Since our UGCC brethern are getting some press here today regarding the RDL I'll jump on the trend.

Here is a quote from Bishop Robert Moskal, Eparchy of Parma, regarding the 'O' word (orthodox).

From: http://stjosaphateparchy.org/BishopLetters.html

This would be a different perspective than what the RDL gives us.

Since nobody has touched on this, it confirms my belief that the Ruthenian church really has an identity crisis. I was born into it. I know. (Sanctus bells and clappers on Good Friday, anyone?)

Bishop Robert seems to have a good grasp of the situation. If he could only practice what he preaches and purge his diocese of recited liturgies and the rest of the remnants of Latinization, they could be the closest thing to "Orthodox in communion with Rome".

Etnick, your Pravoslav christian...

A fabulous catechesis. My hats off to Bishop Robert. God grant him many years!

That is precisely what should have been said and done with the Metropolia's RDL.

Gordo, an Orthodox Christian in Communion with Rome

Gordo, what is an Orthodox Christian in Communion with Rome?

Any Byzantine Catholic

How so?
Orthodoxy 101. You can not accept many dogmas of the Roman Catholic church as an Orthodox. Byzcaths MUST accept dogma of the Catholic Church. There is no such thing as Orthodox in communion with Rome. Lest we remember that our people were stolen from Orthodoxy by the politicians of the day. As a Catholic you can not simply ascribe to the entire teachings of the Orthodox church. If you do subscribe to the Orthodox teachings but remain Catholic under rome, then you have placed yourself outside the catholic church.
Also, I know the arguments inside and out. Basically it has become the status quo for some Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite to pick and choose how they view basic catholic dogma. This is known as cafeteria catholicism. You are either Orthodox or not Orthodox. There is no in-between. 350 years, and the ever present heavy hand of rome have jaded the memory of the real reason there are Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite......... because it was a political movement placed upon our forefathers who were indentured servants/serfs. Regardless of papal luncheon talks or recent musings in the forms of papers, the latinization continues, not only by remaining under Rome under false pretenses, but the new divine liturgy created by the Roman Catholic Church of the Ruthenian Byzantine Rite is just another chapter in the long list of abuses placed upon our people.
Sorry, but I can prove any argument you may have as solid as a wet paper bag.

Well, since I am Orthodox, and in communion with Rome, your argument is false. One contrary example disproves a universal thesis.

Why am I so tired of the "there is no such thing as Orthodox in communion with Rome" debate, and uniates "have no right to their Church and their existence" arguments?

It doesn't strike me as either true or charitable, and if it is not true or charitable, it is not Orthodox.

Nick

Dear Orthodox Pyrohy:

I hope your pyrohy are light-years better than the inaccurate analysis you've just offered. For a few examples:



I take that claim seriously - which means I'ld like some proof. Would you care to produce at least three (you said "many") such dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church which an Orthodox Christian absolutely cannot accept - and produce a specific dogmatic definition by the entire Eastern Orthodox Church forbidding her members to accept each of these dogmas? Chapter and verse, please!



"Dogma", by the way, is the singular - the plural form is either dogmata or dogmas (I prefer dogmata). And the only "Byzcath" I know is this web-site and its forum. But to the substance: the Catholic Church recognizes various theological traditions as belonging to the fullness of her heritage. She acknowledges that in particular matters it happens that one or another of these theological traditions has given a better expression of the truth, and/or a better understanding of the Faith. In recent times, the Blessed Pope John XXIII, the Second Vatican Council, and the Popes since that event have not suggested that the Eastern Orthodox theological teachings are unacceptable, let alone heretical. If you would like chapter and verse for that, I and others can provide them at great length.



Since it is both inaccurate and offensive to call a human being a "thing", very well, there is no such "thing". There certainly are and have been such people. Attempting to tell people that they do not exist is not conducive to intelligent discourse.



