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!

Fr. Serges book has not been sent to each priest of the Metropolia. At least not my parish priest.

If your parish priest has not received a copy of the book, this should be reported to Stauropegion Press immediately. The Press complained at the time that it was proving difficult to obtain accurate, up-to-date lists of the clergy names and addresses.

Fr. Serge

I'm confused. Who authorized the sending in the first place? Who paid for it?

CDL

Dan, I think it's a secret.

Given the way that our clergy is already divided six ways from Sunday it is a darned foolish thing to have done, a very poorly calculated risk.

This will only serve to divide our clergy even further.

I am not sure this evening if the I prefer the role of the puppet, the string, the boards or the jerk.

I guess it's not only our bishops who think we are idiots.

Eli

And don't pull my note either, for God's sake.

Let something honest stand as it is. Even if I am wrong or impolitic!!

Eli

I had missed this. I apologize for my private note to you, Father and for the public ones.

Now I have to go and soak in ice water and try to get my BP back in some kind of normal range.

Eli

Lazareno writes:

To which Fr Serge responds:

If Lazareno's "from" identification (California) is an indication, then one could deduce that Lazareno's parish priest serves the Eparchy of Van Nuys. Last I checked the most accurate, up-to-date lists of clergy names and addresses are readily available in the public domain with no difficulty at all. This holds true for the other eparchies of the Metropolia as well.

Surely, if the author and his publisher could undertake a critique of the proposed liturgy which was not in the public domain without any difficulty, then they should be able to find clergy names and addresses which are.

And, surely, if whoever sent the book missed a few clergy, all the arguments in it must be worthless!

Having previously owned and operated my own publishing business and engaged multiple times in the mass mailing of books, I routinely had to count on roughly 3% never arriving at their destination. Believe it or not, items often become lost in transit or are inexplicably returned even with accurate mailing labels attached.

~Isaac

I'm just a junior member, not a theologian or scholar. I have not read the entire proposed liturgy, although I admit to having put in my 2 cents on what I didn't like about what I had read. That said, here are some questions and concerns I have about this thread:

1. Was the laity ever involved in the authoring or revising of any Byzantine or Orthodox liturgy? If not, why should we be involved now?

2. If every church/parish is to send a representative, who will determine who is to be sent? The pastor? A committee of parishioners? Who appoints the committee? What ramifications will the determination have on the unity between pastor and parishioners, and among parishioners?

3. One of the hottest issues appears to be the inclusive language. From what I've seen on this Forum, no one (myself included) appears to favor that change. Surely there must be a few Byzantine feminists. What happens if they send a contingent to the conference?

4. It seems only right to have one liturgy approved and implemented throughout the Metropolia. But to tell the truth, I'm not sure why new translations were required, unless to correct errors of theological importance. Nevertheless, I have a feeling that no matter who and how many are involved in the revision, there are going to be a lot of people who are not happy with the result. Barring theological error, it seems the better practice to have a minimum people involved, all of whom were engaged from the start. Otherwise, we could be in danger of creating the proverbial blind men's elephant, or worse, a piece of Congressional legislation. At the risk of being flamed, I'll ask: Since when is the Catholic Church a democracy? Aren't we supposed to be humbly obedient to our priests and bishops?

Finally, as a cantor I know what we're going through with regard to the changes in music. I hear cantors complaining that "We've sung it this way for over 50 years, why do we need to 'go back' further?" And I've heard parishioners complain that they don't like the "new music." All this is a factor of change. In two or three years, we'll be used to the new music and only a few diehards will talk about how great the music was back in the "old days." The rest of us will move on.

I love the Byzantine Church; that's why I joined my parish and requested and received a change of rite. I love our liturgy; that's why I have made the effort to learn the various services so that I could become a cantor. I probably won't like everything about the new liturgy, but "I will sing to the Lord as long as I live" whatever liturgy is given to me, approved by the bishops.

Sophia

Well apparently there are some significant, shall we say, unnecessary theological ambiguities introduced into the liturgy over time.

The numbers of people involved impact in several ways. Most significantly the numbers responding to reject the current iteration, whatever it is at the moment, will indicate to the bishops that there are more important issues than personal preferences or a passing fancy.

Religious indifference is no more inherently holy that some sort of religious rebellion. What is going on here can hardly be classified as a protestors revolt. As it gains more focus and less momentum, it will be more helpful than destructive.

Eli

Liturgy means the work of the people. It is not the private sphere of scholars squirreled away in some ivory tower. We experience the awesome mysteries of the Holy Trinity during divine worship. Through the work we do at Liturgy in our chant, our bows, kissing icons, lighting candles, etc. we learn our theology.

A theologian, especially in our Eastern Christian tradition, is first and foremost someone who lives a life immersed in our authentic Carpatho-Rusyn spirituality. So, in a sense we are all called to be theologians.

John S.,

I believe the present course of pushing this translation is a good way to kill the spirit of the people. This doesn't just come from this forum but this forum is representative of some of the most active people in our parishes.

djs and Father David are correct when they remind us that the bishops have a right to do this. They have a right to close Churches. They have a right to do all sorts of things. But will excercising that right serve the purpose of growth or will it be an excercise in destruction.

Some wit suggested that we should comfort our bishops as they watch their actions force the Church in decline by reassuring them that they are actually "accomplishing what they were consecrated by Rome to do." I'm not quite that cynical about Rome though there has been ample evidence that Rome would like to see us disappear. But the observation that the bishops actions have been one of the factors in our precipitous decline is hard to avoid.

CDL

Dear Carson,

You write: "djs and Father David are correct when they remind us that the bishops have a right to do this. They have a right to close Churches. They have a right to do all sorts of things. But will excercising that right serve the purpose of growth or will it be an excercise in destruction."

However, according to quite orthodox, classic Roman Catholic theology, even the Pope is required always to act in aedificationem ecclesiae. Never may the Pope act in destructionem ecclesiae.

Should a Pope so much as attempt to act in a fashion toward the destruction of the Church, he would be abusing his authority and subject to correction from the source of that authority - Almighty God, Who is perfectly free to choose the instruments of that correction. There are examples in point (the history of the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate is one).

Well, if even the Pope cannot do such a thing, still less can a diocesan bishop do it.

Fr. Serge Keleher