The importance of Tradition

[ciero]

In the last few months I have noticed that quite a few folks who post here find it ok for traditions of the church (especialy the Byzantine church) to be replaced by traditions of other churches (especialy the Latin church). A few examples; replacing the service of Vespers with Divine Liturgy, in imitation of the Latin Mass of anticipation, replacing Great Compline on Christmas Eve with a midnight Mass ( Divine Liturgy), replacing the praying of the Hours with the recitation of the rosery just to name a few. The answer always seems to be…this is where the people are or this is what the people want, so therefor its ok, or this is America and we need to do these things to “inculturate”.

It bothers me that Traditions both liturgical and non liturgical are thrown away so easily, and things constantly being dumbed down. "Our people cant/wont stay for a 2 hour Liturgy. We couldnt expect our people to sit through 14 readings at the Vesperal liturgy of St Basil on the eve of Christmas or Pascha…its just to long.

Are our priests and bishops really doing us a favor by throwing out our traditions or dumbing them down and not holding us to a higher standard?

 

[JRKH]

Without getting into a lot of specifics about this or that liturgy or this or that location, I think I would say that no they are not doing us a favor by not holding us to a higher standard. I think what they are doing is trying to keep many people from quiting church altogether. This speaks tot he “dumbing down” aspect you mention.

Personally I don’t have a big problem with shorter liturgies. There are those who, for legitimate reasons, perhaps cannot participate in the longer versions. I do think that it is sad that the longer versions are “tossed out” in favor of the shorter ones. Thus, it is those who DO seek the longer, more involved, and more lofty versions who suffer.
If a person is lucky enough to live near a monestary or, to a lesser extent, a seminary, they might be able to take part in the more traditional services, but for the majority of Catholics this is not an option.

Just some thoughts

Peace
James

 

[Seamus_L]

Ciero
It seems your basing your arguments almost entirely on what you're hearing from posters online. In the actual churches, almost all devotions with Latin origins have already been supressed. Does anyone even say the rosary as a group anymore, or have stations of the cross, supplikatsia, molebens to the Sacred Heart, etc. Haven't seen it on any church websites.

 

[JRKH]

Ciero

                                  It seems your basing your arguments almost entirely on what you're hearing from posters online. In the actual churches, almost all devotions with Latin origins have already been supressed. Does anyone even say the rosary as a group anymore, or have stations of the cross, supplikatsia, molebens to the Sacred Heart, etc. Haven't seen it on any church websites.

I can’t speak to the other items, but our parish has a once monthly rosary group which usually has a short talk beforehand.
Also there is a group of retirees who pray the rosary every morning right after mass.

I agree that it would be nice to see some of the other things like the stations of the cross return.

Peace
James

 

[dvdjs]

In the last few months I have noticed that quite a few folks who post here find it ok for traditions of the church (especialy the Byzantine church) to be replaced by traditions of other churches (especialy the Latin church). A few examples; replacing the service of Vespers with Divine Liturgy, in imitation of the Latin Mass of anticipation, replacing Great Compline on Christmas Eve with a midnight Mass ( Divine Liturgy), replacing the praying of the Hours with the recitation of the rosery just to name a few. The answer always seems to be…this is where the people are or this is what the people want, so therefor its ok, or this is America and we need to do these things to “inculturate”.

It bothers me that Traditions both liturgical and non liturgical are thrown away so easily, and things constantly being dumbed down. "Our people cant/wont stay for a 2 hour Liturgy. We couldnt expect our people to sit through 14 readings at the Vesperal liturgy of St Basil on the eve of Christmas or Pascha…its just to long.

Are our priests and bishops really doing us a favor by throwing out our traditions or dumbing them down and not holding us to a higher standard?

I can see this thread getting off to a messy start. If as SeamusL thinks, you are basing these observations from posters on-line, please give links so that we are actually talking about what those posters said rather than a possible misinterpretations of it.

