Saw this in the Wall Street Journal: Traditional Catholicism is Winning

Unfortunately, the Ruthenian Church in Pittsburgh had gone in the opposite direction over the past 30 years. The result is that the seminary is empty. And with the Revised Divine Liturgy most parishes had about 1/3 of their people simply walk away.

When will our bishops and priests learn that radical orthodoxy and good music fill churches?

I keep seeing these kinds of posts, complaining about the situation in the BCC. I've read them for years.

My question for everyone is, what are you actively doing about it? First, are you offering prayer and sacrifice? Are you engaging your clergy in real dialogue? I don't mean just writing letters of complaint to the eparchy (or to Rome) either. Are you networking with like minds and praying together about the situation? A bunch of people acting independently are not, in all likelihood, going to affect real change.

My last experience in a BCC parish (St. George, Olympia, WA) was over 10 years ago and I can't remember it well at all so I have no real recent personal experience to draw from about this matter. I would say, though, that so many people (posters here and elsewhere) are so unhappy that they could have a powerful voice if working in unison. Just my thoughts.

After being told to shut up and get back in the ranks, I went where my vision of Eastern Christianity is shared by most of the faithful, the clergy and the hierarchy.

Stuart, I know you went to the Melkite Church and many others have gone to other ritual churches or to Orthodoxy.

My lines of thinking are this - many Roman dioceses would not be offering the Latin mass or now having FSSP or ICK parishes if the laity were not vocal and agitating about it. I'm wondering if an organization could actually be created, along the lines of the Greek Catholic Union of long ago, that could show strength in numbers (and demonstrate perhaps some financial clout) to the BCC hierarchy and the new Metropolitan, lobbying for a "reform of the so-called reform" or returning to the DL before the RDL.

Do you have any thoughts on this idea? Like I said I am not a BCC member, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I see how much pain and distress there is out there among many BCC faithful.

I attend a wonderful orthodox BCC parish. We are growing. We have active young members and an active ECF program and an active Adult Enrichment program (we are reading Eastern Orthodox books- just finished this past Lent the Commentary on the Divine Liturgy by Nicholas Cabasilas). We have started a Young Adults Group. Our priest celebrates the full cycle of services (Vespers, Matins, and Divine Liturgy) weekly. We are reaching out to the unchurched (We could do better but we are trying) with the Good news of Jesus Christ!

So, I understand the reservation of some but it is not all bad and there are many, many orthodox Byzantine Catholics reaching out to the wider public with open arms, welcoming people and sharing the transforming love of Jesus Christ within the Byzantine Catholic Church!

That's true. It's only part of the story. Many Roman dioceses wouldn't be offering the Latin Mass except for all the lay people who left for the SSPX. Especially a few years ago, the permission for the old Mass was typically given mainly as a means of keeping people from leaving.

from the article:



Yes, it is true that the Liturgy is what keeps us engaged and draws others, Byzantine, Latin or otherwise.

Yes, it is true that there are issues with the RDL and it was a sore subject, remains so with many, and there were several notable casualties stemming from its implementation (including some prominent friends here).

But to say that the RDL is the sole reason that people have left in large numbers is rather simplistic. To quote our eloquent friend and frequent contributor, StuartK, there is a straw for every camel's back. I suspect the RDL may have been it for many, and this is likely why people are jumping to this somewhat cursory conclusion.

I do agree that traditional values, orthodox orientation and a solid commitment to proper rendering of our beautiful chant keep people engaged, and are all very critical to the life of our Church. But there are other things that can, do and have happened that drive folks away, irrespective. Parish closings, indifferent clergy, aging populations and demographic shifts among our people, level of engagement of the laity in the life of the Church, etc.

Although I have had my own share of difficulties with the Church of my fathers (yes, I am a "cradle" Byzantine-Ruthenian, for the avoidance of doubt, and it hasn't always been a rosy experience either), I prefer for the moment to focus on doing what I can for my parish, my pastor and fellow parishioners. We'll have to see how the current Metropolitan intends to lead, but the bigger indicator of the future in my mind remains the choice of successor for the Eparchy of Passaic. Our pastor announced this Sunday that it could take up to a year for this to be settled. In my mind and IMHO, this is indicative of a much bigger set of problems and challenges than the RDL.

Though the bishops (most of them) will acknowledge privately that the RDL has been an unmitigated disaster, and while some of them have (also privately) made it known that no ramifications will ensue if the Red Books mysteriously reappeared and the Teal Terror got relegated to the attic, publicly there has been no sign of backing down. For them, it's a matter of authority: they authorized the change, and who are we peasants to demand they change back? Besides, the books have been paid for, and it will be a couple of decades before they can afford to issue new ones.

That aside, let's face it--the Ruthenian faithful themselves have no consistent or united view of what their Church is or ought to be. Until that happens--which will take real leadership on the part of the hierarchs--the Church will continue to drift, and people will continue drifting out of it.

It is interesting to watch the fates of the two 'sisters' floating into the 21st century- i.e. the BCC and ACROD and their 'cousin' - the OCA. Their fates, its seems, are somehow linked by their common heritage and struggles.

I will just say that we have our own problems. As with the BCC, it is taking an interminable time for a successor to our late Metropolitan to be chosen. As with the BCC there is discontent in many parishes and if my own home parish is any indicator we have shed nearly 500 souls to death and relocation in the twenty years our current pastor has been on the job. There certainly have not been marriages and births to match that loss.

The three churches I mentioned share for the most part the old 'rust belt'. Our parishes are located in older neighborhoods. Our birth rate mirrors that of the nation and our young people leave home with an uncertain sense of what they are and the things which made our heritage important have faded as time goes by. School events take precedence over church events, work comes first etc... etc... etc...

So I think it is easy perhaps to blame a book or the actions of this Bishop or that Bishop but in the end, we all have to face reality.

For years the OCA claimed several hundred thousand faithful in its censuses and ACROD claimed 50,000 to 70,000. If I recall the Pittsburgh eparchy claimed 170,000 or so. The reality is that those numbers were wishful thinking when they were made and are rather farcical when you look at the present reality. ACROD probably has fewer than 12,000 registered souls, the OCA maybe has 35,000 and the BCC - I'm not sure but I doubt if it substantially exceeds the 47,000 or so of her Orthodox counterparts.

