www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Blanket Permission for Byzantine (Old) Divine Liturgy?

The forced change of rubrics, texts and music together is what has caused spiritual pain. This has been discussed at great length on this Forum.

I have never suggested that a public forum is a substitute for a pastor and have no idea where you got such an idea from. I have stated that each of us – especially those in orders – have a responsibility to provide pastoral care at all times no matter the occasion (in person, on the forum, etc.). An extra level of charity is always appropriate, no matter what the venue. A response that softly combined brotherly correction with a bit of education would have been more appropriate.

As to the rest, I am on record for stating that we have accurate and complete translations of the Divine Liturgy, and that because the people have memorized a specific translation any updates respect what is memorized and make changes only with great care, and with much education, encouragement and pastoral care.

Beautifully said.

Administrator,

My question was about the use of the term "Theotokos". Why is using "Mother of God" a more accurate and complete translation? How much education is needed to convince someone that Theotokos means Mother of God? I mention other Greek terms that STILL continue to be operative in all Christian religious groups. The term "Christ" is Greek. Though our Lord has many other titles that are popular, "Christ" is still here.

I believe that the English phrase "Mother of God" replaced "Theotokos" in the same vein as the term "Orthodox" disappeared. It would be disingenuous to think that all members of your church community have a short term memory and only have a fondness for English translations that obscure the more popular Eastern terms.

Case in point: What do we make of the phrase "Christians of the True Faith"? It has been suggested that this phrase is a uniate phrase that was to disguise the term "Orthodox" or its Slavonic equivalent. The Ukrainian Catholics have returned to using the term, but the RDL bishops have decided to preserve the uniate derivative, and from what was stated here on these forums, the term was not up for discussion. I use the term "uniate" in the descriptive sense, not as a pejorative.

When, Administrator, does that education begin? Byzantine Catholic have been here over 100 years. Many have edubecated the masses with catechetical materials, programs, classes, books, etc. How many homilies have conveyed the term? Icons of the Theotokos in your churches have the title on them. The term is in history, theology and spiritual books that anyone can either purchase and/or borrow from a library. The picture you paint is one of a horde of lazy and ignorant believers. This is not fair to those in your church who HAVE been educated.

Forgive me for saying this, but you seem to paint a pretty gloomy picture of the state of your church, one that implies that education has never happened there; one where people will only learn if handle like fragile porcelein. So, my question stands: When does the education begin? The RDL books have adopted the term "Theotokos". From what I gather, many of your priests HAVE spent considerable time educating their communities. My aunt mentions how education preceeded the reinstitution of infant communion. Someone in her community asked her what the term meant, and she knew enought to educate her. The only response was, "Oh". Life went on and the newly enlightened sang the word during worship that day. It can be done and it was.

But you speak of a particular fondness that some people have for wordings. I don't know what this fondness is you wish to defend. Fondness is no substitute for education. Fondness should not prevent education or retard it. Education should just happen. It is called catechesis.

I am only asking questions.

Ed

IF I were a more patient, and less tired (two jobs these days!) man, I would be inclined to calculate the ratio of periods to question marks in your six paragraph post that ends in "I am only asking questions."

I have gotten myself into trouble before by being too bold faced and direct in simply confronting folks with whom I disagree (and likely they recipricate), so I have to gently ask, (trying to do so more gently than I have before):

Are you really just asking questions?

Ed, I want to be gentle and the least confrontational I can be about this, but it seems as often as not, in the threads you start or are attracted to, provocation is the common denominator. As often as not, I feel like I am watching you pick at scabs and poke at old cats when you find the sore spots like it is a hobby or a sport. Like our church, what we are going through, and the tender and sensitive matters surrounding it in these times are a sort of sport or curiosity to you.

I hope I am wrong.

A Simple Sinner,

Yes. I am asking questions. If questions are considered "provocation" then there is a problem bigger than the need for catechesis.

My aunt's friend's church was attacked unfairly recently because of some misunderstanding by most posters on these forums. Even pumpkin roll eucharist was brought up! Was this to be taken as humor or just provocative? Here, I tried defending the good name of a community my own Byzantine Catholic aunt was familiar with. But one only has to read what was made of it to see that this "poking" was a common trait with many others.

My questions are real because I am trying to make sense of what is said on one hand and done on another. Contradictions often raise questions. I am not the one being contradictory. Your church community is. I am only trying to figure it out, and I was hoping that serious answers would be given.

