One of the problems the Ruthenian Church has is an inability to confront its own past in an honest and objective way. Everything is spun or whitewashed, even when everyone knows what really happened, because, I guess, people are afraid of what "outsiders" will say. Just read the official biographies or obituaries of Ruthenian hierarchs past and present, to see what I mean.

Hi all. I don't know much about the BCC (I don't live near one now, and I didn't before I moved either) so I have no comment about the "RDL". I would, however, like to comment on the original article ...



I haven't been keeping score exactly, but based on my experience it seems like the neo-conservatives might be winning. Anyone else come to that conclusion?

"...everything is spun or whitewashed"--these are unqualified words, that sound like those of one who is held captive by bitterness and logismoi.

Please stop this destructive speech, Stuart. Your own church sends her seminarian(s) to our seminary. By extension your criticism of us extends to the Melkites in that sense.

Hospodi pomiluj.

JJP, if you can say that Nelson's (and my own) parish is not subject to the issues that concern you about your own, how can the negative appraisals be a one size fits all? How can they be connected to the same RDL which we also use?

I still think, for as much as is known as to how the RDL was developed, approved and promulgated, I still remain puzzled by one aspect. All hierarchs approved and are ultimately responsible, irrespective of what they may or may not have said about it afterward. This much cannot be disputed. So what was it that made them think they needed to push this through?

Again, leaders in different positions of leadership can and do lead differently, as is often seen in the secular world as well as within the Church. So we owe it to Metropolitan William to see how he will both leader and govern this Church. He is in a very different position now.

FWIW - he has already appointed a new Chancellor and Protosyncellus, separating the posts and appointing new individuals, so he is showing some early signs of being willing to make changes.

He seems very much aware of the condition of the Metropolitan Church and the influences of secular society on it and the Universal Church, in general. This will likely be a primary focus, as further evidenced from his homily and comments made formally at his own enthronement.

I still remain convinced of two things: (i) the global Ruthenian Church suffers from a lack of formal unity, unlike the UGCC for example, and will likely become less and less relevant over time as a consequence; and, (ii) the decision on a successor for the Eparchy of Passaic will be the most telling sign as to how the Metropolitan Church will be governed and develop for the generation to come.

I don't know anything at all about your new Metropolitan. But one thing - he does know how to make a statement. I first saw him at Metropolitan Nicholas Smisko's 50th Anniversary Liturgy at St. John's Orthodox Church in Perth Amboy, NJ. He was fully vested, crown included and seated in the front pew, left side in a place of honor directly across from His Eminence, Archbishop Demetrios the representative of the EP who, like the other Orthodox bishops, was wearing his monastic cassock with a pectoral cross and panagia. When he exchanged the Kiss of Peace with the other hierarchs, it was quite a moment so he may indeed be open to surprises. (I don't know what the Greeks thought of it, but we 'Ruscnaci' were moved given our bittersweet history.) Give him a chance.

EXACTLY!



Do you have the names of the new Chancellor and Protosyncellus? Or a link to the announcement?



Yes I was impressed by his homily and saw it a call of renewal within our church.



So how do we solve this then? (and before people coming rushing in with "get rid of the RDL," please don't becuase getting rid of the RDL will not correct all ills- to think that is very naive)



I agree with you here Curious Joe. I think that a dynamic, young bishop is needed to fill this Eparchy.

Because they come from the top down. I've been to your church once and I was really impressed, and Fr Pipta is by all accounts what we all hope for in a BC priest.

The problem is that it reminds me too much of my nondenominational upbringing, where each local church is dependent on the personality or charisma of the pastor leading the congregation. When you have a holy, amazing, dynamic person, it's a great place to be. But as soon as that person is gone, the foundation is gone also. I remember talking to the Orthodox priest at a parish that I attended who, in explaining this idea, said that if he were to up and have an affair and leave the Church, his parish attendance might dip for a bit, but it would continue on in much the same fashion as before he arrived, it wouldn't collapse or visibly alter as a result. He was a part of something greater.

I'm not saying this is the dynamic at your parish at all. It's the lack of a solid bedrock in the Ruthenian Church as a whole that concerns me. I am capable of overlooking flaws, and no place is perfect. But what type of experience and instruction will my children receive? They will speak English and Spanish. When they ask why the English liturgy says "us all" and the Spanish translation isn't "nosotros" but instead "la humanidad", will my explanation make any sense? When the catechism class teaches that the Ruthenian Church was never an Orthodox Church, and that contradicts what they hear at home, what kind of view will they have of the Church in general?

I don't think it's responsible to just wait and see.

Be realistic Stuart. How many people put negative information in an obituary, biography, or an autobiography? Take Abraham Lincoln, for example; how much do you read of the criticism of him as President; are most Americans aware that the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to the rebel states? Go on down the line, Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson, Kennedy, Nixon, Roosevelt(s), etc.

