East meets West pilgrimage at St Andrews Abbey in Valyermo

Friday September 25
5:00 PM, Vespers in the Byzantine Chapel (old youth center chapel) at St. Andrew's Abbey.
6:30 PM, Dinner in main refectory
7:30 PM, Conference talk

Saturday September 26
8:30 AM, Matins, Byzantine Chapel
11:00 AM, procession with icon of the Mother of God from the Byzantine Chapel main Abbey area
11:30 AM, Hierarchical Divine Liturgy
1:30 PM, Time for picnic lunches and fellowship
3:00 PM, Icon tours in Byzantine Chapel, and conference at Abbey Welcome Center
5:00 PM, Great Vespers in the Byzantine Rite
7:30 PM, Latin Rite service of Vigils for Sunday in the Benedictine tradition

Sunday September 27
8:30 AM, Matins, Byzantine Chapel
12:00 PM, Mass in the Latin Rite

Vicnaja Pamjat, Fr Stephen Dutko

Though I never met him, I did meet his son David during my many visits to Pittsburgh.
The many Youtube videos bring a sense of family to this remote (in a Rusyn sense) part of the world.



The Paschal canon sung at the funeral of Fr Stephen. The joy is so radiant!

The church renovation

About 3 years ago our church was renovated.
Here are some of the pictures of what the interior looked like before and after.


Before:

Right side view

Left side view

View from choir

After

View of front after renovation

Right side after renovation

Left side after renovation

The whole theme of the "renovation" seems to herald back to an earlier era of iconclasm, or at least minimalism regarding the usage of iconography. We once had walls vibrant with color and iconography, only to see the icons depicting the life of Mary (of whom our parish is named) that were interspersed between the stained glass icons depictiong the life of Jesus, removed and sold, given away to various parties, or who knows what. Now we have austere plain white walls that have no distracting color or iconography to bring the Divine Liturgy to life.

The gold leaf on the back wall of the sanctuary was painted over with "gold" paint. I don't know if that meant it was "gold" in color or actually had some miniscule amount of gold in the pigment.

Christos Razdajetsja!

Christ is Born! Glorify Him!
Now we are in the feast of Christmas, til Jan 1 2009.

Perhaps this next year will be a brighter year for our troubled church. I hope and pray that our bishops will look positively toward the future rather than pessimistically as semi-retired Bishop Andrew has done in the Eparchy of passaic.

It was sad news hearing of the closing of St Nicholas in Edison, NJ. For 11 years the parishioners had enjoyed the fruits of their labors in a newly built church only to have a pessimistic and somewhat spiteful bishop callously sell it out from underneath them to pay for undisclosed 'expenses' of the Eparchy.

Our metropolia is shrinking in numbers largely due to our own lack of evangelisation both within and outside our church. We have failed to educate our youth in what our church means to us and how it relates to the world at large. We have become lazy in our own attendance at major feast days opting for other churches.

Oh another post about the sad state of affairs...

It has been so nice NOT posting or really watching the activity at the dysfunctional Byzcath.org BBS. They are still so narrowly focused on the negatives of the RDL that they will never see any positive in anything coming out of the Byzantine (Rusyn) Church. The administrator is so full of himself that he can not see any good coming from the Metropolia of Pittsburgh (BCC) that he himself profess the BCC as his "former" church. I gather he had not the strength to stick with his church and fight rather than jump ship as indicated here: (emphasis by me)

"I should have noted it further, but even comparing the official Liturgicon with a Pew Book is a bit of comparing apples and pears. [Sorry, oranges are already taken.] I don’t give credit to the RDL for restoring the Third Antiphon and the Beatitudes since in my former parish they were in use for the past 25 years (we simply pasted them in the book). For us and a number of other parishes the RDL shortened them. How could you possibly consider that to be a restoration?"

Many time on that BBS I have seen references to RDL liturgies that are under an hour in length. I find it hard to believe especially in the Pennsylvania region where the singing is considerably slower than out here in the Van Nuys Eparchy that the Divine Liturgy could be celebrated so quickly. Our Sunday Liturgies regularly last 1.5 hours.

