It may be my imagination, but it seems that Eastern Orthodox laity have more ministerial opportunites than Byzantine Catholics do..is this my imagination? I notice that EOs have Frederica Mathewes-Greene, Barbara Pappas, Frank Schaeffer, etc...even when I go to the library, I do not see any "offerings" by Byzantine laity as do I see RC works by Scott Hahn, Marcus Grodi,and so on...why is this???

I'm not entirely clear what you mean by "ministerial opportunities". Given the backgrounds of the respected and accomplished individuals noted in your OP, my first reaction would be to reflect on the loss of "family-based tradition" we have suffered as Byzantine Catholics in America, given the imposition of celibacy on our clergy. It comes as no surprise to Byzantine Catholics who have had exposure to married clergy in their Rite (rare as it was) that wives and children of priests from Orthodox traditions become leaders of their churches, as pastoral leaders in their "family" parish, lay theological authors and scholars, or as clergy and religious. Their religious life is inextricably interwoven with their family life from an early age, to the benefit of their own soul and to the greater good of their religious communities.

On the other hand, in certain Eastern Catholic jurisdictions one finds a stifling degree of clericalism which positively deters people from taking on leadership positions beyond the traditional kitchen duties, bingo hall and school of religion. That I know several laymen who had very excellent ideas shot down in a very public and insulting manner by the hierarchy merely reinforces my perspective.

Yes, regrettably this is true too often, as well. In my initial reply, I could not help but first reflect on the common (clerical) family backgrounds of each of the individuals mentioned in Volodymyr's OP. That said, we can all most assuredly recall several such instances where laymen were so treated, often resulting in them being driven away to other folds.

Coincidently, earlier this evening, I stumbled upon an older thread relating to + Cardinal Newman, where you shared the following thought …



Amen!

There are a lot more Orthodox than there are Eastern Catholics in this country. Interesting that RC authors mentioned are both converts from Protestantism. The same can be said of a large number of the Orthodox writers particularly at Conciliar Press.

Off-topic, but a happy birthday to our brother, volodymyr, and may God grant him many more years in health and happiness.

Many years,

Neil

Happy Birthday, volodymyr, and Many Years.

Bob

Frederica Mathewes-Greene and her husband were both Episcopalians before coming into Orthodoxy, Barbara Pappas I'm not familiar with, and is Frank Schaeffer the same Frank Schaeffer who used to be a well known fundamentalist?

Many years, volodymyr!

Many years, volodymyr!

Back to your OP, I cannot think of any Byzantine Catholic laity who have become widely known theological authors or scholars. Nor can I speculate as to why that may be the case.

A possibility - half the battle in understanding the history of the Byzantine Ruthenian church (among others, UGCC, etc.) is understanding our history as a people (e.g. what's a Rusyn?); in other words, there is a need to understand the ethnic identity as well as the religious heritage. There are a few scholars who have written on the history of the Ruthenian (Rusyn) people, including good coverage in their work on our interwoven social and religious history, most notably Professor Paul Robert Magocsi (author of one of my favorites, "The People from Nowhere").

However, there are only so many times that one can point out that Andy Warhol was a Rusyn ...

... and this certainly isn't theological authorship!

It's indeed interesting that the people you had identified, in addition to having current or past family ties to a religious tradition, were not "cradle Orthodox", as pointed out in a few posts throughout the thread. Could a conversion experience perhaps put one in a better position (perspective, desire, etc.) to write about their faith experience as opposed to a lay person who remains within a faith tradition from cradle to grave?

I'm thinking of an unrelated example, but one popular book (at least among curious Catholics) on Mormonism was written by Isaiah Bennett, a priest who converted to Mormonism and then converted back to Catholicism.

I'd think Fr. Protodeacon Paul Weyrich was roughly comparable to Frank Schaeffer in prominence and was also involved in writing about politics.

Catherine de Hueck Doherty would be another prominent Catholic laywoman. Not entirely clear to me whether she was technically Russian Catholic, but she was certainly influenced by her Russian background.

(Though neither were Rusyn.)

Not to beat my own drum too much, but ...

How many Orthodox or Roman Catholic laity have ...

Founded a publishing company that has produced over 200 books in the last 15 years?

Provided Sunday bulletin covers with color icons and theological commentary according to the Byzantine Church calendar on a weekly basis to 300+ Catholic AND Orthodox parishes reaching some 40,000 families for the last 12 years?

Founded and organized ecumenical conferences for Catholic and Orthodox lay persons to attend on an annual basis for 15 years?

Founded and produced a media ministry with over 200 hour-long programs of lectures, liturgies, theological books, and special events throughout the Eastern Christian world on a streaming video website, and made those programs available in CD and DVD formats?

