Post your thoughts! Let the debate begin! *evil laughter*

Yes i think there should be. maybe not on Sundays when everyone would be there but maybe on a weekday evening every so often.like every once and awhile if a liturgy is being said for a member of my family and my whole family shows up and not many others Father Tom will celebrate most of the liturgy in Old Slavonic. i think it should be allowed in those cases.
-Katie

Christos Voskrese! Christ is Risen!

Dear ByzanTeens;

I am glad you brought this up. I can't understand why some people to get "all up in arms" about this.

I think that if you want Slavonic liturgy to continue now and again it is important to make you desires known now. And more importantly: The clergy would do well to respect and comply with the request of youth who care enough to ask. It shows their dedication to our church. Also, a kid who is smart enough to ask for it, is also smart enough to learn some. Why not have the occasional seminar on Church Slavonic??

My point is that even though we have good translations in English, (and Slavonic must never replace English in North America now;) praying the "same" prayers in different languages can show the different nuances in the respective languages which in turn deepens the understanding and faith of the one praying.

So have at it guys: it will give your grandkids something extra to do when they start arguing over the elimination of English or Slavonic in the Liturgy in favor of Spanish!!!

Love and Greetings to All!
Stefan-Ivan

Yes, but only of Russian pronunciation of Church-Slavonic is used

Speaking as a guy who is considerably past his Byzanteen years, I think that the Eastern Church should take a lesson from their Western brothers and sisters. We see many in the West who truly miss the Latin Mass, as is evident by their Uno Voce societies and the like. The West, just because of the immensity of its membership when compared to the East, can afford splinter groups within its ranks - The East cannot.

There are those in the East who truly miss the Old Slavonic Liturgy, and I believe that they should be accommodated - not as in separate Old Slavonic parishes (which smacks of division and "splinter-ism,") but within their existing, home parishes, on a somewhat regular basis.

I can understand folks my age (early 50's), who grew up with Old Slavonic, wanting to see it reinstated to our worship with more regularity - I'm somewhat surprised (and thrilled!) to see many Eastern youth wanting the same thing!

The Holy Father did mandate that measures should be taken to maintain and promote the beautiful traditions of the Eastern Churches. Well, one of those traditions is The Old Slavonic Divine Liturgy.

Christos Voskrese!

a pilgrim

BTW - Katie g - I grew up in the same parish in Joliet that your family comes from!

Christos Voskrese!

You will never know unless you ask. When the priest agrees, advertise, and see what comes. You might be very surprised at the response. Hospodu pomolimsya.

Voistynu Voskrese!

Actually, the archaic Ukrainian that is used in the UGCC more than adequately satisfies any lingering nostalgia for Church Slavonic . . .

Alex

I think all churches should have a liturgy in Church Slavonic at least once a year. How the feast of Sts. Kyril and Mefodie?
Paki,Paki,
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

There is an old joke about a Roman Catholic priest and a Greek Catholic priest making fun of certain aspects of each other's liturgical languages . . .

The Roman Catholic priest made fun of Church Slavonic by saying: Paki i Paki - daj Pope, tabaki!

The Greek Catholic priest thought about it and then said: "Sursum Corda - na tobi svenyacha mordo!"



Alex

And what's the deal with Ukrainians always praying about "pork chop sauce" huh? :p

(Повсякчас, get it?)

Dave

Dear Dave,

The last time my family and I were in a Chinese restaurant, we learned that "Sheh-sheh" meant "thank you."

In Ukrainian, it sounds like "more-more."

After listening to me say "sheh-sheh" after almost every time we were served food, my father-in-law turned to me and said, "Haven't you eaten today at all, Alex?"

And your point about the pork chop sauce isn't far off the mark.

My father HATED the Ukrainian rendering of the Our Father and the three "nekhaj's" or "May there be" for "May Your Name be hallowed" etc.

So he stuck to Slavonic . . .

And he often referred to a saying when he heard the Ukrainian version and said, "Nekhaj, Nekhaj, Nekhaj bude hretchka" ("Let there be (sown) oats").

The Old Believers are famous for attacking the three-fingers for the Sign of the Cross as the position the hand takes when one plucks tobacco . . .

Do you get the feeling people take their traditions and rites a bit too seriously at times?

God bless, Reader!

Alex

I totally agree with the Old Slavonic liturgy at least once a year,especially if it is what members of the church want. i know that some members at our parish would object but that is why i think it should be done on a weekday so it would be optional. does one liturgy a year really hurt anything?i think not.
-Katie

I am far from being a ByzanTEEN, but when I was, and still attended the church I was raised in, most of the cantors did parts of the mass in both English and Old Slavonic.

Certain parts of the mass would be sung once in English, then in Slavonic. For example, when I was married (right after Easter) the cantor sang "Christ is Risen" in English. Then he did it in Slovanic. (Really threw my in-laws and work friends for a loop not to hear English. It was quite the topic for them at the reception.)

Doing this may be a way to gain interest in having an occaisional mass said totally in Slavonic.

Just a thought.

I think that totally or even partly slavonic masses are great!! I love hearing the songs and liturgy sung in slavonic! But being out in Arizona, I am as far away from our eastern roots as i can get. We have asked our cantors to sing one or two songs during communion in salvonic but not too many people now the language so it is hard. Being out in Arizona though, we have "snowbirds", older people that stay in Arizona during th winter and leave to go back east during the summer- so they are originally from the east and they know it, but they can't be bothered. But i love going back east and singing in church slavonic!
Alyssa Hvasta

I wonder what happened to the person who started this thread. He said "let the debate begin" and yet no one is debating. Where's the fun in that?
-Katie

I think debates are nice when we can hear peoples� tones of voices getting elevated and when we can see them speaking through their closed teeth and hitting the table with their fists. Now, that's fun.
Lauro

Christ is Risen!

Sorry that I haven't been able to reply since I started this thread, my recent studies sorta grabbed me by the ears for a bit. Now to have a real debate!

