So many times I started writing my complaint letter to Rome but just never finished it. My letter is not only finished but mailed. And on January 7th the Old Calendar Christmas. Isn't that ironic? My pastor reviewed it and said it was good. I think what gave me the final push was that I heard that Bishop John was going to promulgate the revision of the other services. They just don't realize how many people they have chased away. What is worse is that they don't care! Or are they doing it on purpose?

Make a new year's resolution. Write your letter today and then get 2 other people to write letters. We can't let the bishops kill our church!

Good for you!

The problem is that even though so many people dislike the Revised Divine Liturgy and want instead the Byzantine Divine Liturgy very few have actually written letters. The story is the same: the bishops don't care; Rome doesn't care.

Is the revised DL going to be used by the Romanian?

Not likely. It is promulgated exclusively by the Ruthenian Church and supposedly reflects Ruthenian usage, which is quite different from Romanian usage.

Thank you.

The Romanian liturgies I have attended appear to follow the general form of the current RDL, though with the inclusion of the small litanies between the antiphons and the beatitudes for the third antiphon. I'm not sure of where it is "quite different" from the Ruthenian usage though. Next Sunday, I'll ask if I can borrow one of their liturgy books for further comparison.

In the form of the teal (green) pew book, NO.
The Romanians use different melodies and translations.

Bishop John (mentioned above as going to do more revised Lit.stuff) and Bishop John Michael are not the same person, let alone in the same church.

Thank you. My husband and I are in the process of turning EAST and at times I get confused with the ongoing situations.

Have the Romanians rewritten the texts to neuter all mankind?
Or are their translations accurate?
I don't know what is worse about the RDL. The inaccurate translations or the music no one can sing.

All Byzantine liturgies have the same general form. The Romanian usage, reflecting its geographical and cultural heritage, combines elements of both Slavic and Greek usage, even though the official liturgical language is Slavonic. Therefore, they could never use the Ruthenian liturgy, which reflects an entirely different heritage and usage.

I only know of our own small poor parish. The texts and teachings are not nutered. This was/is one of my problems with the Roman Mass since Vat II.

No, the texts aren't rewritten gender neutral.
Yes, their translations are accurate.

Why does everyone have such trouble singing what is in the RDL book? It is not complicated music. Less complicated than choral arrangements for the Divine Liturgy by Russian composers.

The RDL translation could have been done better to fit the "Ruthenian" melodies and left the gender neutral issue out of the agenda. English is an difficult language to fit to slavic melodies.

Perhaps you could enlighten me to the multitude of differences between the Romanian and "Ruthenian" liturgy. Perhaps I have not been astute enough to notice the obvious.

I have to disagree to some points:

1. As far as the Typikon, the Romanian Greek-Catholics are closer to the Greek Typikon. The Romanian Orthodox Church has influences from both Greek and Slavonic Typikon, as well as some "personal" characteristics. If anyone wants we can discuss this on a different topic.

2. The official liturgical language of both Romanian Churches (Orthodox and Greek-Catholic) is Romanian. In the US and Canada they also use English. We have the service books, especially the Slujebnik (Liturghier) translated into Romanian for the first time by the end of the 17th century. Although in the Romanian Orthodox Church, due some historical and political reasons for about 100 years Greek was used in the liturgy, since the 19th century the orthodox use only Romanian in the services. Since the birth of the Romanian Greek-Catholic Church in 1689/1700 there is no record of using any other liturgical language than Romanian. Slavonic was used in the liturgical services only up to the beggining of the 18th century.