Hi all,

You have been very helpful in helping me to learn in the past, and I hope that your knowledge and experience can come to my aid again. As some of you probably know, I am an RC exploring the East, and am very drawn to Orthodoxy, while being compelled by my belief in the primacy of the Pope to be remain Catholic. In the goal of finding a belief structure and tradition that meets both of these criteria, I took the advice of one more experienced than I (you know who you are and I thank you for your advice) and attended a Melkite Church for the first time the other week. It was very different from what I am used to in the Ruthenian parish that I attend, with the readings read instead of sung (a minor point), but with prayers cut out, most notably the Thrice-Holy hymn, and requests from the deacon that the congregation recite some of the priestly prayers. Is this a common Melkite practice in line with their Bishops and practice, or something unique to this parish or area?

Also, since I know that there are people here from many different individual Churches, both EC and EO, your insight into finding "orthodoxy in communion with Rome" would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Lech

PS - it is late as I type this, so please forgive all funky grammar and "creative" spellings. Thanks

The Melkites employ modified Greek usage as opposed to the Slavic usage of the Ruthenian Church, so there will be differences between them (e.g., the entrances process through the entire nave, as opposed to remaining on the Solea).

As is the case in all Eastern Churches, there are local variations. Reciting as opposed to chanting the readings is not universal practice in the Melkite Church; in our parish, the readings are sung. The Trisagion is never omitted (and doing so is a serious liturgical abuse), and reciting the priestly prayers is simply unprecedented.

In short, good liturgy and bad liturgy are found in every Church (Catholic and Orthodox alike), and you had the great misfortune of encountering very bad liturgy in your visit to a Melkite one.

Since I attend the same Melkite church as StuartK, but have also attended a couple of Ruthenian churches, I'll add just a few comments. In our particular parish everything is sung. Like StuartK affirmed, the Trisagion is never omitted, and so doing is an abuse.

One difference that you'll notice is that we don't recite the prayers before Communion that are recited by the Ruthenians (and presumably the other Slavic churches). Metropolitan Kallistos Ware claims that the Greek practice is to recite those prayers at home before leaving to attend Divine Liturgy.

The chanting style is also very different. Melkites follow the Byzantine style of chant, while the Ruthenians have their own distinct style, of which they are very proud.

The liturgical translations are also different. The Ruthenians currently have the "Revised" Divine Liturgy. If you want to know a little something about that I'd suggest you check out the subforum devoted completely to that topic. Supposedly this "revised" Liturgy follows the "Ruthenian Rescension," which are the official texts for all the liturgical and paraliturgical services promulgated by Rome in the 1940s for the Ruthenians churches (including churches of Ukrainian, Hungarian, Trans-Carpathian, etc. nationalities). The Melkites, on the other hand, refer to the Arabic and Greek texts for their translations of the various Liturgies.

You'll find that in the majority of the Ruthenian churches in the U.S. there are several litanies missing (or made "optional") from the DL that are in the Melkite translations. I can't speak for other Melkite churches, but ours only has one litany missing, and it's not even in the current official translation for the DL.

The last difference I'll mention is the use of the Hours. Most, but not all, Melkite churches at least celebrate Orthros (morning prayer) before the Divine Liturgy. Many also celebrate Vespers on Saturday night. This is something that is very rare among the Ruthenians in the U.S. From what I understand, the Third Hour, instead of Orthros/Matins, is what was customarily celebrated before Divine Liturgy among the Ruthenians. However, most Ruthenian Churches in the U.S. don't even do this. I've heard of some that have a public recitation of the Rosary before Divine Liturgy. I don't know that I've ever heard of a Ruthenian church celebrating any of the Hours, even on Sundays.

I hope this helps a little.

ICXC + NIKA,
Phillip

The really unusual thing about our parish is there are no books. The priests, deacons and the reader have texts, but everybody else just sings from memory. It's pretty remarkable.

