www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy One Year and One Day - A Reflection

Which brings us to the crux of the problem. Rome produced the Ordo in 44. It was never promulagted. So yes, it is a change on paper but not a change in actual practice. And even the change on paper was approved, twice.

What is required for a promulgation? Perhaps formally there was none but the intent was certainly there:

Letter of Ivancho to Tisserant [patronagechurch.com]

Keeping the doors open has become common, although that does not seem the intention in the correspondences.

Interestingly enough, over on OCANEWS.org there is mention of a new liturgy book just out for the OCA. This book instructs, amoung other things, that priestly prayers (including the Eucharistic prayer) be taken silently and that the word "lord" is inserted before the commemoration of the metropolitan, ie. "our lord, Metropolitan X," in the litanies, and has some (sadly) amusing typos. There seems to be some uproar from "the people" that "how can they say 'Amen' to what they do not hear?" So I am wondering if audible prayers are more common in the OCA than is previously thought, or if this is just people "biting back" at change. I feel for them either way.

RDL issues aside, there�s something about this statement that I find highly offensive. If you were, as you say, a cradle Byzantine Catholic, then it is reasonable to assume that these �typical 75 plus year old someones� you speak of are, no doubt, your own parents and grandparents. And if they, like you, are cradle Byzantines, then they�ve weathered storms and changes within their Church that you can�t even imagine. Yet they stayed. Had they �abandoned ship� in the midst of their own times of turmoil, you most certainly would not have been born the cradle Byzantine that you were.

For you to imply that it is typical of these parishioners to be individuals who �could care less,� �[don�t have] a clue� and are �only worried about where they will be buried from� smacks of insensitivity in the highest degree. These people are not stupid � they represent the shoulders upon which we stand today. The fact that you have youth and probably even education on your side does not automatically make you and the other younger cradle Byzantines you speak of any better than they. I�m embarrassed to see your uncharitable comments characterized as being �typical� of our elderly parishioners, and I feel that they are owed an apology. It�s a shame that you apparently felt unable to make your point without resorting to denigrating this group of people who, for the most part, don�t even participate on this Forum and, hence, have no opportunity to defend themselves.

Al (a pilgrim)

No apologies here. My own parents and many other older Byzantines I've talked to really don't care about the inclusive language or any other aspect of the RDL other than the new music, and how they don't like how it sounds.

I don't think my post was uncharitable or hurtful. It's a big dose of the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts. Everyone knows the majority of the BCC parishioners are 60 plus and would never leave no matter what happens. I'm younger and have a little more time left on earth, so I did what I believe was the right thing to do.

The author of that article has many negative things to say about many subjects. Do you have any other sources about these "new" Liturgy books and the "uproar from the people"?

Where can we find these books? I would love to do a comparison of the minor changes and typos from the OCA reprinting versus the major overhaul of the BCC RDL.

Here is the context from the original:


I'm looking at this in terms of the RDL and the use of honorifics not found in the source texts, and the neglect of other designations that are there. One criticism of the RDL is the tendency for embellishing the liturgical text, which simply has Vladyko/Despota/Master, and requiring such specific titles as Reverend Father or Most Reverend Bishop or even Most Reverend Metropolitan etc. Why not simply "Master" as found in the source texts rather than overworking the translation by reading more into the text than what is there (eisegesis through translation). Two anecdotes, which prove nothing, but illustrate the result: (1) at the annual DC pro-life Compline the Bishop who usually leads the service could not come but the books were printed and so, to the priest who filled-in, the request sung as in the booklet "Most Reverend Bishop give the blessing." (2) At the inauguration liturgy for +William as Bishop of Passaic, presided over by Met. Basil, at the end "Most Reverend Metropolitan give the blessing" was the sung request but Bishop William steps forth to give the blessing (And BTW there in Passaic's Cathedral with all our hierarchs present, "Give me Your Body O Christ" was sung, more than once, during the communion of the clergy.) My point for (1) and (2) above is that had it just been "Master" basically both instances would have just worked out.

Regarding the OCA issue and the RDL: the Recension text ( 196 [patronagechurch.com] ) does have an honorific that even the 1965 translation ( 15 [patronagechurch.com] ) avoided: Kyr. That the OCA translation (I presume it is also in the Vulgata/Russian recension) would choose to render this as "lord" is ill-advised mainly because of the confusion, as seen in the quote above, of this title with the other, familiar, "sacred" word for "Lord", Hospod.

My suggestion: Abolish all the pompous-sounding and wordy honorifics that are not in the source texts and simply translate Vladyko/Despota as what it is, Master; and if one chooses not to avoid the formal designation then just use the transliterated title thus: For the most-reverend Archbishop, our Metropolitan Kyr ___, for our God-loving Bishop, Kyr _____ ...