I recall someone in transition wanting to go to midnight mass and break the fast afterwards, but do not recall a suggestion to replace compline with midnight mass. I like the idea of evening liturgies, but have no interest in having them replacing vespers. Praying the rosary before liturgy? Well, that requires a discussion of tradition and its organic development, doesn’t it. Surely you’ve seen this in the old country, ciero. So before we go off talking past each other how about some actual facts.

And the same request applies if one is talking about experiences in parishes, and wants to seize the opportunity to criticize bishops: which parish? which particular church? is the parish representative of the church? is the observation representative or is it an outlier in the current trends in that church? etc. I don’t know much about particular churches other than my own, but I can say that Vespers are celebrated much more in the BCC in the US over the last decade than they have been for the previous 30 years.

I think that there is an interesting conversation to be had about understanding tradition, and understanding how one always put new energy tradition to conserve it. But that conversation really cannot be done without the conversation being rooted in the reality of actual verifiable facts.

 

[Diak]

In the last few months I have noticed that quite a few folks who post here find it ok for traditions of the church (especialy the Byzantine church) to be replaced by traditions of other churches (especialy the Latin church). A few examples; replacing the service of Vespers with Divine Liturgy, in imitation of the Latin Mass of anticipation, replacing Great Compline on Christmas Eve with a midnight Mass ( Divine Liturgy), replacing the praying of the Hours with the recitation of the rosery just to name a few. The answer always seems to be…this is where the people are or this is what the people want, so therefor its ok, or this is America and we need to do these things to “inculturate”.

It bothers me that Traditions both liturgical and non liturgical are thrown away so easily, and things constantly being dumbed down. "Our people cant/wont stay for a 2 hour Liturgy. We couldnt expect our people to sit through 14 readings at the Vesperal liturgy of St Basil on the eve of Christmas or Pascha…its just to long.

Are our priests and bishops really doing us a favor by throwing out our traditions or dumbing them down and not holding us to a higher standard?

Not everyone here fits that description (although I haven’t posted here for several months). You bring up a complicated issue that has numerous dimensions.

First of all, don’t put too much investment in the often Latin-leaning tendencies of this Forum. Indeed, there are some here who seem to harbor some romantic desires for a relic latinized faith relying on the “Byzantine Mass” as some kind of back-door refuge for problems in their own Latin Church. I warn all of my own catechists and their students to stay away from here for definitive answers (as many of these are actually in opposition to our hierarchy, the Magisterium, and sensible pastoral application).

Likewise there are some Eastern Catholics who have never known anything other than the latinized celebration of the services who “like it short” because it is convenient, they have never been catechized, and that’s the way they were brought up.

Speaking for the UGCC, our Patriarch and hierarchy, as well as the Magisterium itself, we have strong and direct guidance to be faithful to the restoration of our authentic Kyivan liturgical and spiritual patrimony. We have been instructed to remove recent latinizations that our particular Church herself declared to be acceptable at more recent local councils as Zamosc that were convened often under Latin pressure. The service books published in Rome have been declared to be the standard, at least for the UGCC, which contains the restored pre-Zamosc order of Vespers, Matins, and the Divine Liturgy.

While this restoration may take some time, it is happening in many places. Many of our younger clergy have come from parishes that never served the latinized forms, and some of our newer bishops are Studite monks accustomed to the full celebration of the tradition.

As for replacements, you go and tell some Ukrainians you are not going to sing “Z Nami Boh” (Prophecy of Isaiah sung at Great Compline) for Christmas. Our largest parish in the Eparchy (Sts. Volodymyr and Olha in Chicago) is strictly Julian Calendar and generally abbreviates very little.

