The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Galumph, Leon_C, Rocco, Hvizsgyak, P.W.
5,984 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 members (1 invisible), 246 guests, and 50 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,389
Posts416,722
Members5,984
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 252
bkovacs Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 252
Is there much difference in the english translation Divine Liturgies used by the Ukrainian Greek Catholics and the Byzantine Ruthenian Catholics here in the US.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208
Yes. As much as between daylight and dark.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
I'm surprised at this - can you expand please Sielos?

I'm surprised because in Australia the UGCC uses the revised Divine Liturgy in the same translation as the Ruthenians so far as I understand it.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208
I'd be glad to say some of the reasons why if I had set my alarm clock and hadn't waked up late - gotta get to Liturgy and then work afterwards...Also I'm going to be away from computer for a coupla days. I bet other forum members can, in the meantime, put in their 2 cents worth. That is, if anyone else finds the 2 versions as distinct to each other as I do.

I admit I prefer it in Ukrainian or Slavonic...

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Yes, a very significant difference. Probably the only thing in common is "Lord, have mercy". The Synodal English translation was approved in 1987 with the publication of the Liturgikon and later the pew books.

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 384
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 384
Likes: 1
Diak,

Can you please expand? Not living in the US, I have no idea what the differences are, and find it distressing that a sister church in the Byzantine family could differ so radically...

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
Some relevant links that may be of interest and for background:

The official Slavonic of the Ruthenian Recension, that is, the common source for the Ukrainian and Byzantine Catholic churches. The following Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and Preparation Rite (Chrysostom Liturgy [patronagechurch.com]) is extracted from the Ruthenian Recension Služebnik [patronagechurch.com].

The 1964/65 BCC Liturgicon which is a complete translation of the Slavonic of the Ruthenian Recension: Chrysostom Liturgy [patronagechurch.com].

The Revised Divne Liturgy(RDL) 2006 liturgicon: RDL Chrysostom Liturgicon [patronagechurch.com]]

See also Study Texts of Translations of the Liturgical Books of the Ruthenian Recension.


Last edited by ajk; 07/16/12 04:30 PM.
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 379
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by Diak
Yes, a very significant difference. Probably the only thing in common is "Lord, have mercy".

Come on... I know that nobody likes the Ruthenian translation, including me, but the poster asked a serious question and this is a rather flip answer. They have much more in common than is different, although the differences are significant. I tried to do a search online, and the only thing I could find from a Ukrainian source is this. [nativityukr.org] I'm not sure if this is the actual current translation used in Ukrainian parishes, however. It actually seems a lot like the previous Ruthenian translation, with a few differences. I'm not familiar enough with the Ukrainian translation to offer a solid comparison. On the occasions that I've attended a Ukrainian church, I haven't been so struck by the differences that I would say "night and day". I have thought "this is nice, I wish we said it this way instead".

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Originally Posted by babochka
Originally Posted by Diak
Yes, a very significant difference. Probably the only thing in common is "Lord, have mercy".

Come on... I know that nobody likes the Ruthenian translation, including me, but the poster asked a serious question and this is a rather flip answer. They have much more in common than is different, although the differences are significant. I tried to do a search online, and the only thing I could find from a Ukrainian source is this. [nativityukr.org] I'm not sure if this is the actual current translation used in Ukrainian parishes, however. It actually seems a lot like the previous Ruthenian translation, with a few differences. I'm not familiar enough with the Ukrainian translation to offer a solid comparison. On the occasions that I've attended a Ukrainian church, I haven't been so struck by the differences that I would say "night and day". I have thought "this is nice, I wish we said it this way instead".

Agreed - I too wish I could offer more educated commentary, but babochka sums it up well.

I have a cherished copy of the UGCC's Anthology (to which I refer often), and have been to many Ukrainian DLs, never feeling out of place or disoriented as a Ruthenian. In fact, the instances of overlap in our chant traditions are rather comforting and remind us of the common elements of our heritage.

Without the benefit of the level of scholarship required to make a well-supported comparison, I would say that the UGCC translation (i) is different in terms of the style of language used and (ii) lacks the "ever popular" inclusive language used in the RDL. They still chant of myrrh-bearing women and a paralytic man. smile

As an example, I was recently reviewing the Typical Psalms.