So I think we all need to end the pity party and stick to the work of the Church. Strength in a Church is not necessarily found in its numbers, but in the character and faith of its members.

Hang in there! S'bohom!

This article is also written about the problems with the Roman Catholic nuns. The very same problems apply to the Pittsburgh Metropolia. And especially the nuns in Uniontown.

The Vatican's Corrective to Liberal Catholics

The bishops, many of our priests, and certainly our nuns are still hostage to 1960s and 1970s post-Vatican II secular feminist ideas. They can't even look at the evidence before them. Lots of people have left. Instead of looking at where they have gone wrong they attack those they chased away. So much for building the kingdom of God.

I don't subscribe to the WJS, darn it...

Alexis

Aside from the insistent use of gender inclusive language in the Scriptural translation used in the RDL, exactly how has the Pittsburgh Metropolitan Church given in to a "secular feminist agenda"? What is happening in Uniontown that reflects this among the sisters and their order?

As a woman, perhaps a former member of the BCC (or current, dissatisfied one), what is happening that you in particular (i) find objectionable and (ii) reflects incorporation by the BCC of "post-Vatican II secular feminist ideas"?

Not all of us are as close to the action, so to speak, as you may be from Pittsburgh, so please do share some of your specific observations.

Except for inclusive language I find little fault with the translation. It has not been an issue of any great importance to our congregation. I don't wish to suggest motives for people who are complaining. It's just that it is of minor to no importance to us.

As a fairly newly married BCC convert with a young one on the way, I won't be raising my child in the BCC as it currently exists. I'd rather my kids be raised straight Roman per their mother's rite than a confusing and inconsistent hybrid theology.

If the liturgy is brought back in line and if the "teaching on the ground" can begin to reflect true Byzantine theology at the parish level (Nelson's parish is a model, mine isn't) that could change.

The inclucive language is a big problem to me, and the motivation to resist it lies in the theology and the philosophy that it reflects.

My wife and my daughter (both linguists) and I find much to fault in the translation, which is what happens when you start doing line-by-line comparisons with the Slavonic text. The RDL swings back and forth between excessive literalism to paraphrase, and, on occasion, to pure invention, without rhyme or reason. Stylistically, the prose if flat, awkward, infelicitous and lacking in poetry. Underlying it all is the relentless didacticism of post-conciliar liturgists, all of whom seem to think that liturgy has to be written on a fourth grade reading level, or the people won't "get it". Closely related to that is the translator's desire to give us his interpretation of the text, rather than the text as it is. All things considered, and when compared to the 1965 translation, EPIC FAIL!

I can't believe my post, which was so obviously light hearted and good natured, got deleted. If there is a member of this forum more able to take, or more deserving of something like grammatical correction than Stuart, I don't know who it is.

No one need delete anything that is ever said about me. I'm a big boy and can take my lumps. Besides, you guys are pushovers. Try growing up in a family of aggressive New York Jewish intellectuals. You either grow a thick skin or spend the rest of your life in therapy. And I hate therapists.

Good music and radical orthodoxy help fill churches but having lotsa babies ensures the future in a way nothing else can. Traditional Catholics are inclined to repudiate the culture of death - those who embrace it destroy their future.

Here in Texas Hispanics are giving birth left and right - consequently they're on the way to becoming the majority. And in Quebec, the students react against the government's raises in tuition. What else can it do? The "Quiet Revolution" included welcoming contraception and later, abortionism. They thus sabotaged their future without forseeing it's destruction.

Choose life. Or else: perish.

How many of the mothers are actually married to their baby daddies?

Lisa,

Don't expect a move back towards traditional Byzantine Liturgy under Metropolitan Skurla. He's a nice guy. But he's pretty far left when it comes to liturgy. His idol and mentor is Cardinal Mahoney of Los Angeles.

The bishops have made it clear that anyone who does not like the liberal reforms should leave. They call the people who have left to be "disobedient" and "uneducated". They wipe the dust from their feet when such people leave and rejoice. Take the hint.

Jason

Haven't heard the Mahoney angle, have heard the "disobedient" "uneducated" and "should leave" line a lot here before.

This was before my time. Was it ever quoted or a first or second-hand account?

I don't doubt any of it, it's just hard for me to reference in conversation right now beyond "I heard it on the internet."

For that matter, has anyone documented a cohesive account of how the RDL went down? All I can gather is snippets here and there.

Ask the Administrator. Do it in a PM.

Christ is Risen!
JJP et al.,
You haven't heard the "Mahoney angle" in the past because it seems to be meant to poison the well of our most reverend Metropolitan, unless it's based on a forthcoming quote or reference. I await either hearing that it was not a quote, or else I will have more reasons to pray for my Mother Church it seems.

Regarding how the RDL "went down", if you are recommended to find out via a PM, keep in mind that you won't be getting a cohesive, unbiased account. If the criticism of the RDL could simply be explained and defended in such a way, it would already be available in a public manner. The problem as I have seen it in trying to wander through places such as Byzcath is that there is so much of this anti-RDL criticism that is based on bitterness, that it would only come out through that which is private, incomplete, based on one angle, etc. There is the truth which is complicated and then there are assumptions and one-sided narratives.


How would you like a learn about a process that includes an office in Rome, Bishops, and a Liturgical Commission, to be explained in a manner that enlightens all motives, driving factors, and the like? Do you expect it to be cohesive in any real sense of the word? In my estimation, whatever you were to read would be incomplete, given the inherent complexity of the process and history.

If you hear that Bishop X or Commission member Y or Pontifical representative Z said or did anything that determined something, please be aware that you are most likely only engaging in gossip.

This is why I must ask-Why do any of this speculation?
The bitterness wrapped up in all of this is why I tend to avoid this site.

If we are to truly hope and pray that our churches grow through filling them with people and good music, what we need to do is not ask for private accounts of the "real story", but instead we ought to study our musical tradition, and sing our services to the best of our ability. Learn the vespers, hours, matins services, and then participate. We should not live in the past or the future, but live in the present.

Love our hymns, and sing them. Fill the choirs with new voices if you think things are "dying".

Speaking out in bitterness over what happened in the past, or going on a historical quest for how things became the way that they are will not change the way things are. What is needed for change is to change.

And if you love the church enough to lead it, when it comes to choosing hymns, who knows, you one day may influence the character of a new commission, if that is what our hierarchs call for.

