www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Spinoff to RDL from What Protected Eastern Catholicism....

A good question, and it deserves an answer. Here are my two cents, and two possible answers.

I think the Committee to Revise the Liturgy really thought that they would be hailed as leaders and progressives. They fully expected that everyone would see their scholarship as inspired, and that they would be praised for their courage, something like a 'Great Leap Forward' and a model of renewal. It was going to be a lasting gift to the Church, and generations would mark this moment as wonderfully inclusive and inspired by the Holy Spirit everyone would thank those who made it happen.

I think they have been seriously disappointed that their scholarship is so discredited by the scholars, their new 'professional' music is worse than what was happily sung by 'illiterate' cantors and congregations, and their popular movement has proved so unpopular.

I don't think they expected that everyone would hate the 'green book' as much as they do. These books sit in the pews, no one picks them up, no one participates. Rather than move Liturgical participation among the faithful forward, for most of us, it has been a great leap backward. My parish used to sing, now, Liturgy is a duo between priest and cantor, a shadow of the Liturgy that used to be. Those of us who are left just shake our heads at the waste. So much for inclusivity. The Committee still doesn't understand why no one is thanking them. They can't fathom why the green books are so hated, they meant well. Maybe it was because there wasn't enough catechesis? Maybe it was because the pastors' weren't behind the project? Maybe it was because our people are too stubborn? Maybe...

Why is the Ruthenian Church the odd man out? Well, the positive interpretation is that the Committee wanted to 'lead', and it just didn't work out they way they hoped it would. A dream opportunity, lost.

A more cynical interpretation, is that the Bishops really wanted a way to finally and permanently separate themselves and our Church from every other Byzantine Church. And so the authorities used these poor priests on the committee, and shamefully the priests allowed themselves to be used.

The Bishops didn't want our Church to share books with the Ukrainians (Ruthenian Recension), or with Johnstown, or with other Orthodox, or our Church in Europe, or with anyone else. They wanted to be different than everyone else, so that they would be making our Church into a new Recension, a new way of celebrating. They wanted a new branch, carving out for themselves a new tradition in the world of Byzantine Liturgy. They wanted an independent identity for the Ruthenian Church, and since it didn't have one (apart from fading ethnicity), the Bishops arrogantly decided it needed to be invented. Those who authorized the new books, manipulated the Committee, and wanted to enshrine the animosity of past generations in the books of future generations, so that their bitterness and vengefulness and small mindedness would outlive them. They used the Committee, and the Committee was so obsessed with their ideas and this golden opportunity, that they were blinded to how they were being used. Such a mentality by those in authority makes victims of one's own Church, and is too sad to contemplate. Perhaps our people are so used to being victimized, that they sometimes confuse it with 'obedience', but a victim is a victim. I hope some moderator on this forum, or some objective judge will call me out, and reject 'the cynical interpretation' as too cynical and say I am unfair and uncharitable and disrespectful to suggest it. Maybe I'll be banned again. I hope this explanation is not true, but I'm afraid it might be.

The Committee is discredited, their work is discredited, and the green books are discredited and doomed to rest unused in the pews, a terrible waste of time, effort and money.

Two possible answers to a reasonable question. Both answers unreasonable and depressing, and one worse than the other. Please, tell me I'm wrong.

Nick

At my parish there is active, maybe overactive participation in the liturgy, with the RDL. I would also like to note, that anytime there is a change to the wording and/or structure of the liturgy participation drops for some time. The Maronite Church suffered some when changes to the Qurbono were instituted. We must remember that if it is solely the words and chanting that are forcing one to limit their participation, previous participation would probably not be considered "active," but rather "passive-active" where people are singing the words, but not engaging the words and more importantly the Eucharist.

My points have all been shown to be valid. Archbishop Basil made a political statement with the Liturgy. He created a "Novus Ordo" Liturgy that is on purpose different from the Byzantine Liturgy. He rejected the Vatican directives.

But what can we do about it? The bishops won't listen to complaints. They don't care if everyone leaves. Bishop Kudrick knows lots of people have left. He does not care a bit. If he did he'd answer letters and let us have our Liturgy and our music.

I ask again. What can be done to fix the problem?

