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

I have just listened to a broadcast of a "Vesperal Divine Liturgy" (RDL) from the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Parma. I don't know how to begin to comment without getting myself banned. I will sleep on it and try again tomorrow.

My only question is, why did you waste electricity and brain cells listening to that disaster.

'cos you can't make any worthwhile comment unless you have experienced it ?

I can easily think of topics upon which I could offer quite worth-while comments without having experienced the topic in question personally. I have no desire to land in Hell, but I'm quite capable of commenting on why the place should be avoided and how one should go about seeking one's ultimate destination Elsewhere!

Just yesterday I was preaching about Saint Brendan the Navigator and the religious significance of the seafaring Irish monks of the sixth century. I myself have never ventured upon the Atlantic Ocean in a leather boat, nor do I intend to. But the people seemed to find my sermon worth-while. However, it was probably not as worth-while as Saint Brendan's monastic and ascetic accomplishments.

Fr. Serge

On Sunday, 17 June, I listened to a broadcast of Vesperal Divine Liturgy celebrated at the Byzantine Catholic Cathedral of St. John the Baptist, Parma, Ohio, on Saturday, 16 June.

It is nice to see an Eastern Catholic church undertaking some form of outreach. I was also pleased to note that there was a deacon participating in the service (an all too rare occurrence). One could also hear other people in the singing background � it is always good when people gather to pray.

Here endeth the praises. If you do not like negative comments and/or are easily upset or offended then please read no further.

I wish I had recorded the broadcast, as it was not easy to listen to the service and follow along in the books I have. I may try to do so next week.

First I will comment on the service, then the 'performance'.

I missed the initial vozhlas, tuning in during the third �Come, let us worship...�. Psalm 103 was not chanted. Next came the Litany of Peace, then the Lamp-lighting Psalms. I believe all Psalm verses were chanted, but I'm not sure that 10 stichera were sung. (My apologies � I had some difficulty following along, and I also could have had more reference materials laid out before me.) Then we had the Entrance/�O Joyful Light�, the Saturday evening Prokeimenon, a Small Litany, then the Trisagion and the Divine Liturgy portion of the service. It took less than 15 minutes to get to this point.

The Prokeimenon and Alleluia were with verses. I note that after the Epistle, though the 'celebrant' addresses the 'lector' with �Peace be to you reader�, the usual reply of �And with your spirit� is not in the text, nor was it sung. Why?

There were three (?) extra petitions for Father's Day inserted during the Litany of Fervent Supplication. It is a normal practice to insert special petitions here, but these were all rather lengthy and, in my opinion, a bit over the top. The service progressed as per the RDL*. A rather short setting of the Cherubic Hymn was sung and the Great Entrance began almost immediately upon its conclusion. The Hymn was not nearly long enough to cover the priest's prayers and actions at this point in the Liturgy. One does not know if these were curtailed or if the 'awkward silence' was cut from the broadcast.

The Liturgy continued as per the RDL*. The Ambon Prayer sounded like the normal one, not one of the ones Fr. David Petras is attempting to resurrect. The saints of the day were were mentioned in the Dismissal.

At no point in the broadcast could one hear the bells, or even chains, of a thurible. The entire service as broadcast (sans Communion) was 50 minutes.

Now on to the performance, or execution (no double entendre intended) of the service.

Cathedrals are meant to be shining examples of 'good practice' and where one should be able to find the best of everything (or close enough to it). If this is true in the BCC, the quality of the service I heard means I will make every effort not to attend a service in a Byzantine Catholic parish � I am not a masochist!

I fully realise that poor performance is not legislated for in the RDL, but there is a connection.

The singing was atrocious. There is no other way to put it. The priest and deacon were 'OK', but if the MCI had anything to do with training the cantor then they have a lot to answer for! No person in a leadership position should be singing �Lo-ho-hord have mercy� or �A-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-men�. To say this grates on the ear is an understatement. Added to this he was nearly always flat. All three of the main players did a fairly good job of staying in different keys throughout the service. This gives the impression not of a unified service, nor of people praying together, but of different groups of people who happen to be praying at the same time and place.

Many texts were stumbled over, as if being read for the first time. Also, texts were rushed. Someone would start at a normal pace, pick up speed toward the end of the prayer, then drop down to a normal speed for the next one.

I have, on occasion, heard the priest's silent prayers taken audibly. If this broadcast presented the way it is to be done in the BCC then I am convinced they should never, ever be heard aloud. They weren't chanted but read/declaimed in such a sing-song way as to sound as if one were performing on stage or children. I gained nothing spiritual from the revelation of these secret prayers. Although it sounds well nigh impossible, they put me off the service even more!

A second, more competent, cantor appeared after Communion, and one could easily hear people trying to sing along, but the original cantor soon returned.

If the BCC sticks to the RDL and everything else given above, and continues to broadcast such, they will definitely see an increase in conversions � to other Churches. According to legend, when Prince St. Volodymyr's emissaries attended a Divine Liturgy at Hagia Sophia in Constantinople they were not sure if they were in heaven or still on earth. If they had attended the service at St. John in Parma they would have had no doubt that they were not in heaven. If they had to experience it repeatedly they might even have thought they were elsewhere.

Yes, these words are harsh, but they are not written out of malice. They are the reactions of someone who has experienced good liturgy and who has listened to something quite the opposite.

Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.



* I have two versions of the RDL in my possession: the 2004 draft which appears in Fr Serge Keleher's analysis of the RDL and a 2005 draft with musical settings but none of the celebrant's �silent prayers�.

How does one have a "draft" of a liturgy that has already been approved?

Mary

Put simply I'm interested in liturgics (not just the Divine Liturgy, but also the Divine Office and para-liturgical services). I've collected service books of various Orthodox and Eastern Catholic jurisdictions along with Roman Catholic, Coptic, Armenian, and even some Protestant books.

I have seen the 'theory' of the RDL - the text - and I wanted to hear it in 'practice'. In all honesty I'd rather attend another 4 hour Coptic service (and that was mostly in Arabic, a language I do not understand).

Mary,

I do not (yet) have a copy of the RDL as officially promulgated 6 January 2007, just earlier, draft, versions.

For the liturgicon see bottom:
http://www.patronagechurch.com/Liturgicon_2006/2007%20Liturgy%20-%20Music.htm

specifically
http://www.patronagechurch.com/Liturgicon_2006/Chrysostom/Liturgy.htm

For "peoples" book and music:
http://metropolitancantorinstitute.org/Publications2.html

Thanks. I just haven't had a chance to print them yet.

