The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Galumph, Leon_C, Rocco, Hvizsgyak, P.W.
5,984 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 456 guests, and 39 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,389
Posts416,722
Members5,984
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
ajk Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
Based on the Forward in the 2006 liturgicon I have to wonder, what is the present status of the recension books. We may presume they are the norm but there is a shift in emphasis indicated from Slavonic first and Greek last (1965) to Greek first (2006).


1965 Liturgicon Preface
Originally Posted by 1965 Liturgicon
The Rite of the Sacred and Divine Liturgy, presented here, is a faithful translation of the text and rubrics of the typical Church-Slavonic edition of "Čin Svja�čennyja i Bo�estvennyja Liturgii" published by the authority of the Holy Apostolic See of Rome, and printed by the Grotta-Ferrata Press, Rome, 1942.

Where the English lacks a concise and literal equivalent of the Slavonic, paraphrasing has been employed, and where the natural order of the English language demands it, words have been transposed. In order to capture the various shades of meaning, which the Slavonic lacks, this translation has been compared with the official Greek version published at Rome in 1950.


2006 Liturgicon Forward
Originally Posted by 2006 Liturgicon
The text has been translated from the Greek original as found in the Ieratikon (Rome, 1950), compared with the Church Slavonic of the Slu�ebnik (Rome, 1942) and the English translation of the Intereparchial Liturgical Commission of Pittsburgh and Passaic (1965), which was confirmed by the Sacred Congregation for Oriental Churches, Prot. No. 380/62, on December 10, 1964. ... The rubrics are founded on a careful historical study of the development of the Liturgy as revealed by manuscript evidence and modern liturgical scholarship. Authentically distinct Ruthenian practices are respected and the final product is guided by considerations of pastoral prudence in the specific situation of the Byzantine Ruthenian Church in the United States of America.

Also, what are instances of "modern liturgical scholarship" that influenced the RDL? What "Authentically distinct Ruthenian practices are respected"; what are examples of practices that were deemed not to be authentic?

Dn. Anthony

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
L
lm Offline
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Quote
the final product is guided by considerations of pastoral prudence in the specific situation of the Byzantine Ruthenian Church in the United States of America.
RDL

Quote
The idea that the choice of liturgical forms must be made from the "pastoral" point of view suggests the presence of this same anthropocentric error. Thus the liturgy is celebrated entirely for men and women,

Cardinal Ratzinger (Now the Chief Shepherd)


Cardinal Ratzinger explicitly said men and women when he indicated that there was an anthropocentric error! biggrin And these comments (presumably not originally written in Greek) expressed rather pastorally his displeasure for such pastoral concerns. What a great shepherd we have!

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Originally Posted by ajk
Based on the Forward in the 2006 liturgicon I have to wonder, what is the present status of the recension books. We may presume they are the norm but there is a shift in emphasis indicated from Slavonic first and Greek last (1965) to Greek first (2006).


1965 Liturgicon Preface
Originally Posted by 1965 Liturgicon
The Rite of the Sacred and Divine Liturgy, presented here, is a faithful translation of the text and rubrics of the typical Church-Slavonic edition of "Čin Svja�čennyja i Bo�estvennyja Liturgii" published by the authority of the Holy Apostolic See of Rome, and printed by the Grotta-Ferrata Press, Rome, 1942.

Where the English lacks a concise and literal equivalent of the Slavonic, paraphrasing has been employed, and where the natural order of the English language demands it, words have been transposed. In order to capture the various shades of meaning, which the Slavonic lacks, this translation has been compared with the official Greek version published at Rome in 1950.


2006 Liturgicon Forward
Originally Posted by 2006 Liturgicon
The text has been translated from the Greek original as found in the Ieratikon (Rome, 1950), compared with the Church Slavonic of the Slu�ebnik (Rome, 1942) and the English translation of the Intereparchial Liturgical Commission of Pittsburgh and Passaic (1965), which was confirmed by the Sacred Congregation for Oriental Churches, Prot. No. 380/62, on December 10, 1964. ... The rubrics are founded on a careful historical study of the development of the Liturgy as revealed by manuscript evidence and modern liturgical scholarship. Authentically distinct Ruthenian practices are respected and the final product is guided by considerations of pastoral prudence in the specific situation of the Byzantine Ruthenian Church in the United States of America.

