www.byzcath.org
Posted By: ConstantineTG Why we need English - 09/20/12 10:27 PM
http://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2012/09/18/why-americans-need-an-all-english-liturgy/

Applies to Eastern Catholics too, as well as those in Canada
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 09/21/12 01:17 AM
Well, believe it or not, I ran into something like this not too long ago at a Divine Liturgy I was at. The priest and deacon were praying in English, but the choir threw everyone off, and responded in Slavonic throughout much of everything, except for the Nicene Creed, which was in English, thankfully.

However, I agree about this being an issue in both Orthodox and Eastern Catholic parishes. There are still parishes set up in the right way, though, especially in the UGCC parishes (mainly St. Josaphat Cathedral) where you either have a full English liturgy, or have a full native language liturgy throughout...I don't encounter any bilingual liturgies at St. Josaphat. However, at St. Vladimir UOC a few blocks down, they do have bilingual liturgies from time to time to compress everything into one liturgy.
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 09/21/12 01:39 AM
I don't see why English and the traditional languages cannot be used interchangeably. It really isn't that hard.
Posted By: Lester S Re: Why we need English - 09/21/12 04:29 AM
Originally Posted by StuartK
I don't see why English and the traditional languages cannot be used interchangeably. It really isn't that hard.


This.
Posted By: Booth Re: Why we need English - 09/21/12 01:38 PM
Originally Posted by StuartK
I don't see why English and the traditional languages cannot be used interchangeably. It really isn't that hard.


I agree. Several years ago, during a visit to a Maronite parish, they had five languages during their Qurbono - the primary texts in English and Arabic, the Words of Institution in Aramaic, Ave Maria in Latin, and the Kyrie in Greek.

It was very natural, and didn't seem like they were trying to squeeze in languages for their own sake. One sensed the history and universality of the Church. And, nobody's head exploded. Indeed, they seem to have more non-Lebanese parishioners than my UGCC church has non-Slavs, and we offer a fully English DL.

(Whether or not the use of Latin and Greek in the Maronite Qurbono is traditionally and rubrically appropriate is totally outside of my bailiwick.)

Five languages is probably a bit much for most parishes and traditions, but it's an interesting example.

Seems to me - a nobody in upstate NY, mind you - that there is an argument for the limited use of some of the original Greek text of the Divine Liturgy. Besides being the languages of the NT, it was, after all, one of the three languages on the Cross inscription, a fact noted twice in the gospels. I think it would help conversions by underscoring the universality of the Greek rites (in conjunction with a push to remind Latins of the "Greek reality" of the Roman Empire and early Catholicism).

I'd love to be able to tell Protestants that our DL uses the language of the Bible, and then watch the smoke pour from their ears (in a good way).

Similarly for Old Church Slavonic ... once a language leaves such a footprint on a Church, it seems right and proper to retain it to some degree.

Say in some science fiction scenario the Greek-rite churches in the United States totally lost all ethnic flavor (not something I support, but for the sake of example) and became totally "Anglo-Greek Catholic." Then imagine they send missionaries and convert ... ah, let's say ... Thailand to Greek Catholicism. In such a case, I think an argument could be made for having the DL in Thai, but retaining some honorific level of Greek, and Slavonic, and English.

I write this with the spirit of a parlor discussion, not with any sort of desire to remake the liturgical status quo in a laboratory.
Posted By: Epiphanius Re: Why we need English - 09/21/12 04:09 PM
Originally Posted by 8IronBob
... The priest and deacon were praying in English, but the choir threw everyone off, and responded in Slavonic throughout much of everything ...

IronBob,

I will agree that there is a certain jarring effect when an invocation is given in one language, and the response is given in another--especially since the last part of the invocation is the cue for the response. (Of course, some people are so used to having the choir respond for them that they don't even think of the responses as "theirs" at all--they won't notice this jarring.)

Originally Posted by 8IronBob
There are still parishes set up in the right way, though, especially in the UGCC parishes (mainly St. Josaphat Cathedral) where you either have a full English liturgy, or have a full native language liturgy throughout ...

I really don't see why a liturgy has to be *all* one language. Most people have no problem hearing short segments in an unknown language, and if these segments are repeated often enough ("Hospodij, pomiluij" for example), they even become familiar. The key, I think, is to be sensitive to the needs and preferences of the congregation, so that no one feels "left out."


Peace,
Deacon Richard
Posted By: rome1453 Re: Why we need English - 09/21/12 04:38 PM
Very good article. It could apply to the UK as well.
Posted By: ConstantineTG Re: Why we need English - 09/21/12 04:56 PM
Originally Posted by StuartK
I don't see why English and the traditional languages cannot be used interchangeably. It really isn't that hard.


