www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Keep Writing Letters!

I am reposting my original posts that have disappeared down the chain. I have learned that people are writing to Rome and that Rome is listening to the faithful priests and people of the Ruthenian Catholic Church.

Below are my original posts:

I encourage everyone in our Church to write letters writing campaign to Rome. We are a small Church. A mere dozen letters from our clergy alone would be able to overturn the reformed liturgy in favor of the real liturgy. If we all write letters and each find only 2 more people to write letters we can succeed. I especially encourage our clergy to write since letters from clergy are not ignored by Rome.

Start by obtaining a good copy of the promulgation and cover letter from your pastor. The one on this website is not good enough.

Send copies to the following people (as a start):

His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI
The Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City, Europe

His Eminence Cardinal Ignace Moussa Daoud, Prefect
Congregation for the Oriental Churches
Palazzo del Bramante
Via della Conciliazione, 34
00193 Roma, Italia, Europe
Telephone: 011.39.06.69.88.42.82
Fax: 011.29.06.69.88.43.00

Send separate letters to the following at the same address:

His Excellency Antonio Maria Veglio, Secretary
Mons. Krzystof Nitkiewicz, Undersecretary

And to the following:

His Eminence Cardinal Francis Arinze, Prefect
Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum
Palazzo delle Congregazioni
Piazza Pio XII, 10
00193 Roma, Italia, Europe
Telephone: 011.39.06.69.88.43.16; 011.39.06.69.88.43.18
Fax: 011.39.06.69.88.34.99

His Eminence Cardinal Walter Kasper
Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity
Via dell'Erba, 1
00193 Roma, Italia, Europe
Telephone: 011.39.06.69.88.30.72; 011.39.06.69.88.42.71
Fax: 011.39.06.69.88.53.65

When I have a chance I will post the mailing information for all the Greek Catholic patriarchs (especially the Ukrainian Patriarch Lubomyr and the Melkite Patriarch Gregorios III) and for our bishops in Europe.

Keep your letters polite and respectful. Make sure they contain no emotion all.

There is a lot of material on this web board to draw from. Write the letter in your own words and focus on the following points:

1. This Reformed Liturgy violates official books, the Ordo Celebrationis, and the Liturgical Instruction.

2. This Reformed Liturgy makes the Liturgy in our Ruthenian Church different than all other Byzantine / Greek Catholics and thus hurts unity within the Catholic Church.

3. This Reformed Liturgy makes the Liturgy in our Ruthenian Church different than all the other Orthodox Churches and thus hurts Catholic / Orthodox unity.

4. The embracement of inclusive language violates Liturgiam Authenticam.

Make sure your letter is no longer than 2 pages. Have someone not from our Church read it. If they don't understand what you are saying neither will the people in Rome.

Make sure you ask questions. Why did they approve a Byzantine Novus Ordo liturgy that is different than the official Ruthenian books? Why did they direct the use of inclusive language that violates Liturgiam Authenticam? Ask them why the official Ruthenian Divine Liturgy is being prohibited at the same time the Holy Father is considering making the Tridentine Mass an equal standard with the Novus Ordo.

Enclose a copy of Archbishop Basil's promulgation letter and the cover letter sent to your pastor so they know what you are talking about.

Do not threaten to leave or withhold your offerings. Take the position that you are a faithful Byzantine Catholic and that you want the official liturgy of our Church. Take the position that you are willing to do whatever it takes to obtain permission from the Vatican for your parish to continue celebrate the official Ruthenian Divine Liturgy.

Use full names and addresses. Make sure the signatures are clear. If you can sent either U.S. Global mail, UPS or FedEx. The special cardboard envelopes will attract attention.

If you think you can manage it petitions do work. Just make sure that every signature and name and address is captured and legible.

Don't sit back and think someone else will write and you can ignore this. YOU NEED TO WRITE YOUR OWN LETTER! YOU NEED TO WRITE YOUR LETTER TODAY!

Dostojno Jest

---

Another address:

His Beatitude, Cardinal Patriarch Lubomyr
The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
pl. Sviatoho Yura 5,
Lviv 79000 Ukraine
Phone: (+380) 322 97-97-63

Additional Letter to:
Dionisio Lachovicz (Liakhovych), O.S.B.M., Auxiliary Bishop

General - info@ugcc.org.ua
Press office - press@ugcc.org.ua
Synod of Bishops - synod@ugcc.org.ua
Secretariate of the Sobor - sobor@ugcc.org.ua

I had a pm. We need to write to Patriarch Bartholomew, Bishop Maximos of Pittsburgh (the head of the Orthodox Catholic Dialog).

His All Holiness BARTHOLOMEW
Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch
Rum Patrikhanesi, 342 20 Fener- Halic, Istanbul, Turkey
Tel. +90 212 5319670 - 6
Fax. +90 212 5349037
E-mail: Patriarchate@ec-patr.org

Also:
His Eminence, Metropolitan Meliton of Philadelphia.
Tel.: +90 212 6354022
Fax: +90 212 5349037
E-mail: melito@superonline.com

I have been told that the Patriarch is very interested in the activities of the Byzantine Catholics. It does affect the Catholic / Orthodox ecumenical dialog. He will not take kindly to a feminist rewrite of the Divine Liturgy.

... and those of us that don't have a problem with the promulgation should write letters in agreement to it. If half the energy was put into understanding and accepting the changes as is being put froth into rebelling against it, our church could spend more time on important matters, such as preserving vespers, matins and other traditions.

In all fairness, I do not find the statement to be accurate. I know of a multitude of Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Churches, yet only 2 of them have Vespers and Matins. Likewise if those that expend big money and lots of time creating and promulgating the RDL would instead concentrate their efforts on instituting Vespers and Matins, I feel the world would be a better place.

Those that oppose the RDL are not Rebelling, but rather are seeking to live the Catholic Faith. Those that have been deemed Rebels are following guidelines from the Vatican. Those that support the RDL are Rebelling against Vatican directives regarding Liturgical Language and regarding being true to authentic Eastern Christianity.

