www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Good News for People Concerned about Inclusive Language

Once again, you want us to look at the Pink Book from the perspective of what has not been changed instead of what has been changed. And when we ignore what has been changed then this whole thing seems like one big misunderstanding.

It reminds me of the phrase, "...and other than that how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"



I can only interpret that to mean that you can't name one Orthodox Litugicon that requires the prayer of the First Antiphon be prayed aloud, removes the Little Litanies, prohibits more then one verse of the Antiphons and prescribes that the prayers be prayed aloud after the Latin custom. I welcome hearing of one from you since I've never seen or heard of one that does.

Monomakh

When did arguing by smear become acceptable?

"For he is gracious and loves us ALL" at the final blessing given by Bishop John.

Blech! (isn't it "good" instead of "gracious"?)

Again, I can only comment with, "kumbaya"!

So you agree with me that since we don't know whether this is the first or last time for inclusive language to be used in the Liturgy, that the door is open for more in the future.

You say that prayers were not changed, how do you explain removing 'man' from the Creed?



I'm confused because you seem to believe that the church ended in Acts 28 and reappeared in the 20th century.

You might want to read these when you get a chance:

"stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (II Thess. 2:15).

"I commend you because you . . . maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (I Cor. 11:2).

I fail to see the fresh air in having feminized inclusive language in the Divine Liturgy.

I fail to see the fresh air in having Latin confessionals in our churches.

I fail to see the fresh air in being in and out of Liturgy in under 50 minutes.

I fail to see the fresh air in not providing Matins to the faithful.

I fail to see the fresh air in not providing Vespers to the faithful.

I fail to see the fresh air in having Liturgy on Saturday evening and claiming that it fulfills your Sunday obligation when it is completely possbile to have Liturgy on Sunday morning.

I fail to see the fresh air in kneeling on Sundays.

I fail to see the fresh air in having stations of the cross and rosaries in our churches.

I fail to see the fresh air in keeping the Royal Doors open for the entire Liturgy.

I fail to see the fresh air in not informing the faithful and basically ignoring fasting periods besides the Great Fast.

I fail to see the fresh air in having pews in our churches.

I fail to see the fresh air in not doing proper prostrations when called for.

I fail to see the fresh air in having one verse antiphons.

I fail to see the fresh air in having 'All Souls Saturday' as a panichida on Friday night after a chopped up Presantified Liturgy and claiming to have celebrated All Souls Saturday.

Fresh air would be to correct the above in at least the overwhelmingly vast majority of our churches and return to our Traditions like Rome keeps telling us to.

Monomakh

Thanks Monomakh!

Fresh air to me, is keeping the faith. This revision is nothing but hot air, going no place.

Nick

I think the problem is that you are using terms imprecisely. A Liturgikon contains instructions for the priests and deacons telling them how to serve the Liturgy. Typically, Liturgika do not contain information about the moveable hymnography, etc. Typika contain instructions for how to put the services together (i.e., what hymns should be sung, etc.) Of course, then each Church usually also publishes a Guide for each year telling Cantors how to put the services together. I have been collecting these yearly volumes from both the Church of Greece and Constantinople for years. (Interestingly, they often disagree with each other on precise details.) On top of this, you then have the "flexible Typikon" that each local Bishop prescribes. I remember very distinctly a discussion I had with a certain Orthodox hierarch who informed me quite clearly to put away my Liturgikon and my Typikon -- for he informed me gruffly: "In this diocese, I AM the Liturgikon and the Typikon. You don't need those books -- you just do it the way I tell you."

So the situation is much more complex than your question allows me to answer.

Dear PrJ,

Yes, there are different Liturgicons from Greece, Constantinople, and other places, and also those published at different times do differ in details!

That is why our Church has OFFICIAL books, published by Rome, that unify us, and hold us together as a Church. It is called the Ruthenian Recension.

