Use of 'recited Divine Liturgy' in UGCC

[ukr_cath_ont]

Hello all,

Recently I had the chance to attend a ‘recited Divine Liturgy’ at a Ukrainian Catholic Church in which everything is recited by spoken word instead of sung. Very strange and rather underwhelming experience.

This led me to wondering, why do the Ukrainian Catholic bishops allow this sort of thing? We have been advised if not ordered by Church hierarchs - including the Pope himself - to de-Latinize completely and rediscover our Byzantine tradition in its fullness, yet it is simply not happening in many parishes.

I further pondered why recited liturgies and other abuses never occur in any Orthodox church? I have many priest friends in the OCA and their bishops do not ‘breathe down their necks’ to make sure they follow the rubrics, yet never, ever in a million years would they consider a recited liturgy.

 

[Mintaka]

Because most of the weird Orthodox priests run off to one of the weird claim-to-be-Orthodox, Orthodox-don’t-claim-them-back churches. (If you see an Orthodox group being inexplicably pals with Unitarians and Episcopalians, they’re probably one of the weird groups. They’re also happy to try to ordain female Catholics as “priests.”)

OTOH, you do hear about some fairly significant abuses involved with sucking up to various kings, tsars, Putin’s guys, and imposed Muslim rulers, and there’s a lot of conflict among Orthodox priests, bishops, etc. about how much one should go along with government control of churches and bishops. In the West, we already have had a lot of church/state clashes resolved in favor of the Church’s independence from temporal rulers. In the East, the Byzantine emperor was in control of appointing the patriarchs and bishops and frequently exiling them and unappointing them, right up until the Muslims took over Constantinople. So although the Orthodox reserve the right to tell off their rulers, there’s also plenty of historical examples arguing against it. It puts them in a bad position that they’re still working out. (And there’s all that unofficial layperson belief that “Moscow is the Third Rome, destined to rule the world.”)

So there’s a compensating tendency to be really hardcore about preserving everything liturgically the same. (To the point that the Old Believers schism among the Russian Orthodox was set off by a tiny change in wording. You can look it up.)

So yes, it’s discouraging that idiots try to change things for no reason, when sung Divine Liturgy is so much more beautiful and heavenly. But there’s other stuff you don’t have to put up with but which the Orthodox do have to deal with, so be glad about that.

 

[ukr_cath_ont]

Because most of the weird Orthodox priests run off to one of the weird claim-to-be-Orthodox, Orthodox-don’t-claim-them-back churches. (If you see an Orthodox group being inexplicably pals with Unitarians and Episcopalians, they’re probably one of the weird groups. They’re also happy to try to ordain female Catholics as “priests.”)

OTOH, you do hear about some fairly significant abuses involved with sucking up to various kings, tsars, Putin’s guys, and imposed Muslim rulers, and there’s a lot of conflict among Orthodox priests, bishops, etc. about how much one should go along with government control of churches and bishops. In the West, we already have had a lot of church/state clashes resolved in favor of the Church’s independence from temporal rulers. In the East, the Byzantine emperor was in control of appointing the patriarchs and bishops and frequently exiling them and unappointing them, right up until the Muslims took over Constantinople. So although the Orthodox reserve the right to tell off their rulers, there’s also plenty of historical examples arguing against it. It puts them in a bad position that they’re still working out. (And there’s all that unofficial layperson belief that “Moscow is the Third Rome, destined to rule the world.”)

So there’s a compensating tendency to be really hardcore about preserving everything liturgically the same. (To the point that the Old Believers schism among the Russian Orthodox was set off by a tiny change in wording. You can look it up.)

So yes, it’s discouraging that idiots try to change things for no reason, when sung Divine Liturgy is so much more beautiful and heavenly. But there’s other stuff you don’t have to put up with but which the Orthodox do have to deal with, so be glad about that.

Thank you for your response. Good insights. However, I am still curious as to why the bishops of the UGCC don’t intervene when a church in the eparchy goes off the rails, liturgically speaking.

OCA by the way most definitely is a canonical Orthodox church, but nonetheless your point is noted.

 

[Seraphim73]

Because most of the weird Orthodox priests run off to one of the weird claim-to-be-Orthodox, Orthodox-don’t-claim-them-back churches. (If you see an Orthodox group being inexplicably pals with Unitarians and Episcopalians, they’re probably one of the weird groups. They’re also happy to try to ordain female Catholics as “priests.”)