Dear InCogNeat3,

Actually, the bulk of this year's Cantor Intitute in Pittsburgh has been on the celebration of Matins (an additional session was added on implementing the new books so as not to interfere with the original cursus); during the previous year, the liturgics and music for Vespers were taught. We've cleaned up a quite a bit of the abbreviations and omissions in the books from the Sisters of St. Basil, particularly at Matins. For three years now, weekly materials for the celebration of Vespers have been available including saints' stichera. We developed a set of Octoechos canons for Sunday Matins that received the blessing of BOTH Metropolitan Judson and Metropolitan Nicholas.

Some of us have been working for years on restoring Matins and Vespers - and the biggest roadblocks I've met have not been priests or bishops, but parishioners. (Which is not to say that it wouldn't be a LOT easier to do this if more priests were willing to promote a full liturgical cycle in their churches. I wish more Orthodox parishes here celebrated Matins; our neighborhood church just started at the end of last year.)

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

That is good to hear. However, I assume that the Matins that you are refering to has inclusive language, which is fundamentally flawed. (Some of the flaws of inclusive language are explained in several Vatican documents.) Unfortunately there is a June 29 RDL implementation deadline, however I have yet to hear of a Metroplia wide mandatory deadline for Matins and Vespers.

I doubt you'll see vespers in the BCC on a large scale anytime soon. Let me explain why.

I'm 40 years old. Raised Greek Catholic. Never witnessed a vespers in any parish in my area.

As most on this forum know, I'm now Orthodox. There isn't a single OCA parish that DOESN'T celebrate vespers every Saturday in my area.

My 76 year old father(cradle and current Greek Catholic) still cannot fathom why I attend vespers every Saturday. He thinks I've gone off the deep end going to church TWICE every weekend. When I try to DRAG him with me to vespers, he practically kicks and screams saying "Vespers is b******t! You're nuts! I never attended a vespers in my life." I kid you not. I can't convince him that it's Byzantine tradition. When I bring up prostrations during lent, he's ready to call the rubber truck!

That's why you'll never see vespers implemented in the BCC. 80% of the current membership has no clue that there's more to the Byzantine rite than just Liturgy.

Z'Bohom

My priest would be more than happy to celebrate Vespers. However, no one would show up. It's not the priest but the parishioners.

BTW, we aren't alone. I recently meet the new Greek Orthodox priest in my area. He replaced the previous priest. The previous priest had vespers. Now, they stopped again with the vespers. I assume nobody showed up.

Etnick,

you are right, if Vespers is started out of the blue without any other fanfare or education, no one will show up because no one will know why they should go.

I know a Greek Catholic priest who this past Christmas had Vespers on Christmas Eve (according to the Typikon) and told the congregation that if they wanted to hear all about the Nativity and experience the festal prayers that Vespers and not Liturgy would be where they could hear that. By doing this he got a good turnout because he gave a good reason as to one of the many reasons why Vespers is important. Did every person show up, no, but a lot more than you would expect did and this priest received great feedback. In fact many of the people asked why they had never seen or heard Vespers before and when the next one would be. So it can be done in an educational and informative manner. In most cases it has to come from the clergy. There are many parishes where not a single person even knows about Vespers. The people don't know what they don't know. Our clergy need to step up, and this should be encouraged by all of us including our Bishops. Then we would actually be taking steps towards an authentic place of worship.

So it can happen, but not without some proactive clergy sharing with the faithful why they should attend and educating them as well. It would be naive to assume 100% turnout, but with the right process we will be successful.

Monomakh

"Isn't vespers something we have on Good Friday instead of Mass?" I've heard this at my parish.

You're right--if no one comes and there's no education then what is the point?

Perhaps education is a good place to start. If the priest spoke about the place of Vespers in the tradition and how it can actually benefit those that want to grow in the faith and heop them grow closer to Christ in the rectory after DL or included some info in the church bulletin maybe some folks would work up some interest. I'm just guessing. At my parish Vespers takes place at least once a week (twice during the Great Fast season)and is well attended.Many of us are new to the fait but their are some cradle byzcaths that attend regularly also. I'll ask them why they come and if they grew up with it and maybe they'll have some compelling insight that could help others.

Peace,
Indigo

Keep Writing! Keep Praying! Keep Fasting!

I am reposting my original posts that have disappeared down the chain. I just heard this morning that certain powers in Rome are starting to ask questions about what is going on in the Ruthenian Church. If Rome rescinds the RDL we have a good chance for getting the Ruthenian Liturgy mandated.

Below are my original posts:

I encourage everyone in our Church to write letters writing campaign to Rome. We are a small Church. A mere dozen letters from our clergy alone would be able to overturn the reformed liturgy in favor of the real liturgy. If we all write letters and each find only 2 more people to write letters we can succeed. I especially encourage our clergy to write since letters from clergy are not ignored by Rome.

Start by obtaining a good copy of the promulgation and cover letter from your pastor. The one on this website is not good enough.

Send copies to the following people (as a start):

His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI
The Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City, Europe

His Eminence Cardinal Ignace Moussa Daoud, Prefect
Congregation for the Oriental Churches
Palazzo del Bramante
Via della Conciliazione, 34
00193 Roma, Italia, Europe
Telephone: 011.39.06.69.88.42.82
Fax: 011.29.06.69.88.43.00

Send separate letters to the following at the same address:

His Excellency Antonio Maria Veglio, Secretary
Mons. Krzystof Nitkiewicz, Undersecretary

And to the following:

His Eminence Cardinal Francis Arinze, Prefect
Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum
Palazzo delle Congregazioni
Piazza Pio XII, 10
00193 Roma, Italia, Europe
Telephone: 011.39.06.69.88.43.16; 011.39.06.69.88.43.18
Fax: 011.39.06.69.88.34.99

His Eminence Cardinal Walter Kasper
Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity
Via dell'Erba, 1
00193 Roma, Italia, Europe
Telephone: 011.39.06.69.88.30.72; 011.39.06.69.88.42.71
Fax: 011.39.06.69.88.53.65

When I have a chance I will post the mailing information for all the Greek Catholic patriarchs (especially the Ukrainian Patriarch Lubomyr and the Melkite Patriarch Gregorios III) and for our bishops in Europe.