Why are some issues considered "scabs"? What is so scabby about them? I raise the topic about fond terms like many others who have raised them: "Christians of the true faith" versus "Orthodox Christisns"; "Mother of God" versus "Theotokos"; vows versus crowning. I have asked for written material, catechesis, from your chief shepherds and, so far, have received absolutely nothing. Am I to conclude that no one really knows for certain where their church stands on anything? It is even stated here (not by me) that your highest ranking church shepherd now considers the RDL optional. Woah! Does that mean infant communion the Filioque will become optional? If your own shepherds cannot educate or enforce what they publish, then more confusion will ensue. There will be more questions ...

This is not a sport or curiosity of mine. I am personally affected by these issues because of my own familial ties to Byzantine Catholicism.

How long will a church let "tender and sensitive matters" continue? Why do those things which are naturally and instrinsically of nature to Eastern Christianity, nay, Byzantine Christianity, have to be "tender" and "sensitive"? What happened to letting the light shine on the hill top? What I and others witness is a community continuing to suffer because the best it has to offer a society so steeped in sin is hidden beneath a bushel basket. Why the fear? Why the timidity after all these years? The Orthodox are not afraid of being and promoting their brand of Eastern Christianity. Why the hesitancy? Why the loathing? The Roman Catholics are not afraid of being and promoting their brand of Latin Christianity. Why the scabs? Why the old cats continue to linger? The Evangelicals are working hard to convert your next generation.

It was one of your own chief shepherds that I read about not being fearful of who you are. Even Rome had to write "Instructions" to spell it out. Even after all this, confusion remains the name of the game. Your people are affected. Your people protect the scabs and harbor the old cats.

I appreciate the Byzantine Catholic church. But I also have many questions because contradictions remain apparently present after all these years.

Back to my question: What exactly is this fondness for translated (and preferred) terms like "Mother of God" and "Christians of the True Faith" that are still so dear to many in your community? Why can fellow Eastern Catholic (like the Ukrainians) find no problem to adopt "Orthodox" in their worship, but not the RDL shepherds? Why can fellow Eastern Cathoolics (like the Melkites) find no problem to rid of the vows in their "crowning" ceremonies? Why can fellow Eastern Catholics (like the Romanians) find no problem in working with "Eastern" monastic institutions?

Again, it is not me but many in key positions who are doing what they can to dismantle your beautiful church from within. I am only asking questions.

Ed

Have I even once suggested or implied that “Mother of God” is a “more accurate and complete translation” than whatever translation you are referring to? You constantly make incorrect assumptions and then ask misleading questions. I think “A Simple Sinner” is correct in his observation that your questions are not asked in plain interest.

My point about the use of the translation “Mother of God” is simple. People have used it their whole life (and many of the Ruthenians who use it are in their sixth, seventh and eight decades of life). Prayers and liturgical texts are written on the soul after a lifetime of use. One must take great care in forcing people to change, especially when the change is not at all necessary.

How much education is needed to convince someone that “Theotokos” means “Mother of God”? Quite a bit. Possibly a lifetime. There is a vast difference between someone understanding that the one is a Greek term from a Council and the other is an English translation and internalizing it in the heart. It’s not a parallel, but what did you call your grandmother? If you called her “Baba” or “Nana” your whole life what would your response be if someone came along and told you that you were wrong for using that term of endearment and legislated that in the future you must refer to her as “γιαγιά”. You might understand intellectually that “γιαγιά” is her name (title) in Greek but for the whole rest of your life she will be “Baba” or “Nana”. Many of our older people (and even many of our not so old people) have formed a close relationship with the Mother of God (with the older term being “Bohorodice”). It is not a matter of teaching people that the terms are equivalent and one is now preferred and the other discouraged. It is so much more than that.

“Christians of the true faith” is an incorrect term and should be changed to “Orthodox’. But at a pastoral level many Ruthenian clergy and laity would be scandalized at the use of the term. All their lives they have been taught that we are Catholics, not Orthodox. They have lived with the very real pain of split families from the Church splits in 1929 and watched in horror as the Soviets simply dissolved our Churches in Europe and annexed them to the Moscow Patriarchate. For them the term “Orthodox” carries with it a ton of negative history. One simply cannot force the term upon them. One teaches the correct use of the word and allows it – over time – a positive understanding of the term to replace the negative understanding. There are probably many ways to teach the proper understanding of the term “Orthodox” (but, really, even this would involve consideration of self-identity). My recommendation has been to add it to the books, perhaps leaving “Christians of the true faith” as the text with a footnote that says: “Literally, ‘Orthodox Christians.’” The alterative might be the opposite; to use “Orthodox Christians” in the book but to allow the older clergy to keep using “Christians of the true faith” for the rest of their lives of service.