I am also an RC exploring the East and I have been attending a Melkite church since approximately September. I have never encountered what you have described. In the parish I attend, everything is sung. To my knowledge, I have never heard the thrice-holy hymn omitted and I have never heard the people recite any of the priest's prayers.

I presumed the lack of pew books was typical of the Melkites. Perhaps I'm wrong? It is pretty amazing that everyone sings from memory. I'm still working on memorizing all the hymns and tones so that I can sing along with everything.

I think a lot of the chants used by the Melkites lend themselves to easy memorization.

I've attended the Melkite church in Atlanta, I don't know, I'd say somewhere between 10 and 15 times, and after the third visit or so, I got one tone down pretty easily. Some are harder (and less beautiful) than others, IMHO.

Alexis

I don't know about your preceding point but this last one seems to be the implementation of the new revised Melkite Liturgy which has provision for lay people to offer the petitions of the Ektene and join the priest in praying the Prayer of Thanksgiving after Communion. It was discussed here:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/345413/1

Lech,

If you attended the Melkite Divine Liturgy on Easter then substitution of "All you who have been baptized into Christ" rather than "Holy God" is appropriate (for the Ruthenians...I assume the same is true of the Melkites.)

Fr Deacon Paul

"All You Who Have Been Baptized" replaces the Trisagion at Pascha and Theophany in all Byzantine Churches, but the impression given by Lech was this happened some time after Pascha.

My parish in San Diego- Holy Angels Ruthenian Catholic Church- celebrates both Vespers on Saturday nights and Matins before Divine Liturgy every Sunday.

In fact I'm going to Vespers for the Mid Pentecost right now. I'm not sure if our parish is the norm but there is at least one (and I assume more) that celebrate Matins & Vespers each weekend in the Ruthenian Catholic Church.

Do you celebrate Vespers, or the "vespergy" that is all too common in Ruthenian parishes? I once asked my pastor (back in my Ruthenian days) why he did not offer Vespers on Saturday evening, since this was encouraged by the Liturgical Instruction and also "fulfilled the Sunday obligation" of the faithful. And I was told that "our bishops did not accept that particular instruction" because of the "strong Eucharistic orientation of Ruthenian piety"--which I took to mean that Ruthenians don't show up for liturgies that don't offer communion. Father Nicholas of Holy Resurrection made reference to this tendency in a lecture he gave at an Orientale Lumen conference, pointing to it as an example of a divergence between Greek Catholics and Orthodox spirituality, which (he said) could only be rectified by fidelity to the Typicon.

In any case, it is exceedingly unusual for a Ruthenian parish to offer Saturday Vespers, and Orthros is virtually unknown. In fact, I have seen Ruthenian priests and deacons get "deer in the headlights" looks when it was suggested that they might want to celebrate Orthros, and more than once I have seen a priest really struggle through the service when called upon to do so.

As might be expected, Abbot Nicholas was one of the few who seemed absolutely comfortable with the service.

I believe the Cathedral of St. John in Parma celebrates matins (in English and Slavonic) every Sunday before Divine Liturgy...

Our Priest serves Great Vespers every Saturday and Vespers during the week (not every week but almost) and celebrates Matins at least once or twice a week apart from Sunday.

Where can I find this "Liturgical Instruction"? I would like to see it, and to be able to refer to it.

In my Ruthenian parish, we have a vigil liturgy on Saturdays at 5pm, so that if someone won't be able to make it to DL that Sunday for some reason, they can "fulfill their Sunday obligation" by attending the vigil liturgy. On average, only about 1-3 people attend. I've brought up the issue of Great Vespers several times, including the fact that, from what I understand, one can "fulfill the Sunday obligation" by attending it. One response has been that we have so many people who have come over from the Roman Church, that unless it is a Eucharistic celebration, they won't come, they'll go to an RC Mass instead, and that it's better to have a vigil liturgy and keep them at the Byz Cath church. IMHO, I believe it's better to offer Great Vespers. A bit of re-education would have to be done, but I think that's a good thing. Some would still choose the Mass, of course, but at least we'd be restoring our tradition, which I think is important.