Keep your letters polite and respectful. Make sure they contain no emotion all.

There is a lot of material on this web board to draw from. Write the letter in your own words and focus on the following points:

1. This Reformed Liturgy violates official books, the Ordo Celebrationis, and the Liturgical Instruction.

2. This Reformed Liturgy makes the Liturgy in our Ruthenian Church different than all other Byzantine / Greek Catholics and thus hurts unity within the Catholic Church.

3. This Reformed Liturgy makes the Liturgy in our Ruthenian Church different than all the other Orthodox Churches and thus hurts Catholic / Orthodox unity.

4. The embracement of inclusive language violates Liturgiam Authenticam.

Make sure your letter is no longer than 2 pages. Have someone not from our Church read it. If they don't understand what you are saying neither will the people in Rome.

Make sure you ask questions. Why did they approve a Byzantine Novus Ordo liturgy that is different than the official Ruthenian books? Why did they direct the use of inclusive language that violates Liturgiam Authenticam? Ask them why the official Ruthenian Divine Liturgy is being prohibited at the same time the Holy Father is considering making the Tridentine Mass an equal standard with the Novus Ordo.

Enclose a copy of Archbishop Basil's promulgation letter and the cover letter sent to your pastor so they know what you are talking about.

Do not threaten to leave or withhold your offerings. Take the position that you are a faithful Byzantine Catholic and that you want the official liturgy of our Church. Take the position that you are willing to do whatever it takes to obtain permission from the Vatican for your parish to continue celebrate the official Ruthenian Divine Liturgy.

Use full names and addresses. Make sure the signatures are clear. If you can sent either U.S. Global mail, UPS or FedEx. The special cardboard envelopes will attract attention.

If you think you can manage it petitions do work. Just make sure that every signature and name and address is captured and legible.

Don't sit back and think someone else will write and you can ignore this. YOU NEED TO WRITE YOUR OWN LETTER! YOU NEED TO WRITE YOUR LETTER TODAY!

Dostojno Jest

---

Another address:

His Beatitude, Cardinal Patriarch Lubomyr
The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
pl. Sviatoho Yura 5,
Lviv 79000 Ukraine
Phone: (+380) 322 97-97-63

Additional Letter to:
Dionisio Lachovicz (Liakhovych), O.S.B.M., Auxiliary Bishop

General - info@ugcc.org.ua
Press office - press@ugcc.org.ua
Synod of Bishops - synod@ugcc.org.ua
Secretariate of the Sobor - sobor@ugcc.org.ua

I had a pm. We need to write to Patriarch Bartholomew, Bishop Maximos of Pittsburgh (the head of the Orthodox Catholic Dialog).

His All Holiness BARTHOLOMEW
Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch
Rum Patrikhanesi, 342 20 Fener- Halic, Istanbul, Turkey
Tel. +90 212 5319670 - 6
Fax. +90 212 5349037
E-mail: Patriarchate@ec-patr.org

Also:
His Eminence, Metropolitan Meliton of Philadelphia.
Tel.: +90 212 6354022
Fax: +90 212 5349037
E-mail: melito@superonline.com

I have been told that the Patriarch is very interested in the activities of the Byzantine Catholics. It does affect the Catholic / Orthodox ecumenical dialog. He will not take kindly to a feminist rewrite of the Divine Liturgy.

This is good news indeed Dostojno! I used your information when I submitted my letters to Rome. Again, I urge all Ruthenian Catholics to write, write, write!!!
Thank God for Pope Benedict! May he hear the voices of those who have been scandalized!

I also don't think it would hurt to make sure to mention the bishop who heads the committee since I have been told he has "been taken to the woodshed" by Rome in the past...but what do I know...

Chris

Interesting, but I would be surprised if Rome actually did anything.

Xpucmoc Bockpece!

Ungcsertezs

I would be very surprised as well...

Chris

Never give up, and never go away! Remember the parable of the Unjust Judge.

Fr. Serge

Here we have a dilemma. We are asking Rome to intervene in our sui juris church to preserve the integrity of our Byzantine Rite. Suppose he acts, then the Pope of Rome is interferring in liturgical matters in an Eastern church. We can't have that because what the Pope preserves by fiat he can destroy by fiat. On the other hand, we have the hierarchs of a "Byzantine" church taking liberties with the liturgy. They see themselves as the masters of Tradition rather than the servants of Tradition - how Catholic!

I predict that Rome will do nothing. If the Orthodox can accept Latin Rite Catholicism, they can accept the miniscule BCC as a small, anomalous hybred that will fade away in a generation. On the other hand, how could they accept the micromanagement of liturgical matters from Rome as a normal exercise of papal authority?

This post does not reflect my opinion of the RDL or our hierarchs - just speculations as to how Rome might look at this.

I have never spoken with an Orthodox Priest that "accepts" post Schism Latin Catholicism.

Write to the Pope and to the Oriental Congregation soon!

Mention that there is a "vacatio legis" (a "grace" period} up to June 29, 2007, before the obligation of using the Revised Liturgy goes into effect. Say that since there are still many questions regarding the translation and structure of the Liturgy, and some division/disturbance among the people and clergy, the date of official implementation should be postponed indefinitely. There should be a review of the whole project. Write today!

I wonder if it may be too late, in the sense that all of the pew books have been printed, and they won't spring for more?

I know when the Vatican told the Canadian Bishops Conference that they should not use the NRSV lectionary for the Roman Church in Canada, the Canadians said, "Well, we already printed one million lectionaries..." and the Vatican said, "okay, but do not print any more..."

That is to some extent why I asked if "inclusive language" was the primary objection as far the the people's book goes. Essentially, changing that would involve a one word change in the Creed, and reprinting the liturgikons.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

You know, one of the changes that really bugs me is the "holy gifts to holy people," rather than "holy things to the holy..."

For some reason, that one drives me up the wall, that is the one that is going to make me cringe for awhile...

That is because it is given to us out of the same flawed theology that gives us "...holy Anaphora..."