Other than a self-whipping, what purpose does an expose' of sins decades ago accomplish?

For those of us who remain in the Byzantine Catholic Church in America, let's put out efforts into constructive efforts. For those who have left the Church, we welcome you, but please be constructive and not divisive. As a historian you are aware of what divisiveness has done.

Christ is risen! Let the Church also experience Resurrection; the Crucifixion is over. Death has been conquered!

The announcements are prominently linked from the Archeparchy's home page. Here is the appointment information:

Officlal Archieparchial appointments

I was also pleased that only three days after his enthronement, the new Metropolitan made time to celebrate the Divine Liturgy and preach at the Cantor's Day of Recollection at the cathedral.

Either the Metropolitan or the rector of the cathedral could easily have vetoed the choice of an Orthodox priest to preach the retreat. Father David Mastroberte of the Johnstown diocese gave a pair of excellent talks from his own experience on the theology and practice of the cantor's vocation, and it was followed by an hour-long open discussion among all the cantors present.

Jeff Mierzejewski

People assume that Metropolitan Skurla is cleaning house. We don't know whether Msgr. Duker was pushed out of office as Protosyncellus and Chancellor or decided to retire. He is not a supporter of the Revised Divine Liturgy. He is also not very East-leaning. But he is a really nice guy.

I'm becoming convinced that there is no hope of liturgical restoration or singable music in the Pittsburgh Metropolia. It might be time to start again somewhere else. My family needs a church without politics in liturgy.

This is a very important question that I think can be applied not only to JJP but to others as well.

We need young people to stay in our church and help bring about the renewal that we all want to see... but blaming it ALL on the RDL, well that is just a cop-out.

Pope John Paul II called us to a new evangelization and told us to "be not afraid." Following this call is why I think we see a rise in Traditional Catholicism by young people. I think Metropolitan William, from his enthronement homily, and the other people's comments above, understands and sees that we need to participate in the new evangelization .

Christ is Risen!

Sorry Lisa, to hear of your discontent because of liturgical revision. Please stay and work within the Church. Don't be like those people who complain about government but fail to vote.

Liturgy and politics has always been with the Church because we are human. That is why the Liturgy has gone from a prayerful agape meal to a long and theological complex ritual. The emperors, patriarchs and ethnic groups have all made changes for centuries. If not you would have to speak Greek or Aramaic, and bring a lamb, bread, chicken or produce to Church with you for your offering.

Christ is amongst us!
Fr Deacon Paul

I was thumbing through said catechism one night when we were at dance practice (my wife instructs Rusyn folk dancing at the BCC church in town)and found it to be consistent with what we teach the same grade level at the Orthodox church down the street rgarding matters of faith (for the most part. ) The section on Church history was odd. If I recall, it sort of skipped from the Christianization of the Slavs to the 20th century and omitted any mention of the struggles which the faithful had to confront - even from a BCC point of view. Nor did it, if I recall, say anything about why there was an Eastern church at all. Perhaps my memory is faulty or my review was merely a 'browsing' exercise, but that sticks in my mind.

Of course,we on the Orthodox side are just as guilty by glossing over the period of union.

Perhaps our mutual inability to confront the painful truths of our history has something to do with our mutually declining numbers and an inability to hold onto young people? At least the Ukrainians - Greek Catholic or Orthodox - have nationalism and a national identity to guide them.

Just wondering....

I thought when I signed up that most of the evangalization in this sense was going to be outward - towards Roman Catholics and towards Orthodox Christians. As it turns out, the greatest need is inward, which has to happen before the outward can occur.

If I was single and 10 years younger, it might be an enticing project. I can be very stubborn and wouldn't let the lack of any real desire for this type of message phase me.

But my priority isn't helping the Ruthenian Church despite its lack of desire for help, it is finding a church that I can raise children as Eastern Catholics that will work with me in that process, not against me.

If I thought that things were tilting towards this, I would be able to have patience. But anything I see tells me things are tilting the opposite direction. We can hope and pray all we want that the leadership will act differently than it has in the past, but God has granted us free will (amen). That means that if these are the decisions that they want, and if they want a feminist liturgy translation, that is what it will be. Maybe not forever, and we can all have hope. But I am focused on the next 5 years, not the next 5 decades. I pray that it changes in generations to come, and maybe my kids will be a part of it, but I am not going to work at cross purposes with the church in their upbringing.

The problem isn't the RDL, the problem is how and why it came into being, which is much greater.

All that being said, I still attend one. On a very different level, Church is people, and the people are great and hard to imagine leaving. It's a matter of when that balance tilts far enough to force a decision, and personally I feel it more every day.

Reverend Andrew J. Deskevich
Chancellor

Very Rev. Eugene P. Yackanich
Protosyncellus
(former Apostolic Administrator)