www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy RDL Review from Peter Galadza

Fr. Serge:

That sounds like a good solid plan for the melting pot in America and I think, by necessity, it rises above your personal opinion because although the music is vitally important, matters of the intellect have to come first.

But for this,


there must be some good punch line, but I just can't think of it.

What happens when you invite various jurisdictions, ethnic communities, and musicologists to apply this translation to their specific circumstances?

If you read the article again you'll see this:

"The inclusion of almost every text needed for the celebration of vespers and Divine Liturgy on Saturday evening is certainly a welcome addition and will serve as an example for other Catholics of the Byzantine tradition (e.g., Ukrainian Catholics). Tragically, when the latter introduced Sunday vigil "Masses" (in an understandable attempt to curb the exodus to Roman Rite parishes), they did so in a pseudomorphic fashion, entirely omit-ting the Sunday "first vespers." The new? Byzantine Catholic pew book codifies the creative solution devised by the Pittsburgh Metropolia several decades ago (that is, the practice of joining Saturday evening vespers to the Liturgy of the Eucharist) and should help revive familiarity with vespers."



Having Vespers every Saturday unlike 90%+ of our parishes do would be the solution to having exposure to the beauty of vespers. I don't know why some people can't bring themselves to admit this. It is a travesty that 90%+ of our parishes don't have Vespers, I can't say it in a pretty way, it's an inexcusable situation. Why in the world for example does our Cathedral in Munhall, that has a full time priest and a highly qualified cantor, not have Vespers and yet can find the time for Saturday evening liturgy?


Since the salient point of my last post did not come across I'll give it another try. I was pointing out that it is interesting how the 'traditional' and 'authentic' banners are waved by the revisionists when discussing the music but not when discussing other aspects (i.e. antiphons, litanies, Vespers, Matins). Yes they are separate issues with inconsistent reasoning behind them.

Honestly, because Fr. Peter is correct. If we didn't have mass on Saturday night, many of those who come would end up going somewhere that does have mass, whether that's a Greek Catholic or Roman Catholic church. Catechesis has to take place before Saturday evening mass is dropped and vespers are instituted, and that'll be a hard job! The WORST thing that came out of Vatican II (for all the Catholic churches) was the introduction of the Saturday afternoon/evening "anticipated" masses.

So instead of spending money and time on catechesis and evangelization it was spent on revising?



Where is the concern for loosing the traditional minded Greek Catholics to Orthodoxy? Why does this only exist for the Saturday evening crowd? We're back to the old 'pastoral sensitivy' that is cried out in a crowded room whenever traditional principles are called out for. Yet when the RDL is jammed down our throats 'pastor sensitivity' is forgotten.

Monomakh

I'm so glad Fr. Peter likes the "revised liturgy". I had no idea he had any expertise in the Ruthenian Chant tradition and in the pastoral needs of our Byzantine Catholic parishes.

It is so interesting that we have to get Roman Catholic professors and Ukrainian Catholic priests to tell us what we should be doing, and what our tradition really is. Why didn't anyone ask us?

Nick

Nicholas,

Because "We" are not part of their agenda.

Xpucmoc Bockpece!

Ungcsertezs

How sad. Thank God I have a pastor who has put these new books in his basement, waiting for the 'right time' to introduce them. God bless my pastor, and pray that the 'right time' for this Liturgy never arrives.

Nick

The cantor (he is a good one!) told our pastor that he will gently retire when the new books are implemented, and let a new generation introduce the new music.

But we don't have a new cantor, so until we get one, the 'right time' will have to wait!

Dear Nick,

As I point out in my notorious book, anybody who wants to has a right to offer comments on the matter, and that particularly includes Greek-Catholics of any jurisdiction or ethnic background (for that matter, it also particularly includes Eastern Orthodox Christians). So even though I may disagree with some of Father Peter's comments, he has every right to express them.

The same applies (in spades) to clergy and faithful of the Ruthenian-American Metropolitanate. In this day of the Internet, there is no need to wait to be asked. One reason which motivated me to make that text available was to encourage people to speak up.

If it's any consolation, the English-language Roman Catholics are in the midst of an even more bizarre language crisis. It seems that towards the end of 2006, Pope Benedict (God bless him and grant him long life) decided the time had come, and sent a directive via Cardinal Arrinze's office to all the Latin-rite episcopal conferences in the Anglophone world, instructing them to restore the accurate meaning of "pro multis" in the Institution Narrative as offered over the Chalice. This followed upon the already painful (for ICEL supporters) prescriptions of Liturgiam Authenticam. But the new ICEL prepared a draft translation of the Novus Ordo attempting, begrudgingly, to do as the Pope wanted.

According to the London Tablet, 28 April 2007, p. 40, an unnamed priest (presumably in England) put this draft on his blog, to make it available to the clergy and faithful - what a revolutionary thought. I have no idea who this priest is.

Nevertheless, the bishops promptly ordered him to remove the draft from his blog, or face legal action for "infringement of copyright". Evidently the exclusive inner ring of ICEL believes that no one else is competent in the English language - or believes that the said inner ring has divine inspiration to discern what is good for the clergy and faithful, whether the clergy and faithful like it or not.

Now whom does that attitude remind me of?

Fr. Serge

Bless Fr Serge,

Is this the proper information to obtain your book?

Stauropegion Press
PO Box 14096
Pittsburgh, PA 15237-9998

The price is $20.00 + $4.00 per book shipping and handling ($24.00 total per book).

Your question may be unfolding what, "for us and our salvation" really means and that it is not so inclusive after all.

One wonders what kind of lawyer the members of ICEL will need as they stand at the pearly gates with their copyright in hand arguing, "Yes, but I had a copyright!" I don't think Thomas More will offer a helping hand.

"When More some time had Chancellor been,
No more suits did remain.
The like will never-more be seen,
till More there be again!"


Or perhaps this one:

To a Dignitary who spoke contemptuously of a Saint:

"Tell me not, Dean, I am unkind, if from the snuggery,
of thy well-cluttered, cultured mind to Chelesea's strand
I flee,
Where England's Chancellor by grace of courage so was
steeled,
To meet thy tyrant, face to face; to die - but not to yield!

And though his views, dear Dean, were such
as you will still deplore;
I could not love thee Dean, so much,
Loved I not Thomas More!"

(E. L. Mascall)

Fr. Serge

Dear Recluse,

Yes!

Fr. Serge

Has anyone read the latest edition of "Byzantine Catholic World?" The review by Rev Peter Galadza, praising the RDL, is printed this month. It is interesting that not one word of criticism has been written in this magazine since the reformation of our Liturgy. I suppose I am a part of this pesky "cyber revolution" to which Rev Galadza refers. But I suppose I should take solace in the fact that, according to Rev Galadza:

"but as anyone with experience in "liturgical transition" knows, twelve to eighteen months usually suffices for congregations to adapt to the textual and musical changes, and once they have done so they find it hard to believe that they ever used the previous version."