That being said, as such liturgical scholars as Frs. Alexander Schmemann, Juan Mateos, and Miguel Arranz have demonstrated, there is a distinction between the cathedral (parochial) and the monastic typikon for services. “Abbreviation” is always a loaded subject, and one has to be careful as to appropriate pastoral adaptation (such as the abbreviation of the Kathismata at Vespers and Matins, abbreivating the Canons at Matins, etc.) with the larger and more wholesale abbreviations of the Divine Liturgy including entire litanies and antiphons, etc. as well as casting aside services that always formed an integral part of the parochial liturgical corpus.

 

[malphono]

In the last few months I have noticed that quite a few folks who post here find it ok for traditions of the church (especialy the Byzantine church) to be replaced by traditions of other churches (especialy the Latin church). A few examples; replacing the service of Vespers with Divine Liturgy, in imitation of the Latin Mass of anticipation, replacing Great Compline on Christmas Eve with a midnight Mass ( Divine Liturgy), replacing the praying of the Hours with the recitation of the rosery just to name a few. The answer always seems to be…this is where the people are or this is what the people want, so therefor its ok, or this is America and we need to do these things to “inculturate”.

It bothers me that Traditions both liturgical and non liturgical are thrown away so easily, and things constantly being dumbed down. "Our people cant/wont stay for a 2 hour Liturgy. We couldnt expect our people to sit through 14 readings at the Vesperal liturgy of St Basil on the eve of Christmas or Pascha…its just to long.

Are our priests and bishops really doing us a favor by throwing out our traditions or dumbing them down and not holding us to a higher standard?

It bothers me too, but I imagine that’s not a big surprise. You’ll recall that I got slammed for having had the temerity to so much as mention certain things of this nature in a previous thread, so perhaps it’s best that I reserve further comment. Well … at least for the time being.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You have to realize that some Latinizations today are not imposed by the Latin Church and have been adopted by the Bishops of the Eastern Churches themselves. And most of the time its not by choice, there are many issues where Eastern Catholics move to Roman Catholic parishes for one reason or another. Whether we would like to admit it or not, there is a competition for parishioners. If EC parishes do not hold “anticipated” Divine Liturgies, the congregation will just go to the RC parish down the street to attend on a Saturday evening. There have been less interest in other forms of Divine Praises and just interest in “Mass”. A tradition is only good if there’s someone to carry it. My parish I heard tried to restart Vespers in the recent past, and no one came. For Christmas we did have Great Compline followed by Divine Liturgy. Most ordinary, everyday Catholics wouldn’t mind going to either a RC Mass or DL. If the EC parishes do not give in, everyone else will just move to RC parishes which have Masses throughout the entire day at the most convenient hour for the people.

Lets face reality here, not many people have the actual free time during weekends to spend hours and hours for Vespers, Matins and Divine Liturgy, especially here in North America. Many people even work during weekends. We shouldn’t look at it as the leadership of the EC parishes and eparchies are out to destroy traditions, but are just responding to the spirutual needs of the people.

 

[Aramis]

Well, in the case of current canon law…
Latins have to have a DL to fulfill obligation.
Easterns have to have a sunday or holy day DL, or a tradition of some other praxis, or enabling legislation for some other praxis.

The Byzantines universally have a vespers and matins tradition; further, certain feasts have an anticipatory combined vespers/DL tradition.

The Ruthenians and Ukrainians have a persistent use of anticipatory DL’s… 50 years gives it force of law as custom.

CCEO:Canon 880

1. Only the supreme authority of the Church can establish, transfer or suppress feast days and days of penance which are common to all of the Eastern Churches, with due regard for 3.
2. The authority of a Church sui iuris which is competent to establish particular law can constitute, transfer or suppress feast days and days of penance for that Church sui iuris, however having sought the opinions of the other Churches sui iuris and with due regard for can. 40, 1.
3. Holy days of obligation common to all the Eastern Churches, beyond Sundays, are the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Dormition of the Holy Mary Mother of God and the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul except for the particular law of a Church sui iuris approved by the Apostolic See which suppresses a holy days of obligation or transfers them to a Sunday.

