1 members (Erik Jedvardsson),
1,165
guests, and
84
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,506
Posts417,454
Members6,150
|
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31 |
... then not even fix the first words of the Liturgy the people are supposed to hear (which, despite all the changes, you are still stuck with the improper "Reverend Father give the Blessing."
I don't expect any explanation from those that "are in the know." Although it would be kind and loving to explain why with all the spirit of change the first line of the new liturgy couldn't even be fixed. I presume that Fr. David is one of those in the know. One may not agree with his comments but he has been forthcoming with answers and discussion. He has discussed this point: Also on his website: http://www.davidpetras.com/page/response I know he has said more on this but I can't find the posts. Dn. Anthony
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,516
Forum Keilbasa Sleuth Member
|
Forum Keilbasa Sleuth Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,516 |
I address my Bishop as Master, I am not sure about the argument that this has fallen away. When I see the Bishop I say, "Vladyka Blahoslovi" or Master Bless. The issue is the Deacon saying "Master give the Blessing" HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BISHOP. It is the Deacon asking the priest, the sacramental presence of Christ to give the blessing.... Now do you get it?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31 |
To whom (if anyone in particular) is this question addressed?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,516
Forum Keilbasa Sleuth Member
|
Forum Keilbasa Sleuth Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,516 |
how do I say it.... using Master Bless is more than just a linguistics game. However it is another overlooked statement meant to carry a meaning of the Divine that is just reduced to the whims of a linguistics game. Like I stated above the deacon is asking the priest, the sacramental presence of Christ to give the blessing..
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,384 Likes: 31 |
To whom (if anyone in particular) is this question addressed? I think my opinion is being confused as being the same as Fr. David's: our opinions differ. I have now found Fr. David's more detailed comments: https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbt...id&topic=0&Search=true#Post69851I (quite some time later, May 2005) emailed him expressing my concerns: That �Master� is an (antiquated?) address for young males and therefore should not be used can not really be an issue. The people are used to the term in addressing God/Christ, for instance in the �reader prayers,� �O Master forgive our transgressions...�, in the �mercy� Troparion �offer this supplication to You, our Master� at the very beginning of the anaphora, �With these blessed powers, O loving and kind Master,� and the Communion prayer �Remember me O Master.� I don�t think anyone would be taken aback by the deacon�s �Master give the blessing� (is this in fact the only �public� use of the term for the priest in the liturgy?). Most of the uses of master by the deacon are a quiet dialog with the priest (e.g. proskomedia). As a deacon, I feel that �Reverend Father� and worse �Most Reverend Bishop� is an unnecessary complication, a dreadful mouthful and a pain in the neck --- totally uncalled for wordiness. It is such a relief when (still kept even in the Passaic liturgikon) I can say �Master bless the warm water.� To me, Master is efficient, direct, and snappy: as it comes to us it applies equally well to bishop, priest, and God; and given its use for the latter, the former two should not have a problem with it being applied to them. [Also, it circumvents honorific titles that are inappropriate in the liturgy.]
I wonder too why the liturgy, especially the anaphora, uses it, along with Lord, as the exclusive address for God. Is the term Father purposely avoided in direct address, except for the unavoidable use in the doxologies? Is there a deference in not using it, even in the anaphora, so that we can climactically, say �Our Father�? If so, the use of �Reverend Father� has done the liturgy a great disservice. To the above, Fr, David responded that he took exception to my term "disservice"; he further remarked (I use this with his permission): ... the reason for "vladyko" in the Slavonic ( = Master) or "Despota" in Greek ( = Master) is because that is how those dignitaries were addressed in ordinary life. It is very unlikely that people today will suddenly start calling me "Master" instead of "Father." In regard to liturgical texts, the Byzantines tend to use the address "Father" for the first person of the Trinity for very solemn prayers, it has a kind of exclusivity because it is used in the prayer the Lord taught us, and it was at one time a part of the "disciplina arcana." [emphasis added] What surprised me is that he agrees with my analysis about reserving the use of the direct address of "Father."* Why then should we use it in the translation so (seemingly) indiscriminately? Dn. Anthony * It should be noted that this does not hold for the Basil Anaphora.
Last edited by ajk; 05/29/07 09:03 AM. Reason: typo
|
|
|
|
|