Not everyone is fervent in the faith like yourself. If it was just me alone I would "suck it up" too and probably learn the entire Divine Liturgy in Ukrainian. But there is a family I need to consider. I don't want my kids to grow up in a Church that they are alientated in. We live in a very secular society and I want to have the best possible environment for them to be successful at continuing to be Christians. If they are detached from their parish community in any way, it won't take much to detach them completely from Christian life.

Also, if we're happy with our thinning population of cradles, lack of immigrants, and disinterest from the local populace, well, our parishes can keep being ethnic. In our care, the very few non-Ukrainians who have went through our parish never stayed. I think I've been the only one the last two years. There were those who came after me but I don't see them anymore. If the Byzantine faith is to not only grow and flourish, but remain in North America, it needs to be expressed in the culture of the land.
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 02:19 AM
If you speak many languages, you are polyglot. If you speak two languages, you are bi-lingual. If you speak one language, you are American--or in this case, Canadian. There is absolutely nothing at all wrong about retaining both the traditional and vernacular languages side-by-side. If you find Slavonic, or Greek or Latin or Aramaic or Arabic to be "alienating", that says a lot more about you than about those languages.

There are three very good reasons for retaining the traditional liturgical languages alongside the vernacular:

1. Continuity: the ancient languages are a visible and audible reminder of where the Church was, and of the clouds of witnesses who surround us; it manifests a dimension of the universality of the Church, just as much as the vernacular does.

2. Aesthetics: the liturgy was composed in specific languages, each with their own unique cadences, grammar, syntax and poetry. There are aspects of the liturgy in its original language that you will never catch in translation, no matter how good it may be (and most are not very good). In addition, the traditional tones are best heard in the original languages for which they were composed, and while many vernacular arrangements are quite good, resetting music composed for one language into a different language always involves compromise.

3. Keeping the liturgists honest: as long as the people are at least passingly familiar with the texts in the original languages, it will be difficult for "professional liturgists" to impose their own theological hobby horses upon them through the the use of tendentious translations. It happened in the Latin Church through the ICEL's appallingly banal and error-riddled paraphrase of the Novus Ordo Missae, to say nothing of the Revised Divine Liturgy.

I might also add that I think you are selling your kids short. Most kids are fascinated by languages and rapidly pick up new ones.
Posted By: Nelson Chase Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 03:32 AM
By not using the native language of the people (in America English) the Church is being unfaithful to the Eastern Tradition, which is to have the liturgy in the vernacular.

Posted By: Lester S Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 04:13 AM
Originally Posted by Epiphanius
Originally Posted by 8IronBob
... The priest and deacon were praying in English, but the choir threw everyone off, and responded in Slavonic throughout much of everything ...

IronBob,

I will agree that there is a certain jarring effect when an invocation is given in one language, and the response is given in another--especially since the last part of the invocation is the cue for the response. (Of course, some people are so used to having the choir respond for them that they don't even think of the responses as "theirs" at all--they won't notice this jarring.)

Originally Posted by 8IronBob
There are still parishes set up in the right way, though, especially in the UGCC parishes (mainly St. Josaphat Cathedral) where you either have a full English liturgy, or have a full native language liturgy throughout ...

I really don't see why a liturgy has to be *all* one language. Most people have no problem hearing short segments in an unknown language, and if these segments are repeated often enough ("Hospodij, pomiluij" for example), they even become familiar. The key, I think, is to be sensitive to the needs and preferences of the congregation, so that no one feels "left out."


Peace,
Deacon Richard


Deacon Richard, I'm with you, on those points. I like hearing the Ukrainian/Slavonic, to be honest. The way it's done, at the local church, is the languages bounce off each other. It helps ease the transition. Being the only Asian there, I'm stepping into their world; and I'll respect it, and learn to assimilate in the process. For some ethnic parishes, it may be the only way to keep the culture, amid the divergence from the familial, to the societal.
Posted By: Lester S Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 04:21 AM
Originally Posted by Nelson Chase
By not using the native language of the people (in America English) the Church is being unfaithful to the Eastern Tradition, which is to have the liturgy in the vernacular.



Brother Nelson, I'd be more apt to say, the vernacular of the congregation. Although the majority of the people at the church I go to are Ukrainian, 80-90% of liturgy is in English.
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 12:42 PM
Originally Posted by Lester S
Originally Posted by Nelson Chase
By not using the native language of the people (in America English) the Church is being unfaithful to the Eastern Tradition, which is to have the liturgy in the vernacular.



