www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy I like the changes to the Divine Liturgy, anybody else agree?

All I am saying is that I am just happy that people are praying the services ...

I would prefer to accentuate the positive and to rejoice that people are being given the opportunity to pray within the large and broad context of eastern Catholic worship. Glory to God!

I would also prefer not to criticize the choices that other priests make -- they know the best way to minister to their own people and I respect their choice.

A long time ago I used to be very judgmental of those who did not pray the entire cycle. I was blessed to be able to pray the cycle each day (not just Sunday) with active participants. At the time, I could not see why everyone did not do what I was doing. Unfortunately, I was very judgmental towards those who did not.

Now, in God's providence, due to external situations, I find myself unable to pray the daily cycle in a parish and "forced" to make accomodations to the busy-ness of modern life. I have found that what matters most is the desire to pray and the willingness to do the best one can to do the most one can. What is lacking in opportunity is more than abundantly made up by God's marvelous grace. All we have to give Him is our loaves and fishes and He miraculously feeds thousands with what we have given Him. After all, isn't prayer really more about recognizing what He does than it is about recognizing what we do?

I can honestly say that God has a good sense of humor -- he exposes to us our judgmental thoughts by reducing us to become one of those whom we most critically have judged :-)

No, there is certainly no reason to be judgemental. But proper teaching of the people regarding the Tradition of the Church can also go a very long way.

I saw this in another thread, although I have read this several times in the past. Metropolitan Sheptytsky has some real words of wisdom in this writing.

http://www.archeparchy.ca/documents/Concerning%20Ritual%20Matters.pdf

Father Mack, is Metropolitan Sheptytsky being judgmental like you are implying that I am?


note: emphasis is mine, this is a part of the entire writing


"such a one sins through carelessness, by not observing the prescriptions, and makes of our Rite a sorry caricature."

Is that judgmental or just the way it is?

Is Metropolitan Sheptytsky overlooking the feel good element that you speak of and the 'A' for effort clause that you've implied exists? He seems pretty clear to me, do you disagree with Metropolitan Sheptytsky on this issue?



Monomakh

Monomahk,

Please reread the entire article in context because it shows Fr. J in clear agreement with the Metropolitan. You are the one in disagreement with him.


Here the good Metropolitan calls the Latinizations of Zamost and Lviv legitimate changes that should not be condemned and cannot be abrogated unless a Synod decides otherwise. He also states customs approved of by nothing more than the embrace of the people and silent acceptance by hierarchs are lawful customs that cannot be abrogated by the priests. How much more so can customs (like Vesperal Liturgies) introduced by lawful authority become lawful custom?

Fr. Deacon Lance

Deacon Lance,

reading and comprehending are two different things.


i.e.
So since I practically never see priests saying prayers in front of the icon screen before liturgy, is that a lawful custom or a sin as he later states?

Also, is he being judgmental?

By the way, I've stated time and time again that our leaders should lead, meaning the hierarchs. I've also stated that the hierarchs could clear up any confusion easily on this.



Monomakh

Deacon Lance,


"This does not mean that we should condemn all the legitimate changes" This implies that some should and could be condemned actually. We could get into a spitting contest all evening over which is legitimate but it would probably be fruitless.

The salient point of that section is that there are legitimate ways to make changes. Could you state what synod introduced the ignoring of the Ruthenian Rescension in the 1960s?

A lawful custom does not mean a custom that was jammed down the laity's throat without a synod does it? A lawful custom is one that is just that, lawful. Do you agree?



Monomakh

Monomakh,

The Ordo allows for the prayers to be said silently in the sacristy so that would be lawful custom.

The hierarchs have cleared it up. They allow Vesperal Liturgies.

Fr. Deacon Lance

And you actually think that Metropolitan Sheptytsky would agree with this in principle huh?

"...and the need to be ready for the call when the time comes to
work for our separated brothers and sisters, demand of us that we all be ritualist, and not merely observe faithfully what has been until now prescribed and obligatory, but also revitalize our characteristically unique traditional customs which, either totally or in part, are being lost.

Do you really think that Proskomedia doesn't fall into that?

Did you read his thoughts on proper Proskomedia? If its not even being done in places do you think its being done correctly? Or did the hierarchs say that's okay too?



I never said they didn't allow Vesperal Liturgies. They should have our Traditions followed and have the full liturgical cycle celebrated, for some reason they have decided to not follow our Traditional customs. I don't know how far Father David would want the hierarchs to go in mandating this (I'll let him answer this) but he wishes for the full office because he realizes that this is our Tradition.

THe hierarchs should however have the courage to restore the office and mandate that when possible it be followed. Why is that too much to ask? I think they should be restored in a lawful way as soon as possible, don't you?

Monomakh

Fr. Deacon Lance --

What I believe Monomahk is trying to say is, who decides what becomes local custom? Is it the parish priest, or is it the Bishop, or is it the people?

