C'mon people! Where's the strong posts of protest? It's so easy to derail a thread that has such promise like this one. Is outrage that there is less outrage! Burn those calories in angry protest!!! Raise your blood pressure over an issue you have no real control over! Send your checks for Fr. Serge's book. Read it through and through. Run to the Orthodox church where everything is perfect! Don't lose steam now....page 3 was going so strong, what happened?
While "on Eagles Wings" in being set to prostopinije tone 9, make the full revision and translate it into Latin! Revise the proposed liturgy revision with your own "hit parade" of cover versions to suit every fancy.
Seriously, this thread started off with a well thought out proposition (of which I don't agree with all the points), and like most threads on this topic of topics has degenerated into the usual silliness surrounding this debate.
in response to the original post:
1) after telling your priest you don't want the DL revised, what can he do that you haven't already done? Withholding your tithe will only close your parish faster.
2) Write you Eparch first before step 1. There is more at stake.
3) Perhaps this should be step 1.
4) presuming you obtain actual copies of the proposed liturgy rather than initial documents which can and will be disputed. Little litanies were lost in Parma/Van nuys back in the 70's folks.
5) support Fr Serge's efforts to control our heirarchs and buy his book with the money you saved by not tithing.
6) when the revised liturgy arrives in your parish, take time to actually try it before you throw it away. The advice given in the original post amounts to 'don't vote in November, the outcome won't change'.
Yes our dear priests will likely have no choice in the matter but close the parish because their parishioners left without first seeing what the change was really about. As to speaking out with impunity, I know from experience that it does come back to haunt you. Will it be "too late" once the revision comes out? There has been change before , there will continue to be change after.
One can already check out other churches without waiting for the revision. If you are anxious to leave the Pittsburgh Metropolia for Orthodox jurisdictions, don't let the spectre of a translation change get in your way.
Steve
Monday, October 30, 2006
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
More thoughts on Byzcath.org Revised Liturgy Forum
Forty two years ago, a major change was made to our liturgy, did we have a say in it? How many people know who was on the commision then? Does anybody remember when the changes were promulgated? It helps that then, we did not have the internet to hyper rapidly speed news, opinions, and counter opinions into households and parishes within the Metropolia of Pittsburgh.
Today we see a sad recurrence of distrust within the Metropolia tearing our ailing church apart. In this sub forum, The Revised Divine Liturgy there has been a strong anti IEMC/IELC/MCI sentiment shown toward any pro IEMC/IELC/MCI posts. Two stubborn divergent camps have formed, with a lack of charity growing each day as the debate grows more personal.
Have we forgotton the painful experiences of our past? No. But we seem to repeat them nonetheless. While posters on both side of the issue make claim and counter claim, watchers from many churches, Catholic and Orthodox, look on in amazement as we tear each other apart verbally, rather than build each other up. Sadly there have been a number of priests caught up in both sides of this debate who have showed a lack of charity at times. I do not use the word lightly given that I too have been sometimes less than charitable in my posts, and have been admonished for it by the admin.
One side claims our liturgy never changes. The other counters that it has always changed over the centuries. Both sides are correct.
I used to enjoy browsing byzcath.org before The Revised Divine Liturgy forum appeared.
Two posts caught my attention to this:
[quote]This thread instead of being an informative discussion of church, has degraded into attacks on personal character and unfounded accusations. Instead of proving a point, undo enemies to any efforts are being further created. Rather than have this futile exercise continue I am closing this thread.
I am deeply disappointed in the matter that things have been represented on this thread.
In IC XC,
Father Anthony+ [/quote]
and by Admin:
[quote]First point:
:Jeff wrote:
"...you should probably START by convincing the bishops that your request for a broader review comes from honest interest and willingness to help."
Such a statement is offensive and I demand that you offer an immediate apology to the entire Forum community.
There is no one who is participating in this discussion who does not have an honest interest and a willingness to serve our Church. Never, ever conclude that principled disagreement by fellow Christians amounts to dishonesty and unwillingness to serve the Church. [/quote]
After valiantly making his point time and again amid the animosty shown toward his knowledge by some members of the forum, I feel Jeff certainly owes me no apology as a member of the forum, unless you feel that I am not part of the "entire Forum community". There is great frustration on all sides of an issue that lacks clear resolution from our heirarchs who should be leading our church.
Even when any liturgical and music changes are promulgated there is always the possibility of further change. If there weren't a possibility of change, there wouldn't/couldn't have been any changes implemented ever in the past. Is our Liturgy exactly (as in identical in every word action and note) the same as was celebrated 100 years ago?500 years? 40 years?
