Monomakh replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=255770#Post255770
[quote=Dr John]
Let us please get beyond the 'externals' and focus on the ESSENTIAL elements of our Church: prayer, fasting, liturgy and 'koinotis' (=community) that lead us to salvation.
Blessings to ALL!
Dr John [/quote]
I agree, yet another reason why the full and official Ruthenian Rescension should be practiced and all this nonsense of the RDL should never have happened. Instead prayer, fasting, and I would add evangelization and renewal of our Orthodox roots should be focused on. + Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict both have called us to this, why don't we listen?
Monomakh
Theophilos replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=255991#Post255991
Glory to Jesus Christ!
Just wondering when the moderator is going to step in and admonish those posters who are taking patently uncharitable personal jabs at defenders of the RDL? To wit:
[quote]I am glad that you like the changes. More power to you my friend. My local RC parish has a Polka Mass a few times a year. You should come, you'd probably like that as well! [/quote] (Slavipodvizhnik, post 255949)
[quote]If you REALLY like the changes of the RDL, go back and read the post Stephanie Kotyuh made a few up from here. You might want to join that parish! [/quote] (Etnick, post 255953)
Are these kinds of comments really necessary? If so, perhaps I can offer an observation along these very lines:
If the two of you think the RDL, for all its shortcomings, is akin to a polka mass or a "guitar liturgy" in a nominally Byzantine parish in Cleveland, then you have given me good reason to fear, and perhaps to weep, for my family, friends and colleagues in the Orthodox Church.
For all the talk about having or not having @#$%$, it seems to me that it is the two of you need to grow up and be men.
Theophilos
Diak replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=256000#Post256000
It has gone both ways, Theophilos, which can be pointed out - but which would help nothing. At least there is somewhere to discuss such things, "rough around the edges" though it may be.
Try sitting in on a discussion of evolution in public school curricula in Kansas, or any number of scientific or political controversies. In spite of all this is quite civil, I can assure you.
Etnick replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=256012#Post256012
[quote=lcanthony]As author of this thread I had hoped for more than the usual body slamming of our Liturgy. If you want to split hairs I suspect our ancestors of centuries past would take umbrage with any version of the Divine Liturgy used in the last 200 years. THe Divine Liturgy is a living organism, always changing as societies and cultures change. If you want to be Orthodox, go ahead and be Orthodox. I've been there and done that. They go through their changes, Russian, Greek, OCA, Old Rite, new calendar, etc. They certainly aren't one big happy family. What is the goal of this fight other than the sake of a unhealthy dose of self righteousness? [/quote]
Theophilos, What were you saying about charity? :confused:
Monomakh replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=256038#Post256038
[quote=Theophilos]
[quote]I am glad that you like the changes. More power to you my friend. My local RC parish has a Polka Mass a few times a year. You should come, you'd probably like that as well! [/quote] (Slavipodvizhnik, post 255949)
[quote]If you REALLY like the changes of the RDL, go back and read the post Stephanie Kotyuh made a few up from here. You might want to join that parish! [/quote] (Etnick, post 255953)
Are these kinds of comments really necessary? If so, perhaps I can offer an observation along these very lines:
If the two of you think the RDL, for all its shortcomings, is akin to a polka mass or a "guitar liturgy" in a nominally Byzantine parish in Cleveland, then you have given me good reason to fear, and perhaps to weep, for my family, friends and colleagues in the Orthodox Church.
For all the talk about having or not having @#$%$, it seems to me that it is the two of you who need to grow up and be men.
Theophilos [/quote]
Theophilos,
I think that the salient point of the two posters is where does this all stop. When a parish and/or eparchy continually deviates from Tradition time after time, year after year, decade after decade, what's to preclude crazy things like polka masses, guitar masses, etc. from occurring. If you were to tell a Roman Catholic in 1950 that all these things would be occurring 20-50 years later, they would have thought you were exaggerating as well, but my friend it did happen and continues to happen. Will it happen here, no one knows, but there needs to people on guard to prevent it from happening. I've felt like the voice in the wilderness for many years, and it doesn't look like it is going to change unfortunately. The only thing I've ever seen Slavipodvizhnik and Etnick be guilty of is defending Tradition and the Faith.
