www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Our liturgical tradition- a response

Rumours are whizzing through cyber-space about an impending concession affirming the right of all Roman-Rite priests to use the Tridentine Missal and providing for communities of lay people who prefer that liturgy. An interesting thought.

May we expect a similar statement from the Council of Hierarchs of the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitanate of Pittsburgh assuring clergy and faithful that they will not be deprived of the full Liturgy of the Ruthenian Recension?

Incognitus

Incognitus --
From your lips to God's ears!! We can only hope!

Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Incognitus

Or use of the Vulgata, Old Rite or any other traditional Byzantine rescension approved by Rome?
FDD

Bless, Father David,

As a Ukrainian Greek-Catholic, such as I am, I cannot pretend to understand the subtleties of the discussion here.

But as for your call for a "higher level of respect," I think I'm correct to say that this is as high as its going to get.

Judging by the reaction toward your words here, you have so very obviously achieved so much on behalf of the Church that I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you!

Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,

Alex

Hello Deacon,

I thought I would quote from Romans too. Note the difference, "How can men preach," "How can people preach."

But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher? 15* And how can men preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach good news!" 16* But they have not all obeyed the gospel; for Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?" 17 So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ.


Turning our attention to St. Paul, he writes to the Church at Rome, So, it is not just any words, but words that are heard and understood. This is what prompts the action. [/QB][/QUOTE]


I am incompetent to comment on most of the changes in the Divine Liturgy, but the changes for so called inclusive language smack of the spirit of the world and not of Christ, that I think is what is heard in the use of inclusive language.

At the root of the so called inclusive language movement is a rejection of Genesis:

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."

It is thereby, I think, a rejection of the command to be fruitful and multiply. While I doubt that the Committee had the spirit of world in mind when they decided to incorporate inclusive language into the Divine Liturgy, the fact that they did not recognize it as such, is disturbing.

I remember now I owe you some information.

I'm sorry I haven't had much time for the Forum recently. In addition, I will be out April 12-18 and April 20-May 3.

Incognitus has made a great deal of the "Ruthenian Recension," and of obedience to it. It would be a surprise to me to be accused of "disobedience" to it since I have always supported a return to our Byzantine traditions - including here at the Seminary, the use of zeon and comminution (consecration of an ahnec which is broken for Communion and practiced in very few Ruthenian parishes), the elimination of the "filioque," et cet. By the same token, I am not what could possibly be labelled a "liturgical fundamentalist" - a term that I am coining, but not to be "intolerant: of anyone who practices the full ritual. Archpriest Chromoga was a staunch supporter of the Ruthenian Recension, and was the chief advisor in Bishop Emil's "pastoral" promulgation of the Liturgy in 1970. Fr. Vancik, with whom I worked was likewise a staunch supporter of the recension, but assisted Bishop Andrew in his "pastoral" promulgation in Parma in 1987, which action he repeated in Passaic in 1996. These were provisional until the Liturgy would be normalized in a form reviewed and "approved" by Rome for the whole Metropolia. The Liturgy is complete, except for the three verses of the Antiphons, the Small Litanies and the Litany after the Great Entrance (cf. Robert Taft, The Great Entrance, page 428, point 7). This is basically the way it is being done in Parma, Van Nuys and Passaic now and for many years. [Aside to John Damascene, where were all these priests protesting what you call the "Petras/Pataki" Liturgy in 1987 and 1996? By the way, it is not "my" Liturgy in any way, I've worked for over 20 yearswith two separately constituted Liturgy Commissions with a number of members, with the entiure Council of Hierarchs, past and present and with the Oriental Congregation.] The "Ruthenian Recension" is clearly the "Russian Recension." Cyril Korolevsky was clear on that in his votum to the Oriental Congregation. Lest another storm of protest arise over this and lest I give any support whatsoever to the group that wants to retain the hybrid Liturgy of the 1905 Sluzhebnik, let me say that Korolevsky did what was most logical and his efforts were certainly the best effort at restoring the Ruthenian Liturgy to its purity, and deserving of our support - but I still am not a "liturgical fundamentalist." I do not think it necessary to restore the small litanies and the Litany after the Great Entrance, and apparently the Oriental Congregation agrees. I do think that the practice of the public recitation of the presbyteral prayers should be supported - they are a much more important component of the Liturgy, and with the Liturgy in the vernacular, cry out for restoration. The Byzantine Liturgy is not a "museum, piece," but a living celebration of the presence of God, and my conscience tells me I have been obedient to that - and, by the way, also to the Ruthenian Recension in its true inner purity. I am grateful for the many kind remarks of members of this Forum, and while I realize I can't convince everyone of my position, I am grateful for the opportunity to express it. I don't judge at all the motivations of those who oppose it, though I believe I have the right to suspect that part of it may simply be resistence to "change," which, in reality, in most of our parishes, will be quite small. Some may fear that the Liturgy will be be able to be celebrated the way it is or the way they would want it in their parish. Likewise, I think the biggest fears actually are "inclusive language," about which I may say something in a future post, and music, an area in which I am really weak.

Dear Father David,

You posted:

"I do not think it necessary to restore the small litanies and the Litany after the Great Entrance, and apparently the Oriental Congregation agrees"

Why do you not think the Litanies and Antiphons should be restored? Who does more prayer hurt? Will certain intentional errors be fixed in the new Liturgy, for instance, "Pius and Orthodox Christians" rather than, "Christians of the True Faith?"

How trustworthy is the Oriental Congregation? Isn't the Oriental Congregation mostly Roman Catholic Cardinals? Aren't many, most, or all of those Cardinals in support of the Novus Ordo? Can the Oriental Congregation be trusted to not Latinize or Protestantize what comes before them?

And finally (for now) how will the "New Liturgy" attract/retain Vocations for the Byzantine Catholic Metroplia of Pittsburgh?

Dear Father David

It has been noticeable, watching the practices of bishops over the years from several jurisdictional perspectives, that protesting priests very often 'die on park benches' figuratively speaking.

What I mean to say is that priests often fare very badly at the hands of a bishop determined to rule rather than to shepherd. I have not been on this Foum for long, but it seems to me that one of the bishops in question here is not known for his benign nature and habits toward priests or laity. So it would seem to me that silence would be the rule on the part of those priests who are under his jurisdictional care.

I offer these comments purely as observations based on current events or recent events, and not as judgments or condemnations. It seems obvious to me why there were no "protests" out in the open for all to see.

Eli

Dear Incognitus,

Many thanks straight from my diaconal heart!

deacon Peter

The noble incognitus does it again Why is this man not an Archbishop?

ICXC
NIKA

It's so nice to be appreciated; thank you. The Pope is infallible - I'm just incorrigible.

Incognitus

And sadly for us -- incognitus

Now, now. Remember the goose and the golden eggs!

Incognitus

Why should he go for a demotion? I'm convinced he's the Patriarch of Rockall [uk.geocities.com] .

ا ربي يسوع المسيح،يا ابن الله،ارحمنا نحن الخطأة