One thought for consideration-do the bishops truly ask people who do not "like" things to leave? I think what happens is that when people don't like things and they protest and say things in the bitterness that pervades this website and elsewhere, that the bishops may seek peace and ask people to leave if they will not cease complaining.

There's nothing wrong with not liking something, but seeing beyond one's own preferences for consistency/the way it was/etc., and participating nevertheless. Does every priest who prays "for Christ is good and loves us all" like that more than "for Christ is gracious and loves mankind"?
If you think that, you really don't understand how much our priests love our Church, and those of us who make it up.

One final point about being anti-RDL-in the span of the bishops who so many decry, I would ask that you factor in the other things that seem to be never mentioned on places such as this forum. What of the restoration of infant communion? What of the stress on standing more (despite the fact that many still misinterpret what 'may sit', which is a different point)? What of the calling for priests to wear pectoral crosses?

Sometimes we see what we want to see, and we ignore what we want to ignore. Perhaps the same will be said about me, that this is a Pollyanna-ish ode to the Ruthenian Church. I guess that may be true, I love my Mother, what can I say?

May God cure mankind of our paralysis on this commemoration of the paralytic, that we may all walk in the truth and in love.

In XC,
J. Andrew

By the way, I saw The Administrator today at Liturgy. He's looking better, has lost a lot of weight, and is trying to regain his strength. Continued prayers are in order.

As for J. Andrew's post, one can try to put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

That was my first thought when you advised a PM, glad to hear it. Will take up both suggestions.

I do think a public "accounting" or history of the time period would be useful and appropriate, warts and all.

It would--sunlight is a great disinfectant. But it will never happen. The rampant clericalism of the Ruthenian Church ensures that omuerta will be observed.

Well, anyone can make a website.

Lots of slander and gossip going on here. Feels like people have nothing better to do than grind old axes. How does this help us on the path to transformation?

Give Metropolitan William a chance before you judge him. He has been Metropolitan for less than two weeks.


Pray, fast, and trust in God to guide His church.

Slander isn't called for, and these type of conversations require much grace and charity. But I think it's appropriate to ask what our shepherds have had to say on the matter. If the answers are divisive or uncharitable, I don't think you can fault the questioner or the one providing a truthful answer.

I take being spiritual head of my house seriously, and this has concerned me for a while. If there's nothing to hide, then this should be a quick and easy accounting.

This isn't for the sake of discord. If we blind ourselves to (very recent) history the same issues will only be perpetuated. I don't feel the need to wait and see, because my priority is my family and where we worship, not the Ruthenian Church. If the two are aligned, fantastic. If not, I want to know.

How many chances does one get? It's not like he's an unknown quantity. My guess is he'll stand four-square for drift. He won't repudiate the RDL, nor recall the Teal Terror, but he won't take any action against those parishes within the Archeparchy of Pittsburgh that don't use it, and he won't interfere with other bishops who choose either to enforce the new liturgy or look the other way. From what I have seen of Metropolitan William in the past, his interests don't run to liturgics, in any case.

The problem with whitewashing one's own history is soon one begins to believe it. In the intelligence business, believing one's own propaganda is called "drinking one's own bathwater"--in the long run, it's an unpleasant and unhealthy habit.

One of the problems the Ruthenian Church has is an inability to confront its own past in an honest and objective way. Everything is spun or whitewashed, even when everyone knows what really happened, because, I guess, people are afraid of what "outsiders" will say. Just read the official biographies or obituaries of Ruthenian hierarchs past and present, to see what I mean.

Hi all. I don't know much about the BCC (I don't live near one now, and I didn't before I moved either) so I have no comment about the "RDL". I would, however, like to comment on the original article ...



I haven't been keeping score exactly, but based on my experience it seems like the neo-conservatives might be winning. Anyone else come to that conclusion?

"...everything is spun or whitewashed"--these are unqualified words, that sound like those of one who is held captive by bitterness and logismoi.

Please stop this destructive speech, Stuart. Your own church sends her seminarian(s) to our seminary. By extension your criticism of us extends to the Melkites in that sense.

Hospodi pomiluj.

JJP, if you can say that Nelson's (and my own) parish is not subject to the issues that concern you about your own, how can the negative appraisals be a one size fits all? How can they be connected to the same RDL which we also use?

I still think, for as much as is known as to how the RDL was developed, approved and promulgated, I still remain puzzled by one aspect. All hierarchs approved and are ultimately responsible, irrespective of what they may or may not have said about it afterward. This much cannot be disputed. So what was it that made them think they needed to push this through?

Again, leaders in different positions of leadership can and do lead differently, as is often seen in the secular world as well as within the Church. So we owe it to Metropolitan William to see how he will both leader and govern this Church. He is in a very different position now.

FWIW - he has already appointed a new Chancellor and Protosyncellus, separating the posts and appointing new individuals, so he is showing some early signs of being willing to make changes.

He seems very much aware of the condition of the Metropolitan Church and the influences of secular society on it and the Universal Church, in general. This will likely be a primary focus, as further evidenced from his homily and comments made formally at his own enthronement.

I still remain convinced of two things: (i) the global Ruthenian Church suffers from a lack of formal unity, unlike the UGCC for example, and will likely become less and less relevant over time as a consequence; and, (ii) the decision on a successor for the Eparchy of Passaic will be the most telling sign as to how the Metropolitan Church will be governed and develop for the generation to come.

I don't know anything at all about your new Metropolitan. But one thing - he does know how to make a statement. I first saw him at Metropolitan Nicholas Smisko's 50th Anniversary Liturgy at St. John's Orthodox Church in Perth Amboy, NJ. He was fully vested, crown included and seated in the front pew, left side in a place of honor directly across from His Eminence, Archbishop Demetrios the representative of the EP who, like the other Orthodox bishops, was wearing his monastic cassock with a pectoral cross and panagia. When he exchanged the Kiss of Peace with the other hierarchs, it was quite a moment so he may indeed be open to surprises. (I don't know what the Greeks thought of it, but we 'Ruscnaci' were moved given our bittersweet history.) Give him a chance.

EXACTLY!



Do you have the names of the new Chancellor and Protosyncellus? Or a link to the announcement?



Yes I was impressed by his homily and saw it a call of renewal within our church.



