www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy Status of Revised Divine Liturgy in 2024

We are very much in agreement. This forum was a beacon of truth at the time and I'm so grateful to it for this among many other things. It's actually so sad and ironic that of all the things for our Ruthenian church to be proactive and ahead of mainstream culture about, it would be..... gender-inclusive language. It's the main reason I brought this thread up to begin with... at the time it seemed almost academic and and oddity to most people, so it was hard for many to understand the problem. I am very much convinced such a change would scandalize a much greater amount of parishioners now than it did then, to the point that it would not be accepted by the laity, given how mainstream this particular attack on God's order has become.

That so many parishioners now don't even know that it happened is also a shame (and is exactly what was intended). They have a good instinct not to "find reasons to be upset about things" that until they become aware, never knew existed in the first place. I think it is important to keep this discussion current, less our liturgy continues to get chipped away at slowly over time. The enemy is playing the very longest of games here.

Christ is in our midst!!

The "inclusive language" argument was lost in the Latin Church long ago. We now have our third liturgical edition and some parts are difficult to read aloud. The first steps were for "inclusive language" and then trying to find common texts with our Protestant brethren. Then Pope St John Paul 2 issued translation norms to bring English editions back closer to the Latin. Now we've got a lexicographical mess. We've also had our translation of the Bible done over to conform to the translation directives so as one priest said "we have translation du jour."

Are we talking about the liturgical books, the prayer books?

As a newer member of the Byzantine Catholic Church, I am unaware of exactly what went into the development and promulgation of this "teal terror." I recall often hearing my priest use the older language ("mankind," etc.), but we do for the most part use the teal book for our liturgies. Can anyone give a general overview of what exactly the change was and how it occurred? Was it just inserting gender-neutral language, or was there more to it?

Christ is in our midst!!

miroslav_jc,

Welcome to the forum. We hope your time with us is spiritually beneficial.

You may find on the forum a working translation of the Divine Liturgies of both St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil the Great. They are a work of love by members of the Ruthenian Catholic Church and this forum. Many have worked on these translations which you may find in the liturgy section in a locked thread. Go to Mysteries, go to the first topic, and in that you will find the locked thread.

The problem and objections that many Ruthenian Catholics have with the "teal terror" is that it is a very real break with the tradition of the Ruthenian Catholic Church. The translation in the "teal terror" was made using a Greek text of these liturgies of a later time than the tradition of the Ruthenian Catholic Church. The Ruthenian texts were compiled and published by Rome in the early 1940s but were ignored in the preparation of the texts used now in the Ruthenian Catholic Church.

This is the understanding that I have been given by members of the forum who are also members of the Ruthenian Catholic Church.

Bob
Moderator

Bob, thank you for the warm welcome.

I have spent some time reviewing various threads on this forum and found a lot of interesting information. In case anyone else stumbles upon this thread and wants to learn more, I'll post a few links to get people started. I have not read through all the on-topic material (there is a lot), but enough to get the gist of it I think.

- Fr. Serge Keleher's book on the RDL: [available near the start of this thread]
- RDL Criticisms by John Vernoski (Administrator of this forum): https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbt...how-the-rdl--violates-vatican-directives
- Discussion of RDL Criticisms by Fr. Serge Keleher: https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbt...leher-studies-on-the-byzantine-liturgy-1
- Confusion on the Promulgation of the RDL: https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbt...ivine-liturgy-of-the-ruthenian-recension
- Unofficial Study Texts: https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbt...f-the-ruthenian-divine-liturgies-chr-bas

One thing that I have been unable to find is any sort of official liturgical reform history or responses to the many criticisms of the Revised Divine Liturgy published by the Metropolia. While Fr. David, who I gather to have been the head of the liturgical committee that developed the RDL, has responded on these forums, he seems to have been acting in an unofficial capacity in doing so. And aside from his messages, there is nothing else I have found. Given the seeming credibility of the RDL's criticisms (which I am admittedly not knowledgeable enough to verify many of the claims made), the lack of official responses or reasonings do not bode well for the Metropolia. Additionally, some posters referenced potential appeals to Rome. Whether any were made or what their results were is also something I have not found.

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can point me in the direction of official accounts of why the RDL was promulgated as it is? Am I correct in saying that Fr. David's posts were not official responses from the Metropolia?

Regards,
A servant of Christ

Christ is in our midst!!

I wonder how the translation work done by members of the forum and posted on this thread, compares to the recent book reprinted from the late 1930s.

Miloslav,

There was no official response to the questions raised. I personally know several people who wrote complaint letters to their bishops. Archbishop Basil of Pittsburgh (now deceased) supposedly sent courteous responses acknowledging receipt of the letters but offered no actual response. Bishop Andrew of Passaic (head of the Liturgical Revision Commision and now deceased) sent very harsh responses to letter writers condemning them for questioning a bishop and calling them to obedience. But that was very much his nature (he was a "pay, pay and obey" type of bishop). It's possible the other bishops at the time (Bishop John in Parma and Bishop William in Phoenix) sent responses, but I have no knowledge of that.

The whole Revised Divine Liturgy is still problematic and will remain that way. The "Teal Terror" is still terrorizing. But it is unlikely that anything will be done. At public events, Bishop Robert keeps saying "Invite! Invite! Invite!" to counter the rapid decay of our Church. But he (and the other bishops) don't seem to understand that people don't find the Revised Divine Liturgy with the modifications modeled after the Latin Novus Ordo rubrics, secular academic gender-neutral language and clunky music to be very attractive. Still, we do the best that we can.

TR