My question is directed over and above your sequential exposure to the liturgy, and is not a criticism of your use of the term "draft"....

The curious thing is that it has been stated several times in this Forum that the liturgy was approved by Rome before Metropolitan Judson died and that NOT ONE WORD HAS BEEN CHANGED SINCE THEN.

That would mean that after the approval from Rome there would be no future "drafts" of the approved liturgy...see what I mean?

Mary

Mary,

That is a different topic and not necessarily pertinent to this particular thread, though it is a valid point! Do we not already have a thread on this particular aspect of the RDL project?

Not that I know of. I've asked the question directly and Father David answered directly that there have been NO changes to the liturgy since it was approved by Rome...not one word has been changed.

I cannot at the moment remember in what topic heading that question arose, but it is not the only place where it was mentioned.

I just hope to keep that question alive because I don't believe the answer...at least not yet.

Mary

KO63AP,

Obviously you must have listened to the radio broadcast of the Vesperal Liturgy on WHKW, 1220 AM, out of Cleveland, OH. The broadcast from St. John�s in Parma has been on the radio (different stations from time to time) for many years. I�ll be tuning in next week, maybe you starting this thread will be good for ratings?!

Monomakh

The blessing is for the reader only. Many times the reader is responding with "an to your spirit" while the Alleluia is being sung. I had never heard the reply to "Peace be to you reader" sung (chanted) by the reader or the congregation in any of the BCC, OCA , AOA, Russian Catholic or ACROD parishes I have visited over the years. Most often the reader responds "and to your spirit" in a low voice, audible but not projected.

This particular exchange between priest and reader has had the priest part in most texts but rarely the reader's response. I would guess it is to keep the exchange a private one.

As to 10 stichera, the RDL book only shows three stichera (for Sunday), however a cantor could add the remaining seven to complete the celebration.

Was this a live broadcast or prerecorded and edited for a time slot on radio? Also, was the homily broadcast? If not, that will also cut down the airtime.





Now given that earlier in the review you were more dispassionate, it seems that now you turn less than charitable. Perhaps this was the first time they had broadcast their liturgical services? True not all cantors are perfect, at least they are willing to make the effort and face the slings and arrows of perfectionists listening to the broadcast. Does your own parish provide such radio outreach as a comparison? Why do we as a church focus so much of our energy on negative aspects?

Is this broadcast available via internet?

What time is this Vesperal Liturgy(?) on the radio? It sounds like I'll need a bottle of liquor to help me get through it! God help us!

Steve Petach wrote:
I believe the Divine Liturgy has been on the radio for some time, say six or so years. Each parish in the Eparchy of Parma contributes to the cost of it on a monthly basis. It represents the entire Eparchy. That's why we get an opinion -- as our collection goes to pay for it. That broadcast showcases the Byzantine Church to anyone who listens to it -- it should be the most beautiful service we can muster. It's our calling card to those who don't have a clue who we are. It's especially important that we sing it beautifully, as the other senses are not engaged through the radio. Perhaps poor singing in church is offset by the beauty & incense experienced in the whole package.

Why do we focus on negative aspects? Because our church seems unable to self-examine and correct its mistakes -- the same ones are repeated again, and again. Give us something positive to focus on, and I guarantee you'll have people on board faster than you can say Restored Divine Liturgy. I would be one of them, but right now I'm in the same boat as Recluse.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOH - that's the one I heard last night - and last week too

I have to admit - I was very very disapointed

I had heard so much about the new settings etc and frankly I found them to be ..... well ... really I did not want to sing along

I found the actual singing /chant bad . I cannot understand how anyone could manage to get so many intrusive 'h's in. In the days of my youth my singing teacher would have slain me for that . I would have been very correctly told to go away and not open my mouth in public till that fault was cured.

As for , as Kobzar has mentioned , each person singing in their own key well words fail me on that - how unprofessional - and if this sort of thing is going out every week - well sorry - someone needs to do some work with clergy and chanters .

I can't comment re the actual texts used - I don't know enough about Liturgy - and of course what I am used to is different [ UGCC and in Ukrainian to boot]

I enjoyed hearing it sung in English - well enjoyed is I fear a little OTT

Why was so much rushed when sung - aren't we supposed to be able to hear and understand what is being sung ? All I know is that I couldn't and if I listening intently could not - what chance is there for the person standing in the Church who is also trying to join in Communal Worship. I know it's not easy to get mikes correctly positioned in a Church - but I presume these ones are placed for the broadcast use not solely for the benefit those of the congregation present.

OH yes - and where did they get that silent thurible from - now that's an interesting invention.

Steve is correct. Praise the effort and be as dispassionate as is possible when speaking of the Revisions and other problems in our Church. The problems with the texts, rubrics and music are not the cantor�s fault.

As to Steve�s last question, I think that we as a Church focus so much of our energy on the negative is because the path to the growth of our Church is so clear and yet we keep diverting our journey onto dead end trails. Look at greater Pittsburgh. Most parishes are lukewarm and have severe abbreviations in the Liturgy. Yet in the midst of them one parish started praying the full official Divine Liturgy (accurate rubrics, no abbreviations (meaning every little litany), and over time added Vespers and Matins). In ten years this parish - in a city that lost more than half its population in the past 25 years - grew from 30 worshippers on a Sunday to 140 worshippers on a Sunday (and buried another 130). The quality of liturgical prayer was phenomenal and the people raised the roof with their singing even at Vespers. Not all that far away the Cathedral in Munhall began experimenting with revisions to the Divine Liturgy - new words, rubrics and music. People responded by heading for the door, and the quality of the Liturgy is poor and the singing is almost nonexistent. So which one was chosen as the model? The one that grew from 30 to 130? No. The one that chased away the people is the model. We prohibit a celebration of the Liturgy that has been demonstrated in a number of places to grow the Church and instead mandate a celebration of the Liturgy that has been shown to kill the Church. Is there any wonder why people are always so negative?

But it�s not too late! The bishops could rescind the RDL and instead mandate what works � the official Ruthenian Divine Liturgy.

Lord have mercy!
Let us pray fervently that this will come to pass.

Dear Steve,

I realise that the exchange between the priest and reader is often glanced over, only half executed, or at best just 'not heard'. In Sunday's broadcast the reader was at a microphone, the priest could be clearly heard and there was an opportunity for the reader to respond. In theory he could have pulled back from microphone and replied, on the other hand his reply does not appear in the RDL so I shouldn't have expected it.