:)
Monomakh
Theophilos replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=256039#Post256039
The truth, Etnick, is that your attempt to belittle his appreciation of the RDL by suggesting that he is not a "real" Byzantine only proves his point.
Please know that I say this as someone who finds much that is problematic with the RDL, from the inclusive language and awkward translations to the mandated uniformity (insofar as such uniformity circumscribes an even fuller flowering of our authentic liturgical life). I also think, however, that there is some good in the RDL, too -- the restoration of Theotokos comes immediately to mind.
Look, most of us have been, at one time or another in the course of this discussion, guilty of speaking uncharitably. I know I have done so (see my exchange with Elijahmaria a few months ago). But I do perceive an unfortunate unevenness in the enforcement of the rules of the Forum vis-a-vis defenders and critics of the RDL (see the banning of djs way back when or the suspension of Rufinus).
Now, my perception could be wrong, of course. Had I the time, I might subject this entire Forum to a scientific analysis to show that critics of the RDL who speak uncharitably are treated far more leniently than defenders who do the same.
I find this unevenness both maddening and disappointing. Given the unevenness in the number of posters who are critics of the RDL and those who are defenders, I would think that the critics would be held -- actually, hold themselves -- to an even higher standard, in the name of maintaining a free and open discussion. Certainly, all snitty, sniveling, yipping, and haughty comments should be verboten. But if I have the strength of numbers behind and beside me, and if I am actually interested in understanding the other side, I would not want to drive them away by insulting them.
It seems that opinion is not shared by everyone.
In Christ,
Theophilos
Etnick replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=256044#Post256044
[quote=Theophilos]The truth, Etnick, is that your attempt to belittle his appreciation of the RDL by suggesting that he is not a "real" Byzantine only proves his point.
Please know that I say this as someone who finds much that is problematic with the RDL, from the inclusive language and awkward translations to the mandated uniformity (insofar as such uniformity circumscribes an even fuller flowering of our authentic liturgical life). I also think, however, that there is some good in the RDL, too -- the restoration of Theotokos comes immediately to mind.
Look, most of us have been, at one time or another in the course of this discussion, guilty of speaking uncharitably. I know I have done so (see my exchange with Elijahmaria a few months ago). But I do perceive an unfortunate unevenness in the enforcement of the rules of the Forum vis-a-vis defenders and critics of the RDL (see the banning of djs way back when or the suspension of Rufinus).
Now, my perception could be wrong, of course. Had I the time, I might subject this entire Forum to a scientific analysis to show that critics of the RDL who speak uncharitably are treated far more leniently than defenders who do the same.
I find this unevenness both maddening and disappointing. Given the unevenness in the number of posters who are critics of the RDL and those who are defenders, I would think that the critics would be held -- actually, hold themselves -- to an even higher standard, in the name of maintaining a free and open discussion. Certainly, all snitty, sniveling, yipping, and haughty comments should be verboten. But if I have the strength of numbers behind and beside me, and if I am actually interested in understanding the other side, I would not want to drive them away by insulting them.
It seems that opinion is not shared by everyone.
In Christ,
Theophilos [/quote]
My whole point is how can the RDL be defended? There is absolutely NO excuse or reason for inclusive language in the Divine Liturgy. I won't even comment on the horrid music.
The Ruthenian Liturgy wasn't complete to begin with. I know of only one parish in my area that used the Red Book. That was tossed in the bonfire for them with the RDL. The Ruthenian liturgy needed fixing, not further destruction with needless revisions.
I wonder what the Patriarch and the rest of the Orthodox bishops think of the RDL. I wonder if any of them have been hospitalized from laughing so hard after reading it. How are they to take Orthodox/Catholic relations seriously if the Byzantine won't do it themselves.
As far as fairness on this forum, it's well known that the Administrator doesn't like the RDL. I'm not going to say that he's biased, so draw your own conclusion.