Forgiveness

11th Sunday after Pentecost.
Byzcath.org posted on the main page:

Forgiveness Requires Forgiveness – The God of all men releases us from the difficulties of our faults, according to the parable. This is what is signified by the forgiveness of the debt of the ten thousand talents. But this happens only on the condition that we ourselves release our fellow servants from the hundred denarii, that is, from the few minor faults they have committed against us. (St. Cyril of Alexandria)

I don't suppose the administrators or moderators are ready to forgive those they banned and reinstate their posting priveleges? Nah! Taht wouldn't be the proper Christian thing to do now, would it? Gotta show "tough love" to those miscreants who dared to oppose the heirarchy of the BYZCATH.org church.

Ahh the bitter fruits.....

From Byzcath.
I thought it so appropriate given how many they have banned or otherwise turned away at what purports to be a "balanced" bbs welcoming to all who desire to learn about eastern Christianity (even if the byzcath name implies a particular affiliation with the Byzantine Catholic Church-Metropolia of Pittsburgh). The administration there is similar to the chief priests and Pharisees in that they refuse to listen to any opinion regarding the changes in the BCC (particularly in regard to the "RDL" promulgated by the metropolitan and bishops of that church.) The hypocrisy did not go unnoticed.


Tenth Week After Pentecost

July 14-20, 2008

Matthew 21:43-46 – “Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it. And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.” When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. But when they tried to arrest him, they feared the multitudes, because they held him to be a prophet. (RSV - Gospel for Thursday)

Is the fruit you bear sweet or bitter? - Although [the chief priests and the Pharisees] were hard of heart and on account of their unbelief and wickedness blunted in their understanding against the Son of God, nevertheless they were unable to deny Jesus’ straightforward statements and understood that all the judgments of the Lord were directed against themselves. So they determined indeed to kill him but feared “the crowd, for they considered Jesus to be a prophet.” But crowds are easily moved, and do not persist in their resolution. The man they now honor and revere as a prophet they later shout against: “Crucify Him! Crucify Him!” (St. Jerome)

A correction to the last posting

Seems ByzKat is still banned from byzcath.org till 2010! The devious ones there have changed the "banned" notice to "member" to deceive newcomers of the shameful way they treat posters with whom they disagree...

Ok, one l a s t post on byzcath.org, really......

Rather than post publicly and be banned like so many others:

Perhaps it is summed up by the very posters;

Originally Posted By: Etnick
I'm sure that many OCA and other Orthodox people are far flung and whatnot, but the point is the services are always held. It's not up for debate. It's the Byzantine tradition. If you choose to call Byzantine Catholics as "Ersatz", maybe they are. Sort of a cafeteria mentality. We'll take this and this, but not this or this.

Rome keeps telling the EC's to be authentic. Why aren't they?


We aren't because you say we aren't? By Etnick's standards we fall short?

I don't choose it, these insults and monikers - I accept that is how those with a view to look down on us - often smugly - will put it. And boy do they.

I am happy for you who are located "Where we say men and mankind" that you have found the true fullness of Byzantine praxis by your standards. I wish you well and hope that you flourish and grow in holiness.

I really just cannot take a lot more of ByzCath during our Great Lent though. Some time off may be needed. I love the BCC and on here the way some are taking every opportunity to insult the Byzantine Catholics is just sad. Though it seems to be well accepted and allowable.

It is constant snyde mark and barb and criticism, one right after another, by folks inside and out... I just don't get what the attraction is to focus this VERY negative attention on our small church is all about.

Or perhaps it is the number of excellent posters such as Byzkat who were banned by an administrator, likely due to compelling posts and replies being hard to refute by Byzcath.org administration unwilling to accept the RDL that our Bishops promulgated.