The BCC is down to three stichera on a Saturday evening? I thought the Basilian practice of not repeating any stichera was bad enough, but even they haven't gone that far. Does anyone know the history of this abbreviation? Has it come in with the RDL or is it older?

As I stated in my 'review' this was a Sunday evening broadcast of a Saturday evening service. Thank you for reminding me of the homily. It was not cut, although this was the first time I've ever heard "The title of today's homily is ...".

I will not deny that I was less than charitable, but I could find no other way in which to put across my feelings and reactions to this broadcast, this is why I didn't post immediately after the broadcast.

As I was lead to believe, and as others have confirmed, this is a regular broadcast - not a first time attempt. I know that few cantors are 'perfect', but should not the Church be putting forward their best? My parish does not provide any such broadcasts, although I wish they did. I did compliment the Parma cathedral for actually having such a programme, I'm just disappointed with the result.

Why all the negativity? How are people expected to react when the traditions of their Church are dismissed, when they are treated as children, when they see good practice ignored and bad practice promoted? Should people from a parish which served the Divine Liturgy according to the Recensio Rutena say "Thank you for butchering the Antiphons and removing Litanies."? People are frustrated and as a result turn negative. This is not an ideal reaction, but it is a reality.

It appears that the Vesperal Divine Liturgy can be heard via WHKW 1200 AM's website [whkwradio.com] only as it is being broadcast, Sundays at 5:00 PM. There does not appear to be an option to "listen again".

I wonder why there is no information about these broadcasts on the web pages of the Parma Eparchy [parma.org] nor the Parma cathedral [home.catholicweb.com].

Yes. Sadly, what you have posted here is a description of what has ocurred at my parish. It is difficult to react in a way other than complete disgust. It is not enjoyable to walk around in a perpetual state of disgust, and this is one reason why I am compelled to find another Eastern Catholic Church--or convert to Holy Orthodoxy.

WOW!

Finally a thread that is really discussing what this Revised Divine Liturgy is all about. I have to make sure I catch the broadcast next Sunday. That is if it does not mysteriously disappear.

It appears that:
WHKW AM 1220 [whkwradio.com] allows you to listen live to the radio broadcast.

It appears [whkwradio.com] every Sunday at 5pm EST you can listen to the RDL live from Cathedral of Parma. [parma.org]

So, if you haven't had a chance to hear the RDL this might be your chance.

I'll be listening next week .

I want to see if this will become more familiar as the weeks go on. I also wish to see if the various musical problems become less as the Clergy, Cantors and people become more familiar with it.

Anyone care to join me in this ?

This is something specific to the Vesperal Liturgy ("Vigil Divine Liturgy" in the new books), and has been in place for years. Father David's Typikon, which is normative for the Byzantine Catholic Church, gives the usual rules for stichera at Vespers, and the Metropolitan Cantor Institute vespers books for Saturday night give seven stichera (with the saints' stichera posted weekly on its website); the daily Vespers book is similarly complete.

But in this case, the Typikon adds:


So the format of the stichera is specific to the Vigil Divine Liturgy, as has been published in the BCC for quite a number of years, specifically to be used in place of a Saturday evening Divine Liturgy.

(The Cantor's Companion goes on to note that Vespers rather than the Vigil Divine Liturgy is the preferred option on those days for which an evening Divine Liturgy is not specifically appointed.)

Do I like the Vigil Divine Liturgy? Not particularly, certainly not as a replacement for Vespers! On the other hand, our local OCA parish omits all the chanted verses of Psalm 140 as well and the saints' stichera in most cases, so I can hardly be shocked at parishes not taking all ten stichera. Even with just three verses, I've heard quite a few complaints about "stuff from Vespers" in the Divine Liturgy book.

It's interesting to note that one can celebrate an ordinary Vespers almost entirely from the Green Book, without a parish having to purchase anything additional except for the cantors. Of course, for a regular service of Vespers, one would want books for the service, or a combined anthology like the Velikij Sbornik.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

There is no response at this point in the Sluzhenik and Apostol of the Ruthenian recension; in fact, "reader" in the English translation appears to be an addition to make clear that fact that the blessing is in the singular.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Thanks for looking - forgot to do so myself.

Then again, no one has ever said the Recensio Rutena books were perfect � just better than most!

This is one of numerous lacunae, including a reply to "Peace be with you." before the Epistle, St. Olha in the list of saints at the Lytia petitions, etc.

Our Lady's Slave - I'll join you in your endeavor.

OK - a reminder for those interested.

The Vesperal Divine Liturgy from St John's Cathedral in Parma will be broadcast tonight at 5pm Eastern Time [ sorry can't convert it for anyone else ]

The Radio Station is WHKW, 1220 AM

At the moment I am unable to raise the Station on the Web - but will keep trying

Link for Radio Station [whkwradio.com]

updated info for those intending to listen tonight.

We still cannot get the Radio Station 's Site

BUT

http://206.183.0.11:8001/whkw.mp3

will work for PCs in iTunes, WMP, Real Player and VLC

It may not be broadcast tonight as the Liturgy started at 4pm and Bishop John is ordaining his subdeacons to the diaconate at this Liturgy.

Fr. Deacon Lance

It was broadcast today. It was a regular "Vesperal" liturgy.

I've listened to this evening's broadcast.

First the good news. One could hear more people singing this time. But this may be due to the fact that there were a number of people from the seminary there this week. We shall see what how next week's broadcast sounds.

Examining the service itself, one notes there was no deacon this week. Perhaps he was saving his voice for the main Liturgy on Sunday... We did not hear Ps. 103, the First Kathisma (or any part of it), nor any of the readings at Vespers. As mentioned earlier, the Petras Typicon was followed and only three stichera (this week � for the feast of the Nativity of the Forerunner) were sung.

At the Liturgy itself the correct propers were taken, except at �It is truly proper�. In Slavic usage the irmos of the 9th Ode was to be sung (in some traditions it follows an introductory verse). Only the pryspiv was sung � we did not hear the irmos itself (or is this another peculiarity of the Petras Typicon?). An 'alternate' ambo prayer was read.

Where there were choices for melodies, melody 'B' was followed again.

I was also surprised to hear �Heavenly King� sung after the Gospel. I have never heard this done before � is it something unique to the Petras Typicon?