OTOH, you do hear about some fairly significant abuses involved with sucking up to various kings, tsars, Putin’s guys, and imposed Muslim rulers, and there’s a lot of conflict among Orthodox priests, bishops, etc. about how much one should go along with government control of churches and bishops. In the West, we already have had a lot of church/state clashes resolved in favor of the Church’s independence from temporal rulers. In the East, the Byzantine emperor was in control of appointing the patriarchs and bishops and frequently exiling them and unappointing them, right up until the Muslims took over Constantinople. So although the Orthodox reserve the right to tell off their rulers, there’s also plenty of historical examples arguing against it. It puts them in a bad position that they’re still working out. (And there’s all that unofficial layperson belief that “Moscow is the Third Rome, destined to rule the world.”)

So there’s a compensating tendency to be really hardcore about preserving everything liturgically the same. (To the point that the Old Believers schism among the Russian Orthodox was set off by a tiny change in wording. You can look it up.)

So yes, it’s discouraging that idiots try to change things for no reason, when sung Divine Liturgy is so much more beautiful and heavenly. But there’s other stuff you don’t have to put up with but which the Orthodox do have to deal with, so be glad about that.

Pretty sure you’ve never met a real life Orthodox…

 

[Shiranui117]

My home ACROD parish recites large parts of the Liturgy, including the Anaphora, the Eucharistic Canon and the Epiklesis. Even the Gospel is read, not chanted. Doxologies and litanies are chanted. It’s never bothered me. If one priest reciting the Liturgy is being called a liturgical abuse in the UGCC, rejoice.

 

[Seraphim73]

My home ACROD parish recites large parts of the Liturgy, including the Anaphora, the Eucharistic Canon and the Epiklesis. Even the Gospel is read, not chanted. Doxologies and litanies are chanted. It’s never bothered me. If one priest reciting the Liturgy is being called a liturgical abuse in the UGCC, rejoice.

Well according to the rubrics the Anaphora, Canon and Epiclesis are supposed to be read inaudibly by the priest.

 

[Robertwilliam]

Well according to the rubrics the Anaphora, Canon and Epiclesis are supposed to be read inaudibly by the priest.

That might be true in the Russian Orthodox Church, they also use a Vail that is closed during different parts of the Liturgy, but as a member of the Antiochian Orthodox Church, we always hear the entire Anaphora, Consecration, and Epiclesis in a normal audible volume when our priest chants it, I myself have heard our Arch Bishop Joseph (now Metropolitan Joseph) Vocally chanting it in a normal volume. I don’t think it is Holy Tradition from the Apostles to chant it inaudibly.

 

[DeniseNY]

Because most of the weird Orthodox priests run off to one of the weird claim-to-be-Orthodox, Orthodox-don’t-claim-them-back churches. (If you see an Orthodox group being inexplicably pals with Unitarians and Episcopalians, they’re probably one of the weird groups. They’re also happy to try to ordain female Catholics as “priests.”)

OTOH, you do hear about some fairly significant abuses involved with sucking up to various kings, tsars, Putin’s guys, and imposed Muslim rulers, and there’s a lot of conflict among Orthodox priests, bishops, etc. about how much one should go along with government control of churches and bishops. In the West, we already have had a lot of church/state clashes resolved in favor of the Church’s independence from temporal rulers. In the East, the Byzantine emperor was in control of appointing the patriarchs and bishops and frequently exiling them and unappointing them, right up until the Muslims took over Constantinople. So although the Orthodox reserve the right to tell off their rulers, there’s also plenty of historical examples arguing against it. It puts them in a bad position that they’re still working out. (And there’s all that unofficial layperson belief that “Moscow is the Third Rome, destined to rule the world.”)

So there’s a compensating tendency to be really hardcore about preserving everything liturgically the same. (To the point that the Old Believers schism among the Russian Orthodox was set off by a tiny change in wording. You can look it up.)

So yes, it’s discouraging that idiots try to change things for no reason, when sung Divine Liturgy is so much more beautiful and heavenly. But there’s other stuff you don’t have to put up with but which the Orthodox do have to deal with, so be glad about that.

What on earth are you talking about??

