Chicago Sun-Times Reports on Christian Suffering in Middle East

Today, the Chicago Sun-times reports a rarely stated fact for Christians in the Middle East: Persecution at the hands of Moslem neighbors.

From the report, note the following:

Only in Israel, where religious freedom is honored, have Christians increased, soaring from 34,000 in 1948 to 140,000 today.

Advocates for Islam talk about its history of tolerance, but political, revolutionary Islamism is the driving force in Mideast history today; it has little use for religious freedom. That has Christians literally running for their lives.

Read it all here (and post a comment to let it be known that it is an important issue).

A Rupture of Continuity? or a Continuous Rupture?

Sandro Magister recently began a series of contributions by several Italian (and/or Roman) theologians discussing the Second Vatican Council. Last week saw a very interesting addition to the discussion by University of Bologna Professor Enrico Morini. Professor Morini outlines a thesis that the Council did indeed elicit a rupture, but one that sought to re-establish continuity with the Tradition (ecclesial) of the first millennium. I found particularly interesting the professor's views related to collegiality and the question of the filioque.

I leave it you whether you agree with the professor's passing comment about Father John Romanides.

Give it a read here.

Trouble in Egypt (for Christians)

The Assyrian International News Agency posts this story:

Egyptian Armed Forces Fire At Christian Monasteries, 19 Injured

(AINA) -- For the second time in as many days, Egyptian armed force stormed the 5th century old St. Bishoy monastery in Wadi el-Natroun, 110 kilometers from Cairo. Live ammunition was fired, wounding two monks and six Coptic monastery workers. Several sources confirmed the army's use of RPG ammunition. Four people have been arrested including three monks and a Coptic lawyer who was at the monastery investigating yesterday's army attack.

Monk Aksios Ava Bishoy told activist Nader Shoukry of Freecopts the armed forces stormed the main entrance gate to the monastery in the morning using five tanks, armored vehicles and a bulldozer to demolish the fence built by the monastery last month to protect themselves and the monastery from the lawlessness which prevailed in Egypt during the January 25 Uprising.

"When we tried to address them, the army fired live bullets, wounding Father Feltaows in the leg and Father Barnabas in the abdomen," said Monk Ava Bishoy. "Six Coptic workers in the monastery were also injured, some with serious injuries to the chest."

For the rest of this important story, click here.


Also see the interview with Pope Shenouda recently included by our friend Josephus over at Byzantine Texas.

Incidentally, AINA should be added to your regular reading (as should Byzantine Texas) for more in-depth coverage of the treatment of Christians in many places in the Middle East.

Sayidna Elias: We need your friendship

From Zenit.org's coverage of The Second General Congregation of the Special Assembly for the Middle East of the Synod of Bishops.

ARCHBISHOP ELIAS CHACOUR OF AKKA OF THE GREEK-MELKITES, ISRAEL. "During the past twenty centuries our Christians from the Holy Land were alike condemned and privileged to share oppression, persecution and suffering with Christ. ... Being the archbishop of the largest Catholic Church in the Holy Land, the Melkite Catholic Church, I insistently invite you and plead with the Holy Father to give even more attention to the living stones of the Holy Land. ... We are in Galilee since immemorial times. Now we are in Israel. We want to stay where we are, we need your friendship more than your money".

Fr Touze and Roman Miopia

From Rorate Caeli and also Josephus at Byzantine, Texas comes the most astounding interview from Zenit to be published in decades. The piece in question is an interview entitled "Married Priests Will Always Be an Exception: Interview With Theologian on the Foundations of Celibacy". Before reading my comments, I would urge you to read the entire interview. Below are highlights only.

ROME, MARCH 9, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Married priests are an exception and the Church is increasingly convinced that they must remain so, according to a spiritual theology professor at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross.

Father Laurent Touze explained the foundations of priestly celibacy when he spoke at a two-day conference held last week at Rome's Pontifical University of the Holy Cross. The conference, "Priestly Celibacy: Theology and Life," was sponsored by the Congregation for the Clergy as an event for the Year for Priests.
...

ZENIT: Why, then, are exceptions made?

Father Touze: Historically because there has been a manipulation of texts and I believe a bad translation that the Eastern Church, which has separated from Rome and has recognized that what they had declared contrary to tradition, could be accepted. In this connection there truly are some exceptions. The Church discovered that she had the possibility of admitting exceptions but that these should be understood as such. Respectably, as the Second Vatican Council stressed, there are very holy married priests in the Eastern Catholic Churches who have contributed much to the history of the Church and to the faith in times of persecution, but they are truly exceptions and must be understood as such.

To this should be added the quote from Fr Touze noted at Overheard in the Sacristy,

Prof. Laurent Touze – Pontifical University of the Holy Cross
“During the time of the early Church all priests, deacons and bishops had to practice celibacy from the minute they were ordained.”

It is obvious that Father Professor Touze is a terminal victim of scholasticitis. This disease, widespread for centuries in the West and recently thought to be in decline, begins with a defective understanding of "original sin" as an ontological state of being passed on through procreation. Rather than explicitly respecting the Scriptures and Tradition of the Church that the effect of original sin is death, and thus endemic to humanity, scholasticitis views Original Sin as a guilt passed on via the very act of sexual intercourse - even between spouses - and thus somewhat sinful and thus to be avoided. Hence the movement in the West towards a celibate clergy historically had as much to do ensuring the 'purity' of the celebrant at the Liturgy as the commonly referenced prevention of property disputes raised by the progeny of the presbyterate.

Through the miopia of scolaticitis the in persona christi view of the priest at Mass confuses the role of the priest as the president of the community (an essential part in Greek of the etymology of the term "presbyter"), with a somewhat magical ontological identification of the priest with our Lord offering Himself for the life of the world. This is clearly seen in the scholastic obsession that the recitation of the "Words of Institution" are the the identifiable moment and necessary element to confect the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. This accounts for the absence of the Epiklesis in the Roman Canon. (Check the nicely informative article at Wikipedia on Epiclesis.)