I would venture to say that those who are most vocal about the changes in the liturgy are the minority. People will leave the Church for one reason or another, as sad as it is; people will leave because of word changes, some will leave because the Priest will not agree to celebrate the Mystery of Crowning, others will leave because Evangelical churches are more fun. I think those who disagree and stay and disagree with some form of charity are who we should be talking about.

Dear Erie Byz,

I'm glad your parish is not having trouble adopting the RDL. I think what we're dealing with here is location, location, location.

I grew up with my home parish in another Eparchy. In 1995, my home parish was still saying Stations of the Cross during Lent, and my home pastor (may God rest his soul) told me that when I visited with my one-year old he would not give her communion, even though she had received the Holy Mysteries through the Parma Eparchy.

When I moved to the Cleveland area I finally knew my church like it was meant to be known. Icon screens graced the churches, not communion rails and Stations of the Cross as I had been used to. I could have left because it was different, or I could educate myself on the true traditions of the Byzantine Church.

I asked my pastor lots of questions. He gave me lots of answers, and lots of history. He told me the reason the Parma Eparchy was so "Orthodox" was because all of the truly "Eastern" priests were shipped out of Pittsburgh by an un-named Bishop who was Latinized.

We are truly dealing with apples and oranges. My experience East of Cleveland was very Latinized. In fact it was so bad, my husband refers to it as the Roman-Byzantine Church.

All we want is what is rightfully ours, the Restored Divine Liturgy -- not some fabricated anomaly. Whether we disagree with charity or not, we're being ignored, and that's why people are frustrated.

I would say we need to keep writing to Rome. Byzantine Catholics have a right to the Byzantine Liturgy. The bishops have prohibited the Divine Liturgy that Rome told them to celebrate. If we keep writing and never let up eventually the bishops will do what is right. We are in the right. The bishops are in the wrong. Keep writing.

My experience with the green book is that the green book gets put down because our head cantor, devoted and die-hard, is musically illiterate, and has trouble remembering the new music. Therefore, what he leads, what he uses, is mostly based off the 1965 recordings, with some wiggle room due to the process of both memory and fitting to current texts. He does a fine job, within that constraint of using the old music.

The people put the books down because they do not match, they have way too much page flipping, and because they are heavy and awkward. But, when I have done what is in the books in his absences, the people pick up their books, and follow along. Many in our parish are musically literate.

My old blue book is preferable due to weight; many at St. Nick's wish for a lightweight, text-only people's liturgikon. The only people I've heard complain of the new texts (as opposed to the book itself) have been Latin Traditionalist refugees, and they complained about the lack of Slavonic in use, too, in the days of the blue book. I extracted the text from the PDF of the RDL, and made a booklet with just the text (and the 8 tones' texts) for my daughter. Many have asked me for a copy.

I've seen online a lot of varied complaints; I've not heard those complaints at St. Nick's. I've heard only complaints about the music in the book not matching what is done, and most would prefer either solution: (1) sing what is written or (2) do not annotate the book with written music.

I'm always amazed when I read things like this. I had a completely different experience of Byzantine Catholicism growing up, in the early 1970s. Maybe because we were so far from the "Old Country" (Pennsylvania!) out here in California. I had only been to one Byzantine church until fairly recently. We had an iconostasis. We had infant communion. We had pews, but they were removed from the church from Easter to Pentecost. I am grateful that I didn't have the trauma of change and that we always had many things as they were supposed to be.

Still, I have the trauma of the RDL. I think the cantor and I are the only ones upset by it, though. My parents certainly don't get my ranting.

Elizabeth

Can I add your voice to the many who have asked you for a copy? I've been planning to do this for months for my kids. My 7 year old loves to follow along, but gets so lost following the book. I would love to not have to reinvent the wheel.

Elizabeth

Very well said, Father Deacon AJK. Your posts here are a delight. Sadly, the bishops are not interested in doing what is right seem intent to continue their attack on the Liturgy and the people. They seem intent on presiding over the death of the Church. They tell people that if they do not like the RDL they can leave and then they can close the parish and move the priest to another parish that needs a priest.

I have not as yet given any copies out, since the text is copyrighted to the Metropolitan Church. PM me.

I already tried. It says you're over your limit.