The Ukrainian Catholics are at an advantage here. They seem to have used the term “Orthodox” in their earliest translations. And they do not have the immediate memory here in the United States of the events of 1929.

Here is another way to look at this. Let’s say your favorite Christmas Carol is “O Come, All Ye Faithful”. You have sung it all your life and know it by heart. Now along comes a committee that decides that they don’t like the current translation. They prefer what is called the “Portuguese Version”:

Hither, ye faithful,
haste with songs of triumph,
to Bethlehem haste,
the Lord of life to meet;
To you this day is
born a Prince and Savior;
O come and let us worship
O come and let us worship
O come and let us worship
at His feet.

Now, you might intellectually accept this alternate version as a legitimate one. But what words are written on your soul? Would singing these for the next 10 years (or longer) ever replace the words you grew up singing? It is precisely because translations are far more then just words that one must be very careful in changing them. Once something is memorized the Church needs to be very careful in reaching into someone’s heart to change the way that person relates to the Lord. Never change what is perfectly acceptable and has been memorized over a lifetime just to meet an individual’s (or a committee’s) idea of what is perfect.

Please do not continue to preface every reply by questioning my intentions.

This thread begins with the notion that your chief leading shephered has now instructed his people that the RDL is now optional. This is a long way from the beginning of its implamentation when another shepherd said there will be no debate. SInce then, your website has provided a public forum to question and challenge it. If what the originial poster states is true, then your challenge has become successful.

I only ask for debate, or morre likely, questions to be permitted. I admit, I have a lot to learn of this community. Where else besides my aunt do I have to go to ask questions?

It looks like there are still more lingering hangups permitted to foster or fester. From what I read, many on these forums, who are members of the same church community, HAVE renewed themselves as "Orthodox Catholics" or "Orthodox in COmmunion with Rome" and move on. Good for them. Unfortunately, thesee folks' lights have become extinguished one by one in favor of those who still cannot get over the past.


Ed

As long as you misrepresent and twist what people say I will rightly question your intentions.

The Forum has also been a vehicle for those who support the Revision. Father David’s posts, for example, find far more readers here then do his columns in the three eparchial newspapers.

I don’t know that what the original poster states is true. Can you provide evidence of parishes returning to the older texts and music, and written authorization for them to do so? It seems to me that what we have is a number of parishes that never started the RDL and the Metropolitan is not making an issue of it. That is not quite the same thing. In any event, I sincerely doubt that the discussions here on the Forum have anything to do with the decisions of these pastors. We have a good readership but the fact is that most Ruthenians have not heard of this website.

Your ‘questions’ are loaded with sarcasm and judgment, no matter which direction they come from. They do not come across as questions from a fellow Christian seeking understanding. They come across as someone looking to tear down.

One does not condemn a people for where they are at, for mostly where they are at is a direct result of the decisions of their past bishops. One instead leads them from where they are and lifts them up to where they should be, using gentleness and charity. There are plenty of examples in all churches of pastors who directed change without education that wound up destroying the parish. There are also examples of pastors who took a parish and nurtured it from bad praxis to good praxis. I’ve seen parishes go from the worst praxis to the best praxis (complete and correct) in just a few years with the people eager to learn more and to pray more. No mandates were required, just good example, education and encouragement. It is this that I desire for the Church.

The issue is or should be with the use of "orthodox" (small o) in the liturgy. Your question is wrong because it presumes the answer. I'm acquainted with Greek, I'm ok with the word orthodox, I have no anti use of "orthodox" because we're not the "Orthodox" baggage, I have many issues with the RDL translation, and yet on this issue I do not favor the use of the word "orthodox" in our translation. I'm willing to try to make my case for a translation close to the BCC's on the basis of linguistic merit, clarity of meaning and fidelity to the received texts. If you're really interested in substance and not hype, start a thread (it's in my to-do queue) exploring the issue. To me your questioning of this issue is presumptuous.