When you do not have a clear path for churches to follow, you often end up with disorganized Liturgical practices. Sure, things will probably not always be the same at every Byzantine Church, but there should be standards. If we can't get the very basics of the Liturgical cycle correct, how can we move beyond that to restore other practices that need mending?

Currently, there's a Byzantine Parish in Cleveland who RECITES, yes RECITES the Creed instead of chanting it -- now, it's done because the priest feels that he has so many Roman Catholic's attending his church he must accommodate them. Additionally, he sings RC hymns during communion -- and this is post RDL. He even gave the lecture when the new books came out regarding kneeling..."The proper posture is to kneel -- though I can't make you stop." They also do not participate in infant baptism. Hence, anyone in the BCC who still wants to participate in First Communion, leaves their church and begins attending that Parish. No bells on their cadilla, Roman-colored vestments, and a Pre-Sanctified that can only be described as a "happy" Liturgy. Oh one more thing, they pray the Rosary and had a guitar concert in the church after Divine Liturgy.

Which of these is an organic or local tradition? Well, depends who you ask. I can tell you, the people who understand the Byzantine tradition at that parish are anguished over the situation and have given up trying to talk to their priest. He simply replies that he's trying to include everyone. So if the Harry Krishna�s showed-up and wanted equal time....well, you get the point.

The only way you can tell it�s a Byzantine church is by the name on the sign, and by the (thank God!) icon screen in the parish.

Now, would you want to be the priest who follows this act? What the Bishop has is this anomaly Parish where no other priest in the Eparchy wants to serve. When you go to Liturgy there, you most certainly have to stop off at the Orthodox Monastery, to be, in a friend's words, "cleansed" because there are so many Liturgical abuses.

We must begin somewhere, and if it means we have to start all the way at the beginning, with understanding the proper liturgical cycle, then so be it. We can't take a lazy approach to our church tradition -- the example I gave proves how something so benign can spin out of control.

Father Lance--this is not a bait and run question, I am legitimately asking. Where in the particular law of the Ruthenian GC Church of Pittsburgh does it say that "vesperal" Liturgies can be served on Saturday nights in place of Vespers or just a regular Divine Liturgy? I had seen a copy of the revised law when it came out in 1999, but that was my former pastor's copy. At that point, most of the conversations about the law centered on the loss of the long sought after restoration of the ordination of married men to the priesthood and the legalization of Eucharistic ministers. Can you please post the reference from the new code or point me in the direction where I can find it online? Thanks! John

Monomakh,

You jumped from the prayers of preparation to the Proskomedia which are two seperate things. The prepartory prayers and vesting prayers may be said privately as allowed by the Ordo. The same Ordo forbids the Proskomedia to be takenly privately. So one is lawful there other is not.

I am always amazed that those who complain about the mandating of the RDL are the first to call for mandates for other things. I for one am not big on mandates. Sometimes they are needed, but more often than not they do not work. Would mandating Vespers and Matins really accomplish anything? Do you think people are going to go because the priest has to have the services? And before you start about the Orthodox, I've been to Orthodox parishes. For one, most Orthodox don't have a full cycle either. Slavs do Vespers and Greek do Orthros, very few do both. From my experience they are poorly attended. And I am quite confident that applies to 90% of Orthodox parishes.

From the point of view of exposing the most people to the material. Saturday Vesperal Liturgies certainly expose more people to Vespers than getting rid of Saturday Liturgies and mandating Vespers in their place. I understand the Hierarchs decision.

Fr. Deacon Lance

John,

It is self evident in the fact the Green people's book contains the text for Vesperal Divine Liturgy along with the Resurrectional Stichera and Dogmatika.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Stephanie,

"What I believe Monomahk is trying to say is, who decides what becomes local custom? Is it the parish priest, or is it the Bishop, or is it the people?"

A combination of the people always with the approval of the Hierarchs.

That Fr. X does whatever he wants cannot be used to condemn bishops deciding on a course of action.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I'm not following this. How is a "Vesperal Liturgy" with its unintended syncretic mesh of pieced "Vespers" with a Liturgy not intended for this use be exposing more people to Vespers, rather than what they would actually be "exposed to" with the entirety of Great Vespers, thus exposing them to the organic Vesperal lex orandi and restoring the idea of the vigil cycle of Saturday evening in the Slavic tradition? Even though we are well past your "final word" on this subject perhaps you could clarify.

As author of this thread I had hoped for more than the usual body slamming of our Liturgy. If you want to split hairs I suspect our ancestors of centuries past would take umbrage with any version of the Divine Liturgy used in the last 200 years. THe Divine Liturgy is a living organism, always changing as societies and cultures change. If you want to be Orthodox, go ahead and be Orthodox. I've been there and done that. They go through their changes, Russian, Greek, OCA, Old Rite, new calendar, etc. They certainly aren't one big happy family. What is the goal of this fight other than the sake of a unhealthy dose of self righteousness?