I, for one, am very against totally Old Church Slavonic Liturgies. I have several reasons for this belief. The most important one is that to do the Liturgy in Old Church Slavonic would be a slap in the face to Cyril and Methodius. How can this be, you ask, since Cyril and Methodius made Old Church Slavonic?? Cyril and Methodius made Old Church Slavonic to serve a very specific people in a very specific region of the world. They never argued for Church Slavonic to be used anywhere else but in the country where it was native! The duo always argued for the Liturgy to be in the native language of the people, not a foreign language. Vatican II agreed with this concept and it has spread to every avenue of the Catholic Church, with the exception of the Tridentine Masses.


My second reason is that using Old Church Slavonic is against Vatican II. This is because Vatican II proclaimed that the language used must be the language of the people, even though Latin can be used. The official stance, then, of the Catholic Church is that we, the people, must use our own, native language, NOT a language meant for another time, and another people.

Third, I believe that using Old Church Slavonic in all the parts of the Liturgy (some is OK, if not used too often)will drive away visitors. I am a convert to the Byzatine rite, Katie G witnessed it. When I first walked into St. George Byzantine Catholic Parish in Aurora, IL, the Liturgy was alien enough. I couldn't follow along. I didn't know how the books worked. But at least I could understood the language. But, if they were chanting it, say, in Romanian, I probably never would have come back. The power of at least understanding words is great, brothers and sisters, and should never be underestimated.

Christos Voskrese!
Dear Nathan,
For one thing if you read my posts then you would know that i am not necessarily promoting this for Suday liturgies but for weekday liturgies. Most visitors come on Sundays. For another thing if there are enough people who want this why is it a bad thing. here's a question Nathan, if our church was in an area highly populated with Spanish speaking indivuduals would you think it okay for a liturgy or parts of the liturgy to be said in Spanish?It's just a thought, I would totally support it becuase it would be in the language of the people.
-Katie

Katie,

I know you meant this question for Nathan, but I think you have answered your own question... so here's another. Where in this country (or any country for that matter) is there an area highly populated with Old Church Slavonic speaking individuals, that is, individuals who use OCS for normal everyday conversation?

Well, since Church Slavonic is a liturgical language, and not a conversational language, you never found a group of people conversing in it in the United States -- or in the Carpathian homeland.

But most of us know that.

I think the real point (and please forgive me, Katie, if I'm misinterpreting it) is that just as a Spanish language liturgy would be a cultural expression for Hispanic-Americans, a liturgy in Church Slavonic is a cultural expression of Rusyn-Americans.

While never the "vernacular" of the people, Church Slavonic was the spiritual language of our people.

--Tim

Tim,

are you sure about that? I've never known a liturgical language to develop that was not the vernacular of a people. Why else would a Greek liturgy be translated into Slavonic? Why develop another liturgical language when Cyril and Methodius had the Greek?

A Spanish language liturgy is much more than a cultural expression. For those who only speak Spanish, a Spanish language liturgy allows them to express their worship of God, not to express a culture.

Dear-in-Christ Deacon John, Tim and others,

Christ is Risen!

There are some accuracies and inaccuracies that need to be teased out here. The liturgical language now employed by the Slav Orthodox Churches (and those that came from them, such as the various BCs) is not the same language that Saints Cyril and Methodius codified and used.

The language of the missionary work of the Brothers from Thessalonika should be called Old Church Slavic (or Slavonic if you perfer) or Old Bulgarian. It represents as much as possible the common language of the Slavs that was spoken over a very wide area and would have been able to be understood from what is now Moravia to Bulgaria. This was at a time then the Slavic languages had not diverged as much as they have today.

The liturgical language of the Slav Orthodox (and other Churches including the Old Ritualists) should be called Church Slavonic. It represents a much later development than the work of Saints Cyril and Methodius and has been revised and updated over the centuries (IIRC most recently in the reign of Catherine in Russia) to more closely resemble the modern languages. Old Church Slavic is a South Slav language. Church Slavonic is harder to place; it is highly Russified now in all its recensions but still has a South Slav base.

So, Old Church Slavic, the language of Cyril and Methodius certainly represents as best as possible the vernacular of the Slavs at that time. Church Slavonic, the modern liturgical language, represents a liturgical language somewhat removed from the literary language but nevertheless updated to keep it somewhat understandable. Church Slavonic further exercised a massive influence on the development of the literarature and literary standard of the Slavic lands where it was the liturgical languages, that is South and East primarily.

Having done some grad work in this I am happy to continue discussing it but I am not a teen either.

Tony

Perhaps the problem is the isolation caused by the term "Hispanic-Americans." My paternal grandmother never learned English yet lived in the US for about 20 years. She only spoke Spanish. My father and mother separated and divorced, my dad went home, my other uncle did as well, and my grandmother was left with her last son, my uncle who eventually became a JW.

I used to take my grandmother to RC Mass in Spanish. Sometimes there were cultural events but not often. Going to Mass in Spanish was not a cultural event. I am not sure if she would fit the term "Hispanic-American." I think I would though, for me a Spanish Mass or Liturgy is nice but not necessary, for here it was necessary. Latin would have worked for her as that is what she grew up in but one was not available then and there.

Tony

Huh?

Lots of our immigrant grandparents never learned English, or at least never learned it well.

What does that have to do with the cultural pride of their English-speaking grandchildren singing a Spanish-language song or having a liturgy in Church Slavonic?

And of course a religious service is also a cultural event. It's also a musical event. It's also a communal event. It's a family event.

It's many things all at the same time. And it can be different things for different people.

--Tim

This is my point exactly. You do not make clear what you mean by "Hispanic-American" which is why I mention that twice above. Am I an Hispanic-American for your purposes or was my grandmother?

Our language needs are (were as she has gone to rest) totally different.

To put the Church Slavonic spin on this there are people who until today have never heard the Divine Liturgy in any other language (than Slavonic). While it does not represent their home-language do they have no need for a Slavonic liturgy because they don't speak it at home?

Sorry, you've lost me. I don't understand what your grandmother has to do with anything.

I'm talking about us, not our grandparents. Mine are all dead, so I'm assuming this isn't much of an issue for them.