As to your poor Auntie's turmoils and what you characterize as others muck-racking through websites, I'm surprised that, with you as a nephew, your aunt isn't a whole lot tougher. Review your own conduct in the thread you started on the "vows" (which starts off well enough, but read on). Again your continued questioning ignores the answers provided in the thread. In short: The "vows" are in the Slavoinc of the Recension text; they have standing. One can propose that the time has come for them to be eliminated from a translation of the service. I believe they should stay. Your question presumes the answer and it ignores the circumstances and falsifies the motivation of our church and its bishops.

Darn if I do, darn if I don’t. Small o or big o; I see how this is so strenuous on the RDL church. It seems to me that NEITHER is acceptable. Period. The RDL church prefers the uniate derivative “Christians of the true faith” because it avoids this wretched (to use a popular adjective) term. I sense fear.


Then other Eastern Catholics, such as the Ukrainians, are not being faithful in their adoption of the term “orthodox” in their church service? There seems to be two sets of criteria of what constitutes “linguistic merit”, “clarity of meaning”, and “fidelity to the received text”. Please explain these three criteria of yours as they relate to the Ukrainian’s adoption of the term “orthodox” and the RDL bishops refusal to adopt or even to discuss it.


My “poor Auntie’s turmoils”? “Tougher”? I am certain you are not being sarcastic here, are you? My “Auntie” is quite a strong, spiritual woman. Probably did more for her Byzantine Catholic community than you can muster. There is no reason to chide a woman you have never met, especially one who is deeply involved in her church community. But since you are a man who just don’t understand when a woman gets upset, maybe some explanation is necessary. My aunt has a friend for many years who belongs to the community that many were making false accusations against. What was implied on this forum, including pumpkin eucharist and pagan mass, was just plain silly, if not sad. In the end, no one knew what happened. Someone read an on-line bulletin and started a post aimed at questioning it. People have a right to ask questions without being personally assaulted. The question raised was not wrong or presumptuous. What I did was simply convey to the posters on this public forum what a member of that community told my aunt. They were upset with people like you. Many do not have computers that are their means to combat lies. Do you know what it is like to tick off the church ladies?


The turning point was when a clergyman called the vows “wretched”. What is a person to think looking inside this church when he or she sees on one hand shepherds preserving this ceremony, and on the other hand clergyman referring to it as “wretched” and never having used it in his own ministry. Rome, we have a problem. I asked questions, but no one really seems to know. From what I understand, the RDL shepherds are no longer in Poland being obedient to Polish government and Roman Catholic shepherds. Signing the church registry, I think, is good enough. Why vows? What is the Byzantine Christian theology behind them? Why include them if the crowning does the job?


Father Serge Keleher, many other clergy, and posters on this forum disagree with you. Are you saying that you are the expert in these matters? So, we are back to where we started: confusion. Because of confusion, one “can propose” questions about the inclusion of vows in the RDL community. My “auntie” tells me that their community NEVER uses them. Regarding the RDL worship, the original post was about your chief shepherd giving a blanket permission for the old Byzantine Divine LIturgy. This is a bold, public statement or observation. People read this and are learning that the books they are currently using (maybe) in their worship are optional. It first began with one shepherd stating that there will be "no debate" on the subject; now, the rumor has it that another shepherd is disavowing it (no pund intended).


What are the circumstances? What IS the motivation of your bishops? I wrote several open letters to a Father David Petras asking WHO demanded that gender neutral language be instituted in your RDL service, and he has yet to give a straight answer. (I think knowing who the WHO really was will tell the tale that needs to be told). What is the motivation to keep preserving vows when many of the clergy and people consider them “wretched”? My “auntie” can’t find anything in the children’s catechesis material hallowing the beauty and wonder of vows in the Byzantine wedding ceremony.

So, here is the problem (and I have my strong Auntie to raise this issue) – you have a church community that instructs its children one way, but they later get smacked down for living out their religious way of life. Case in point: In another community, the clergyman introduced/instructed the children (and adults) to enter the church and make a path to the icon on display to venerate it. The children, having been instructed and explained the purpose of this ritual, did just that. This went on for a few months until those “fond” of NOT venerating the icons as they enter (they usually would make a bee-line to the back pew where they would plop their butts down) had their staunch ways supported. The uneducated adults, some who quipped that their church was becoming too Orthodox, began to put pressure on the children to stop their little charade. The children eventually stopped venerating the icons. This seems to be the problem with certain terms and rituals too. Will education be put into practice only when all the staunch have died off? Will it be too late?

