www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Differences between Russian and Ruthenian usages?

What are the differences between Russian and Ruthenian usages?

A follow-up question: Are some of what are considered Ruthenian usages today developments after union with Rome in the seventeenth century? If so, what are distinguishable Ruthenian usages that pre-date union with Rome?

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Dave, I'll assume you are asking about the Ruthenian Metropolia usage vs. the Russian.

First of all, in the Russian usage the Typical Psalms (Psalm 102, 145) are used instead of the first and second resurrectional antiphons with the Beatitudes as the third throughout most of the year. For Paschal time in the Russian Church, these resurrectional antiphons (the normal Sunday ones in the Ruthenian Metropolia usage) are taken until Ascension.

The use of the Typical Psalms and Beatitudes is also true of the Ukrainian Catholic Liturgikon, although not too many UGCC parishes use the Typical Psalms and Beatitudes. There are troparia appointed to be interspersed in the Beatitudes in the Russian Oktoechos.

In Ruthenian parishes the practice has been to use the resurrectional antiphons year round, like the current Greek usage. I have never seen a Ruthenian pew book with the Typical Psalms, while even the older Ukrainian pew books usually contain these.

The Litanies between the antiphons/Typical Psalms, Litany for the Catechumens, etc. are generally not ommitted or shortened in the Russian usage. There are also additional prayers by the deacon/priest after Communion in the Russian Liturgikons such as "Having beheld the Resurrection of Christ", "Shine, shine, O New Jerusalem", and "O great and holiest Pascha", and "Wash away, O Lord". Also the reader announces the Prokimen, Epistle, and Alleluia and indicates what the proper tone is to be (also discussed recently on another thread).

Many Russian parishes have zapivka as has also been discussed on the Forum previously. There are other numerous variations, such as different style of vestments for both priest and deacons ("high backs" for priests, deacons wearing single orarions not wrapped under the right arm unless they are protodeacons, etc.) along with chanting and musical differences.

The 1942 Ordo Celebratonis brought many aspects of the Ruthenian rescension in line with the post-Nikonian or Synodal Russian usage, such as opening and closing the curtain and Holy Doors, antidoron before the dismissal, etc. Overall the UGCC Liturgikon is closer to the Synodal Russian usage with respect to liturgical texts and rubrics than those in use in the Ruthenian Metropolia.

Dave, sorry I'm really in a hurry tonight with family activities and only had a few seconds for this reply and couldn't give a more detailed answer as I would like to. Hope this helps and God bless.
Subdeacon Randolph, a sinner

Randolph,

The pew books in use until recently in Passaic and in use still in Pittsburgh AFAIK (I don't know about the other eparchies) were the "Levkulic" ones I believe and all the ones I saw had the Typical Psalms as an option.

David,

There are other differences but it is hard to establish if some of these are truly rubrical (in the official texts from Rome in the case of the Ruthenians vs. Moscow texts) or if they are variances of practices not reflected in the rubrics. For instance, the rubrics about the Communion of the faithful differ from the Rome liturgikon to the Ordo. And in any event what is practiced in almost all the parishes is different from the Russian (and all other modern Byzantine Orthodox usage AFAIK).

There are small usage differences when all added up are interesting to note, some are: color and style/size of "communion cloth" (some BC priests use the diskos under the chin of the communicant, some nothing, in few places is the cloth held for the communicant, many BCs use white wine not red, of course pre-cut particles, there is a difference in the number and arrangement of candlesticks on the altar, the BC bishops do not usually vest in the nave here in the USA and they do not use the small omophrion nor the klobuk (this may have changed in one eparchy), the BC bishops usually dont use pure beeswax thin candles for the dikerion and trikerion and they usually do not cross them nor join them but keep them straight, during the liturgy the omophoria are not swapped nor removed, the Ruthenian mandyas is usually much shorter so as not to drag the around and most Ruthenians do not use the "walking stick/posoch/posokh."

There is debate about singing "Eis polla..." vs. "Mnohaja l'ita" especially since there seems to be a general lack of attestation of the former in the BC texts.

There are some other differences like the full paschal dismissal beyond Bright Week and the replacing of the "More honorable..." with "Shine, Shine..." I am sure the list could be longer. This is what I could come with off the top of my head.

