www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Small Omophorion and other questions

Daniil:

I am wondering which Bachinsky Fr. Serge refers to. There are several, I believe.

The most famous (at least for Subcarpathian Ukrainians, dare I used the terms together) is Bishop Andrei Bachinskyj, considered to be the "greatest bishop of Mukachevo. Father A. Pekar, OSBM credits him with much hard labor in organizing the eparchy after its "official" canonical establishment (as an independent eparchy) by the Holy See and Empress Maria Theresa) in 1771. This began what historians refer to as the "Golden Age" of the Mukachevo Eparchy.

Bachinskyj is known to have given the eparchy its ecclesiastical composition, deaneries, vicariates, other offices, schools, cantor's institutes, seminaries and much more. Among his accomplishments were the publication of many liturgical and educational texts in the Church Slavonic and Ruthenian (Subcarpathian dialect of Ukrainian) languages. He fought heavily against the latinization of our Rite. These works may very well have included an archieratikon and perhaps it was not published in L'viv until 1886, while being attributed to the saintly Bishop Bachinskyj who served as Bishop of Mukachevo from 1773 until 1809.

The bishop was very concerned with the preservation of the Ruthenian cultural identity among his people, which as we know, was constantly under threat of being supplanted by the Polish, Hungarian, Russian and other identities. At that time, the Ruthenian culture was seen to include those people on both sides of the Carpathians, who shared a common heritage and religious tradition. Bishop Bachinskyj was the one who introduced blue and yellow as the Ruthenian national colors and dictated their use throughout the eparchy. This was before the development of the modern Ukrainian consciousness, to which unfortunately, many of our Transcarpathian ancestors did not properly ascribe to due to outside influences which did not want to see them united with their Galician brothers and sisters. The bishop united all the Ruthenian people throughout the Hungarian Kingdom, into administrative districts of the Mukachevo Eparchy. (You can tell that I am a Rusyn Ukrainophile, who believes that we are both of the same culture and heritage and should thus be united as one group that preserves colloquial differences as in any region of Ukraine today.)

When Galicia was annexed to Austria-Hungary in 1772, Bishop Bachinskyj initiated a campaign for a Ruthenian Metropolitan Province that would include all Greek Catholic Eparchies in the Empire. Sadly, because of Hungarian politics, his plans did not come to fruition. Galicia however, did receive its Metropolitan See in 1808 while the eparchies in what was then considered Hungary proper remained under the authority of the Hungarian RC Archbishop of Estergom, a terrible situation which endured for many years.

I thought that some acknowledgement of Bishop Andrei Bachinskyj as one of the greatest bishops of Mukachevo was merited, whether or not he is the Bachinskyj of the archieratikon. From my reading of our history, it would make much sense if he was the one responsible for compiling this liturgical book for use during his time, faithful to our Ruthenian Recension* in its authentic usage.

*Recension used in both Galicia and Subcarpathian Rus'.

Joe

Dear Joe,

Father, bless!

's a funny thing - my grandparents came from the Carpatians - they were all Jews - and their black-sheep of a granddaughter ends up hanging out with them thar Ruthenians.

Just wondering if you or anyone else knoweth - The "new" translation (You know, the one that shreds the service of the Antiphons, Oh, OOPS! there I go again) which may or may not ever see the light of day, depending upon what the next Metropolitan decides - is that strictly the "ordinary" (i.e. no Bishops) Divine Liturgy, or will it also address the do's & don'ts of the hierarchical version as well? If it does, which way does it lean?


Cheers,

Sharon

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

I am not sure, but I think it may have been another Bachynsky. Wasn't there one as Metropolitan of Galicia?

Anyway, next time I see Fr. Conrad Dachuk, I will ask him to borrow it.

Daniil

In 1973 the Congregation for the Eastern Churches published an Archieratikon in Church Slavonic for use in the Ruthenian recension. This is the official text for Pontifical services both in the Byzantine-Ruthenian and Byzantine-Ukrainian Churches. This can be ordered from Rome directly.

There is no mention of the small omophorion in this text. In its origin the small ormophorion is simply the large omophorion folded. Fr. Taft refers to this in practice in an article on the Liturgy of the Great Church of the 10th century found in Orientalia Christiana Periodica. Vol XLV. Fasciculus II. 1979, Roma. 279-307.

If you can locate a copy of J. Braun, Die liturgische Gewandung im Occident und Orient nach Ursprung und Entwhichlung, Verwendung und Symbolik, Freiburg im B. 1907, you will find it also of help with these questions.

The current Ruthenian Archieratikon is what we use at St. Elias in Brampton and the hierarchs follow it. This Archieratikon preserves many of the uses peculiar to the Ruthenian recension. It is not an imitation of Russian use. (Of course there are many similarities but this should not be surprising if one keeps in mind that it is all Byzantine liturgy.)

When the hierarch blesses with the trikerion and dikerion after he is vested in the centre of the nave, he sings: O Lord, O Lord look down from heaven� He does this four times as he blesses to the four points of the compass. The choir/assembly respond each time with Many Years.

When the hierarch blesses with the trikerion and dikerion at the Little Entrance recites the verses from the Hours and again there are four blessings and four Many Years. This blessing is inserted in the Entrance Hymn of the day, usually on a Sunday: Come let us worship and fall down before Christ (4 blessings) O Son of God�.

In previous practice while the bishop incensed the Holy Table, etc. a large number of the concelebrants preceded him. The current Archieratikon calls for the bishop to be preceded only by the protodeacon.

I have served with bishops who have used both the Lviv Archieratikon and the Roman Archieratikon. The differences are minimal.

Dear Father Protodeacon,

Thank you for the post, and I will look up Father Taft's article.

Does the Archieratikon then indicate the use of the small and large Omophor? Have you seen the custom of removing the large Omophor, and giving it to the clergy to carry in the Great Entrance, and then holding it over the Bishop as he receives the gifts? Is this a Greek use, and is it in the Slav Books? Is this the reason it was then folded, or the small Omophor used?

Elias

Dear Father Elias,

The Ruthenian/Ukrainian Archieratikon refers to only one omophorion and this I take to be the large version. It is worn from the vesting of the bishop at the Divine Liturgy until the divesting of the bishop following the Divine Liturgy.

In the Russian use the large omophorion is removed before the reading of the Gospel and is carried in by a deacon who takes it through Holy Doors and returns with it while the Apostle is being read. A deacon at the Transfer of the Gifts also carries it. What you refer to in your post is a common Russian practice. I am not sure if any bishops who follow Greek usage also do this or not. I will have to check out why the large omophorion was originally folded. This may take me a while, as this is not a pressing matter. But when I discover the reason I will let you know.

Dear Father Protodeacon David,

What is the Lviv Archieratikon? By Roman, you mean the one published by Patriarch Joseph in Church Slavonic?

Daniil

Dear Daniil,

The current official Archieratikon was published in 1973 in Church Slavonic by the Congregation for the Eastern Churches. This is the only Archieratikon in the Ruthenian recension that has offical status. It is the official book for the bishop among the Byzantine-Ruthenians and the Ukrainians. This is the text that we follow at St. Elias in Brampton. I should note that while the date of the text is 1973, it was not resleased for sale until 1977.

Just an observation. (Fascinating discussion!!!) At the present time, I do not believe that we have any major liturgical books in English, which have "official" status, save for the Rite of Baptism, and some Holy Week stuff published by various Eparchies.

Anybody know differently?

Just wondering...


Sharon

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

Dear Father Protodeacon David,

So which one is the L'viv Archieratikon again? I pressume that the Roman Archieratikon is the one you said was published in 1973.

Daniil