Rorate Caeli

Is the Novus Ordo influencing even the Melkites? Just asking.

The Melkite Greek Catholic Eparchy of Newton (with jurisdiction over the Melkites of the United States) recently came up with a new official English translation of the Divine Liturgy. The following is an excerpt from an analysis of the translation, written by a Melkite priest. While there are positive aspects to the translation, according to this analysis, there are others that will cause disquiet not just for Eastern Catholics, but also for Roman Catholics who already know the damage caused by the liturgical reforms of our age, so profoundly distant from the liturgical spirit.

(The analysis refers to the translation as a "final draft"; since then it has been promulgated by the Melkite hierarchy as the sole official English translation of the Divine Liturgy in the Eparchy of Newton.)

Given recent signs that some in the Eastern Churches are influenced by contemporary "Roman" practice (the de facto adoption of ad populum by some jurisdictions, especially those of Syriac origin; the hybridized "Melkite Vespers" with Novus Ordo-style general intercessions celebrated by Pope Benedict XVI last year in Jordan, and the controversial "Revised Divine Liturgy" of the Byzantine Catholic Church in America, among others), and given the recent calls of some Eastern Catholic prelates for sweeping liturgical reforms (see this for example), surely our Eastern Catholic brothers will forgive a Latin Catholic blog such as ours, for the interest and concern with which it views some (and not necessarily all) of the liturgical developments in their Churches.

Those who think that our concerns on these matters are misplaced are invited to (charitably) explain why, in the combox.

Here is the excerpt:

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!