I think that some people here are just too thin skinned for lively debate. :D
Monomakh replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=256047#Post256047
[quote=Theophilos]The truth, Etnick, is that your attempt to belittle his appreciation of the RDL by suggesting that he is not a "real" Byzantine only proves his point.
Please know that I say this as someone who finds much that is problematic with the RDL, from the inclusive language and awkward translations to the mandated uniformity (insofar as such uniformity circumscribes an even fuller flowering of our authentic liturgical life). I also think, however, that there is some good in the RDL, too -- the restoration of Theotokos comes immediately to mind.
Look, most of us have been, at one time or another in the course of this discussion, guilty of speaking uncharitably. I know I have done so (see my exchange with Elijahmaria a few months ago). But I do perceive an unfortunate unevenness in the enforcement of the rules of the Forum vis-a-vis defenders and critics of the RDL (see the banning of djs way back when or the suspension of Rufinus).
Now, my perception could be wrong, of course. Had I the time, I might subject this entire Forum to a scientific analysis to show that critics of the RDL who speak uncharitably are treated far more leniently than defenders who do the same.
I find this unevenness both maddening and disappointing. Given the unevenness in the number of posters who are critics of the RDL and those who are defenders, I would think that the critics would be held -- actually, hold themselves -- to an even higher standard, in the name of maintaining a free and open discussion. Certainly, all snitty, sniveling, yipping, and haughty comments should be verboten. But if I have the strength of numbers behind and beside me, and if I am actually interested in understanding the other side, I would not want to drive them away by insulting them.
It seems that opinion is not shared by everyone.
In Christ,
Theophilos [/quote]
Theophilos,
It's no secret that I'm not a fan of the RDL, so for what's it worth, I think that the administrators on all of these forums do a good job and I personally don't envy their job at all, I wouldn't want to be a moderator at all, it's not easy. I'm pleased that this forum exists and that these topcis can be discussed. I've had my share of retractions and apologies, and also had posts that I didn't get a chance to retract or explain because they were just flat out deleted. Did I agree with it, not every time, but I respect the moderators' decision and move on. If I want to express the things that were delected than I need to start my own board (I'm not going to that, see my note about a moderator above). My Indians are going to play the Red Sox in ALCS tomorrow. If we were to put Indians and Red Sox fans together in the same room, every close call would be viewed as bias towards one team when the call doesn't go our way. I think that its human nature to think that the umpi!
res, referees, moderators, etc. are out to get us, when 99 out of 100 they are not.
In the spirit of civil discussion, in my last post I asked where does all of these revisions end my friend? Once again, a Roman Catholic in 1950 would never have forseen what was to come in the next 50 years of their church. So while some things may seem like chicken little or exagerrations, please realize that crazier things have happened in our own lifetimes even. If you're serious about an academic discussion, let's do just.
:grin:
Monomakh
Father Anthony replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?
ubb=showflat&Number=256082#Post256082
This thread is now closed with the above post. All posts after midnight on this date have been deleted. The thread went from actually having some good point being finally made by both sides of the issue to having all sorts of things irrelevant being introduced to it which have nothing to do with the subject of the thread.
I strongly suggest that in the future, points dealing only with the topic be discussed and that you leave the outside materials for other sections.
In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator
As usual, in his heavier handed moderation style, Fr Anthony has chosen to excise the lengthy posts shown above for his own reasons after waiting many days after this thread started to wander off track.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Musings about the Liturguical changes
Keep in mind that the promulgation and the changes with it are entirely an act of our hierarchs who drove the project, received approval from Rome, and mandated it. While various individuals have had a hand in the translations, the choices of rubrics to follow, and other decisions, the ultimate decision squarely rests with our hierarchy, period. If the Hierarchs had disagreements with those whom they had solicited input, I would gather the Hierarchs made the final call.
We, the faithful are left with a predicament, do we stay faithful, obedient yet voiceless about the changes and accept what our hierarchs have promulgated, without questioning? Do we leave our heritage for another church, which may have other problems, but with relatively intact liturgy? Or do we stay and question our bishops through letters, discussion and other means, making our voices heard?