Brother Nelson, I'd be more apt to say, the vernacular of the congregation. Although the majority of the people at the church I go to are Ukrainian, 80-90% of liturgy is in English.


True, but even so, the Ukrainian Cathedral here (St. Josaphat) still offers two full Ukrainian Liturgies, and two English Liturgies (one being the Saturday Vigil) every weekend. Also, there's a Croatian Byzantine Church (St. Nicholas) that usually offers Croatian (probably Slavonic) liturgies every other Sunday, which is the other parish that the priest from Holy Spirit Parish, is stationed at.
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 01:53 PM
Quote
By not using the native language of the people (in America English) the Church is being unfaithful to the Eastern Tradition, which is to have the liturgy in the vernacular.

This is only partly true. As Father Taft wrote in his book Through Their Own Eyes: Liturgy as the Byzantines Saw It , just how much of the Liturgy the Greeks of Constantinople actually understood is open to question. Much of the liturgical text was written in patristic Greek, the readings were delivered in Koine, and the homilists frequently affected an antiquarian Attic Greek--none of which were in daily use (hence not vernacular). And, while Slavonic (Old Bulgarian) may have been broadly intelligible over the breadth of the Slavic lands, the division of Slavonic into Eastern, Western, and Southern dialects, which eventually became the modern Slavic languages, meant that, by the sixteenth century, very little Slavonic would have been understandable to the typical Russian mouzhik. Indeed, Slavonic itself continued to evolve over time (being the language of diplomacy within the Byzantine commonwealth), so that early Slavonic would not be easily understood by someone who knew only late Slavonic. Today, in Greece and Russia, the liturgical language is not easily comprehended by the the average Greek or Russian.

In any case, the strict vernacularists are presenting a false dichotomy: the issue isn't traditional languages OR the vernacular: the solution is traditional languages AND the vernacular, both coexisting, both familiar, both loved and appreciated.

Anyone who says otherwise, on either side, is merely being provincial.
Posted By: Lester S Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 02:34 PM
Originally Posted by 8IronBob
Originally Posted by Lester S
Originally Posted by Nelson Chase
By not using the native language of the people (in America English) the Church is being unfaithful to the Eastern Tradition, which is to have the liturgy in the vernacular.



Brother Nelson, I'd be more apt to say, the vernacular of the congregation. Although the majority of the people at the church I go to are Ukrainian, 80-90% of liturgy is in English.


True, but even so, the Ukrainian Cathedral here (St. Josaphat) still offers two full Ukrainian Liturgies, and two English Liturgies (one being the Saturday Vigil) every weekend. Also, there's a Croatian Byzantine Church (St. Nicholas) that usually offers Croatian (probably Slavonic) liturgies every other Sunday, which is the other parish that the priest from Holy Spirit Parish, is stationed at.


Look at the bright side: at least you won't have to fork over 250-500 bucks for a Rosetta Stone style language learning experience (which I'm a fan of, but too broke to buy one :p)
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 02:46 PM
Originally Posted by Lester S


Look at the bright side: at least you won't have to fork over 250-500 bucks for a Rosetta Stone style language learning experience (which I'm a fan of, but too broke to buy one :p)


Very true, very true... I've gotten a pretty good hand on the Old Church Slavonic language from a Divine Liturgy book from 20 years ago (at least it's transliterated/Ruthenian, not Cyrillicized like in the Ukrainian Liturgy). I think I'd have to learn Cyrillic to make heads or tails of the Ukrainian Liturgy for sure. That's probably why I can easily pick up on the Ruthenian Slavonic Liturgy better.

Just sad that Ukrainian is not one of Rosetta Stone's languages of choice. The only one close to it is Russian, and there's an apples to oranges difference between the two languages. Although I think Russian is the closest Slavic language to the ancient Slavonic language that there is (at least the Russian Orthodox use Slavonic in their liturgies).
Posted By: Lawrence Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 09:32 PM

In the language of the people, quite frankly, would mean (in alot of parishes) two liturgies on Sunday.
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 09/22/12 10:11 PM
Originally Posted by Lawrence

In the language of the people, quite frankly, would mean (in alot of parishes) two liturgies on Sunday.


Erm, well...right, I guess you have a point. Although back when the economy and the church were more robust, that was the case. You'd have one Mass or Divine Liturgy of a Catholic Church (depending on whether it's a Latin Rite or Eastern Rite) in English, then you'd have another in that nationality's language. This was when you had more immigrants that didn't know the English language, and they only knew how to worship in the tongue in which they had from the old world before they came here.