I'm no scholar, but I produce and distribute the stuff that scholars write! Is that not a ministry for the laity?

Jack Figel (Byzantine Catholic layman)
Publisher, Eastern Christian Publications
Chairman, Orientale Lumen Conferences
Executive Producer, Orientale Lumen TeleVision

And oh, by the way, I'm 100% Carpatho-Rusyn with all four of my Greek-Catholic grandparents born within 20 miles of Presov, Slovakia in the Carpathain Mountains.

Jack

Thank you for speaking up, Jack. Your contribution is profound. It's had a huge impact on my life. Many, many thanks!

I think Jack is living proof of my statement regarding the attitude of the hierarchy towards lay activism. It's as though they are afraid that the laity taking the initiative in anything will result in the stewardship problems of the 1930s.

Yea! Me too, although probably 40 clicks as they say! And my children as well! (although their paternal grandfather's family was just over the border from Medzilaborce in Transcarpathia, we'll be OK with that!

Jack, indeed your contributions are extraordinary! That you have accomplished all of this without the grand level of publicity afforded some other laity in their ministries speaks not only to the relative lack of awareness of Eastern Christian tradition, which you continue to battle in your ministry, but most especially to the evident love of your Church that continues to inspire your many labors.

Thanks for reminding us all that noted lay ministry doesn't necessarily mean you have to write a book and be on the talk show circuit!

May God bless you and continue to inspire you in your abundantly fruitful ministry!

Stuart, I fear you may be right, and in that regard have come closest to addressing the central question in volodymyr's OP thus far. While our circumstances may be particularly unique, I do believe that "cradle Christians" of all types learn to accept authority within their churches to a large degree, and thus may be reluctant to express their views in very public ways (i.e. through published works).

It has also occurred to me that we do not have many opportunities for lay theologians within our church infrastructure. There are other Christian denominations which have scholastic programs and institutions that crank out laity with advanced degrees in theology regularly, and one would think that these individuals would make a living via continuation of that scholarship, through teaching and writing. I struggle to see how Eastern Catholics in the US would be or would have been at all incentivized to follow this type of career path. Indeed, when people ask where they can read more about Eastern Catholicism, more often than not they are directed toward a work from an Orthodox author.

Joe,

Until Sts Cyril and Methodius Seminary received its certification several years ago there was no Byzantine Catholic educational institution where they could receive government loans and grants. Seminarians' tuitions were subsidized by the eparchies; non-seminarians would naturally be at the bottom of the priority list. I don't know if the Ukrainians and Melkites have encouraged laity advanced education in the USA.

Also remember that our Mother Church in Europe was severely persecuted and without God's mercy would not exist today. So there were no laypersons who could have come forth during this sad period.

I would expect in the future generations that you will be seeing more publications and valuable contributions come forth. As they said in the Republican presidential debate, your comparing apples and oranges.

Another factor is the economic demand for such publications....you certainly won't sell many books to Greek Catholics compared to Eastern Orthodox demand.

Have a blessed Nativity
Christ is amongst us!

Does this mean just the BCC and in particular regarding scholarly-type works, a career in theology, liturgy etc.? I'm thinking of (the forum's) Adam DeVille (presently "subdeacon of the Ukrainian Greco-Catholic Church")?

Being a Cantor is an almost essential ministry in the BCC with its charism of congregational singing: a vital ministry of the laity.

It should also be allowed that advancing to the clerical state is a lay ministry of sorts. Revitalizing and re-establishing the minor orders as a stable ministry seems an obvious and time honored way for the development of some lay involvement. In fact:
Not to diminish lay contributions but since 2001 Jack, tonsured and ordained reader, has also been just such a one who, having started his ministries as a layman, made the traditional progression to the clerical ranks ( link; see Canon 327). For that matter, how about deacons, presbyters and bishops in the BCC (let alone laity) and the OP about no offerings in the library. I know Fathers Petras and Custer have had in print monographs and scholarly journal articles. But I wonder how many libraries have, for instance, Fr. Custer's The Old Testament: A Byzantine Perspective or his other books that would match or even exceed the publishing standards of St. Vlad's. How many Byzantine Catholics are even aware of such works? Does the BCC even care to advance such research, publishing and involvement?

There is a reason why Jack is, for all intents and purposes, the only "permanent" Reader in the Ruthenian Church.

Whatever the reason, my point is that it is a proper course or end for those laity who are called. (And I know of three, maybe four others who are tonsured readers in the BCC.)

All moving on to bigger things, or quite happy to stay readers forever?

