www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Archbishop Ranjith: Stole Over Chasuble!?

"Anything worth doing is worth doing badly"--G.K. Chesterton

"Perfect is the enemy of the good"--Voltaire

I simply prefer to see the liturgy being celebrated revently and with awe in accordance with the liturgical laws of the church. Is that really so strange?

Which doesn't mean you shouldn't always try to do your best.

One most certainly should, but when one is faced by a situation of grave crisis, it is important to focus on the most important issues first.

I've watched some Latin bishops vest in my day--and this is not to say that this is some sort of norm. But it seemed to me that they put on what was handed to them and in the order that it was handed to them.

I've also noted a difference in the way bishops operate in the East and in the West--Latin and Orthodox, no Easter Catholics. The Latin bishop has a Master of Ceremonies who tells him where he needs to be and, in a way, seems to orchestrate the flow of what the man is supposed to do and whre he's supposed to be. The Orthodox bishops I've been around seem to be in complete control of the direction and flow of the liturgical events they participate in. I don't think I've ever seen anyone pretend to be their Master of Ceremonies.

So I'd give the good Archbishop the benefit of the doubt. I'd blame this one on his secretary or the person who is his Episcopal Master of Ceremonies.

BOB

True, but this is just a discussion forum where we exchange thoughts and ideas. It's not as if we were members of the College of Cardinals or the Holy Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate trying to decide where our priorities should be.

Also, Pope Benedict XVI has obviously decided to make it a priority of his pontificate to restore the beauty and integrity of the liturgy, so he obviously considers this to be part of the solution to the Church's current crisis.

Agreed. I think you are right about the role of the master of ceremonies. And even Pope Benedict waited a couple of years to appoint a new pontifical master of ceremonies, in the form of Monsignor Guido Marini [en.wikipedia.org].

As for Orthodox bishops, I guess they have their own archdeacons who work behind the scenes to ensure everything goes smoothly?

In my experience as a mercenary altar boy, only a few do. Most Eastern bishops, with the exception of the Russian Orthodox (including some OCA), call audibles a lot. I have yet to see a Pontifical Divine Liturgy done strictly according to the rubrics. And, mind you, Byzantine rite rubrics tend to be rather vague, e.g.: "Going to the usual place at the appointed time, the celebrant does what is normally done according to local custom"

If you are lucky, you know exactly what that means.

The Liturgies I've served with Metropolitan Basil have been mixed. Some of the times he's been in control and others he just goes with the flow or at the direction of the M.C., which is many times Archpriest Dennis Bogda from the Cathedral.

Stuart:

Sounds like what they tell us in funeral service when we apprentice. Whatever you do, make it look like that's the way it's supposed to be done. Like the time I fell into the grave. I got out and announced that the grave was the proper depth and would everyone please step under the tent for the Committal Service.

But you make my point. The Orthodox bishop seems to be in command rather than being ushered along.

Aside from this, I think the attitude with the Vatican II Liturgy has been that we need to "loosen up" about anything and everything. Prior to that, I'd venture to say that both East and West operated out fo the pattern that everyone better know what is expected at every step and whoa to the man who made a misstep.

BOB

Sounds like what they tell us in funeral service when we apprentice. Whatever you do, make it look like that's the way it's supposed to be done.

I remember one Divine Liturgy celebrated by His Grace Bishop Nicholas (Samra) with a mixed group of presbyters and deacons from several different Greek Catholic Churches--and one mercenary altar boy. The last thing he said, before we entered the sanctuary was "Remember, in the Holy Place we do stop for mistakes. If we make a mistake, we will continue as though nothing has happened".

But you make my point. The Orthodox bishop seems to be in command rather than being ushered along.

The deacon in the Byzantine rite has the distinct responsibility of telling the celebrant what to do--"Master, bless this"; "Master, go here"; "Master, say this prayer", and so forth. I suppose he is the master of ceremonies, but in fact, the bishop, as liturgiarch, can indeed do pretty much what he pleases, when he pleases, and how he pleases.

Of all the Orthodox (and Greek Catholics, for that matter), the Russians are the most liturgically persnickity, and Arabs the least. It's hard to tell with the Ruthenians, because they never follow the books they were given by the Holy See. For instance, I've been to many Ruthenian Pontifical Divine Liturgies, and never seen a bishop vest in the middle of the church. On the other hand, they traditionally sing hymns that are not in the Archeiretikon, and omit large chunks of things that are. Just what they do, and what they omit is pretty much a matter of personal whim.

Is it like that http://www.aracaeli.com.br/fotosprodutos/tunica%20branca.jpg ?

Here in Brazil it's called "túnica". There is a permission to the clerics to use it. Some of them use the "túnica" with the stole during the week, and on Sunday they vest normally, with the chasuble.

Phillippe

As far as I can tell - here in the UK we would just call that an alb . That, or one very similar, is what is supposed to be worn over street clothes , under the Chasuble.

If it does not completely cover street clothes at the neck then an amice should be used .

At the 40th anniversary liturgy for the Eparchy of Parma, Bishop John vested in the center aisle. The liturgy was celebrated outdoors under a tent. It was magnificent.

Well, that's progress, I suppose. I should like to see the Archieretikon that he used, and whether it conforms to the Slavonic texts of the Ruthenian recension.