The holy gifts are to be raised up as an offering to the greater honor and glory of God.

These are not gifts raised up for us, for people.

These gifts include us, include the people, who offer themselves as part of the holy Oblation, as we have always understood oblation in the context of the Eucharistic prayer.

We, the people, participate in the redemption of the world, for the greater honor and glory of God....the holy one.

That is why it sticks. It is part of the greater perversion of our current Eucharistic theology as expressed in the new Byzantine order.

And that is why it must be resisted at all cost.

We must keep writing but we must also know what we are writing about and why. There are serious theological errors that have been set loose in this Church through the RDL. It is not a harmless thing. I will not judge the authors but the work is clearly flawed and the catechesis is heterodox.

Mary

The problems with the Novus Ordo Pittsburgh-Ruthenian Liturgy are legion.

The Liturgicons are incomplete when compared to the official Slavonic edition. They contain rubrics and text that are inaccurate. They use a style of gender-neutral language the Vatican has now prohibited. Some of the specific problems have been discussed at great length here on the Forum and those interested can easily find those discussions. [The best and most complete listing of the problems of this liturgical recasting can be found in Father Serge Keleher�s excellent book. By now everyone who takes issues of Liturgy seriously should have a copy of this book along with most of Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI)'s books on Liturgy.] The use of gender-neutral language (especially in the Creed) is certainly a problem weighty enough to - by itself � necessitate the cancellation of the New Liturgy and the preparation of a new, corrected edition. But there are other problems which - had gender-neutral language not been employed � are also each weighty enough to necessitate the rescinding of this Revised Liturgy.

The music provided in the new Pew Book is awkward. When sung it sounds as if those singing it are not native speakers of English (this also has been discussed here � though less so since most of the proposed settings seem to have been a secret until someone published a few on the web last fall). I have spoken to numerous priests and cantors since the promulgation (as each has seen the book for the first time and carefully reviewed it). Not a single one found it worthy.

Had there been a cooperative effort to correct the few errors in the previous edition of the liturgicon and to produce a comprehensive music book that utilized the talents of many knowledgeable and experienced clergy and laymen (cantors and those experts in language and linguistics) from across the country our Church could have produced something excellent. Instead we have something so flawed it needs to be rescinded.

This promulgation is an opportunity lost and a great tragedy for our Church. It will implode under the weight of its own flaws. Perhaps then we can have a Liturgy that embraces the fullness of our Ruthenian recension.

If the debate over the liturgy produced a revitalized Church then wonderful. It may kill us or it make wake us up. In either event it looks like a challenge is upon us.

Perhaps Father Serge may still be invited.

CDL

Does anyone know-

1) How wide spread is the disatisfaction over this new liturgy, is it wide spread enough to cause concern for our Bishops?
2) Has leadership in the Church given any indication that they now have misgivings about any of this?

My fear is that the disatisfaction with this Liturgy could signal the second coming of Bishop John Ireland.

Surely the second coming of Archbishop John Ireland has already occurred - in the wake of Cum Data Fuerit.

Fr. Serge

I look for evidence of a revitalization. Let me know if you see any. I only see a great sadness. It is like this Church has nothing better to do, than to celebrate its own funeral (and even that, no one will be able to sing, because there will be too many versions of the music, and no one will be able to join in.)

Our Church is wallowing in self-loathing despair. Our clergy are demoralized, and the people are without pastors who care.

Nick

Not fair. Not true. I think our pastors care very much and are well aware of the demoralization in their ranks.

One needs to look at who is pastoring our priests, and by what means.

Burdens sometimes need to be laid across the backs of those to whom they truly belong.

Mary

I have been thinking about this post since yesterday.

I think that all of Orthodoxy would stand up and applaud the fact that Rome is acting to protect the Orthodox Liturgy. Change to what we hold common with Orthodoxy should occur both organically and with the entire Church (Catholic and Orthodox Byzantines).

On a practical matter Pope Benedict XVI could seek the counsel of the Orthodox Patriarchs on this revision. We know how they would respond. But let us pray that our hierarchs will come unto themselves and rescind this Revision and embrace the official 1942 Ruthenian Liturgy instead.

In light of the administrator's comment, could it be appropriate to address the same letter both to His Holiness Benedict XVI and His Holiness Bartholomew? Could this be done together with our Orthodox brethern? From "us!"

Does someone with computer experience know how such a letter could be circulated electronically for signature?

Is it possible that some of the heat could be taken out of this discussion if those who participated in the development of the new books could share with the rest of us their rationale (both for translation and 'editing') and their approach (insofar as they consulted with/drew upon the efforts of other Byzantines, Catholic and Orthodox). Has anyone done a comparison, for example, with the UGC 'Anthology' and/or the Carpatho-Russian books? Perhaps, too, one ought to look at the evolution in liturgical practice among Byzantine Catholics throughout the Metropolia over the past half century or more to understand how things got to where they are today.

Does anyone know if any official statement has been released by the Vatican concerning the opposition of the Ruthenian Metropolia's RDL? Has anyone who has written such oppostion letters receivced a response back?

Christos po sredi nas!

Ungcsertezs

I hope the pope orders our bishops to copy the Orthodox instead of copying the Roman Catholics with this new liturgy.

A directive along those lines came long ago, but as with many things from Rome it has been ignored. One could look at this as the hierarchs showing that shepherd a truly sui iuris Church. I guess one can now await canonisation of saints and election & appointment of bishops without the involvement of the Holy See. If you believe this please keep a watchful eye out for pigs next time you're on an airplane.

Canonisation of Saints without the obligatory involvement of the Holy See is a serious possibility - the problem is that certain people in the Eastern Catholic Churches covet the "prestige" that comes from having the Pope do it.

Fr. Serge

Am I missing something here?
I don't understand why there would be an official response at all. Hasn't Rome already approved the RDL for use?
Sorry folks, cry as we may, I believe this is a done deal.

Andrasi

Many have written letters of protest. Remember, there are areas of the Metropolia that haven't even bought the new books. Surely someone has received some form of feed back by the Vatican, even if it's "thanks for your concern, but there's nothing we (Rome) can do for you."

