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

Monomakh:
"But even if I agreed with you on this point, why are you so in favor of keeping tradition in regards to our chant but not in favor of keeping tradition regarding rubrics, antiphons, litanies, etc.????
"

Had I EVER written/posted that I was not in favor of keeping rubrics, antiphons litanies, etc on this board? I never said, insunuated or otherwise that I was not in favor of such. Don't put words in my mouth!

I have observed what I have experienced personally from growing up in the BCC as well as travelling.

Does the 1942 recension call for high and low "Mass" as was commonly found in the 40's and well into the 70's? Why was there so much difference in the various liturgy books and practice? It seemed that each priest was allowed to 'mix N match' rubrics and liturgical usage. This at a time where we supposedly had uniformity.

I posted my comments regarding the MUSIC because there has been so much written about how terribly hard it is to sing the RDL (translation notwithstanding). I asked that those who say it is difficult, impossible, etc to sing, if they themselves had ever heard or ever been a cantor leading Slavonic liturgies to seriously compare the various sources of the music used as the basis for the RDL settings.

God bless you, Jeff! Thanks for taking pity on someone like me. Now I understand things much better. Just a few questions:

"When we sang the Divine Liturgy in Slavonic, the chant books we used were primarily the 1906 Prostopinije of Bokshai and Malinich, along with printed and handwritten variants of the same basic music"

I am presuming the 1906 version was written by two people named Bokshai and Malinich who were most likely cantors. And I am presuming they wrote this version in "the old country" or just after coming to America. Is that correct? If so, that would seem to make their version the most authentic version of what our ancestor's sang in Carpatho-Rus. Also correct? Or is this an opinion? Does anyone else have a different interpretation? I'm not trying to start a fight, I am merely trying to verify.

"When English came into use, a committee of priests and cantors prepared VERY simplified melodies based on the prostopinije for the Divine Liturgy in English, using only one or two melodies for each hymn, and often changing the rhythms in startling ways."

Why would they change it in startling ways? Any ideas as to their motivation? And why would they simplify the melodies? The congregation would have at that point in time (1950's) been made up of the original immigrants from the old country as well as their children-first generation born Americans as well as some very young second generation born Americans. If they could sing the prostopinje in 1949 in Slovanic with more complicated melodies, why couldn't they sing them in 1955 with complicated melodies only this time in English? I understand that sometimes things don't translate well from one language to another, let alone trying to set it into music. But would it have been that difficult? Look at the musical "Les Miserables." It's hailed a work of genius because it was originally written in French and the words rhymed (in French) and made great sense. Then translated to English it still rhymed (in English) and kept the original meaning of the words without changing the melody greatly. And words in French and English sometimes aren't anywhere near each other, as far as syllables go. So to match up translations while keeping the meaning as close to the original as possible and still fitting the rythm and meter is very, very hard. Is that what happened when translating Old Slavonic to English?

"This book was recorded on cassette tape, with a note attached saying something like "For clarity, the singing on these recordings is much slower than they should actually be sung in church." Despite that, many DID learn to sing these slow, simplified and inconsistent settings in English."

Well, that would explain why our cantor in my home church in the sixties made everything sound like a funeral dirge! My mother used to come home pig biting mad, as they say, because they would practice something in choir practice two nights a week, then Sunday the cantor would change it so that everyone almost fell over due to lack of momentum! Thanks for that explanation.

Your last response did not mention the 1965 book that I am used to using. It has the English on the left side of the page and the old Slavonic on the right side of the page in Latin letters, not Cryllic. Is that simply a version of the Father Sokol book or is it something different?

I am not taking sides in this, so plese do not take any of my questions as "leading." I am not trying to "trap" you in any way. They are honest questions and I want to follow and honor my ancestor as best I can. I have stated this repeatedly in different threads on this forum. If the new RDL is something my grandmother, who was born in 1889, would have recognized if she weas still alive, then I'm all in favor of it. I just keep hearing different things and am confused as a result.

Thanks. Sorry this turned into such a long post. I didn't mean it to.

Tim

Dear Tim,


Yes. Joseph Malinich was the cantor of the cathedral in Uzhorod; Father John Bokshai was a priest with musical training who notated the melodies as sung by Cantor Malinich. For more information, the this leaflet [metropolitancantorinstitute.org] from the Byzantine Seminary Press, especially part 5.


Since the chant was an oral tradition, the melodies recorded in Uzhorod would have been just one version - but ended up as an authoritative one (since it was published by the Bishop as a standard for teaching). Also, studies have shown that many of these melodies could remain "fixed" over long periods of time, with only slight changes. These melodies were certainly sung in Carpatho-Rus', and widely used here (though with all sorts of small local or regional variations).


All good questions. Every one I have talked to who was involved with this music told me that the guiding principal was "keep it simple." This was an era when the Liturgy in the OFFICIAL Divine Liturgy text for the people was short enough to be celebrated in 25 minutes. There was protest at the time, and many cantors have told me they continued to sing according to the old melodies, using the new ones only as guides (at best) or ignoring them.

(You will notice some melodies in the Green Book for the irmos (a Matins hymn that on feast days sometimes replaces "It is truly proper") are given in two forms. The much more complicated one, usually labelled "solemn", is the original feastday melody. At a previous parish, I sometimes sang the English texts to these melodies, and was amazed at the number of old ladies who came up to me, told me they remembered them, and sang them to me correctly in Slavonic. I have no idea why there was such a move to abbreviate and simplify the music - it may just have been the tenor of the times.)


With the exception of the irmos melodies, most of the prostopinije melodies were INTENDED to be usable with any Slavonic text; the people had books with text only, and the cantors started the singing. Because of the flexibility in the melodies, they certainly CAN be used for English texts; the important thing is to find where the musical accents are and match them to the English syllable and phrase accent, often leading to melismas (several notes per syllable, in both Engish and Slavonic). In the 1960's versions, a different method was used: omit any "extra note", regardless of whether they are musically important, and avoid singing melismas or complicated rhythms.


From your description, I'm not sure what this is. Send me a PM with the title and a physical description and we can try to figure it out.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

One is the 65 Liturgicon "Red Book" the other I believe is the 65 Pew Pamphlet "Grey Book" that has seen many versions and adaptations.

Fr. Deacon Lance