www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Question to Byzantine Catholics

SS,

What will that prove? This is probably the only church that does things without an explanation. Usually, minutes of meetings, conferences, and public forums are held and documented, thus leaving a paper trail documenting where and who the request to adopt inclusive language came from. Do you really think your bishops will answer my letters on this topic? I highly doubt it. One bishop even went so far as to say (and the only one who said ANYthing on this subject) that it was not up for debate.

For the sake of the members of the Byzantine Catholic church, your chief shepherds should do what chief shepherds do - teach. Yes, they should teach their people WHY they adopted inclusive language into their worship and what is their theology behind it. Private letters? What I see is a bushel basket theology that leaves everyone guessing where the light is.

Ed

Damned if they do. Damned if I don't. Pretty much just damned any way you slice it I guess.

You write questions addressed to the bishops but say it would be pointless to write them. Who is to address it authoritatively otherwise?

Ed we know there are problems. They confront us in the empty pews and are conspicuous in the missing generation and family and neighbors of the parishes we attend each and every Sunday. Some of us are also a great deal more pragmatic in our realism about the roots of these problems. The RDL may not be helping, but their were problems - even bigger than you can see - well before. A lot of things are coming to a head right now.

You are free - speech being what it is - to characterize Father David as "hiding". I think that a nasty and invective term and charge. I know Father David personally - I lived down the hall from the man at a formative time in my life when I was in the seminary, he deserves better even when we disagree with him, but lately any stick will do.

So we may have to agree to disagree - I will let you rage on in your search for justice for your family members who have been hurt. I am growing more cautious and careful about what I say - the opinions of an ex-seminarian who has sat on parish council and enthusiastically returned to his church after a few years of hedonism are surely not worth much.

The ironic thing is, that one would almost be forced to conclude that I like the changes because I don't vocally and prolifically hate them on here. I am largely not a fan - the timing was inooprtune, the expense seem difficult to justify, the distinction it puts between us and other Greek Catholics doesn't seem wise in the face of a near certain future wherein closer collaboration will become the norm.

On the other hand, it is still Catholic, it is still home, my sins still get forgiven when I go to confession, it is still the joy of the Eucharist when I receive.

So in the face of all this uncertainty with the future and what it holds, as one on the inside I would appreciate it if it would be possible to tone down some of the certitude, damnations, condemnations of specific clergy and even - if possible - the starting of new topics expressly for (as far as I can tell) rhetorical combat of the bishops.

(On that last point again, Ed, why are you openly addressing the bishops here? bishops you won't even write yourself? All we are left with is the presumption this is a rhetorical device, and it is difficult to escape that it is a provacative one at that. Truly no one can answer you.)

So I apologize openly and clearly to you if I have failed to demonstrate compassion and more openess to understanding the pain your family members have gone through. If you find some of this confrontational approach cathartic, I can do that for you and try to be more understanding.

I would go so far as to say that your contributions here are most welcome in a real way as you are proving a useful and worthy ideological ally to the Administrator who shares in your distaste for certain directions our good church has taken.

If you could in turn reach out to me and those of us who nowadays are more largely keeping silent or no longer coming around... Those of us who are chosing to take a different track in dealing with these and other problems, who sometimes just don't see eye to eye and share in your perspective from your position of what some of those problems are...

Well, it would be appreciated. During Holy Week, it would probably also be especially appropriate.

I am taking the rest of the week off. I hope you have a blessed Holy Week (if this is the period you celebrate it) wherever you are and with whomever you share it.

Pray for us.

Ding dang! If everyone was so on fire like you, your churches would be standing room only!

Have a wonderful Holy Week. You seem to be a good man.

Ed

I agree. Many problems existed prior to the RDL. The Ruthenian Church and her people have suffered greatly for a very long time. The only way I can understand why the Lord allowed and allows it is to consider that maybe we are being purified for something incredible in the future. I believe that if, instead of reforming the Divine Liturgy, the bishops had begun a decade long process of renewal of what is ours (the 1941) they would have had some incredible support. But education, example and encouragement is necessary; first for our priests, then for everyone else.

As to whom to raise the questions to, of course one should communicate with the bishops. Discussions on forums such as these are nothing more than a cyber version of the Sunday coffee hour. It is one thing to address these issues on a forum such as this but quite another to actually sit down, write a letter and bring these issues to the bishops.

Ed has crossed the line a number of times, has been told there is a limit and that he is approaching it. And I hope he will consider that when he does it does not help the argument he advances. But this works on both sides because several who support the reform consider all disagreement with the RDL to be nothing more then personal attack against those who prepared the RDL (or the bishops).

Is Father David �hiding�? No. Ed is incorrect in making such an accusation and should withdraw it. The issue is more that Father David is one of a few who will speak publicly to defend the RDL. It is natural that some will see that disagreement with the ideas he puts forth will be confused with disagreement with him. If there were as many people supporting the RDL as there are who support the official Ruthenian recension perhaps it would be easier to see that the issue is not a personal one. I applaud Father David for being wiling to speak, even though I almost always disagree with the principles he presents. This is in part natural. Anyone who goes to an �away� football or baseball game and sits in the middle of fans from the other side is going to experience it. It is almost never personal.

It is interesting. In this forum I have provided both sides of the issue of the RDL more opportunity to share their thoughts then any other vehicle in the Ruthenian Church. That seems to count for nothing among some. I don�t receive all that many complaints on how participants speak on the issue of the RDL, but those I do receive are fairly distributed on both sides. I would remind everyone that those who speak uncharitably eventually do in their own cause. But all disagreement is not uncharity. It is always best to present one�s position without rancor or bitterness, and support it with good scholarship.

I pray especially for our participants during this holy season and ask for your prayers.

John