Now on to some less objective commentary... Things were pretty much the same as last week. Music was rushed, singing was flat and there were plenty of extraneous h-es. There is no excuse for this 1) in a cathedral, 2) for an open broadcast. Again, sounded like we had someone else � a better singer � come in after Communion, then the original cantor returned. I also found the way the 'silent' prayers were delivered annoying � but that is a 100% subjective opinion.

Tomorrow I hope to have a close listen to the recording and see if I can pick up anything else.

Father Deacon,

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because you live in PA and in another Eparchy.

What happened this evening (ordinations) at the Cathedral was not broadcast.

It has clearly never been a live program in the past ever.

The broadcast from St. John�s in Parma has been on the radio (different stations from time to time) for many years. I wonder if they are actually broadcasting the entire liturgy (a Vesperal one in this case) from the previous day (on Saturday evening). You may be wondering isn�t that what they always did? In the past, I know for a fact that the only parts of the recording that were changed were the Tropar, Epistle and Gospel. (Note: You can ask pretty much any of the priests in the Eparchy of Parma if you need confirmation of this and I encourage people to do so. I�ve personally been in the recording room where the Epistle and Gospel were recorded in the past. From what I remember, the recording room is upstairs off of the choir loft more or less.) The rest of the service was the exact same recording every week. So with just a little editing, voila, you had that week�s service for the radio. I�ll have to listen to see how much difference there is from week to week.

Monomakh

"I was also surprised to hear �Heavenly King� sung after the Gospel. I have never heard this done before � is it something unique to the Petras Typicon?"

Perhaps not.

Out west we have been in the habit of singing "Heavenly King" after the Gospel for quite some time (30+ years that I personally can remember).

But I gather that all that is "BCC" revolves around a small sphere surrounding Pittsburgh, or at least one's own parish.

I have also heard the troparion of the feast, or "Duch Svjaty..." sung at parishes dedicated to the Holy Spirit

On page 9 of Sokol (1946) it lists:
"Pered propvid'--Before the Sermon"
1 "Carju nebesnyj"
2 "Duch Svatyj"

I would gather by that reference that this clearly PRE-dates Fr David's Typicon.

Thank you, Steve.

As I mentioned earlier, this practice is news to me. It is not in the Recensio rutena books, nor have I spotted it in any Ukrainian books (although I don't have the Dolnytsky Typicon in the original Slavonic, just a {sometimes questionable} Ukrainian translation). Hopefully those more knowledgeable than I will continue to contribute on this topic.

The singing of "O Heavenly King" or "The Holy Spirit" certainly pre-dates the work of Father David. However, it is a purely local custom, peculiar to Transcarpathia, and therefore does not appear in any official service-book, nor is this custom found in "Ruthenian" churches apart from those which trace their origin to Transcarpathia - and even there it is done ad libitum.

Fr. Serge

OK - I managed to hear it too .

Sadly immediately afterwards my Internet connection went down so was unable to make any comments about it - and I have quite a lot.

I'll get dowm to writing up my comments later today - again I will not comment on the texts - I don't know them well enough. I will be commenting on how it sounds to the outsider coming new to it

Well - now for my comments about the Liturgy from Parma that I heard last night.

Please bear in mind that I am UGCC so can't really talk about the texts.

To start we had problems accessing the broadcast at all - and I'd be glad if someone could in fact tell me what is happening with the Station itself - it was much easier to get there last week from WHKW AM 1220

However - get there I did - and after some band music the Liturgy itself started.

The first thing that struck me [ now remember I did sing a great deal in my youth so I am criticising as a singer ] was that we were still getting intrusive 'h's . There really is no excuse for this and it should not take long for the problem to be sorted . Hearing "Lo-ho-ho-hord have mercy" is a real turn off , not to mention "Glo-ho-hory". Strangely enough you will not normally hear congregations singing in this way. This problem with the intrusive 'h's must be dealt with. This Service, coming as it does from the Cathedral , should show what is best in Liturgical worship - and with this sort of thing it does not.

The congregation were a little better this week - but I would still like to have heard more - since this is a weekly broadcast please would they check the placement of Microphones ? It is sad that anyone who is not EC would gain the impression from this that congregations do not take part. This as we know , is far from the truth - when the congregation know [ I mean really know ] the music they are singing it becomes part of them and they will sing from their hearts and souls. I have always been astonished just how my Parish sing - mainly older folk and few with books - but oh it is sooooo natural . I can't say that I get this feeling from the Cathedral of St John the Baptist.

Again there were very marked tempo variations - some things dragged badly and others were rushed almost to the gabble state. It was a little better than last week - but again this is something that can be improved - and I hope that it will be - rapidly.

Why was the singing flat so often ? Again - this requires work .

Yes I know that Cantors are often volunteers and therefore I presume unpaid - but if your Cantor does not have sufficient pride in his work [ and I really do mean this ] and he cannot hear when he is flat , then he should not be singing for something as important as this. It may be a weekly Service - but it's one that could attract people to our Eastern Churches - and if musical people hear these badly sung Chants , they will not be attracted. Keeping pitch in unaccompanied music is not easy I will admit - but going flat is not good.

I realise that they are very tight for time in this broadcast - there was still someone speaking last night when the radio station started the next programme - this is a shame - though if some of the responses had not been dragged maybe [ I'm not 100% convinced at this stage ] timing might have been better.

I would be grateful if someone from St John's would tell me from where they managed to get their silent thurible - just a wee thing I know - but the sound of the bells lifts people .

This may seem as being destructive - I hope not. My intention is to be constructive in my criticism. I'm sure this could be a great broadcast service - and I hope and trust it will be.

Slava Isusu Christu!

I have not had a chance to hear the broadcast yet, but I may be able to shed some light on the problems some people have had getting the station. Without getting too technical, the broadcast for the station is going through a "server." That's simply a big computer that is used to store information or to route information. Each server has a limited number of connections. Think of it as electrical outlets in a room. If the server that has the broadcast only has enough connections for 100 people to listen at a time--anyone after that 100 won't be able to access the server. If you only have two double outlets in the room, you can't plug in five things. (Unless you add an extension cord or an outlet strip.) I don't know anything about the broadcast--what company they use (Adelphia, Comcast, etc) or how it is set up. But my best guess is that the reason people can't hear is there aren't enough open connections. They probably don't need that many on a normal basis. But with the RDL, more and more people are trying to listen. So you are stuck in a traffic jam. I work at a Big Ten University and we put an internet radio station on the air in my College a few years ago. The same thing happened. We were able to track the number of people who tried to access the website--and we didn't have enough capacity. So the Dean said to get more connections. (Put outlet strips in the room with only two double outlets.) Now we can have up to one thousand people listening at a time. Before it was 100, I believe.