If we choose to leave, our voices will have less impact on the Hierarchy, unless in large enough numbers, which surely would mean the demise of the Ruthenian Church in America. Do we love the Divine Liturgy or do we love our parishes (and our history)? We can love both only if we stay.
If we choose to stay, but just follow along without voicing displeasure with the translation, we are essentially ratifying their decision, whether we agree with the decisions or not. Again though we must ask ourselves, are we there for the Divine Liturgy or the parish family?
This brings us to choice number three, to stay and to voice displeasure with translation and rubrics, that are less in line with the other Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches, in a hope of guiding our church through this troubled period.
I say this after having spent an wonderful, introspective weekend at Holy Resurrection Monastery where all the litanies are sung, the translations are more "liturgical" (no P.C. stuff, thank you). While they (HRM) are now under the omophor of the Romanian Catholic Eparchy, I still do feel a connection with them as a Rusyn Catholic in the Van Nuys Eparchy since they had a similar challenge before them a few years ago prior to the changes in the Divine Liturgy.
Throughout all this, I have deliberately not mentioned the music, Which I do find is a POSITIVE change from the Hierarchical mandate of the 1965 books wherein the music settings were grossly simplified (like so much in America). While much has been written debating the settings of the music, many of those issues have boiled down to the translation being somewhat less than poetic and not fitting to anything but the simplified forms of the melodies.
As to some of the claims that not all liturgies have been restored, the service of Matins has been restored so far as Music and text.
Again just as with Vespers, Matins and the Hours, it remains for our Hierarchs to lead with proper parochial instructions to only use vespers un the evenings and restore Matins on Sunday mornings. Perhaps at times, we all suffer from the common malady of the modern computer literate generation in desiring a[i]ll things[/i] to be instant. The positive changes to the Divine Liturgy will come, but at the same human pace that change has always come through the millenia, slowly.
Quite literally, my worthless opinion,
Steve
We, the faithful are left with a predicament, do we stay faithful, obedient yet voiceless about the changes and accept what our hierarchs have promulgated, without questioning? Do we leave our heritage for another church, which may have other problems, but with relatively intact liturgy? Or do we stay and question our bishops through letters, discussion and other means, making our voices heard?
If we choose to leave, our voices will have less impact on the Hierarchy, unless in large enough numbers, which surely would mean the demise of the Ruthenian Church in America. Do we love the Divine Liturgy or do we love our parishes (and our history)? We can love both only if we stay.
If we choose to stay, but just follow along without voicing displeasure with the translation, we are essentially ratifying their decision, whether we agree with the decisions or not. Again though we must ask ourselves, are we there for the Divine Liturgy or the parish family?
This brings us to choice number three, to stay and to voice displeasure with translation and rubrics, that are less in line with the other Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches, in a hope of guiding our church through this troubled period.
I say this after having spent an wonderful, introspective weekend at Holy Resurrection Monastery where all the litanies are sung, the translations are more "liturgical" (no P.C. stuff, thank you). While they (HRM) are now under the omophor of the Romanian Catholic Eparchy, I still do feel a connection with them as a Rusyn Catholic in the Van Nuys Eparchy since they had a similar challenge before them a few years ago prior to the changes in the Divine Liturgy.
Throughout all this, I have deliberately not mentioned the music, Which I do find is a POSITIVE change from the Hierarchical mandate of the 1965 books wherein the music settings were grossly simplified (like so much in America). While much has been written debating the settings of the music, many of those issues have boiled down to the translation being somewhat less than poetic and not fitting to anything but the simplified forms of the melodies.
As to some of the claims that not all liturgies have been restored, the service of Matins has been restored so far as Music and text.
Again just as with Vespers, Matins and the Hours, it remains for our Hierarchs to lead with proper parochial instructions to only use vespers un the evenings and restore Matins on Sunday mornings. Perhaps at times, we all suffer from the common malady of the modern computer literate generation in desiring a[i]ll things[/i] to be instant. The positive changes to the Divine Liturgy will come, but at the same human pace that change has always come through the millenia, slowly.
Quite literally, my worthless opinion,
Steve
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