There was a Latin Rite Church that actually had a German Mass on the first Sunday of every month, which was good, since my mother was the first from her family born in this country, and her mother, father, and sister all came from Dusseldorf, even though they did pick up well on the English language, they still opted to worship like it was the old days all over again.
Posted By: Soson Kyrie Re: Why we need English - 09/23/12 04:47 PM
Originally Posted by StuartK
Quote
By not using the native language of the people (in America English) the Church is being unfaithful to the Eastern Tradition, which is to have the liturgy in the vernacular.

This is only partly true. As Father Taft wrote in his book Through Their Own Eyes: Liturgy as the Byzantines Saw It , just how much of the Liturgy the Greeks of Constantinople actually understood is open to question. Much of the liturgical text was written in patristic Greek, the readings were delivered in Koine, and the homilists frequently affected an antiquarian Attic Greek--none of which were in daily use (hence not vernacular).

In any case, the strict vernacularists are presenting a false dichotomy: the issue isn't traditional languages OR the vernacular: the solution is traditional languages AND the vernacular, both coexisting, both familiar, both loved and appreciated.



This.

A few points to add:

In North America, we enjoy a culture where a good majority of the population speaks, as a native language, the same language and pronunciation they see on the TV. This is not always the case in other parts of the world - even in England (and yes, England, not the UK), there are plenty of people who do not talk at all like the guy on the BBC at home, and if I go to many more parts of England out of the way of officialdom I have a very difficult time understanding what people say (and my first language is English). But these same folk generally can quickly switch to the Queen's English and I have no problem understanding them. That is to say, outside of North America, no one necessarily expects the "language of the people" to be heard on TV, press, literature or in official government/corporate business.

Where I am now, in China, has this problem in spades: much of the country does not speak "Mandarin" Chinese as correctly pronounced and used as a native language, and the one that does is an elite enclave. Well over 100 million Chinese in fact do not speak the official language as a first language at all. Nevertheless, though local TV/radio programming exists, the majority of programming is in Mandarin as is all government documents. The "people" also have generally no hangup about hearing Mandarin or using Mandarin, however poorly, in commerce or interacting with government.

The same applies to the traditional languages: while it's true that the "tradition" of the Byzantine church is for vernacular languages, a standard needs to be set. For the Greek liturgy, it was fairly highfalutin' official Greek, since dialectiic variations were probably very strong in Late Antiquity. There needed to be some standard.

In fact, a number of the texts in the Menaion, Triodion and the like* are in highly poetic, sometimes even arcane Greek. This is because this is how you composed poetry back then, and because (as mentioned by Stuart/Father Robert) people found highfalutin' rhetoric (and debates using ostensibly dense and precise philosophic terms) a form of "entertainment". Moreover, the things these texts talk about are sublime and theologically precise, and IMO requires a translation that uses terms and concepts that modern humans are ignorant of, outside of graduate level theology classes.

So, the idea that people once composed Greek liturgies so that the Greek on the street could easily understand it is a myth with lots of attached modernistic assumptions. Translation is important, even pastorally necessary, but it needs to be done judiciously. I believe getting a translation of high English literary merit will be difficult, perhaps impossible, but at the very least it must be theologically precise or it's unusable.

I frankly get tired of much of the "traditional versus vernacular" debate, which is unaware of much of the points above, often debated by people who wouldn't know a Menaion or Triodion if it were put in front of them. Without a theologically accurate translation of at least decent linguistic quality, translation is useless. Most of the translations of the Divine Liturgy we have (one for almost every Orthodox/Greek Catholic jurisdiction) are decent, but the other texts are all over the map, generally of passable to poor quality.

SK, whose parish is almost 100% in English, with translations of decent to good quality.

* for those who don't know, the Menaion and Triodion are critical books of the Byzantine Liturgy
Posted By: ConstantineTG Re: Why we need English - 09/24/12 03:52 AM
Originally Posted by Lawrence

In the language of the people, quite frankly, would mean (in alot of parishes) two liturgies on Sunday.


While we should never do away with the ethnic parishes, if the non-ethnic English Liturgy is self sufficient, they should be in a separate parish.
Posted By: rome1453 Re: Why we need English - 09/24/12 09:21 AM
Ukrainian or English?

http://www.cnewa.org/default.aspx?ID=1932&pagetypeID=8&sitecode=HQ&pageno=1


12 Sep 2012 – By Barb Fraze

WINNIPEG, Manitoba (CNS) — Many Ukrainian Catholic leaders serving the faithful outside the homeland face a dilemma: Do they serve the needs of the new immigrants and elderly by using Ukrainian in liturgies, or do they minister in English to keep younger people coming to church?