But our bishops have decided to take us outside of the Ruthenian Recension! So now, we have another Liturgicon, that is different not only in "precise details" but in major changes, whole litanies missing, invented "fantasy" rubrics, and too many changes, mistakes and innovations to name.

It was the offical books that united us. Now, it is our new Revisionist Liturgy, that will divide us, and in my opinion, finish us.

Why the bishops are doing this to us, I can't understand. I am praying hard, that our bishops come to their senses, and listen to the priests and the people, and send these books for recycling.

It is not too late for them to do their job, and defend the tradition, and stand up for the Ruthenian Recension.

Nick

Saint Athanasius, pray for our Church, and convert the hearts of our leaders, to defend our beautiful tradition!

I have a question: Isn't the plural of Liturgikon properly Liturgika and not Liturgikons?

Look, you've previously stated on this board:

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/225135/page/0/fpart/4#Post224187

"Given my rather intimate and personal knowledge of the diversity of practice that exists within the Orthodox churches in the English speaking world I am quite confident that the new liturgy fulfills this requirement completely.

I have personally witnessed absolutely every change recommended or adopted in the new liturgy in an Orthodox parish. Thus there is nothing in it that I can see that is not in line with at least one version of Orthodox liturgical practice."

I thought maybe you could and would share this knowledge. If you can't name one, then just say you can't name one.

The 1964 Liturgikon (regardless of what the plural is) that Rome told us to use was virtually parallel to the Russian recension used in the vast vast majority of OCA churches to this day. Our Ukrainian Greek Catholic brethern also are supposed to use this. Contrary to your spin of the situation, we as a church are moving away from our Orthodox brethern and our own Greek Catholic brethern as well. We should be striving for unity not separation.

That is the problem and no twisting of terms can deny that truth.

Monomakh

I am confused -- what is the "one" (given the many different sources, books, etc.) that you want me to name.

My original post simply stated that there is great diversity of practice on the local parochial level in the Orthodox world. There is also great diversity of liturgical standards from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

If you need proof of this, just start traveling and visiting different parishes and/or go online and visit the various jurisdictional sites that prescribe weekly liturgical services.

Your recommendation to travel and visit Orthodox parishes is such a good idea that I've already done it.

After all, I have to go to Vespers, Matins, and Great Canon of St. Andrew sometime and somewhere. 90%+ of Byzantine Catholic Churches don't offer these services even though Archbishop Basil has called for an 'authentic place of worship'.

btw, this post pretty much summarizes my feelings (in fact I replied right after it) about visiting Orthodox churches:

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbt...s&topic=0&Search=true#Post210268

Monomakh

you can cite any two (I know, which two?), but just one (I know, which one?), any one will be sufficient.


And for some reason you want to take as many obscure and liberal examples out there and combine them together to get the Byzantine Catholic Church. Justify our majority by citing the remote minority somewhere else. We are supposed to forget about the other 99 out of 100 Orthodox churches that have Traditional sense. We're supposed to forget about the inclusive language and be thankful for the areas where there is not any inclusive language and thank Master Liturgical Commission from Pittsburgh. No wonder people are fleeing to Orthodoxy?!


Once again, they prescribe weekly Matins and Vespers, why don't we? Why don't all of our Cathedrals do this? Why doesn't our Cathedral in Pittsburgh that has a full time priest and highly qualified cantor have Saturday evening Liturgy instead of Vespers? Why can't you see that the New Liturgy is just a contiuation of watering down and making our church more liberal? Where is the pastoral sensitivity to those who have enough sense to respect Tradition?


Monomakh

Sensitivity??????

I think the pot is calling the kettle black. The one who encourages (on a Byzantine Catholic forum) that BC's "flee" from their church to the Orthodox church is calling for people to be sensitive?????

That doesn't appear to be a good way to convince people to come to your side. What was that the Master said about a "Golden Rule?" Maybe the Orthodox have a different Gospel. Come to think of it they DO have the King James version. Is that what they use in Russia and Greece, or do I detect some evil revisionism?