Christo po sredi nas!

Ungcsertez

U-C,

I agree there are protesters among us.

I am just saying that Rome has already spoken. They've reviewed the RDL and approved the RDL. I can't see Rome changing a decision based on our protests. IMHO it isn't the way they operate.

I would think if Rome believed there were errors they would have found them during the review process. Whether or not we've all purchased the books is irrelevant.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Andrasi

Well that's part of the protest, the debate if such texts, which differs from the other Constantinopolitan Particular Churches (both Orthodox and other Greek Catholic jurisidictions)are an error. "You say toma-to, I say..."

Christos po sredi nas!

Ungcsertezs

U-C
Forgive my thick hunky head.
It appears to me in examining the RDL Rome would have found all errors and requested correction before a final approval. It has been written that during the review process Rome did ask for revisions and once made the RDL was approved.

The debating of such texts and protest letters would imply Rome is in error/missed something in the review process/approved a Liturgy that is in error. While we here in the US are used to speaking our minds in protest utilizing the democratic process to effect change, in my many years of being Catholic I've never known Rome to be a democracy.

I'd be interested in hearing of any replies as well but I must say I'm not holding my breath.

Andrasi

The initial approval was suppose to be from 2001. When there were other changes, were they just rubber stamped w/o another review of the final draft? It's not like a representative from the Congregation for the Eastern Churches came in person to the Metropolia's Chancery to approve the last draft before going to print (like a Rebbi inspector at a Kosher meat processing plant).
The Ruthenian Metropolia's laity has every right to question the RDL and the process in which it was promulgated and to send letters of protest to the Vatican.

Christos po sredi nas!

Ungcsertezs

As one might say, WRITE ON!

Fr. Serge

I have a letter from Father David from the files here where I asked that question. Father David has said, for the record, that no text has been changed since the approval in 2001.

We have no right to press that issue until there would be hard evidence to the contrary. That is part of the problem with protestors who shoot from the hip. They most often miss the mark.

What is much more solid ground is the fact that there are multiple and substantial arguments against portions of the texts of the RDL, and also against the entire project.

The Vatican is no more perfect than Pittsburgh in that the Vatican is also run by men who are imperfect. It might come as s shock to some but not all those priests, bishops and cardinals think alike over there, so what might come glaring to you or me, won't phase others at all.

Does that mean we are wrong because we are only parish priests and laity? I don't think so. It simply means that we care at a very immediate level about a liturgy that, at the moment, offers some very ugly and weak theology, for starters.

Do you suppose that anyone in the Vatican would raise and eyebrow at the use of "...holy Anaphora" in the text? No. Most would not.

Do you think they might raise an eyebrow at the clear catechesis that we've been offered. I think some would. I am certain that Pope Benedict would raise an eyebrow. He might even be inspired to write a correction. And that is not the only place that the weak theology displays itself.

The only way to bring these things to light and to focus attention on them is to write letters. Document the concerns.

And then wait. Not necessarily silently. But wait nonetheless.

The same kind of hesitancy that is displayed in this thread exists from our bishops down to the most silent layman or woman.

In all of history the greatest spiritual battle that mandkind faces is his own inertia. Add to that a tablespoon of fear of those who exercise power over us and it is a wonder God's presence in our lives has any effect at all.

Blessings....Mary

There are rumors in the Italian press (see http://www.quaderniradicali.it/agenzia/index.php?op=read&nid=14917) that in a short time the Argentine Mons Leonardo Sandri (present Substitute of the Secretariat of State) will be the next prefect of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, in the place of Card Daoud who is resigning for age.

Your opinions?
What will change?

I am curious. Has anyone who participates on this forum written a letter to Metropolitan Basil? Have you received a response?

Do you have the address for Metropolitan Basil?

Thank you.

PS Sent out 4 letters today.

Brother Ed

...any returns yet?

Ungcsertezs

Writing to the bishops won�t help. They know the new liturgy is really bad but they don�t care. Bishop William won�t even talk about it. He just gets mad whenever anyone asks about it. I wrote directly to Pope Benedict XVI. I am also writing to the different people on the list posted here. I�m mailing about one letter each week. I�ll let you know when the responses come in.

If you live in Phoenix make sure to visit St. John�s Melkite. The music is different but at the least they take the Byzantine liturgy. We haven�t gone yet but a parishioner told me to go to Holy Archangels to check it out. Her family might be going there instead of St. Stephen�s. They are Slavic so we might feel more at home there and there is a choir that is pretty good.

The article on the front page of byzcath.org confirms the fact that a new prefect for the Congregation for the Eastern Churches has been appointed by Pope Benedict XVI. Letters should be sent to him once he assumes his position.

Well....

Since I was all but kicked off the How We're Implementing the RDL, I will come here to this thread...

In addition to keeping the letters going, petition your church, as I am doing.

The only way to reverse the wrong that has been done is to obtain a majority of the congregation.

Sorry, not really kicked off, I may have said some things out of anger and out of line...that being said...the message is still the same, we have a right to protest if we do not like the RDL, right? Last I checked this is a Representative Republic and it is a "God given right to free speech". If a majority does not want it, why implement it?

Hello Rusyn,

Your anger is understandable. The reformed Liturgy is a hard pill to swallow. I equate it to the death of a loved one. There are stages to go through: denial, anger, grief, acceptance. I have already gone through denial and anger and currently reside in a state of grief. I am certain that acceptance is not in my future. Sadly, just a handful of people have written letters to Rome. The majority seem to take an apathetic stance. There is not a mass protest coming from the faithful and the clergy. I believe there are reasons for this. Some are afraid of confrontation. Some are not aware of the damage that has been done. Some do not care. And some truly like the changes (though I have not met anyone).

These are truly sad days in the BCC and I continue to grieve.

I wrote twice to Cardinal Daoud the prefect for the Congregation for the Eastern Churches. Received no response for either letter. I wrote Cardinal Levada, no response as well.