This is an amazing example of the pot calling the kettle black. I regret the necessity of reminding you of the very recent past, but it is you who have made this sad exercise necessary:

In 1946 "the politicians of the day", making full use of the police and military and supported in some degree by the Patriarchate of Moscow, used force and violence, including murder, in an effort to compel Greek-Cathoics in the USSR to enter the Moscow Patriarchate. For political reasons, this was not applied in Transcarpathian Ukraine until 2 or 3 years later, when it was done with, again, every aspect of force and violence including the brutal murder of the Blessed Theodore, Bishop of Mukachevo-Uzhhorod.

The same thing was done in Czechoslovakia and Romania by the Communist governments there, in conjunction with the Moscow Patriarchate (in Czechoslovakia) and the Bucharest Patriarchate (in Romania).

These are not events of centuries ago; these are events within living memory. It is possible to expand on this at great length, and without in the least departing from the truth.

You assert that:



Then what do you make of the several million Greek-Catholics who were dragooned into a purely external "reunion" with the Moscow Patriarchate and the Bucharest Patriarchate and who were compelled by state force and violence to receive the Eucharist at the hands of the hierarchs of those Patriarchates? I invite you to view the cinema film of the "L'viv Church Council" of 1946 and take a good look at the faces of the poor priests who were abused in that way.

Much more pleasantly, what do you make of Metropolitan Nicodemus of Leningrad and Novgorod, who frequently admitted Catholics to the Eucharist and on at least one documented occasion welcomed a Roman Catholic priest to concelebrate the Divine Liturgy?



[I assume that you meant to write "subscribe", not "ascribe".] Permit me to refer you to Metropolitan Elias (Zoghby), Archbishop - Emeritus of Heliopolis, who takes precisely the position which you have just claimed is impossible. His Eminence is by no means alone, nor does he make any secret of the matter.



Excuse me? Whence do you derive your authority to pronounce that people are outside the Catholic Church? Pyrohy are delicious (especially when filled with cherries or lekvar), but is there some "Council of Pyrohy" enabled to pass judgement on these high questions?

I could go on, but this is depressing (and I could be criticized for shooting fish in a barrel).

Fr. Serge

Orthodox Pyrohy,

I concur completely with Father Serge's excellent reply.

Might I also recommend, if you want to seek the truth of the matter here and are not merely asking the question to challenge my claim, that you purchase and read a copy of Vladimir Soloviev's The Russian Church and the Papacy. You can find a very inexpensive copy here. Chapter Two in particular ("The True Orthodoxy of the Russian People and the Pseudo-Orthodoxy of the Anti-Catholic Theologians") convinced me personally that to be Orthodox does not require me to be "anti-Catholic" in my theology - in fact quite the opposite.

In discussing the idea that the claim to "Orthodoxy" is often monopolized by those who would set themselves against the West and in fact see much of what defines them as "Orthodox" being precisely this negation in terms of denying doctrines emphasized in the West, Soloviev writes:



As it pertains to those who would define many of their pseudo-Orthodox positions (which are really only anti-Catholic positions) as representative of Orthodoxy, Soloviev offers the following:



I offer these quotes as a way to define the parameters of what for me it means to be Orthodox, and how I view the position of those who would refuse me the title of Orthodox Christian simply because I am in communion with Rome. I certainly would not begrudge any Orthodox Christian not in full ecclesiastical communion with Rome who desired to call himself a "Catholic Christian", for that is certainly what they are.

In ICXC,

Gordo

Father bless!

Thank you Father Serge, for explaining (once again) why we shouldn't have to apologize for our Church.

Our Church is the Church of martyrs, saints and long-suffering confessors. Our fathers gave great witness, and thanks be to God, there are still people who are willing to defend our Church!

Nick

I will also say that we have far to go with the Latins in recognizing that members of Orthodox churches are Catholics as well. In the spirit of Orientale Lumen, I posted the following poll at a site called "4 marks" on how many have visited an Eastern Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Church.

My question was subsequently changed (by some scrupulant, no doubt) to:

Have you ever visited an Eastern Catholic Church?

The irony of course is that Orientale Lumen was not just meant to help Latins familiarize themselves with their Eastern counterparts in the Catholic communion, but with the members of the Orthodox churches as well! I even had a preface there stating that I was doing this in honor of the anniversary of OL.

Ah well...