UGCC: Bless the Lord, O my soul, and let all that is within me bless His holy name.

RDL: Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all my being bless His holy name.

Different, yes. Substantively / theologically different? I couldn't say, but I wouldn't think so.

What is more perplexing to me is that two Eastern Catholic Churches of similar Slavic heritage could not simply collaborate and agree on a universal translation in English.

But alas, that ship has long sailed ...

Last edited by Curious Joe; 07/16/12 05:19 PM.
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by babochka
... They have much more in common than is different, although the differences are significant. I tried to do a search online, and the only thing I could find from a Ukrainian source is this. [nativityukr.org] I'm not sure if this is the actual current translation used in Ukrainian parishes, however. It actually seems a lot like the previous Ruthenian translation, with a few differences...
Yes those differences, even seemingly small -- like homoiousios vs. homoousios of the 4th c. -- can be so significant. This is not a complete text in that it does not have the preparation rites and deacon parts and has some other abridgements. Of the portions most criticized in the RDL on this forum, this translation by the Ukrainian church should, by contrast, get very high approval. It also makes some needed improvements relative to the 1964/65 BCC liturgicon with which it has a lot in common, as does the RDL. But this Ukrainian version makes the right moves unlike the RDL which I see as a setback.

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 5
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 5
To this new Byzantine Catholic, but a long-time student of the Eastern Church, one of the most maddening experiences involving any of the Orthodox or Eastern Catholic groups is the plethora of translations of the liturgy and office hymns into English. Too many otherwise gifted clerics have decided that they know better how to translate the Greek and/or Slavonic texts and so impose them on their congregations or "sell" them to their eparchies. They mean well, but the result is that memorizing hymn and liturgy texts or teaching them for use outside the home parish is pointless. The same writ large confronts those moving from Ukrainian to Ruthenian or Greek to OCA. And yes, some of the translations are not that good, accurate, or beautiful- let's be frank. One of the complaints against liberalizing Protestant groups is that you never can tell what the worship will be like from one place to another. Hmmmm.... Makes me kinda appreciate Church Slavonic all the more!

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
Come on... I know that nobody likes the Ruthenian translation, including me, but the poster asked a serious question and this is a rather flip answer. They have much more in common than is different, although the differences are significant.


It is an honest answer, although admittedly exaggerated a bit. There are some intentions in the Ektenies that are similar, but that is about the extent of the exact similarities. The question was not about "liking" anything, which is completely subjective. I am only referring to the English text, which is a different translation entirely. When the translation is different, even over a few words, it is different especially if you are trying to sing it. Those few words can make all the difference in phrasing when singing the text. And no, the text you linked to is not the UGCC Synodal English text.

Quote
Can you please expand? Not living in the US, I have no idea what the differences are, and find it distressing that a sister church in the Byzantine family could differ so radically...


As has already been mentioned consistency in translations has not been a thing of great importance amongst Eastern Christians. Rather than spending pages and pages of specific commentary on this thread, I would recommend you take the red Synodal English-Ukrainian Liturgikon and going through comparing the text to the RDL.

Quote
Without the benefit of the level of scholarship required to make a well-supported comparison, I would say that the UGCC translation (i) is different in terms of the style of language used and (ii) lacks the "ever popular" inclusive language used in the RDL. They still chant of myrrh-bearing women and a paralytic man.

And your point is that they are different translations? That was mine as well.


Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
UGCC: Bless the Lord, O my soul, and let all that is within me bless His holy name.
RDL: Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all my being bless His holy name.

It's a bit more than that. The RDL only allows the first verse of Psalm 102 to be taken. The following is Psalm 102 as taken in the typical UGCC pew book:
Bless the Lord, O my soul,* Blessed are You, O Lord.
Bless the Lord, O my soul,* and let all that is within me bless His holy Name.
Bless the Lord, O my soul,* and forget not all His benefits:
He forgives all of your iniquities,* He heals all your diseases;
He redeems your life from corruption,* He crowns you with mercy and compassion.
Compassionate and merciful is the Lord,* long-suffering and abounding in great mercy.
Bless the Lord, O my soul,* and all that is within me bless his holy Name.* Blessed are You, O Lord.

