www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Filioque reintroduce by Metropolia again

Actually, Father Raptosh warned the parishioners in Monroeville that the music & texts were going to be difficult, and that we should brace ourselves for the new Divine Liturgy books that will be introduced later this year. He made the point that he didn't particularly like the final work done by the Liturgical Commission. When the outdoor procession with the Plashchanica began, people simply didn't sing because the text was so different from the the Levkulic Holy Week Service booklets.

Ung-Certez

Adam,

your quite right, ther were two booklets and the people's book had only changeable parts. As far as I could determine, the text in the priest/cantor edition for the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom mirrored that which is found in the red Liturgicons that can still to this day be found on many a Holy Table.

As far as not being able to chant the text, the website on the Metropolitan Cantor Institute did have a recording of the the changeable parts at least 10 days in advance Good Friday. Wanting to help the cantors, I downloaded the recording and burned about 10 CD's for the cantors to practice with before the service. They had the CD in their hands at least 1 week prior to Good Friday.

There is a great resource in the MCI website for those interested to learn.

Yet there are many in the Ruthenian Metropolia who are not pleased with these texts, including many priests.

Ung-Certez

My copy of the people's book merely has instructions where the Liturgy continues as normal. No filioque, no problems, people singing as they should be. I don't have the copy that was actually used in the pews (oh horrors, pews). Personally, I felt it was easy enough to follow and lead and heard no complaints to those effects from other parishioners.

J Thur,

Since your 'from' location only specifies a dot, perhaps you could let us know which Eparchy you are in at least? I had to chuckle at the typo "Enlightened folks questioned who the sewers of confusion were?"

Nicholas,

I am puzzled by the context of an official book being declared an "official disater" by one other than an official who was involved in it's making.
As to hearsay about other parishes......... :rolleyes:

Steve

Steve,

A point is a dimensionless locus.

Read my 'Interests' and that should explain my dimensionless locus.

Was it really a typo?

Joe

I am sympathetic to UC's comment. The "people's book" for Great Friday's vespers at the MCI has texts that could use a good editor. Two verses are enough to make the point.

For example, after the (changed from the 1976 by an added phrase not in the 1976 OS) verse "If you O Lord should mark..."

"All creation" (Vsja Tvar') of 1976 is now "The whole creation" At least "all" worked better musically.

"Beheld" is changed to "saw", presumably in the interest as creating as pedestrian a tone as possible.

"foundations of the earth" is changed to "earth's foundations". Perhaps OK, but some teach that the first is better - i.e., that possesive constructions for things should be avoided in formal writing.

"All things" may be marginally truer to "Vsja" than "All creation", but is poorer, vague writing.

"suffered with" is changed to "suffered along with", for reasons hard to fathom.

Finally we are treated to:
"...endured this for us". No proper antecedent exists for "this" - The 1976 text had "suffered for us" perhaps to avoid this problem.

The next verse again substantially departs from the the English and OS of 1976. And is followed by "outlaw people" (outlaws?) plotting vain "things" (more "things"); betrayal "into lawless hands" an awkward synecdoche and preposition - "handed over to the lawless" was better); the "Lover of us all" (ugh) is not just lifted, but "lifted up"; to "save Hades' captives" (while this punctuation is perhaps becoming accepted, Strunk & White says "Hades's").

And so on, and on, and on ...
The overall effect is annoying and distracting.
Dubious word choices that set a low tone are bad enough, but questionable writing practices and outright bad practices don't belong in serious writing. And this writing should be taken very seriously. Are there professional writers, poets, editors on the committee that reviews these texts?

Oh... and the musical setting of "The Noble Joseph". I am surprised it didn't start a row. Heart-breaking.

I can't speak to the details of the Liturgical Commission's work, but I do know that the Commission had decided (or been directed by the hierarchs) to produce any new translations from the Greek, with an eye to the Church Slavonic - rather than following the Church Slavonic directly in all cases.

Similarly, while the 1963 Grail psalms are used more consistently, psalm texts are changed in some places to match the Septuagint more closely, especially when a sticheron quotes the psalm verse, and the Septuagint text really matters.

In the first verse you cited, djs, the Lenten Triodion of Mother Mary and (bishop) Kallistos has "The whole creation...when it saw Thee...Thou hast endured this for our sakes..." rather than "All creation... beheld...suffered for us" On these three points, the new version is closer to the standard Orthodox rendering in English (and I suspect, the Greek).

In the following verse, the Lenten Triodion says that the people "imagine vain things", and that the Creator is delivered "into the hands of lawless men".

So while I agree that there are some things I would have done differently (for example, the Basilian text has "Lover of Humankind", I would prefer "Lover of Mankind", the Commission fairly consistently uses "Lover of us all"), most of the issues you cited involve places where we are actually coming closer to Orthodox wording, and to the Greek (including the LXX Scriptures) - which is probably more to be desired than not.

The Commission could perhaps use more poets (although reading ALL the stichera for Holy Week, I'm sure it has at least one), and an editor (though these editions had far fewer typos than much of the material I've ever worked with). But anyone who joins the committee's work needs to be sensitive to patristics, Greek _and_ Slavonic, and the current translations used by the Orthodox, as well as our own traditional translations.

And as far as the Music Commission - it's a committee composed of both priests and cantors, including (I believe) Daniel Kavka of Philadelphia, and headed by Bishop Andrew. Its going to represent a cross-section of the oral and written tradition, and its work is going to have some compromises. But overall, it's produced some of the work that you've spoken highly of in other places, djs. Maybe you could volunteer your services?

Christ is risen!

Jeff Mierzejewski

I volunteer without qualification.

Sorry to break away from the topic a bit....

But I thought Eastern Catholics thought that the Filioque clause wasnt heretical? Can you explain?

If I remember correctly Passaic, Parma and Van Nuys all removed the "filioque" from the liturgical Creed. However Pittsburgh retains it officially. Is this correct?

If so, then it seems for a Metropolia-wide publication the only choice is to include it even if in bracket.

It isn't heretical for us to use "filioque." However, we may use the older and original form of the Creed that doesn't contain it. Even where it appears in publications, it often is in brackets as an option, not a requirement.

Whooops, there goes the conspiracy theory!

I don't think there is any conspiracy theory. My understanding is that our Byzantine Church may or may not use filioque. It's neither required, nor forbidden.

Steve, I would have to agree that the Canadian/Kievan conspiracy is still around - and bears watching!