.

I do not know the answer to the question but I offer instead some background that may highlight the dilemma.

The stumbling-block, in a sense, is the English translation that is the 1965 liturgicon, the "red book," and its relation to the Ruthenian Recension link promulgated in 1941 link . Here the comparison is the 1965 link and 2007 (RDL) link liturgicons to the Slavonic version of the Recension link and its "Ordo" English_1955 & Latin_1953 . The 1965 liturgicon is a usable, literal-without-being-stilted, complete (though in need of some improvements and corrections) translation of the 1941 Recension Slavonic text.

If one does as noted, i.e. removes from the RDL the rubrics that are not in the Recension, and abandons the controversial changes, then one essentially has the 1965 "red book" liturgicon but in an abbreviated form, and with some corrections that most everyone would find ok. The dilemma is then, why the effort to produce a corrected abbreviated liturgicon when the full version is all but in place and has been since 1965. The question then, having already the full, why an abridged liturgicon; is this progress?



There are those in authority who, as Jesus warns (Mk 10:42), "lord it over" others. For them, the unforgivable "sin" of those who oppose is not that the opposition is wrong but that it is right. As Jesus then says (Mk 10:43), "it shall not be so among you." In this, I firmly believe in the integrity of our bishops, that it is not so among us, and that integrity prevails.


You can't stop the train just because some folks can't or won't get on board, but you can do your best that the train stays on the tracks.

Dn. Anthony

Nah Matthew, that is asimple misperception. Look through Ed's post history and see how much I have "followed him". Out of the last 50 posts we have largely stayed out of each other's way, and as far as I can recall, I have NEVER weighed in on:

"Another Open Letter to Father David" "Open Question to Father David Petras" "Holy See Rejects Feminist "Baptism"" or "Feminism and the English Language" which make up the preponderence of Ed's contribution on ByzCath the last few weeks.

So no, you are not correct, it simply hasn't happened, and the appearance of it is only there for those that wish to see it or imply it.

Coincidentally, is your misplaced observation about me in this thread in any fashion related to our disagreement in another thread?

The plain truth of the matter is this largely is going to happen between two men with big personalities in a small forum. The traffic being what it is during this time, it is inevitable that if Ed and I participate in so much as half the threads that are active for a length of time, we will be running into each other.



Ed if you have been made to feel singled out, that is regretable and I apologize. You are of course as free to participate here as anyone else is - it is largely a function of following the rules to moderator satisfaction.

And to be clear I don't discount your opinions or questions.

What does cause me some irritation - and I admit I have probably handled this poorly - is the knowing certitude in some posts of your statements and opinions as being objectively clear to all.

Sometimes, as a a Byzantine Catholic my entire adult life, who has been to seminary and served on two pastoral councils, ehtusiastically visited about half our parishes and maintained close friendship with some of the clergy and a few seminarians, I simply don't come to the same conclusions, and I feel compelled to make that known.

It seems to me a modicum of humility on both our ends is warranted. I will make better effort to not have you feel singled out, in return perhaps some of your questions and observations could be softened or couched in terms of "It seems to me..." "Is it the case..." or likewise.

You want me to take a stab at the original post which seemed to serve a largely rhetorical function, I can only answer your original question by saying I can't answer your original questions:



I can't answer them for the simple fact that the first one you would have to ask the bishop - I don't use my real name, but will assure all here - lest their be any question - that I am neither of those three.

As to the second question, I am not clergy, so I can't tell you how long they will use them. My educated guess would be that as clergy in promises of obedience to their hierarchs, they will - if they be obedient - use them until told otherwise. Again, that is just my most educated guess on the matter - if they plan to do otherwise, you would have to ask one of their number directly. I can't talk for them.

So my best stab is my original reply post - you address a question to the bishops, you do just as well to write to them.

