www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Keep Writing Letters!

It has not had more influence because it has officially prohibited in some eparchies. When the bishops prohibit the clergy and people from praying what is officially ours the result is bound to be confusion and despondency. An effort such as the current mandate (but done more pastorally) to restore the official Ruthenian recension would have been welcomed in many places.

If you really have not run the full Liturgy I recommend listening to the recording from Pascha (the Easter Sunday morning Divine Liturgy) featured on the home page of this website. The only litany missing is the catechumen (and only because the catechumens were received the day before and the deacon chose not to pray it).

Dear John

May I ask in which eparchies it was officially prohibited, and by whom? Bishop Emil's letter certainly allowed certain standard abbreviations, and it was understod that they were to be taken from what I ear. But what parts were officially prohibited, and when?

Surely these are important issues for the eventual use of the Ruthenian Recension in the United States.

In Christ,
Jeff

Just an observation here--has anyone noticed how few posts there are by priests in any of the Eparchy's? I know they are busy. Some priests serve four parishes. Very few serve only one. And if they do serve only one you can bet it's a big one.

However, that being said, I can't help but think there must be some available time to review and even respons to some posts. Even if it is early morning or late at night.

People say say "just ask any priest in the Eparchy" about something. Why do we not hear from the priests's themselves? Are they unaware of the forum? Are they too busy? Or are they simple leery of answering, since they could find themselves in trouble? I've talked to a few priests about the RDL and other matters. They seem to wish anonymous. Interesting. Those who can be punished keep quiet. Not all of them, surely. But the majority seem to keep quiet. Or am I reading something into this that I shouldn't?

Tim

Jeff,

Let's start close to home. Bishop Pataki of Passaic prohibited the full celebration of the official Ruthenian recension with the promulgation of the revisions he did in 1995. Are you saying that you are unaware of this, or that there was a directive since then in which Bishop Pataki authorized the Ruthenian rubrics (which were correct in the 1964 English edition)? Perhaps you can speak with your pastor to learn what was mandated in 1995 and how it differed from the 1942 official Liturgicon?

Ironically enough, it was the Archeparchy of Pittsburgh that was friendliest to the official, full Ruthenian Divine Liturgy, not because it had been encouraged, but because there had been no directives in recent decades to do anything else. It was celebrated in other eparchies (Harrisburg came close) but in those places it involved not following the bishop�s directive to the letter.

But surely you are already aware of the 1988 Parma and 1995 Passaic reforms and are speaking in jest?

John

I know I posted something similar to this elsewhere on the board, but cannot find it.....

Maybe it is time to create the Rusyn National Catholic Church.

I was on the pncc.org (Polish National Catholic Church) website, and got to thinking...what would be involved in doing that for those of us that want to preserve the Rusyn Cyrillo-Methodian Slavonic Divine Liturgy?

Just wondering...

Isn't that what ACROD is for?

Another schism in the Ruthenian Church in America would be the end of it.

You are absolutely correct about that.

Obviously you are both correct. Just looking at the simple demographics over the last 30 years proves that a split would be fatal.

The point is....does something this dramatic have to happen before the mistakes are realized and it is too late? If the faithful beeing kept in the dark, eventually there may be another mass exodus, then what do we do?

I think that an exodus on the part of those opposed to the new revised liturgy is inevitable.

John

"As I have said so many times, compare the changes to the official Ruthenian recension liturgical books, then to the Liturgicons used by other Orthodox Churches, then to the Novus Ordo Latin Liturgy. Which mandates that many presbyteral prayers be prayed aloud? Which reduces litanies to an introduction and then the presbyteral prayer?"

Actually the 1970 Roman Missal does not mandate that the Eucharistic Prayer be prayed aloud. It says: In all Masses the priest may say the Eucharistic Prayer in an audible voice. So according to your own policy that priests should have the freedom and the Holy Spirit will decide which will out, freedom was allowed and the Holy Spirit spoke, for I know of no Latin parish using the 1970 Missal where the priest takes the Eucharistic Prayer inaudibly even though he has the freedom to do so.

I think your criticism of the Latin Liturgy goes to far. To read your statements one would conclude that the Latin Church has decided to scrap the reform and return to the 62 Missal wholesale. The Holy Father has emphatically rejected this idea and made it very clear that the 70 Missal remains the ordinary form of the Roman Rite. You don't see the Holy father saying the Eucharistic Prayer inaudibly. The biggest problem with the reform was the dumbing down of texts in translation via ICEL and priests disobeying the actual rubrics and allowing nonsense like polka or clown Massess. I fail to see how the revision of our Liturgicon in anyway resembles what was done with the Missal. No propers were changed, no texts added or created, nothing suppressed but repeated litanies and some antiphon verses.

Once can disagree with the new Liturgicon but I don't think it can called an imitation of the Missal or founded on the dissident litrugical principles that produced the bad implementation of that Missal.

Fr. Deacon Lance

We already have our own PNNC...it's called ACROD.

I know that there is the ACROD as well. As I posted before, I am looking at converting to the ACROD. I know many ACROD priests as well as Metropolitan Nicholas.

Thanks, Father, for your post. It had previously been my belief that technically the Roman books granted freedom for either the quietly or vocally prayed anaphora. Father Deacon John Montalvo posted a quote awhile back from one of the Roman liturgical books that specifically stated it must be prayed aloud and I admitted I was in error and stood corrected. I don�t have the time to find his quote tonight but maybe someone can search it for us and link it.

It should be clear, however, that the custom of praying the anaphora out loud for educational purposes is part of the Latin ideas popular in the past generation. Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) spoke to this and suggests that those liturgists were incorrect and that silence might just be best. The fact that the Latins have identified a problem with the custom should be a sufficient reason not to copy by mandate such a custom in the Ruthenian Church. No one who has supported the reforms has indicated why allowing liberty would not better serve the organic process. (And hopefully everyone will remember that this has been my consistent position for the past 20 or so years.)

Methinks you are reading too much in my post. I said that the Latins have identified problems and that we should not imitate their customs. Clearly "Summorum Pontificum" can be seen as a reaching back to the sacred liturgical tradition of the Latin Church as part of a larger attempt to reign in some of the silliness that occurred in that Church. There is no reason for us to do anything but be Ruthenians and be good Ruthenians. Our liturgical is not inferior and there is no reason to unilaterally change it, let alone copy Latin customs!

I disagree strongly. It is a direct and purposeful imitation of some of the customs inflicted upon the Latin Church in the past generation. It is a latinization at a far deeper level than anything that has happened in the past. This reform strikes at the very soul of Eastern worship.

As I said last night, the Church has moved on from such nonsense. Authenticity to sacred tradition is �in�. Trendy agendas are �out�. Fidelity, faithfulness and integrity are the buzzwords of the new millennium.

John

Yes. I believe that the RDL was the beginning of the end.