--Tim

Tim,

The original post about Spanish in the liturgy used "Spanish speaking indivuduals" you turn that into "Hispanic-Americans." It makes a difference if Spanish is the first language. If Spanish is the first language, or the only language, that is different than one who is bilingual from home.

I am not talking about some nostalgia trip. I am talking about people who don't understand English.

Tony

If you want to dismiss this discussion about remembering and keeping alive the Church Slavonic liturgical heritage of the Byzantine Catholic Church as a "nostalgia trip," then that's your right.

--Tim

Christ is risen! Katie, I apologize, I miunderstood you. I'm glad that we agree on this issue. And yes, I do think that if needed the Liturgy should be translated into Spanish. As for whether or not we should be proud of our heritage, my answer is, WHAT heritage? I have at least five cultures in my blood, many of which have frequently conflicted (Native American, English, French, Polish, Irish, and MAYBE Dutch) so believe me, I have no heritage whatsoever. Many of us are a mix, maybe not as mixed as I am but even so. There are more people coming into the Byzantine Church who are English, German, Irish, French, heck, maybe even Chinese. We can't afford to be ethnical anymore.

It may have been the vernacular of "a" people, but not the vernacular of the folks in the Carpathian homeland of the Byzantine Catholic Church. They spoke a different Slavic dialect, although we don't know precisely how different it originally was, since it wasn't written.

It was obviously a related Slavic tongue and Church Slavonic was nowhere near as foreign as liturgical Greek would have been. But it wasn't the vernacular, just as it wasn't the vernacular for the Russians, Ukrainians or Belarussians.

It was an externally imposed liturgical language, and as such, I think it acquired a spiritual heft and a power that the local tongue didn't carry.

There were attempts to use Church Slavonic as a foundation for a literary language of the Carpatho-Rusyn people, but that ended in the mid-1800s.

--Tim

Christos Voskrese!
Nathan, i guess for me since my family came from the old country and helped start the church in Joliet i feel more strongly about the Old Slavonic liturgy becuase it is part of my heritage. I'm almost 1/2 of Slavic descent so maybe that is why i feel more closely realted to the Slavonic liturgy. i can understand how people not familiar with it may be uncomfortable but now a days we are lucky to get one song in Slavonic every Sunday and i hardly think it is worth it for people who don't understand it to complain about it. i don't see why they complain because A.)in almost every case the english is on the other side of the page or B.) we sing the English version first. in any case i think it is just plain unfair that people complain about one song a week. becuase that is what it seems like it has come to.
-Katie

As one who took a grad level OCS class to help with Slavonic, learned modern Slovak for the BC Church (three full academic years and two summers in Slovaki), cantored Church Slavonic Divine Liturgies in seminary, read the epistle in Slavonic at Uniontown (from a Slavonic Apostol, not latinica), who travelled to Europe to learn more about his church on various ocasions, who spent his own money to do so and has kept studying Slavonic whenever it has been possible, I am not dismissing it.

If you can say all of the above about yourself, please go ahead. If not, say something useful.

You dismissed the need for Spanish language liturgy. Obviously you have not been close to someone isolated from his/her language group. If you had lived it you would not talk this way.

Tony

Christ is Risen!

Tim, Tony, why do you two fight? What point is there in it? What profit? "Vanity is all things" is right indeed! C'mon, you two, make up now please, either that or take your argument OFF the thread. This is an argument I'd expect between seven year olds, not almost fully grown men. Capish? Good. And Katie, I understand your ties, and I do like Slavokian, I usually like singing it, so I agree with you there.

Dear-in-Christ Nathan,

Indeed, He is risen!

Right this does not belong here.

Thank you for "almost fully grown." I will be 37 in a few months and I am happy that I am not fully grown.

Tony

Jeepers. Do me a favor, in every posting where I used the word Spanish or Hispanic, substitute the word Italian.

I didn't start the analogy, I was just continuing a thread. This was never about Spanish language religious services, the issue was raised just as an example of using another language in a service. It was part of a conversation about keeping tradition alive, not about your Spanish-speaking grandmother or even my Rusyn-speaking father.

I apologize for this silly tangent that has nothing to do with a discussion about the possibility a once-a-year Church Slavonic liturgy for assimilated descendants of the folks who brought the Byzantine Catholic Church to America.

I'm leaving the ByzanTEEN forum to the ByzanTEENs.

Over and out.

--tim

Christ is Risen!

Thank you so much, Tony, for declining. Yes, 37 is ALMOST grown up. As for you, Tim, you are more than welcome to hang around, just don't act like you need to rip people's throats out. Any more comments?

Gee does that mean there's hope that I'll grow some more too? Hope so!!

Sharon
(who still climbs on kitchen counters when necessary at 43)

How does one say "Mass" in Old Slavonic?

Christ is risen!

According to the glossary from a Pitt OCS class in '00 (that I took) and according to the last texts I have seen for the Croatians using Slavonic (that was published in Prague in 1922) it is m�a as one finds in the modern Slav languages. Although the variant misa would be obviously understood.

The Kiev and Friesing Fragments both likely contain what you are looking for.

Tony

Joe,

XB!

I didn't really have time to look much into this...but I did anyway. There seem to be two words, one used by Westerners (RCs) and one by Easterners. The Westerners preferred words deriving from Latin missa. Hence, in Western and South Slav languages where the majority is RC (and by assimilation from Polish apparently into western Ukrainian) they use a Slavicized form of missa for RC Mass.

D'jachenko gives Ob'idnja as a synonym for Liturgy. This is the word used in modern Russian for RC Mass (обедня).

Again looking at any of the historic Glagolitic texts (mostly fragments) that are Western Rite, you could probably find more.

I'm glad I looked into this. Thanks for the great question!

Tony

English-speakers of any age group who are interested in Church-Slavonic would do well to study the Grammar of Church-Slavonic published (in English translation) by Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville.
Khristos Voskrese!
Incognitus

Tony,

Thank you, sir. So, what does one say to those who express their preference for using Old Slavonic by using Latin terms? If they were consistent, wouldn't they use Old Slavonic terms?

I hope your studies are going fine.

Joe

Joe,

Christ is risen!