Mr. Administrator has made the point, and I apologize if I can’t put it into exact words that reflect his thoughts, that you can’t reform one area of church without first adopting the mindset and heart. Something like that. But it looks like that mindset is slowly being adopted at the grass roots level in the many communities that DO get it. The work is long and laborious, but has become successful in many areas. Then, after all was said and done, a proposed marriage ceremony is put forth wanting to preserve vows! People witness no vows in their community and then read about them in their church books! I read the books that were sent to me and also have questions.

It is understandable why confusion reigns. I wasn’t the one who brought it, no matter how presumptuous you consider me. My heart leans to Eastern Christianity. I can overlook the personal sins and mannerisms of shepherds, but when the teaching is contradictory or when teaching conflicts with actual practice, then it is no wonder why “orthodox” is such a wretched term: straight-belief/worship is not so straight. It would be a contradiction of terms because straight-ness implies one is being straight on all matters, not wishy-washy or leaning to particular fondness. But going back to the case in point: The next generation is finally getting it only to be smacked down. The church leaders knows who pays the bills, so those doing the smacking down are catered to. Forget Eastern Christian catechesis. Utility bills and salaries must be paid, not the truth be told.

I remain confused about your religious community. My poor, strong Auntie is still upset about her friend's church community having been charged as pagans.

I thank you, Mr. Administrator, and all others who have continued to challenge me. It has truly been a learning experience. I am grateful for this opportunity.

Ed

Just a point on some earlier posts. I would be leery of calling anything with a 40-year history, tradition. Look at the Latins, for example. They have the "tradition" of the last 40 years of music and liturgy in this country. The problem is that it's mostly inferior and did not develop organically. Bad music and liturgy are still bad 40 years later.

It is impossible for me to respond to false presumptions and non sequiturs of which this is but one example. You might as well be asking, "and have you finally stopped beating your wife?"

As I said, consider starting a thread on the issue. I'll no doubt participate and try to make my case. I can appreciate the arguments that can be made for other solutions than mine. Often, in the end, there are many valid points on all sides of the issue and a judgment must be made.

Similarly for the issue of the "vows."


As you have described her in your posts she seems to be a concerned, genteel woman, not a hardened malcontent. Such a "strong" person as you put it, has my admiration and should be appreciated and recognized as such. Who is she; what is her church/parish?

False presumptions? Non sequiturs? Beating your wife?


Appreciate arguments? Not with the implications of false presumptions, non sequiturs, and beating one's wife. You have avoided answering the questions I make. Maybe your avoidance is indicative of your answer? I gave you a case about how your next generation of Byzantine Catholics are being educated and practicing their faith - even in matters of rituals (venerating icons as one enters the church) and how this was smacked down by the bill payers of the parish because their fondness for all things not-so-Orthodox. The children do not pay the bills and have no influence over their shepherds. They can only rely on whether they are ever permitted to experience and practice their Eastern Christian faith. If the older generation in your communities wish not to be educated, then you can forget all the effort being invested in the younger and newer generation. Such silliness to actually think that the children are the future of one's community. That future is retarded day in and day out by those who want their fondness to be catered to while holding their wallets and purses. My question is still valid: When does that education begin? And if it already has, why is it always being challenged by those in charge? Catechesis material does not have vows taught, but vows are still proposed for the future of a church not in sync (or never wishing to be in sync) with fellow Orthodox believers.

It looks to me like your RDL communities are in a real impasse. Other Eastern Catholic communities have already made the decision and took the road to what they consider will lead them to authentic Eastern Christiand beliefs and practictes. Your RDL shepherds are still instilling indecisiveness and confusion. One bishop mandates "no debate" on the RDL worship service; another offers a blanket permission to return to the older pre-RDL worship service.

This forum provides an opportunity to offer questions. From what I read about the history of the Byzantine Catholic church, previous media outlets that questioned the church doings were taken over completely by the shepherds. No debate.


I am not at liberty to provide personal information. She had her identity stolen once, and I think it be best to leave her alone. Can you accept that? She also does not participate in these forums. I do. I participate because of my interest in Eastern Christiantiy and our discussion.

Peace,
Ed

Alternately, to protect the innocent, this is never revealed. "The Aunt" as a source of inside knowledge or turmoil is, however, a recurring leitmotit.

I think you mean leitmotif.

I would ask my grandparents, but they are deadmotifs.

I would ask my uncle, but he is a dead byzcathmotif.

My auntie is a wonderful leitmotif, an excellent "source".

Ed