One person said to try this address: http://206.183.0.11:8001/whkw.mp3. Again, without getting too technical--each computer has a unique "address" called an IP address. Just as no two homes have the same telephone number or street address, no two computers have the same IP address. In this case, the address is 206.183.0.11. That is the server that has the broadcast. The next numers: 8001 are probably one of the connection numbers I mentioned earlier. I just tried it and it would not work--someone is probably using that connection. So I, in effect, got a "busy signal" the way you would on a telephone.

I could be way off on this, but with my experience, it certainly sounds like this is the problem. At least being able to access the program. Now the problems with mic placement and cutting people off as they are still talking, that's something the station is responsible for. Most likely people are getting cut off because the station is using an automation system and whe the clock on the computer running the system says it's time to move on--it moves on, whether DL is over or not.

I hope this helps and doesn't confuse anyone

Slava Na Viki!

Tim

Tim

Thanks for that explanation - it makes sense. However it's now over 24 hours since I managed to access the actual Website for the Radio Station.

I really don't know how I managed to get on last night , but I did - thank goodness.

I trust this will be fixed / upgraded / more points [outlets ? ] put into the system by next week.

I really want to see if it improves

OK did anyone else listen to it ?

Rufinus - you said you would - did you ? Your thoughts on it ?

OK - Rufinus - you posted this on 21/06/07 at 3.47pm

It is now 26th June.

I have posted my thoughts on Sunday's Broadcast of the Saturday Vigil.

I notice that you have posted since then - but you have not mentioned the Service - did you listen ?

Enquiring minds want to know

Is this "revised" Divine Liturgy anyplace on the internet for someone to hear that does not attend a GC church? Just curious what all the commotion about the chant is.

I couldn't get through. I tried for an hour.

I am interested to hear it. Perhaps next week. Is there anyone who can down load it?

Dear bergschlawiner,

Try metropolitancantorinstitute.org

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

Bergschlawiner,

Visit The Kliros forum for Administrator John's link to a Ruthenian DL with music.

Ungcsertez

Perhaps they decided to edit the Liturgy to fit into a one hour format. I know that in my parish when we do a vesperal DL it is often an hour and a half.
Having listened to copy of the broadcast in question, I too was disappointed by the omission of Ps 103.
Only three stichera were sung, which is all that is indicated in the pew book. (personally I rather that all 10 stichera be sung for ANY vespers or Vesper-liturgy)


Most likely, the silences were trimmed. The entire service was trimmed to fit into a 54 minute time slot including introduction and ending comments.


I would hope that this one example via radio would not be your sole judgement on the entire church! Yes, there is much to dislike about the broadcast/recording.


�Lo-ho-hord have merrrr-cy� is most definitely grating on the ears, not good technique! The nuances of the voices are more pronounced when for the broadcast, the cantor, deacon and priest are so closely miked. I dislike close miking because you lose the natural reverberation and ambiance of the church itself. Given that this isn�t their first time broadcasting the Liturgy, I would hope that some constructive feedback is given so that the broadcast might be more �live�. At Holy Ghost in McKees Rocks, PA the 9am Sunday liturgy is broadcast live with a more general microphone placement that allows the listener to hear more voices singing along.


It seems that to some �recited� means literally that. I have on many occasions heard the prayers chanted and they are actually not bad in sound. I still have trouble with some of the translations though.


Fortunately, not all services celebrated with the RDL sound as �difficult to listen to� as what was broadcast. I have heard better and I have experienced worse than this. I would hope that should my own parish (cathedral) broadcast the DL, it would sound much more pleasing, even though we do use the RDL and have been for several months now. We haven�t had an exodus of parishioners.

From a technical stand point--there is no reason for broadcasting either a live or recorded event with bad mic placement. I teach radio broadcasting and spent almost twenty years on air as a dj, newsperson and talk show host before turning to teaching. Many times we broadcast live, from a variety of environments. Anyone with a minimum of experience can set up microphones properly to get the sound right. Don't get me wrong, a church is probably one of the WORST places inwhich to record something. The stone throughout, the marble throughout and the high ceilings make it more challenging than a simiple room. But it is still not that hard. Physics is still physics. A body mic (which they are obviously using) is not the cause for bad singing or all of those really annoying "h"s that were in the broadcast. I don't know that it is fair to blame the RDL for the extra "h"s. The words are the same, just the tune was different, in many places. I don't want to pick on anyone, but one would think the Cantor at a Cathedral would know better than to add the "H"s. And this broadcast has been going on for about six years, I believe. All parties involved have done this before. So why does it sound as bad, technically, as it does? That's a wonderful question. I don't know who recorded it, edited it or anything else about it. Does anyone? I would be curious.

Tim

What is a Vesperal Liturgy? It sounds like a Latinization... should we really be broadcasting such an abuse, for everyone to hear?

It is nuts.

Nick

I see no reason in principle to object to broadcasting a Vesperal Liturgy - provided it takes place on Christmas Eve or Theophany Eve (in those years when Christmas does not fall on Sunday or Monday), on Holy Thursday, on Holy Saturday, and/or on the feast of the Annunciation in those years when the Typicon prescribes the Vesperal Liturgy.

Why would one do such a thing on any other occasion?

Fr. Serge

Orthodox churches, (at least the OCA), allow Vesperal Liturgies on certain feasts with the Bishops permission. My parish had a VL on the vigil of Ascencion.

Our priest is part time, with a secular job, and it was the only way to hold a service for the feast... Hope this helps.

Bishop Tikhon (OCA) of San Francisco seems to be very much against that practice [holy-trinity.org].