So how do we solve this then? (and before people coming rushing in with "get rid of the RDL," please don't becuase getting rid of the RDL will not correct all ills- to think that is very naive)



I agree with you here Curious Joe. I think that a dynamic, young bishop is needed to fill this Eparchy.

Because they come from the top down. I've been to your church once and I was really impressed, and Fr Pipta is by all accounts what we all hope for in a BC priest.

The problem is that it reminds me too much of my nondenominational upbringing, where each local church is dependent on the personality or charisma of the pastor leading the congregation. When you have a holy, amazing, dynamic person, it's a great place to be. But as soon as that person is gone, the foundation is gone also. I remember talking to the Orthodox priest at a parish that I attended who, in explaining this idea, said that if he were to up and have an affair and leave the Church, his parish attendance might dip for a bit, but it would continue on in much the same fashion as before he arrived, it wouldn't collapse or visibly alter as a result. He was a part of something greater.

I'm not saying this is the dynamic at your parish at all. It's the lack of a solid bedrock in the Ruthenian Church as a whole that concerns me. I am capable of overlooking flaws, and no place is perfect. But what type of experience and instruction will my children receive? They will speak English and Spanish. When they ask why the English liturgy says "us all" and the Spanish translation isn't "nosotros" but instead "la humanidad", will my explanation make any sense? When the catechism class teaches that the Ruthenian Church was never an Orthodox Church, and that contradicts what they hear at home, what kind of view will they have of the Church in general?

I don't think it's responsible to just wait and see.

Be realistic Stuart. How many people put negative information in an obituary, biography, or an autobiography? Take Abraham Lincoln, for example; how much do you read of the criticism of him as President; are most Americans aware that the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to the rebel states? Go on down the line, Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson, Kennedy, Nixon, Roosevelt(s), etc.

Other than a self-whipping, what purpose does an expose' of sins decades ago accomplish?

For those of us who remain in the Byzantine Catholic Church in America, let's put out efforts into constructive efforts. For those who have left the Church, we welcome you, but please be constructive and not divisive. As a historian you are aware of what divisiveness has done.

Christ is risen! Let the Church also experience Resurrection; the Crucifixion is over. Death has been conquered!

The announcements are prominently linked from the Archeparchy's home page. Here is the appointment information:

Officlal Archieparchial appointments

I was also pleased that only three days after his enthronement, the new Metropolitan made time to celebrate the Divine Liturgy and preach at the Cantor's Day of Recollection at the cathedral.

Either the Metropolitan or the rector of the cathedral could easily have vetoed the choice of an Orthodox priest to preach the retreat. Father David Mastroberte of the Johnstown diocese gave a pair of excellent talks from his own experience on the theology and practice of the cantor's vocation, and it was followed by an hour-long open discussion among all the cantors present.

Jeff Mierzejewski

People assume that Metropolitan Skurla is cleaning house. We don't know whether Msgr. Duker was pushed out of office as Protosyncellus and Chancellor or decided to retire. He is not a supporter of the Revised Divine Liturgy. He is also not very East-leaning. But he is a really nice guy.

I'm becoming convinced that there is no hope of liturgical restoration or singable music in the Pittsburgh Metropolia. It might be time to start again somewhere else. My family needs a church without politics in liturgy.

This is a very important question that I think can be applied not only to JJP but to others as well.

We need young people to stay in our church and help bring about the renewal that we all want to see... but blaming it ALL on the RDL, well that is just a cop-out.

Pope John Paul II called us to a new evangelization and told us to "be not afraid." Following this call is why I think we see a rise in Traditional Catholicism by young people. I think Metropolitan William, from his enthronement homily, and the other people's comments above, understands and sees that we need to participate in the new evangelization .

Christ is Risen!

Sorry Lisa, to hear of your discontent because of liturgical revision. Please stay and work within the Church. Don't be like those people who complain about government but fail to vote.

Liturgy and politics has always been with the Church because we are human. That is why the Liturgy has gone from a prayerful agape meal to a long and theological complex ritual. The emperors, patriarchs and ethnic groups have all made changes for centuries. If not you would have to speak Greek or Aramaic, and bring a lamb, bread, chicken or produce to Church with you for your offering.

Christ is amongst us!
Fr Deacon Paul

I was thumbing through said catechism one night when we were at dance practice (my wife instructs Rusyn folk dancing at the BCC church in town)and found it to be consistent with what we teach the same grade level at the Orthodox church down the street rgarding matters of faith (for the most part. ) The section on Church history was odd. If I recall, it sort of skipped from the Christianization of the Slavs to the 20th century and omitted any mention of the struggles which the faithful had to confront - even from a BCC point of view. Nor did it, if I recall, say anything about why there was an Eastern church at all. Perhaps my memory is faulty or my review was merely a 'browsing' exercise, but that sticks in my mind.

Of course,we on the Orthodox side are just as guilty by glossing over the period of union.

Perhaps our mutual inability to confront the painful truths of our history has something to do with our mutually declining numbers and an inability to hold onto young people? At least the Ukrainians - Greek Catholic or Orthodox - have nationalism and a national identity to guide them.

Just wondering....

I thought when I signed up that most of the evangalization in this sense was going to be outward - towards Roman Catholics and towards Orthodox Christians. As it turns out, the greatest need is inward, which has to happen before the outward can occur.

If I was single and 10 years younger, it might be an enticing project. I can be very stubborn and wouldn't let the lack of any real desire for this type of message phase me.

But my priority isn't helping the Ruthenian Church despite its lack of desire for help, it is finding a church that I can raise children as Eastern Catholics that will work with me in that process, not against me.

If I thought that things were tilting towards this, I would be able to have patience. But anything I see tells me things are tilting the opposite direction. We can hope and pray all we want that the leadership will act differently than it has in the past, but God has granted us free will (amen). That means that if these are the decisions that they want, and if they want a feminist liturgy translation, that is what it will be. Maybe not forever, and we can all have hope. But I am focused on the next 5 years, not the next 5 decades. I pray that it changes in generations to come, and maybe my kids will be a part of it, but I am not going to work at cross purposes with the church in their upbringing.

The problem isn't the RDL, the problem is how and why it came into being, which is much greater.

All that being said, I still attend one. On a very different level, Church is people, and the people are great and hard to imagine leaving. It's a matter of when that balance tilts far enough to force a decision, and personally I feel it more every day.

