But they are not OF the Greek/Constantinopolitan Tradition, even as they use the same rite; They evolved away from it, and became part of the Slavic Tradition.They are liturgically linked to the Constantinopolitan Particular Church by history. The Ruthenian Recension is derived from the South West Rus’ Recension of the Church of Constantinople from the time of the mission of SS. Cyrill and Methodius (starting c. 860’s A.D.) and later by their disciples’ mission to Kyivan-Rus’ in the 980’s A.D. These missions came from the Constantinopolitan Church. So they are a Recension, liturgically,
of the Constantinopolitan Church tradition.
U-C
While the Ruthenian Churches aren’t part of the Uniate Church of Constantinople, (Uniate Greeks are very small in number), they trace their liturgical tradition to the liturgical tradition of the Church of Constantinople, even with the Nikonian Reforms. Yes, they developed local rubrics and a different liturgical language. These parochial rubrics and different liturgical language is the recension.But they are not OF the Greek/Constantinopolitan Tradition, even as they use the same rite; They evolved away from it, and became part of the Slavic Tradition.
Vico: the Russians are another recension, at least post-Nikon, and are back-filling that into the Ukrainian Orthodox (MP)… rather forcibly, by many accounts.
A. 1941 Recensio Vulgata (pro Russis, Bulgaris, Serbis) –
Croats (Serbs), Belorussians, Bulgarians, Russians, Ukrainians outside Ruthenian tradition
B. 1941 Recension Ruthena (pro Ucrainis et Ruthenis) –
Byzantine Galicia and Subcarpathia prior to Union of Brest, 14th century Divine Liturgy of Metropolitan Izydor or Kiev (1436-1458)
This is not correct. The Vulgata is intended only for the celebration of the Nikonian (Synodal) Russian liturgical tradition (which would currently only include the Russian Catholics); the Ruthenian Rescension is for all churches of the tradition of “Rus” outside of the Nikonian Russian rescension. All Churches of the Unions of Brest and Uzhorod follow this rescension, along with “sui iuris” eparchial Churches related to these, such as Krizhevtci, Presov, etc.So one can readily see that these recensions can be used by various ritual Churches. There is more to the definition of a ritual Church than the liturgy they use.
Many parishes do have pews, or at least some chairs exactly for this reason. So, if it is difficult for you to stand for the whole liturgy, I’m positive you’ll be able to find a place to sit.I also have a question about attending the same Divine Liturgy as the OP (don’t jump on me, please).
I know the norm is to stand during the Divine Liturgy – are there concessions made for those of us who can’t stand that long (I’m assuming an hour or more)? The website of the church I plan to attend has a nice explanation of what a Latin Rite visitor can expect, but I didn’t see this mentioned.
Thanks very much.
In practice, it’s the 24th… officially, it’s still part of the Ruthenian Church Sui Iuris, but the other end is treated as autonomous from the Metropolia.i have a question
to which sui iuris does the Metropolita of Pittsburgh belong to?
I am sorry it is incorrect. My source must be incorrect, which is:This is not correct. The Vulgata is intended only for the celebration of the Nikonian (Synodal) Russian liturgical tradition (which would currently only include the Russian Catholics); the Ruthenian Rescension is for all churches of the tradition of “Rus” outside of the Nikonian Russian rescension. All Churches of the Unions of Brest and Uzhorod follow this rescension, along with “sui iuris” eparchial Churches related to these, such as Krizhevtci, Presov, etc.
FYI I see the book is available on Google books.Morality and reality: the life and times of Andrei Sheptyts’kyi by Paul R. Magocsi, Andrii Krawchuk, Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, 1989