www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Tomb of Saint Josaphat

St. Josaphat's in Parma, of course !!!!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by spdundas:

"I've experienced the Holy Spirit taking over me...as I was kneeling on the ground and leaning against the very wall of the catacombs. The Spirit have confirmed that Peter is INDEED the earthly head of the Church, the Prince of Apostles."

"I have full confidence now, since the Holy Spirit Himself told me so."

I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend you, but I have to say that even though you are defending a Catholic doctrine, you are doing it in a very Protestant manner. This way of speaking "The Holy Spirit spoke to me" "When I was reading my Bible this morning, the Lord said to me...", sounds like something a Pentacostal preacher would say.

I think we should be very careful in interpreting our personal, individual religious experiences and emotions as "God has now confirmed once and for all..." Better leave that to the saints.

"I have learned that it is through the pope, the Church remains in unity and in one piece while the Orthodox and Protestants are just scattered all about divided."

I'm not so sure that I buy this claim that the Orthodox are so divided...in terms of the earthly, temporal organization, yes. But that's really not what's most important, not to us Orthodox anyway. I think we have more unity of faith than the Catholics have. There are no "Hans Kungs" in Orthodoxy.

"So, it is because of the fact, Rome is indeed ROME of all ROMES (not Constantinople, Moscow, Antioch, EVER!)"

hm, Antioch was also founded by St.Peter...

"Constantinople can't be seen as the "New Rome" unless they're "wanna-bes.""

As far as I know, there was an Ecumenical Council which gave the title of "New Rome" to Constantinople.

"It's the Orthodox's major LOSS to not be in communion with Rome."

I think Rome have to clean up it's own house before it will be a loss for the Orthodox not to be in communion with it. I even know Catholics who have said that it would be a disaster for the Orthodox to join Rome just at this moment.

"One would never imagine how powerful the Orthodox will become if they're in communion with Rome."

Well, "power" is really not what we are searching for.

"The fact many great relics in St. Peter's Church as well as all the major basilicas in Rome and in many Cathedrals throughout the city of Rome is a great testimony that all in the Christendom have greately entrusted in Rome and have seen Rome as the main Christian Center of the whole world."

It could also be said to be a testimony of some not-so-holy "Vicars of Christ" who sent crusaders to burn and steal form their Christian "brothers".

Christian
Proud to be Orthodox NOT in communion with Rome! (or actually, rather thankful, than proud)

Dear Griego,

Well, some of the commentary I've read about the bringing of St Josaphat's Relics to Rome suggested that this was done to avoid further issues with the Orthodox.

The Basilians and also the Polish Kingdom had used these Relics for purposes of, how shall I say, "stuffing the Unia down the throats of the Orthodox."

St Josaphat is a MOST controversial figure among the Eastern Slavs and continues to be that.

Even Metropolitan Andrew Sheptytsky was most sensitive to this fact.

The revamped service to St Josaphat seems (to me at least) to have pulled out the more triumphalistic phraseology.

(The Orthodox are no longer referred to as our "schism-loving brothers" Isn't that a scream?! )

And the Ukrainian Catholic clergy and faithful are divided on him as well.

When I once asked a Ukrainian Catholic priest why the Orthodox reacted as they did against Josaphat, he simply told me, "Because he got under their skin to the point where they couldn't take it any longer."

At a Litia service when St Josaphat's name was mentioned, a babushka next to me said audibly, "Are we still commemorating that . . . (I won't complete her sentence).

The official history in four volumes of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by Prof. Vadim Scherbakiwsky notes the historical episode with St Josaphat and states that "this was an inappropriate response on the part of the Orthodox that damaged ecumenical relations."

Orthodox never will give their children the name "Josaphat" and especially in East Slavic cultures.

Eugene Ivankiw, writing for the "Visnyk" of Sts. Volodymyr and Olha parish in Chicago once stated that St Josaphat is truly a controversial figure and we (meaning Ukie Catholics) should not go parading him about to the further damaging of Catholic-Orthodox relations (meaning "Ukrainian" in this context).

I once squealed on my piano teacher, who was Orthodox, who told me some things about Josaphat. My mother promptly fired her, something I've always been sorry about.

I once had an open and heated argument with my Ukrainian literature teacher in Saturday school about St Josaphat and upset her to the point that she started to cry and left the class.

St Josaphat is so controversial a figure that today I would say it is best to keep him and his cult in Rome and away from the Eastern Slavs, especially the Ukies.

If there was a way to accept both Josaphat and Athanasius of Brest, and there isn't, that would be a way out.

But we have our own New Martyrs and saints today, Catholic and Orthodox, and we share a common historical heritage, we Ukie Catholics and Orthodox.

It will be some time before the time in which Josaphat lived and other figures such as Meletius Smotrytsky, whose writing led to Josaphat's death, and who is today honoured by BOTH Catholics and Orthodox (believe it or not) can be reassessed.

The name of Josaphat is too closely associated with all the dark sides of the Unia of Brest-Litovsk and especially with the Catholic demand that the Orthodox "convert" as if they weren't already Christian etc.

He is truly misunderstood, I believe. But no one can help that today.

