www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy The Resistance Movement

Must have the brief together and tight before you can begin to make the case, or decide who to send to speak with whom, or how to get one's foot in the door, so to speak.

A conference won't get that. A conference will waste time, energy and material resources. By the time we are done conferring, we'll be a year into the new and improved liturgy and the Church will cry foul and claim, as they did in Canada, that to change now would be a hardship.

Better to make it apparent right here where we are headed and that we intend to get there in a timely fashion.

The "brief" could be prepared right here in front of God and everybody. There are sufficient human resources to do the deed and collect the words and formalize it into a clear presentation.

There should also be a letter with signatures. One letter sent to all parishes for signature, or signatures collected under a unified brief statement to be sent with a longer letter.

In this one the body must speak as well as representatives of the body.

Eli

To take a case anywhere one has to have a case. I want to see the new liturgy presented in the best possible way in the most fair venue. That is why there is a meeting in the making. Sure this should have happened at least a year ago, but it's not too late. Let us give the liturgy a fair reading at the conference now being planned for the near future. The liturgy isn't even available yet. How can one make a serious case for or against it until it is made.

Please, let us be calm. Let us get copies distributed. Let us examine it with the help of some people who can help us examine it together. In a few days we will have some details.

CDL

Skip the resistance movement! It�s not appropriate as spoken of in this thread.

The appropriate response here is prayer and fasting.

The bishops and the liturgical commission are not the enemy. The proper approach is to politely approach those in authority and again and again encourage them to lead us to a full celebration of all of our Divine Services according to our official books. When the path to what is right is the easiest that is the path that will be taken.

It appears the resistance has been resisted.

CDL

"It appears the resistance has been resisted.

CDL"

You just couldn't resist that one now could you?

Thank You all for your most valuable input!

The esteemed Administrator posted,
"Skip the resistance movement! It�s not appropriate as spoken of in this thread."

I hope the rest of this post (and thread) will be deemed respectful and appropriate by the Administrator and Moderators.

In my thread beginning post I stated,
"Here our some of my brainstormes (obviously far from perfect) resistance ideas:"

My ideas 1, 2, and 3 are merely brainstorm ideas. I offered these ideas in their negative forms. However, I think that there are positive ways of implementing the gist behind the same basic ideas. Here they are:

Negatively implemented Idea 1 said something about sending substantial, Voided checks in our Eparchial Appeals. Many posted that this is not a wise idea. That very well may be the case. However, How about sending valid, nonvoided substantial checks for our Eparchial Appeals with a note or letter stating that the NEW Liturgy is defective and that we would like a more Orthodox Liturgy?


Negatively implemented Idea 3 offered the idea to manually correct the Liturgy books with pens, whiteout, etc. I think that a positive way to implement the idea is to form a coalition of parishioners throughut the Metroplia that will offer to split the cost of printing and distributing Liturgy Books that are more faithful to the One True God, Our Fathers among the Saints Basil and John Chrysostom, and the Ruthenian Rescension.

Negatively implemented Idea 2 said something about refusing to chant inclusive language, but rather to correct the texts as we chant substututing "mankind" for "humankind" etc. I have yet to think of a more positive implementation for this basic idea. I do not see, how I could knowingly, in good conscious chant inclusive language. Any ideas for a better way of changing the situation?

Incog...,

Thank you for you positive alternatives. They may well be the alternatives left to us. I hope the alternative of a conference beforehand would help to shape a very useable liturgy so that this can be avoided. If the commission avoids such a conference as proposed I think the people must ask themselves what this says about their attitude toward the people. But if they will come to such a conference and explain to us step by step why the new recension is faithful and helpful and be willing to listen to the people and make the relatively minor changes that may be necessary then I think we have a catalyst for real spiritual growth.

The question is after 20 years of decline are our leaders up to the challenge. The one most significant element in a groups growth or decline rests with the leadership of the group. Am I allowed to say that?

Will the leadership rise to the challenge? Or will they hide away? Stay tuned.

CDL

Agreed wholeheartedly! Drawing togethere a document that systematically addresses specific and substantive concerns is not an act of rebellion any more than any other doctrinal or theological treatise is, and should not really be addressed as rebellion and or resistance or untutored or unrestrained mob action.

The fact remains that whatever any group within the Church does to express its frustration, as you said in another post yesterday that you were perhaps doing, is going to be perceived as rebellion.

One of the things that the preparation of a document does is channel that non-productive frustration into an act that results in an objectively productive and useful document that can then be presented to authorities in the Church who have real power and authority to act, or not to act as they choose, but at that rate the choices will be clear to all.

Eli

A conference in August in Chicago allows us to do that. We would very much like representatives of the commission there to present the recension as so far developed. I pray they don't let us down.

CDL

Any conference will have limited attendance under the best of circumstances and will not be representative of the body of the Church. Planning for a "conference" will take time and energy which will make it more difficult to act in a timely fashion.

You don't even know the status of the printing of the new liturgy, nor do you have knowledge of the new music, nor of the rest of the liturgical changes outside of the Divine Liturgy.

You convene a conference without a solid document in place and you've gotten face time for a few and a chance to tip a few brews. And that is all you've got.

Eli

The Admin and I must agree to disagree. The only recourse the laity have is to withhold funding.

Actually you are in total and absolute disagreement with anyone who can see the irreversable damage that has already been done in the Church by exercising this fiscal tactic in anger, in frustration, in rebellion, makes no difference the cause.

Not even our bishops could reverse that damage if they wanted to and were willing to give their lives to do so.

Your's is the worst of all possible bad solutions.

Eli

Our laity are not entirely innocent either. There is much to be desired and for some, clergy and laity, it is too late for this world. And that is all I wish to say of that.

You are doing a severe disservice with your one-sided foment, and that is precisely the kind of advisement that will make truly constructive action, ultimately, impossible.

Eli

Eli,

I appreciate your opinion and I value your constructive criticism, however I am not convenence the later is not the best course of action. We will have to agree to disagree.

Your friend in IC XC
ray

A parish needs to add 6% to the core worshipping community every year in order to grow.

If you normally have about 70 laypersons in attendance, you will need to add four or five new committed worshippers this coming year to make up for losses and minimally grow.

If you normally have 200 laypersons in attendance, you will need to add twelve this coming year. There is no getting around it. (More is better, of course.)

Personally, I think it would be preferable if these new members were converts from Protestantism, agnosticism and atheism but more than likely they will have to be Latins who transfer in because Eastern Christians in North America don�t seem to have much of a knack for evangelism.

Why do I mention this here? Because if a parish is not already meeting these goals it is on the decline, and must eventually reverse the trend or close, that is the reality. Negative publicity and squabbling is going to leave a bad impression on the community at large. This is not good for the overall health of the church.

That means it may no longer matter what the text of the liturgy is like. This could be like rearranging the deck chairs on a sinking ship.

+T+
Michael