On this count alone, Rome has had significant difficulties in recent years when accepting into communion various ancient Churches of the East whose Liturgy never featured the Words of Institution at all. Indeed, it has led to elaborate and imaginative explanations as to how these ancient rites claiming Apostolic origin, could still be found valid in the scholasticized context without the essential ingredient.

The Byzantine Tradition has always held the original position on both the Eucharist and the question of clerical celibacy. Regarding the Eucharist, it is the Epiklesis - the calling down of the Holy Spirit to change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ - that effects the change in substance. In this view, the priest or bishop acts as president or overseer of the gathered Church, with the spiritual authority and power to effectively call on the Holy Spirit for this change, the spiritual authority being guaranteed by the Apostolic Sucession of the bishop and adherence to the Gospel Tradition handed down from the Apostles.

As the result of Original Sin (or more precisely Ancestral Sin) is the corruption and death now rampant in creation, Holy Baptism and Chrismation make each Christian capable of achieving repentant growth in the Likeness of God, and Ordination grants the permission through orthodox teaching and Tradition in the Apostolic Succession for the cleric to lead the people in the Eucharistic celebration. That is the extent of the liturgia - the public work, the work of the people - in the participation of clergy and laity in the Divine Liturgy. It is the Holy Spirit who brings Christ to us through our thanksgiving and anamnesis (remembering) His Self-offering for us to God the Father. Therefore, purity from sexual intercourse is not such a central necessity as the Scholastictic Roman doctrine would have us believe.

True, married clergy abstain from sexual relations with their wives on the eve of the weekly celebration of the Divine Mysteries. However, this is part of the fasting and preparation for the reception of the supreme and highest Gift of God to humanity in the Body and Blood of Christ, not because sexual intercourse compromises the purity of the celebrant and therefore risks the efficacy of the Holy Body and Blood..

In the 2005 Extraordinary Synod on the Eucharist, held at the Vatican, the conflict between the Byzantine historic Tradition and understanding of the Eucharist and priestly celibacy versus the Roman Scolasticitis saw a brief and reportedly heated exchange between Melkite Patriarch Gregory III Laham and Italian Cardinal Angelo Schola of Venice. As noted by Amy Welborn, amongst many at the time, reported:

According to priests who briefed reporters on the synod proceedings in several languages on Tuesday, the debate produced a coarse exchange late Monday between Cardinal Angelo Scola of Venice, the general relator of the synod, and Melkite Patriarch Gregoire III Laham.

“Celibacy has no theological foundation” in the priesthood, Laham said, responding to an opening speech by Scola that cited “profound theological motives” for not allowing married men to enter the priesthood.

“In the Eastern Church married priests are admitted,” Laham said, adding that “marriage is a symbol of union between Christ and the church.”

Responding to Laham, Scola asserted that “in the Latin church theological reasons exist” for maintaining the policy on celibacy. He did not elaborate on those reasons. He then added, “The synod is a place to explore the Mystery, not to give directions on its use.”

In reality, the Cardinal knew he didn't have a theological foundation to stand on. The history of the issue of clerical celibacy can be easily traced by anyone who wants to take the time to review the history of the canons, starting with the complete collection in the Rudder and equally reviewing the various canons in the West up through the time clerical celibacy was universally invoked.

Foolish comments like those of Father Professor Touze are an embarrassment and irresponsible. Such views will not only reduce any forward movement towards reconciliation with the Orthodox, but will reinforce the sense of estrangement felt by Eastern Catholics who repeatedly have to argue for their own Tradition's 'rights' in the Church.

Let us pray that Fr Touze and those like him retire to happy and peaceful pursuits, like moth collecting.

A Critique of the Melkite English Divine Liturgy Project's "Final Draft"

This critique references the edition of the Common Language Translation of the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom as promulgated 27 January 2009 by the Eparchy of Newton for Melkites in the USA

From the beginning, our little community has participated in the trial use of the several editions of the Common Language Translation project for English-speaking Melkites. With each new released edition, we have taken full advantage of the options permitted and tried them all out at least once. Ultimately, we have returned to the traditional 'options' and practices that have proven themselves efficacious for all Byzantine Rite Christians following the Typikon of the Great Church. That said, a review of the project's "Final Draft" is in order.

THE FINAL DRAFT AND PROCESS OF ESTABLISHING A COMMON ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR ALL BYZANTINE RITE CHRISTIANS

The goal of a common text of the Divine Liturgy for English-speaking members of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church is a laudable one. A tragedy for the development of Byzantine Christianity in the Americas and other English-speaking regions has been the history of ad hoc translating, with both Catholic and Orthodox jurisdictions acting independently, and some jurisdictions producing various efforts of individuals having no coordination or support from the hierarchy. It is not uncommon to find that one jurisdiction may have two, five or more ‘approved’ (or commonly employed) translations each featuring twists of phrasing, anomalies and idiosyncrasies. This discordant reality makes a visit to another parish of ones own jurisdiction an adventure in attempting to avoid stumbling over linguistic variations not encountered in ones own parish. Compound this with the number of translations produced by ‘other’ jurisdictions and the frustration and confusion of the laity across the board becomes easily appreciated.

The fact that English is one of the few modern languages experiencing this frustrating, and spiritually stunting, situation is understandable given the historic context of the waves of distinct immigrations to the “New World”. The various small pockets of individual Eastern Christian communities were typically viewed by their “Old World” hierarchy as living in diasporas. Thus, they were encouraged to continue using the old language versions of the Divine Services and prayers rather than to produce English editions for the generations that would follow. Thus, while other linguistic nations moved to produce suitable translations in the new language, many of which have become the standard used by all Byzantine tradition Christians speaking said language, one may literally fill a bookcase with the numerous English editions of the Divine Liturgy produced by various Orthodox and Catholic jurisdictions over the years, each featuring their own merits and deficits, their own inspiring turns of phrase, their own clumsy or downright incomprehensible translations.

Given this historic context, the new Common English Language translation project by the Melkites is laudable in its intentions. One could take from the very fact of the project a hope that once finalized the resulting product might provide the springboard for the production of a common English translation for all Byzantine Rite Catholics. Indeed, one could dream of the day in which such efforts would lead to a definitive English edition that all Byzantine Christians, Orthodox and Catholic, could agree on for their jurisdictions’ regular worship.