A touch of the old Slavonic in our English translation -- why not, whatever our ethnic background, it's our liturgical heritage .

ajk-

the problem with "Kyr" is that in the English language it denotes a standard abbreviation for millenium or 1000 years. (k= 1000, yr= year) Granted, this is used mainly by geologists and astronomists. Though I guess this would be appropriate since we do ask God to grant "many years."

For easier reference:

A Providential Typo From God
by David Barrett, Southbury CT

I thank God for the varied and insightful editorials and reflections that have recently appeared on this website, specifically by Mark Stokoe and Matushka Donna Farley. They validate some of the points I made in my last reflection (�The Synod of Bishops � In the Wrong Place in Egypt�). Sadly, as all the recent posts on this site have predicted, none of these warnings, pleadings, or observations have had any impact on present circumstances.

In fact, things just seem to be getting worse.


An example of this is the recently released new edition of the Divine Liturgy service book for priests. After allowing the last edition to become unavailable by being out of print, our ever-predictable Metropolitan has come up with a new version, more wieldy in size (some priests are already complaining that it does not conveniently fit into the pockets of their cassocks or riasas) and with some backwards-moving changes. The new version is replete with dozens of references/rubrical instructions on each page for prayers to be �secret� or �said secretly�. One wonders if these supra-clerical (meaning, anti-laity) clerics are even aware of the First Epistle of Peter, where the entire Body of the Church (specifically, in this context, the laity) are referred to as �a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God�s own people� (1 Pet 2:9). As the recently retired (should have been deposed) Bishop of Alaska, Nikolai, once told his flock in his diocese when asked why he said the liturgical prayers silently, �Those are my prayers!� This is the typical, mutated type of ecclesiology one expects from a hierarch who never finished his theological education.


Another not only sad, but very skewed, change is in the petitions of the litanies that pray for our hierarchs, specifically the Metropolitan. Previous editions of this service book read, �For the holy Orthodox patriarchs, for our Metropolitan _____ �. Now, this has been superceded by, �� for our lord, Metropolitan _____ �. I recall from my studies in Church History that our calendar contains martyrs who shed their blood and lost their lives for refusing to call any emperor (Roman, Byzantine, or otherwise) �lord�. And yet, here we have our so-called spiritual �leader� putting that very title for himself in the Liturgy service book.


What are also found numerous times throughout this new edition are typographical errors. It seems that the Divine Liturgy is not important enough to warrant a proofreader/editor before the new service book is printed and released. However, there is one typo that stands out. On page 17, in �The Liturgy of Preparation�, the text of the new edition reads, �By being nailed to the Cross and pierced with a spear, Thou hast poured immorality upon men.� Not �immortality� as the text calls for and previous editions have stated, but �immorality�.


On one level, this may seem to be just another typo among many. Yet, on another level, it may be a providential typo allowed by God. Just as God spoke to Elijah, not in the strong wind or the earthquake or the fire, but in the �still small voice� (1 Kg 19:12), so now, God often speaks to us in the silent, small details of daily life, if we are only quiet within and without, having eyes to see and ears to hear. This typo is a pronouncement and a summation of the �ministry� of Metropolitan Herman, who, consistently and unwaveringly throughout this crisis, has poured out immorality upon the Church in America. One does not have to look far to find examples of this. In fact, Matushka Donna Farley mentioned the latest one in her reflection, when she stated that the Metropolitan gave a clergy award to the priest who is being sued for breaching pastoral confidentiality, and she fittingly referred to this incident as �pastoral carelessness�.

(David Barrett is a MA & MDiv graduate of St Vladimir�s Orthodox Theological Seminary in Crestwood, New York. He has been a choir director in the OCA for thirty-two years, currently serving at Christ the Savior parish in Southbury, Connecticut)

Click on the "Share your comments" tab at ocanews.org and then read some of the comments from people on this reflection. I should have posted the links to begin.

I see one comment poking fun at the typo--and some other people bashing the Metropolitan. Any other sources?

Typographical errors are often amusing (I would hate to tell you some of the howlers of which I have been guilty!). My favorite remains an English translation of the Liturgy of Saint Basil the Great which reads:

"We have seen the typos of Your Holy Resurrection . .."

Fr. Serge

Look again at the "Share your comments" section for the article "The DC Town Hall." In just a quick perusal of the comments I found references and comments, in whole or part about the changes in the DL book of the OCA approved by Met. Herman, or topics relevant to the changes. Look at comment numbers: 1,8,11,19,23,24,25,26,28,29,31,32,34,35,42,43,44, and 50. Gotta read all the way down. My guess is too, if they're dicussing this on OCANEWS.org it's probably also a topic on the Orthodox Forum on Yahoo. Might want to check there.

honestly though, i have never once heard the issue of the liturgical handbook come up as a topic of conversation at the local OCA parish in which i spend quite a bit of time.

Sorry can't find it. But I sure am glad people are concerned. Can you imagine if they tried to add gender neutral language!