I read Bishop Tikhon's letter. I think it is well written and that he makes a good case against Vesperal Liturgies that are not specifically prescribed. On the other hand, he loses me in a few places. I think his criticism of the Catholic Church comes dangerously close to crossing into the territory of self-righteousness. Also, I ultimately think he may be a bit unrealistic in discussing practical considerations. For example, last night, my pastor offered Vespers and the DL of SJC for the Feast of Ss. Peter and Paul and he will offer the same services tonight for the mission in Austin. My wife and I attended the service. Counting the two priests (the pastor and a priest visiting his parents), I can recall 23 persons present-there were possibly more, but if so, not many. Had the service been scheduled in the morning-even at 5AM, which is a few hours prior to the time most people have to be at work, there may have been 2 or 3 parishioners, but more likely, there would have been none. Houston is a huge city, though our Church has only one parish in Houston. My wife and I live within the city boundaries of Houston, and we have about a 25 mile drive to the Church, which is also in Houston. Many of the parishioners have a far greater distance to drive. I know of one family that has a drive that takes them about and hour and 15 minutes one way. Furthermore, most of the parishioners work in places that are as far from the Church as their homes are. It is simply far more practical for many parishioners to come in the evening when travel times are not doubled by the horrendous morning traffic and they do not have to battle their children to get them out of bed 2 or 3 hours earlier than what would be the norm. Perhaps these matters don't convince Bishop Tikhon. But they are the reality of life in a country that has few Orthodox parishes and even fewer Eastern Catholic parishes. In many cases, the options are DL in the evening for feast days, or no DL at all for feast days. I choose the former, problematic though it might be.

Ryan

In his zeal Bishop Tikhon has overlooked a few matters:

a) the Typicon provides that in most years the Divine Liturgy is united to Vespers for the feast of the Annunciation - this is the unique example of a "Vesperal Liturgy" using the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom;

b) The Orthodox Church permits, even encourages, the celebration of the Divine Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts in the evening.

c)beginning the Divine Liturgy before dawn is normally restricted to Holy Pascha - a proposal (let alone a command) to do this on a frequent basis is unsupported by the Typicon.


In none of this do I take issue with what is, I trust, Bishop Tikhon's fundamental thesis - that the serving of "Vesperal Liturgies" is indeed restricted to certain specific days and is not to be capriciously extended and that instead of dismissing the Typicon as "irrelevant" we should study and learn the Typicon, which has a great deal to teach us.

The problem in translating the Typicon is that this is the book which ties the other service-books into a unified, harmonious whole, which means that it is virtually impossible to translate the Typicon in the absence of a complete set of agreed English service-books.

Fr. Serge

Austin could have the liturgical hours and other prayers until they are established enough to have their own priest offering Liturgy. If they could get a deacon, they could have Typica services. They could also alternate with your parish, having Liturgy in Austin once a month and no Liturgy in Houston on that day, possibly during the week to inconvenience people the least. The frustration and desire to have Liturgy would push them to grow while the typica or prayer services would fill their spiritual needs in the mean time.

A Vesperal Liturgy would be in the evening on the day before a feast day. It is done to end the current liturgical day with Vespers and to allow the next liturgical day to start. We all know that it is an aberration to routinely practice them. You said above that your priest prays the liturgy on Sunday evening in Austin after praying it on Sunday morning in Houston. He doesn't pray a vesperal liturgy, does he? That would make it a Monday liturgy.

You also said he uses vesperal liturgies for major feasts during the week because of the need for an evening time. He could pray a normal liturgy on the feast day itself in the evening, celebrating the day's vespers after the liturgy. With it being summer, it is still bright out at 7 PM.

These suggestions are different, and I am not sure if they are currently supported by our typicon, but they aren't unfeasible and fill all of the needs you have raised. They are ways to deal with these issues which adhere to our tradition.

Generally, we do have have DL on the actual day of the feast, in the evening, and it is not a Vesperal Liturgy. However, since we did have DL for Ss. Peter and Paul last night, it was a Vesperal Liturgy. The reason for this change is because our pastor and the pastor of the parish in Dallas only recently began serving the mission in Austin. The suggestions you have made are worth consideration. However, which week would inconvienence people the least? I have a difficult time applying that concept to the notion of depriving people of communion. Why should the parishioners in Austin be able to attend DL only once or twice a month, simply because they are still a small group? When will a priest be provided for them? Six months? A year? Or will this arrangement with priests from Houston and Dallas continue indefinitely because they are willing to do it and it is convenient for the Archeparchy? I don't mean to dismiss your concerns about faithfulness to they typicon, but I disagree with your assertion that that your suggestions address all the needs I have raised because I don't think provided people with DL only one or two Sundays per month is adequate for nurturing their spiritual growth. Having the Liturgy of the Hours is a wonderful blessing, and I, for one, wish that we would pray the Hours in preparation for DL at my parish in Houston. However, for me, it is not a substitute for weekly reception of the body and blood of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ.

Ryan

It would only be a temporary situation while they grow. How many of them are there and how long has the mission been there? It doesn't sound like long. How far does your priest travel? It wouldn't be feasible to continue serving them in the long term if they don't grow large enough to warrant a parish community. I think it only takes 30 people. It isn't depriving them of the Eucharist, it is supporting them with the prayers of the Church until they are established enough to have a priest able to celebrate the Eucharist. That there are two priests serving them is a real blessing which should provide them with many more opportunities!

Does your parish have a deacon it could send down there on Wednesday evenings to celebrate a typica service? If so, they could also receive the Eucharist on a weekly basis. Or your priest could celebrate Liturgy on Wednesday with them while you have a reader's service or an akathist in Houston. This isn't ideal for anyone, but it is transitional and it is reality. If they are so small that they can't support anything more, it isn't a replacement for them to pray the hours together until they grow. It is the way our entire Church was grown in this land!

No, we do not have a deacon. And I still disagree. We'll just have to disagree. In my opinion, Eucharist once a month is not adequate-period!!! And the fact that it has been done this way in the past does not persuade me to the contrary.

Ryan

Besides, right now, the mission in Austin does not have its own building. The Maronite Church in Austin is graciously allowing the mission the use of its building. So, Fr. Elias from Houston and Fr. Philip from Dallas cannot offer morning liturgies for the Austin mission anyway (I forgot this when making earlier posts).

Ryan

Wondering, good points. I am once again reminded of our widespread misunderstanding of the eucharistic nature of the Divine Praises and by extension the entirety of the Church's liturgical tradition, the disregard for the venerable received tradition of our Church, and the minimalist tendancy to reduce our Christian participation to "obligation" and "Mass". The Vesperal Divine Liturgies are for specific festal times of the liturgical, and look towards the fulfillment of the festal cycle in Great Compline, Matins and the Divine Liturgy (no Great Compline for Holy Saturday), and were never intended to stand alone.