Accepting the wholesomeness of the goal to produce a standard edition of the Divine Liturgy for English-speaking Melkites, it is in order to consider the results of the efforts made thus far. This is particularly important now as the currently released edition is proclaimed the “final draft”. Therefore a careful review of the draft’s accuracy of text, rubrics, and format deserves serious review. In addition, and more importantly, the quality of the English text that is being promulgated needs very careful consideration.

THE FINAL DRAFT – ITS GOALS, LIMITATIONS ON THE PROJECT AND RESULTANT TRANSLATION ISSUES

For the US edition of the Final Draft, the Eparch has provided an “Instruction” that serves as a general introduction as well as explanation for the selection of several particular translation choices. The Instruction notes that the English translation is the result of a process that began with the “the official Greek text”, followed by “the official Arabic translation as approved by the Melkite Holy Synod in 2005". The English translation is portrayed as the next step in the process of bringing to the vernacular the fruits of the Apostolic Tradition embodied in the original texts.

Emphasis immediately must be given to the fact that the translators were required to produce an English translation that conformed to the Arabic in all particulars rather than the “official Greek text”. The significance for this is understandable, but ultimately controversial. In terms of the particular customs and idiosyncrasies of the Melkite usage, it is natural that following the Arabic texts approved by the Holy Synod is a commendable choice. However, for the text of the Liturgy itself, such an approach is problematic; the English Final Draft is a translation of a translation. This is the very criticism of such English language Bible translations as the Douay, the Confraternity Edition, and the original translation of the Jerusalem Bible. While not condemnatory in and of itself, such an approach should always be guided by reference to the original text, and where peculiarities or questions arise weight be properly given to the original. (Note that this approach would actually strengthen the argument for reliance on the Septuagint as the basis for English translations of the Old Testament rather than relying on Hebrew, and in particular the Masoretic text.) There are nuances in every word and turn of phrase in any language that when employed can convey more accurately the originals meaning in translation; but if the translation is used as the authorized text for translation into a third language the resulting phrasing may be completely misleading.

The quintessential example of this is in the case of the Final Draft is the choice to use “now and always and forever and ever” versus the traditional English rendering “now and ever and to the ages of ages”. The stated justification for this choice in the Instruction is “that every major modern translation of these words in Scripture…employs the former, forever and ever.” One could be forgiven for viewing this choice as trivial. However, the original Greek Scriptures, the Divine Services and various commentaries of the Church Fathers use the term translated “ages” with specific import and meaning. In Greek the phrase “now and ever” or “now and always” already conveys the sense of “forever” before including the phrase “ages of ages”.

The term “age” in Greek has specific connotations indicating more than the simple measuring of time, and to render the phrase as “for ever and ever” is as potentially misleading as assuming that “era” carries no significant distinction than, say, “recent years”. (Please note that “forever” is specifically and consistently rendered “for ever” in the Revised Standard Version hinting at the distinction of “unto ages” versus “forever” in the original Greek.) “To the ages of ages” indicates not just an endless passage of time, but the taking into account of every age, era and circumstance. It clarifies the glory due to God as possessing a fullness that extends beyond all created realities. Thus, the selection of “for ever and ever” subtracts from translational accuracy and weakens the theological import of the original Greek.

Similarly, the substitution of “forgive me” for the expression “be propitious to me” is justified in the “Instruction” as being “clear and accessible in conveying the same meaning”. In fact, this simply is not so. The term propitious implies kindness, mercy and a favorable disposition. Thus, traditional (commonly chosen) English translations have utilized phrases such as “have mercy on me and forgive me” or “be propitious to me and forgive me”. The simplification (reduction) of the phrase to “forgive me” alone removes the dialogic framework of the prayer, actually omits the reference to God’s great mercy, and thereby ignores the very reason one can ask to be forgiven. This is at best a deficient paraphrase and at worst a gross lack of fidelity to the original.

Other examples of poor translation can be seen in the hymn to the Theotokos “It is truly right”. The translation’s text betrays an inferior understanding of the Incarnation by choosing “you gave birth to God the word in virginity” versus the more accurate translation “without corruption you gave birth to God the Word”. The word “corruption” is an exact translation of the Greek, which does not refer to sexual intercourse but rather the general corruption of human nature. It therefore conveys the truth that the Virgin conceived and gave birth to our Lord without the corruption of ancestral sin.

It must also be noted that the translation ends: “You are truly Theotokos, you do we exalt.” Given that in context the English word “magnify” is a direct translation of the Greek and, indeed, one may argue a cognate term, the justification for using “exalt” can only be that it happens to be the inferior term used by Baron De Vinck and Archbishop Raya (of blessed memory) in their original translations over a half century ago.

THE FINAL DRAFT AND INJUDICIOUS TRANSLATION DECISIONS

These examples demonstrate the principle difficulty with the translation. The translators were apparently restricted to conform their work to a translation (Arabic) of the original (Greek) instead of working directly from that original. To this was coupled the problem that the project freely borrows from pre-existing English-speaking Melkites translations. These prior works produced by translators for whom English was not their primary language, often employ awkward phraseology. These two facts combine to weaken the translation in many ways.

For example, a typical Ekphonesis (doxological conclusion to a prayer) in the Final Draft reads, “That being ever protected by Your power we may render glory to You, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, now and always and forever and ever.” The issue here is the absence of prepositions and articles for “Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” In Greek, “to the” is clearly implied by the repetition of the conjunction “and”. An exact word for word translation of the phrase from Greek would be “to (the) Father and (to the) Son and (to the) Holy Spirit…” The Greek nouns used in such a construction clearly indicate a comprehension that 'reads' “to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit”. The inflected form of the nouns carries the prepositional connection with it.

It begs the question to ask why the option to translate Trinitarian references using fuller, more majestic phrasing was passed over. One can only assume that to one for whom English is a second or third language the nuanced differences in English syntactical construction went unnoticed. However, the lack of the full prepositional phrases in the conjunction weakens the Trinitarian emphasis inherent in the original Greek. As translated in the Final Draft the Trinitarian reference could too easily be misinterpreted as modalistic rather than hypostatic.