Ukrainian “has revived a little with the new immigrants,” who want their native language used in church so their children will know how to speak it, said Archbishop Stefan Soroka of Philadephia. Some places, he added, place an “inordinate emphasis” on Ukrainian- language liturgies.

Yet, especially among teens and younger Americans, “even those who speak Ukrainian don’t want to go to a Ukrainian service,” he said. Parents tell priests they are tired of arguing with their children about going to a service they do not understand.

“You don’t hear them protesting — they just walk away,” he told Catholic News Service.

In large Ukrainian Catholic parishes, liturgies are offered in Ukrainian and English. Of his 67 parishes, he said, only two would not offer bilingual homilies.

But the Philadelphia Archdiocese’s situation is even a bit more complicated: Many immigrants are from Eastern Ukraine, and their language is Russian, so priests minister to them in their native language. This upsets Ukrainian nationalists, Archbishop Soroka said, “but we can’t hold back evangelization because of Ukrainian nationalists.”

“If we don’t reach out to them,” Russian-speaking Ukrainians will go to Orthodox or evangelical churches, he said.

In Chicago, which has a large ethnic Ukrainian population, some fourth-generation Ukrainians still speak their homeland’s language, and many young people are forced to learn it, said Bishop Richard Seminack.

Yet after about age 15, “you become adapted to the American culture” and lose the language, he said. If liturgies are offered only in Ukrainian, young people “leave the church or go to the Roman Catholic Church or no church at all.”

Bishop Seminack, whose diocese includes the whole Western United States and extends into Hawaii, said in other Midwestern communities and along the West Coast, parishes have adapted English into the liturgy. But in Chicago, three of the Sunday liturgies at the cathedral use only Ukrainian, and only one is celebrated in English.

In the diocese that includes Great Britain and Ireland, “We still don’t have liturgies in English ... in all our churches,” said Bishop Hlib Lonchyna.

“It’s a problem and it’s a blessing,” he said. “It’s a blessing’ because — especially in London — new immigrants feel at home in the church.

But some parish priests cannot speak English well enough to celebrate English-language liturgies, and some elderly Ukrainian Catholics “get very tense when things get celebrated in English,” he told Catholic News Service.

“Because of this mentality, we have lost a lot of people,” he added.

Bishop Peter Stasiuk of Melbourne, Australia, said language is not an issue in his diocese, which includes Australia and New Zealand. Most immigrants from Ukraine arrived after World War II, and “we have integrated into the Australian community very well,” he told Catholic News Service.

The church has been using primarily English “for quite a while” and uses Ukrainian only “where people request it and where it is necessary.”

“The church’s role is to evangelize the people, not to teach language,” he said, adding, “Our biggest problem isn’t language, it’s secularization.”

The concept of what gives the Ukrainian Catholic Church its identity is “a work in progress,” said Winnipeg Archbishop Lawrence Huculak. Liturgy, music, icons, traditions vestments all “work to attract people to the faith,” he said. But church leaders must balance those items’ importance against the faith itself, he said.

When Ukrainian Catholics prepare traditional Easter food and bring it for a blessing Holy Saturday or early Easter morning, it is “a unique combination of food, culture, tradition and prayer life,” he said. Some items from Good Friday might still be set up in the church and “it just all works together.”

“The culture has stayed alive and found new creativity,” he said. “Unfortunately, perhaps language is the most difficult (cultural aspect) to maintain.”

Archbishop Huculak noted that French-Canadian Catholics face similar language problems.

The head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk of Kiev-Halych, Ukraine, spent years working in Argentina.

“Our most vibrant parishes in Argentina are Spanish-speaking,” he said.

When Archbishop Shevchuk met with young people at a Winnipeg parish Sept. 7, he told them not to worry about not being able to speak Ukrainian.

“This is not a church of Ukrainians, it’s a church of Christ,” Archbishop Shevchuk said. “We are a global church. We are a church of the Ukrainian tradition.”
Posted By: Wheelbarrow Re: Why we need English - 09/24/12 04:25 PM
Well I do love the Ukrainian language but can be a difficult barrier. I like the mix of both. But UGCC parishes have to understand that if they are to set up missions in the west with the purpose of evangelizing the west then they need to use english. But if they are only putting up Churches to act as a sort of hospice for the homesick and cultural nostalgic, then they really need to rethink whether or not such a thing is a mistake. I do believe it would be a mistake to do that.