I think it makes more sense to have a parish celebration of the Divine Liturgy on Sunday afternoon if the priest has an availibility issue Sunday morning, and have the mission gather for Reader's Vespers on Saturday evening to celebrate the glorious "resurrectional transition" that occurs at Great Vespers, which is cheapened when stikhera and the Apostikha are omitted as in the current "Vesperal Liturgy".

As my good friends across the pond often say, this is indeed a "sticky wicket".

I have struggled with the questions raised by Diak and Wondering my entire priestly life. When I was ordained as an Antiochian priest in California, Vesperal Liturgies (on the evening before) were the norm for all great feasts. This is how I was trained to celebrate the feasts.

However, as I grew to love the cycle of services and to celebrate Vespers daily in my parish, I came to see that the Vesperal Liturgy cut that cycle short. In truncating the full cycle into an hour-and-a-half "greatest hits" version, the people lost a lot of theology (and hymnography). I therefore decided that I would not offer any more Vesperal Liturgies, but would offer Vespers the night before, followed by Matins and Liturgy the next morning. Of course, this meant that Matins would begin around 5:15am-ish in the morning so that Liturgy could begin by around 6:30am-ish and people could still get on their way to work by 8am-ish. I LOVED it! But it was a little hard getting my children to Liturgy each Feast My children tell stories of being loaded into the Van early in the morning and then put to sleep on the Church floor while Matins was being prayed. (My wife worked evenings to help support the family.) Although at this point, these stories have become part of beloved family lore, I must tell you that I was not always as spiritually prepared to serve Liturgy as I should have been after loading three young boys into a van, unloading them and then putting them back to sleep BEFORE the service began. (I would often start the trek at 3:30am as I lived about 35 minutes away from the Temple.)

However, as much as this helped to keep the Church's Cycle going, I slowly (I am a VERY slow learner sometimes) realized that I was the only one who was able to experience the Cycle. Some of my people came to Liturgy (usually I sang Matins by myself) and most of my people came the night before to Vespers. No one, other than my boys asleep on the floor, was able to experience the full cycle.

I then had to ask myself -- what is best for the people? Is it best for the people to miss the Divine Liturgy for all of the great Feasts? Are they learning anything about the Cycle of Services by only coming to Vespers? Is the unity of the Community being reinforced by the separation of services? Would it be better for my people to celebrate together the essential parts of Vespers and Liturgy rather than having them celebrate separately pieces of it?

Of course, these questions have resounded in my head for many years and I still don't know that I like any of the choices. I said to our new deacon last night, "I wish we lived in a village and could all walk to church before walking to our jobs next to the Temple." I do know that since I am now older (and sleep far less soundly than I did as a young 33 year old), I can't IMAGINE doing the early morning routine like I used to! (I am sure my teenage boys would not enjoy it much either :D).

In other words, we are struggling in our modern world to find ways of living out our spiritual lives and helping each other live them out. As I look at the variety of ways in which Eastern Christians keep the fasts, celebrate the feasts, serve Liturgies, prepare for communion, etc., I can see very clearly that as an Eastern Christian community we are still figuring this out.

My suggestion is (and I have learned this experientially the hard way) that we support each other and give each other freedom to make difference choices as we struggle to find ways to be both contemporary and Eastern.

Father, your blessing!

Having done similar things as a layman with several children, I can understand and sympathize!

I think that, particularly for those places without a full-time priest, we would be better off trying to restore Vespers - Matins - Divine Liturgy on SUNDAY first, and that will lead the faithful to realize both what they gain by celebrating a feast-day Vesperal Liturgy, and what they lose. IF we can get to a point where the "one liturgy per altar" rule, and the ordinary scheduling of a single Divine Liturgy in the morning, are seen as normal and even beneficial, then

- places where a morning Divine Liturgy on feast days is impossible, will see a vesperal Liturgy as what it is - an extraordinary economia for the specific benefit of the faithful;

- places where a morning Liturgy on feast days IS possible may see more of the faithful making arrangements to attend. It will involve sacrifices, and some of the faithful won't be able to attend, or will choose not to, but by comparing the feast with Sunday they will see the basic pattern.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

The Bishops could clear this up immediately if they wanted to.

They have the fortitude to jam the RDL down the faithfuls' throat, but that fortitude is absent regarding Vespers and Matins?


Monomakh

Dear Monomakh,

Yes,they could. However, given the huge amount of flak they took in the late 1990's for removing the filioque, ordering communion of infants being baptized (and thus undercutting "First Communions"), ending "weekday Mass" during Lent in favor of the Liturgy of the Presancitified Gifts.... and garnered reactions that INCLUDED parishioners threatening to walk, or actually walking, because of those changes...

How many people have actually shown support for a return to our traditions when the bishops DID make them? Was there an upwelling of support, followed by encouragement for a more complete return to our older traditions? Or did they just continue to hear complaints from all sides?

Or will the bishops hear no words of support until they order an immediate observance of the full Typikon in all churches? And what is the likely parochial reaction? It bothers me immensely that most of my fellow vostochniki seem so unwilling to acknowledge anything good our bishops do.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Jeff,

There are several parishes serving a daily Divine Liturgy during Great Lent and no Presanctified Liturgy during the Great Fast. That mandate is still being ignored.

Ungcsertezs

Dear Ungcsertezs,

I realize that, but it is not so long ago that that was the common practice - and it took episcopal pressure to change it in the average parish, at least in the Pittsburgh archeparchy where I was living at the time. I know quite a few layfolk who still complain about "their" daily Masses being taken away during Lent. My point is: how many bishops got any positive feedback for those changes?

Jeff

I believe there are parishes in Florida that have this practice. It's not just a Pennsylvania latination;)!

U-C

All the things that I have applauded over the years. However, the arrogance of the BCC bishops is unbeliveable. Just look at HT in Bridgeport, CT...it was probably one of the better parishes that gave support for these good changes...only to be spit upon by Bishop Andrew...

Chris

I was uneasy about the removal of the filioque and studied the issue and saw that it was a legitimate act, consistent with Church teaching and in union with Rome's desires for us. I didn't walk.

I loved the fact that my infants were communicated bedcause of the great grace they receive, because it was legitimate practice of our Church and because of a treatise I read on infant baptism by, of all men, St. Augustine.

The Presanctified is one of the most beautiful services I have ever attended. I loved it the first time I went. Apart from that, when I found out that Divine Liturgies weren't traditionally served daily during Lent and studied the issue, I accepted it and saw it to be fitting.

