www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Vote: Abbreviated or Longer Liturgy?

What a shock to go to a Greek Orthodox church and find the "revised" liturgy! This was 20 or more years ago. They shortened the Trisagion to singing two times, then the doxology, and the conclusion. Father could not explain why it was first sung only twice.

Apart from highly involved baroque settings (like Bortniansky # 7) the Cherubic Hymn is too short to cover the action, whether there is a deacon or not. But all is not lost; there are several possible ways to deal with the problem.
1) popular but not overly intelligent - drag the singing!
2) associated with one - repeat endlessly.
2) chant the Cherubic Hymn in more than one language. This can make you look generous while in fact making life easier on priest, deacon and chanters. Great PR, and it's fun
4) radical solution - use the Cherubic Hymn for an antiphon and restore the psalm which it displaced long ago. I've never heard of this being done, but it's conceivable. Details in Father Robert Taft' volume on the Great Entrance.
Incognitus

Incognitus,

I thought this was common knowledge, but perhaps I need to clarify. As some have pointed out, Bishop Emil (Mihalik) promulgated the Ordo Celebrationis in 1970 for use in the Eparchy of Parma (and by extension the Eparchy of Van Nuys, which was created from territory of the Eparchy of Parma.) However, Bishop Emil's letter of promulgation has some "nuances" that differ from the Ordo Celebrationis. The Divine Liturgy as celebrated in the Eparchy of Van Nuys follows the order as outlined by Bishop Emil with the exception that presbyteral prayers and the anaphora are chanted aloud. So our celebration of the Liturgy is not abbreviated when compared to Bishop Emil's promulgation.

My thanks to Father Deacon for clarifying the matter - now that he has reminded me I do remember Bishop Emil Mihalik's letter. However, it seems to my understanding that while the diocesan bishop might be able to permit certain abbreviations, as Father Deacon has mentioned, the full text remains the normative text and we retain the right to use it. At the very least, the faithful retain the right to be made aware of that full text and not dismissed with the affirmation that certain elements of the Liturgy have been abolished.
Incognitus

In re-reading Bishop Emil's promulgation, I did find something quite interesting. The "nuances" in the promulgation seems to assume the celebration of the Divine Liturgy without the ministry of the deacon. (eg., at the Minor Entrance, the priest carries the Book of the Gospels in procession and intones, "Wisdom! Be attentive!) Perhaps this accounts for the differences from the Ordo Celebrationis?

Since there were other eparchies and churches sui iuris with the same situation regarding deacons that did not ask for nor prmulgate the variances instituted by Bishop Mikalik in his April, 1970 promulgation letter, I don't think the question of lack of deacons was that signficant in his request for variances.

Deacons (or the lack thereof) are not mentioned even once in the letter as I recall, and really the only thing indirectly perhaps pertaining to them are a few references of litanies which he allows to be shortened or omitted. The majority of the instructions deal only with the priest.

Some of them just don't make sense, for example the variance for the priest not having to say the preparatory prayers in front of the iconostas, as is the practice in every other Byzantine church, Catholic or Orthodox.

The abbreviation of the antiphons I think was done perhaps to be consistent with the 1965 Inter-eparchial pew books pretty much in general use at that time, which contained the abbreviated order of the antiphons. The omission of the prayers of the antiphons by the priest are also likely in response to the abbreviation of the antiphons, as he would have time to say them if the antiphons were taken in entirety, and even with the antiphons taken entirely he could still say the prayers of the antiphons and could still omit the little litanies. His directing the Small Entrance to begin at the Hymn of Justianian is also due to the abbreviated antiphons, as there is not time only singing one verse of the antiphon.

At that time it seems there was a concerted pastoral effort to shorten the Liturgy and make celebrations consistent with the abbreviated order in the 1965 Intereparchial pew books. Considering what was happening to the Roman liturgy during the same time frame (1965-1970) and the tendency of the American Byzantine hierarchy to "fit in", I think this is also part of the equation.

I realize that some of those who want a longer Liturgy will completely disagree with the question I will ask next and insist that the entire Liturgy should always be served. Short of that ideal, what are the things most people here would like to see restored?

Full and complete 1st and 2nd Antiphons?

The Little Litany?

The Beatitudes?

The Angel of Peace Litany?

The Litany for the Catchumens? (perhaps in conjuction with an actual catechumenate group)?

Or other thoughts? I'm sure I missed some.

Fr Deacon John wrote:

Is the text online anywhere? It might be of great historical interest to have it posted somewhere.

Dave, if you have the newer (1996) English Ordo Celebrationis by Fr. Serge Keleher and Jack Figel (Eastern Christian Publications), it is included as an appendix.

Thanks, Diak, for the tip. I only have an earlier edition published in 1958. I hear the later edition is more friendly for those who do not know Slavonic very well. This one has a whole lot of Slavonic in it.

I just came across the Ordo online. It's a recent addition to the site so it may not be all done:

http://www.patronagechurch.com/Ordo-English-1955/index%20English%20-%20Ordo.htm

And the Liturgikon is being done as well.

http://www.patronagechurch.com/Liturgikon%20E&S/The%20Liturgikon.htm

More can be found at this index page:

http://www.patronagechurch.com/HTML/prayers__liturgy.htm

Dave,

Thanks for those links. Great site.

Many years,

Neil

Having looked at Bishop Emil Mihalik's letter, I notice that the abbreviations are authorized (need not be taken) but not mandated (which would read "may not be taken" or "are not to be taken" or similar words). Hence, with apologies to Father Deacon, they are still abbreviations.
Just as an exercise - and anybody with a stopwatch can do this - try timing how long it takes to sing a small ektene, or the litany before the Lord's Prayer - and then ask yourself what you must do that is so overwhelmingly important as to necessitate dropping those elements from the Divine Liturgy.
Incognitus

In light of incognitus' observation, I will "nuance" my earlier statement. The Divine Liturgy as celebrated in our parish is a more complete Liturgy than the abbreviations authorized by Bishop Emil.

This actually brings up another question. Did not Bishop Emil's promulgation authorizing the deviation from the Ordo just reflect the celebration of the Divine Liturgy in the eparchy of Parma?