Again, the problem originates in the directive to produce a text that mirrored the Arabic as exactly as possible. It seems that the majority of the editors, having English as a second or third language, misunderstood the impact of narrowing of the phrase would threaten to have on weakening the Trinitarian reference for the English worshipper and opted to approve a phrasing that mirrors the ‘letter’ of the source but diminishes theological nuance in the product. In the Final Draft’s phrasing of almost all Ekphoneses, the Persons of the Trinity grammatically become almost an afterthought. A more thorough acquaintance with English would have avoided this. A more careful adherence to the original Greek would have necessarily precluded it altogether.

The fault is in the directive to work from the Arabic instead of the Greek. A more rational approach would have been to translate from the Greek and compare the results with the Arabic. This would have undoubtedly produced a more accurate work in English while allowing for reasonable conformity with the Arabic.

RUBRICS, OPTIONS AND FORMATS

One distinctive problem with the released edition of the Final Draft is absence of rubrics. By definition, rubrics provide clear explanation of the movements and actions accompanying the text of the ritual. Unfortunately, the Final Draft provides vague descriptions of the teleturgical action that in no way promote basic conformity amongst the English-speaking clergy. The aim seems to have been to provide the laity with a basic understanding of what the clergy are doing during at any particular moment in the Liturgy. However, as with earlier drafts, the officially released volume is organized like a study text. The liturgical flow is repeatedly interrupted by ‘rubrics’ that diverge to note various options requiring the worshipper to anticipate which option a particular community follows and know how far to skip ahead to keep up with the given celebration. While earlier drafts at least occasionally noted the options and place more detailed information at the end of the volume, the Final Draft seeks to provide information about various optional practices in great detail at the exact point in the text of the liturgy wherein they occur. The result is an extremely unfriendly user’s edition. (A side note: As no discussion has yet been formalized concerning a ‘definitive’ translation of the Divine Liturgy of St Basil the Great, it is curious that several prayers from that Liturgy are included in the work under consideration.)

Amongst the various options allowed for the antiphons after the open litanies, the Final Draft does allow the Beatitudes along with the basic stichera from the Octoechos. This is extremely welcome as it allows the laity to experience more of the rich hymnody of the Church, with perhaps a goal of encouraging more participation in the offering of Great Vespers, Orthros or other Divine Services that sadly tend to be forgotten in many Melkite communities today. It must be noted, however, that for a project that intends to unite the English-speaking Melkites in using one text with specifically delineated options, it is somewhat ironic that at the end of the Beatitudes in each Tone the text includes two separate translations of its Troparion of the Resurrection. Obviously no consensus has been reached on a standard text for these commonly used troparia.

This also brings to the fore the question of the legitimacy of some of the options themselves. Here and there options are presented that obviously reflect the spirit of the Roman Church's post-Vatican II ‘people’s participation’. For example, the Ektene after the homily presents an option in which ‘readers’ chosen from the laity stand in the “middle aisle” facing each other and offer petitions from a large collection at the end of the volume. (The text is silent whether additional ‘made up’ petitions are allowed.) In short, a practice is being introduced that is a direct copy of the Roman Novus Ordo practice of "general intercessions" after the homily – a practice that is, to my knowledge, without precedent in the Byzantine Tradition.

The directions for the litanies after the homily also are troublesome from a theological perspective. The Litany of the Catechumens is directed to be done only “if there are Catechumens” present, and only one of the Prayers of the Faithful is to be included “(for brevity)”. This emphasis on 'brevity' extends to the introduction to the Holy Creed, directing that “if” there are Catechumens the traditional exclamation, “The Doors! The Doors!” is to be used, but otherwise omitted. The problem here is that it is debatable whether the “The Doors! The Doors!” ever related to the catechumens, given that they presumably were dismissed earlier, before the Great Entrance. Rather the exclamation was a warning to ensure that non-Christians not be admitted to the celebration of the Eucharist and Holy Communion. Thus, the exclamation has traditionally served as a reminder to worshippers of times of past persecution and the superlative holiness of the liturgical actions that will follow.

As to the omission of the Litany of the Catechumens and editing of the two Litanies of the Faithful "for brevity", the time factor in their inclusion amounts to a mere two or three minutes. Also, one must consider the spiritual possibility that whether present or not, the Church should always offer prayers for catechumens, recognizing that there are perhaps many whom our Lord is leading to His Church who have yet to realize this and so have not yet participated in the Divine Services. Offering this litany confirms our prayers to strengthen those 'invisible catechumens' whom we may not even know but whom God will lead to join with us in the future. It also reminds us of our duty to proclaim the Gospel in our whole life, not just in church, and thus encourages us to give daily witness to the True Faith such that those invisible catechumens may be inspired to come forward. Reflecting on the call to evangelism, omitting the Litany of the Catechumens could be said to border on sacrilege.

When viewed together, it seems that the various optional directions in the Final Draft combine to promote a Liturgy significantly influenced by the current Roman Rite Mass. While a few of the options present legitimate variations in the customary practice of the Church, most have the effect of encouraging a ‘shortening’ of the Liturgy to suit modern sensibilities and convenience or to promote a more "people friendly" (to wit, emotionally moving rather than spiritually uplifting) experience. During the reception of Holy Communion by the laity, there is even a note allowing the singing of “spiritual hymns” after the singing of “Receive me now, O Son of God”. One shudders at the thought of chanters or a choir singing “And He Will Lift You Up on Eagles Wings” at this most sacred moment!

This brings us to the final issue to be addressed in critiquing the Final Draft – the Melkite translation of the hymnody of the Church in general. The Melkites are to be congratulated for being among the first to produce handy, relatively inexpensive editions of almost the entire Byzantine hymnological corpus. The Octoechos, Menaion, Triodion, etc. have all been published, with nearly each now being in a second edition that has corrected and expanded the material contained therein. In fact, a volume for Holy Week and the General Menaion, are the only books still needing to be published.