We used to do the 3rd hour, but have recently switched to Matins. I don't know if it is a permanent switch, nor do I know the reasons for the change. We generally have Great Vespers before a Feast, but not on Saturdays.

We alternate between third hour and matins. Come to think of it, I'm not sure what happens on 5th Sunday . . .

We're ruthenian, but there aren't many ruthenians in the parish.

It is available through Eastern Christian Publications. But there should be a copy in the rectory of your parish.

Thank you very much for posting this!

We join with the priest for the Prayer of Thanksgiving at our Melkite mission, and this caused quite a stir when we had a visiting Ruthenian priest fill in when our priest was away at a conference. He gave a stern lecture to us about not taking over "the role of the priest", and none of us knew what he was talking about; we were just doing what had been told to us by our regular priest.

Up until now that incident bothered me quite a bit whenever I've thought about it, and I didn't know who was correct in this instance. Now I know the source of the confusion, and it puts my mind at ease to know that it is a difference between the two Churches, and not an error being committed by our local mission.

Peace and God bless!

Let's just say it is unprecedented, and one would have to look at the practice of the Antiochian Orthodox Church and the ancient Liturgicons of both Churches to see what the authentic practice really is.

I'm not as strict as some when it comes to "authentic practice", at least not when it comes to little things like Prayers of Thanksgiving. It's not much different from the changes that have been occuring in the Byzantine tradition for centuries, and certainly much smaller than the adoption of the Byzantine Liturgical tradition by the Melkite Church just under a thousand years ago.

At anyrate, I'm just glad to know that it's not something our local priest made up; I had assumed that it was since I'd not heard of this general "experiment".

Peace and God bless!

The key question is whether this is actually Melkite practice in the Middle East, or whether it is something "invented" for the English translation. If it is, then something has been innovated for one part of the Melkite Church, introducing a rather substantial division in Melkite liturgical practice. Moreover, if the Antiochian Orthodox don't do it, either here or in the Middle East, then it is flouting the letter and spirit of the Liturgical Instruction, which directed Eastern Catholics to work closely with their Orthodox counterpart Churches to eliminate differences in liturgical usage.

Certainly the RDL has driven such a wedge between Ruthenian Catholic and Carpatho-Rusyn practice (to say nothing of what is done by Ruthenians here and Carpatho-Rusyn Catholics in Ukraine and Slovakia); it would be tragic to repeat that error in the Melkite Church.

Wow, I have never heard of this. I find myself uncomfortable with this to the Nth degree, and I must agree with your visiting Rusyn priest. Liturgical innovations are insidious pathogens that although starting small, will eventually kill the entire organism. Look at the fiasco with the RDL with the BCC, and the problems in America with the "Orthodox-Lite", for lack of a better word, Churches.

Alexandr

A couple of links:

In response to an earlier request: The Liturgical Instruction for the Eastern Churches from the Vatican website

Perhaps Fr. Titus Fulcher's critique of the new Melkite practice re: lay petitions might be of interest (from his larger critique of the Final Draft of the Melkite DL revision):



AFAIK, he's correct about it being without precedent.

On the other hand, the Melkites have also supposedly allowed minor clerics to perform the ektenie in the absence of a deacon... so it's not entirely without precedent in the Melkite church.

Thank you, and also to StuartK, for the info.

I did a quick look-through and couldn't find anything that specifically addressed Great Vespers, but I'll look again.

Jaya

The Liturgical Instruction should not be viewed as a handbook for the celebration of the liturgy (in the manner of, e.g., the Ordo Celebrationis). It is not a book of rubrics, but provides principles and guidelines for the restoration of the full Eastern Christian liturgical traditions in the various Eastern Catholic Churches.

