www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Church Slavonic

If any real resemblence of the time-honored Subcarpathian-Rus' Prostopinije is to survive, then the Church Slavonic language will be the only way to recognize what true Prostopinije music really sounds like. How could anybody even with a third grader education in music think that WHAT IS NOW BEING SUNG IN ENGLISH is a good English rendering of Prostopinije? I'm tired of the priests and bishops of the Ruthenian Metropolia in America patronizing we the faithful by saying that "they" are continuing our authenic liturgical musical tradition. The current "English" music is horrible. Why don't they quit playing games and admit that they want to do what the RC's of post-Vatican II did, "make up" their own new "American" liturgical music! Don't patonize me and all of the other educated faithful of the Ruthenian Metropolia who know and love real authenic Prostopinije!

Dear Ung-Certez,

Prostopinije developed over centuries of usage of Church Slavonic. I don't suppose it would ever sound authentic in English, given the different sentence structure and patterns of usage in the two languages.

You are probably right that we will need to develop an English language chant. This will probably take a few centuries, but we can start now. We can call it Pennsylvania Plain Chant (not to be confused with Pennsylvania Polka, we hope}. Five hundred years from now it will sound glorious!

What's a few centuries in eternal life?

Have a Blessed Day!!!!

John
Pilgrim and Odd Duck

I guess then that would mean the canonical establishment of a new "Rite" or Particular American Rite of the Quasi-Eastern Church where anything goes? Then all of the parishes can sing or more likely "read" a liturgy and have a completely American Novo-Latinized 15 minute liturgy that contains no litanies, no singing, etc., etc. Then we would have no need of iconscreens or priests for that matter because in this new American Eastern Rite Church concepts like confession and Holy Communion are considered "old world" and not politically correct but concepts like abortion, divorce and "alternative" life styles are not only accepted but encouraged! Yes I do believe the liberals in the Church would really like that. Then we could petition the newly-excommunicated American Roman Catholic Church for acceptance as they too would have this same mind set and dogma!

Tradition in our Church exists for a reason and not for the sake of keeping a "ethnic" church custom because our parents and grandparents kept these certain traditions. I honestly don't understand the thinking of "the powers that be" (the hierarchy and clergy) of the Eastern Catholic Churches here in America, they are so eager to "get rid" of anything they deem old world or ethnic in order to please the liberals in the Church. How can we say that we are returning to our true Eastern Church traditions and at the same time have such a disregard or dislike for proper liturgical music and liturgical education and cantorial training?

Ung-Certez

Well, as a part-time Cantor, I think part of the problem with Ruthenian Slavonic is how it is written. I feel that if we went back to the Cyrillic alphabet and taught that pronuciation, it would solve some of the problems. IMHO, even though there are some dialect issues between the Slavic States, most of the Chruch Slavonic is constant when written in the original tongue.

Dmitri

The correct Slavonic appears to be "Kol' slaven nash Hospod'..." the key being 'Nash Hospod'' Literally "How (how much) praised (is) Our Lord" Nash (our) modifies Hospod' (Lord).

I have not gone thru the books to check this but "slaven" should be a participle. "Glory/Slava" is obviously related but the difference being a noun or adjectival form (a participle can play this role). The infinitive should be 'slaviti' = slaven(hard sign) in masc/sing/nom. If it were our glory it would be 'nasha slava' or similar and if it were "to us" is would be 'nam' although 'nas' is perhaps possible. If you would like to correspond privately regarding this, feel free.

Hope this helps.

Bob

"I would like to discuss Church Slavonic."


Old Slavonic is a dead language. If anyone really wants to discuss it favorably, I think they should continue the thread ONLY in Old Slavonic and using Cyrillic letters, thus they can demonstrate how relative it is to our society and how it can serve as a medium of communication.

Oh! I almost forgot. OS is also a good tool to make the silent Anaphora a more mysterious experience. See no Anaphora. Hear no Anaphora. and Speak no Anaphora. Have no liturgy.

Nyardi i moslatu pimi fluponi! Zanesk' po'hil dimi sjahotomukj tysim i flavam.

[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

Would somebody please tell me how Church Slavonic helps us to fulfill the commandment to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ to those who do not know Him?


Just wondering.


Sharon


Sharon Mech, SFO
Cantor & sinner
sharon@cmhc.com

Sharon,

It has absolutely nothing to do with your concern about spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. It all has to do with other agendas.

Wrong. It has everything to do with spreading the Word of G-d. I like liturgical language. For me, it reminds me that God is more than the ordinary. I think we in the West have tried to bring G-d down to our level instead of lifting to His. The discipline of haveing to study and learn a different tongue used only for Divine Liturgy and ceremony is what leads us into a special mindset in our Theosis. I am trying to incorporate more Slavonic in my own prayer life. For me, the words take on a deeper meaning as I am forced to meditate on everything I pray to the Almighty. Don't get me wrong, vernacular is wonderful; but don't put down Slavonic either simply because you may not like it. Consider, for instance, when Latin was removed from the Roman Church. Church became very ordinary...