The poll results are telling....

http://www.4marks.com/polls/details.html?poll_id=1067

God bless,

Gordo

I posted a similar poll on that site last year which included the Orthodox as well as "what's an eastern christian?"

the responses were sad.

It just tells us that we all have alot of work to do!

Gordo

A lot to do!

It is just such a shame that all the resources are being wasted on this stupid revision of the Liturgy.

If all this energy and money had been spent on the renewal of the Church, instead of abandoning our tradition and deforming our Ruthenian Recension, imagine what could have been accomplished!

Nick

Dear Nicholas,

CHRIST IS RISEN! The Blessing of the Lord!

Fr. Serge

I gotcha goin! Someone had to make for some discussion other than inclusive language.

Certainly the money could have been spent elsewhere. What about putting the effort foward to have better commnunity outreaches for the poor, needy, elderly, etc... What about using the money to get people back into church? I will admit the structure of the new pewbook is rather nice though.

It's awesome that every topic you can think of is somehow related to the RDL, and how it has single-handedly destroyed the Faith of our Fathers!


Stash: "Hey Jash, I got an "insinkerator" today!"

Jash: "No doubt it will mangle your garbage like the Liturgical Commission mangled our Liturgy!"


!just for good measure!!!!

[note: sarcasm intended]

Hmmm, an insinkerator? Remember the correct term for that item now known as the insinkerator was the insink-erater. By taking out the hyphen and changing the e to the o it destroys the proper job the great Willard T. Bookheimer made this device for, thus reducing his great knowledge and life-long work to properly dispense the sink of garbage to nothing.

From my understanding...ByzCath are Orthodox in belief...such as no belief in "Purgatory", Immaculate Conception, applying Eastern schools of thoughts from Eastern Fathers, etc. etc. etc. The only thing difference is that ByzCath is in Communion with Pope of Rome whereas the Orthodox is not.

Even the ByzCath have a different view of Papacy than from Roman Catholic...in fact it's more closer in line with the Orthodox view than RC.

That's probably why I doxed easily because I had a healthy view of Papacy that I learned about in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese website explaining their view on Papacy. I was elated.

But yes, many ByzCath have identity crisis because of many years of Latinization (especially during Communist years) as a means to "separate" themselves from Orthodox Church (so that people could identify which is in Communion with Pope and who isn't). That's a sad way to do that...one still can maintain full Orthodox praxis and still be in Communion with Rome. That's precisely why the late John Paul II wrote Oriental Lumen to remind the ByzCath to re-embrace Orthodox identity and to de-latinize.

I'm just not narrow minded "either this or that." I only see what G-d sees...people with Christian faith.

Peace,

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

Hmmm...I wonder why the Ukrainian Catholic Cathedral in Philadelphia is named "Immaculate Conception"?

No doubt someone will produce a book entitled The Elephant and the Ruthenian Liturgical Question. And no doubt someone on the Forum will realize the original version of that joke.

Fr. Serge

"No doubt someone will produce a book entitled The Elephant and the Ruthenian Liturgical Question."

Because the Liturgy is trunkated.

Latinisation/being like "other/proper" Catholics.

Even though it's not the origin of the joke, I like it! Thanks!

Fr. Serge

From the dust jacket of The Elephant and the Kangaroo by T. H. White
Sounds appropriate. But Father's reference to a question makes me think of Physics class where we dropped eggs off the top of the band hall and the teacher asked us which would hit the ground faster, an elephant or a feather.

In the interest of getting this back on topic, I'd like to add to the main point of this thread (the main point being that there is excellent catechesis from fellow Greek Catholics out there explaining why we should have the word orthodox in our liturgy contrary to what some say.) And that dovetails into the addition I'd like to make. We are not just continuing to separate ourselves from our Orthodox Brethern by ignoring this word, but we are the only Greek Catholic Church that I know of that does not use the word orthodox.

As the official policy of a Local Church; Monomakh is correct; there is no other Greek-Catholic Church that does not use the word "Orthodox" in the Liturgy. One can find, unfortunately, individual clergy here and there who omit it, or use it only under strict obedience.

Fr. Serge