I stopped posting there and mostly stopped reading that board back in Feb 2008 when Byzkat (Jeff Mierzejewski) was banned. Also after defending several friends who were defamed through libel, by malicious posters who remain active on that board (ungcertez, etnick, among others), I, and they (ByzKat, Fr David Petras, Prof Thompson, among others) left the company of that board (some INvountarily and othersvoluntarily), shaking the dust off our feet so to speak.

A closed thread which underscores the hostility found on Byzcath is here:
www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=279617#Post279524]I guess they are right again...
Interestingly, this was the thread which ByzKat was banned. I notice he appears to be "un"-banned. I would guess he and others won't be coming back soon until there is a true metanoia amongst the administration of this bbs, which I would feel is highly unlikely.

Sincerely,
Steve

My last commentary on Byzcath

For the indefinite time being, I have decided that the forum on Byzcath.org isn't worth posting on anymore since they (the administrators and moderators) have rather successfully banned or overtly discouraged those who disagreed with them from ever coming back. It's too bad since that bbs originally was 'home' to many good people of the Eastern Catholic faith, including myself. With the banishment of fellow member and Metropolitan Cantor Institute student ByzKat, back in February 2008, I have decided not to post there. (Not that anyone at that bbs really cares whether one who primarily lurked though did post often enough would leave). I did notice recently that ByzKat has been "un-banned" possibly in a vain hope to lure those of us disgusted by the one sided nature of that sandbox, particularly in the area of derisiveness toward those who held anything of a positive view toward the "Revised Divine Liturgy" or RDL for short.

In the future I will focus more on my travels again and the more positive aspects of the Byzantine (Ruthenian/Rusyn) Catholic Church. In particular I will add more pictres to the blog.

Till then,

Wow! What lack of charity from where else, but BYZCATH?

Administrator Administrator Administrator Member Registered: 11/02/01 Posts: 4475 Loc: Virginia

Originally Posted By: Happy Latin "Pope John Paul can say what he likes on the issue but that does not make it so." Amazing how some people can be so dismissive of the words of the pope.... I'm sorry, but we really don't need posters who place their personal understanding above Church Teaching. I stand by my post, and recommend Happy Latin find a forum where his opinion triumphs Catholic theology and praxis.

No, what Byzcath.org needs is an administrator who is capable of handling uncomfortable posts which challenge his authoritarian (and of course "correct") views. The poster he is so blithely dismissing has only posted six posts compared to the esteemed administrator who has posted well over four thousand posts. Obviously quantity wins over quality. Sheesh!

Oy! byzcath again...

Administrator replied to a Watched Topic at the site:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=280859#Post280859

[quote=PrJ]My ecclesiology teaches me that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles and as such have been given the grace of God to lead the Church. From talking to those involved in the translation project, it is clear that the Bishops engaged in this project with a very deep reverence both for their calling as apostolic leaders of the Church and for the grace of God that they have received in their consecration. Therefore, this work (in my opinion) is an example of Apostolic and patristic praxis.[/quote]
I disagree respectfully with PrJ. The good intentions of the bishops and those who served on the committees that created the Revised Divine Liturgy in no way guarantees that the outcome is an example of Apostolic and patristic praxis. Good people can do bad things and we have in the Revised Divine Liturgy nothing less then a tragedy. We have texts and rubrics that are less accurate than those given in the 1964 edition. We have music that both disrespects what people have memorized and makes those singing it sound like English is not their native language (due to the improper accents). Good intentions have hurt a lot of people. Unfortunately, PrJ has fallen into the trap of judging things by the good intentions of those who created rather than the quality of the product."

Wow, what aggrandisement! The Administrator (and owner of)  Byzcath.org who is probably a good person himself and who can do no wrong in his own eyes is just as guilty of falling into the trap of believing that if we change what people memorized over the last 40 years (a wink of an eye in liturgical time), there will be tragedy!

What poppycock!

People learned those translations and setting from 1964, grew to memorise them and are now the older generation. Before them was another generation which had memorised the entire Divine Liturgy in Church Slavonic with music that was substantially different than the 1964 settings (which were greatly simplified at the direction of the bishops, not the cantors given the task of setting the words and music).