His Grace Bishop Hlib in Father Johns article above already made it clear that it seems to comfort those new immigrants who have just arrived from Ukraine. It's understandable that it would but if not assessed carefully it will only become a Church that preaches to the choir rather than a Church that seeks to evangelize and help Ukrainians adapt to the English/Irish Culture.

I am currently learning how to speak Russian, so I have no problem with the slavic languages. I only have a problem when I see Churches being created, not to evangelize but only to act as a hospice for the homesick as mentioned earlier.

When His Beatitude came for the Eucharistic Congress it was all in English, but all the responses were in Ukrainian and I thought that was a fantastic mix as I know most of the responses in Ukrainian anyway. But the whole language thing really has not bothered me that much at all and Fr.Serge would do the Homily in three languages, First in English, then Ukrainian and then Irish/Gaelic. Some Greek was used too so it was a fine mix.

But if the homily was just in Ukrainian? It would probably not be inviting and I would feel as if I am stepping into a culture and that I shouldn't really be there. My dad was saying ''This Church is all in Ukrainian, I like it, but its for Ukrainians not for us''. He couldn't be anymore wrong as most of you would know but I think his statement is evidence of a person who would like to attend but does not because he thinks its for Ukrainians only. If it was a mix of English and Ukrainian Greek I think many Irish would attend especially if there were more parishes set up around Ireland in the big citys and towns.

By the way the Ukrainians in Dublin are very welcoming and I thank them for all their goodness and kindness they have shown to me and my family.









Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 09/24/12 08:19 PM
Well, I have been learning Church Slavonic quite a bit, since most modern Slavic languages are based off it, in much the same way that most Western and Southern European languages are based off of Latin. However, besides Ukrainian and Russian, which are the two most direct descendants of Church Slavonic, I usually opt to learn the ones where I can read the alphabet, like Slovak, Croatian, Polish, etc... I'll try reading and writing the cyrillic script once I mastered everything else.
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 09/24/12 11:33 PM
Actually, Bulgarian is the modern Slavic language closest to Old Slavonic, which is sometimes called "Old Bulgarian".
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 09/24/12 11:36 PM
Quote
Where I am now, in China, has this problem in spades: much of the country does not speak "Mandarin" Chinese as correctly pronounced and used as a native language, and the one that does is an elite enclave.


My daughter, the linguist, says Chinese is not so much a language as a family of languages, mostly unintelligible to each other.
Posted By: ConstantineTG Re: Why we need English - 09/24/12 11:44 PM
Originally Posted by Sbdn. John

“This is not a church of Ukrainians, it’s a church of Christ,” Archbishop Shevchuk said. “We are a global church. We are a church of the Ukrainian tradition.”


I love His Beatitude even more! I'm so honored to have personally met him.
Posted By: Wheelbarrow Re: Why we need English - 09/25/12 11:55 AM
Originally Posted by ConstantineTG
Originally Posted by Sbdn. John

“This is not a church of Ukrainians, it’s a church of Christ,” Archbishop Shevchuk said. “We are a global church. We are a church of the Ukrainian tradition.”


I love His Beatitude even more! I'm so honored to have personally met him.


Nice qoute especially what St.Clement says here on the homepage of byzcath.org : Get out of the Storm of the World – After toiling the whole night Simon and his companions caught nothing. But in the name of Christ they let down the net and immediately it was full of fish. … Many have taken part with the holy apostles in their labors, and still do, especially those who inquire into the meaning of what is written in the holy Gospels. For the net is still being drawn, while Christ fills it, and calls to conversion those who, according to the Scripture phrase, are in the depths of the sea (that is to say, those who live in the surge and waves of worldly things). (St. Clement of Alexandria)

certainly no coincidence. biggrin
Posted By: Lawrence Re: Why we need English - 09/25/12 02:52 PM

In one parish I'm familiar with, a few years ago they had an English liturgy with about 20-30 people followed by a Ukrainian one with 60 or 70. Then suddenly the liturgies were combined with just one on Sunday that was typically two thirds in Ukrainian, though on somedays it was half and half, or even mostly English. Alot of people became angry because they felt Ukrainian was being phased out, but then the parish picked up a number of recent immigrants from Ukraine, and the liturgy was changed again to being about 3/4's or more in Ukrainian. Now there's a small minority angry again, only this time they feel that English is being phased out. It's in cases like this, where you really need 2 liturgies on Sunday.
Posted By: ConstantineTG Re: Why we need English - 09/25/12 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by Lawrence