Tony

Tony, most if not all of the differences you state (white wine, pre-cut particles etc.) are variations within the Ruthenian usage and not necessarily differences per se as far as the respective Liturgikons go. The more traditional practice of red wine and full proskomidia has been restored in many places in the Rutheniian metropolia.

As far as the number of candlesticks on the altar, I have seen a variety of these arrangements at ROCOR, OCA, and Patriarchal parishes, from one set of three to two sets of three to one set of seven to two sets of six (twelve totalo). The number and arrangement is not mentioned even in such basic guides as Archpriest Sokoloff's before the Revolution. This cannot be used as a legitimate difference between Russian and Ruthenian usage.

The last Ruthenian Pontifical Liturgy I attended the bishop used dikeriotrikery with the long beeswax candles and ribbons. I have also seen Ruthenian priests use the larger aer for communion. Likewise these are local variations and not real differences as far as the Liturgikons are concerned.

Ruthenian bishops also do use the klobuk and small omphor. At the recent consecration of UGCC Bishop +Richard (remember that the UGCC uses the Ruthenian Rescension as well) he was vested in the full mandyas.

Also I have seen the replacing of "It is truly proper" with "Shine, shine" and the dismissal used similarly in Ruthenian parishes as in the OCA or ACROD.

With regards to the Typical Psalms, as I previously stated neither the 1965 Pittsburg or 1978 Levkulic pew books, the mainstays and most prevalent in the Ruthenian Metropolia, contain the Typical Psalms nor Beatitudes, only Sunday and weekday antiphons. The Typical Psalms and Beatitudes are in most UGCC pew books.

Dear Randolph,

How is different from

with which I started my reply to David?

Dear Randolph,

You wrote "most if not all of the differences you state...are variations within the Ruthenian usage"

David's question was "What are the differences between Russian and Ruthenian usages?"

I am trying to answer his question, what is the issue here?

You wrote "The last Ruthenian Pontifical Liturgy I attended the bishop used dikeriotrikery with the long beeswax candles and ribbons. I have also seen Ruthenian priests use the larger aer for communion."

The last Ruthenian Pontifical Liturgy I attended was in September of '02, straight candles were used. "Aer" for communion? Are you talking about the Aer/Vozdukh or the lention or iliton? I wrote "communion cloth" I don't recall seeing an Aer used during the distribution of Communion.

You wrote "Ruthenian bishops also do use the klobuk and small omphor. At the recent consecration of UGCC Bishop +Richard (remember that the UGCC uses the Ruthenian Rescension as well) he was vested in the full mandyas."

I'm trying really hard but I can't remember bishop Andrew or Metropolitan Basil in a klobuk or small omophor. Maybe someone can send a link? David asked about "Ruthenians" as far as I can tell Ruthenian practice is usually distinguished from Ukrainian practice on this board. He did not ask about "all those that use the 'Ruthenian recension.'"

Further you started a previous post "Dave, I'll assume you are asking about the Ruthenian Metropolia usage vs. the Russian." Was "+Richard" consecrated for the Ruthenian Metropolia?

You wrote "With regards to the Typical Psalms, as I previously stated neither the 1965 Pittsburg or 1978 Levkulic pew books, the mainstays and most prevalent in the Ruthenian Metropolia, contain the Typical Psalms nor Beatitudes, only Sunday and weekday antiphons."

Again, maybe someone from Pittsburgh can write in about this. Before the new Passaic books were used the pew book we used in my former parish has the Typical Psalms. When I moved and started visiting parishes in the Pittsburgh Archdiocese it was the same book they had with the same contents. I will get my hands on one and we can compare publication data, etc.

Tony

If you think the highly Latinised mantle of the Byzantine Catholic bishops is a full mandyas, you are very much mistaken. This is not the same as a full mandyas of either monastic or episcopal description. It is a corrupted piece of liturgical vesture that should have no part in Byzantine Christian life.

... unless the bishop really was wearing the full
mantle and not the usual streamlined thing.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Fr Mark,

If you go here [saintelias.com] and scroll down just a bit you will see an example of the mandyas Slav BC bishops wear.

Tony

Friends,

The 1978 Levkulic pew book I am looking at has the Typical Pslams (although abbreviated) it does not have the Beatitudes, which makes sense considering the Third Antiphon isn't usually taken around here. In Pittsburgh, at least, the Typical Psalms seem to be reserved for the Great Fast.