Alex

You could say it but it would be a false statement.

Dear djs,

True, but some popes, like Innocent III, didn't exactly apologise for the excesses of the Crusaders of his day either - instead he accepted and worked under the status quo.

And the Teutonic Knights attacked Rus' mercilessly in the time of St Alexander Nevsky and so did not contribute to an improvement of East-West relations . . .

The papal armies tried to conquer the Czechs five times and failed, thanks to the old general Zizka!

(The Hussites later taught their successful anti-Crusader military tactics to the armies of St Theodore Ostrozhsky in his struggle with Poland).

This prompted Erasmus of Rotterdam to comment satirically on such church-sponsored wars.

I believe he said, "Our bishops, in fact, stay as far away from religion as possible - to them, praying is seen as a waste of time. They would rather boast of their swords and side-arms . . ."

Alex

But of course, dear Alex, these sidearms could not be seen as applying to the palitzas (thigh-shields) of the bishops of the Byzantine Rite, be they Catholic or Orthodox! :-)

OrthodoxEast

Dear OrthodoxEast,

Yes, indeed, the sidearms referred to by Erasmus were of much more durable material . . . .

I think I mentioned to you that a priest was blessed with the Palitza at the OCA ordination I attended?

What is the difference between the Palitza and the Epigonation? Are they the same? If not, what would a priest do if he received both?

Alex

Yes, Alex, we've discussed the fourth crusade in exhaustive detail before
https://www.byzcath.org/bboard/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000661;p=1.
I am not positive that that is precisely what OSWE had in mind. But, if so, I wanted to clarify, that the idea that the Crusaders were sent to Constantiople by the Pope really turns history completely upside-down.

Dear djs,

I'm not suggesting otherwise!

And if I go into details that we've covered before, and I know I have, then this is for some here that may have come on recently and might wonder what the heck we're talking about.

I don't mean to offend by repeating what is well-known to us and I apologise if I have.

Certainly, Popes have sent armies to fight wars.

The Crusaders, largely a rabble of bandits that the West was happy to get off its hands, fought and pillaged in the name of the Roman Catholic Church.

My point is that it is very difficult for those who suffered their piracies to separate them from the RC Church and the Pope.

And by pillaging Orthodox Churches and Shrines, the Crusaders expressed the view of the Western Church toward the East that, since it was "in schism," it no longer had grace etc. and, from the Crusaders' point of view, could be the object of pillaging and looting.

Alex

Dear Ruthenian Colleagues,

Is devotion to St Josaphat strong among the Ruthenians?

How would you characterize it?

Alex

CHRIST IS RISEN!

Dear in Christ, Alex, the palitza and the epignation are one and the same, i.e., they are the diamond-shaped thigh-shield which always hangs on the right side.

The nabedrennik, however, is the rectangular-shaped thigh shield, and is normally associated with the Russian recension. Among the Russians, the nabedrennik is usually the first "award" given to a priest. It is worn on the right side UNTIL he is awarded the palitza (epignation), usually when he is already an Archpriest, at which time the nebedrennik is switched to the left side since the palitza is *always* worn on the right. Confused yet?

OrthodoxEast

Dear OrthodoxEast,

Ah, so ultimately the priest could have a rectangular shaped "knee-protector" on both sides!

Sometimes I regret not becoming a priest - and just so I could wear such things . . .

But the problem with me would be that I would be forever fidgeting with them, like toys or something .

When I first heard the word "palitza" used I was confused as that word means "staff" as well.

In other words, I have a heck of a lot to learn about our beautiful traditions!

So what else is new?

Alex

Alex, once when I was in Our Lady of the Cedars Melkite Catholic Church in Manchester, NH, a group of Latin Rite Catholic youngsters was attending the Liturgy being served by Fr. Edward Kakaty, who was then the pastor. After the Liturgy, Fr. Ed held a question-and-answer session for them. They were most curious to know why Fr. Ed (who was privileged to wear an epignation) wore a pillow on his hip! :-)

OrthodoxEast

Dear OrthodoxEast,

Actually, the Old Believers of Bilaya Krinitsa have their square-shaped pillows for prostrations all over the Church - there are even pillows standing up against the iconostasis and they DO look like epigonations!

I ordered one from them and these pillows come with a loop at one corner so people can carry them at their sides . . .

Do you think those Latin youngsters had any Old Believer relatives?

Alex

Dear Alex,

Thank you for your reply.

I find it so sad regarding the reputation St. Josaphat has among the Orthodox and certain Catholics. He is vilified by the Orthodox, considered controversial by Byzantine Catholics, and not that well known among Roman Catholics. One could say he is the "Rodney Dangerfield" of the saints- "He can't get no respect"!

Never has there been a saint that has caused so much reaction when brought up in discussion. Every time a post has been started about Saint Josaphat, it has always lead to arguments. Even Alexis Toth doesn't come near to being considered that controversial.

Saint Josaphat is one of my favorite saints and I do hope that the truth about the extraordinary holiness of this saint will be recognized by both Orthodox and Catholics.

Saint Josaphat, Apostle of Union, pray for us and for the union of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches!!!