Canon 881

1. The Christian faithful are bound by the obligation to participate on Sundays and feast days in the Divine Liturgy, or according to the prescriptions or legitimate customs of their own Church sui iuris, in the celebration of the divine praises.
2. In order for the Christian faithful to fulfill this obligation more easily, the available time runs from the evening of the vigil until the end of the Sunday or feast day.
3. The Christian faithful are strongly recommended to receive the Divine Eucharist on these days and indeed more frequently, even daily.
4. The Christian faithful should abstain from those labors or business matters which impede the worship to be rendered to God, the joy which is proper to the Lord’s day, or to the proper relaxation of mind and body.

Canon 883

1. The Christian faithful who are outside the territorial boundaries of their own Church sui iuris can adopt fully for themselves the feast days and days of penance which are in force where they are staying.
2. In families in which the parents are enrolled in different Churches sui iuris, it is permitted to observe the norms of one or the other Church, in regard to feast days and days of penance.

CIC (Roman)Can. 1246
§1. Sunday, on which by apostolic tradition the paschal mystery is celebrated, must be observed in the universal Church as the primordial holy day of obligation. The following days must also be observed: the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Body and Blood of Christ, Holy Mary the Mother of God, her Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, Saint Joseph, Saint Peter and Saint Paul the Apostles, and All Saints.

§2. With the prior approval of the Apostolic See, however, the conference of bishops can suppress some of the holy days of obligation or transfer them to a Sunday.

Can. 1247
On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.

Moreover, they are to abstain from those works and aVairs which hinder the worship to be rendered to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s day, or the suitable relaxation of mind and body.

Can. 1248
§1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.

§2. If participation in the eucharistic celebration becomes impossible because of the absence of a sacred minister or for another grave cause, it is strongly recommended that the faithful take part in a liturgy of the word if such a liturgy is celebrated in a parish church or other sacred place according to the prescripts of the diocesan bishop or that they devote themselves to prayer for a suitable time alone, as a family, or, as the occasion permits, in groups of families.

 

[ProVobis]

§1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.

Actually the Latin refers to it as Vespers. That can cover the late afternoon or evening period. Can’t trust those translators.

Can. 1248 - §1. Praecepto de Missa participanda satisfacit qui Missae assistit ubicumque celebratur ritu catholico vel ipso die festo vel vespere diei praecedentis.

Also see forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=7394820#post7394820

 

[ciero]

I can see this thread getting off to a messy start. If as SeamusL thinks, you are basing these observations from posters on-line, please give links so that we are actually talking about what those posters said rather than a possible misinterpretations of it.

I recall someone in transition wanting to go to midnight mass and break the fast afterwards, but do not recall a suggestion to replace compline with midnight mass. I like the idea of evening liturgies, but have no interest in having them replacing vespers. Praying the rosary before liturgy? Well, that requires a discussion of tradition and its organic development, doesn’t it. Surely you’ve seen this in the old country, ciero. So before we go off talking past each other how about some actual facts.

And the same request applies if one is talking about experiences in parishes, and wants to seize the opportunity to criticize bishops: which parish? which particular church? is the parish representative of the church? is the observation representative or is it an outlier in the current trends in that church? etc. I don’t know much about particular churches other than my own, but I can say that Vespers are celebrated much more in the BCC in the US over the last decade than they have been for the previous 30 years.

I think that there is an interesting conversation to be had about understanding tradition, and understanding how one always put new energy tradition to conserve it. But that conversation really cannot be done without the conversation being rooted in the reality of actual verifiable facts.

I’m not here to point at any particular church or eparchy or parish…I think what bothers me most is the mindset that allows these traditions to be undervalued or not valued at all.