In Christ,
Subdeacon Lance

Bishop John Kudrick wore a klobuk at the Parma clergy gathering. He often wears his. I know he has both a klobuk and small omophor because he showed them both to me at a pontifical Liturgy in Kansas City last year.

So when we say "Ruthenian" it's the old question of which meaning of "Ruthenian" we are talking about.

I served as subdeacon for Bishop John Kudrick in summer '02 and prepared the dikery/trikery. I can give you the address of the Orthodox monastery I ordered the long beeswax candles from if you like. My wife prepared the ribbons on the dikery/trikery.

I know I should have spent more time in the first reply as the issue is not immediately straightforward. The Ordo Celebrationis of the Ruthenian Rescension is for both the UGCC and the Ruthenian Metropolia as promulgated. That is well documented.

Within those who use the Ruthenian Rescension, there are various versions of the Liturgikon based on the Ruthenian Rescension, such as Rome UGCC, Synodal UGCC, Pittsburg, Parma, etc. These can be very generally subdivided into the UGCC and Ruthenian Metropolia versions of the Liturgikon.

What kind of mandyas, candles, etc. are subject to local variations and I was merely trying to focus on the general differences in the Divine Liturgy itself, not minor particular variations that may exist or accretions within the Ruthenian usage.

Since the UGCC and Ruthenian Metropolia both use the Ruthenian Rescension there are two sets of considerations, namely that between the Russian and Ruthenian rescensions themselves, and the differences within those using the Ruthenian Rescension (namely between the UGCC and Ruthenian Metropolia). And obviously there will be local variations in any usage, Greek Catholic or Orthodox.

When it comes to length of candles, length of mandyas, how many candles on the altar, how long the communion cloth is, etc. I put these as matters of less importance as there are even variations amongst the Orthodox on these. I will still kiss the hand of my bishop if he is wearing a shorter mandyas. That alone to me is not the definitive sign of his orthodoxy.

Back to the Typical Psalms, if you can give me particulars of a promulgated pew book with them I would appreciate it. I am not denying there may be local variations. I have heard a recording of Holy Spirit choir in Philadelphia singing them in Slavonic but found out later that they were using a choral arrangement, not pew books.

Again, the 1965 Pittsburg and 1978 Levkulic editions are far and away the most common pew books in the Ruthenian Metropolia at least in my experience and neither has the Typical Psalms.

My first response to David was to give very general differences in the Divine Liturgy regarding the service itself which one would likely notice right away when attending and not accessories such as length of mandyas, length of communion cloth, etc. which are subject to local variations. I didn't mean to rub anyone the wrong way but give a general answer to a general question.

What detailed answers! Many thanks for these!!

I had also asked:

From what I've read here, I'm assuming that there are some textual things here (some private prayers omitted, etc).

The discussion on the Typical Psalms and Beatitudes was interesting to read. Was the Beatitudes part of the Liturgy before union with Rome? Or, is that a Russian development?

Am I correct that the following are not part of the differences between Ruthenian (pre-union) and Russian usages?

Suppression of prosphora traditions (blessed bread as an ablution at Communion time and antidoron) and the use of pre-cut particles are post-union developments, right?

Omitted litanies and abbreviated antiphons are also pretty much post-union developments also, right?

Thanks again!

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Forgive my ignorance, but what are pre-cut particles? I have a feeling I'm not going to lie the answer.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Father, bless!

www.prosphora.org [prosphora.org] contains this link entitled "On the Abuse of Pre-cut Prosphora" that explains:

http://www.cin.org/archives/cineast/199805/0328.html

The author says that some Orthodox use pre-cut prosphora but from what I've heard that must be extremely rare.

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

In that the non-Orthodox author states that some Orthodox use pre-cut prosfora, I should like to see some documentation of this. Personally, I have never seen examples of this abuse among the Orthodox--if it happens somewhere, it must be rare indeed.

OrthodoxEast

In re-reading the link the author that "some have said" that some Orthodox Churches pre-cut prosphora. So, actually, he's attributing that comment to others. I misspoke here and I apologize. Whatever the case, it appears to be practically unheard of among Orthodox.

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com