My worthless use of bytes on the internet,
Steve
Today we see a sad recurrence of distrust within the Metropolia tearing our ailing church apart. In this sub forum, The Revised Divine Liturgy there has been a strong anti IEMC/IELC/MCI sentiment shown toward any pro IEMC/IELC/MCI posts. Two stubborn divergent camps have formed, with a lack of charity growing each day as the debate grows more personal.
Have we forgotton the painful experiences of our past? No. But we seem to repeat them nonetheless. While posters on both side of the issue make claim and counter claim, watchers from many churches, Catholic and Orthodox, look on in amazement as we tear each other apart verbally, rather than build each other up. Sadly there have been a number of priests caught up in both sides of this debate who have showed a lack of charity at times. I do not use the word lightly given that I too have been sometimes less than charitable in my posts, and have been admonished for it by the admin.
One side claims our liturgy never changes. The other counters that it has always changed over the centuries. Both sides are correct.
I used to enjoy browsing byzcath.org before The Revised Divine Liturgy forum appeared.
Two posts caught my attention to this:
[quote]This thread instead of being an informative discussion of church, has degraded into attacks on personal character and unfounded accusations. Instead of proving a point, undo enemies to any efforts are being further created. Rather than have this futile exercise continue I am closing this thread.
I am deeply disappointed in the matter that things have been represented on this thread.
In IC XC,
Father Anthony+ [/quote]
and by Admin:
[quote]First point:
:Jeff wrote:
"...you should probably START by convincing the bishops that your request for a broader review comes from honest interest and willingness to help."
Such a statement is offensive and I demand that you offer an immediate apology to the entire Forum community.
There is no one who is participating in this discussion who does not have an honest interest and a willingness to serve our Church. Never, ever conclude that principled disagreement by fellow Christians amounts to dishonesty and unwillingness to serve the Church. [/quote]
After valiantly making his point time and again amid the animosty shown toward his knowledge by some members of the forum, I feel Jeff certainly owes me no apology as a member of the forum, unless you feel that I am not part of the "entire Forum community". There is great frustration on all sides of an issue that lacks clear resolution from our heirarchs who should be leading our church.
Even when any liturgical and music changes are promulgated there is always the possibility of further change. If there weren't a possibility of change, there wouldn't/couldn't have been any changes implemented ever in the past. Is our Liturgy exactly (as in identical in every word action and note) the same as was celebrated 100 years ago?500 years? 40 years?
My worthless use of bytes on the internet,
Steve
Monday, September 04, 2006
Some thoughts on the debate of "new" music on Byzcath.org
Why is the music from the current Pittsburgh Metropolia IEMC constantly being reffered to as "new" music? The only "new" part of the music is in fact the translation. The music is primarily taken from a 100 year old text published in Uzhorod, Ukraine.
Is there some [i]older[/i] music that we should be using instead?
I think of "new" music as the 1964/65 music commission's work which had an episcopal directive of 'keep it(the music) simple'. For more than a complete generation now we have been singing this "new" music, that came at the same time as a translation coincidentally.
The real issue has not been the music but the revised translations and the underlying revisions to the rubrics. The "new" music from the IEMC is no more difficult to sing than the 'original' Slavonic of 100 years ago.
Perhaps it is my biased view that things were not as we necessarily imagined them to be 100 years ago in the 'glory' days of our musical tradition.
Each of us only knows a tiny fraction of the history. Each of us also has a bias of our own history to colour our perceptions of what the past was.
It was enlightening to see and hear what was realy happening in modern day Ukraine and compare what has transpired in the USA with the music and translation issues.
Is there some [i]older[/i] music that we should be using instead?
I think of "new" music as the 1964/65 music commission's work which had an episcopal directive of 'keep it(the music) simple'. For more than a complete generation now we have been singing this "new" music, that came at the same time as a translation coincidentally.
The real issue has not been the music but the revised translations and the underlying revisions to the rubrics. The "new" music from the IEMC is no more difficult to sing than the 'original' Slavonic of 100 years ago.
Perhaps it is my biased view that things were not as we necessarily imagined them to be 100 years ago in the 'glory' days of our musical tradition.
Each of us only knows a tiny fraction of the history. Each of us also has a bias of our own history to colour our perceptions of what the past was.
It was enlightening to see and hear what was realy happening in modern day Ukraine and compare what has transpired in the USA with the music and translation issues.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
More Uzhorod pictures
Captions coming soon...