As I said I don't really wish to go blow-by-blow on every phrase of text, but it can be seen already from the First Antiphon that the UGCC Synodal text is very different from the RDL.

Quote
What is more perplexing to me is that two Eastern Catholic Churches of similar Slavic heritage could not simply collaborate and agree on a universal translation in English.

After 2006 it seems even farther away.

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 379
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by Diak
As I said I don't really wish to go blow-by-blow on every phrase of text, but it can be seen already from the First Antiphon that the UGCC Synodal text is very different from the RDL.

Yes, but just in the example given, it is clear that the two texts have much more in common than just "Lord, have mercy", which was your original response to the question.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
I disagree, especially when trying to sing them. Even small differences can be vexing when trying to match texts to melodies. So taking one line of one translation is like taking seven lines of a different translation? I don't think so. Actually, I am starting to think my original observation not so much of an exaggeration.

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 379
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by Diak
I disagree, especially when trying to sing them. Even small differences can be vexing when trying to match texts to melodies. So taking one line of one translation is like taking seven lines of a different translation? I don't think so. Actually, I am starting to think my original observation not so much of an exaggeration.

Interesting. The more I hear your explanation, the more I see your point. I took the original question to be simply about the wording and I still think that the wording is what he was asking about, but there is much more to it than simply the words used in the translation.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Exactly. "Singeability" relative to a certain chant tradition (Kyivan and Galician in the UGCC) also has to play into the equation in any translation work. That itself can cause some shifting of phrases, changing words or word order somewhat, etc.

I'm a deacon who likes to take as little as possible from the pew book, and those little differences in translation drive you crazy when you trying to put one specific version to memory to serve the Liturgy.

That is also why the "same translation" business for all English-speaking Greek Catholics is a fable. You can't expect a translation set for Byzantine-Arab chant like the Melkites to work for Prostopinje, etc. Even the "Carpathian Chant" settings for certain parts in the Anthology are not exactly like the MCI music. But those certainly aren't the only concerns regarding changes of text like "inclusive language", additional abbreviations, etc.

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 41
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
I'm surprised at this - can you expand please Sielos?

I'm surprised because in Australia the UGCC uses the revised Divine Liturgy in the same translation as the Ruthenians so far as I understand it.
This is not surprising. Father Petras has written that all the Byzantine / Greek Catholic Churches have plans to adopt the rubrics of the Revised Divine Liturgy. It looks like the UGCC in Australia went whole hog.

I have a copy of the Ukrainian Anthology. The music is OK but not fantastic. But it certainly is better than the mandated RDL music. Odd, since the same individual was hired to do both.

I wish Metropolitan William would praise the good intentions of the RDL in a letter that bans it. But it is unlikely since he is a self-described "progressive" who talks about "making progress" with the liturgy and "bringing it into the 21st century." But don't hold your breath. They spent million$ on it and don't have money to pay for another translation andd new musicians. Even if they did do another translation and music it would take 10 years to get it done. No one will be left by then.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
This is not surprising. Father Petras has written that all the Byzantine / Greek Catholic Churches have plans to adopt the rubrics of the Revised Divine Liturgy. It looks like the UGCC in Australia went whole hog.

Where did he write this? This will be news to the hierarchy of the UGCC. Even at recent clergy conferences it has been made clear that the 1988 Synodal text is still normative, and absolutely no one from the Bishop to the Patriarch has mentioned doing away with the Synodal Liturgikon. When the Patriarch was here last fall he made it clear he wants the English text in the Anthology and Liturgikon to be normative in English, as his predecessor Patriarch Lubomyr also decreed. The RDL is not being used in any Eparchy of the UGCC as an official text.

Quote
I have a copy of the Ukrainian Anthology. The music is OK but not fantastic. But it certainly is better than the mandated RDL music. Odd, since the same individual was hired to do both.