One particular eparchy that was one of the most Easternizing up until a few years ago has allowed and is even encouraging daily communion services during this upcoming lent for people who want daily communion. Now dont get me wrong I have nothing against daily communion …but daily communion during lent is NOT our tradition and never has been. And to allow it to be merged into one of the canonical hours is beyond understanding. If we are going to give up our tradition of fasting even from the Eucharist during lent…why not just do it in the form of the Presanctified Liturgy, which is part of our tradition?

The idea of whittling away what is authentically ours just to keep asses in the pews really bugs me. If people prefer what they can get from the Latins why not just let them get it from the Latins? Why do we always have to compromise our Liturgy, tradition and culture to make people who aren’t interested in being authentically Eastern happy?

Sorry for the ranting. Its been a long tiring day.

 

[ciero]

You have to realize that some Latinizations today are not imposed by the Latin Church and have been adopted by the Bishops of the Eastern Churches themselves. And most of the time its not by choice, there are many issues where Eastern Catholics move to Roman Catholic parishes for one reason or another. Whether we would like to admit it or not, there is a competition for parishioners. If EC parishes do not hold “anticipated” Divine Liturgies, the congregation will just go to the RC parish down the street to attend on a Saturday evening. There have been less interest in other forms of Divine Praises and just interest in “Mass”. A tradition is only good if there’s someone to carry it. My parish I heard tried to restart Vespers in the recent past, and no one came. For Christmas we did have Great Compline followed by Divine Liturgy. Most ordinary, everyday Catholics wouldn’t mind going to either a RC Mass or DL. If the EC parishes do not give in, everyone else will just move to RC parishes which have Masses throughout the entire day at the most convenient hour for the people.

Lets face reality here, not many people have the actual free time during weekends to spend hours and hours for Vespers, Matins and Divine Liturgy, especially here in North America. Many people even work during weekends. We shouldn’t look at it as the leadership of the EC parishes and eparchies are out to destroy traditions, but are just responding to the spirutual needs of the people.

In my opinion Constantine if people aren’t interested in what we have to offer let them go. Parishes that have not given in and hold fast may suffer for a period but I have seen it over and over again…stick to the traditions, serve the services even if nobody comes and eventually people will come. Our people have a “mass only” attitude because its been what they have been fed for the last 50+ years Educate these same people and things will change, and dont be discouraged if some folks walk away…people walked awy even from Our Lord.

Before the Ruthenian and Ukrainian Churches switched into English, Vespers and Mattins were served regularly and the churches were full. These services fell into disuse when things went into English and for over 20 years the services were not available in English and the services were forbidden to be translated into English by the Bishops. Thank God the Basilian sisters disobeyed the Bishops and translated them anyway.

My point is I guess is where do we draw the line? What if people want communion in the hand next week and say if we dont give it to them they will go to the Latins? When do we say enough is enough? When do we stand up I dont want a hybrid Liturgy anymore and if you insist on giving it to me I will go to the Orthodox? The door swings both ways you know.

 

[5Loaves]

I’m not here to point at any particular church or eparchy or parish…I think what bothers me most is the mindset that allows these traditions to be undervalued or not valued at all.

One particular eparchy that was one of the most Easternizing up until a few years ago has allowed and is even encouraging daily communion services during this upcoming lent for people who want daily communion. Now dont get me wrong I have nothing against daily communion …but daily communion during lent is NOT our tradition and never has been. And to allow it to be merged into one of the canonical hours is beyond understanding. If we are going to give up our tradition of fasting even from the Eucharist during lent…why not just do it in the form of the Presanctified Liturgy, which is part of our tradition?

The idea of whittling away what is authentically ours just to keep asses in the pews really bugs me. If people prefer what they can get from the Latins why not just let them get it from the Latins? Why do we always have to compromise our Liturgy, tradition and culture to make people who aren’t interested in being authentically Eastern happy?

Sorry for the ranting. Its been a long tiring day.