PLEASE NOTE!!
I wrote the Holy Father, Pope Benedict, and did receive a reply from the Office of the Secretariat of State:

"From the Vatican, 10 March 2007. Dear XXXX, I am writing in reply to the letter which you addressed to the Holy Father on 27 February last, and I would inform you that is has been duly transmitted to the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, with a request that the matter be given appropriate consideration. With every good wish, I remain yours sincerely in Christ, +Leonardo Sandri, Subsitute"

If the name of the Archbishop who signed this letter is not familiar to you, get familiar with it. It is the name of the newly appointed Prefect for the Congregation for the Oriental Churches: Archbishop Leonardo Sandri.

I don't know when he will be assuming his new role, but he will be the one we will be directing our new letters regarding the Reformed Divine Liturgy.

Does anyone have info about the date Archbishop will assume his new role?

Even when the higher-ups do not respond to a letter, they do indeed count that letter!

Meanwhile, I would think that Archbishop Sandri has already taken up the reins, although I could be mistaken. One thing to watch: we're due for a Consistory for the nomination of new Cardinals, and the Prefect of the Oriental Congregation will certainly be made a Cardinal. I'd be surprised if that Consistory is held before the autumn, but we shall see.

Fr. Serge

Archbishop Sandri has taken over as Prefect of the Oriental Congregation. I'm not sure how this bodes for the Eastern Churches...

In the later half of June, my wife and I were in Rome during an extended celebration of our wedding anniversary. One evening we had dinner with my former instructor who is on the faculty of the PIO as a liturgy professor. he related the following:

On May 25, 2007 a new rector for the PIO was nominated, Fr. Cyril Vasil' S.J. Fr Cyril is the son of a Greek Catholic priest and has a brother who is a married priest. When the Prefect was told of this fact, he became a bit unnerved. He was then informed that, yes, married men are ordained as Greek Catholic priests.

So you are saying he is very knowledgeable regarding the Eastern Churches he was just put in charge of, eh?


Rusyn31-
"Last I checked this is a Representative Republic and it is a "God given right to free speech".

Are you referring to the Church here? Uh-we may live in the good ole US of A, but the Church doesn't work like that. Especially THIS church, LOL!

Sam

Deacon John Montalvo said: "Archbishop Sandri has taken over as Prefect of the Oriental Congregation. I'm not sure how this bodes for the Eastern Churches..."

It didn't bode very well for us (re: Reformed Liturgy) under the last Prefect who was an Eastern Catholic.

I pray that the new Prefect is aware of issues such as "inclusive" language, etc., and other Western pre-occupations.

It looks like the new Prefect for the Eastern Churches has already assumed his post. Get your research together and start penning your letters.

Prefect Lights a Lamp for Eastern Churches

VATICAN CITY, JULY 3, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The recently appointed prefect of the Congregation for Eastern Churches lit a lamp in St. Peter's Basilica to symbolize the Church's concern for Christians in the East.

Archbishop Leonardo Sandri lit the flame in front of an icon of the Mother of God.

Archbishop Sandri said the flame is "a sign of our full attention toward our brethren of the East, who suffer daily from the consequences of war, division, hatred and attempted bombings," Vatican Radio reported.

He also said the gesture was a call to prayer for those involved in the spiral of violence that damages personal and social coexistence.

I don't agree. It has never been about majority or popular opinion. It is about right and wrong. Inclusive language is wrong. Abbreviating and revising the Liturgy is just wrong.

I don't want attend the Petras recension, or the Schott recension. I want the Ruthenian recension. Obviously, the revision got the majority of the commission to agree, and the majority of the bishops to agree. But even with majority approval, it is still wrong.

What we need, and what we must have, is a real liturgical renewal. We need a beautiful and poetic English translation of the Ruthenian recension, that is accurate, complete, faithful, and true. One that is free from inclusive language and any other political agenda.

Because it is agenda driven, I am optimistic that it will appear dated and intolerable within a very short time. It is what happens whenever you embrace and enshrine the fads of a fading generation. It is the last gasp, of a hopeless cause.

The Ruthenian recension, even if it only has a minority following today, is timeless, and beautiful. It will be back, when this disaster of a revision looks dated and tawdry. We haven't long to wait, either.

Nick

I've held off writing to Rome intentionally until the Motu Proprio came out, basically to use it in detail as a striking, direct, and very recent example of precedent. Thank you, Papa Benoit.

Excellent. The more such letters, the better. Incidentally, while it is essential that such letters are sent to all the right people in Rome (including the Pope), I venture to predict that since the new Prefect of the Oriental Congregation is not yet a Cardinal, we shall wait until November for an effective response (the consistory for the creation of new Cardinals is expected in November). The Holy Father goes to Castelgandolfo either tomorrow or the next day. In the summer the weather in Rome is unbearable and the place is full of tourists, so the people who work there take vacations in the summer if at all possible (I learned many years ago never to go to Rome in the summer if I can possibly avoid it - the libraries I want are all closed in summer).

But keep those letters coming!

Fr. Serge

Well,

Week 2 and I am up to 70 signatures on my petition to return to the Liturgy my ancestors brought to this land from the Rusyn homeland.

Once I get a majority, I will submit it to our pastor and then send a copy to the Archbishop.

It probably will not do any good, but if I did not try, then I would be as guilty as those that keep the status quo.

Make sure to send it to the Papal Nuntio and to the Holy See.

Fr. Serge

I shall, thanks for the reminder...

Fantastic! Keep up the good work.

Keep writing to Rome!

The new pro-nuncio speaks English and responds to letters.

Update for yunz all (hehehe a Pittsburgh thing...)

Week 3 and I am up to 90 names. I have not even made it to Saturday p.m. Liturgy where they know about my petition and are waiting for me, I'll have at least another 40-50 names. I will get there next week....when I get to approx. 1/2 of the active parishioners (~120 parishioners), I will submit the petition to our pastor, the Archbishop, the Apostolic Annuncio in D.C., and to Pope Benedict XVI.

Because we have a great cantor for 9 a.m. Liturgy (who can read music and sing quite well), it was not as bad. In the past, I used to go and sing bass for Liturgy, but I refuse to pick up those hideous green monsterous books...

