www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Serbian Orthodox Protest Liturgical Changes

We have moved on from that practice, in an organic way. To restore it is liturgical archaeologism. Would you like to restore the Agape Meal before Divine Liturgy too?

So the OCA has abuses too - that's not exactly news either. As I said, the cancer has spread. The reason for having secret prayers is not because clergy were trying to cut corners. I suggest you do a little bit of study before impugning a millennium of Byzantine liturgical practice. Was the silent recitation of the Canon in the Roman liturgy a result of cutting corners too?

This is what I have seen in Antiochian parishes as well.

Yes, our priest says the prayers aloud and the royal doors remain open during the entire liturgy. Is this an abuse? I honestly don't know. I've never seen it done any other way and I've attended Antiochian, Greek, OCA, Melkite, and Ruthenian liturgies.

Even if it is technically an abuse, it is a far cry from inclusive language, dumbed-down language, omission of essential parts of the liturgy, etc. that goes on in many other churches.

What is the theological reason for the priest saying some prayers silently and for the doors being closed for parts of the liturgy? Also, is there a general concensus in Orthodoxy on these issues?

Joe

In my parish (Carpatho-Russian), the silent prayers are silent and when the priest is praying the prayers the cantors and congregation are singing responses. To me, I think this better maintains the flow of the liturgy, whereas when I've been in places where things are said aloud such as the Anaphora; everything seems to come to a screeching halt so the priest can say these prayers. It is more noticeable the longer the prayers consecration are in my experience.

I prefer the silent prayers remain as they are, and I personally would oppose changing this.

Also, the Royal Doors remain open throughout in my parish.

I have to confess that I would personally lament not hearing the Anaphora and the other beautiful prayers. Still, whatever is best in keeping with the tradition is what should be done, no matter what my personal preferences are. I am relatively ignorant of the rubrics of these liturgical matters. What are priests being taught in the seminaries?

Joe

my very Orthodox OCa parish has the chanted Anaphora and does not have the curtain- I don't see anything "outrageous" about the doors being kept open.

EVERYTHING in the rubrics of the Church are there for a reason. What you see or don't see as being "outrageous" are of no consequence. Orthodox divine services are a priceless treasure that we must carefully guard. Similar services were once celebrated in other Christian communities, but over the centuries they were lost as a result of both liturgical and theological reforms. From the priest�s exclamation at the very beginning of the service we are immersed in an atmosphere of uninterrupted prayer, in which psalms, litanies, stichera, troparia, prayers and the celebrating priest�s invocations follow one another in a continuous stream. The entire service is conducted as if in one breath, in one rhythm, like an ever unfolding mystery in which nothing distracts from prayer. Byzantine liturgical texts filled with profound theological and mystical content, alternate with the prayerful incantation of the psalms, whose every word resonates in the hearts of the faithful. Even the elements of �choreography� characteristic of Orthodox services, such as solemn entries and exits, prostrations and censing, are not intended to distract from prayer but, on the contrary, to put the faithful in a prayerful disposition and draw them into the theourgia in which, according to the teaching of the Fathers, not only the Church on earth, but also the heavenly Church and even the angels participate. Liturgical texts are for Orthodox Christians an incontestable doctrinal authority, whose theological irreproachability is second only to Scripture. Liturgical texts are not simply the works of outstanding theologians and poets, but also the fruits of the prayerful experience of those who have attained sanctity and theosis. The theological authority of liturgical texts is, in my opinion, even higher than that of the works of the Fathers of the Church, for not everything in the works of the latter is of equal theological value and not everything has been accepted by the fullness of the Church. Liturgical texts, on the other hand, have been accepted by the whole Church as a �rule of faith� (kanon pisteos), for they have been read and sung everywhere in Orthodox churches over many centuries. Throughout this time, any erroneous ideas foreign to Orthodoxy that might have crept in either through misunderstanding or oversight were eliminated by Church Tradition itself, leaving only pure and authoritative doctrine clothed by the poetic forms of the Church�s hymns.
Orthodox liturgical texts are important because of their ability to give exact criteria of theological truth, and one must always confirm theology using liturgical texts as a guideline, and not the other way round. The lex credendi grows out of the lex orandi, and dogmas are considered divinely revealed because they are born in the life of prayer and revealed to the Church through its divine services. Thus, if there are differences in the understanding of a dogma between a certain theological authority and liturgical texts, I would be inclined to give preference to the latter. And if a textbook of dogmatic theology contains views different from those found in liturgical texts, it is the textbook, not the liturgical texts, that need correction.
If we can call the services of the Orthodox Church a school of theology, then the Divine Liturgy is this school par excellence. It teaches us about the mysteries of the Heavenly Kingdom because it itself is an icon of this Kingdom, the most complete, perfect reflection of the heavenly reality in our earthly conditions, a revelation of the transcendent through the immanent. In the Kingdom of God all symbols shall pass away, and only the heavenly reality will remain. There we will not commune of the Body and Blood of Christ in the form of bread and wine, but in a more perfect way we shall be united with Christ Himself, the Source of life and immortality. If the manner of our communion with God will change, its essence will remain the same � always a personal encounter with God, not of isolated people, but of people in communion with each other. In this sense it is correctly said that the Liturgy served on earth is but a part of the incessant Liturgy celebrated by people and angels in the Heavenly Kingdom.

Alexandr (with the much appreciated assistance of His Grace +Иларион

Alexandr, that is all beautifully put and I wholeheartedly agree. Now, with regard to these concrete issues, I have to ask:

1). Is it essential for their to be a curtain? In all of the Orthodox and byzantine Churches that I've been in, I've only once seen a curtain and it was in a Melkite Church.

2). Is it essential that the doors be opened and closed at certain times?

3). Is it essential that certain priest's prayers be prayed silently?

Also, are there specific reasons why things must be done in a particular way? I ask these questions because I am almost utterly ignorant when it comes to the history of liturgy and so I wouldn't have the first clue as to what is kosher and what isn't in liturgy (aside from obvious, common sense things that pertain to any kind of liturgy). Thanks.

Joe

Joe,
I am at work now so I will make this a quick answer. Consult Maximus the Confessor. The Divine Liturgy is symbolic of the history of salvation. The opening and closing of the Rpyal Doors represent the opening and closing of the doors to Heaven. The symbolism of the history of salavation is an essential element of the celebration of the Liturgy.

Alexandr,

I whole-heartedly agree with what you say about the Liturgical texts but cannot with regard to the rubrics. There are so many accepted variations, even contradictory rubrics, rubrics intended for monasteries that even the most strict parish priests don't follow, I don't see how one can claim they are inviolable. If that were true we would still be using the Typicon of Hagia Sophia and not that of St. Sabbas. While maintaining the greater tradition we must avoid making an idol out of rubrics.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I agree that is why I am trying real hard to place faith in our shepards.

Hospodi Pomiluj! I hope they have the same faith!

Which current Orthodox translations?

XB!



Caro Padre Diacone,

Don't presume to say it's a very good translation if you don't read Greek.

in Domino,

Edward