www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Can we forgive Archbishop John Ireland?

I read with interest the thread "Ha!" about the John Ireland school. The reply from the school's principal was almost predictable. Most Catholics (at least those aware of who Eastern Catholics are) are scandalized by the ill treatment our people received from the Latin hierarchy of the nineteenth century. Archbishop Ireland was a product of his era--an era that did not fully believe in the equality of dignity of our Churches. He did not act alone. His views were shared by many (perhaps most) other Latin hierarchs and priests of the day. For example, it was about this time that Eastern Catholics were told that they needed to receive Confirmation from a Latin Bishop if they lived in this country (a position which was upheld by Rome).

Thankfully, the Church has changed tremendously since that time and even the principal of the John Ireland school has expressed his sensitivity to the issue. No one in the Church today defends the attitudes of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. This is not to say all issues are completely resolved. But, things have changed considerably and all the documents of the Church support the equal dignity of our Churches (Vatican II, _Catechism of the Catholic Church_, Canon Law, the writings of John Paul II, etc.)

As to Archbishop Ireland and his era...the Church has come around almost 180 degrees. [Thank you Dr John for catching this! <g>] There are still a few issues needing resolved (ordination of married men to the priesthood in our Churches being probably the most noteworthy) but even on these there's been significant progress.

John Ireland was a product of his times. The views of that era have since been repudiated by the Church. I trust Archbishop Ireland is much more enlightened today. I think Stuart said it best: "let the dead bury their dead." IMO, it's time for us to forgive and work towards greater understanding and respect between our Churches.

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

[This message has been edited by DTBrown (edited 05-28-2001).]

I agree, David Ignatius, with what you have said. My general perspective is: Bishop Ireland is dead; our ancestors who got screwed by Bp Ireland are dead. He was a bishop who had authority to do things that were nasty (and, in my opinion: sinful.)

So, as Christians we've got to let it go. And focus more on where we are going. And to light a fire under certain episcopal glutei-maximi to set stuff in motion. And to send them money, and letters, and 'threats', and all that other good stuff to remind the 'powers that be' that WE TOO hold the grace of the Faith, and that we are more than willing and able to get out there and be missionizers of the Gospel. Just let us loose. (We're going to do it anyway.)

[And David Ignatius, I hope you'll revise your mathematical post about "360 degrees" (the same thing) to 180 degrees (the opposite thing).]

"As to Archbishop Ireland and his era...the Church has come around almost 360 degrees. There are still a few issues needing resolved (ordination of married men to the priesthood in our Churches being probably the most noteworthy) but even on these there's been significant progress."

You got it. This is an issue, and it's not going away. To the bishops: "HELLO!!! WE'RE HERE!! HOWDY!! WE'RE ALIVE AND NOT ABOUT TO DIE! WHAT'CHA GONNA DO? AND OUR SURNAMES ARE J-U-S-T LIKE YOURS? AND WE HAVEN'T FORGOTTEN. HOW CAN YOU FORGET? WE AREN'T BEING PISSY: WE'RE BEING OUR FAMILY. MY UNCLE WAS A HIERO-MONK. MY COUSIN WAS A PRIEST'S SON. MY NEIGHBOR AT CHURCH IS THE DAUGHTER OF A PRIEST AND THE GRANDCHILD OF A PRIEST. WHAT THE HELL HAVE WE DONE WRONG THAT OUR CHILDREN ARE TAUGHT TO BE ASHAMED OF THEIR FAMILIES?

Can folks understand 'angry'? We are not unchristian; we are not judgemental; we are not 'renegades'. We are your own people: uncomplicated, straightforward, straightshooters, honest to a fault, and more law-abiding than freakin' Moses himself. DON'T leave us in the lurch.

We had a real pastor in Metropolitan Judson; he loved ALL his people- may his memory be eternal! Let us pray to God that our next Archepiscopal pastor will equally understand and love the people and will walk the streets of our neighborhoods, shop in our stores, sit for hours in the Emergency Rooms when our people are sick, be at the unemployment lines when the 'corporations' take our jobs to Mexico, stand with the elderly when the 'pensions' are reduced to less than minimum sustenance, stand with our people when the coal-seams catch fire and burn our people out to NOWHERE, and tell our people that they have to 'sacrifice' (yet, again) to support the 'economy' that gives them little, but reinforces the profits of the 'haves' while we remember the bodies of our ancestors which were thrown on the front lawns of 'company housing' in coal towns after a mining 'disaster' with the admonition that the family had to be out within 48 hours since they weren't 'employees' any longer.

Church as community? You bet your ass. We hung together then; we've got to hang together now.

I apologize if I've offended some folks who don't understand or know of what the ancestors went through. But we've heard the stories; we've seen the pain in grandma's and grandpa's eyes when he/she talked about these events. And we would be cold-hearted bastards if we were to ignore or de-value what is part of our blood.

Our faith and our community are inextricably united. Ethnicity be damned: Ruthenian, Ukrainian, Greek, Great-Russian, Bylo-Russian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Melkite, etc. We are of one spiritual heritage-- and most of our folks know it.

Let's get to this point 'officially' and pray that we can progress without the baloney that induces us to be separatist.