Again, the best time we sung today was when we sang Slavonic without the words in the books.......hmmmmm, thought that was suppose to deter us in regards to singing the Liturgy brought to us by our Rusyn ancestors? Guess what, the parishioners are saying their peace.

As many parishioners stated in the last few weeks, "if it ain't broke, why fix it?" Good question, any of the heirarchy want to answer this question... Another parishioner stated this morning, "I will become Orthodox before I Latinize". Wow! What a statement. I am thinking on doing this as well. I know Metropolitan Nicolas Smisko personally, I am sure he would not mind converting me to the Carpatho-Rusyn Orthodox Diocese.

Rusyn31 quotes a parishioner: "Another parishioner stated this morning, "I will become Orthodox before I Latinize".

Latinization is "imitating the outward appearance of the Latin Rite out of feeling of inferiority of one's own rite." We do many of the same things as the Roman rite: read an epistle and gospel, recite the words of institution of our Lord, etc. Using new music based on moe traditional melodies, or saying the anaphora aloud, or not saying three litanies (not found in the Roman rite anyhow) are not "latinizations" Nor has the order of the liturgy in your parish changed dramatically from before the promulgation. People may not like the changes, but if they oppose the Restored Divine Liturgy because it is a "latinization," then they are certainly misrepresenting what the new translation is about.

The revised divine liturgy is a modernization of the rite, not a Latinization of it.

The people in my parish oppose the Revised Divine Liturgy because it is not what our Rusyn ancestors brought to this country 100 yrs. ago. I am unsure what tradition this is suppose to be, but it certainly is not the Carpatho-Rus' prostopinije that we grew up with. The re-translated English words I can deal with. What I, along with at least 100 others so far cannot tolerate is the new music, the, "traditional melodies". If it is traditional, why hasn't anyone heard it before now? The people in my parish are angry that not one word in the new books are in Slavonic. Slavonic WAS a constant at our Sunday Liturgy for close to a century, respected and honored by everyone, even for the younger parishioners like myself.

As I have posted many times, we sing better, louder, and with more heart-felt passion in Slavonic than with the "new tradition" Restored Divine Liturgy. Again, either listen to the radio apostolate or come to our church and listen in person.

Throughout the decades, our great cantors such as Prof. Parvensky, Prof. Karol taught Carpatho-Rus' prostopinije. That tradition was handed down to our previous and current cantors. Many of our first cantors here in America were trained in Uzhorod, is that not the tradition we should be keeping?

It is not a secret that the Greek Catholic Churches in Europe have changed everything they do to fit the majority nationality and/or ethnicity, all but throwing out the traditions kept by our Rusyn ancestors. Other threads on this board talk about that Slovakization and Ukrainianization of the Rusyn Greek Catholic Church abroad. Are we doing the same thing to our Rusyn roots, as they are doing in Slovakia and Ukraine for the sake of modernization?

Do we have to end up being like the Greek Catholic Rusyns in Europe? That is petitioning Rome for a purely Rusyn bishop just to keep the traditions of our people alive?

If you come to our parish, you can see on either side of our church two Ukrainian churches. One was Catholic and went Orthodox in the 1920's. The other is the current Ukrainian Catholic church that broke from the Orthodox in the 1950's.

Anyway, 100 yrs ago, we went to that original Ukrainian Catholic Church, seeing no apparent differences. After only a few months, the differences in the Ukrainian and Rusyn styles of prostopinije were apparent, and arguments formulated between them. This is the primary reason why we founded the Rusyn Greek Catholic Church right across the street. We wanted to keep our Rusyn traditions, not keep or conform to anything or anyone else's traditions.

Also, many parishioners are angry that nobody came to our church to ask or to see what we wanted. Was it the same in other parishes? I know that there were some Spiritually Conferences, but from what I understand, all questions were pre-screened and there was no real debate or open talk, just a one-way dialogue on how the Restored/Revised Liturgy will be carried out. It would have been nice to have been a part of the decision making. After all, isn't the church about the parishioners as well as the clergy (and everyone else)?

Father David is only partially correct; some elements of the reform are not an imitation of the outward appearances of the Latin Liturgy. Others are. Father David is wrong in suggesting that it is a restoration or merely a new translation. It is neither. It is not Eastern. The whole idea and ethos of this reform is rooted in the same theories that took hold of the Western Liturgy in the 1970s and 1980s, theories that did no good to the Western Church and which they now are struggling to correct, with much pain.

Father David correctly states that Latinization comes from a feeling that our liturgical tradition is inferior and inadequate. But apparently the committee that revised our Liturgy also felt that our beloved official Ruthenian recension was inferior and inadequate. Otherwise they would not have felt compelled to abandon it and change it to conform to the principles of some anthropologically-centered Western liturgical theories that were in vogue a generation ago. Far from championing inclusively, this committee has excluded so many by its imposition of these now obsolete Latin theories. The whole idea of revising the liturgical tradition by a select committee is entirely foreign to Eastern Liturgy. This committee�s reform is a latinization on a much deeper and more profound level then simply erecting Stations of the Cross or putting a Sacred Heart statue in our churches. This reform strikes at the very soul of Eastern worship. A reform of this type has never been done before and can only be seen as an influence that has come into our Church from avant-garde centers of Western liturgical experimentation. It must be rejected in favor of our authentic and official Ruthenian Liturgy.

The Church has moved on from such nonsense as is found in this reform. Authenticity to sacred tradition is �in�. Trendy agendas are �out�. Fidelity, faithfulness and integrity are the buzzwords of the new millennium.

Dear John,

Wasn't our "official Ruthenian liturgy" (which I care about deeply, and which we at the MCI are STILL correcting existing services to match) prepared by a committee, at the request of bishops, and over the objections of some priests and laity? (I don't deny the value of these books, only the idea that they somehow came "from the people".) And didn't Rome in the 1990's suggest that the anaphora might be taken aloud?

For purposes of discussion, could you please list the Latinizations you see introduced in the new books - distinguishing them from abbreviations of long standing in our church?

