So this brings up the question of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom that we use in the Orthodox Church. In North America, we do not have a single translation of this Liturgy. Some churches use the old English with the thees and thous and some use a more modern English. one of the things I hope comes from this new Episcopal Assembly is indeed a single English version of the Liturgy. But that is not the reason for this post.
Like many of you, I have been to and served many Liturgies in many different churches over the last 6 years of my priesthood. one of the things that irks me more than anything else is liturgical abuse! The most common abuse is cutting things out of the Liturgy itself. Now I am no liturgical theologian but my guess is the creator of the Liturgy wanted certain things done.
As an example, after the sermon, which belongs after the Gospel by the way, there is what is known as the Litany of Fervent Supplication and then three prayers of the faithful. I have been to many parishes where these are removed from the Liturgy all together. In fact, the version of the Liturgy one could purchase from the Holy Cross Press does not even include these litanies. I believe this to be wrong and would call this a liturgical abuse.
I have also been to come churches where the choir or the chanter drone on and one, maybe we need to look at the music to see if we really need to make 5 minutes to sing an amen! Yes I have timed it!
The Liturgy of the Orthodox Church is beautiful and should be said with reverence and dignity. All parts of this should be included, yes including the Catechumens that I know most priests skip. Liturgy is important and needs to be served correctly.
Liturgy evolves. The "Fervent" litany is where the prayers "belong" but at some point the "real" litany was moved to the front of the liturgy and the fervent was as left as sort of a memorial in the middle. If folks want to make changes, rather than leave out the ones in the middle It might actually make more sense to put the "real" litany back…
In the 1930s (or so) the EP approved an English liturgy that lumped the first two antiphons together and the the beatitudes. Everything up to the the Little Entrance could have been read at a normal pace by a priest and a reader in about 1 or 2 mins. And the left out the other litanies as well.
The problem with liturgy evolving is that the scholars (Fr Schmemann, Fr Taft, Fr Wybrew) never get consulted when clergy want to make changes. ALthough it drives people bonkers, the liturgy of New Skete is more in keeping with decent liturgical scholarship.
As to the thee/thou language found among the Antiochians, Russians and others that use such language, their renditions are artless and, in many cases, filled with errors in grammar. They would do well to read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest copies of the 1662 BCP and decent copy of the KJV and the Complete Works of William Shakespeare.
"As an example, after the sermon, which belongs after the Gospel by the way, there is what is known as the Litany of Fervent Supplication and then three prayers of the faithful. I have been to many parishes where these are removed from the Liturgy all together. In fact, the version of the Liturgy one could purchase from the Holy Cross Press does not even include these litanies. I believe this to be wrong and would call this a liturgical abuse."
If we are talking about the same litany, they were not removed. They were just not added in the Greek Church. In the Slavic Churches an addition was made by Met. Peter (Mohila) of Kiev in 1629. It was a Latinization that mimicked the Roman Rite's petitions.
On the issue of unity in prayer. We do need to mirror one another on at least the basics. When I travel I never know what translation of the Creed, Trisagion, or even the Lord's Prayer will be used. I understand the need to conform to musical need's but we need agreement on the prayers that are the pillars of our faith.