There are two main points to the Instruction. The first is the imperative to restore the fullness of authentic Eastern liturgy, which also implies the restoration of the fullness of Eastern spiritual, theological, doctrinal and disciplinary traditions as well. The second it to eliminate all substantive differences between the liturgy of the Eastern Catholic Churches and their counterpart Churches in the different Orthodox communions.

The Instruction mentions the Liturgy of the Hours only insofar as it notes the importance of the Hours in the liturgical and spiritual life of the Eastern Churches, and that where liturgical celebration of the Hours, particularly Orthros and Vespers, has fallen into abeyance, it should be restored. To encourage this, the Instruction indicates that attendance at Great Vespers on Saturday evening should be considered to fulfill the "Sunday obligation" of the faithful.

With regard to the innovative practices included in the revised Melkite liturgy (which are not mandatory, thank goodness), the Instruction would (a) have us examine whether the practice of having the faithful either join with the priest in the prayer of thanksgiving, or of leading the litanies, is an authentic organic development of the Eastern Churches or an unwarranted expropriation of a practice of the Latin Church (i.e., a latinization); and (b) whether this development would created an unwarranted distinction between the liturgy of the Melkite Church and its counterpart, the Antiochian Orthodox Church.

Don't forget that Antioch has every right to her own liturgical tradition, which may differ slightly in its realisation from from that of other Byzantine Churches--although Antioch follows the Byzantine rite.

Largely, the Antiochian Orthodox and the Melkite Greek-Catholic Churches are in liturgical synchrony. Most of the families of the faithful are interrelated.

If you find sub-deacons empowered through synodal decree within the Melkite Church, you will find a similar expression of oikonomia within our sister (Antiochian) Orthodox Church.

Is this a statement of fact, or a speculation? I can easily verify whether that is the case in the AOA here in the U.S.

Also, in the United States, at least, provisions made for "extraordinary" situations have a troubling way of becoming all too ordinary. The classic example is the Latin Church's provision for using laymen as "extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist", which was meant to cover such situations as bringing the Sacrament to the sick and shut-in, or when the sheer number of communicants is so large that it would not be practical for the priest and deacon to distribute it all themselves. Yet as other will attest, lay ministers of the Eucharist are employed routinely even when the size of the congregation is small and a priest and deacon are present. In fact, it is not unusual for those two worthies to sit out the distribution of communion and allow the EEMs to do it entirely by themselves.

So I would still be leery of allowing the laity to "assist" the presbyter in saying the prayer of thanksgiving, or to recite the petitions of any litany. Simply put, there is no reason for them to do so.

This is one of the things I was looking for and couldn't find. Is it possible the online version is different than the version you have access to?

Actually, there's no such thing as "extraordinary minister of the Eucharist", as you need to be ordained to minister the sacrament, that is for the consecration to occur. Ministering Holy Communion is a different thing. This is precisely explained in Redemptionis Sacramentum:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/orientchurch/Istruzione/pdf/istruzione_inglese.pdf

Page 55, row 5nn.

Whatever. The fact is, this is a very common abuse within the Latin Church.

Got it. Thank you.

Thank you for your insights and thoughts. It seems most of what I experienced there was part of a beta for for liturgical direction. If, as has been suggested, the participation of the laity in the Prayer of Thanksgiving is a reflection of the unity of the priest and congregation in prayer, instead of the priest as the spokesman for the group, I don't see automatic difficultly. However, as a post Vatican II RC, I agree that items that take over the unique role of the ordained are potentially problematic, and can easily abused, as is the case of of the Extraordinary Ministers discussed earlier (the distinction between Eucharist and Holy Communion is not relevant for the topic at hand). I am sure that the majority approach this ministry for the right reason, but the theological truth, and the opportunity to have it lived out in liturgy (for we are material creatures and belief sometimes follows doing - remember what the Jewish people said at the foot of Sinai - "We will do and we will believe".