If I have understood the question you mean BCs who say they want "Mass in Slavonic." It is unfortunate that many older BCs still use the term mass. It is what they were taught. It was commonly used then and still is in some EC circles. No matter how much some on this boared wish to think otherwise, there are BC parishes where the priest and parishioners refer to the Divine Liturgy as Mass. That is simply reality. Is it wrong for them to use mass? Yes. But wrong does not blot out reality.

It is in my opinion an unfortunate consequence of latinization. It should be pointed out that in literature of the same period (early to mid 20th c.) mass is the acceptable term among many academics. I have even heard Orthodox say "mass" to mean "Divine Liturgy."

There is even some confusion regarding language. I have heard people refer to the historic liturgical language of the Slav Orthodox, wich is Slavonic, as Russian and Slovak. I was once told a certain cantor sang the "Russian Mass" very beautifully. A life-long BC told me this about another life-long BC who was/is a cantor.

In the big picture, I think this will mostly correct itself. For me it is not a big deal. But it doesn't hurt to talk about it.

Tony

Tony,

I guess it just goes to show how ecclectic language can be, especially English. I like to study etymology and the choice of words people use. Like accents and dialects, it betrays their origins and/or upbringing. A little bell is rung when someone states they prefer the OLD SLAVONIC in the Liturgy, but use LATIN terms.

Of course, this is not more important than other issues, but word choice is very interesting nonetheless.

In my own genealogical studies, the history of the surname is very interesting. Every one of my German ancestors had their names changed (read: Anglicized) by port authorities, census takers, and pastors documenting things in church registries. But most of my ancestors were illiterate, so they didn't know what was correct. But this is getting off the topic of why some people prefer the Old Slavonic Mass.

I am contemplating purchasing the Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language because it demonstrates how it evolved over centuries. I would like to read it over the summer - as well as a number of other fine books. What do you recommend for reading regarding word choices? In light of the current 'restoration' in the Ruthenian Church, many eparchies have gone back to using Greek terms (i.e., presbyters, syncellus, proto-, etc.), thus by-passing later Old Slavonic terms. What accounts for this?

Joe

Joe,

XB!

Well, a little bell used to be rung when the Words of Institution were said in Slavonic in the Byzantine Mass! :p

My ancestors on my dad's side as well suffered a change in spelling in the surname and there was no change of language. Merely poor education or illiteracy, or carelessness can account for it.

I recommend reading more of the Slavonic texts themselves. I find that most of the Greek terms are preserved in the Slavonic texts. I find protojerej, protopresvyter, presvyter and synkell in D'jachenko. Just off the top of my head I think the Russian and Rome books use these terms. It is like liturgical terms, tropar' kondak, irmos, etc. Slavonic just took them in and made them more familiar sounding (and usually shortened them).

If "mass" was used because it made life a little simpler, most likely the same thing happened with the rest of the language used to talk about Church life.

Tony

Christ is risen!
Christos voskrese!

The Chuch Slavonic phrase for:
The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom
Bozhestvennaja liturgija svjataho Joanna Zlatoustaho

The Church Slavonic phrase for The Divnine Liturgy is a mixture of words of Slavic and Greek origin just as the 'English' phrase mixes English and Greek words.

Bozhestvennaja - Slavic; root term Bozhe = God
liturgija - Greek;
svjataho - Slavic; possessive form
Joanna - Greek name retained but transliterated
Zlatoustaho - Slavicized version of 'Golden Mouth' which is what Chrysostomos means. Zlaty means golden, and ousta means mouth. (Possesive form.)

Hope this helps,
Mike O

Thank you, Mike. I was just wondering how those who prefer the Old Slavonic liturgy got "Mass" (Latin) out of what you just gave. Maybe they should take your Old/Church Slavonic class?

Side bar: This somehow reminds me of how we occasionally graft on Latin meanings and theology throughtout history. Here, we may have a theology that can stand on its own two feet, but folks still ignore it for foreign terms, concepts, theology, etc. I believe the Vatican II Fathers called it "inorganic."

Not wanting to make a mountain out of a molehill, but I just can't ignore the similarities. People 'think' they want the Old Slavonic, but ignore the actual OS terms used to refer to the liturgy. In its place, they adopt foreign terms (Latin) which they might better understand and/or feel comfortable with. Inconsistency is a powerful sign of something discombobulated. OS doesn't seem to be the true goal here. If it was, then they would use OS, not Latin.

Joe

PS: Latin conjugation for 'revenge'

FLUNCO, FLUNCARE, FACULTY, FIXEM

Just a little Latin ...

Dear Friends,

Even though I pray in Ukrainian and English, I love using some prayers in Church Slavonic as they have a wonderful "ring" to them (something like the Old English).

They also remind me of when my poor parents laboured hard to get me to say the Our Father, Hail Mary and Nicene Creed in Church Slavonic . . .

I went back to the house I grew up in and there are RC nuns living there now (they work as volunteers in hospitals).

Where my mother had her seamstress business is now their chapel.

I told the nuns that I learned to pray in that house and they invited me to recite aloud the prayers my parents taught me.

I recited the Our Father and Hail Mary in Slavonic there where I used to play as a child.

Tears came quite copiously . . .

I also find that when I read teh Psalter in Church Slavonic, over time, I understand 90% of it all.

Alex

All of these discussions are NOT about OLD Church Slavonic. They are about NEW Church Slavonic.

Khristos voskrese -
Mark,monk and sinner

>The Chuch Slavonic phrase for:
The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom
Bozhestvennaja liturgija svjataho Joanna Zlatoustaho<

Unless it's that of St Basil the Great, St Gregory the Dialogist, St James etc., when the saint's name needs changing!


Khristos voskrese -
Mark, monk and sinner

Vo�stinnu voskrese!

Dear Fr. Mark,

Indeed! I made this point in my first post on this thread.

Tony

Tony and Fr. Mark,

I'm glad somebody said it, although I'm guilty of saying "Old" CS when I meant to say just CS.

This raises a question for me.

Not all jurisdictions use identical forms of Church Slavonic. Are these more like "dialects" of Church Slavonic, or do certain groups have a much different form than others?

