Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Liturgies

[Ak_Fossil]

I don’t know how to highlite something that was mentioned earlier, but BPBASILPHX, you should look at May 14th, and see what it says, before you make a quote that is not true within the Ruthenian Eparchies. Beatitudes are on page 23 of the new (2006 ) pew book, and we in Alaska used them during Great Fast, and use them as a hymn periodically within the year. Maybe at your place you don’t use them but they are in an approved published book for the Byzantine Catholic Church of America.

 

[Hesychios]

I don’t know how to highlite something that was mentioned earlier, but BPBASILPHX, you should look at May 14th, and see what it says, before you make a quote that is not true within the Ruthenian Eparchies. Beatitudes are on page 23 of the new (2006 ) pew book, and we in Alaska used them during Great Fast, and use them as a hymn periodically within the year. Maybe at your place you don’t use them but they are in an approved published book for the Byzantine Catholic Church of America.

The Ruthenian church in America is really a conglomerate of many different slightly variant traditions from Europe, mostly from Slovakia, Hungary and (what is now) Ukraine. One can still find locations in Ohio and Pennsylvania where there are two or more parishes really rather close to each other, now probably better off merged, but the congregations were started by Croatians in one place and Slovaks in another with Ukrainians in a third. Even when Rome separated the Ukrainians from the Ruthenians early in the last century, there were elements of each group left in the “other” church’s parishes.

Before the seminary in Pittsburgh, the Ruthenians relied on a Latin Abbey near Chicago to provide training for new priests (and ultimately) bishops. This Abbey was specialized in ecumenical work and was a home to numerous refugee monastics from eastern Europe, including Belarus, Russia and Ukraine. It used the Nikonian recension of the Russian Catholics as well as the Ruthenian recension.

Individual parishes have often varied in practice considerably from place to place, then there was that Elko episode, which was something like a shattering, having more impact in some areas than others. Finally there were the many helpful bi-faculty Latin priests who sometimes received their training from the Russicum, and sometimes from Pittsburgh and sometimes from other places who did their level best to provide their congregations the most authentic Byzantine-Slavonic liturgical practice they could possibly give.

The Ruthenians of Pittsburgh have been hybridizing for years. It couldn’t be helped considering what they had started with.

No way for me to know from where I sit, but I am inclined to believe that in the main sense BPBASILPHX is correct, I have seen that he usually is. As far as the Ruthenian Metropolia of Pittsburgh is concerned, whatever is in the new pew book or what has been done in one parish in one place for a long time may not represent the previously longstanding norm, it’s difficult to tell.

 

[Patchunky]

Before the seminary in Pittsburgh, the Ruthenians relied on a Latin Abbey near Chicago to provide training for new priests (and ultimately) bishops.

'St.Procopius Abbey in Lisle, Illinois didn’t come into use by the Ruthenians until late 1945 or early 1946.

Prior to this, seminarians were sent to Presov, Uzhorod and Mukachevo in what was then Czecho-Slovakia. With the annexation of Eastern Slovakia and Zakarpatija by Hungary in 1938 and the start of World War II, it became impossible to send the seminarians to the old “homeland” to be trained and they were trained here in a make-shift seminary until they started using St. Procopius. By this time, plans were already under way to build Sts. Cyril and Methodius Seminary.

The Russicum uses the Belarussian Recension of the Divine Liturgy and not the Ruthenian Recension.

hope this helps…

 

[dvdjs]

The Ruthenian church in America is really a conglomerate of many different slightly variant traditions from Europe, mostly from Slovakia, Hungary and (what is now) Ukraine. One can still find locations in Ohio and Pennsylvania where there are two or more parishes really rather close to each other, now probably better off merged, but the congregations were started by Croatians in one place and Slovaks in another with Ukrainians in a third. Even when Rome separated the Ukrainians from the Ruthenians early in the last century, there were elements of each group left in the “other” church’s parishes.

Individual parishes have often varied in practice considerably from place to place…

Michael, I am not exactly sure what your point is. But I disagree with your history and the implications you attach to them.

The people who started the present-day Ruthenian church in America came from the Hungarian regions of Austria-Hungary. While not exclusively, they are very largely of Rusyn ethnicity. They were not a conglomeration of Slovaks, Ukrainians, Romanians, Magyars, Croats etc., even though, after the passage of an interesting century-plus most people of these regions have now assimilated to such separate identities. At the time of immigration this separation was nascent; it was probably more evident in mother language (hence some specific Hungarian, or Croatian churches) than in liturgical practice including chant style (excepting, perhaps Maramorosh). This is not to say that there was complete uniformity of practices, but I think the suggestion that such diversity was a reflection of a multi-ethnic conglomeration in the Ruthenian church is not correct.