Are you a cantor and have sung these liturgically? Used any of the older hymnals before it? I have, and the work of Frs. Peter and Roman Galadza along with the others in compiling the Anthology is a great step forward in English settings of the Liturgy for our particular tradition, which has not known a similar consistency as the Levkulic settings in the BCCA.

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,882
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,882
The book we use for the English Liturgy is "THE DIVINE WORSHIP An Anthology for Worship". Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky Inst. Ottawa 2004.

Ths is the book as far as I am aware used all over the Melbourne Eparchy.

cool

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 41
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 41
Diak,

Back when he posted here Father Petras wrote that he had presented the RDL to meetings of Greek/Byzantine Catholic bishops. He says similar things on his website. He said that is received very well and that others would be adopting it. The rubrical changes were pretty much mandated by Father Taft so it makes sense that the UGCC would eventually adopt it. Don't get me wrong. I really dislike the RDL. But I like the people at my parish. It's lost a lot of people since the RDL mandate. I'm not sure how many years it has left.

I'm not a cantor in the UGCC but visit UGCC parishes. The music could be set better. A lot of the accents are strange but if you are used to it you're not going to notice it. J. Michael Thompson did most of the work on the Anthology, although the Fathers Galazda and others helped. That was his main reason that Bishop Andrew and the Council of Hierarchs hired him to write the music for the RDL. That and and the strong recommendations by the priests at the seminary who are all close friends with him.

Jason

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Pavel - that is consistent with what Fr. Olexander also told me, namely the 1988 Synodal English translation is in use which is contained in the Anthology. That is, when English is actually used.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
It appears you are misinformed. First of all I really don't know of what "rubrical changes were pretty much mandated by Father Taft" you are referring to. Fr. Taft, while a great liturgiologist and liturgical historian, is not a bishop and has no authority to promulgate any text for a particular Church. Secondly, I have yet to see any document referencing other particular Churches are going to adopt the RDL.

Quote
A lot of the accents are strange but if you are used to it you're not going to notice it. J. Michael Thompson did most of the work on the Anthology, although the Fathers Galazda and others helped

I think you actually have it the other way around. As I understand there was a commission of five cantors - Frs. Peter and Roman Galadza, Fr. John Sianchuk, and Joseph Roll, all noted UGCC cantors, musicologists and liturgists. Professor Thompson was the fifth and essentially acted as adjudicator when there was some disagreement between the other four and was not the primary person setting the melodies or doing the editing. Fr. Peter Galadza was the chief editor.


Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 252
bkovacs Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 252
A couple of other questions. The RDL uses the NAB for the Bible translation. Does the UGCC use the RSVCE or NAB?. Also is the "Divine Liturgy An Anthology of Worship" a good book to get if you go to a UGCC in the US. It is rather expensive. The only copies of the Divine Liturgies I have are from the Jordanville prayer book and the Holy Transfiguration prayer book.

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Originally Posted by Jason D
I wish Metropolitan William would praise the good intentions of the RDL in a letter that bans it. But it is unlikely since he is a self-described "progressive" who talks about "making progress" with the liturgy and "bringing it into the 21st century."

Could you kindly substantiate this with direct quotes from His Eminence, especially since this it is alleged to be a "self-description" (as progressive)?

Originally Posted by Jason D
They spent million$ on it and don't have money to pay for another translation andd new musicians.

million$? how'd you arrive at that figure?

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 41
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 41
Ummmm... have you ever had a conversation with Bishop William? If not, ask anyone who has. He doesn't hide it.

As to the $$, do the math. 10 years in the making. 2 or 3 week long meetings a year with about 8 or 9 people (food, flights, hotels). Then add the cost of the music (they paid by the note) and the printing and videos.

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978
Thanks Curious...my thoughts exactly.


Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
I'm confused. Is the term "Revised DL" used in two senses? One, for rubrics that differ from the "full" DL for want of a better word (i.e., having a reduced number of antiphons of shorter length, omitting the litany of the catechumens etc.) and one for a particular English translation used in the US. The Ukrainian priest who told me that we use the "revised divine liturgy" in Australia celebrates in Ukrainian and told me the Sluzhebnik for the revised DL is the same but you leave bits out.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
A couple of other questions. The RDL uses the NAB for the Bible translation. Does the UGCC use the RSVCE or NAB?. Also is the "Divine Liturgy An Anthology of Worship" a good book to get if you go to a UGCC in the US. It is rather expensive. The only copies of the Divine Liturgies I have are from the Jordanville prayer book and the Holy Transfiguration prayer book.