Dmitri

Sharon,

Church Slavonic (and Old Church Slavonic before) was a tool utilized by SS. Cyril and Methodios in evangelizing the Slav people. As should be well known they suffered much for putting the worship of the Church and Scripture in the LANGUAGE OF THE PEOPLE. That is what Slavonic in its various recensions WAS. It is not that now, at least not in the same way.

There are many people who due to nostalgia or other reasons prefer to worship in Slavonic. Should they be worshiping in the language they speak? OF COURSE! Does that mean that Slavonic is bad? Never to be heard again? Not in my opinion. If you are an American BC of Slav background and know the liturgy in Slavonic if you were to travel to many places where Slavonic is still strong (especially Russia) you would be able to participate.

Some years ago I was travelling in Egypt and was in Cairo on Sunday and found a RC church that had mass at a time I was able to attend (I was not RC at that time and am not now)...anyway, it happened that that mass was in LATIN! I am not a fan of Latin..oh and it was the 'new mass' (someone start foaming at the mouth now) but I had studied Latin and was familiar enough with it and the structure of the mass to be able to participate somewhat. Had it been in Arabic I would have been much more a spectator.

Many of our older people feel (likely due to the catechesis they received) that they should or have to worship in Slavonic. Sometimes they even get it wrong! Incorrect pronunciation, etc.

I think that this whole situation is unfortunate but the Catholic Church teaches that one's conscience has a place in moral decisions, is that correct? An older person whose conscience tells him/her than he/she must/should worship in Slavonic is 'bound' to do that, right?

I dunno I dislike the whole ethnic thing some days, it is terribly isolating and I think is disastrous but I am not sure that this agression/negativity toward Slavonic is any answer.

Bob

[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: Bob King ]

Dear J Thur,

What other agendas does it have to do with?

Bob

Posted same thing twice.

[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: Bob King ]

Dear Bob,

I agree with you and I think you are making an excellent point.

When we up here had the Liturgy in Slavonic, we had Ukrainians, Hungarians, Slovaks and some others in our Church.

When we got rid of it, we became more ethnocentric with only Ukrainians here, only Slovaks there etc.

Being an ignorant lay person, I don't pretend to understand all the nuances concerning liturgical renewal that are being discussed here.

I think that Slavonic MUST be studied in our seminaries and by scholars so that we can maintain an understanding of the liturgical riches of our Churches from the past.

There's nothing wrong with studying and learning a language like that, including Latin or other more modern ethnic languages. Americans should learn that the world isn't about English only or that different races and cultures don't share American values.

When people say they are learning French or Spanish or Italian, they are, as you know better than I, learning a derivative of Latin which also forms a solid chunk of the English language as well.

But perhaps I'm being silly.

For English speakers only, English must be the Lingua Franca of the liturgy.

But please, there is English and then there is English.

In the rush toward English-dom, one sometimes detects an attitude of modernizing and shortening all things Byzantine liturgical.

We all have our agendas and our gurus whose teachings we push in the liturgical department.

It must all be done with great sensitivity, freedom, flexibility and pastoral understanding.

Imposing liturgical a prioris on everyone regardless is a turn-off in any language.

Alex

[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

Church Slavonic is a great subject for liturgical studies. I would like to learn how to sing the Liturgy in Slavonic.

Having said that, the push to retain Slavonic in the liturgical life (aside from occasional usage) of the Byzantine Catholic Church is IMO mistaken. The main effect of doing so is to discourage authentic evangelization.

Church Slavonic is a dead language. To perpetuate its usage as the lingua franca of our people only keeps us from reaching out to the people in our neighborhoods who need the Gospel so desperately. That was the entire purpose which compelled Sts Cyril and Methodius--evangelization in the language of the people.

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Dear Dave,

Agreed.

No one should push Slavonic on those who don't relate to it, just as we shouldn't push liturgical reforms, no matter how brilliantly conceived, on people when they don't want them either.

But I think our Churches' scholars and others can and should study Slavonic and no Slavic Orthodox or Eastern Catholic priest's education is complete without Slavonic studies. They know enough Latin . . .

In addition, it is really a myth that Sts. Cyril and Methodius translated the liturgical texts into the "language of the people."

The Pan-Slavists and Eastern European nationalist movements were fond of saying that. But it is a myth.

Slavonic was as "dead" a language as Latin and Greek at the time.

The Thessalonian brothers simply introduced another standard liturgical language, like Latin and Greek, that would be closer to the Slavic languages of the people at that time and therefore BETTER understood.

Slavonic underwent subsequent historic changes as was shaped by other Slavic nations to become better understood as their languages developed.

But that goes to show how totally "not dead" Slavonic really was.

And has the Russian Church suffered for its use of Slavonic in Russia?

Not at all.

We need to keep the study of Slavonic, at least by our professional theologians and tradition-keepers.

Remember also for all the rhetoric about understandable languages, Latin is still the official language of the Roman Catholic Church.

You can go to an ATM machine in Vatican City and withdraw money in Latin.

My history is a little rusty, but I don't think the Romans had too many ATM machines back then

And if one studies theology at Rome, at least so I was told, the lectures are, by and large, in Latin, although one may write one's exams using Italian.

Alex

[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]