1.) The opening Moleben to Blessed Theodore Romzha. 2)Bishop John and Milan Shashik 3.) Orthodox and Catholics Bishops (& Metropolitan Nicholas) together at worship. 4.) Bishop John, Bishop Milan Shashik, & Bishop at lunch in Seminary. 5.) Banner at entrance to seminary. 6.) Tomb of Bishop Theodore Rohmza. 7.) Cathedral in Muckachevo, Ukraine
1.) The opening Moleben to Blessed Theodore Romzha. 2)Bishop John and Milan Shashik 3.) Orthodox and Catholics Bishops (& Metropolitan Nicholas) together at worship. 4.) Bishop John, Bishop Milan Shashik, & Bishop at lunch in Seminary. 5.) Banner at entrance to seminary. 6.) Tomb of Bishop Theodore Rohmza. 7.) Cathedral in Muckachevo, Ukraine
WOW! What a trip!
Uzhorod, 2006 Conference on Prostopinije. Well, finally I have pictures.
The Greek Catholic Cathedral in Uzhorod, exterior & interior
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
One Month Before the Great Trip
To Uzhgorod...possibly the one time I can "afford" it. Stiil unemployed, but very much looking forward to the upcoming trip. It promises to be exciting, challenging, unusual, memorable and probably a host of other adjectives I haven't conjured up yet! I must remind myself that I should let things happen as they may and not get upset about the numerous changes in plans that are bound to arise.
I still have shopping and packing to do...a month seems like so little time, yet the event seems so far off!
I still have shopping and packing to do...a month seems like so little time, yet the event seems so far off!
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
A Joyous Orthodox Pascha to all!
For those who celebrate the old calender Pashca, Christos Voskrese! Christos Anesti! Christ is Risen!
Although I am Catholic, I have always felt the connection with our seperated brethern in the Orthodox church.
View of St Nicholas OCA in McKees Rocks, PA.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Upcoming Trip This June
This June, I hope to make a trip to Uzhgorod, Ukraine for the 100th anniversary of the publication of Bokshay's "Prostopinije". It will mark my first major trip abroad, so I am hoping that all will go reasonably well.
"Prostopinije" was published in 1906 as a compilation of plain chant music for the Byzantine-Rusyn (Ruthenian) church. There are earlier texts that are sinilar to this, though not as well circulated as this text became. In 1925 Joachim Racsin published his collection of "Prostopionije" which followed Bokshay, and added more material form various sources. The 1944 "Plain Chant" and later the "Basic Chant" by Fr Andrew Sokol provided a transliterated text of Boshay's "Prostopinije" into Latin text (OCS pronunciation). Still later in 1969 Fr. Stefan Papp publlished his "Irmologion" which again used Bokshay as a refernce, though he included many particular melodies used in the Presov region that do not appear in the origional 1906 volume.
Interestingly in all three successor volumes some of the same musical typography errors are faithfullly copied. A particular example is the now less-used 'Voshel Jesi' melody for the Bishop's entrance.
I hope the conference is understandable (ie not entirely in Ukrainian) to an eager 'non-academic' like myself.
Steve P
"Prostopinije" was published in 1906 as a compilation of plain chant music for the Byzantine-Rusyn (Ruthenian) church. There are earlier texts that are sinilar to this, though not as well circulated as this text became. In 1925 Joachim Racsin published his collection of "Prostopionije" which followed Bokshay, and added more material form various sources. The 1944 "Plain Chant" and later the "Basic Chant" by Fr Andrew Sokol provided a transliterated text of Boshay's "Prostopinije" into Latin text (OCS pronunciation). Still later in 1969 Fr. Stefan Papp publlished his "Irmologion" which again used Bokshay as a refernce, though he included many particular melodies used in the Presov region that do not appear in the origional 1906 volume.
Interestingly in all three successor volumes some of the same musical typography errors are faithfullly copied. A particular example is the now less-used 'Voshel Jesi' melody for the Bishop's entrance.
I hope the conference is understandable (ie not entirely in Ukrainian) to an eager 'non-academic' like myself.
Steve P
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Introduction
Vecernaja Zorja-Evening star
A commentary blog of Eastern Catholicism and Orthodoxy from the view of a cantor in the Eastern Catholic Church.
As a somewhat travelled cantor from the Eparchy of Van Nuys (Pittsburgh Metropolia, Byzantine Catholic) There are some thoughts i'd share with the 2 or 3 readers of this blog. (I doubt there would be more).
Steve
As a somewhat travelled cantor from the Eparchy of Van Nuys (Pittsburgh Metropolia, Byzantine Catholic) There are some thoughts i'd share with the 2 or 3 readers of this blog. (I doubt there would be more).
Steve
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
