John,
Bishop Andrew outlawed the official Ruthenian Divine Liturgy ten years ago. When he was in Parma he outlawed it there. The official Ruthenian Divine Liturgy has been under assault by our bishops for almost our whole time in the United States. He has actually disciplined priests who have taken the full Liturgy.
Harrisburg was the big holdout in Passaic until Father Shear died.
There are a small number of parishes elsewhere in the country. I�m not going to provide a list because I don�t want the bishops disciplining those priests for following Rome�s directives. But if they use the Revised Liturgicon they will not be able to take the full Liturgy because the Revised Liturgicon leaves out a lot.
Don�t give up on your Church. It�s not a done deal if we unite and appeal to Rome. The Ruthenian Liturgy is worth fighting for.
Blessed Theodore
BT,
I understand what you're saying and feeling for those few parishes that may follow the 1964 recension to the letter. My parish for instance, has a fuller liturgy now than it did prior to Bishop Andrew implementing the changes 10 years ago.
I think that it's been mentioned somewhere that the bishop is the guardian of the liturgy and chief liturgist for his diocese. If that is the case, priests not following what the bishop has set forth are disobedient to him, who is their master and father in Christ. The bishop, OTOH, is answerable to Rome if he does not mandate or follow what Rome has approved or set forth. Look at Bishop Basil (Takach) for instance. He was following what Rome set forth. That's what being in communion with Rome means.
I'm not asking for names, but exactly how many parishes in the four diocese' of the Metropolia actually celebrate the DL exactly following the 1964 liturgicon? Does anyone know?
I'm not giving up on the Church, I'm just being realistic. Rome approved the Liturgy, it's going to take a lot of letter writing
or a new major exodus of people to other Churches (as was the case in the formation of the Johnstown Diocese) to make Rome notice and make a change. We're small fish in a big pond, unfortunately.
Would I rather the 1964 Liturgicon (with corrections) to what is being promulgated now? Yes! But I'd be a minority in my parish, let me tell you. Our average Sunday Liturgy
now runs 1 hour 10 minutes to 1 hour 20 minutes and believe me, there are more than a few people who grumble it's too long sometimes and walk out after communion. What will the new revisions do to a parish that now is used to a 35-40 minute recited liturgy (low mass)?
Would I rather that our bishops had done this in concert with the other Churches in the English speaking world or at least in the USA that use the same recension as us? Absolutely! I think it was extremely arrogant and impudent to do this alone, only the Ruthenian
sui juris Church of Pittsburgh, as if the UGCC and Melkite GCC did not exist here. That is my opinion.
What I'm trying to say is: let's give things a chance, maybe modifications can be made once the dust has settled. Is that unreasonable?
my $.02. John K