Slam me… I’m with you and malphono…

Daily communion during Great Lent? This should be unthinkable… As a once famous Fr. Vasiliy would say “Was it daily communion during Great Lent in19th Century Russia? No, it was not! Is Outrage!” Trying to have a bit of humor in what is in fact a really disturbing issue… Seriously, to me this is really inconceivable… (Emoticon with tear going down cheek)

I have *some understanding * for situations in places where the Church had to go underground for example, and for those communities in the diaspora who felt such a burdon to, for example, “be American”, here in the US.

I’m very grateful for our tiny parish which so orthodox although served by a bi-ritual priest (tho he hasn’t celebrated the Roman Rite in decades and is not Latin in any way but on paper). under a Latin Archbishop. How ironic…

When we don’t have services I (and many other parishioners) go to Orthodox parishes, some of which have their own issues such as pews, not a Latinization but a protestantism adopted by the Latin Church. I have only been to a couple of other EC/OC parishes which did, sadly, have pews but were otherwise fairly orthodox.

A large Greek Orthodox Church I attend a handful of times a year is filled with pews. The feast day services I’m there for it’s rare there are more than about 10 of us faithful there, :sad_yes: including the family that home schools and has their kids along. I wish they’d just remove a section of pews so that those who wish to do so could stand. As it is about 4 of us do stand and then prostrate in the aisles.

Seems to me that the same problem that has led to many issues in the Latin Church has led to many issues in the East-- lack of good catechesis. I’m constantly learning more— like the layers of the onion in infinite layers…

It has been a long tiring day.

 

[5Loaves]

If EC parishes do not hold “anticipated” Divine Liturgies,** the congregation will just go to the RC parish down the street **to attend on a Saturday evening.

That is their choice. It sounds like what you’re describing is a “Sunday obligation” mindset if they just go to the Latin Church because they’re “busy” Sunday morning. That would be a “spiritual need” right there in terms of having potentially somehow deeply lost their sense as Easterners.

My parish I heard tried to restart Vespers in the recent past, and no one came… If the EC parishes do not give in, everyone else will just move to RC parishes which have Masses throughout the entire day at the most convenient hour for the people.

If no one came how did they have Vespers? I have to believe the clergy was there and possibly a cantor or a few choir members and a couple of parishoners. That is not “no one”. I’m in plenty of services where present is the clergy, a cantor or 2 or 3 choir members and a few of the faithful— and I’m talking Orthodox as well as my own parish. I’ve been to a number of services (not Sunday) at my Russian EC parish where it was me and a couple of the choir and the priest, maybe the deacon. Father has never even hinted “why bother” on those occasions (and he qualifies as a senior citizen so doing the DL alone is a lot!).

Lets face reality here, not many people have the actual free time during weekends to spend hours and hours for Vespers, Matins and Divine Liturgy, especially here in North America. Many people even work during weekends. We shouldn’t look at it as the leadership of the EC parishes and eparchies are out to destroy traditions, but are just responding to the spirutual needs of the people.

I believe they respond to the spiritual needs of the EC faithful when they celebrate faithfully as many of the services as they are able, according to our patrimony. Some will come, some will not. It’s a very different perspective on what it is to “respond to the spiritual needs”. “Responding to the spiritual needs” would be helping the faithful examine their lives and consider where they place their treasure. Who are we at the most fundamental level? Receiving “Sunday” Eucharist isn’t the answer to being faithful.

Maybe they’re concerned about the loss of financial contributions… Maybe they need to “downsize” and respond faithfully to those who do want to worship in their tradition (it’s not your tradition when it’s outside your tradition) and let those who are happy in the Latin Church when it’s more convenient go to the Latin Church. It’s gone on for centuries. Since the two are apples and oranges at so many levels I have to think that those who are ready to go to the Roman Rite have a lot more going on than just convenience.

