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

Anyone see the Revised Presanctified?

As expected - it is just as bad as the Revised Divine Liturgy.

I respect and like those involved that I know, but, really, 1970s language, political correctness, and all the other revisions they are into just drive people out the door. And now Petras and Hayduk and even Bishop John are pushing this idea that somehow when they revise every service all of a sudden the world will love what they did. No way! They are only imitating the worst of what the liberal Roman Catholics did after Vatican II. The Romans ran from it and so will our people. Whoever stays will be in survival mode until they are out of power and those of us who love the liturgy and good music are allowed to have their say.

The bishops should take the recommendations of the commission and use it as model of what not to do with Liturgy!

It looks like they will not stop until they chase the last person away. It is really annoying that they are so dismissive of people who want good Liturgy that is designed by the Lord and not by a committee meeting in a hotel conference room. If you point out the problems with the Revisions or even a typo it is considered a personal attack on them. What a way to run a church!

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Could you be a little more specific - what sort of things do you see that you object to? Especially since the "old music" was retained as an option throughout, and many of the changes adopted (such as printing the complete set of psalms appointed in the Slavonic books, and including the changeable texts for each day on which the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts is normally celebrated) bring it closer to the Roman edition of the Ruthenian recension books. I know that some here have insisted that, for example, singing the same three fixed Psalms, or the same two prokeimena, throughout the Fast is more "pastoral" - but is it really in keeping with our Rite? Especially now that parishes are celebrating it more often?

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

P.S. Material to assist in the implementation of the new books is being put onto the Metropolitan Cantor Institute website, at the request of Metropolitan Basil.

Jeff Mierzejewski,

I don't recognize you as anyone in authority. You currently work with the music because you are embrace the Reform. Others would have been chosen if they embraced the Reform but because they do not they are blackballed.

My comments and complaints routinely go directly to my bishop.

Best wishes,

JD

Cue the music: Sound of Silence [youtube.com].

This really does not seem to address the specifics of Jeff's statement.

Not yet having seen the new "translation" of the Presanctified, I cannot comment definitively, but I fail to see that there was much more needed than to run a pencil over the existing text and revise some of the rubrics. I suspect that the same philosophy that informed the RDL has been applied to the Presanctified (which I personally believe to be the crowning glory of Ruthenian liturgy), with the same baleful results.

It all comes from "translators" who lack the humility to leave well enough alone, but who are always interested in showing others just how bright and original they can be.

Newsflash: "Originality" in liturgical translation is most decidedly NOT a virtue.

I know that this admonition has appeared before but it still needs to be repeated. any member of the clergy, whether it is a bishop, priest, or deacon,should be referred to by their correct title. No matter what on's opinion is of a specific topic, this policy should be maintained.. The writer should have named the two priests listed in his posting as Father.
Deacon James Sofalvi

JD,

William is correct in his remarks on your reply, but was perhaps a bit restrained in what he said. Since you elected to raise the issue, you opened the matter of your concerns to discussion. Jeff asked about specific points of disagreement - a not unreasonable request to which you responded rudely. Jeff didn't ask that you recognize him as anyone in authority. The same request for specifics could have as easily beem made by any other forum member with no connection to the Metropolia.

If you don't choose to engage in dialogue or discussion on a matter, then don't bother to post comments on that matter - send them directly to your hierarch and save the bandwidth. The point of a forum is not merely to provide a place for one to sound off and not expect to engage in social intercourse on the topic. You owe Jeff an apology.

The point made by Deacon James is also valid. It is the policy of the forum to address clergy by their proper titles.

Many years,

Neil

Are there parishes using the revised books (besides mine.) If so, what are your thoughts?

John,

If you don't recognise Jeff as an authority and your comments and complaints go directly to your bishop, why then do you post a complaint here, where it is unlikely you will be publicly or privately answered by your bishop?

While the revised PreSanctified Liturgy is different enough in wording, and uses that frustrating "gender neutral" language, it does attempt to restore the Presanctified Liturgy to its correct order with respect to the inclusion of the antiphonal psalms, the corrected liturgy of the word with the blessing and prostrations between the first and second readings and the splitting of the entrance hymn. The antiphonal psalms didn't appear in the Levkulic books. Also the Levkulic books did not split the readings with the blessing "the Light of Christ...".

Interestingly, the rubrics and flow of the Presanctified Liturgy now follows the OCA (Orthodox) usage!

Steve

My Levkulic book (priest/cantor edition) has the blessing with candle and prostrations between the two readings.

Fr. Deacon Lance

There were at least three editions of the Levkulic Presanctified (that is three each of the "text only" and "priest/cantor" editions). I'd have to hunt for it, but the first edition used here in Virginia (late 1960s, maybe early 1970s) had only one set of generic sticheri. The second edition and third edition contained a separate set of sticheri for each week. The third edition had other corrections, like the blessing with the candles (etc.).

I've noted before that in Annandale when the Levkulic Presanctified was used there were about 100 people on Wednesdays and 120 people on Fridays and it was well sung. The very day the Passaic books came out (the first Wednesday of the Fast that year) there were the usual 100. It was so disliked, the number on Friday was about 30. Except for rare occasions it has never really recovered from that number.

Change - even good change - must occur slowly and with proper education. People see the Liturgy as a fixed rock in their lives. Radical change destroys that stability. The changes in the Roman Mass after the Vatican II Council caused up to 1/3 of Roman Catholics to walk away. A large percentage of them never returned, and another large percentage who did return are the classic "Christmas and Easter Catholics". Their reform was most definitely not a success, unless you define "success" as loosing only one-third of your people. It seems nothing has been learned from their experience. [Interestingly, Pope Benedict XVI is not mandating the individual elements of the "Reform of the Reform" in the Latin Rite. He is suggesting them, and even recommending them, (the latest three seem to be encouraging kneeling for Communion, having a crucifix on the altar, and the celebration of the Mass ad orientem) but allowing the reforms to take root organically so there are no sudden shifts. He is a good pastor!]

I continue to recommend that the bishops show respect for the people by rescinding the Revised Liturgies, and promulgating the Ruthenian Recension in full. Then publish new editions of the old books with necessary corrections (I hope to post more detailed suggestions on this soon). The "fixed texts" of the Divine Liturgies do not need great changes to make them accurate (in my liturgy update I have so far less then 10 to Chrysostom, and almost all of them are minor). Clergy texts have more leeway for change, as do lesser used troparia.

Yes, the blessing with the candle is there but the second prokimenon is not. Also the prokimenon in the book was a generic that was used for all Wednesdays, rather than the specific prokimenon for the week.

Interestingly, in an earlier (?) Levkulic presanctified book, the rubrics for kneeling and standing at "Let my prayer ascend..." are clearly spelled out. In the large format priest/cantor edition (possibly later?) the only rubric for the people is to kneel (and remain kneeling throughout).

We have been using the new books at our parish and they are working out very well. As a cantor, I appreciate the consistancy between all the liturgies, and I find the stichera and prokeimena to be more singable than the older Passaic books. I know there are many who would disagree, but this is just my own experience.

Not JUST yours... mine as well.