The Serbian form seems quite different to me than the form used in Ruthenian churches. Have the differences always been there or did they change because of time and distance?

I suspect that there were always differences, even in Old Church Slavonic, between separated Slavic groups.

Christ is risen!

If this is too brief please ask more questions.

Church Slavonic, like Church Latin, was and is pronounced differently in different places. The local language has a lot to do with this. I have talked about this before on this board. Gospodi and Hospodi are written the same way in Church Slavonic. Similarly the yat' has a variety of pronunciations. There is further the issue of softening, palatalization. This is all not very different from modern English or again, Church Latin. So, easily you could give the same exact text to a Ruthenian, a Muscovite, a Bulgarian and a Serb and get 4 different renderings. Even within one group there is a variety, many Russians today apply akanie to CS, this is not standard but it happens frequently. There is also a trend to render Church Slavonic in the modern alphabet, this has caused some standardization which is further distancing. The use of the Latin alphabet among some has also contributed. There is finally the issue of the stress. Some texts have actually moved it. Some groups shift the stress regularly while others are adamant about using the stress as found in the text.

On another level there are textual variations. Basically there are two levels of modern texts, but a third will be brought forth. The "Nikonian" which predominates; orthographic and vocabulary updating has taken place until about two centuries ago. This is by far the most wide-spread form of CS. Then there is the pre-Nikonian or Old Rite form which was in place before the Nikonian reforms. This usage is basically confined to Old Ritualist usage. The Ruthenians present an odd case as they have some usages which are pre-Nikonian but the majority of the texts are Nikonian sometimes without the spelling updates. There are also Ruthenian texts that are neither standard pre-Nikonian nor Nikonian. These must represent a local usage.

There are other slight differences, the Bulgarians have slightly different texts but they are basically Nikonian.

I hope this helps.

Tony

Katie, your perspective is an interesting one; I haven't heard it from any other Byzantine Catholic young people. That might have something to do with location--I live in Washington state, where ethnic Ruthenians are scarce, to say the least. There are only a handful of people in my parish who are of Eastern European descent, and most of them seem to be over 50.

Personally, I have no ethnic attachment to Old Church Slavonic whatsoever. (If I really wanted to connect with my heritage I'd be lobbying for the liturgical use of Chaucerian English. )The same could be said for most of my Byzantine Catholic peers in the NW.

I think the use of Slavonic in the liturgy should reflect the demand for it. If a parish is predominantly Ruthenian or if the parishoners want Slavonic, then by all means, use it. But that really is not the case with most Byzantine Catholic parishes in the U.S. If our churches are growing at all, it is through converts, the majority of whom have no stake in Eastern European culture or language. Is it worth it to pacify a handful of ethnic Ruthenians by using Slavonic in the liturgy if its use might be a barrier for potential converts? Byzantine Catholicism is weird enough for most people already!

At our parish, we sing the Eucharistic and Marian hymns in Slavonic as well as in English. I feel that this is a mistake. I don't think it serves any real spiritual or aesthetic need. To me it is more like a vestigal trapping than part of the liturgy itself--hardly anyone understands it or knows how to pronounce it, and when the head cantor starts singing it only a few people try to follow her. So in our parish I would say that the use of Slavonic has indifferent and, very possibly, negative effects. In other parishes the situation might be different, of course. My instinct is that Old Church Slavonic is a non-essential that will probably be shed if Byzantine Catholicism is going to survive and grow in North America.

Katie A,

"But that really is not the case with most Byzantine Catholic parishes in the U.S."

It really is the case in all the parishes in PA, NJ, OH, NY, and New England.

"...if its use might be a barrier for potential converts?"

I do not think anyone serious about conversion is going to see a hymn here or there as a barrier. A significant portion of the Liturgy certainly. A hymn here or there sung in English and Slavonic? Come on.

"At our parish, we sing the Eucharistic and Marian hymns in Slavonic as well as in English. I feel that this is a mistake. I don't think it serves any real spiritual or aesthetic need."

It serves the purpose of reminding you where your faith came from and who gave it to you. Even if you don't have a drop of Slavic blood in you, you are now the spiritual child of the Rusyn people who fought and sacrificed and worked to ensure the survival of the Byzantine Catholic Church in the US.

"hardly anyone understands it or knows how to pronounce it, and when the head cantor starts singing it only a few people try to follow her."

How about learning?

"My instinct is that Old Church Slavonic is a non-essential that will probably be shed if Byzantine Catholicism is going to survive and grow in North America."

That was the same instinct that the Roman Rite had after Vatican II, they have shrunk not grown. Now they have realized eradicating Latin was a mistake and are bringing it back for the Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and short exclamations. We would be wise to avoid their mistake.

Fr. Deacon Lance

The Eucharistic and Marian Hymns which Katie A. mentions are not in Church-Slavonic; they are in an Eastern European vernacular language which prudence forbids me to name.

Regardless of who does and who does not enjoy the sound of Church-Slavonic, that language will remain an unavoidable reference for a long time to come, because of the lack of English translations of certain liturgical texts. While it is possible to find most texts in English nowadays, one must know precisely where to look (since no one has yet indexed the various translations in print) and there is no general agreement regarding the principles and/or style of liturgical translation.

The only "principle" that the various jurisdictions who make greater use of English seem able to agree on is that principle that no jurisdiction is willing to cooperate with any other jurisdiction. The result is a bizarre and frustrating combination of tyranny and anarchy. Neither of these characteristics could be considered proper and Christian.

Now back to the joys of Church-Slavonic. Would some computer expert be so kind as to devise and market a COMPLETE Church-Slavonic font? My computer-literate friends tell me that this is a daunting request, because of the overwhelming number of diacritical marks - but surely if they can design programs to enable word processors to handle Chinese ideographs, they can design programs to handle Church-Slavonic, diacritical marks, feast-day signs and all.

By the way, there must be a Church-Slavonic word for "Mass", meaning the Roman-rite celebration of the Eucharist, because that was done in Church Slavonic until quite recently. If anyone can find a copy of the "Glagolitic" Missal used in parts of Yugoslavia until lately, that book would provide the word in question, whatever it may be.