Reverend Andrew J. Deskevich
Chancellor

Very Rev. Eugene P. Yackanich
Protosyncellus
(former Apostolic Administrator)

He made changes, early on, that presumably reflect his preference and view as to the leadership needed to run the Archeparchy. This was not characterized here (at least not yet) as "cleaning house".

What would people be saying a few months from now if he made no changes whatsoever (which seemed to be the presumption of many, as stated in this and other threads)?



What is "singable music", and how does that concept relate to Prostopinije? We have a chant tradition, not a music tradition.

If one has ever tried to learn Byzantine (Greek) Chant when one approaches it from a Western framework and point of view (as many do, myself included, given our education and training), it seems rather foreign indeed. Yet, when mastered and done correctly, it is an extraordinary expression of love for and adoration of God.

FWIW - I don't think anything that the Eastern European hierarchs heard in Pittsburgh on the 18th struck them as overtly odd, in all honesty. Not to say there are not what many would classify as "rough spots" with some of the current settings ...



Again, other than the overt insistence on gender inclusivity in language, what "politics" are evident in the RDL? Surely many would agree that a lot of "politics" were involved in the making, but what other than the nature of the translation and adapted language reflect "politics in liturgy"?

It is lamentable that this has driven you to consider leaving the BC Church, and we pray that if this does happen, you end up finding a spiritual home that is suitable for you and your family. That said, I would suspect there are other issues beyond the RDL and the defects associated with it (not at all saying it is without flaws) that are driving you away. Perhaps you can have a meaningful, private discussion with a BC priest in your are whom you trust (there must be at least one in the greater Pittsburgh area) who can help you with your discernment.

Christ is risen!

The latter, the "need" as you've described it, and as defined by the Catholic Church as alluded to in Archbishop William's first official and public remarks, is precisely what the New Evangelization is meant to address - a need for renewal first within the Church, by it and its faithful.

Nelson described it as "need" although I agree with the description.

Every church could and has called for "renewal". Met. William's comments were admirable, and I think that most of the heirarchs in attendance would agree and say the same about their own churches.

I didn't see anything that spoke to the issues we are discussing, and believe me I was looking for it. I took his comments to be addressing the technological age that we live in, and the struggle of asserting our faith in society's culture. What we are talking about here is the Church's culture.

Personally, I could not agree more. The process itself was divisive, and damage was done (as is evident from the comments of many here, with justification). Yet, as I stated earlier, no matter what any of the current and prior hierarchs at the time said afterward, it all went down and went through with their approval. I still wonder what drove this result more than anything.

I too am a father of three terrific kids, and all of this was a big issue for me recently. I moved to an area near a long-standing, well known BCC parish, yet arrived to find it almost dead, with padlocks ready. That course was reversed entirely by then Bishop William and the efforts of a dedicated priest, one who was new to the area and the parish, and thus had no "skin in the game" so to speak, other than to simply do the right thing. The parish has enjoyed a bit of its own renewal and revival, and will hopefully continue to do so, but it takes the will of the people - the faithful parishioners - first and foremost.

The situation here was so bad that I could no longer take my children there, in the darkest days. ECF classes were cancelled. First Penance was eliminated, not just the semblance of a Latin-like First Holy Communion, but the preparation of the children itself for the Sacrament of Reconciliation. The environment was becoming openly hostile to the formation of the children of the parish, in general. The result would have been the permanent loss of this generation and those to come.

That said, I could not bring myself to join the very vibrant local RC community where my kids have many friends, nor could I turn to Orthodoxy, although many nearby possibilities existed. Neither seemed like the right answer. So we stuck it out until then Bishop William and our new pastor recommitted to the community. I dare say that if the many long-time faithful who ignored all signs and overt messages to go elsewhere (and there were many) did not do the same, there would no longer be a BC community here. We are thankful that is not the case. But, it started with the will of the people ...

Perhaps I give Archbishop William a little more promise than others as a result of this witness and experience, but he's earned it in this case.

Actually, when you write down the notes in a book, connect the words to the notes in a specific way, and tell people to sing it that way, and no other way, or else, you don't have a tradition at all. You have an arrangement. It's dead as a smelt.

One idea, brought up long ago, was to have all the cantors in the Metropolia submit all their arrangements to be collected and collated in a single volume, which would have given the cantors a wide range of examples on which to draw for inspiration. After all, for Prostopinje to be a living tradition, it needs to be dynamic, to adapt and evolve as it is passed down from cantor to cantor, each of whom has to deal with a specific parish of varying vocal capacity and tastes.

That idea was torpedoed by a late bishop, who proceeded to denounce those who had come up with the idea, and who disciplined the lector who offered to assist in the collection and collation process. Apparently nothing good can originate with the laity. After all, if we're so smart, why aren't we bishops (or at least priests). "Filthy peasants, go back to your hovels and do what you are told."

So, now we can see what good comes from deferring to our betters (bowing head and pulling on forelock in truly deferential manner).

When I left, I told my priest why, in no uncertain terms. He looked sad. He told me it's my duty to obey the bishop. I said, "Not when the bishop is wrong". At least he had the integrity not to call me ignorant--but then, he's a pretty smart guy, and I think he knew precisely what kind of product the RDL was.

"If one has ever tried to learn Byzantine (Greek) Chant when one approaches it from a Western framework and point of view (as many do, myself included, given our education and training), it seems rather foreign indeed. Yet, when mastered and done correctly, it is an extraordinary expression of love for and adoration of God."

Made the transition seamlessly in less than a month. Nonetheless, arranging Prostopinje (or Byzantine chant) for English is a difficult art, particularly if one intends it to be sung congregationally. Just how poorly we have been served can be heard by comparing the manner in which David Drillock and Mark Bailey have arranged the corpus of Russian chants for English, or how the Boston Byzantine Choir has done the same for Greek and Melkite Chant; or Archangel Voices for the whole spectrum of Orthodox chant traditions. Clunky does not begin to describe how the music for the RDL sounds (of course, it's not helped by the banality and awkwardness of the new text).

In any case, why settle for one setting (and why Boksaj, whose compilation represented Prostopinje as used in just one cathedral at one time), when there are many talented cantors capable of working with the whole tradition? It's interesting to hear choirs and congregations from the Carpathians and Slovakia: their music is much closer to the music we used to sing, because, as a living, oral tradition, it continued to evolve, while Boksaj's music, once set into print, became a museum piece. We should have accepted the continued evolution of Prostopinje in English, into an authentically "American" chant, rather than trying to pickle our singing in formaldehyde. We could have had (to paraphrase Jaroslav Pelikan), "the living music of the dead"; we chose instead "the dead music of the living".