The Gospel excerpts in the Anthology for the Resurrectional Gospels at Sunday Matins are RSV. As far as a liturgical lectionary goes in English, it is up to the priest to use a standard lectionary for the Gospel and Apostol. The only "standard" translations are the Rome Slavonic, the Rome Ukrainian (Patriarch +Josyp's) and the subsequent Svichado reprint of Patriarch +Josyp's. For English I've seen various things such as the NAB Ruthenian books in a few places, the Holy Cross Apostol, Bishop +Fan Noli's books for either the Apostol or Gospel or both, and RSV Gospel lectionaries such as the Antiochian book (which is the one we use) and Archbishop +Joseph Raya's books in use.

Yes, the Anthology is expensive, but not as much as some (like the Mega Horologion, etc.). You get what you pay for, and it has many other features besides just the Divine Liturgy and Propers such as the preparation for Holy Communion, Resurrectional Gospels for Matins, Little Hours, etc.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
I'm confused. Is the term "Revised DL" used in two senses? One, for rubrics that differ from the "full" DL for want of a better word (i.e., having a reduced number of antiphons of shorter length, omitting the litany of the catechumens etc.) and one for a particular English translation used in the US. The Ukrainian priest who told me that we use the "revised divine liturgy" in Australia celebrates in Ukrainian and told me the Sluzhebnik for the revised DL is the same but you leave bits out.


Yes, there can be some confusion. The RDL as spoken of here is the new 2006 English translation in use in the BCCA, and currently mandated by those hierarchs as the only acceptable English translation in that particular Church according to the promulgation letters.

What you are referring to are really "pastoral provisions" to omit some material from the Sluzhebnik such as the litany for the catechumens when there are no catechumens, etc.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Originally Posted by Diak
Quote
I'm confused. Is the term "Revised DL" used in two senses? One, for rubrics that differ from the "full" DL for want of a better word (i.e., having a reduced number of antiphons of shorter length, omitting the litany of the catechumens etc.) and one for a particular English translation used in the US. The Ukrainian priest who told me that we use the "revised divine liturgy" in Australia celebrates in Ukrainian and told me the Sluzhebnik for the revised DL is the same but you leave bits out.


Yes, there can be some confusion. The RDL as spoken of here is the new 2006 English translation in use in the BCCA, and currently mandated by those hierarchs as the only acceptable English translation in that particular Church according to the promulgation letters.

What you are referring to are really "pastoral provisions" to omit some material from the Sluzhebnik such as the litany for the catechumens when there are no catechumens, etc.


Thanks Fr Deacon. So English translations of the UGCC Sluzhebnik as well as Ukrainian ones also contain the Liturgies in full, but the Ruthenian RDL one not only doesn't but is in a controversial translation?

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
D
DMD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Just me, but speaking as an Orthodox, I find this odd to say the least. If you attended an ACROD parish one Sunday, an OCA the next and a UOC the third, you would note slightly different translations, but the Lituries of each would, for all intents and purposes, be the same. (Maybe a different third antiphon or the number of Alliluia repetitions or the number of petitions might differ - but those are little things.....)


Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 384
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 384
Likes: 1
DMD, I would be surprised if what you say is entirely accurate - at least based on what I have observed here in Britain, and from the reports of an Orthodox priest friend of mine in North America who has served as a supply priest for a number of jurisdictions (he himself is OCA). Indeed, the new 2nd edition of the Liturgy for the Greeks, put together by Fr Ephrem Lash, includes this comment:

'Although in current Greek parochial practice everything between the Gospel and the Cherubic hymn is normally omitted...'

Now, I found this incredible. And it represents just one sentence among other sentences of corrective intent.

I cringe when I think of the ways in which our Ukrainian sluzhebnik may have deviated from Orthodox usage, but this just confirmed to me that, in fact, probably all jurisdictions have additions and omissions that are less than ideal.

edited in order to emphasise the enormity of the comment!