Incognitus

Certain of the hymns in question also do not have satisfactory English settings. I have found them to sound and meter so much better in Slavonic.

As Fr. Deacon Lance has well pointed out, a Communion or processional hymn here or there in Slavonic will not "turn off" someone looking for a spiritual home. There should be some small reminders here and there in the Liturgy of the particular heritage of the parish.

Usually I have found the occasional "mother tongue" hymns to be somewhat of a point of interest, actually.

I do enjoy an occasional hymn in Slavonic, even though I don't understand a word of it. The Slavonic words fit the music better than English does. I have noticed the same thing with Gregorian chant. English must not be a very musical language. But if we follow the logic of "heritage" then we need to put everything back into Greek - 10th and 11th century Greek to be exact. Danged revisionists have messed up everything.

Deacon Lance:

"It really is the case in all the parishes in PA, NJ, OH, NY, and New England."

Are those parishes growing? Are most of the Ruthenian people older, or are there lots of young families with kids? My point is that Ruthenians are probably not going to be the church's future, and there is really no way to change that. They're going to assimilate (or have assimilated) just like every other immigrant group has. Taking the Eastern Catholic Slavs that I know as an example: most of their adult children and grandchildren are not Byzantine Catholic at all. I think it's a matter of survival. Byzantine Catholic churches are few and most of them are very small. If they are going to grow it will be through non-Slavic converts. The sooner we stop presenting Byzantine Catholicism as an ethnic package, the better, in my opinion.

"I do not think anyone serious about conversion is going to see a hymn here or there as a barrier. A significant portion of the Liturgy certainly. A hymn here or there sung in English and Slavonic? Come on."

Well, at my parish we sing more than a hymn "here or there." People who are very serious about converting probably will not be dissuaded by that, I agree. But what about people who are simply curious? If we're deciding whether or not a particular practice is inviting to outsiders or if it is alienating, I think we should err on the side of being inviting.

"It serves the purpose of reminding you where your faith came from and who gave it to you. Even if you don't have a drop of Slavic blood in you, you are now the spiritual child of the Rusyn people who fought and sacrificed and worked to ensure the survival of the Byzantine Catholic Church in the US."

I know that. Appreciating our forebears is a good thing, one that churches in general don't do enough of. I think we should be very hesitant, though, about the degree to which we make the Byzantine Catholic church an ethnic instead of a universal faith. Don't we owe a debt to those Ruthenian immigrants to keep their churches growing and thriving? We need to start distinguishing between the necessary, integral parts of Eastern Christianity and their cultural appendages. Eastern Christian spirituality should not be inextricably linked with Eastern European culture anymore. We aren't in Eastern Europe. If the Byzantine Catholic churches don't find a way to resolve this soon, it will be too late.

"How about learning?"

Why? Honestly, I haven't heard any compelling reasons to do so. Maybe if I were a philologist or a liturgist it would be profitable for me to study a very old liturgical language that I have no connection to. But as a layperson? How is knowing Church Slavonic going to make me a better Byzantine Catholic?

"That was the same instinct that the Roman Rite had after Vatican II, they have shrunk not grown. Now they have realized eradicating Latin was a mistake and are bringing it back for the Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and short exclamations. We would be wise to avoid their mistake."

There were all kinds of problems affecting the Roman Catholic Church after Vatican II, all of which contributed to their decline in membership. Replacing Latin with English was hardly the deciding factor. The number of people who had no qualms about the Mass being in English far outweighed the number who opposed it. I also think it's a mistake to consider our situation analogous to theirs. The RC Church had a long history of using a liturgical language in place of the vernacular. We do not. Also, they eliminated Latin all at once, which was bound to result in some disgruntled laypeople. In Byzantine Catholic churches, the use of Slavonic has fallen away gradually as the Slavs themselves started speaking English.

Forgive me if I sound abrasive about this. I don't mean to. It's a subject about which I have strong feelings, and I've been bothered by it lately.

Katie A. inquires "How is knowing Church Slavonic going to make me a better Byzantine Catholic?" Well, I never said that it would. Ultimately, that's a question which Katie will have to answer for herself. If she feels it would be a bother, or that her talents do not go in that direction, then it might be perfectly sensible for her to conclude that learning Church-Slavonic in her particular case would be more trouble than it's worth and therefore would not make her a better Byzantine Catholic. Nor am I about to criticize that decision.

To some extent, it's like asking whether learning New Testament / liturgical / patristic Greek would make someone a better Byzantine Catholic. In the abstract, an abilitiy to read the stuff is certainly beneficial, but people have many demands upon limited time and can reasonably decide that philology is not the most important pursuit for them. However, if NOTOBY learns New Testament / liturgical / patristic Greek our Church will assuredly be worse off.

The same applies to Church Slavonic. If no one learns it, we shall have lost something worth having, but that does not mean that particular individuals should feel obliged to learn it, or under pressure to learn it. Some of us enjoy it, and even find it pleasant to discuss different forms and variations of the language. I hope that we don't do anybody any harm that way, although I've occasionally encountered people who find it a nuisance when some busybody (such as your humble servant) explains that the Church-Slavonic (or Greek) text doesn't really mean what this or that translation would have it mean.

But that's life. So if Katie A. doesn't want to learn Church-Slavonic, my best advice to her is not to give it another thought; it is possible to lead a full, rich and holy Christian life without even knowing the Slavonic alphabet.

On the other hand, I have no hesitation in urging those who are interested in Church-Slavonic to learn the alphabet without delay.

Incognitus (Slavophile and Proud)

Katie,

"Are those parishes growing?"

Some are, some are not. Allgheny County is the second oldest county in the nation. Dropping numbers have to due with demographics not ethnicity.

"Are most of the Ruthenian people older, or are there lots of young families with kids?"

People of Rusyn heritage come in all age groups. My parish has lots of young families with kids.

"But what about people who are simply curious? If we're deciding whether or not a particular practice is inviting to outsiders or if it is alienating, I think we should err on the side of being inviting."

