www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy A Call for a Conference on Our Liturgy!

By Ligonier, I think incognitus meant at the Antiochian Village Conference Center near Ligonier. That would be a good site.

Just to clarify, DisneyLAND is in Anaheim, California, Disney WORLD is in Florida. No self respecting theme park enthusiast ( )would ever call the Metropolis of Disney in Florida Disneyland. For theme park purists there will only ever be one Disneyland.

One who was present at Disneyland's 50th Birthday celebration.

OH dear - I seem to have put my little size 5 right in it

Mea Culpa Mea Culpa - mea Maxima Culpa

Though I have to say that if the adverts we get over here are anything to go by - with deference you can keep it

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I think that the conference should be hosted in a venue where it is open and accesible to as many people as possible.

We had a great deal of success with this in our August 6, BEMA evangelization visioning conference in Whiting, Indiana. One of the reasons for the success of the Aug. 6 event was the fact that we had a definite vision and definite ground rules which were STRICTLY adhered to. The vision was about giving postive input ONLY.

I think we can do something similiar with this Liturgy translation conference. The conference would have very strict perameters and clear a sense of purpose. The point would be to have the different perspectives and explanations presented. This would not be duplicating the explanation seminars that the Metropolia already has planned as a preparation for the implementaion of the new translation.
The purpose of the conference would be to provide a venue that is more adequate than internet for the obviously voluminous discussion that this issue provokes. I suspect this discussion is only going to increase in size and intensity. Aside from anything else I am finding these discussions very educational and I think many others could profit from these presentations as well.

On another note, we pastors will be on the front lines of the implementation and fallout thereof of the new translation. We also stand to possibly loose parishish membership over it. At the very least we may have to deal with the unrest, emotion confusion, resentment or even joy and gratitude, in fact the entire spectrum of reaction that ensues from any type of change let alone a new translation. Therefore,I think the more opportunity for presentation and discussion the better. I think it could be helpful for pastors.

It would be wonderful to have hierarchs present. Bishop John was present at our Aug. 6 visioning conference and made a valuable contribution both in the way that he allowed things to be freely presented and in what he personally said at the conference. The conference being proposed here would likewise allow for the free expression of ideas and information. My vote would be to host the conference in Chicago. I would be willing to join others in assisting our esteemed presenters with travel expenses.

--Fr. Thomas J. Loya, STB., MA.

djs,

The figures have been publish on this forum within the last few days. I've seen them before. I understand that people die and move but I don't understand the lack of a coherent vision and call to action unless our destiny is to collapse and cease to exist.

My purpose in calling upon the bishops to lead us is not to strike against them but to challenge them to call upon us to become the Church we ought to be. If I have stricken against the bishops I apologize to them, to the Church, and to God. In fact if my plea to them to lead us is a strike against them I withdraw everything I've said and will repent of all I've done in the past seven years.

CDL

IF those who are mandating the current draft of the liturgy do not call this meeting or council for the expressed purpose of opening the draft to further change, then what would be the point of convening anywhere in the world?

What is the purpose of this sort of informal meeting? What could happen there that is not happening right here and with more people involved and less expense?

Eli

Fair enough, Dan. And I don't want to minimize the gravity of the fact that even in the more recent years, with a consistent enumeration scheme, the numbers continue to decline slowly. If we are to reverse that trend we do need just precisely that vision you are talking about. And which, I think, Bishop John shares.

Pavloosh, it is sad. This whole process has been introverted, in spite of what we are exhorted to do in the Instruction from Rome regarding collaboration. We seem to ignore the experience of the Latins in the recent rounds of proposed changes to their Missal. We also are seemingly ignoring the example of other churches of our rescension. The 1988 UGCC Liturgikon, for example, returned to a more faithful adherence of the 1941 Ordo. The proposed but yet unseen Revised Liturgy seems rather an intended regression from the 1941 Ordo.

Eli, that is a good point. Those who will be directing the implementation of the changes need, no must to be involved and to hear what is being discussed - but unfortunately I doubt you will get all of the hierarchs in one place like that. And really at this point that is what it will take.