Last edited by Slavophile; 07/18/12 03:25 PM.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
Thanks Fr Deacon. So English translations of the UGCC Sluzhebnik as well as Ukrainian ones also contain the Liturgies in full, but the Ruthenian RDL one not only doesn't but is in a controversial translation?

The 1988 UGCC Synodal Liturgikon is essentially the Ukrainian and English translation of the "official" Rome Slavonic sluzhebnik of the 1950s, and contains all of the material to serve the Divine Liturgy in accordance with the Ordo published in Rome.

As pertains to your question regarding the RDL being a "controversial translation", you can review the posts on this forum for the last six to seven years and judge yourself and also read all of the comparisons between the RDL and its predecessor in the BCCA (give yourself lots of time, as there are many). Not having a dog in that fight, I'll pass in the interest of time.

Quote
in fact, probably all jurisdictions have additions and omissions that are less than ideal.

That is definitely true. Read some of the criticisms of the Old Ritualists regarding the Nikonian reforms.

Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 252
bkovacs Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 252
So in conclusion. If I wanted to pick up a copy of the Divine Liturgy for my own personal study, which included Chrysostom and Basil which would you get. Is the Antiochian Service Book any good. It is fairly inexpensive and has both Liturgies. Byzantine Daily Worship or The Divine Liturgy an Anthology for Worship, both costly. Any suggestions?. Which do you like to use?.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,727
Likes: 23
John
Member
Offline
John
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,727
Likes: 23
Originally Posted by bkovacs
So in conclusion. If I wanted to pick up a copy of the Divine Liturgy for my own personal study, which included Chrysostom and Basil which would you get. Is the Antiochian Service Book any good. It is fairly inexpensive and has both Liturgies. Byzantine Daily Worship or The Divine Liturgy an Anthology for Worship, both costly. Any suggestions?. Which do you like to use?.
I recommend: Draft Study Texts of the Ruthenian Divine Liturgies (Chrysostom and Basil). It has plenty of footnotes, and you can print your own copies or contact me for a paper copy. I highly recommend them! biggrin

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
The Anthology [Ukrainian Greek Catholic] is an absolute masterpiece. We recommend it highly!

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,441
Likes: 5
J
Job Offline
Cantor
Member
Offline
Cantor
Member
J
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,441
Likes: 5
Quote
the new 2nd edition of the Liturgy for the Greeks, put together by Fr Ephrem Lash, includes this comment:

'Although in current Greek parochial practice everything between the Gospel and the Cherubic hymn is normally omitted...'


Unfortunately, this is exactly the type of thing that kills me...and Killed the DL for the Ruthenian BCC in America...I remember speaking with a several priests who were "in the know" while the RDL was being formulated...I saw it shortly after it came out...I had attended a funeral and had a chance to flip thru the actual book...I don't remember the specifics...but I brought up some of the issues with the priest who was part of the working committee...he would always refer to things like this...essentially since the Greeks do it or the Antiochians to that...it's OK for us to do it...so somebodys "mistranslation" or "revision" even if it's not widely adheared to is brushed off as its ok since someone else who is in the Orthodox Church says its ok...I envision some day, God willing, the RDL goes away...100 years later some scholars pick up a copy and say...see that's what we should be doing...that's how they did it...missing the history that goes along with it...


Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Well, I know one change in the Divine Liturgy is in the antiphon. Now instead of singing "Through the prayers of the Mother of God" it's "Through the prayers of Theotokos" so the wordings seemed to have changed in that sentence. Although both do mean the same thing, Theotokos does sound more in line with Eastern tradition through the translation. Mother of God is more Western than anything else.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
Actually, the Greek text of the Liturgy uses the terms Theotokos and Mother of God together, sometimes within the same hymn, so it is important to differentiate when each is used in order to have an accurate translation. And Theotokos (or Bogorodice) is an example of a word best left untranslated, since all English equivalents are either awkward or inaccurate.

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
C
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
Originally Posted by Pavloosh
The Anthology [Ukrainian Greek Catholic] is an absolute masterpiece. We recommend it highly!


