www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Liturgical Reform Responsibility

We love, without restraint of humility, our tastes and preferences - no matter what, if anything, informs them. And we have cultivated a doubt of expert opinion - all the better, of course, for indulging our own tastes, and maintaining great self-esteem no matter how ignorant we objectively are.


It's been awhile since we have had a good discussion, djs...

This is true, but often dissent is precisely a means for defending the higher good - St. John Chrysostom spent most of his life in this way.

I don't think anyone here is doubting expert opinion; rather make the process a bit more transparent. When even clergy are in the dark who will be compelled to follow these prescriptions, the precondition of mistrust will be inherent even if unintended.

Your earlier comments about liturgical texts not being actually written by the laity are in many ways valid. But liturgical uses that were not accepted by the laos in a larger context have fallen into disuetude.

And we should not forget, albeit a severe example, of the disaster with the Old Rite in Russia, as well as the amply documented liturgical disasters in the Roman Church of the last 35 years. Let us take history into account as well as the sensus fidelium. The end result will be much greater trust and respect for the hierarchy.

Dear Father Deacon Diak:

I have already specifically stipulated to the wisdom of your ideas here, and include your comment that there is a great deal of untapped expertise in the laity. So the idea of a broader review is great.

But it must also be accepted that, as with your reg reviews, not every comment will be a reasonable one, not every suggestion will be accepted, and not every one will get a specific reply. My guess is that the most unreasonable commentors (the few) will leave the experience even more annoyed: why bother to have us write out our opinions if you didn't accept them? Even so, a broader review will be worth it to develop a better sense that this is for the body.

ps If a Chrysostom came along I suspect that I would also not be including any dissent that he gave as uniformed or inchoate whining.

Agreed and well said.

djs,

I suspect that you are correct as well, including your comment about Chrysostom. That is why I suggested a six month limit on the review. We have far bigger fish to fry than this new translation but a six month review may set a new pattern for the Church. Today we run into far too many examples of people who don't seem to care if the Church esists beyond them. Some are beyond being tired of having no active role in the Church. Some never had an active role because they were never given one and so don't care one way or another. This brief examination may inspire SOME to take a new path which will lead to a more positive Church.

Then again, I may be overly naive.

Dan Lauffer

BTW This isn't to say their aren't several who are very active and champing at the bit to be even more so.

Maybe the most objectionable sections of the revised liturgies will become apparent to the hierarchs who are responsible for approving or rejecting it. If so, maybe they will take steps to modify the most controversial wordings, THEN approve it. Is that possible given the advanced state of the project?

I don't think it is too late for the bishops to stop and reconsider what they are approving. The matter is serious enough. This is a "big fish", there may be "bigger fish" but that doesn't lessen the fact of the serious nature of this problem. The Liturgy is the "source and summit" of the Christian life. Nothing is equal to the Liturgy, rather, all other Christian endeavors must flow from or lead to authentic worship.

Too late, as it will be introduced at this year's Mt. Macrina Otpust.

Ungcsertezs

Well, I'm glad there is an answer to the question when will it be introduced. (Couldn't find an irony graemlin)

I knew it was coming because everyone is being silent about the issue. Be quiet and maybe nobody will notice the change seems to be the standard operating procedure in the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy these days.

Ungcsertezs (I told you so, I told you so) :rolleyes:

Just following up to learn whether or not the revised liturgy has been and is being used at the pilgrimage, and whether or not folks are voicing their concerns about it there, and to whom. Inquiring minds want to know. Also minds too far away to attend.

Glory to Jesus Christ! We just got back from three lovely days at Uniontown! (I had to come back early because of work.)

Nope, it wasn't. There were some variations in the texts at the altar and kliros, but no more than usual. Cantors, clergy and people sang Slavonic hymns alongside the English ones throughout, as did groups of pilgrims arriving on the grounds; Sunday Matins was fantastic, and the Slavonic liturgy was well-attended, with lots of singing for the non-changing parts (although there were people arriving asking where books were so they could follow the service. If/when new people's books come out, perhaps someone should COLLECT a large number of copies of the 1978 book to use at Otpust?) There were a couple of melodies used at the Slavonic Liturgy during which singing dropped off quite a bit, but I suspect they were just rarer melodies rather than any kind of new ones.

There were many cancellations locally on Friday, with some people mentioning warnings from Federal officials not to travel this weekend. Saturday was a bit quiet. But after the Slavonic Liturgy, the crowds continued to increase all day Sunday, with a huge number of people present for the vocations and hierarchical Liturgies.

The Homer Glen crowd made it and were a lot of fun to hear from; Sister Celeste, Father Tom (Loya) and others did a great job with the teen program, and Sister Theodosia has written a new icon that brought me close to tears, so I had to get a print I could take home to mount and have blessed.

As always, the pligrimage was a great blessing! Lots of services, good mix of English and Slavonic; I heard one question after Matins about the new music (a good discussion ensued), lots of really positive attitudes throughout the weekend. (The fine weather definitely helped.) Though there was a greal deal of talk about vocations, I saw no frightened people in sight.

I hope no one stayed away from Uniontown because of evidently mistaken predictions like the one quoted above. (Well, I suppose that liturgical changes could have been formally announced at the hierarchical liturgy that was starting as we had to leave. But certainly no new translation was in use for the weekend, and there was no lack of Slavonic and Rusyn/Slovak/etc.) Anyone who could have attended Otpust and didn't, missed out on supporting and benefitting from something very good for our Church.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski
(who needs to go weed the garden now... )

Jeff, if you would come milk the goats I would have loved to have been there. They don't take too kindly to being left for three or four days without some relief.

Perhaps if I brought them next year we could have a "petting zoo"...

Sounds lovely - glad you enjoyed!

Incognitus

Jeff--what is the subject of Sr. Theodosia's new icon? Inquiring minds...John

Jeff,

What do you consider "no lack of Slavonic" to be?
One, two "token" Slavonic hymns/Mnohaja L'ita's?
At least we diehards have the traditional sing-a-long (lots and lots of Slavonic :p ). Jeff, you should come to the sing-a-long, you would have been in shock!

Ungcsertezs