www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship The Kliros Vesper Liturgy for the Vigil of Christmas?

Some cities used to have - at an incredibly early hour on Sunday morning - what was known as the "printer's Mass", for newspaperman, so that they could go straight from the office to Church and then go home and collapse. A bit more widespread was the practice of having a Midnight Mass each Sunday in one or two Churches, for those whose schedules made Sunday morning impossible (doctors, police, et al.). It's not a case of complete inflexibility, but it is definitely a case of recognizing that there are certain parameters within which we may - and indeed should, when that is needed - be flexible.

Incognitus

It seems to me that those advocating a change to our Ruthenian liturgical inheritance (i.e., modify and not restore) have yet to offer any evidence that the fullness of the Byzantine liturgical tradition will not work in America. It further seems to me that until we embrace and live our inheritance for a generation or two, our Church will not be in a position to understand said tradition (that is to really live and breathe it), or begin to know how it could or should be modified.

Hieromonk Elias� posts on this topic are all excellent. St. George Church is one of the few parishes that has a fairly full liturgical life, complete with Vespers, Matins and the Divine Liturgy. We see much support for his position in that St. George Parish has gone from a parish that split 60 people between two Sunday Divine Liturgies to a parish that gets 20-35 for Saturday Great Vespers, 40-70 for holy day Great Vespers, a growing number for Matins, and about 140 for Sunday Divine Liturgy. I know of no other parish in greater Pittsburgh with similar trends over the past 9 years (but I would be delighted to hear examples of such). And each time I visit there I am greeted by the older parishioners with stories that St. George Parish is very much like it was 50 years ago, and that they find it very attractive.

Some comment on what has been posted so far:

The issue of obligation is not relevant to this discussion since no one has advocated the abolishment of Sunday Divine Liturgies.

Many people support the idea of multiple Divine Liturgies on the basis of accommodation (giving people more opportunity to �fulfill the obligation�). Very often, however, the exact opposite is true. Multiple Divine Liturgies divide the parish community into what can be considered smaller parishes. The loss of community then leads to a loss of people in general. I have seen examples where the merging of two Sunday Divine Liturgies into one Sunday Divine Liturgy has lead to not just a number that equates to the sum of those originally attending the two separate Liturgies, but one in which the renewed community became very spirit-filled and attracted many additional people (those who did not attend either of the two original Divine Liturgies on a regular basis). I have also seen this same occurrence when the Saturday evening Divine Liturgy was abolished. Most recently I have seen this at my mother�s parish, where a Saturday Divine Liturgy with 20 people and a Sunday Divine Liturgy with 30 people were combined for one Sunday Divine Liturgy with about 75 people (and this in a parish where the average age is over 60). The difference is in the spirit of community that was possible with more people, together with the fact that the priest didn�t have to take everything twice.

A story. A few years back while on vacation I attended a Saturday evening Mass at a small Roman Catholic parish in a small town in New England. At the end of the Mass the lady sitting next to me asked me: �Do you always come to this Mass?� My response (with a large grin and a bit of a laugh) was: �No. I belong to a parish that meets on Sunday mornings.� She laughed back and then responded: �Oh, I always come on Saturday night because I like to sleep in on Sundays. I don�t know any of those people.� My guess is that most people who attend on Saturday evenings would make a fairly easy adjustment to going on Sundays. I do have a concern for those who work on Sunday mornings, but it seems to me that dividing the community is almost never worth it. The less you ask of people, and the more you make things convenient for them, the less they participate. The opposite is also true: the higher you set the expectations the more likely they are to meet them. The point of my story is not that I enjoyed being taken for a local. The point is that the woman, who was obviously a long term parishioner, did not really know the people who went to the parish that met on Sunday mornings. What does this say about community?

I�m not sure I agree with Jeff�s descriptions here. Most people I know have described me as being either �conservative� or �traditional� in liturgy. Yet I have never advocated the status quo (to continue what we have been doing). It seems to me that most people consider the things I have been advocating for the past 25 years (Vespers, Matins, the Hours, and a full Divine Liturgy) as either �conservative� or �traditional� (I prefer the term �traditional� because it avoids the parallels in secular politics). I would hardly use the term �radical� to describe those who seek to live the fullness of our Ruthenian liturgical heritage. I suspect those who wish to continue with our �Liturgy only� liturgical life are best termed �status quo-ers�.

I�m not sure that the fact that no one requested �straight Vespers� is relevant here. I have long had books that contain �straight Vespers� and �Vespers and Basil Liturgy� for Christmas Eve. There were once distributed to about 30-35 parishes (but I don�t know what parish is doing which this year). It seems to me that the most used book for Christmas Eve is �The Office of Vespers for The Nativity of Our Lord God and Savior, Jesus Christ� published a number of years ago by Msgr. William Levkulic. Since it contains options for either �straight Vespers� or �Vespers and Divine Liturgy� (with music for everything) parishes that have the books on hand didn�t need to purchase any books this year. I do not know if these books are still available from the Seminary Press, but I provided �master copies� of them to two parishes this year (with the �master copy� simply a good copy of an almost clean original).