 

[5Loaves]

I recently has a little argument with our deacon. He was on his way to the annual gathering of the deacons. He’s the only EC deacon since we are under a Latin archbishop. He mentioned what he was wearing to the gathering. It wasn’t his *riassa *. I let in to him… “What do you think Fr Maximos (HRM monk) would wear?” “What do you think Fr George (OCA deacon we both know) would wear?” I also brought up that when our clergy were recently in Constantinople they of course were forbidden to wear their clerical garb, and here you are, at least today, free to wear these in our country.

I have very strong feelings about this. I understand where he was coming from and he understood where I was coming from. (The archbishop apparently wore a flannel shirt and chinos… sigh! ) The cassock and kontorasson as clerical “street clothes” are to me basic parts of our traditions. Our parish clergy do not wear them coming and going to church but put them on soon after arriving well before vesting prayers and remain in their ryassa until after we’re done eating and socializing. They usually take it off before doing dishes etc. One deacon kept his on when doing dishes, but he was a Dominican and used to wearing his Dominican habit while doing physical work. (I was told by some clergy that the Dominicans here are encouraged to not wear their habits around town )

Kýrie, eléison

“The Opinionated Tailor”, Khouria Krista West, ecclesiastical tailor, has a number of podcasts about this topic including The Power Of The Cassock, The Big Black Dress and several on a book she’s writing Vestment Book I, Vestment Book 2, and Vestment Book 3. (I haven’t had a chance to listen to the Vestment Book series yet.)

sign me: The Opinionated Baba

 

[ProVobis]

I’m not here to point at any particular church or eparchy or parish…I think what bothers me most is the mindset that allows these traditions to be undervalued or not valued at all.

One particular eparchy that was one of the most Easternizing up until a few years ago has allowed and is even encouraging daily communion services during this upcoming lent for people who want daily communion. Now dont get me wrong I have nothing against daily communion …but daily communion during lent is NOT our tradition and never has been. And to allow it to be merged into one of the canonical hours is beyond understanding. If we are going to give up our tradition of fasting even from the Eucharist during lent…why not just do it in the form of the Presanctified Liturgy, which is part of our tradition?

I think you’re definitely onto something here. Good post.

 

[Diak]

I recently has a little argument with our deacon. He was on his way to the annual gathering of the deacons. He’s the only EC deacon since we are under a Latin archbishop. He mentioned what he was wearing to the gathering. It wasn’t his riassa . I let in to him… “What do you think Fr Maximos (HRM monk) would wear?” “What do you think Fr George (OCA deacon we both know) would wear?” I also brought up that when our clergy were recently in Constantinople they of course were forbidden to wear their clerical garb, and here you are, at least today, free to wear these in our country.

I have very strong feelings about this. I understand where he was coming from and he understood where I was coming from. (The archbishop apparently wore a flannel shirt and chinos… sigh! ) The cassock and kontorasson as clerical “street clothes” are to me basic parts of our traditions. Our parish clergy do not wear them coming and going to church but put them on soon after arriving well before vesting prayers and remain in their ryassa until after we’re done eating and socializing. They usually take it off before doing dishes etc. One deacon kept his on when doing dishes, but he was a Dominican and used to wearing his Dominican habit while doing physical work. (I was told by some clergy that the Dominicans here are encouraged to not wear their habits around town )

Kýrie, eléison

“The Opinionated Tailor”, Khouria Krista West, ecclesiastical tailor, has a number of podcasts about this topic including The Power Of The Cassock, The Big Black Dress and several on a book she’s writing Vestment Book I, Vestment Book 2, and Vestment Book 3. (I haven’t had a chance to listen to the Vestment Book series yet.)

sign me: The Opinionated Baba

Several times a year I serve with the Latins of the local RC Archdiocese (I will be proclaiming the Gospel at the next Archdiocesan diaconal ordination this spring). I am never out of proper clerical attire for a Ukrainian Greek Catholic deacon when serving with them, whether that be riassa outside of services or stikharion and orarion during liturgical services. If anything it is a great conversation starter.