In one parish I'm familiar with, a few years ago they had an English liturgy with about 20-30 people followed by a Ukrainian one with 60 or 70. Then suddenly the liturgies were combined with just one on Sunday that was typically two thirds in Ukrainian, though on somedays it was half and half, or even mostly English. Alot of people became angry because they felt Ukrainian was being phased out, but then the parish picked up a number of recent immigrants from Ukraine, and the liturgy was changed again to being about 3/4's or more in Ukrainian. Now there's a small minority angry again, only this time they feel that English is being phased out. It's in cases like this, where you really need 2 liturgies on Sunday.


Our parish switches to one bilingual Liturgy every Sunday during the Summer months. Most of the regulars in the English Liturgy head elsewhere. I think this is where our attrition rates go up, especially for new people in the parish who are non-Ukrainians.

Sometimes we don't realize it, but given our ranks are thin to begin with, losing that one person or that one family is a big deal.
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 09/25/12 09:02 PM
The fundamental problem with the UGCC in this country is the continuing waves of Ukrainian immigration. At least with the Carpatho-Rusyn, they came in one big gulp, and then they stopped coming. By the 1960s, most Rusyn families were second, third or even fourth generation American and totally assimilated.

With the Ukrainians, however, you had distinct waves of immigrants in the 1890s, the 1920s-30s, the 1940s-50s, and then after the fall of communism in the 1990s to the present. No sooner does one generation of immigrants assimilate, than another comes along , effectively resetting the clock. As the Church is one of the few (and strongest) centers of cohesion for an immigrant community, the new arrivals migrate to the Church, and naturally expect it to be "just like home". As immigrants tend to be zealous in their religious identification and observance (another form of group identification and solidarity), it's hard for the established members of a parish to resist them. What the UGCC needs is about fifty years when immigration from Ukraine just dries up. Then, finally, it will be able to shake loose from its ethnocentrism.
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 09/25/12 10:07 PM
Well, the way things are in other parts of Europe, like Greece with their debt crisis, and their riots all over, especially, I'm pretty sure you might see another surge of them coming to this country. So I'm pretty sure the Greek Orthodox will no doubt keep their native language in at least one or two Liturgies in anticipation for new immigrants from there.
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 09/25/12 11:45 PM
I seriously doubt that any Greeks will come here. The solvent and ambitious ones will probably head for Scandinavia or Latin America. But an increasing number of Greek Orthodox priests here in the States are becoming more and more vocal about the necessity of celebrating primarily in English.
Posted By: dochawk Re: Why we need English - 11/12/12 01:52 AM
Originally Posted by ConstantineTG
While we should never do away with the ethnic parishes, if the non-ethnic English Liturgy is self sufficient, they should be in a separate parish.


If we did that in my parish, there wouldn't be enough Ruthenians left to keep the original parish going . . .

hawk
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 11/13/12 02:33 AM
Originally Posted by dochawk
Originally Posted by ConstantineTG
While we should never do away with the ethnic parishes, if the non-ethnic English Liturgy is self sufficient, they should be in a separate parish.


If we did that in my parish, there wouldn't be enough Ruthenians left to keep the original parish going . . .

hawk


True dat. Although with the amount of Ukrainians that live here, and continue to come here, I'm pretty sure that these will remain ethnic parishes for a good amount of time to come, but some, especially the Ukrainian Cathedrals, will be fair to those that want to experience the DLs, even if they aren't Ukrainian, and have one or two DLs in English every weekend, too, alongside the Ukrainian DLs. However, you're right about the Ruthenian Churches, most are either bilingual, or all English at this point.
Posted By: ConstantineTG Re: Why we need English - 11/13/12 06:23 PM
The problem with Ethnic parishes is they put love of ethnicity/culture on the same level as love of God. We should realize that the parishes should be open to all, and also open to the next generation who will be more American or Canadian. Unfortunately, people don't realize this yet, even if their church buildings are half empty.
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 11/13/12 08:43 PM
Not to mention all the retranslations/revisions of those Divine Liturgies, such as the Ruthenian Byzantine, as well as the Roman Missal. In fact, I'm kind of disappointed about how St. Josaphat went about the English DL. They recite half the Liturgy, and they don't use incense, unlike the days when Bishop Moskal and Fr. Gribik were running the Cathedral. Seems like things have really changed for the more "Latinized" under Bishop Bura and Frs. Bohdan and Claudio. There's a reason why St. Josaphat's English DLs have turned into almost a ghost town.
Posted By: dochawk Re: Why we need English - 11/16/12 03:43 PM
Originally Posted by 8IronBob


However, you're right about the Ruthenian Churches, most are either bilingual, or all English at this point.