Now since the Admin who wrote that statement is himself a cantor who has arranged (set) music for the Byzantine Catholic Church, Eparchy of Passaic, he would of course be beyond reproach himself even though his settings followed the same oversimplifications of the 1964 setings and even had his own syllAble problems (which most of us just ignored, being that the inserts weren't official outside the Eparchy of Passaic).

Another one BANNED from Byzcath...

Another good and honest member BANNED form byzcath: Byzcat. Seems his only crime was being right about his views on music which countered with the owner/administrator of that board who seems to have a not so hidden agenda to discredit anyone associated with the RDL. It seems the admistrator's displeasure extends to those who disagree with his style of setting music, an endeavour he undertook for about 25 years prior to the introduction of the RDL last year. Sounds to me like a classic tale of 'sour grapes', almost sour raisins, dried up shriveled sour grapes at that. It seems that it may only be a matter of time before I join the league of "Banned" member of byzcath....

More byzcath frustration.

I am saddened by the attitude Byzcath.org has taken regarding the thread "Prof. J. Michael Thompson Resigns".

The original poster had merely mentioned the fact of Prof Thompson's resignation. Yes, it is fact, I know first hand.

I had posted a rather strongly worded, perhaps too strongly worded for some, as the post has been deleted prior to the thread being locked, which called for some form of censure of those posters who were publicly revelling in Professor Thompson's misfortune of "resignation".

There have been numerous posters over the years at Byzcath.org who were outright banned or disallowed from posting for less over-the-top postings about others with whom they disagreed.

I had hoped the thread would have been locked or removed before the "If it is true, all I can say is Wooohooo!!!" post by Secret Squirrel who like Etnik, Ung-Certez, Rusyn31, Pisankar, InCogNeat3's and others have made no secret their dislike of Prof Thompson using Byzcath.org as a public platform to foment their anger at Thompson and anyone connected with the IELC/IEMC, all with the implicit consent of the administrators of the board.

Interestingly, the Administrator/owner of Byzcath.org posted this reply to me:

"Steve’s ongoing conflation of all judgment of Mr. Thompson’s work with judgment of his person is itself not charitable. Those who post negative comments about persons are dealt with by the moderators. Ultimately such comment only succeeds in reflecting negatively upon the man who posted it. Men of good will can and do comment legitimately on the work of another (be it Mr. Thompson’s, Msgr. Levkulic’s, Mr. Jumba’s, or anyone else’s). Great care should be taken both in expressing it (so that it is not personal) as well as in reading it (so as not to interpret legitimate commentary on work as judgment of person).

I can certainly agree with Steve’s comment about those who step forward undergoing very close scrutiny. This is the case with all who offer their work to the Church and I have certainly seen it many times, including with my own meager offerings. The best thing to do is to listen to it, accept and profit from legitimate criticism, and reject the rest. "

This from the previous 'de facto' top cantor, John Vernoski, for many of the parishes in the Pittsburgh Metropolia. His "meager" offerings spanned 25 years, an impressive mailing list and the imprimatur of Bishop Andrew (Eparchy of Passaic). His work did not undergo anywhere near as much international scrutiny by cantors as Thompson's.

Notable has been cantor Vernoski's ongoing difference of opinion with Prof. Thompson from day one broadcast clearly via byzcath.org. Efforts to counter the onslaught were rebuffed. a number of those who disagreed were banned or just stopped posting, realising that they were outgunned.

Now that Thompson is out of the picture, who becomes the next in line? If there is a revision of the rubrics (restoration of the 1942 rubrics) will the text be again set to the proper melodies, or highly modified, (almost experimental) settings with the proofreading of as many cantors who proofed the settings currently in use. There was close to 200 cantors who were regularly proofing the texts and settings. Of course, those cantors had little say regarding the translation.