Simple Sinner,

I have a simple observation and really what the question for Byzantine Catholics should be and especially the leadership in it. If as you say (and I have no reason to doubt you) that you have visited half of our parishes and maintained close friendship with some of the clergy and a few seminarians, surely you must know that the state of the BCA is not favorable (and this applies to the UGCC as well). In most parishes attendance is down, vocations of the priesthood are down, how many nuns will there be in 25 years? I know that the rebuttal is that the diaconate has increases and so everything is ok Whether the RDL remains, the former is reinstated, or the correct (in my opinion) 1965 Liturgy and rubrics are used, the sinking ship still exists and must be remedied. I have asked time and time again what is the evangelization and outreach plan? Why was so much time and money spent on revising and not evangelizing? You live in Ohio and have traveled the parishes, how many priests are below 50 years old? There nothing wrong with foreign born clergy, but when Greek Catholic parishes here can't produce their own consistently, something is seriously wrong.

I know, the ad hominem argument will be that I haven't saved a church or produced an evangelization plan that has worked so there for I can't ask this question. Isn't this why we have leaders though? I can tell you this, people can get secularism in their lives virtually everywhere without even trying, whether on TV, movies, music, etc. What they can't get without seeking for it is undiluted traditionalism. But just providing undiluted traditionalism and then not telling anyone is absurd! On this subject I feel like the voice out in the wilderness (no I don't think that I'm St. John), I simply mean that it is a subject that isn't even up for discussion. (Yes, I've brought it up clergy and those in leadership in the past many times in many forms)

Father David believes for example that this is 'real evangelization' in this post:

http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=249629#Post249629

His post is not logically flawed in using this label, simply because he chooses to use the label of 'evangelization' differently and thinks that it's happening (which I suppose under his definition is). Well, whatever one wants to call it, more people in the pews, especially children and more vocations have to have. I could care less what term Greek Catholics use for, it really needs to happen. In this post he talks about how getting more souls in the pews can happen and uses the early church as an example. All I can say is that the results are not happening and the last time I checked many Protestants, Mormons, etc. were bringing in people just fine and not using the techniques that his post talks about. Are there's the best, why not examine recruiting techniques out there and get people the correct and true theology of the Greek Catholic Church instead of what is being brought to them currently with other denominations and groups? I guess I am asking why not have a plan from our leadership?

I attended a Sunday talk where the assistant Director of Evangelization, Father Titko, said that evangelization is not going out and recruiting more people for church, but rather it is having the existing people in the pews rediscover their Faith. I have absolutely nothing against this concept, however, once again, we need families and vocations. A crisis exists.


These are just two example and they are not meant to single anyone out, however they are meant to show that the term 'evangelization' can't even be agreed upon. Couple that with the RDL and it makes the current situation sad.


Monomakh

SS,

What will that prove? This is probably the only church that does things without an explanation. Usually, minutes of meetings, conferences, and public forums are held and documented, thus leaving a paper trail documenting where and who the request to adopt inclusive language came from. Do you really think your bishops will answer my letters on this topic? I highly doubt it. One bishop even went so far as to say (and the only one who said ANYthing on this subject) that it was not up for debate.

For the sake of the members of the Byzantine Catholic church, your chief shepherds should do what chief shepherds do - teach. Yes, they should teach their people WHY they adopted inclusive language into their worship and what is their theology behind it. Private letters? What I see is a bushel basket theology that leaves everyone guessing where the light is.

Ed

Damned if they do. Damned if I don't. Pretty much just damned any way you slice it I guess.

You write questions addressed to the bishops but say it would be pointless to write them. Who is to address it authoritatively otherwise?

Ed we know there are problems. They confront us in the empty pews and are conspicuous in the missing generation and family and neighbors of the parishes we attend each and every Sunday. Some of us are also a great deal more pragmatic in our realism about the roots of these problems. The RDL may not be helping, but their were problems - even bigger than you can see - well before. A lot of things are coming to a head right now.

You are free - speech being what it is - to characterize Father David as "hiding". I think that a nasty and invective term and charge. I know Father David personally - I lived down the hall from the man at a formative time in my life when I was in the seminary, he deserves better even when we disagree with him, but lately any stick will do.

So we may have to agree to disagree - I will let you rage on in your search for justice for your family members who have been hurt. I am growing more cautious and careful about what I say - the opinions of an ex-seminarian who has sat on parish council and enthusiastically returned to his church after a few years of hedonism are surely not worth much.