English *is* formally the liturgical language of the Sui Juris Metropolia of Pittsburgh (or whatever it is that we're called this week :))

hawk
Posted By: Nelson Chase Re: Why we need English - 11/19/12 03:28 AM
I have attended parishes that the Divine Liturgy was served only in English, mixed Greek and English, and all in Ukrainian or Old Slavonic.

Of all of them the Ruthenian Greek Catholic parish, that I have attended now for going on three plus years, has had the most young families, young adults, and has had visitors from the outside come and stay the most. I really do think this is due in part because of the services being English only. (sometimes we sing an Old Slavonic hymn)

I know for a fact it has helped my spiritual life dramatically having all the services in my native language.
Posted By: Lester S Re: Why we need English - 11/19/12 07:13 AM
I actually sat through a 17-episode series "From the Desert," featuring two Coptic monks just talking "shop." They covered a variety of topics. One of those topics was on preserving heritage, and language, which I found interesting. One of the monks is an Australian (who's also featured on the film, the Last Anchorite) who mentioned he didn't care too much about translation. But, if he did, he'd translate it on his own.

Posted By: ConstantineTG Re: Why we need English - 11/19/12 07:34 PM
Originally Posted by Nelson Chase
I have attended parishes that the Divine Liturgy was served only in English, mixed Greek and English, and all in Ukrainian or Old Slavonic.

Of all of them the Ruthenian Greek Catholic parish, that I have attended now for going on three plus years, has had the most young families, young adults, and has had visitors from the outside come and stay the most. I really do think this is due in part because of the services being English only. (sometimes we sing an Old Slavonic hymn)

I know for a fact it has helped my spiritual life dramatically having all the services in my native language.


It is in part because of English. In my parish we get some people coming over to join at different times of the year. Over the summer we switch to one bilingual Liturgy (which means it's like 70% Ukrainian since they dominate). That is when certain people leave and never to be seen again.

As His Beatitude +Sviatoslav said, the most vibrant parishes he had in Argentina were Spanish speaking parishes. It is already a tall order to get people to church on Sundays, and you expect them to adopt a whole new language and a whole new culture?
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 11/19/12 08:45 PM
I know that the Ruthenian BCC I usually attend, the priest there usually likes going bilingual sometimes, where he will have most of the DL in English, but will have a few Old Slavonic blurbs thrown in from time to time. Also, when the choir is called in, then there might be the priest praying in English, while the choir responds in Church Slavonic. So there's all sorts of scenarios there, so I get where you're going there, Nelson.
Posted By: Our Lady's slave Re: Why we need English - 11/19/12 10:04 PM
8IronBob

What on earth are you meaning in this phrase
Quote
......in English, but will have a few Old Slavonic blurbs .......
?

I really wonder if this is the best way to refer to text from the Liturgy.
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 11/19/12 10:15 PM
I meant that there are times when he will say part of the Divine Liturgy in Slavonic, and expect a Slavonic response from the Cantor and the Congregation during certain parts, like the "Holy, Holy, Holy" or the Our Father, or along those lines.
Posted By: Our Lady's slave Re: Why we need English - 11/19/12 10:25 PM
I think my understanding of blurb is very similar to

1) This

or

2) This

or of course

3) beloved by some photographers

For goodness sake - people who know nothing about the East lurk here and you refer to responses to the Liturgy in such a casual way.
Posted By: StuartK Re: Why we need English - 11/20/12 12:41 AM
What Iron Bob called a blurb is more properly the "ekphonesis", which is Greek for "blurb".






'




Posted By: ajk Re: Why we need English - 11/20/12 01:01 PM
Originally Posted by StuartK
What Iron Bob called a blurb is more properly the "ekphonesis", which is Greek for "blurb".

... or perhaps more specifically, a sound bite.
Posted By: 8IronBob Re: Why we need English - 11/20/12 08:37 PM
Heh. Okay, moving right along...

Here's an example where bilingual DLs are useful. Found this YouTube clip from the Anaphora part of a mixed English/Ukrainian Divine Liturgy from the Chicago area. Although most Ukrainian Churches I know tend to have separate Ukrainian and separate English DLs, but thought this was worth looking at.

http://youtu.be/MNwJk0hSD3s
© The Byzantine Forum