I supported these things wholeheartedly. But there is something else going on with the RDL and the lack of support for the Bishops.

If the Bishops had stuck to authentic traditions and not worried about who did or didn't walk, then they could point to ROME, THE FAITH AS EXPRESSED IN THE EASTERN CHURCHES, THE WRITINGS OF THE FATHERS AND REASON to show that what they did was right and good.

Now they can do none of this. They can, however, show that they have updated the Liturgy to modern times and like all such fads, the Revised Liturgy will fade away with the generation that created it.


The Bishops need not order an immediate obervance of the whole Typicon in all churches. But there is a serious problem when the Bishops mandate what's less and NOT IN ACCORD WITH TRADITION to the EXCLUSION of the fulness of tradition (the Creed is the simple and clear example of this poor judgment), and especially when what has been mandated has been made to conform to modernity which is the heresy of our times.

OK - watch this space for my comments from tonight's greatly improved broadcast of the Vesperal Liturgy from the Cathedral of St John the Baptist in Parma.

I really need to let it all sink in before I write

Thank you, Anhelyna - I tried to listen but never did get a connection.

Jeff

oh I had no problem tonight - curious.

It's all the nature of the internet...

In general:

I did actually have a chance to hear it "live" this past Sunday. It is dissapointing to me to hear the same somewhat bland "mic"-ing used which shuts out the other parishioners voices. It seems to me that that is the biggest dissapointment I have with the broadcasts, they sound like a half-hearted run through of the vesperal DL. Almost like sighing through the liturgy. Whether RDL or 1964 liturgy or Slavonic at least it should be sung from the heart with zeal and feeling. I almost get the feeling that they are doing the broadcast recordiongs "just because..." rather than with the zeal of evangelization. Different mic placement might solve some of the lack of ambiance.

The Lo-ho-ho-hord have me-rrrrr-cy though does get hard to listen to after a while, I say this constructively as a fellow cantor who DONATES his time to the parish to be a cantor. I say that with all charity as with very, very few, exceptions there are any regularly paid (stipended) cantors left in the BCC.

Just think. If ALL the BCC parishes of the Pittsbutrgh Metropolia were able to be heard online and compared....The noise of complaints from so many sides here on Byzcath would be unbearable!!! Perhaps were are blessed with only having a few broadcasts to sample from....

My $.00003.14159265358979

In actuality, it is good that there are people brave enough to try when so many are quick to complain.

Listened to some of the chant on the http://metropolitancantorinstitute.org/ and it sounded beautiful and makes me wonder what all the ruckus is about this "new" music. Frankly all the talk about "accents" etc. goes over my head not knowing anything about music but this is performed well and sounds better than "correct" music sung by singers with bad voices. I hope that some of this rubs off on the Orthodox. Some OCA parishes could benefit.

One of the tips Professor Thompson gave us when he visited earlier this year was that instead of me-rrrr-cy we should sing something that sounds more like "mussy." To the ear, it it's recognizable as mercy, but sounds better. The Lo-ho-ho-hord is also easily fixed by simply singing it as the single syllable which it is.

Thanks for your comments Steve.

It is interesting to hear them - you are after all a Cantor using the same settings .

It has to be remembered that I am UGCC and hear and participate in a DL entirely in Ukrainian therefore I am not used to hearing DL in English, never mind using different Chant settings.


Now for my reactions to the latest broadcast.

I felt the opening to the programme was much better - hearing Cathedral Bells after the Czech Band and adverts did help to 'set the scene'

Imagine my surprise this week when I heard Psalm 103 - wonderful.

I'm glad that the mics seemed a bit better placed - it was nice to hear the congregation , I was almost sorry when the balance was audibly changed so we got the Clergy and Cantor first and the congregation waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back .

Yes the intrusive 'H's were still there and though it was a pleasure hearing a Deacon 'in action' [ we do not have one ] I did feel he was 'dominating' things - somehow he 'stood out' and I'm sure this is not what is intended.

Please would a singer take the cantor on one side and teach him how to avoid those 'h's getting in - they really really grate. You know ,there is a big difference between reading and chanting so that everyone can hear, and reading and chanting to give a performance so that everyone knows you are doing these things. This is the difference between the vocal textures we could hear - it should not be 'forced '- and at times it was

To me pacing this week was much better - there were far fewer 'severely dragged' things - speed was more appropriate - and possibly because this aspect had been thought about, then that was why Psalm 103 was included. There was no feeling that at times we were really rushing to fit everything possible in , chalk and cheese compared with the last 2 weeks.

Now the Homily - a personal comment here - I do NOT like being told the title of the homily - and I was not impressed by this one - just a personal thing .

Now a couple of generalistations - why are so many of the chants so mournful ? I really felt no compulsion to join in and sing . Will chant like this really attract people ?

I can think back to my first days attending DL - I was longing to join in the chant - people were singing from their hearts - I can't really feel this applies to those in Parma - sorry if it offends - I'm the outsider looking in .

I appreciate that for most Parishes it's still early days using the new DL and musical settings - but again I really must emphasis - this is coming from a Cathedral and it should have a considerably higher standard than most Parishes - they have been doing these weekly broadcasts for how long ? By now - even with the new stuff with which to contend, we should be hearing what could almost be termed 'a polished performance' and with the exception of the Deacon who, in my mind , was giving a performance rather than serving in the Liturgy, what we heard were Clergy and Cantor not really at home with this - they seemed to be struggling.

I will be interested to see how this improves over the coming weeks - but I'm not rushing to get a plane ticket , cope with all the extra security , and come over for a weekend just to see and hear for myself

Actually a good deacon does precisely that - he stands out and he dominates the service, meaning that his is the most prominent and observable role, and he is the "master of ceremonies", so to speak.

Where the rubrics are observed instead of ignored, much of the time the priest is nearly unseen, since he is within the Altar and the Royal Doors are closed, while the Deacon is on the soleas intoning the petitions of the synaptes, ektenes, aiteseis, and so forth. The Deacon proclaims the Gospel (preferably in the center of the nave) while the priest awaits the completion at the High Place, where again he is not fully visible.

One could explore the significance of all this at length. I confine myself to one comment for the moment: many priests (although they will deny it) prefer not to have a deacon, for fear that the deacon will "upstage" them.

Fr. Serge

I heard it and really found it quite good. I'll review it in more detail in the fall.
Rufinus

Rufinus

Do we really have to wait till fall for your review ?

I'm eagerly awaiting your review since you have been studying this