I wish people here would think this way.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 392
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 392
Likes: 1
Does anyone know where the Anthology can be purchased? Thank you.

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG
Originally Posted by Pavloosh
The Anthology [Ukrainian Greek Catholic] is an absolute masterpiece. We recommend it highly!


I wish people here would think this way.

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
C
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
Originally Posted by Anthony
Does anyone know where the Anthology can be purchased? Thank you.


The ones in our pews are in a brand new, never been used condition whistle

On a serious note, you can order them here: http://www.sheptytskyinstitute.ca/?page_id=60

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 384
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 384
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by ConstantineTG
Originally Posted by Pavloosh
The Anthology [Ukrainian Greek Catholic] is an absolute masterpiece. We recommend it highly!


I wish people here would think this way.


Sorry, but what do you mean by that, ConstantineTG?

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
C
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
Originally Posted by Slavophile
[quote=ConstantineTG]
Sorry, but what do you mean by that, ConstantineTG?


Sorry, by "here" I do not mean ByzCath.

People in parishes do not want to use the Anthology.

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 132
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 132
It is used at the Ukrainian mission Divine Liturgies in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The CD is awe inspiring.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
People in parishes do not want to use the Anthology.
Is it "parish", or "parishes"? While I've not been to New West. in a while, when recently travelling in Winnipeg, Edmonton and Saskatoon it was used in parishes in all of those places. Learn it and start singing it. Get some people together and start singing it. Then you can have a Divine Liturgy using it.

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Quote
Does anyone know where the Anthology can be purchased? Thank you.
You can also purchase from Byzantine Church Supplies in Philadelphia, http://www.ukrcathedral.com/byzsup/books.html, the Sisters of St. Basil at http://www.stbasils.com/Store.html or Basilian Press in Toronto.

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
C
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
Originally Posted by Diak
Quote
People in parishes do not want to use the Anthology.
Is it "parish", or "parishes"? While I've not been to New West. in a while, when recently travelling in Winnipeg, Edmonton and Saskatoon it was used in parishes in all of those places. Learn it and start singing it. Get some people together and start singing it. Then you can have a Divine Liturgy using it.


D'oh! Again, why I shouldn't be posting during work :P

I mean people in "our" parishes.

We've tried implementing it and people are resistant to it. And we've already had heated arguments over it.

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Originally Posted by Diak
Quote
Does anyone know where the Anthology can be purchased? Thank you.
You can also purchase from Byzantine Church Supplies in Philadelphia, http://www.ukrcathedral.com/byzsup/books.html, the Sisters of St. Basil at http://www.stbasils.com/Store.html or Basilian Press in Toronto.

Well, you also have St. Josaphat Cathedral here in Parma, OH. They publish their own DL books, too, iirc. Haven't visited the book shop in the Astrodome for a while, but I'm sure they still sell the Anthology as well.

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Oh, found out that these guys actually take online orders for the Anthology, seems pretty good to find that someone actually has it sold this way:

http://www.easterngiftshop.com/byza...anthology-for-worship---UKAnthology.html

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 326
Originally Posted by 8IronBob
Oh, found out that these guys actually take online orders for the Anthology, seems pretty good to find that someone actually has it sold this way:

http://www.easterngiftshop.com/byza...anthology-for-worship---UKAnthology.html

They are charging nearly $40 more than the $60 list price.

It can be ordered for the $60 price from the Sisters of St. Basil: Sisters of St. Basil - Store [stbasils.com]


Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
"these guys"? Talk about disrespect!

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
We've been using the Anthology for several years at St. Vladimir Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in Scranton Pennsylvania and we love it.

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Originally Posted by Pavloosh
"these guys"? Talk about disrespect!

Hehe, yeah, sorry about that, just a quick habit to point out someplace that sells what the poster in question was looking for. But yeah, I should have realized the Sisters of St. Basil took online orders as well as orders by mail. Didn't catch that originally. However, they also had the DL book that was published through St. Josaphat there as well (which I assume is also the book used at the Cathedral, alongside the Anthology).

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  Administrator 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2023). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5