The only objections to these important and essential volumes are the absence of sturdy hardbound editions of sufficient quality for long term use at the Psalterion and the rather pedestrian language used throughout. As I am not familiar with the text of these books in Arabic, I can only note that in comparison to the Greek, and translations based directly on the Greek, most of the troparia and stichera in the Melkite hymn books read as sufficient paraphrases, albeit devoid of the poetic elegance found in many other translations. That said, these books do present the material in serviceable English and the translators and hierarchy authorizing them are to be highly commended!

In conclusion, the Final Draft of the Melkite Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom is a usable but flawed project. As a volume intended for direct use in the worship of the Church it is neither fish nor fowl, neither presenting exact rubrical information for the clergy nor clear easy to follow formatting for the laity. One could make the case that once finalized, the volume could form the basis for specifically designed editions prepared for the clergy, the laity, and chanters/choir usage although some comment has been made that this is not planned.

In its current format the Final Draft is impractical and certainly not recommended for someone attending Melkite Divine Services for the first time. One can only hope that the hierarchy of the English-speaking Eparchies will reconsider some of the decisions that have led to the current edition, both in terms of layout, rubrics/descriptions and translation choices, and go one more round before considering the project finished. A bit of extra time and work now would undoubtedly result in a much more refined product with long-lasting potential.

One final suggestion would be that where commonly recognized English texts have been used in Byzantine churches (Catholic or Orthodox) for generations, consideration could be made to utilize these or else model specific Melkite texts on them, instead of presuming the necessity of a unique translation in every instance.

Our thanks to the translators, editors, and all others who have dedicated so much time, effort, and prayer to this project. These considerations are made not to criticize individuals but, God willing, to inspire the Melkite Church to even greater work on this most important project. The future sustainability and growth of the Melkite Church outside the Middle East depends entirely on such God-pleasing work and the recognition that Antiochian Christianity must be allowed to embrace all people, regardless of their ethnic heritage, with equal openness to that offered by the Roman Church. As with recent directives and clarification of intentions from the Holy See for translations of the Roman Rite, Churches of the Byzantine Tradition, regardless of the intermediary historic origins, need to start fresh from the Greek in seeking to produce vernacular translations, making reference to the ethnic 'intermediary' language as necessary. To do otherwise will only result in more inadequate translations and the generational loss of members who neither maintain fluency with the "original" ethnic language nor are given the opportunity to encounter the purity and majesty of the original Greek.

European Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholics Unite ... on Crucifix Ban

This from the BBC. A few snippets follow:

Although the Greek Orthodox Church has been at odds with Roman Catholicism for 1,000 years, the judicial threat to Christian symbols has acted as a unifying force.

The Greek Church has ostensibly [italics added by the Rambler] intervened in this case in response to an appeal by a Greek mother whose son is studying in Italy.

Helsinki Monitor is urging trade unions to challenge the presence of religious symbols in Greek schools.

The socialist government here is also considering imposing new taxes on the Church's vast fortune, but at the same time is urging it to do more to help immigrants and poor Greeks.

Read the entire article here.

Oh, and while you're at it, check out Touchstone Magazine's Mere Comments for this note of interest: Lithuania to EU: We Will Not Give Our Minors to Homosexualist Indoctrination.

And then there's this "old news" from Germany as reported over at LifeSiteNews, also covered here at Sign of the Times.

And some quarters wonder why parents might choose to home school their children, and why conversions and membership in Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches are on the rise.

(Hint: We don't cater to the current corrupt culture.)

Rome Finally speaks to the Medjugorje Phenomenon

I just came across a translated interview relating that the Pope has definitively spoken on the question of Medjugorje's legitimacy as a Marian apparition. The whole interview is worth careful and deliberative reading. I will here only quote two exchanges that deal with the often overlooked history of the Medjugorje shrine and its significnce.

9. Based on some talks with some Croats and some reports, it can be concluded that Medjugorje is a mass movement which, on a subconscious level, excuses the bloody things done, mostly, against Serbs, but also against Gypsies and Jews, unfortunately, by certain number of Croats known as Ustashas? What is your opinion about this?

Jones: There are many levels to the Medjugorje phenomenon, and one of them may very well be the collective guilt which the village felt because of its role in the massacre of Surmanci, which took place just on the other side of the apparition hill. There were also numerous links between the Medjugorje branch of the Franciscans and the Ustashe. I personally saw the pictures of Ustashe soldiers on the wall of the monastery at Siroki Brijeg when I visited there. Jozo Zovko deliberately injected a political note into the apparitions when he put the grb on the altar during the early celebrations of Mass at the time of the first apparitions in 1981.

11. What do we do with Medjugorje? What do we do with the fraud lasting for 28 years now?

Jones: All we can do is to continue to tell the truth. My hope is that the recognition of the truth about Medjugorje at the highest level of the Catholic Church will lead to reconciliation — particularly between Catholics and Orthodox in the Balkans — and the healing of the wounds which this hoax has caused.

This detail has long been known in the Orthodox world as a central point of scandal and apparent betrayal in Rome's protestations of its desire for reconciliation with the Orthodox Church. Perhaps more forthright actions like this recent one by good Pope Benedict will help restore and build the necessary sense of trust and transparency that will soon (please God!) bring about the true Unity of the Faith.

Read the entire interview here.

Hot News from Rome Regarding Anglicans

While somewhat off-topic for this blog, the following announcement from the Vatican is interesting on several levels. Firstly, the method and protocols for admission of the 'former' Anglicans (clergy and laity); Secondly, the consideration of several doctrinal and possibly ecclesiological differences between Anglican overall and the Church of Rome. It will also be interesting to consider this situation in comparison and contrast with the history of "uniatism".

NOTE ON ANGLICANS WISHING TO ENTER THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

VATICAN CITY, 20 OCT 2009 (VIS) - In a meeting with journalists held this morning in the Holy See Press Office Cardinal William Joseph Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Archbishop Joseph Augustine Di Noia O.P., secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, presented a note on a new measure concerning "Personal Ordinariates for Anglicans entering the Catholic Church".