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Lech

This is abused in the Roman church too. How many times have I seen a member of the laity reading the petitions of the prayer of the faithful, while the deacon stays at the chair. Even in televised papal masses.

Yes Stewart, you are right - I attended during the Pascha season, but not on Pascha proper.

Lech

Hello Everyone: Slava Isusu Khrystu!

It's nice to participate in this forum once again. Time and busyness have kept me away, but I hope to be here when I am able . . . I have read through this thread which touches on some interesting and diverse topics.

There is one thing however, that I would like to focus on. It is the historical evolution of the celebration of Vespers and Matins in Ruthenian-usage parishes. It could apply to both those of the Ruthenian and Ukrainian Greek Catholic eparchies (as well as the ACROGCD and probably Ukrainian Orthodox churches).

A regular Sunday and holy day celebration of Vespers and Matins was indeed a normal part of parish life in the Ruthenian churches. In Europe, it appears to remain more prevalent, particularly in rural and cathedral parishes. In the the United States particularly, (as well as in Canada and South America to a similar degree), these services began to fade from the general consciousness of the church beginning in the later 1940s, through the 1950s and 60s.

Countless priests and cantors who have served the Ruthenian Church in the USA have personally told me about the original practice of celebrating Vespers, Matins and the Divine liturgy (separately) each Sunday and feast day. In the early days of the "first immigration" some parishes were without priests to celebrate the Divine Liturgy every Sunday. In these cases, it was common for the cantor (still often an ordained lector in those times), to chant Vespers and Matins, with the people's participation (obviously leaving out parts logical only for the priest or deacon).

In addition, the archives of bulletins and liturgical books of many older Ruthenian parishes would indicate that there was a regular celebration of both Vespers and Matins. If not, such books as the Lenten Triodion and the Oktoikos (in Church Slavonic), huge volumes published in Lviv at the turn of the century, would not have be needed. I am fortunate to have received copies of these two now rare books.

This historical precedence for the celebration of Vespers and Matins, as well as their harmony with the typikon, can quite possibly be a reason for their emphasis and discussion in the "Ordo Celebraciones" and the "Liturgal Instruction".

The regular celebration of the third or other "hours" appears to have been much rarer in the Ruthenian usage. Certainly monasteries and seminaries have used and do use them, but they do not seem to have been a part of standard parish life. This is actually sensible, if one remembers the historical development of the liturgy and the fact that there was at one time a "cathedral" or urban usage and another distinct "monastic" observance. Vespers and Matins were very much a part of the "cathedral" usage, although in a somewhat different form than today's order, which was adopted from the monastic usage when the typikon became standardized to reflect the latter.

The chanting of the hours in parish churches would appear to be most popular in Slavic jurisdictions which follow the standard Russian recension. This is sensible if one remembers that in many aspects the Russian liturgy generally prefers the monastic traditions. The hours seem less known in churches of the Greek and Slavic-Greek (which includes the Ruthenian) usages.

Focusing on the Ruthenian Byzantine Metropolia in the United States, it is important to note that popular prayer books published until around 1945, still contained excerpts from Matins and Vespers, for the faithful to follow. This would indicate a significant usage of the services through that time.

With greater latinizations in the spiritual life of the church, the focus turned to a greater emphasis on the Divine Liturgy or "mass" as the center of the church's activities. While this concept is certainly theologically true, a poorly understood application led to the disappearance of the fuller liturgical life of the Byzantine Rite, which formally enriched the church.

Interestingly, with a strong focus on the Eucharistic Liturgy, came also an increased interest in popular devotions borrowed directly from the Latin Rite - sometimes entirely intact and sometimes "Byzantinized" by incorporating them into the ritualistic structure and prayerful style of the other liturgical services. Some examples of these are the Stations of the Cross, the Moleben to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, devotions to the "Five Wounds" or "Seven Sorrows" and more.