Blessings!

Thanks, Dr John, for these thoughts. I fully understand the "anger." I have had an icon of St Alexis Toth in our icon corner for nearly 3 years now. Neither would I suggest we not share the story of the suffering of our fathers in faith. That is very much a part of the educational aspect in helping to gain better understanding between our Churches.

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Dear Friends,

I agree that we need to let Bishop Ireland and all those of his time involved in the controversies then rest in peace.

What initially twigged the thread on the school was something that was perfectly valid, however.

In the early Church, to build a chapel or something and name it in someone's name was equal to canonizing them a saint.

To this day, there are Eastern Churches where this is the only form of canonization and in Byzantine Orthodox lands, a canonization isn't considered "complete" until a Church is built in honour of the new Saint.

To name a school in someone's honour is very much like that which is why, as I said, the concern was initially raised.

His Holiness the Pope has himself deferred beatifications of otherwise worthy people because of certain aspects of their past. Christopher Columbus was to have been beatified, as was Pope Pius XII, but these were deferred for well-known reasons.

The matter of how we express our concern, whether sarcastically or not, is important.

The people and their ancestors who were hurt by certain individuals will tend to be like that when they hear of the possibility of "honours" being paid to those individuals.

The history of the Irish AMerican Catholic bishops in the U.S. and Byzantine CAtholics was not a good one, in any event.

In June in Ukraine, the Pope will beatify Bishop Nikita Budka as a martyr, which he certainly was.

But this bishop too has controversy surrounding his life and it was he who provoked Byzantine Catholics to seek out Orthodoxy, even uncanonical Orthodoxy. By publicly announcing in North America that Ukrainians should be loyal to the Austro-Hungarian regime, he provoked their persecution and even internment during World War I.

Yet, he died a martyr and it is for this that we honour him.

Saints make mistakes. So do bishops. Perhaps we should be more respectful.

It is a value that we cannot ever have enough of!

Alex

(O.K. John (Betts), do I get your absolution?)

David,

You raise a good point. We need to forgive Archbishop Ireland as an individual. However, we cannot stand by and allow our Roman Catholic brethren to honor him, without gently reminding them of the intense damage he inflicted upon us. There is apparently some movement to rewrite history, and paint Archbishop Ireland as something of a "prophet of tolerance." For example, there was an article in Crisis a few months ago that praised him to high heaven. Check it out:

Archbishop Ireland�Builder of the Upper Midwest
sketches the story of a bishop who built the foundation of the Church in America�s heartland. http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Crisis/2000-12/ceplecha.html

While we must forgive Ireland, we cannot allow him to be recast as a great Catholic hero. In fact, he severely damaged a portion of the Catholic Church, inflicting a wound that has not yet been healed.

This wound will not heal until we once again have married priests in North America.

Anthony

I don't think anyone here was hurt by Ireland. We should put our engery into helping the church overseas rebuild than worrying about how some church we don't belong to views him.

Besides, none of us knows how things would have otherwise turned out. My understanding is he was very much against the idea that had strong support at the time that every ethnic group (German, Irish, Polish, Slovak, etc.) have it owns bishops. It is probably somewhat silly to think sodme bishop out in Minnesota would have had any better understanding of Byzantine Church. If ethnic bishops had happended our church might not be a good situation today. Who knows?

>>>I don't think anyone here was hurt by Ireland. We should put our engery into helping the church overseas rebuild than worrying about
how some church we don't belong to views him.<<<

Speak for yourself, Olga. The good bishop did tremendous harm to the Ruthenians (including the Ukrainians) in America. By his ignorance and obstinacy, he drove more than 150,000 out of the Catholic Church. He set brother against brother within our fold. He tried to suppress our very existence on these shores. He succeeded in having restrictions placed upon our time-honored and guaranteed Traditions, and is indirectly responsible for the corruption of our rite. He is largely responsible for the "Catholic is Catholic" (actually, "Catholic is Irish-Catholic") mindset that has led to a continual seepage of people from their own Tradition to that of the Latin Church ("After all, we're ALL Catholics, aren't we?"), to say nothing of the inherent inferiority complex and alienation from their own Tradition which affects so many of our people.

No, no harm done at all.

And, please remember, I am the one who said that the dead should bury their dead. But at the same time, to quote Bob Taft yet again, what we need these days is "Anamnesis, not amnesia".

Dear Stuart,

Thank you for putting it all so succinctly, as per your usual style!

But you better be careful, John Betts may come after you

I guess when he came after me, I should have used you as a shield!

Alex

"The good bishop did tremendous harm to the Ruthenians (including the Ukrainians) in America"

Yes. But you are not Ruthenian or Ukrainian nor are any but very few people posting here. Of those who are, none were living at the time and none have related any story of harm they suffered.

A priest once told me don't assume if history had been different, it means it would have been better. He had a theory that since the places where Ruthenian Greek Catholicism was quickest to assimilate was where their were Slovak Roman Catholics, if there was a Slovak Catholic jurisdiction, we would have totally assimilated into it and they would have worked to make it happen, losing our Greek Catholic identity. I don't know if he is right, but you don't either.



[This message has been edited by Olga Nimchek (edited 05-29-2001).]