It's been quiet lately

Well, the biggest news is that in my church (Byzantine Catholic Pittsburgh Metropolia) we are getting a new bishop and our present bishop William is going to Passaic, NJ. I'm not sure yet how this bodes for our eparchy out west (Van Nuys). It does seem that each change of eparch notches us closer to our final dissolution as a viable church in the United States of (Complacency and) Assimilation where ethinc churches like the Ruthenian Church seem to dissappear into the assimilated fog of an increasingly secularised America.

The phantom missing posts after midnight Oct 11, 2007....

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.

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

The Cradle vs Convert issue still survives...

[quote]"I believe that Steve is incorrect in what he is stating here. All voices have been welcomed. Yet we have had some new Byzantines indicate that their opinions should be more valued than those with years of experience in various ministries (and that is wrong)."[/quote]

Welcomed so long as they are in line with the "cradle" view. Which was the point I was trying to make; that in our parishes and other means of interaction we subtly convey an attitude that unless everything they believe is 100%"cradle" then they are not "nash", our people.

A few examples by doing a simple search:

------------------------------------------
Originally Posted By: Rufinus

Overall, I firmly disagree with what the moderator has written. I think that the Bishops have made the right decisions. I think that the Cantor Institute is right on track.



Just curious.

Where are you a cantor? What experience do you have cantoring?


Monomakh

-----------------------------------------------------
Rufinus,

You may be new to internet fora. Topics tend to occasionally drift, some more than others. Your review of the broadcast could help bring us back 'on topic'. ;\)

As for this being another 'cry room', are you surprised? The BCC isn't my Church, but I'm nearly brought to tears by what is being done to it by its leaders. I can't begin to imagine what it's like for those who have lived their entire lives in this Church. {BTW, you still haven't answered the question as to whether you are 'cradle' or 'convert'. Help keep things on topic and reply not here, but in the thread where the question was first asked. }

(posted by Kobzar)

--------------------------------------------------

It is also interesting that most of those involved with this reformation and those in favor of the RDL either are not originally Byzantine Catholic or Carpatho Rusyn (for the most part, there are those in traverse in favor...)

I see that Prof. Thompson is a registered user on this board, did he happen to vote? There is a definite vote yes...
(posted by Rusyn31)
-----------------------------------------------------
Again, seems to me to be a "Craddle vs. Convert" issue.
Craddle Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics have a big problem with the new music. Converts don't have a problem with the new music probably because they never experienced the Church Slavonic Prostopinije liturgies.

Ungcsertezs

-----------------------------------------------

I Know, Enough about Byzcath!!!!!

Yes but, it seems Fr. Anthony, the tireless vigilant moderator for truth and justice stikes again...Witness the following, my message to Fr Anthony:

Fr Anthony,

I am puzzled and disturbed by your sense of reasoning regarding Rufinus and this thread. The fact that Rufinus did not explicitly, overtly ,immediately, capitulate to your demand for a retraction based on your interpretation of his transgression, and the subsequent banning of him as a poster on Byzcath seems to remind me of a Gospel reading we just heard about forgiveness. Lately there seems to be little forgiveness shown toward those who are in favor of the RDL while the onslaught of negative commentary against the RDL continues unabated and unchecked.

While I see that you are Orthodox, you do come across as strictly authoritarian and somewhat uncompromising in your charity towards certain views.

Please read this carefully, as I do not wish to be banned based upon a purely PRIVATE letter to you which would be most uncharitable given the nature of private communications. I have often wondered why there is only one moderator,( you), of the RDL forum, and SEVERAL moderators of all other fora on this board.

To those of us observing the forum at Byzcath, it appears that you are being arbitrary in your exercise of power.

The pertinent posts which drew my attention to this matter:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U-C,

You can't accept the support of non-cradles and give them the right to speak when they agree with you and then tell non-cradles who disagree with you they have no right to comment. How long does one have to be a member of a particular Church before they have a right to speak? 10 years? 20 years? Never because they aren't cradles?