 

[Diak]

An excellent article by Protodeacon David Kennedy of St. Elias (UGCC):
saintelias.com/articles/Liturgical%20Participation/Liturgical_Praticipation/Liturgical_Participation.html

 

[ciero]

That is their choice. It sounds like what you’re describing is a “Sunday obligation” mindset if they just go to the Latin Church because they’re “busy” Sunday morning. That would be a “spiritual need” right there in terms of having potentially somehow deeply lost their sense as Easterners.

If no one came how did they have Vespers? I have to believe the clergy was there and possibly a cantor or a few choir members and a couple of parishoners. That is not “no one”. I’m in plenty of services where present is the clergy, a cantor or 2 or 3 choir members and a few of the faithful— and I’m talking Orthodox as well as my own parish. I’ve been to a number of services (not Sunday) at my Russian EC parish where it was me and a couple of the choir and the priest, maybe the deacon. Father has never even hinted “why bother” on those occasions (and he qualifies as a senior citizen so doing the DL alone is a lot!).

I believe they respond to the spiritual needs of the EC faithful when they celebrate faithfully as many of the services as they are able, according to our patrimony. Some will come, some will not. It’s a very different perspective on what it is to “respond to the spiritual needs”. “Responding to the spiritual needs” would be helping the faithful examine their lives and consider where they place their treasure. Who are we at the most fundamental level? Receiving “Sunday” Eucharist isn’t the answer to being faithful.

Maybe they’re concerned about the loss of financial contributions… Maybe they need to “downsize” and respond faithfully to those who do want to worship in their tradition (it’s not your tradition when it’s outside your tradition) and let those who are happy in the Latin Church when it’s more convenient go to the Latin Church. It’s gone on for centuries. Since the two are apples and oranges at so many levels I have to think that those who are ready to go to the Roman Rite have a lot more going on than just convenience.

Thank you for a wonderful post!!

 

[ConstantineTG]

In my opinion Constantine if people aren’t interested in what we have to offer let them go. Parishes that have not given in and hold fast may suffer for a period but I have seen it over and over again…stick to the traditions, serve the services even if nobody comes and eventually people will come. Our people have a “mass only” attitude because its been what they have been fed for the last 50+ years Educate these same people and things will change, and dont be discouraged if some folks walk away…people walked awy even from Our Lord.

Its not your place or mine to make that decision. We have to realize there’s a political and financial aspect in maintaining a parish. Our Eparchy already sold off a parish this past year. Letting go of the current parishioners who adhere to Latinized practices would ensure that the entire Eparchy would fold up. I always watch videos on St. Elias’ youtube channel and admire their very orthodox practices. But I also realize that we’d be hard pressed to follow them. I know the clergy want to return to the traditional practices, but they have to find a balance for the parish and the eparchy to survive in our area.

Before the Ruthenian and Ukrainian Churches switched into English, Vespers and Mattins were served regularly and the churches were full. These services fell into disuse when things went into English and for over 20 years the services were not available in English and the services were forbidden to be translated into English by the Bishops. Thank God the Basilian sisters disobeyed the Bishops and translated them anyway.

My point is I guess is where do we draw the line? What if people want communion in the hand next week and say if we dont give it to them they will go to the Latins? When do we say enough is enough? When do we stand up I dont want a hybrid Liturgy anymore and if you insist on giving it to me I will go to the Orthodox? The door swings both ways you know.

Well, lets thank God that we don’t have to make these tough decisions ourselves. But even in my short time with the UGCC parish, I’ve been a witness to some worrying conversations about dropping parish attendance. I’d hate for the parishes to die out and left me deprived of the Rite I have grown to love. I think right now we’re balancing traditional practices. We can’t pull the rug right from under the feet of people, many of these Latinizations have been practiced for quite a while. I guess we have to find ways to increase membership and then from there restart some of the practices. But we should be patient, we can’t push people suddenly in a different direction and then kill off the local church.