www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Current and Proposed Liturgical Texts for comparison

I would say "recovery of tradition"yes, revision of the liturgy no way!
Why do they want to go and change it anyway?
Now im all for the changing the thees and thous but that is all.
Stephanos I

What was the latin expression they used for being admitted to communion with Rome.... Nec plus, Nec minus, Nec alietur.
Nothing more, nothing LESS, nothing different.

Stephanos, actually that was what Pope St. Pius X told Natalya Ushakova when she asked him at an audience for guidance for the Russian Catholic Church. But you have the gist of it.

Father Deacon,

With respect, what is "normal" in Pittsburgh ain't necessarily normal elsewhere. As Joe observed, we've been doing an awful lot of the "proposed changes" in Parma for over a decade - and many of the things you list as "usually omitted" aren't.

TO *my* parish, the "new" liturgy will be a truncation. Theoretically, there will be a published "resource" book containing such things as the remaining Antiphon verses, so parishes like ours can dig 'em out and use them if we want to. I sure hope that plan is still in force. Personally I think it's backwards - at least with the Levkulic pew book, parishes who chose not to take Antiphons or Litanies at least saw them in the book, and knew they existed. With the "new" arrangement, it will take a motivated individual to even find out what they are missing.

I truly fail to see what we gain.


Sharon

Sharon,

I fully concede that what is normal for Pittsburgh may not be normal elsewhere. However, I would be confident in saying that the majority of parishes in the Metropolia use the abbreviated antiphons.

Another point to consider and one I don't really understand the Antiphons are one of three things that the 1941 Ordo says maybe be omitted all together at the Ordinary's discretion. (The others are the Teplota, but the 1996 Instruction says to restore it, and the Litany for the Catechumens) Theoretically the bishop could make the antiphons like the Greeks and Antiochians and just have the triple chanting of "Through the prayers of the Mother of God O Savior Save us." and "O Son of God, risen from the dead, save us who sing to You. Alleluia." I don't advocate this but it is one of the abbreviation the 1941 Ordo actually allows.

To conclude given all the discussion that has gone back and forth I think any new Liturgikon will include the full text so that those who want to do the whole thing can do it.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Perhaps someone can explain to me, a non-Ruthenian, why this need to dink with the Liturgy? Is there something wrong with what we have received from antiquity? Did Ss. Basil and Chrysostom miss the point somehow?

Yes, I realize that the changes being discussed here are similar to those that the Melkite synod put out, but I've never heard any reason for this abbreviation. Liturgies in my parish run between 70 and 80 minutes (an hour and 10 to 20 minutes). This is certainly not excessive (and I stand for most of that).

What fo' we do dis?

Edward, confused deacon and sinner

Much thanks to FAther Deacon for making this text available to all of us. I shall add some comments (what a surprise!) as soon as I have some time - this week is already overloaded, and it's getting heavier. For the moment, I shall be cryptic and classical and say only that the proposed text neither skirts Scylla nor avoids Charybdis.
Incognitus

Incognitus,

My Sicilian family is from near the Straits of Messina. It's always kind of cool to tell people that my ancestors are from locales described in The Odyssey.

Logos Teen

Fr Deacon Lance wrote:

That would be preferable. Is there any statement from the Bishops that indicates such will be the case? Fr David?

Thanks to Logos Teen. It's always a pleasure to find that a classical allusion reaches the younger generation!
Incognitus

Stephanos I,

Was that the saying found in the Unia agreements?

Joe

Joe,

Shortly after the turn of the 20th century, when the Byzantine Russian Catholic Church was in its infancy, there was disagreement among the faithful in St. Petersburg as to whether they should westernize or adhere to the letter of the Russian Orthodox Synod's ritual texts. Their query was directed to Pope St. Pius X whose reply was "Nec plus, nec minus, nec alitur", "No more, no less, no different."

Many years,

Neil

On the classical analogy, I am a bigger fan of Homer than Virgil and "The Iliad" pipes "The Odyssey" as my favourite. The female characters always move me, especially Andromache and Hekuba.

Anton

That phrase itself does not appear in the Union documents. It was used by St. Pius X, see my post above.

Natalya Ushakova had asked the Pope at an audience for guidance as a dispute was starting to broil amongst some of the Russian Catholics regarding deviations from the Synodal texts, and she took the initiative to settle the dispute (thank God for ladies, once again ) fully expecting to get the answer she did.

This confirmed what Metropolitan Andrey had already established for the Russian Catholics. The answer from Pius X was most clear, i.e. do not deviate one bit from the normative Orthodox Synodal liturgical texts.

Fr. Deacon, I can't find any note sanctioning any ommissions or truncations of the Antiphons in either Fr. Berko's 1957 official English translation of the Ordo, which is the only English translation with imprimatur (by Metropolitan Konstantin Bohachevsky) and which was for years used as the normative English translation, nor in the Latin original.
Even in the "Divine Liturgy Celebrated Without Solemnity (Simple Celebration, a non-sequitor to say the least), there is no mention of an option to omit the Antiphon. This section, the prime concession to the latinizing camps, should be ignored anyway.

Dear Anton, I was always enchanted by the enchantresses (was Scylla mentioned earlier ) like Circe.

Subdeacon Randolph,

It is in the preface of the 1965 Liturgikon not in the Ordo.

http://www.patronagechurch.com/Liturgikon%20E&S/The%20Liturgikon.htm

I don't see that it is a Latinization though as it has nothing to do with anything the Latins do and the Greeks and Antiochians abbreviate the Antiphons even more than the Rusyns.

Fr. Deacon Lance

RE: Abbreviating the Antiphons.

Does anyone take the Antiphons seriously anyway?

How many parishes actually sing Antiphons antiphonically? How many actually take Psalmody seriously? There seems to be two problems in today�s conventional way of chanting the Antiphons:

1: The Lack of Antiphonic Singing:
Antiphons, if done properly, should be antiphons. �Anti� and �phonos� together means �opposite/opposing sounds.� Typically, the cantor/chanters lead the Psalm verse and the people respond with the refrain. How many parishes actually chant the Antiphons like this?

2: The Lack of Psalmody:
If Antiphons are responses to Psalm verses, then what constitutes psalmody? The popular convention of singing one Psalm verse with refrain seems to �hymn-odize�, that is, make psalmody into a hymn/song whereby everyone sings it altogether.

Cantor Joe Thur