Stuart, I have no way of knowing and it doesn't really matter anyway. Whether within wedlock or out of it, those folks are acquiring majority status. Non-Hispanics here would do well to get used to it and adapt themselves accordingly.

My point is: choose life if you want a future.

By the second generation, their birth rates is approximately the same as native-born white Americans.

If you want to examine fertility trends in various countries, here is an excellent little graphic tool that allows you to see different countries going back to 1800: Gapminder World

Note that the fertility rate in the U.S. has been falling continuously since 1800, but appears to have stabilized; the fertility of other countries begins to fall as soon as industrialization begins. North or South, East or West, Catholic, Protestant, Anglo or Hispanic, Asian or European--same story everywhere.

And it began long before the Pill, so you can't blame that.

JJP et al.,
I think that historical knowledge is beneficial. However, keep in kind that understanding how the RDL evolved, you need to factor in the complexity that there was a liturgical commission, the ruling bishops, and an office in Rome. In one sense, which particular bishops, commission members, and folks in Rome did what components, who expressed concerns or simply had other concerns is something that goes to the level of personal motivations and other things that are the matter of speculation, by and large.

In another sense, of course, the bishops are our shepherds, and they are all giving their stamp of approval to the RDL.

Going back to my own parish again, our parish priest was on this musical and liturgical commission, and your parish priest (to my knowledge) was not. As you have referred to our pastor as a model priest, I would ask you to consider whether that was connected to the rdl, or not. Perhaps it's not directly connected.

I appreciated hearing your testimony of being non-denominational, this was my own path to the Apostolic Faith, from the age of 15 to 21. I would only say that in having visited 9 parishes within our eparchy and others outside of it, I actually was refreshed to see the consistency of the parish life, even if the troparia and the like were sung at different pitches and tempos. One can spot who is an old 'baba' in the parish, who is a zealous convert (mirrors included), and the like. Sure, sometimes things are more vibrant just in terms of what services are offered, but the same heart and soul which is nourished by the Divine Eucharist and the prayers pervades our Church. So I would say that if priestly zeal was truly ineffectual, we would not have had revivals and the like throughout Church history. We should thank God when it is found, as was attested by Metropolitan William's work as Bishop of Passaic in a post above, and in our own priests. And ultimately, we should seek it among our own lives.

{And as a side bar, the musical criticism that our chant is not 'singable' must be considered alongside the fact that musical changes are difficult to deal with when there are years of a different practice. Additionally, the idea that we are told to remain silent and never use other versions of hymns bears a falsification at the enthronement of our Most Reverend Metropolitan William even. The Trisagion used in that video is not in the Green Faithful's book. So the idea that our RDL has made new melodies verboten is disproven even with our own Metropolitan's enthronement, who sang the second repeat of the Trisagion in Greek.}

Anyway, my point in going to our particular parish life is because if there is any correlation then between the RDL and fervor, it is that the parishes with an involvement in the rdl are faring better as a result of it. I don't actually feel that this is a connection that is true or should be made, but I'm trying to emphasize that people can produce arguments through a selective analysis of the data.



Regarding your translation concerns, I think the ideal is to teach children that poor prayers are expressed with different words. Even in vespers and matins there is the use of the word mankind. Us all is less delineated than mankind, but if you think about the spanish that you shared, humanidad is just as gender neutral (pero sabemos que nuestro idioma tiene el concepto del hombre como lider). So the solution to concerns about gender neutrality is to not teach it. Heating the phrase us all does not teach gender neutrality.

Regarding catechism consistency, at times I think that this is inevitable. We'll always have some Roman kids who come to the parish and talk about things like purgatory and the rosary and the like, and I think that's an occasion for more catechesis and mutual understanding. That we have to be hermetically sealed as Eastern is not realistic in a pluralistic country, but nevertheless I share your concerns about a text that would imply that we were never Orthodox. I have never noticed something of the sort from the God With Us Publications, and in our own parish in the teen ECF course, we actually use an Orthodox text, which has led to us discussing our history, with the formation of the sister parishes in ACROD and the OCA, as well as the broader sense of our union with the Orthodox, testified so beautifully by the exchanges of the kiss of peace at our events, including the enthronement of Metropolitan William.

So to sum up, JJP (et alios), I feel your concern for consistency, and can only hope that we as Southern California Byzantine Catholics can do more to get together and encourage each other. Thanks for taking the time to read all of this, and I pray that the Risen Christ will strengthen us to walk more according to the truth.



In XC,

J. Andrew

,
What difference will that make when the culture of, as you say, native-born white Americans, will have extinguished itself before two generations are up?

Stuart, I do not doubt your experience and witness, and value your insights and opinions on many subjects, this one included. In the end as I understand, you voted with your feet, and I'm glad you found a happy home among the Melkites whom I respect greatly. It does seem from what you have shared that your decision was driven by more than the mere prospect of living with the RDL, as was the case with other notables from what I have read, heard and witnessed first hand. This is tragic, and does sadden me personally as a remaining member of the BC church.

As you may recall from some of my initial posts here on this forum, the RDL is (and remains) a mystery to me in many ways as well, and I do not mean to defend it. As a cantor who was trained by one of the old masters while in a Cathedral parish setting, I still find a fair number of RDL settings to be awkward at best. In an attempt to restore some of what was presumably lost, we seemingly disregarded many of the techniques that could have created a better result when matching melodic patterns of Prostopinije to new English text (irrespective of the integrity of such). That those who, from proven experience and after years of well-recognized accomplishment, were in a genuine position to comment on such intelligently were routinely ignored when making suggestions is sad, at best. This much I experienced first hand, so I certainly do not need to be convinced.

As I have confessed previously (in some old threads), my level of scholarship on related subjects precludes me from commenting intelligently on either the (i) the consistency of the text of the liturgy as compared to reliable sources in original language or (ii) the translation used. On the former point, it is equally sad that much good insight and scholarship on the subject was also seemingly ignored. On the latter, I can only share how awkward it has been once again this Paschal season to reflect on the Myrrh-Bearers and the Paralytic, who apparently are no longer women nor a man, respectively.