Fr. Deacon Lance

Rufinus,

Then that will be accepted as a retraction. I have received numerous complaints today over this "poor choice" of words in what seemed to be a personal attack on a poster. I allow free discussion as long as the forum rules of charity are followed.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

Posting to this thread may resume

Fr. Anthony:

I in no way meant to attack anyone. I meant only that I shall not engage in an ad-hominen argument. Period. What astounds me is just as you posted your reply just such an attempt was made. This is what I meant by an attempt at "personal assessment." I meant, I will not permit an ad-hominen argument to develop. Period. But you are right. My words do read with a generality that has overtones that simply do not exist. Please retract the statement.

Rufinus

Rufinus,

You are hereby given an indefinite suspension until such point as you are willing to retract. You have been known for playing these word games and until such time as you retract and act in the proper decorum, you will be outside looking in. There is nothing "ad-hominen" about the above post.

This thread is now closed.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator

Another Yahoo group I'm off of

Well, it seems too trite to have even been worth such a fuss.

The moderator/owner of Byzantine Catholics Speak has decided that my presence is no longer desired in her sandbox. her final email to me is a bit confused:

Dear Steve,

A few moments after your peevish withdrawl, I got the message at the end of my note here, from Seglinde.

I have removed you from the membership list along with kathielee and hermit. There's no real need for you all to torture yourselves with our miserable company.

I'll keep you and kathielee and hermit[man] in my prayers.

Thanks again for you contributions to the list...those things of real substance I mean. When you speak substantively, you are a real gem of a participant. Otherwise you are just plain snitty and that isn't very helpful at all.

You are surely welcome back at any time but not to fly into a fit of peeve every time your sensitivities get tweaked.

Mary

Strange thing is, I had only posted exactly four messages on that group prior to this: My last message having been a rebuke over the tone of the posts. Specifically thus:

"Hows about changing the subject line too, since the thread has slid father than father's original slide?

Steve,
(Unworthy lurker) "

When things got heated between Mary (owner/moderator) and another member, Hermit, I posted the following rebuke:

"WOW!!!! This email list is becoming a replica of Byzcath.org ,(including the threats to ban/moderate members), now that the forum on Byzcath has quieted down to a mere whisper lately,

Time to turn off the email feed and find some peace and quiet.

Steve

Mary Lanser wrote:
It is prideful to come into an area of the Church of which you have little knowledge and refuse to listen long enough to dispel ignorance.

It is also prideful to come among strangers and take over.

One more such outburst and I will put you on moderation till you can learn a little self control...no...a LOT of self control.

Mary

On 8/10/07, *Hermit* <hermitary302@yahoo.com > wrote:

St. Basil said: "To be proud is sometimes virtuous. To have pride
is a vice always. It is a killer vice. It is a big, bad major
slayer! Pride leads the parade of capital sins and always wants to
be first. Humility seeks the least or nothing. "

My reply to Mary, thus ending our rather short exchange of words, and my involvement from the beginning of her group was such:

Mary,

While my support is well appreciated, I gather it wasn't appreciated well enough to retain membership on the group.

In another email you wrote:
"I have removed you from the membership list along with kathielee and hermit. There's no real need for you all to torture yourselves with our miserable company."...."Otherwise you are just plain snitty and that isn't very helpful at all. "

That comes across as "snitty" in it's own respect. Either you you do or you don't respect my views. period. I gather that you don't really respect my views because you place more weight on a few "snitty" remarks over anything substantive that I have posted.

I pray that you will find peace in whatever church you find yourself in. I myself don't like the revision of the RDL however I will remain faithful to the church of my family for so many generations before me, good bishop or bad bishops, good priests or bad priests, good cantors or bad cantors.

I regret our parting of ways was not as peaceful as one would hope, but it is a parting nonetheless.

In Christ,

Steve


So, a learning lesson to all: When it's somebody else's sandbox you've been invited to play in, they are always right even when they are totally wrong. Such is life. Mary started her group out of frustration and anger and her dealings with people there are still colored by that same anger. May Mary find peace in her search for the perfect church which squares with her views.