If Jeff was suggesting that most parishes won�t do either �straight Vespers� or �Vespers and Divine Liturgy� on Christmas Even I will agree. The custom in most parishes that take these services (and they are indeed few) is to take them in the morning (according to the tradition) and then to take either �Great Compline� or �Great Compline and Divine Liturgy� after dark on Christmas Eve. I grew up with Compline at 11 PM, Christmas Carols and �Midnight Mass�.

Vespers IS slowly making a comeback. Each year for the past 15 years I have distributed about 200 Great Vespers books. I already have a small number of requests for the coming reprint of the Matins book. Interest for these services is growing. People (and especially clergy) are slowly realizing that you need not fill the church before considering services like Vespers worth celebrating.

Wednesday night Vespers should be a possibility. I would not advocate a hasty switch over, but I would encourage any pastor to consider it. We must get away from this �if it is not Divine Liturgy it is not worth having� mentality.

JKF uses the term �reasonable accommodation�. I know of a parish where the pastor insists that the Lenten Presanctified Liturgy must occur in the evening. Yet the majority of his people are elderly and don�t come out after dark. For that parish having one evening Presanctified and one morning Presanctified would be what I would consider reasonable accommodation.

For a parish like Jim�s I could imagine the �conversion process� could equate to continue to have evening Divine Liturgies for holy days until well after the Wednesday evening Vespers was established (2-3 years). I would certainly prefer an evening Divine Liturgy than the artificial �Vespers and Divine Liturgy� that cuts out all chance for a full Vespers with Litija and Matins.

Admin

To all those who wonder if a "traditional" service schedule is "practical"...

Look across town, or even across the street, at your Orthodox brothers and sisters! The majority of these parishes seem to have no problem getting the people to conform to the church, instead of contorting the church to fit the supposed "needs" of the people.

I will stop now before I begin to rant...

The good Father Deacon's post is sadly one of the main reasons why I am considering leaving the Byzantine Catholic Church and becoming Orthodox.

This is just another example of the prevailing attitude that exists out there of making 'Byzantine Catholic' synonymous with 'half-hearted and incomplete attempt at Eastern Christianity'.

It also puts us on the slippery slope of having other pro-accomodating yet not traditional practices either being kept or introduced in our church. If the majority of people want to see guitars and other instruments in church should we accomodate them? (disclaimer: I am aware that the good Father Deacon did not write or imply this, but it is a fair question to ask where does this accomodating end and what preculdes others from bringing up ideas like this)

I could go on and on but one last point. The late Great Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict have stated many times in many words that Greek Catholics should return to their roots. What part of this don't we understand? Do we disagree with the Holy Father or just refuse to listen to him?

A traditional Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church is where I belong. Too bad one doesn't exist in this world.

Dear Michael,
Traditional Ruthenian Greek-Catholic Churches certainly exist in this world. It is a question basically of determining what precisely you have in mind, what distance you are prepared to travel and perhaps where you stand on the matter of language.
For the immediate moment, I suggest a pilgrimage to Saint George in Aliquippa, although I don't doubt that a careful survey of what's on offer nearer Cleveland might well produce some encouraging results.

[More than one parish of my acquaintance has advertised with the slogan "the difference is worth the drive!"]

May God bless you in the coming year of His grace which awaits us all.

Incognitus

I have been to St. George in Aliquippa, and our humble Fr. Elias does things traditionally. It is beautiful! We did have that in our area, but alas through transfers it was lost. Which is what I think MC has a problem with -- the inconsistencies in the Byzantine Church. To the outsider we look ridiculous, and our own people are confused. Why do we have so many churches doing their "own thing?" One church in particular doesn't baptize infants with the Mystery of Holy Communion, and still has baptisms separate from the Divine Liturgy!

In speaking with my 78 year old Father over the holiday weekend, he attends Divine Liturgy at a Byzantine Church in another town. On Christmas Eve they were out of church in a little more than an hour. When I told him we were in church for over two, he said that's the way it used to be. He said when he was growing up as a Byzantine the priest had a "high" Liturgy and "low" Liturgy. The low Liturgy began at 8 a.m., and the high at 11 a.m. Well, one day the priest decided to "accomodate" the younger crowd, and moved the low liturgy to 11, and the high to 8....and alas everyone got used to being in church for an hour, and as he says, the rest is history.

I really don't think we need to over-think why the church is in the situation it is...I'm with MC, compromise too much, and pretty soon you'll have nothing left to compromise.