I think this might make it clearer what you mean.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

You hit the nail squarely on the head with this post. Modernization was a failed Latin experiment and they continue to struggle against the damage that was inflicted. That is why the "refomed Liturgy" is so perplexing to me. Why does an Eastern Church mimic the errors of a Latin catastrophe a generation later?

Your post brought tears to my eyes.

_____________________________
Glory to Thee, O Lover of Mankind

Jeff,

Yes, the official books were prepared by a committee. That committee sought to prepare books that were authentic, preserving the Ruthenian liturgical recension. It did not seek to reform the recension according to already abandoned Western models (as did the current committee).

Regarding the aloud praying of the Anaphora, read the Liturgical Instruction. It most certainly did not call for it to be prayed out loud at all times and in all places following the Latin model, introduced by mandate. It sought only that people be familiar with it. Towards that end it asked the Church only �to study the ways in which, at least in some circumstances, it could be pronounced aloud.� It called only for "study", most likely because it knew that the custom it was referring to was not an Eastern one. It also makes clear through out the document that all liturgical renewal and reform would need to be done together, with all the Byzantine Churches (Catholic and Orthodox) acting in concert.

As to listing the specific latinizations, I direct you to many of my previous posts. Many, if not most of them, have been discussed. If you wish to see them more clearly take a 1964 �Ruthenian Liturgicon� and the 2007 �Revised Divine Liturgy� and place them side by side. Compare the rubrics and texts and note the differences. Then examine the changes and ask whether they flow from traditional Byzantine Liturgy (something you�d find in our official liturgical books or in those books published by Constantinople or Moscow) or whether they flow from 1970s Roman Catholicism.

I remind you that you have been asked and agreed to provide a listing of how the 2007 RDL is more faithful to the official 1942 Ruthenian Divine Liturgy than is the 1964 edition. We are still waiting for your posts on that and several other questions.

John

Dear John,

Pardon me, but I have never claimed that it was more faithful to the 1942 books; quite the opposite, I have mentioned things I did not like, and I was the SECOND person on this board to post to that thread, way back when. I did say, and continue to believe, that the changes will move many parishes closer in a number of ways to the 1942 books (by restoring the third antiphon/Beatitudes, verses at the prokeimenon and Alleluia, fuller troparia/kontakia, and omitted litanies for example.) If there are other questions, please refresh my memory. (I do recall one other, asking me to justify my belief that the new books are "better" at "growing the Church" - a belief which was pinned on me along the lines of "All revisionists must believe that the revision grows the Church better, and Jeff is a revisionist" - the latter part of which I certainly dispute. I feel no qualms about declining to justify a belief not my own that someone else attributes to me.)

I am asking specifically about Latinizations because quite a few of the changes in the new book are what I have described before: the bishops' apparent attempt at a parochial standard, where the previous books were hardly ever used (as Father Serge has attested: roughly, "Hardly anyone has participated in a complete service accordng to the new books"). Most of the "abbreviations" in the new books actually result in a LONGER service for most parishes, and no one has provided any evidence that a bishop has refused courteously requested permission to celebrate using complete antiphons and litanies.

On top of that, to say something is a Latinization is here a term of abuse - understandably so. Lumping all differences under that heading is inaccurate, and unhelpful to a real discussion.

So merely comparing the books does not provide a list of Latinizations. You have heard, right, of the "actual all-night Vigil" celebrated in Russia around 1911, with only SOME abbreviations, which was viewed by many as a wild and dangerous experiment? Abbreviation is by no means an automatic sign of Latinization.

So I am asking you to specifically list the Latinizations you see present in the service.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

There is a wonderful book written by Fr. Athanasius Pekar, OSBM entitled, "Our Slavic Heritage". This book was written on the occasion of the 1,100th anniversary of St. Cyril's death in 1969. Published by Byzantine Seminary Press Publications.

Two quotes I want to point out.

pg. 3 "Today, we are witnessing an interesting phenomenon. The Czechs, Slovaks and Croats, who abandoned Cyrillo-Methodian ideals in the past, are making a concerted effort to restore, in their history, the spiritual heritage of the Slavic Apostoles, SS. Cyril and Methodius, while we, Carpatho-Ruthenians, whose cultural and spiritual life has its roots in the Cyrillo-Methodian Christianity, are indifferent about their ideals and sacred trust."

pg. 29 "Let us cherish and preserve our great spiritual treasure, our Slavonic Liturgy with its melodius chant, as a sacred trust of our venerable ancestors."

This book is full of information about our wonderful Slavic Liturgy and the brothers (SS. Cyril & Methodius) that brought it to us.

I think this book needs to be reprinted and be a MUST READ for all Byzantine Rusyn Catholics, especially in the Pittsburgh Archeparchy.

Dear Rusyn31,

That is a wonderful book; I had my copy out a bit ago (and I've been working to further Vespers and Matins in our parishes for years- something Fr. Pekar stressed, both here and in his leaflets). I would love to see a more complete and spiritual observance of our rite - along with unabbreviated and un-"simplified" chants.

Jeff

I think that all of Fr. Pekar's books need to be reprinted and distributed en masse. He points out on many occasions on the extreme apathy of past bishops and clergy in regards to our Slavic (not to mention Rusyn) heritage and their willingness to magyarize (in the Aust.-Hung. Empire) or modernize today (1950's - 1960's) because of this apathy.

Anyone out there know of a print shop that would be willing to do so?

Dear Rusyn31,

"Our Slavic Heritage" IS still in print, from the Byzantine Seminary Press [byzantines.net] for $2.00 - along with the full set of leaflets, many of which Fr. Pekar wrote, if I recall correctly. I've asked them to consider putting the leaflets online.

The Seminary Press also distributes Slavonic liturgy and chant books, and historical materials.


Jeff

A correction: above I mentioned Father Serge's assertion that very few Greek Catholics had experienced complete services according to the Roman books for the Ruthenian Recension. In my attempt at summarizing his statement, I should have said "old books" or "the Ruthenian Recension books" rather than "new books", which was ambiguous in context.

My apologies!
Jeff