Some will actually be attracted by it, others will find it alienating. However, I bet more find the use of incense and chanting alienating, should we discard those to be less alien too? Are we really talking about what alienates possible converts or what alienates you? I am seeing in some converts and youths that because they do not speak or understand Slavonic they feel left out of the club so to speak. In reaction they want Slavonic totally suppressed so they don't feel left out. Understandable but wrong.

"The sooner we stop presenting Byzantine Catholicism as an ethnic package, the better, in my opinion."

I agree the Church is not an ethnic club. On the other hand I do not see doing a few Slavonic hymns as presenting an ethnic package, but honoring and recognizing where and from whom our faith comes. And I say this as a person who does not speak Church Slavonic or Rusyn or Slovak and is not of Rusyn heritage.

"Why? Honestly, I haven't heard any compelling reasons to do so. Maybe if I were a philologist or a liturgist it would be profitable for me to study a very old liturgical language that I have no connection to. But as a layperson? How is knowing Church Slavonic going to make me a better Byzantine Catholic?"

Do not misunderstand, I am not saying you have to become fluent in Slavonic, but it isn't going to kill anyone to learn Christ is Risen, the Trisagion, the Cherubic Hymn, Many Years, Eternal Memory or Godbearer Virgin in Slavonic, or Greek for that matter. And You will be better for knowing and being able to participate in your heritage.

"There were all kinds of problems affecting the Roman Catholic Church after Vatican II, all of which contributed to their decline in membership. Replacing Latin with English was hardly the deciding factor."

We also have all kinds of problems and the limited use Slavonic sees in our Metropolia is hardly a deciding factor. It does not change the fact the Roman Rite's complete elimination was a mistake and is now recognized as such.

"The RC Church had a long history of using a liturgical language in place of the vernacular. We do not."

But we do. Church Slavonic is a liturgical language, not vernacular. Church Slavonic and Rusyn are as comparably close as Latin and Italian are.

Fr. Deacon Lance

SLAVA ISUSU CHRISTU!

I know that the numbers for the Slavonic Liturgy keep growing and growing at the Otpust! This past Sunday, they had 6 or 7 priests distributing the Holy Communion during the Divine Liturgy.

I've been to one parish's Festival and it was standing room only for the Slavonic Divine Liturgy.

I, for one, look forward to the Slavonic Divine Liturgy at the Otpust. It's a chance for me to renew and refresh and recharge myself spiritually! To be sitting there in the bright sunshine, the breeze, listening and singing with the Litmanova ladies and everyone else brings back memories of my Baba and those who have gone before me! It's the spark that makes me keep alive our traditions when so many are saying the heck with it all and are leaving our Church!!!

jmho....

mark

I could see the Slavonic Divine Liturgy in an area that has some connections to the Old Country. In East Tennessee, there are some people who have Slavic ancestors, but they are strictly English speakers. We have one family of Ukrainians who would go for a Slavonic Divine Liturgy, although I suspect they would prefer everything in modern Ukrainian. Actually, if they had they option of a Ukrainian church, I don't think they would have much to do with our Metropolia mission to begin with. The vast majority of our folks are content with the Divine Liturgy in English. As I jokingly implied on another post, where does this "heritage" stuff end? Do we have Divine Liturgy in the vernacular, or must it be in liturgical languages? If we want to insist on authenticity, then we would have to revert to the original Greek of Constantinople. Church Slavonic is a modern invention as well, in comparison to that.

ByzanTN writes that "I could see the Slavonic Divine Liturgy in an area that has some connections to the Old Country." To which Old Country do you refer? There are people in our Church who refer to PENNSYLVANIA as "the Old Country", and they are not joking.

There is not and never was any such country as Church-Slavonicia (and please, will everyone refrain from trying to creat one?).

Nothing and no one is about to attempt to compel you to learn Church Slavonic. These days, in fact, someone who wishes to learn the stuff is apt to have difficulty locating courses (tip: start by a taking a Russian course).

Father Deacon is almost correct: ALMOST anybody can learn a few simple and easily repeated chants. Why? Because history and origins do matter. For precisely the same reason, it is actually good to learn a few bits and pieces in Greek (such as "Christ is Risen"). But if you don't enjoy it, then don't bother with it - and don't take offense at those who do enjoy it.

Modern Ukrainians do tend to prefer things in modern Ukrainian (seems logical, one must admit), but nobody is forbidding the use of Church-Slavonic for those who like it. Besides, there are Ukrainians who think that Church-Slavonic IS modern Ukrainian (after all, Ukrainians sing it so it must be Ukrainian); lots of choirs still enjoy Church-Slavonic.

On the other hand, I'm told that the Russian Greek-Catholic parishes in the West, who had long since adopted the local vernaculars, are now serving new arrivals from Russia - who tell them that nobody in Russia (well, almost nobody) really understands Church-Slavonic and that services in English or French are quite welcome thank you very much. And there is at least one parish in Moscow using modern Russian, despite the Patriarchate's icy disapproval. So I really doubt that we are all in danger of militant Church-Slavonics trying to impose "their" language on everyone.

Of course, if one TRULY wants insurance, it would help to promote a publication of a consistent, complete set of the service-books into English. I can dream, can't I? Oh yes, a condition of this is, of course, that what comes from Greek is translated directly from Greek, and what comes from Church-Slavonic is directly translated from Church-Slavonic. Translations of translations are a nuisance, since they are invariably inaccurate. Anybody want to start a thread about translation problems?

Incognitus

I have heard some of the older folks refer to the "Old Country" and they essentially meant areas of Carpathia. Some said they were Ruthenian, and some said they were Russian. I realize from recent threads, that everyone really wants to be Ukrainian, they just don't fully realize it yet. My ancestors were from Austria, so I have no link to Slavonic, Russian, or, Ukrainian - which to the great horror of Ukrainians, many Americans still think of as a part of Russia.

You are clergy, aren't you? - or so I have heard. Don't you guys call all the shots since the Church is patriarchal? What's keeping you guys from authorizing new translations All kidding aside, new translations would be wonderful. I don't know where the bottleneck is that's holding that up.