The ironic thing is, that one would almost be forced to conclude that I like the changes because I don't vocally and prolifically hate them on here. I am largely not a fan - the timing was inooprtune, the expense seem difficult to justify, the distinction it puts between us and other Greek Catholics doesn't seem wise in the face of a near certain future wherein closer collaboration will become the norm.

On the other hand, it is still Catholic, it is still home, my sins still get forgiven when I go to confession, it is still the joy of the Eucharist when I receive.

So in the face of all this uncertainty with the future and what it holds, as one on the inside I would appreciate it if it would be possible to tone down some of the certitude, damnations, condemnations of specific clergy and even - if possible - the starting of new topics expressly for (as far as I can tell) rhetorical combat of the bishops.

(On that last point again, Ed, why are you openly addressing the bishops here? bishops you won't even write yourself? All we are left with is the presumption this is a rhetorical device, and it is difficult to escape that it is a provacative one at that. Truly no one can answer you.)

So I apologize openly and clearly to you if I have failed to demonstrate compassion and more openess to understanding the pain your family members have gone through. If you find some of this confrontational approach cathartic, I can do that for you and try to be more understanding.

I would go so far as to say that your contributions here are most welcome in a real way as you are proving a useful and worthy ideological ally to the Administrator who shares in your distaste for certain directions our good church has taken.

If you could in turn reach out to me and those of us who nowadays are more largely keeping silent or no longer coming around... Those of us who are chosing to take a different track in dealing with these and other problems, who sometimes just don't see eye to eye and share in your perspective from your position of what some of those problems are...

Well, it would be appreciated. During Holy Week, it would probably also be especially appropriate.

I am taking the rest of the week off. I hope you have a blessed Holy Week (if this is the period you celebrate it) wherever you are and with whomever you share it.

Pray for us.

Ding dang! If everyone was so on fire like you, your churches would be standing room only!

Have a wonderful Holy Week. You seem to be a good man.

Ed

I agree. Many problems existed prior to the RDL. The Ruthenian Church and her people have suffered greatly for a very long time. The only way I can understand why the Lord allowed and allows it is to consider that maybe we are being purified for something incredible in the future. I believe that if, instead of reforming the Divine Liturgy, the bishops had begun a decade long process of renewal of what is ours (the 1941) they would have had some incredible support. But education, example and encouragement is necessary; first for our priests, then for everyone else.

As to whom to raise the questions to, of course one should communicate with the bishops. Discussions on forums such as these are nothing more than a cyber version of the Sunday coffee hour. It is one thing to address these issues on a forum such as this but quite another to actually sit down, write a letter and bring these issues to the bishops.


Ed has crossed the line a number of times, has been told there is a limit and that he is approaching it. And I hope he will consider that when he does it does not help the argument he advances. But this works on both sides because several who support the reform consider all disagreement with the RDL to be nothing more then personal attack against those who prepared the RDL (or the bishops).

Is Father David “hiding”? No. Ed is incorrect in making such an accusation and should withdraw it. The issue is more that Father David is one of a few who will speak publicly to defend the RDL. It is natural that some will see that disagreement with the ideas he puts forth will be confused with disagreement with him. If there were as many people supporting the RDL as there are who support the official Ruthenian recension perhaps it would be easier to see that the issue is not a personal one. I applaud Father David for being wiling to speak, even though I almost always disagree with the principles he presents. This is in part natural. Anyone who goes to an “away” football or baseball game and sits in the middle of fans from the other side is going to experience it. It is almost never personal.


It is interesting. In this forum I have provided both sides of the issue of the RDL more opportunity to share their thoughts then any other vehicle in the Ruthenian Church. That seems to count for nothing among some. I don’t receive all that many complaints on how participants speak on the issue of the RDL, but those I do receive are fairly distributed on both sides. I would remind everyone that those who speak uncharitably eventually do in their own cause. But all disagreement is not uncharity. It is always best to present one’s position without rancor or bitterness, and support it with good scholarship.

I pray especially for our participants during this holy season and ask for your prayers.

John