Commenting on the English-language note, which has been published by his dicastery, Cardinal Levada explained how, "with the preparation of an Apostolic Constitution, the Catholic Church is responding to the many requests that have been submitted to the Holy See from groups of Anglican clergy and faithful in different parts of the world who wish to enter into full visible communion.

"In this Apostolic Constitution the Holy Father has introduced a canonical structure that provides for such corporate reunion by establishing Personal Ordinariates, which will allow former Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving elements of the distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony. Under the terms of the Apostolic Constitution, pastoral oversight and guidance will be provided for groups of former Anglicans through a Personal Ordinariate, whose Ordinary will usually be appointed from among former Anglican clergy.

"The forthcoming Apostolic Constitution provides a reasonable and even necessary response to a worldwide phenomenon, by offering a single canonical model for the universal Church which is adaptable to various local situations and equitable to former Anglicans in its universal application. It provides for the ordination as Catholic priests of married former Anglican clergy. Historical and ecumenical reasons preclude the ordination of married men as bishops in both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The Constitution therefore stipulates that the Ordinary can be either a priest or an unmarried bishop. The seminarians in the Ordinariate are to be prepared alongside other Catholic seminarians, though the Ordinariate may establish a house of formation to address the particular needs of formation in the Anglican patrimony".

"The provision of this new structure is consistent with the commitment to ecumenical dialogue, which continues to be a priority for the Catholic Church, particularly through the efforts of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. The initiative has come from a number of different groups of Anglicans" who, said Cardinal Levada, "have declared that they share the common Catholic faith as it is expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and accept the Petrine ministry as something Christ willed for the Church. For them, the time has come to express this implicit unity in the visible form of full communion".

The cardinal further indicated that "it is the hope of the Holy Father Benedict XVI that the Anglican clergy and faithful who desire union with the Catholic Church will find in this canonical structure the opportunity to preserve those Anglican traditions precious to them and consistent with the Catholic faith. Insofar as these traditions express in a distinctive way the faith that is held in common, they are a gift to be shared in the wider Church. The unity of the Church does not require a uniformity that ignores cultural diversity, as the history of Christianity shows. Moreover, the many diverse traditions present in the Catholic Church today are all rooted in the principle articulated by St. Paul in his letter to the Ephesians: 'There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism'.

"Our communion", the cardinal added in conclusion, "is therefore strengthened by such legitimate diversity, and so we are happy that these men and women bring with them their particular contributions to our common life of faith".

In a joint declaration on the same subject, Catholic Archbishop Vincent Gerard Nichols of Westminster and Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury affirm that the announcement of the Apostolic Constitution "brings to an end a period of uncertainty for such groups who have nurtured hopes of new ways of embracing unity with the Catholic Church. It will now be up to those who have made requests to the Holy See to respond to the Apostolic Constitution", which is a "consequence of ecumenical dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion.

"The on-going official dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion provides the basis for our continuing co-operation", the declaration adds. "The Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) and International Anglican Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission (IARCCUM) agreements make clear the path we will follow together.

"With God's grace and prayer we are determined that our on-going mutual commitment and consultation on these and other matters should continue to be strengthened. Locally, in the spirit of IARCCUM, we look forward to building on the pattern of shared meetings between the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales and the Church of England's House of Bishops with a focus on our common mission".
CDF/ANGLICANS CATHOLICS/LEVADA VIS 091020 (820)

Western Pope's thoughts on Eastern Liturgy

11. In the liturgical experience, Christ the Lord is the light which illumines the way and reveals the transparency of the cosmos, precisely as in Scripture. The events of the past find in Christ their meaning and fullness, and creation is revealed for what it is: a complex whole which finds its perfection, its purpose in the liturgy alone. This is why the liturgy is heaven on earth, and in it the Word who became flesh imbues matter with a saving potential which is fully manifest in the sacraments: there, creation communicates to each individual the power conferred on it by Christ. Thus the Lord, immersed in the Jordan, transmits to the waters a power which enables them to become the bath of baptismal rebirth.

Within this framework, liturgical prayer in the East shows a great aptitude for involving the human person in his or her totality: the mystery is sung in the loftiness of its content, but also in the warmth of the sentiments it awakens in the heart of redeemed humanity. In the sacred act, even bodiliness is summoned to praise, and beauty, which in the East is one of the best loved names expressing the divine harmony and the model of humanity transfigured, appears everywhere: in the shape of the church, in the sounds, in the colors, in the lights, in the scents. The lengthy duration of the celebrations, the repeated invocations, everything expresses gradual identification with the mystery celebrated with one's whole person. Thus the prayer of the Church already becomes participation in the heavenly liturgy, an anticipation of the final beatitude.

Apostolic Letter ORIENTALE LUMEN, John Paul the Great

Eastern Ecclesiology

The Ochlophobist references the translation of an article by Metropolitan Georges Khodr of Mount Lebanon from a recent issue of the Lebanese newspaper an-Nahar. The translation is from the very erudite and informative blog Notes on Arab Orthodoxy and entitled Antiochian Ecclesiology. It's worth reading as the basic concepts apply to all Byzantine Christians, Orthodox or Catholic. This become very apparent in the differences in the way laity and priests interact with their bishops in an Eastern Church versus a Western Church.

A snippet to whet your whistle:

... the bishop is not only connected to the whole of the flock with which he is entrusted. He his connected as a member to the other metropolitans who govern the church that we call ‘local’ or ‘regional’ just as he is united to the right-believing bishops of all the world. However, current, day-to-day events determine the actions of the local church...

Insightful and worthy of your consideration, read it here.

Inner Purification, The Pope and the New Theologian

Feast of the Cross

Exaltation and Procession of the Holy Cross
Taking place at the end of the Great Doxology

At the “Holy God” the priest and altar servers begin the procession with the Cross. The priest incenses the Cross three times, makes there metanias, and led by the altar servers, processes around the Church three times, coming to stand before the Analogion. After the final “Holy God”, the priest exclaims, “Wisdom! Let us stand!” The Cross is placed on the Analogion. As the priest censes the four sides of the Analogion, the people sing:

The Troparion of the Cross in Tone One

O Lord, save your people and bless your inheritance. Grant victory to our country over its enemies, and preserve your community by the power of your Cross.