 

[Seraphim73]

That might be true in the Russian Orthodox Church, they also use a Vail that is closed during different parts of the Liturgy, but as a member of the Antiochian Orthodox Church, we always hear the entire Anaphora, Consecration, and Epiclesis in a normal audible volume when our priest chants it, I myself have heard our Arch Bishop Joseph (now Metropolitan Joseph) Vocally chanting it in a normal volume. I don’t think it is Holy Tradition from the Apostles to chant it inaudibly.

Well it’s true that the rubrics call for some prayers to be inaudible regardless of whether you are in Russia or an Antiochian parish in the States. I’m not arguing for or against the practice. The poster stated that a large part of the liturgy where they attend is recited. I’m simply pointing out that the parts they are referring to, according to the rubrics, are not meant to be heard by the congregation. I couldn’t care less whether or not the supposed inaudible prayers are said aloud or not. But that is a very different thing from what the OP is referring to. Saying the inaudible parts aloud is very different from reciting all of the litanies and responses.

 

[Robertwilliam]

Well it’s true that the rubrics call for some prayers to be inaudible regardless of whether you are in Russia or an Antiochian parish in the States… I’m simply pointing out that the parts they are referring to, according to the rubrics, are not meant to be heard by the congregation…

The only jurisdiction I have been to where it was recited inaudibly was in a ROCOR parish. Every other Church I have been to, Greek, OCA, Antiochian, etc. has been audible. If you could find the Rubrics about this I would be happy. I have been Orthodox since 1986 and never heard of such a thing. If it was true, Why does our Bishop never tell our priests to do it?
I think it is just a local tradition from the Russian Church.

 

[Shiranui117]

The only jurisdiction I have been to where it was recited inaudibly was in a ROCOR parish. Every other Church I have been to, Greek, OCA, Antiochian, etc. has been audible. If you could find the Rubrics about this I would be happy. I have been Orthodox since 1986 and never heard of such a thing. If it was true, Why does our Bishop never tell our priests to do it?
I think it is just a local tradition from the Russian Church.

Technically, the ACROD rubrics say the same thing; they’re supposed to be inaudible. It might be an American thing to read them out loud. I don’t consider either approach to be right or wrong, but I do like to hear some of these priestly prayers; the Liturgy makes a lot more sense and is more edifying when they’re heard by the faithful.

 

[Seraphim73]

The only jurisdiction I have been to where it was recited inaudibly was in a ROCOR parish. Every other Church I have been to, Greek, OCA, Antiochian, etc. has been audible. If you could find the Rubrics about this I would be happy. I have been Orthodox since 1986 and never heard of such a thing. If it was true, Why does our Bishop never tell our priests to do it?
I think it is just a local tradition from the Russian Church.

No, the practice of saying them aloud is pretty much just an American thing and originated with Fr Schmemman at St Vladimir’s. As you know of course ROCOR tends to be very conservative about these kind of things. Here is the text of the Divine Liturgy in English on the Greek Archdiocese website. Notice everywhere it says “in a low voice.” You’ll notice the Anaphora is included along with quite a few other prayers you may not even be aware of because it is still the practice to read them quietly. Here is another example from the website of an Antiochian parish. In this translation it says “the priest says quietly.”

 

[SyroMalankara]

Of course, liturgical giants like Very Rev. Archimandrite Robert (Taft) has stated in the past that originally ALL the “inaudible” prayers were audible, and that many were made “inaudible” when the need to hurry things up superceded the need to hear the priest’s parts. Notice, there are not many inaudible prayers on the congregations side, it’s usually the longer sections that the priest today prays “inaudibly”, while a choir or cantor sings some prayer aloud - usually keeping the liturgy moving along.

 

[Shiranui117]

Of course, liturgical giants like Very Rev. Archimandrite Robert (Taft) has stated in the past that originally ALL the “inaudible” prayers were audible, and that many were made “inaudible” when the need to hurry things up superceded the need to hear the priest’s parts. Notice, there are not many inaudible prayers on the congregations side, it’s usually the longer sections that the priest today prays “inaudibly”, while a choir or cantor sings some prayer aloud - usually keeping the liturgy moving along.

This would make sense; it would also explain the phenomenon of the choir singing “Lord have mercy” overtop the petitions being read by the priest or deacon, which has always irked me.

 

[Patchunky]

The local UGCC here has a recited Divine Liturgy in English. This is done because the priest is from Ukraine and English is not his 1st language. He is still having difficulty with it and does not feel comfortable singing the Divine Liturgy in English.