It's funny you mention that, I just spoke with a newish immigrant family from Russia who recently joined one of the Western U.S. Russian Catholic parishes. The father said nearly exactly the same thing. He actually preferres English in the Liturgy for their children, the youngest American-born, but certainly didn't mind "Christos Voskrese" at Pascha.

Since Katie A. wasn't specific as to which Eucharistic or Marian hymns she referred, how can one make a statement as you have?
Since you brought up the subject in a backhanded way, what language are you referring to?

Steve

Steve, since Katie A. heard the songs and describes tham as "Slavonic", I take it for granted that they are hymns in a Slav idiom customarily sung among the Ruthenians (Hungarian versions exist for most of them). That refers to a limited number of pieces, and I'm familiar with most of them.

If you know your way around the languages spoken in the Carpathian Mountains, have a look. Watch for specific grammar forms, specific spellings of the relative pronoun, and other indicators. I think a few of them are even in Sokol's blue-covered prostopinije book.

Incognitus

I for one would hope Slavonic makes a modest comeback in the American Byzantine Church. I certainly see no harm in singing parts of the Liturgy (the Trisagion, etc.)in Slavonic and other historic languages of the Church.

Some Latin is making its way back into the mainstream of the American Roman Rite through liturgical responses and simple chants.

Sounds good to me!

Michael

In New Zealand most of the Eastern Church members are from behind the Iron Curtain and/or from traditional families.
Exept the Orthodox Churches there is no Eastern Tradition as the Roman Church did its utmost to assimilate.
As we are under the Australian Eparchs, with a bit of pushing we wil have some visits of traditional priests.
We have to cater for people that have been denied their roots for all these many years. It is therefor essential that a " universal" language belonging to the Slavonic people is used. We have to tell these people that they belong and that is not possible in the English language as that language was used to shut them out.
I don't understand the Slavonic language but know most of the answers. I was the only one that started answering the priest. On the end of the Liturgy I had several people singing with me.

Wilhelm

I always grew up hearing liturgical slavonic in my church...so i thought it was the norm for all churches. We do each liturgy with about 2/3 english, 1/3 slavonic. I CANNOT imagine going to liturgy and not hearing it....i would be starved of my heritage. For all of those reading this, please request it in your parish. And, just having a lutrgy in slavonic one a year is not enough to capture interests. I believe that it is the continuous use that has driven me to learn the church language.

I forgot to mention! In my school, there is a foreign exchange student from Russia. And, he said that his orthodox church, and many tha the knows, still uses liturgiucal slavonic until this day. Evenmore, he understood everything I was saying that I could remember from church. So, I believe it is very cool a kid from the otehrside of thr globe and I have something in common, similar religions that we can both relate to...

Are there any ppl from the MOn Valley reading this? If so, you can IM me on AOL @ brandon15033

I am well past the ByzanTEEN age, I am a convert and I first heard Church Slavonic on cassette and it was different, yet beautiful! I do prefer English, but I also feel comfortable in a church where Church Slavonic is used. To me, as I listen and read the English/Slavonic text, I can begin to chant some of the Slavonic. I believe it is a worthy effort to learn even at 41 years old. My son who is 13 knows if I play a CD in Greek or Church Slavonic. To me Church Slavonic is the chanting of the Byzantine Catholic Church and I find it quite relaxing.

I didn't read the whole topic, but my opinion is a church shouldn't lose track of her Traditions, such as old Slavonic in church. The only Byzantine Liturgy I have ever attended was a Greek Orthodox one, and It did not negatively(sp?) me at all that I could not understand what was being said. But hey, I'm weird like that haha.

Too bad the Ruthenian Metropolian Church in America has no need for Church Slavonic, and that's a real shame. There will be no Slavonic texts or musical settings in the "new" pew book, which will seperate the Byzantine Catholic Church in America from it's liturgical heritage.

Vichnaja Pamjat'!

Ungcsertezs

Incognitus wrote:

Nothing and no one is about to attempt to compel you to learn Church Slavonic. These days, in fact, someone who wishes to learn the stuff is apt to have difficulty locating courses (tip: start by a taking a Russian course).




There are some good sites on the internet for learning Old Church Slavonic and Church Slavonic (most people confuse them - they are two different languages, rather like Latin & Italian/Romanian). I think one or two of the sites even have audio, though I haven't checked that out.

The Russian Orthodox monastery at Jordanville NY has a cassette series with booklets for learning the major Church Slavonic prayers (it's not a language course, but helps one to recognize & know the major prayers). Of course it is the Russian pronunciation of CS.

There are numerous grammars and handbooks of both OCS & Church Slavonic. One I have is a short, concise grammar with many examples & a glossary, written by a Jesuit & published in New York.

In grad school we were forced to study OCS (two semesters in my program). Everyone absolutely hated it except me We met 3x weekly and each meeting required about two hours of concentrated translation to English at home. Of course, if you know a modern Slavic language, you'll catch on quite quickly. Those who are really serious about OCS, should contact a university with a Slavic langauges program & find out about their offerings. I know in Poland & Cz & Slovak Republics, study of OCS is required of philologists at many universities. And the schools have some excellent grammars/handbooks in the modern language.


I love OCS and CS myself. I don't understand why more priests and congregations do not have more CS in the liturgy. I believe it adds something to the liturgy, even if only a few select prayers are in CS. It is true that most Russians do not understand CS completely, though most churchgoers have a general idea of the meaning - and of course the regular familiar prayers in CS ARE understood.

I sometimes attend a Maronite liturgy & can't help but admire the way those communities promote Syriac and Aramaic. In one community I know, the priest does not actually SPEAK those languages & probably half of the congregation is not Lebanese, but they have many parts of the liturgy in Syriac/Aramaic & the non-Lebanese sing just as enthusiastically as the Lebanese. What a shame the Slavs in the US cannot do that. I never met a Slav Greek Catholic in the US who was really proud of his CS heritage (I know there are some, but I never met one). Generally, many Slavs seem to have an inferiority complex when it comes to CS. Some will actually apologize to non-Slavs for CS in the church.

And there are moments in my life when I feel that God listens more attentively to prayers in CS than to other languages. An irrational thought, but a sentiment I sometimes feel.

Stojgniev