No one could change a person's feelings. But, if change is to come, we could hopefully exchange here and amongst ourselves who remain in the BCC some specifics behind our criticisms, preferably those that can lead to responses by the laity that have some reasonable chance of success.

Irrespective of the RDL, there have been many forms of neglect in the Church of my fathers. I have witnessed many of them in my young lifetime, some of which actually turned me away from what I thought was a genuine vocational calling. I can remain bitter about that, but understand now that this was God's plan, and my calling was elsewhere both within and outside the church community. But I can look back at some of them and know that they were indicative of problems far greater than the RDL, and that they were more likely the cause of the exodus seen in the past two decades, in particular.

Let me be very candid with you and everyone here, so as not to be misunderstood. I honestly wonder more than occasionally (at least weekly) whether or not the BC church will exist by the time my young children become parents, and whether or not I should be taking them elsewhere to another faith community. But if we all thought this and all chose this sometimes seemingly logical path, the BCC would certainly be no more.

Somehow, I just can't live with that as a good end result, either.

I'd like to believe that others who also remain, thought they may fervently voice their dissatisfaction with the status quo, somehow deep down feel the same way.

Maybe it will help to pull back a bit.

The conversation began with my inquiry as to the roles, quotes, timelines, etc of the development of the RDL in the Ruthenian Church.

There was resistance to that line of questioning.

I'm not trying to persuade anyone to be unhappy with their church. J. Andrew, you seem genuinely blessed and that is a wonderful thing. You asked me questions, and I answered them. Regarding your points about the Spanish translation, I would rather address in a new thread as I have thoughts but don't want to create a tangent. The point is that "humankind" if you will has been excised from the liturgy for political reasons, and it doesn't sit well with me.

You never know how the future will unfold, but I am fortunate enough to consider an Eastern Catholic alternative that I think will allow me to worship liturgically without the need for strength or encouragement to get through.

To get back on point, I think a full accounting is not only warranted, but even if uncomfortable, is a greater benefit to the church than avoiding difficult questions.

Plenty of decisions made by the Catholic Church have caused controversy. These decisions are supported by a great wealth of documentation, evangelization and education. The Ruthenian Church owes its faithful the same, and asking for this isn't something that need be apologized for.

These are the two questions which I still ask myself regarding the RDL.

I have read some of the published documents which came from those involved with the liturgical commission, and keep coming up with one answer: the Boksaj Prostopinije was the youngest, most comprehensive collection of chant settings available, and knowing that it reflected aspects of our inherited tradition, we went with it as a baseline, in the absence of something similar and more recent. I could be dead wrong, but that's how it seems.

JJP,
One source for reading about the liturgy, in addition to the more personal interactions that I've sent in a private message, would be www.davidpetras.com

He is the only commission member or bishop that I know of who has written about this, to my knowledge.

In XC,
J. Andrew

Not a bad suggestion, but I would note that the most detailed information on Fr. Petras' site is a response to the book written on the subject of the RDL by +Archimandrite Serge Kelleher of blessed memory, who also frequented this Forum. An appreciation for his book and commentary is recommended to fully grasp some of Fr. Petras' response.

There was also a document published by Prof. Thompson of the commission, which can be found here, on the use of the Bokshaj Prostopinije in the U.S, as a source of reference for the RDL.

Stuart,

I have heard many times the statement that all the music in the green Divine Liturgies book is taken note-for-note from Bokshai, and virtually every one of those statements has come from you, from John Vernoski, or from your auditors. I would hope that you, as a historian, would rely on better evidence than that.

And as a matter of fact, the statement is simply not true. Those musical settings come from Bokshai and the collections based on that work, but also from the oral traditions of the Pittsburgh and Johnstown diocese; the 1970 Irmologion of Father Stephan Papp (Presov), music from the seminary in Uzhorod; and other printed collections from Europe. The music from Jerry Jumba's Advanced Cantor School also provided significant influences, as did the singing of Bishops Andrew Pataki and Nicholas Smisko.

Our seminary recently completed an eight-week course on the history of our plainchant, with three weeks just on its evolution from 1820 to the present. Until you become more familiar with that history and the issues involved, I would suggest that you refrain from making statements like the one quoted above.

Please note: I am NOT asking you never to raise the issue. I am asking you to put the time into learning what music is and isn't from Bokshai, and what the other sources contained, before you simply claim that "they took everything note for note from Bokshai." The statement in the preface of the green book, explaining the musical sources, is literally true.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewksi

Please consider the following as being constructive observations from one who shares the Rusyn chant tradition with the BCC and who is looking in, from the 'outside' on your ongoing debates on the topic. Thanks!

One has to keep in mind that Boksaj represented just one thread of our venerable chant tradition - the divide between the Presov school and that of Muchachevo/Uzhorod is subtle - but noticeable - and to our 'old timers' it was often the cause of unending 'battles royale' among many would be 'men of the books' as they would be called 'ponasemu.' To many Boksaj became a 'bible', to others it was always a source of controversy.

I remember when Fr. Stephan Papp's recordings first made their way to the West after the Prague Spring in the late 1960's. To my ear, they sounded familiar - yet odd. My dad, who like Joe and others here, was trained as a cantor by an educated Professor and priest(from Presov) explained to me that the best cantors led - not by force - but by 'spirit' or 'duch' -and allowed the congregation (and the priest who often chimed in loudly!!!) to 'drive' the singing.

Never the less, the recordings (and Boksaj) were a good learning tool in the absense of trained cantors on the parish level. It is hard to explain this concept but those of you who have the experience, you know what I am trying to express.

Ultimately the problem with an oral chant tradition is the very 'oral' nature it possesses. Legitimate variances from parish to parish, county to county, state to state developed over time both in Europe and in the Americas.

When there was a Diocesan celebration in our Church (and I am certain that in your BCC this was also the case) in order to avoid that problem from 'ruining' the responses, the Bishop would appoint one or two cantors, or often priests, to lead the congregational responses. Usually men whose egos would allow them to work with others were selected and the ones with large voices and egos (and we all know that there were, and are, plenty of cantorial 'prima donnas') would be relegated to the side of the 'kliros' or cantor stand if in the balcony. )

Taking the language issues aside, I don't have a 'horse in that race', but the problems of singing chant from a book are nothing new and not unique to our particular tradition. With a little bit of ego suppression and pastoral wisdom on the local level, these problems ought to disappear in time.