There really should be face to face, eye to eye contact with those not only responsible for the changes, but those who will be directing the implementation of the changes. They should be seen and be heard as to why we are doing this, face to face.

We haven't seen a text (but have heard there are already changes to the changes), we haven't seen or heard officially the reasons for a change to the text (Ordo and Liturgikon), we haven't heard compelling reasons why we should ditch what we were supposed to implement in the first place, why we should depart from the course charted for us in the 1941 Ordo which we have yet to follow. All of which are fair questions.

In the big picture, we can certainly listen to two or more perspectives on proposed changes to our lex orandi but if it is already on the fast track for implementation, post facto, one has to consider the efficacy of such a meeting. "As soon as September" and we haven't heard a word nor seen a page. Including clergy.

I do agree that Karl is right about neutral location, conference center, etc.

That loss is perhaps more probable to certain than just "possibly", and just as likely it will include more than just parish membership. Our parishes are shrinking in most cases, the clergy shortage acute. Another massive hemorrhage that will likely accompany such a profound change would not be timely, or likely beneficial to our Church.
FDD

Why have such a meeting? To give the bishops the input that they needed, but chose not to seek. To help them, in love, to do the right thing. So that if we find that we can no longer in good faith worship with the church of the metropolia of Pittsburgh, we will have no regrets, since we will have done all that we could have done.

I'm not so sure that promulgation is a done deal. And if it is a done deal, despite an organized and loyal opposition to it, we will know how they think of us. Then all will be clear, and the death knell for our church will sound.

I don't know if I share your optimism of "I'm not so sure that promulgation is a done deal" but the remainder of your plea is certainly worth considering and a decent justification of such an endeavor. Let us all implore the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete for guidance in this watershed time.
FDD

Question....

Would any of you think I'm an old crackpot for wishing we could have a Divine Liturgy using Elizabethan language?

Be kinda neat to me to be able to chant "And with THY spirit"...haven't ever said that since I was a kid in the Episcopal Church

Who can tell me what - if any - Orthodox jurisdictions use such language in their English liturgies?

God bless you all,

Sam

Is that available on-line anywhere, FDD? What do you mean, btw, by " returned to a more faithful adherence of the 1941 Ordo"?

Correction, actually that was 1987. Regarding my comment regarding the Ordo, first of all there were other various "provisional" English versions floating around the UGCC which codified certain abbreviations without giving the option of fuller celebration.

For example, in the 1987 version all three Antiphons or the Psalms of Typika and Beatitudes are contained, all of the litanies are contained, including the Litany of the Catechumens and those during the Prayers of the Faithful, and the rubrics of the opening and closing of the Holy Doors are contained. Even the customary location of the chanting of Psalm 33 is indicated along with the distribution of antidoron if it wished to be taken.

Some, like the Litany of the Catechumens, are included in boxes which the Synod indicated that may be optional as a matter of pastoral prudence but it certainly did not legislate specific abbreviations as demanded practice, and always gives the option for the fuller celebration if desired.

Secondly, since I haven't seen the New Liturgy, but can at this point only go off of Archimandrite Serge's excellent analysis of the text (which I certainly trust) the UGCC 1987 would seem most definitely more faithful to the letter and spirit of the 1941 Ordo than what appears to be proposed.

Regarding availability - I don't know of it on-line but it is certainly available from Basilian Press in Toronto, Icon and Book Service (and likely other sources like St. Josaphat's in Parma as well).
FDD

Thanks, FDD. I was wondering from your phrasing whether there were departures from 1941 (tranlsated) or not.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note, we pastors will be on the front lines of the implementation and fallout thereof of the new translation. We also stand to possibly loose parish membership over it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And the loss of population will largely come from those folks who have joined our churches with young children. The people who support our Church the most. The folks that read the Church Fathers, pray and fast. In short those who really try to have a vital domestic church. Yes, the ones who really want to be Orthodox in Communion with Rome will leave. You know, those who actually go to Saturday Vespers and read Eastern Christian books. Most parishes have at least a few of these types. The loss is the future of our church. And when they 'dox the Metropolia will cease to be a reality.