Proposal for the Revised Apostolic Liturgy (RAL) of John Chrysostom - Part 1

Since the post-Conciliar reform of the Roman liturgy has been such an outstanding pastoral success, and such a monument of scholarly erudition, well might one wonder why the Eastern churches have not availed themself of its wisdom and similarly renewed their liturgies. Wonder no longer! A consortium of liturgical scholars has final come together to bring all the benefits of the great renewal to the Byzantine Rite. In this first post, we have an outline of the general principles of renewal; a second post next week will give us the text of the “Divina Liturgia Normativa”, as it is currently being called, following the principles outlined here.

Regalia of this sort have been abolished

MOTIVATION

We, the liturgical scholars of the Pisti Kai Agapi Synodal Committee (PIKASCO), have developed the Revised Apostolic Liturgy (RAL) as a standardisation and reform of early, diverse, apostolic Eastern Roman worship forms that were celebrated at the present Ayasofya Grand Mosque in 4th to 5th century Istanbul. We prioritise forms codified with the anaphora attributed to John Chrysostom.

Now, it is simply not the case that recensions after the 5th century are less valid. Rather, they represent forms of worship that had become excessively intertwined with secular expressions, worldly expressions that may have forgotten about the poor, the sick, and the suffering, and that have forgotten how to look with the merciful and loving eyes of Jesus Christ.

We have sought to de-Latinise the Ukrainian-Rusyn recension of the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom, as well as to decolonise and prune centuries upon centuries of imperialist and nationalist accretions. Some of these accidentally resulted from efforts to de-Latinise the Ukrainian-Rusyn liturgy in the 1900s through liberal insertions of Polish-Lithuanian sources by Archbishop Andrey Sheptytsky (born Count Roman Aleksander Maria Szeptycki) of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, who was a highly-educated nobleman.

We should never hesitate to acknowledge and praise Sheptytsky’s contributions to the Ukrainian identity, state, and culture; however, it would do no one justice to view any person of wealth and influence uncritically.

Now, it may be true that St Pius X allegedly told Sheptytsky, who was also in charge of the Russian Greek Catholic Church at the time, that the Nikonian and pre-Nikonian rites should be celebrated “Nec plus, nec minus, nec aliter.” (Neither less, nor more, nor other.) However, this was a non-magisterial, non-binding remark which Sheptytsky conveniently adopted, enabling Russian rite prelates under him such as Mykolai Charnetsky to celebrate hierarchical divine liturgies that were identical to imperialist Russian Orthodox forms.

Ultimately his tolerance for imperialist forms, whether the Tsarist Russian recensions or his own native Habsburg Ruthenian/Galician recensions, is insufficiently apostolic. We should also acknowledge the tragedy of the refusal of countless Ukrainian Greek Catholic clergy and laypeople to dialogue, listen, and discern with the lawful Marxist authorities. This rigidity and stubborn adherence to human traditions ultimately led to needless conflict and casualties on both sides.

And of course there were limitations in the resources, geopolitical conditions and sciences of the time that ultimately led to thicker layers upon layers of Habsburg and Tsarist accretion. Thus, we conservatively adhere to sources before the 5th century. Careful pruning and reconstructions were implemented based on extensive, advanced research and the scholarship of liturgists from top pontifical institutions.

Nevertheless, there were necessary adaptations and accommodations made in keeping with modern sciences and ethics. However, aggiornamento is permitted only for improvement. And there were some simplifications made to enable the purpose and message of the liturgy to be made clearer. In the end, the spirit of the original Liturgy of St John Chrysostom at its zenith and in all its splendour is fully intact in the RAL, even more powerfully and vigorously than in the imperialistic and ethnocentric Nikonian, pre-Nikonian, Greek, Antiochian, or Ruthenian recensions.

Having codified the RAL, we shall humbly defer to the lawful authorities, namely the Dicastery for the Eastern Churches, Dicastery for Divine Worship, Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, and ultimately the Roman Pontiff himself for their wise counsel and decision. We pray for successful implementation of the RAL in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the largest Eastern Catholic body, to gradually replace their current Ukrainian-Rusyn recension of the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom, which we advise should eventually be pastorally restricted for the purpose of a more faithful adherence to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council.

Most importantly, the RAL is a labour of love, it is the fruit of a committee which understands that love and obedience towards the Holy Father and the Magisterium are necessary in order to truly appreciate and worship according to the Eastern patrimony. Our passion for synodality drove us to deeper study, discernment, and listening to the Spirit. As a result, we feel an intensely strong conviction to humbly assist the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in recovering its venerable traditions.

GUIDELINES

Prayers

To foster active participation and improve catechesis, no prayer is allowed to be said silently, repetitions are removed, lengthy prayers are shortened for clarity, and late accretions are deleted for purity. Prayers that require excessive explanation and context are either removed or simplified. For example, the prayer “O Heavenly King” prayer is removed for potentially insensitive language.

Any non-essential exaggerations of supernatural events in the liturgy are corrected or removed to maintain a high standard of intellectual honesty.

Orders

The minor orders obscure the priesthood of the lay faithful, instead there should be more emphasis on laypeople leading several liturgical parts. Hence this liturgy will assume that the minor orders are abolished in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which they should be.

Architecture

The holy table or altar should be free standing and always oriented versus populum, as per early Eastern Christian practice. Instead of a cube-shaped altar, a lower hemisphere would convey tenderness and care for our common home. Likewise, the iconostasis should be absent as per early Christian practice.