The priest makes three prostrations before the Holy Cross. He takes up the Cross and proclaims:

Priest: Have mercy on us, O God, in your great mercy; we pray to you, hear us and have mercy.

All: Lord have mercy! (forty times, after each priestly proclamation)

The priest makes the sign of the Cross three times, then slowly bends to the ground, rises, and raises the Holy Cross above his head. He lowers the Cross to the level of his chest, and again makes the sign of the Cross three times. Moving to the South side of the Analogion, facing North, he proclaims:

Priest: Again we pray for our civil authorities, protected by God, that they enjoy peace, health and salvation, and that the Lord God strengthen them in every good deed.

The priest elevates the Cross as before. Moving to the East side of the Analogion, facing West, he proclaims:

Priest: Again we pray for our father and Archbishop Cyril and all our brotherhood in Christ.

The priest elevates the Cross as before. Moving to the North side of the Analogion, facing South, he proclaims:

Priest: Again, we pray for all Orthodox Christians, and for their health, salvation and remission of their sins.

The priest elevates the Cross as before. Moving to the East side of the Analogion, facing West, he proclaims:

Priest: Again, we pray for all who serve or have served in this holy church, for their health, salvation and remission of their sins.

The priest elevates the Cross as before. Turning to the people, the priest makes the sign of the Cross over the people while the people chant

The Kontakion of the Cross in Tone Four

O Christ our God who chose by your free volition to be elevated upon the Holy Cross, grant your mercies to your new people who are called by your name. In your power gladden the hearts of our Public Authorities. Strengthen them in every good deed so that Your true alliance may be for them a weapon of peace and a standard of victory.

The Cross is placed on the Analogion. The priest makes two prostrations, kisses the Cross, and makes a third prostration while the Trisagion of the Cross is sung:

We bow in worship before your Cross, O Master,
and we give praise to your Holy Resurrection (three times)

Additional hymns from the Menaion (p. 123ff) are chanted while the people venerated the Holy Cross in a manner similar to the priest. After the final person has venerated the Cross, the Troparion of the Cross in Tone One is sung again and the Divine Liturgy begins.

Blessed is the Kingdom…

First Antiphon

O God, my God, attend to me; why have you forsaken me?

Through the intercessions...

(after each verse, and the Glory … Now and always…)

Far from my salvation are the words of my transgressions

O my God, I will cry to you by day but you will not hear

But you, the praise of Israel, well in a sanctuary

Glory … Now and always…

Second Antiphon

Why, O God, have you rejected us for ever?

O Son of God, who was crucified in the flesh,
save us who sing to you: Alleluia (after each verse)

Remember your congregation which you have acquired from the beginning

This is Mount Sion where you have dwelled

God is our eternal King; he has worked salvation in the midst of the earth

Glory … Now and always ….O Only-begotten Son

Third Antiphon

The Lord reigns, let the peoples tremble

Troparion of the Cross in Tone One

O Lord, save your people and bless your inheritance. Grant victory to our country over its enemies, and preserve your community by the power of your Cross. (after each verse)

He is enthroned upon the cherubim; let the earth shake

The Lord is great in Zion and supreme over all the peoples

Let them give thanks to your great name; for it is terrible and holy

Isodikon
(Entrance Hymn)

Exalt the Lord our God and worship at his holy mountain,
For the Lord our God is holy

O Son of God, who was crucified in the flesh,
save us who sing to you: Alleluia

Troparia and Kontakion
(Hymns of the day and seasonal hymn)

Troparion of the Cross in Tone One

O Lord, save your people and bless your inheritance. Grant victory to our country over its enemies, and preserve your community by the power of your Cross. (Three times)

The Kontakion of the Cross in Tone Four

O Christ our God who chose by your free volition to be elevated upon the Holy Cross, grant your mercies to your new people who are called by your name. In your power gladden the hearts of our Public Authorities. Strengthen them in every good deed so that Your true alliance may be for them a weapon of peace and a standard of victory.

At the Trisagion, the Trisagion of the Cross

We bow in worship before your Cross, O Master,
and we give praise to your Holy Resurrection (three times)

Prokimenon
(Responsory)

Chanter: Exalt the Lord our God! (all repeat)

Chanter: The Lord reigns; let the peoples tremble!

All: Exalt the Lord our God

Chanter: Exalt the Lord!

All: The Lord our God!

The Liturgy of the Word

The reading from First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians

Brethren: The word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart." Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

Alleluia

Remember your congregation
which you have acquired from the beginning

But God is our eternal king;
He has worked salvation in the midst of the earth

The reading from the Holy Gospel according to St John

At that time: The chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to dath; they led him to Pilate and crie out, "Crucify him, crucify him!" Pilate said to them, "Take him yourselves and crucify him, for I find no crime in him." The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he has made himself the Son of God." When Pilate heard these words, he was the more afraid; he entered the praetorium again and said to Jesus, "Where are you from?" But Jesus gave no answer. Pilate therefore said to him, "You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?" Jesus answered him, "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above; therefore he who delivered me to you has the greater sin." When Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Pavement, and in Hebrew, Gab'batha. Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!" Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar." Then he handed him over to them to be crucified. So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called the place of a skull, which is called in Hebrew Golgotha. There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them. Pilate also wrote a title and put it on the cross; it read, "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews." Many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, in Latin, and in Greek. So the soldiers did this. But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" Then he said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother!" And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home. After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the scripture), "I thirst." When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished"; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. Since it was the day of Preparation, in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him; but when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water.

Hirmos to the Virgin in Tone Eight

O Mother of God, you became a mystical Paradise, when without tilling you brought forth Christ our God, by whom the life-giving Tree of the Cross was planted on earth. Therefore seeing Him on the Cross, we adore Him and we magnify you!

Kinonikon (Communion Hymn)

The light of your countenance
has been manifested toward us, O Lord. Alleluia

Grist to the Mill

Over at Ierinikon, a nineteenth century tract from an Anglican source discusses the division of the Eastern and Western Church. While the author was an early proponent of the "branch" theory of ecclesiology, long refuted, it makes for interesting reading.