The separation of the Galician Ukrainians from the Austrian regions of Austria-Hungary (and previously Poland) is another matter entirely. In the old country there was a pattern of sharing among these separate peoples. There was communication and interaction that affected liturgical practices and singing - especially para-liturgical hymns. And in the US, I think it incorrect to talk of Rome separating the Ruthenians and Ukrainians; rather Rome responded affirmatively to a request for that separation of jurisdictions among people who had for centuries been separate (Hungarian vs. Polish/Austrian), and who, in the US had already in the 1890’s established separate brotherhoods, newspapers, etc.

The Ruthenians of Pittsburgh have been hybridizing for years. It couldn’t be helped considering what they had started with.

“Hybridizing”? I really don’t know what you mean or what you are getting at. But again, your concept of what we had started with is, I think, just incorrect.

As far as the Ruthenian Metropolia of Pittsburgh is concerned, whatever is in the new pew book or what has been done in one parish in one place for a long time may not represent the previously longstanding norm, it’s difficult to tell.

It is not, in principle, difficult to tell, although it would require some actual gathering of facts, and that may be difficult.

More simply, it is also possible to look at older books like Sokol and Bokshay to get some insight. Both have the first two Paschal Antiphons and the typical psalms. Neither have the beatitudes nor the third Paschal Antiphon (with the others), as the prevailing practice was to omit the third antiphon. The new books restore the third antiphon.

By the way, John Vernoski commented over at his forum forum that the custom of taking the Beatitudes during Lent may have arisen somehat accidentaly, owing to his including them in a certain publication that was made for use during Lent.

 

[SVP]

More simply, it is also possible to look at older books like Sokol and Bokshay to get some insight. Both have the first two Paschal Antiphons and the typical psalms. Neither have the beatitudes nor the third Paschal Antiphon (with the others), as the prevailing practice was to omit the third antiphon. The new books restore the third antiphon.

By the way, John Vernoski commented over at his forum forum that the custom of taking the Beatitudes during Lent may have arisen somehat accidentaly, owing to his including them in a certain publication that was made for use during Lent.

Interesting thread there.
Are there any other sources that could prove this is indeed a restoration of the practice rather than innovation, accidental or otherwise?

From the above referenced forum link: (underline emphaisis mine)

I am probably the root cause of the restoration of the Typical Psalms and the Beatitudes in many Ruthenian parishes. In 1984 I published a “Hymns for Great Lent” book that included settings of the Typical Psalms and the Beatitudes to Russian Tone 1. These settings were eventually included in the Lenten Hymnal published by the late Msgr. William Levkulic.

 

[Ak_Fossil]

Again we are talking about part of our Byzantine liturgy and it was just asked----------is there any SOURCE, that can PROVE, a restoration of using the beatitudes. Granted, I am not a superior authority, as many of you seem to be, but what part of authorized publications of this era, doesn’t someone understand.

Pew Book(or Faithful Book), pg 16, above First Typical Psalm— "The Typical Psalms (“Bless the Lord, O my soul”) and the Beatitudes may be sung in place of the Sunday Antiphons except on those Sundays for which proper antiphons are prescribed. The Typical Psalms are sung in place of the First and Second Antiphons.

Pew Book, pg 23, above Beatitudes (Matthew 5: 3-12).
"If the Typical Psalms have been sung in place of the Sunday First and Second Antiphons, the Beatitudes are now sung in place of the Third Antiphon.

The Cantor’s Companion— 2006, Chapter 5, pg 13,–The Antiphons. rather than type all that information, read the entire 6 paragraphs, and you will find the proof–once again-- of using the Typical Psalms and Beatitudes.

These are official books authorized by our Metropolitan Basil, and we are supposed to follow his guidelines as he signed these publications to put them in effect.

I am not concerned with what happened in 1984 with John Vernoski, or the other history of what we used to do, for this question. We are concerned what IS proper to do NOW.

Even back on Nov. 5,2005, Prof. Thompson was saying that he was conducting a survey of Cantors across the Metropolia on the use of the Typical Psalms and the Beatitudes in place of the Antiphons for the Divine Liturgy. He said they were used in St John the Baptist Cathedral in Munhall, Pa. on Sunday’s of the Nativity Fast, the Great Fast and the Apostles Fast. ??