This altar set up for World Youth Day in Lisbon in early August of 2023 represents the best of the original and apostolic tradition. “Two spritzes and a G&T, please.”

Images

Traditional iconography is only allowed when it does not obscure the altar, become an object of worship, nor have convoluted theology. Its use should be extremely limited. Instead of venerating icons, congregants are advised to acknowledge each other as living icons of the Imago Dei.

Icons such as Rublev’s Trinity require extensive explanation and catechesis to understand, hence they should not be displayed.

Needlessly obscure.

Icons of the Theotokos tend to overemphasize her role as a mother, which may alienate people of diverse backgrounds. Instead, pastorally sensitive depictions of Mary should promote feminine strength.

Domes that have the Christ Pantocrator image often depict Jesus with toxic masculinity, instead our Lord should be depicted as a tender, loving, inclusive rabbi who embraces all.

Incense

Burning incense on a bowl is permitted, however the use of swinging thuribles, especially the Eastern Orthodox form with twelve bells, can become noisy spectacle and distract, thus all thuribles are highly discouraged.

Candles and liturgical fans

Few candles are permitted around the altar, but not on top of the altar. Over-decoration by candles should be avoided to prevent distraction.

The trikirion and dikirion are later innovations, and liturgical fans are excessive decorations; it is better to not utilise those ornate objects. Baroque decadence does not express solidarity with the poor.

Liturgical crucifix and blessings

The liturgical use of the crucifix for blessing is a later pious innovation. However, priests are consecrated to act In Persona Christi, to confect the gifts. And the use of the liturgical crucifix for blessings, however pious the intention, may obscure the Church’s true teachings about consecrated hands.

Instead, priests should bless with a relaxed right hand, with an open palm, without forced contortions of the fingers to spell out IC XC, which can foster superstition.

Rightly consigned to the museum.

Oblations

Wine and unleavened hosts are used for the RAL. While the Eastern Orthodox use leavened prosphora to symbolise the risen Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit within the Eucharist, the proskomedia service associated with its preparation is needlessly convoluted, full of nonessentials, and superstitious. Hence, we remove the proskomedia liturgy completely, and use unleavened hosts to minimise the spread of crumbs.

Pontificals

It is inappropriate for bishops to vest in sakkos and mitre, as these accretions originated as the regalia of the Eastern Roman Emperor. The epigonation originated as a thigh shield awarded to officials, thus it should also be done away with. The liturgy is not meant to be a pompous, decadent, secular court ceremony, but a simple communal meal wherein all the people of God actively participate in solidarity with the poor and those in the peripheries.

An undecorated phelonion with plain omophorion that is sewn into shape is preferred for bishops. The full ceremonial omophorion that requires it to be passed around the neck, folded in the front, and hung down past the knees in both the front and the back should not be worn, as it has become excessively decorative and time-consuming to put on, failing to convey the symbol of the Good Shepherd, who should smell of the sheep.

If there are no such omophoria available, bishops can instead wear their epitrachelion on top of their phelonion. For the hands, liturgical cuffs may restrict movement, so they should be discarded.

Attire outside of liturgy

Bishops who enter the temple vested in monastic habit must not wear the klobuk or mantiya, as these kinds of attire may indirectly foster clericalism.

All religious should be encouraged to be clean-shaven, as beards may contribute to clericalism.

The preferred habit for monks and hieromonks should be determined by the principle of the via media. In this day and age that may even manifest in wearing a modest semi-casual suit with jeans.

Fr Karl Rahner SJ, a great Western leader in the synodal path of renewal, photographed during an interview in 1974. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Jesromtel, CC BY 3.0)

Music

The use of Eastern Roman, Kyivan, Galician, and Prostopinije chants for the more melismatic lines are unsuited and unpalatable to modern ears, hence inconducive to discerning, responding, and listening to the Spirit. Instead, simpler chant is preferred for active participation and intelligibility.

Furthermore, classical compositions such as those by Bortniansky, Leontovych, Stetsenko, etc., may reflect an unhealthy obsession with imitating Western European styles. And, their complex harmonies may distract, becoming more of an idolatrous spectacle.

The Cherubic Hymn (“Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim”) in a setting by the Ukrainian composter Dmitry Bortniansky (1751-1825). Insufficiently fostering of active participation.

Any song in the liturgy must have simple, singable melodies to encourage active participation. Musical instruments (piano, guitar, keyboard) as accompaniment should be permitted.

Gestures

Making excessive signs of the cross is potentially superstitious and vain repetition, thus we reduced its frequency in the RAL to emphasize sobriety, solemnity and foster healthy catechetical formation.

Instead of the usual Eastern sign of the cross with three fingers, a small sign on the forehead with the thumb is made as per early Christian practice, and will be rubrically indicated by a ✣ within the liturgical text. If ✣ is not indicated, then it is spiritually dangerous and possibly prideful to make the sign of the cross.

The normative way to worship in the East is always to stand up with confidence, as humans are made in the image and likeness of God. Bowing and prostrating were historically understood to have been penitential gestures, however these may appear to undermine human dignity, and may even be weaponised for performative piety by those struggling with spiritual pride. Thus, only sitting and standing are permitted throughout the liturgy. And we can express penitence through our own interior disposition.

Kissing icons, diskos, chalice and altar may spread germs, so such gestures are better avoided.