Finally, I would note that the late Metropolitan Nicholas had no issues with sending persons, including his seminarians, to your Cantor's Institute for advanced training so that our shared patrimony could be preserved. Had I lived closer to western PA, I would have enjoyed the opportunity as well.

Thank you for allowing an outsider to weigh in on this!

Lower fertility rates are not limited, as I said, to white, native-born Americans, whose fertility rate, as compared to that of Europeans (both Western and Eastern), Japanese, Chinese and Iranians is pretty robust.

As I said, as countries industrialize, their total fertility rate decreases--true across geography, race, and religion. Mexico is rapidly industrializing, and as a result, its fertility rate is also dropping. At present, among immigrants from Mexico, the differential is between where Mexico is now, and where native-born America is now. In a decade or so, there will be no differential: the TFR in Mexico will be about the same as the TFR in the United States, in which case we will notice no difference in the number of babies being born to Mexicans as opposed to Anglos.

Deacon Paul,

Thank you for the kind words but we really left shortly after the RDL went into effect. We return each year for some of the Holy Week services since they still use the old books (which are free from the bishops' personal secular liberal politics).

Laypeople don't have any say in the Byzantine Catholic Church. There is nothing we can do to "work within the Church".

When he was installed as the new metropolitan, Archbishop Skurla talked about some long awaited secretly planned plan to bring new people in to the Church. no one believes him. Notice that he didn't mention anything about restoring the liturgy so that people like my family could return.

Go ask the archbishop if those who want the whole liturgy and the old music we memorized from childhood if we can have it. He's not going to say yes.

After Good Friday Vespers one of the men joked: "There are still people coming to church. We must have more revisions. We must keep revising the liturgy until there are no more people left." Everyone laughed but it is really sad.

Lisa

Lisa is on to something. Eventually the hierarchs will have to remember that we aren't in the hollows of the Carpathians, and that the laity are not illiterate peasants, but in many cases possess precisely the kind of knowledge, talents and skills that are needed to restore and revitalize the Church. Clericalism, however, is rampant, and the general attitude seems to be "if it didn't originate with the clergy, it isn't worthy of consideration".

That attitude can best be summed up in the response someone got from a Chancery drone: "The bishop doesn't talk to ordinary people".

Christ is Risen!



Again slandering the Bishops. I have never seen a credible source that quotes the Bishops saying the laity are "illiterate peasants." So please provide your source or stop slandering.

In fact the Bishops, through our Seminary, have started an online learning program for laity to learn more about their faith. If we were "illiterate peasants" why would such a program be offered through a graduate level Seminary?



Once again more claims with no evidence or sources.



And why should anyone believe that this was said? What is your source? I have spoken to my bishop before and I am an ordinary layman and got treated nothing like what you claim.

Let's get back to working on the salvation of our souls and stop the slandering and gripping about one particular Church.

We all get it, the RDL is not popular with some, but instead of trying to work within the church (as many in the Roman church did over their changes after VII) people left and now complain or Pontificate (if only they would have listened to me!) about it online.

Tell me how complaining against Bishops and liturgical translations help save anyone's soul? Seems to me the only thing it does is lead us all into Spiritual Pride.

Nelson,

How many times have you met our bishops not to know who they are?

The late Bishop Pataki was the one who won't talk with ordinary people. You could ask him for direction but you could never ask him to explain the reasoning that went into his decisions.

Bishop Skurla is nice enough. He is never rude. But neither will he actually answer a question. He admitted to lots of people that the RDL isn't very good. But in the same breath he also said that now that it is promulgated nothing can be done about it.

Archbishop Basil was nice, but at the Uniontown Pilgrimage he always deferred questions on liturgy to Bishop Pataki.

Bishop Dino is nice. I don't think he likes the RDL. He was never a real supporter of it when he was a priest in Passaic.

Bishop Kudrick is really guarded in what he will say.

The bishops do treat us laity as if we are stupid. Ask any of them to explain why the RDL was necessary and you get nothing but cold stares. Been there. Done that.

Now that I think about it, as Metropolitan, Archbishop Skurla could grant blanket permission for parishes to go back to the old translation and music. I know he's been asked. But no one is holding their breath. Pray, pay and obey.

Jason

Not slandering, Nelson, simply relating my own personal experiences with Their Graces--and not merely the late Emeritus of Passaic, either.

Jason has the right of it. Most of our bishops and almost all of our priests are "tames", a term coined by Father Paul Mankowski for a certain type of personality that gets attracted to the Catholic priesthood:



In another essay, What Went Wrong?, about the clerical abuse scandal, Mankowski spoke of how people who complained were made to feel by the hierarchs to whom they brought them:



Does this sound at all familiar to anyone with regard to the RDL--or for that matter, to complaints about clerical sexual abuse, parish closings, financial malfeasance, etc., etc. ad nauseum?

Stuart,

With regard to the first quote you posted, this description fits the MO of business leaders and managers.

The second description fits the military.

Paul,

The second only applies to the military at ranks above O-6. The former only applies to businesses either out of business or going out of business. Both apply to civil service positions at the Federal, State and Local levels, which means we might as well pick our bishops from among the qualified employees of the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Oh, and periodically the military has to fight a war, and that tends to clear out the "tames" for a generation or so (war is pitiless to tames). The only equivalent thing for the Church is a good persecution (which also grinds up tames like so much grist between the millstones), but who wants that?

I just read "What Went Wrong?".

Wow........ I think this is spot on.

E-5's and acting E-5's display this a lot in basic training.

You may be right about businesses; unfortunately it applies to almost all the upper management and boards of directors of the mega-corporations. It must be some requirement at the universities that "educate" them.

It's called "management theory", and those who believe its talismanic powers usually wind up managing companies in Chapter 7. As for E-5s in basic, remember the whole purpose of basic is to obliterate the individual and rebuild him into a soldier. On the other hand, good trainers often make lousy combat leaders.

If anyone has back issues of The Latin Mass, I am looking for this article:

“‘Tames’ in Clerical Life,” The Latin Mass, Vol. 5, No. 3, Summer 1996.

Latin Mass' digital archives do not go back that far. If you have a copy, and can scan it, I would greatly appreciate a copy.

Stuart