Ordination is not an entitlement. That can mean disappointments for a variety of reasons and circumstances, but ultimately one's purpose is to serve the church not the self. This can mean deciding not to petition the bishop for further ordination.

Whatever. One of the big problems of the Ruthenian Church is its chronic unwillingness to speak honestly of its past, or to air its dirty linen in public. It will be the end of it, some day. De mortuis nil nisi bonum, and all that, but recent obituaries of Bishop Andrew seriously made me want to gag. This kind of makes me want to gag, too.

That could be taken as rather dismissive.

What is the antecedent of your demonstrative "This"?

The "Ordination is not an entitlement" bit.

So what are you saying?...that it IS? Ordination IS an entitlement?

Those who know the story know the story. And that's the end of the story.

Let's not have this thread devolve please, gentlemen. Those who serve, in whatever capacity they or their hierarchs determine, are important to their parish, their jurisdiction, their Church, and their Faith. Let's avoid anything that denigrates that value and their willingness to do what they do and do it well.

As regards any discussion regarding the controversial aspects of Bishop Andrew's tenure, John and I have discussed the matter and are in agreement that such is inappropriate during the 40 days following his repose. De mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est.

Many years,

Neil

Deacon Tony,

I think the OP's point focused on the laity because he chose to make a distinction - one expects clergy contributions in terms of written works, etc, and no one disputes that there are many such. He made the apparently valid observation that lay contributions are more difficult to find, if they exist, and that should continue to be the focus of this thread.

Many years,

Neil

Jack Figel's contributions as a Byzantine Catholic layman have, indeed, been extraordinarily valuable, and he deserves thanks for them, not just from his fellow Ruthenians, but from Eastern and Oriental Christians in general and from those of the West with an interest in and love for the Eastern Churches. Likewise, Adam DeVille's site, referenced by Deacon Tony, is becoming known for the quality of its reviews of works related to the East. These are and hopefully will continue to be valuable resources for the education and edification of not only our own faithful, but the wider Christian community.

There are and have been others who have made valuable contriubutions, although they, admittedly, don't always immediately jump out at one.

The very existence of this site, with some 4,320 members over its 14 years of existence (the earliest post that I've been able to find was made on October 15, 1998*), 29,297 topics, and 366,830 posts, certainly suggests one such.

Were it not for John Vernoski, we'd not be having this discussion - there would not be this venue in which Eastern and Oriental Christians, Catholic and Orthodox, and others not of the East, but interested in it, learn more about it, discuss, debate, educate one another, pray for one another, share, and sometimes just chit-chat.

Reading the very oldest threads, it's clear that - its name aside - the forum, from the outset, reached out across ecclesial lines. That in itself is a huge part of what evangelization is all about. It's not just about converting others to one's faith. It's teaching them about it, and it's teaching your own about it, so it can be understood and appreciated - and that's what this forum has offered since its inception and continues to do. Thank you, John, for affording us this place.

Many years,

Neil

*For the benefit of both the trivia aficianados and the historians:

the lowest recorded member number is #3 and belongs to Dave Brown/DTBrown who originally registered on 8/24/1998. (However, Dave apparently forgot his password or something and re-registered on 11/03/2001, as member #59, the number under which he still posts);

the lowest male member number in continuous use to this day (still actively posting) appears to be #9 and belongs to Deacon Lance, who registered on 8/29/1998 (Anthony Dragnani has a lower number, but has neither posted nor been recorded as on-line at the site for a few years now);

the lowest female member number in continuous use to this day (still actively posting) is #10 and belongs to Lory Nemeth, the Director of Communications for the Byzantine Eparchy of Parma. Lory registered on 11/27/1998.

Well, my number is 12, registered on March 27, 1999.

What was my number, before you blackballed me for claiming bingo and pirogi were the overriding priorities of a certain Church?

Stuart,

Not sure to whom 'you' refers, but it wasn't me. I wasn't here except as a lurker/reader back then - not registered and in no position to blackball anyone. You show as #144, with a registration date in 2001, but the earliest post from you under this nick that I can track was made in 2002, in which you make reference to 'being back'.

By posts in which people reply to you by name, I can deduce that you (recorded as 'Anonymous', an unregistered poster) were posting earlier than that. The earliest instance that I found being on 08-20-1999, in response to Medved. As you weren't 'signing' your posts, a nick must have been in place, rather than 'Anonymous'. (There are more than a few 'Anonymous' - unregistered posters, not all of whom were you - I saw an instance of one that looks to have been Father Elias.)

As to how such nicks dropped off and came to be replaced by Anonymous, the answer will likely have to wait until John is back on his feet. I'm still rather amazed that I was able to track down as much info as I did.

Many years,

Neil