www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Lay Epistle Readers

In Britain, I've never encountered a church where the prokimenon is NOT announced.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Christ is ascended!
Into heaven!

In response (no pun intended) to the discussion about the prokeimenon and alleluiarion:

The verses of both of these are properly chanted, NOT by the cantor, but by the lector; it is part of his work. When the verses had "fallen by the wayside," it wasn't noticed; when they were restored in the parishes of the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia, there was a confusion about whose responsibility it was to sing them. In fact, in some parishes it has become the custom for the entire assembly to sing them! (SIGH)

Nonetheless: the cantor should intone the prokeimenon, with the faithful taking it up from him/her; the lector chants the verse; the faithful repeat the prokeimenon.

The alleluiarion is done in the same way.

It should be reiterated that the "announcement" of the prokeimenon/alleluiarion is in fact a custom of the Great Russians, and not of the Rusyns or of the Galicians (even though there are parishes in both groups--St. Elias in Brampton, for example--that uses the practice).

(Prof.) J. Michael Thompson
Byzantine Catholic Seminary
Pittsburgh, PA

I beg to differ with the above post.

This is solidly within the Kyivan tradition, and while the Russian Church may have accepted this practice from the Kyivan Church, it is not just a "Great Russian" tradition.

The Balaban (1604) and Mohylian Kyivan sluzhebniks have both call for the alleluia and prokimen intonation by the reader intoning the actual tone the prokimen/alleluia to be sung in. Neither of these saw any significant use in the Muscovite church.

The 1617 Mamonych sluzhebnik also called for the reader to chant the tone of the prokimen/alleluia.

The pronouncing of the Prokimen is also present in pre-Nikonian Russian books. In the Erie English translation the reader chants "The Prokimenon from the Psalms of David" and introduces the proper tone. For the Gospel he intones "Alleluia from the Psalms of David".

I think rather that what you indicate as the Ruthenian tradition may possibly be at least partly another latinized suppression since this usage is still present in some quarters of the Galician practice, is definitely used in the Kyivan tradition as well as the Russian and some other Slavic usages such as the Bulgarian and Macedonian.

This usage was not in the 1692 Zhokovsky sluzehbnik which was adopted by many Greek Catholic parishes. It is, however in several of the early 18th century texts from L'viv which may explain why it is still present in some quarters of the Galician usage.

This may be a silly question, but is it necessary to announce the tone when everybody has in their hands the entire prokeimenon in musical notation, with the tone indicated in boldface?
(And at our parish, I have never, ever encountered the prokeimenon or Alleluia being announced.)


Sharon

Dear Sharon, this is a holdover from when very few people were literate and the canonarch would not only announce the text but the tone the text was to be sung in. This is also still done in many monasteries.

But even in our "modern age" I have heard positive comments keeping this practice including ladies with young children being a little, shall we say, active, that they appreciate this so they don't have to fidget with the book sometimes.

The practice of arming everyone with words and music is modern and not universal, so the announcing of the prokimenon and alleluia is of use... in some places at least.

In the Old Rite Tradition, as in the Athonite tradition, cantellation is used for many texts, moving line by line. The kanonarch reads the line and the choir sings it or an appointed response.

This is very useful when you are using only one book on each kliros, or in the Athonite tradition, one book which moves form kliros to kliros taken by the kanonarch. These traditions preserve older ways of singing, as are now preserved in the mainstream Churches' treatment of the prokimenon and alleluia.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Agreed that announcing can be useful.

In the Ruthenian tradition, tho' where congregational singing is the norm, and no parish I've ever visited announces, and 'most all of them give the faithful musical resources, I don't think it would make much sense to "restore" the practice of announcing.

Ain't diversity grand?





Sharon

Get the books out of their hands, so that they can worship properly like Byzantine Christians, not like pew imprisoned Latins. This book obsession stops us worshipping physically, as do the pews. They both represent the present Byzantine rite obsession with Western clutter that impedes Eastern liturgical practice and robs worship of its power. In Slovakia everyone sings with heartfelt conviction and slavic gusto, but they don't need books, and most don't use books. They learn and rely on that dying asset - the memory.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Father, bless!

Mebbe our parish is unusual, but I don't think so. Most folks DO know the service - the books don't get used much by regular parishioners. (They are awfully nice to have for visitors.) But come the "changeable" parts, folks reach for their bulletin inserts, so they can continue to participate. They are an assist rather than a distraction.

About the pews, no argument at all. "Friends don't make friends pray in pews."


Sharon

All of the above is documented in the useful book by Huculak. Of course for him Ruthenian = Ukrainian as it does in many publications.

In my time in Slovakia and Hungary with forays into the neighboring areas (all of which can be called AFAIk podkarpastka Rus') I never witnessed in a GC church the prokimen or the Alleluia announced like the "Russians" do it.

Tony

Huculak mentions very little about the pre-Nikonian usages. But looking at the Erie book and other extant material, as I mentioned it is very clear that the announcing was done and common in pre-Nikonian usages.

Again, it is only my conjecture that the predominance of the Zhokovsky sluzhebnik and its daughters amongst the Ruthenians partly caused the announcing to not be done. Hucualak also mentions little about this, but historically it is apparent that Zhokovsky was a key sluzhebnik amongst the Greek Catholics. The announcing is widespread in most other Slavic usages which I don't believe can all be attributed to Muscovite influence.

Again, another interesting aspect of liturgical development and variation between usages. I see nothing wrong or incongruous with the tradition in reinstating this practice.

I agree with Father Mark that there is a preoccupation with the idea of books. I have recordings of monasteries from Greece to Bulgaria to the Pecherska Lavra where the entire service is done with the canonarch announcing verses and tones and the monks following.

Diak,

Sorry, you are right. What I intended to write was that can be found in Huculak on pages 237 - 241 along with other valuable information.

I had no reason to write all and to quote the last paragraph. "My bad" as they say now.

It certainly makes sense that if pre-Nikonian usage has it and the other Slavs do it the Ruthenians would have had the custom. I, however, have applied this argument on this forum at other times and it was not accepted. Again, I have travelled in the subCarpathian homeland somewhat extensively and never saw it practiced there, for whatever that is worth.

Tony

I am a born and raised Roman Catholic, and I'll tell you, by my fourth visit or so to a Byzantine Christian church, I pretty much had it down. Then again, I taught myself chemistry by making up a tune.

The book was handy while I was new to it, but I often find myself fighting the book (Here we jump to page 27, now back to 14? Or are we in the handout? Where are we?)

So eventually I put it down. When I knew, I sang. When I didn't know, I listened.

Sorry, I didn't realize how far up the thread the comment I was responding to was, I should have stuck the quote in Oh, and as a Latin, I'd know anyone who uses a book, except for the hymns, and that's only if its new. Even with hymns--we only use the same dozen or so.