Incognitus,

I was refering to the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church as a whole. Certainly I have not been to every Ruthenian church in our Eparchy. It's only a little over two hours to Pittsburgh, I'll take your suggested trip to St. George's sometime in the near future.

Cathy does touch on important subject, the inconsistentcies throughout our Eparchy. I know, I know in today's PC world, diversity is beautiful and all that. But the fact is that only traditional extremism will stop the downward spiral that we are in right now. It sounds like from earlier in this thread (admin's post I believe) that this statement has some veracity at St. George's.

It is important to add that beyond the inconsistentcies from church to church is the inconsistentcies when a priest in transferred from a church. Saturday evening liturgies are repleaced by Vespers only to be replaced again by Saturday evening Liturgies. Well, which on is it?

This is why there are things like the Typicon in existence so that there are dare I say consistencies. But unfortunely as displayed earlier in this thread there exists a negative animus towards the Typicon and thus we get the current situation.

Also, you wrote "It is a question basically of determining what precisely you have in mind".
I know what you meant but I wanted to point out that it isn't what I have in mind, it's what Tradition has in mind. I'll leave feelings and whims to the Modernists of our church.

mc

As has been pointed out previously, there is a difference between the Tradition and diverse traditions.

It is, for example, the Tradition that we have certain divine services, and that they are done as fully as possible (right there are the seeds of compromise, but what is possible and normal in a monastery is seldom as possible in a parish).

It is a tradition that certain specific foods are associated with certain feast days, and even with certain specific meals.

It is a tradition that in a specific community, such-and-such a language, or a mix of languages, is employed.

It is the Tradition that our divine services are sung, and sung, not arbitrarily, but according to a quite specific order.

It is a tradition that in a specific community we use this chant system, or that chant system, or still another chant system.

I'm putting it this way because you specified that you are seeking a Traditional Byzantine Ruthenian Church. The field would be considerably more open had the word "Ruthenian" been omitted. Not that there is something inherently wrong with the Ruthenian Church, but that the history of that Church presents a certain set of difficulties, and a record of solutions, some of which have later proved to be problematic.

As for the objection that there are conflicting tendencies in the Ruthenian Church - certainly there are; who could deny it? The same, however, is true of every other religious body with which I am familiar. That's the bad news.

The good news is that it is simply amazing how much can be accomplished by what looks like a hopelessly small group, with the help of God and some other factors as well. Don't give up even before you begin.

A good trip to Saint George's. You might also try Saint Elias in Brampton, Ontario (it's not that horribly far from Cleveland). Before you scream "UGH! UKRAINIANS!" bear in mind that in the ecclesiastical sense of the term, Ukrainians are Ruthenians, though they don't particularly care to be reminded of it. [Suggestion - if language matters to you, best to phone ahead to Saint Elias to ascertain what the language mix is to be that particular weekend.]

Incognitus

thanks for the info on Saint Elias in Brampton. I go to the Toronto area often and I will visit it soon! I checked out their website it is an impressive church.

Here is a link to it -
http://www.saintelias.com/

Modernists beware: the photos on this site may be offensive to you. i.e. The church does not have pews, it has a curtain over the royal doors, married clergy and other things that could be frightening and shocking to you.

mc

Labels, labels, labels�.

St. George Parish is now coming across as a bastion of traditionalist Byzantine Liturgy. But that�s not it at all. St. George is the perfect definition of �ordinary�. One would not expect that a parish that simply takes the Divine Services pretty much as we have received them in our official Ruthenian Liturgical Books would wind up being considered �abnormal� instead of �normal�. It seems to me that the �status-quo-ers� and the �revisionists� are the real exceptions to the tradition and that St. George Parish is simply a regular run of the mill Byzantine Catholic Parish.

Admin wrote:
I think what we're finding is that it's 'abnormal' for a priest to follow the Liturgical Books to a T. Each priest seems to want to do their own thing. IMHO, someone has to lead, and others have to follow. It appears in the Byzantine Church, that few want to follow. Bless Fr. Elias for being a follower of the official Ruthenian Liturgical Books.

Well said, much like the majority of your posts.

It's a shame that a 'normal' parish is seen as the bastion of traditionalism and is unique when compared to others.

s'nami boh

mc

If I may be allowed a fine distinction - Saint George's, Aliquippa, is not at the moment "normal", but it is most certainly "normative"! That may explain why it consistently attracts people.

Incognitus

Having just gotten back after the Christmas vacation, I would like to make a few comments on this thread.

Happy New Year to all, by the way.

