www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Use of the word 'orthodox' during Divine Liturgy in the Greek Catholic Church

MC: Previously, you indicated that you would leave the church if your opinions on the liturgy didn't prevail. That makes me discount what you say. But this is interesting: I have to confess that I am not entirely sure. It is part of the record here, however, that he does not share your view of the liturgy revision. And I am not sure of his precise timetable for restoration, but I am rather sure that it all did not happen yesterday. I get the sense, moreover, that he is a good teacher not just one who merely gives orders.

I think you are wrong in your advocacy of extremism - it is careless. I also think that you aare too cavalier about losing souls. You really don't get it.

You can keep playing your violin while the city burns but you need to understand this. By continuing to support a failed system you end up supporting losing more and more souls.

And whether you want to admit it or not the system you support and have advocated today (parishes doing whatever they want) has lost many souls over the past 50 years.(Speaking of careless)

Maybe if you advocated restoring the Byzantine Church instead of supporting a half-hearted failed attempt at Eastern Christianity you would get it too.

But MC, that is exactly what I advocate, nothing half-hearted about it. Next you'll be saying that I really didn't deserve my purple hearts. :rolleyes:

I would seriously like to see my BC parish be exactly like the OCA parish around the corner. Both look the same,but are miles apart. No Slavonic,no trojca,no opening and closing doors,(let alone a curtain being drawn). Yet the OCA church was a spawn of my parish! Go figure???

So we don't use "orthodox" due to pastoral sensitivity?

Yet, where are the people who are against it? From what I have read in this thread only one person seems bothered by the idea. I've discussed this subject with many people in different parishes and I've never encountered any hostility to it. Or, maybe all those people who would be stumbled by the use of "orthodox" post on another Forum?

True, the poll that was run on this long ago was not scientific. But, it is an indication of what many of our people think.

DTB:
Just in case you are reading something into my posts which is simply not there...

I am not bothered by it in the least. I only think it odd that some are so lathered up about not having it, so clueless as to any reasons behind it and the reasons why there may be some people who do find it distracting, and so hostile toward them and anyone who is doesn't attach the gravity to this issue that they do.

Many in my parish and elsewhere around Pittsburgh would not take kindly to it. People must remember there are still people around here that lived through the ACROD split and things got pretty ugly. Family stopped talking to one another, police had to surround altars so priests weren't attacked. Some sensitivity is required here.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Obviously your definition of half-hearted and my definition of half-hearted are different.

To say "I'm for restoration, but if parishes don't want to do it or want to take as long as they want it's okay", to me that's half-hearted. Cathy made a good point earlier in this thread of how in the world can you expect people to ask for Vespers, Matins, etc. when they don't have a clue as to what it is and their pastor won't celebrate them. Of course they won't ask, it won't get done or happen, and it will end up being half-hearted.

I'm not judging your intentions, I'm judging the results and that is what needs to be done in our church. I think that all of us have good intentions or we wouldn't be staying up til 1 in the morning posting on this board.

You are judging the goals I advocate, and you are wrong. The only question for me is how to get from point A to point B. You seem to this that our objectives can be accomplished by administrative fiat. I don't think that anyone with real leadership experience would agree.

djs,

Clearly Father Loya and I agree that we have to take a step back to take five steps forward.

On the liturgy revision you are right we don't share the same view.

But these are separate subjects. Just because we agree on one doesn't mean we necessarily share the same view on others.

Once again, a definition issue between us.

I don't define 'real leadership' as letting parishes take their good old time to restore. I don't define 'real leadership' as closing my eyes and hoping that people who have never heard of Vespers will all of sudden ask for it, and if the priest at the parish deems there request as worthy, maybe just maybe they'll start celebrating Vespers.

mc

I don't think "fiat" is what we want, we just want leadership. Why in the world is a priest in Illinois doing the work that should be coming from the collective leadership? Granted, they aren't stopping Fr. Loya from his pursuits, but there hasn't been anything profound said about what he is doing, one way or the other. Holding a "focus group" type gathering with the Bishop in attendance is fine, and having the outcome of the meeting online is well and good, too. But what will become of all those wonderful ideas -- are they going to be implemented or are the Byzantine Catholics just spinning their wheels? Will those ideas be limited to Illinois, where the people are actually understanding what's at stake? If you want my HO, Fr. Loya is doing a great job of educating his people, that's why things are on the move in Illinois.

True, but 30+ years of sensitivity is a long time. My grandparents were caught in the ACROD split too. Grandpa decided to attend the Russian Orthodox Church, and Grandma took the kids to the Byzantine Church. They managed to live under the same roof for 60+ years, raise six kids, and lived "happily ever after." Sensitivity was required by both. This is what we're lacking, and why the patient people who have been sensitive are finally speaking up.

Fr. Deacon Lance

So is Bishop Robert Moskal not being sensitive by advocating the use of the word 'orthodox'? (refer to the first post in this thread)

Where was all of this sensitivity when Latinizations were being jammed down our throats?

Is the new proposed translation of the liturgy an example of sensitivity?

mc

It's interesting my so-called 'opinions' and positions on the liturgy existed before I was born.

Could it be that I am supporting tradition?

mc

Bishop Robert heads a Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy and the split between the Ukrainian Catholic and Orthodox was not the same as that between Pittsburgh and Johnstown. Of course the Ukrainians use less English than we do and in Slavonic/Ukrainian they always used pravoslavny.

You should research our history and see which Latinizations were forced down our throats (relativley few) and which were adopted quite freely (many more).

As to the sensitivity of the new translation let me say this: Many people are against it but not all for the reasons you might think. Some comments I have heard are that they will stop coming if the new liturgy is too "orthodox" whatever meaning that holds for them. I suspect it means longer liturgies due to taking omitted, litanies, antiphon, prokimen and alleluia verses or any other permitted abbreviations in the Blue or Grey pew books. I have heard complaints about the use of Theotokos rather than Mother of God. I have not heard any about "loves us all" vs "loves mankind" and visiting priests have used it.

Fr. Deacon Lance