Two things would be important to note at this point in the discussion: (1) these devotions were not entirely new to the church and for a time (both in Europe and America), lived side by side with the more native services of Vespers and Matins and; (2) Molebens themselves are a shortened for of Matins, and their popularity kept the clergy and laity somewhat familiar with it's structure and hymns.

Another observation would be the comparison of Molebens to the way in which the Akáfist service is celebrated. Both retain great popularity in Ukraine and other parts of Eastern Europe, among both Orthodox and Greek Catholics. In the USA, it would seem that the Akáfist in its "received manner of celebration" is more popular in certain Orthodox jurisdictions and Molebens would predominate in Greek Catholic and some Orthodox churches. The "normative" celebration of the Akáfist is within the order of Matins. The "common manner of celebration" is to chant the usual beginning, then the entire Akáfist hymn, followed by a "mini-matins", with a prokeimenon, gospel reading and certain other parts. In general Ruthenian churches in the USA celebrate the Akáfist by singing only the odes and kontakions of the hymn(with the usual beginning and dismissal). I personally have not seen this practice in any other usages.

In regards to the so-called Vesperal or Matinal Divine Liturgies, these seem to have become popular in the 1980s and 90s, after the Saturday evening "vigil liturgy" had long been in practice, to fulfill the "Sunday obligation" following the post-conciliar usage of the Latin Church. It was a well intentioned attempt to reintroduce Vespers and Matins, without depriving those used to attending of the Eucharistic liturgy. The structure was in direct imitation of the services of Passion Week and the Eves of Christmas and Theophany.

We should remember that these solemn days have natures particular to themselves and in no way can be compared to a Sunday or standard holy day. The celebrations of the Eucharist with Vespers in Passion Week and on the Eves of the Nativity and the Baptism of Christ have their sensibility in the fact that these days are ones of strict fast and the Eucharist would not be received until the evening, when the day came to a conclusion. The reasoning is quite similar to that of the Presanctified Liturgy. The difference can be seen in the fact that Holy Thursday, Holy Saturday, Christmas and Theophany are major holy days in and of themselves and therefore, the typikon foresees the offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice (See also the prescriptions for the Annunciation.)

Although the "vesperal liturgy" seemed to be a way to teach the faithful more variety in the liturgy, the result appears to be that these inventions have now become so standard (in some places with episcopal approbation and/or mandate), that they will be as hard to remove in favor of normative Vespers and Matins as would have been the "vigil-mass".

Well, I hope these observations will be helpful and most of all, shed some light on the historical development of the celebration of Vespers and Matins in churches of the Ruthenian usage. Most of all, the long precedent, both in Europe and America, of celebrating the complete Sunday and holy day cycle of services should be a catalyst for their re-integration into parish life. The difficulty will lie in the 60+ years in which the church has not emphasized, with any unilateral effort, the fidelity to the typikon which Fr. Nicholas of Holy Resurrection Monastery is indicated (elsewhere in this thread) to have said is necessary for this re-integration to occur. I agree with that observation.

Z'bohom . . . Fr. Joe

In the pew book of the Archeparchy of Beirut I have the Thanksgiving prayer is said jointly, as also a prayer of offering (that one who says about the "unwareness of people"). That practice is also observed in my parish.

By the way, in Brazil we may have an unique practice: after the Axion, the askings of the priest, for the Church, for the dead, for who helps the poor are intermediated by an intercession of the people, looking like the adaptation ad experimentum of the Roman Rite the Brazilian Latin Conference did (whose time has already expirated in theory!). When the celebrant remembers the dead, we say "Give them the rest where shines the bright of Your Face"; when he remembers the Church, "Give to all the salvation"; when he remembers the hierarchy, "And of all (masc.) and all (fem.)" ("E de todos e de todas"). In the city of Juiz de Fora, they say "E de todos e de todas as Igrejas".