1) The Typicon prescribes morning Liturgies on all Saturdays, except, of course, Holy Saturday, because Saturdays were the Sabbath, and "fasts" were not observed (though at some times various forms of abstinence). The reception of Holy Communion, as the first and most important food, broke the fast. But then Liturgies were not permitted in the evening, because there was a Liturgy in the morning - note carefully the double tradition - the tradition of a day as "midnight to midnight" (ancient Roman / Byzantine, which considered itself "Roman") and "sunset to sunset" (Jewish). Fasting laws generally followed the Roman tradition, and hence would affect the Liturgy. However, today we seem to have no concept of one day - one Liturgy. This is not going to change, nor do I wish to involve myself in polemics on this issue - I would have more than one Liturgy for certain pastoral reasons, though I do feel that we multiply Liturgies too much for mere convenience, which compromises community solidarity at times.

2) The idea that floats around that the "Vigil Liturgies" that are found in the Typicon (Holy Saturday, Christmas Eve and Theophany Eve) are not Liturgies of the feast seem to be specious. After all, the Gospel of the Resurrection of Jesus is read at the "vigil Liturgy," and the Liturgy of Sunday begins the continuous reading of the Gospel of John. The Gospel of the Birth of Christ is read at the Vigil Liturgy, and the Gospel of the coming of the Magi is read on the Liturgy of the day. The Liturgy of Theophany does not follow this pattern, since the Gospel of the Baptism is read on the day. However, my point is that the "vigil Liturgies" are as much "Liturgies of the Feast" as the Liturgies during the day. Note carefully that when vigil Divine Liturgies are not celebrated, the Liturgy of St. Basil is moved to the morning Liturgy - precisely because in Constantinople, the Anaphora of St. Basil was not considered PENITENTIAL, which idea we now have because it is so long, but festive - because it more solemnly celebrated all salvation history! These are Great feasts, and seem to follow the tradition (also found in the West on Christmas and Pascha) of a double celebration of the Divine Liturgy, and also the sunset to sunset concept of the day. I cannot positively state why they went into eclipse, and began to be celebrated before sunset - even in the morning. Some possibilities, however, focus on "convenience" at least as earlier generations would consider "convenience", the difficulty of fasting until evening, the length and complexity of the services, etc. Would that there were more "conservatives" back then. The "Christmas Eve supper" does not enter into this, since that was a particular custom of some ethnic areas.

3) During the week, pastorally speaking, only evening Liturgies would permit - or encourage, let us say - the attendance of younger people, who have daytime jobs or go to school, to attend. Some now have the idea, that if the day goes from sunset to sunset, why not celebrate the Liturgy on the eve of the feast - maybe even with Vespers. I don't see anything profoundly un-Christian in these ideas.

4) It is true that Saturday evening Liturgies during the rest of the year (except Pascha) are an innovation. The ultimate model is the Holy Saturday Liturgy (the sunset to sunset day) but, of course, as we have seen, Pascha was the Feast of Feasts, and was celebrated in a particular way, "transcending" other ways. Having served in parishes, and having celebrated such Liturgies, I do not consider them "sinful," though there are many issues which could be raised, but not in this post.

5) Holy Thursday has an evening Liturgy, but this is for other, historical reasons - the Last Supper of our Lord was held in the evening.

Fr. Dave

Happy New Year to Father David - glad to see your posting!


The "double reckoning" of the day can be noticed in the difference between the Liturgicon/Sluzhebnik and the Horologion/Chasoslov. The Liturgicon begins with Vespers, while the Chasoslov begins, if memory serves me correctly, with Midnight Office. That could be explored further.

It is beyond doubt that the handful of occasions with a Vigil Liturgy have a Liturgy which relates to the coming day (this is even true of Holy Thursday - but that day is full of liturgical confusion, because it's overloaded). So in each case I suppose the relevant question would involve searching for an explanation as to why on those specific days the Church wants us to have the Eucharist twice. The only long-standing parallel I can think of in the West is the Nativity of Christ, with Midnight Mass, Aurora Mass, and Noon Mass.

Certainly the Divine Liturgy of Saint Basil is festive, not penitential. The misconception occurs because we serve Basil on the Sundays of Lent - which only proves what we are supposed to know already: Lent is a liturgically conservative time of the year.

Oops - forgive me; you're correct. The West also calls for two Eucharistic celebrations on Pascha.

The evening Liturgies got pushed back to the morning for two reasons: a) sheer convenience, and b) people lost track of the meaning of the Communion fast.

Actually the custom of a special Christmas Eve supper is widespread - the Italians have a marvelous Ieiunium Gaudiosum, with twelve different courses of fish and sea food. If such is our fasting, what shall our feasting not be?

There is nothing un-Christian about an evening celebration of the Eucharist on weekdays because of the demands on most people's time on those days. Saturday, however, is another matter. The uniqueness of Holy Saturday is well worth preserving.

As I often do, I'm anxious to suggest caution and moderation, not to adopt an immobilist position. As the Romans put it: festina lente!

Incognitus