The comments, to date, are also worth consideration. I hope to see the conversation there continue.

The piece is entitled, "A Tractarian perspective"; the original title being:

On the Present Apparent Conflict Between “Orthodoxy” and “Catholicism"
From Dissertations on Subjects Relating to the “Orthodox” or “Eastern-Catholic” Communion (1853), by William Palmer, M.A., Fellow of St. Mary Magdalene College, Oxford, and Deacon.

Like all nineteenth century academic writing from the British Isles it's heady reading, but worth expanding one's twentyfirst century short attention span.

Rome on Constantinople: A Pope speaks on a Patriarch

GERMANUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE: DEFENDER OF HOLY IMAGES

VATICAN CITY, 29 APR 2009 (VIS) - During his general audience this morning Benedict XVI dedicated his catechesis to St. Germanus of Constantinople, who "played an important role in the complex history of the battle for images during the so-called iconoclastic crisis, and was able to resist the pressure of an iconoclastic emperor, ... Leo III.

"During Germanus' patriarchate (715-730)", the Pope added, "the capital of the Byzantine empire, Constantinople, was subject to a threatening siege by the Saracens. On that occasion (717-718) a solemn procession was organised and passed through the streets carrying the image of the Mother of God ... and the relic of the Holy Cross to call upon the Most High to defend the city. In fact, Constantinople was freed from the siege".

This event convinced the patriarch "that God's intervention was to be interpreted as evident approval of the reverence people showed towards holy icons. Leo III on the other hand, who came to the throne in that year of 717, ... began ever more openly to show his conviction that the consolidation of empire had to begin by reorganising expressions of faith, with particular reference to idolatry, a risk to which, in his view, the people were exposed by their excessive veneration for icons".

The Holy Father went on: "Patriarch Germanus' appeals to Church tradition and to the real effectiveness of certain images, unanimously recognised as 'miraculous', were all to no avail. The emperor became ever more intractable in implementing his policies of reform. ... Germanus had no desire to bow to the emperor's will in matters he considered vital to orthodox faith. ... As a consequence he felt obliged to resign as patriarch, condemning himself to exile in a monastery where he died in obscurity. Nonetheless his name re-emerged at the Second Nicean Council ... of 787 where his merits were recognised".

Of Germanus' works "certain homilies on Marian themes have survived, of which some have had a profound influence on the piety of entire generations of faithful, both in the East and the West", including one which Pope Pius XII "set like a pearl in the 1950 Apostolic Constitution 'Munificentissimus Deus'", dedicated to the Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

Benedict XVI went on to recall the "great contribution" this saint made to the Byzantine tradition in which "the rhetorical forms used in preaching, and even more so in hymns and poetical compositions, ... are as important to the celebration of the liturgy as the beauty of the sacred building in which it takes place".

The Holy Father concluded by considering three aspects in which St. Germanus still has something to say to modern man. Firstly, in the need to recognise "the visibility of God in the world and in the Church", because "God created man in His image but that image was covered with dirt and sin" and the Creator "could almost no longer see it. Thus the Son of God became man and ... in Christ, the true image of God, we too can ... learn to see ourselves as His image". If, to prevent idolatry and the danger of pagan images, God prohibited the Israelites from creating His image, yet "when He became visible in Christ through the Incarnation it became legitimate to reproduce the face of Christ. ... Holy images teach us to see God in the face of Christ, ... of the saints and of all human beings".

Secondly, Germanus shows us "the beauty and dignity of the liturgy", which must be celebrated "with an awareness of the presence of God and with a beauty and dignity that enable us to glimpse His splendour".

The third aspect is that of "love for the Church", the Pope concluded. "It may be that in the Church, as in ourselves, we see sin and other negative things, yet with the help of faith ... we can always rediscover divine beauty in the Church. In the Church, God offers Himself to us in the Eucharist, He speaks to us, ... He forgives us and He teaches us to forgive. Let us pray that God may teach us to see His presence and His beauty in the Church, to see His presence in the world".

AC/GERMANUS/... VIS 090429 (710)

And for the other "lung of the Church"...

Christ Is Risen!

Truly, He is Risen!

Eastern Uprising Down Under

Hat Tip to Byzantine Texas for linking to a powerful discussion about special problems faced by Eastern Church Catholic children attending Roman Church Catholic schools in Australia. The original news article is from an Australian Catholic website (natch) called Catholica and is headlined as Issues regarding the Education of Eastern Catholics in Latin Catholic Schools… .

I won't excerpt it; go read it. It is as relevant in the US as likely anywhere in which the Roman Church is in the majority.

Bishop Hilarion Offers Hope and a Challenge

Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev is the most erudite and outspoken hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church. The article linked below presents his thoughts on Orthodox missiology in the Twenty-first Century.

The challenges he discusses are the same as those of Eastern Catholic Churches, particularly as regards 'heritage' issues. (I believe Arcbishop Elias Zoghby, of blessed memory, would rejoice to stand with Bishop Hilarion on the points he raises) The hope for the future is firmly in God's hands, and the imperative for Christian Tradition to be firmly established requires of each of us the commitment to the Christian Faith and its unchanging values. Only in Christ is there hope for the future. Sayidna Hilarion is correct that those Churches descending from the Undivided Catholic Church of the first millennium must stand together in what we hold common, examine what differs between us, and press forward to bring the healing message of Salvation to a corrupt, blind, and an otherwise dying world.

Read Bishop Hilarion's lecture on Orthodox Mission in the Twenty-first Century here.

Clean Monday & St Elias Video on the Church Building as Catechesis

A joyous Clean Monday to all! For Eastern Catholics, today marks the beginning of the Great Fast. For those who wish to follow the readings, hymns and basic commemorations of the Byzantine Tradition, a search through this blog will provide several daily resources from years past. This year, I may not be a very active "blogger" during the Fast as several personal issues impede. I will, God willing, give a personal update on Presbytera shortly for those who have been praying for her.

Hat Tip to the New Liturgical Movement for a nice article on mystagogical catechesis and the below short video from St Elias Ukrainian Catholic Church in Brampton, Ontario.

Moscow Patrarch Enthroned