Also, what are instances of "modern liturgical scholarship" that influenced the RDL? What "Authentically distinct Ruthenian practices are respected"; what are examples of practices that were deemed not to be authentic?

Dn. Anthony

Quote
This is certainly a legitimate and worthwhile request, but keeping in mind that the Ruthenian Recension is in Slavonic, I am concerned about the bypassing of the Recension and the Slavonic in favor of the Greek in the RDL* -- no, not always but all too often and when it seems to me not necessary or even warranted. The Nikonian reform and the biblical Textus Receptus are prime examples why "original Greek" is not automatically "right" or to be preferred. Our liturgical expression is filtered through the Slavonic and exhibits a legitimate Slav ethos that is our heritage (regardless of our biological ethnic background). If we do not preserve it who will?

This is a bit off topic; may I suggest that replies if any be posted to the thread below.

Dn. Anthony


I'm moving this up. I am a bit surprised that this discussion has gotten so little play.

Mary

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
I could be wrong, but I think this new RDL promulgation makes the Rescension (Ordo Celebrationis), and the Rome-issued Sluzhebnik illicit for us. One could say we have a "new rite". Hope I'm wrong.

Dn. Robert

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461
Likes: 1
That is probably right, Deacon Robert. Our UGCC Synod has made the Ordo and the books from Rome (in various English or Ukrainian translations) mandatory and normative by Synodal acta.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
ajk Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by Jessup B.C. Deacon
I could be wrong, but I think this new RDL promulgation makes the Rescension (Ordo Celebrationis), and the Rome-issued Sluzhebnik illicit for us. One could say we have a "new rite". Hope I'm wrong.

I thought that even after June 29 if the liturgy is in Slavonic it is to be as in the Sluzhebnik, if in English according to the "new rite". If so the problem is then that, to function as indicated in each (rubrics), one needs to be a schizodeacon.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by ajk
Originally Posted by Jessup B.C. Deacon
I could be wrong, but I think this new RDL promulgation makes the Rescension (Ordo Celebrationis), and the Rome-issued Sluzhebnik illicit for us. One could say we have a "new rite". Hope I'm wrong.

I thought that even after June 29 if the liturgy is in Slavonic it is to be as in the Sluzhebnik, if in English according to the "new rite". If so the problem is then that, to function as indicated in each (rubrics), one needs to be a schizodeacon.

(1.) In Slavonic, do we run with the full text of the Sluzhebnik, or a butchered version?

(2.)Do we now have to get a bi-ritual faculty? grin

Dn. Robert

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
ajk Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by Jessup B.C. Deacon
(1.) In Slavonic, do we run with the full text of the Sluzhebnik, or a butchered version?

I believe the general order, in this and similar cases, is that we follow whoever is the ranking typicon.

Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 560
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 560
Ok, I'm really enjoying this discussion of somethint that is near and dear to me-my religion and how I express my love for God and how I give thanks to my savior. But my problem is I have no idea of what some of your words mean. Is it possible to phrase things in such a way that the members of the Forum who don't have a theological background can understand it? Without running to a dictionary every other sentence?
Please?

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by tjm199
Ok, I'm really enjoying this discussion of somethint that is near and dear to me-my religion and how I express my love for God and how I give thanks to my savior. But my problem is I have no idea of what some of your words mean. Is it possible to phrase things in such a way that the members of the Forum who don't have a theological background can understand it? Without running to a dictionary every other sentence?
Please?

Hope this helps.
(1.) Sluzhebnik is the Slavonic word for Liturgicon. This is the book used by deacons and priests which contains the text of prayers, and rubrics, of the Divine Liturgy.

(2.) The Rescension (Ordo Celebrationis) is a book used primarily by clergy which gives the rubrics (where to go, what to do, what prayers to take, and when to take them; delineations of actions by celebrants, concelebrants, first deacon, second deacon, etc. )for Vespers, Matins, Presanctified Liturgy, and the Divine Liturgies of St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil the Great.

In Christ,
Dn. Robert

Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 560
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 560
Thank you very much. It helps make sense of what is going on. I take an active interest in my church and feel very strongly about it. But if I can't understand what's being said, I can't be a part of the solution. Thanks again.

S'nami Boh!


Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2023). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5