www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Maximos IV Saigh

Stand up commedian Alex,

As my brother likes to say "You are a bad boy."

CDL

Dear Professor Dan,

I've received a number of posts from people here who wrote to tell me that somehow they've always thought me to be a "Schismatic Orthodox."

And that they were pleasantly surprised to learn I'm in communion/union/under Rome.

I just felt so complimented when they said that.

"Schismatic Orthodox" - as an EC, I feel I've really accomplished something!

A Happy Pascha to you, Sir!

Alex

Professor Alex,

I see what you mean. I'm always tempted to think of the Orthodox not in communion with Rome as "Schismatic Orthodox" but then I remember with what solicitation the Pope treats our sister Churches. I believe the Universal Pastor is correct in his admiration for the Orthodox.

Dan L

Dear Professor Dan,

In Eastern Europe, there is a particular opprobrium attached to the term "schismatic."

This term was not only applied by RC's to Orthodox, but to everything associated with Orthodox traditions - three-fingered Sign of the Cross, iconostasis etc.

The EC Bishop Borecky (ancestor of our own Bishop Isidore Borecky +memory eternal!) in the 17th century wrote to his Orthodox counterpart, St George Konissky of Belarus to say that "The Poles, when they are angry, call us (Eastern Catholics) 'schismatics' as much as they do you (Orthodox)!"

The Ukrainian poet, Taras Shevchenko, in his poems recalled this term, "They got together to devise plots of how to attack the schismats" where this term means "Ukrainians" in general!

Fr. Irenaeus Nazarko, OSBM in his book on Kyivan Metropolitans notes TWO RC synods in Eastern Europe that took place to address the problem of "EC infiltration" into Roman Catholic seminaries, churches and village life . . ."

They objected to EC seminarians coming into RC seminaries with their long black robes with wide sleeves and long neck chains and beards.

They couldn't stand that there were RC seminarians who began to imitate these traditions . . .

And, in one place, they said the EC's were a worse "yazva" (not quite sure about the exact meaning of that word, but it isn't a pleasant one . . .) than the Orthodox schismatics.

Also, the Orthodox historical view of Uniates being a privileged class under Poland is simply untrue for many reasons.

During ecclesial processions in Poland, the Greek-Catholic Metropolitan walked directly behind the last RC bishop.

Alex

Alex,

But the last position is the position of honor.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Exactly. It's still done that way.

Dear Father Lance (and your Amen corner Charles!)

I knew you guys were going to say that!

Just knew it . . .

That is why I was ready with a back-up - the Kyivan Metropolitan walked behind the RC procession SEPARATELY, according to Fr. B Lypsky and others. And this was indeed intended as a slight to the Uniates.

And in the ecclesial processions of the day, the Primate, Archbishops and bishops of the RC Church walked in front.

So much for your cleverness, guys.

My university has the tradition of PHD graduates walking behind their professors to as a way to honour them even above those old . . . you know . . .

That's pretty sharp of you two, considering this is Holy Thursday and all - for you.

Speaking of which, our parish had a bit of a fight on its hands the other week.

As you noted, Fr. Dcn Lance, we have parishes that follow BOTH calendars (Lord have mercy).

Up here, to want the new calendar is to be in favour of Latinizations etc.

So the guys celebrating this week actually voted to CANCEL the 12 Gospels tonight and replace it, instead, with the Stations of the Cross.

I've nothing against the latter, but cancelling the former?

Huh? What kind of nonsense is that?

Anyway, that's the name of that tune, as Biretta would say . . .

Alex

Alex,

I was unaware of that, thanks for educating me. As for Stations, that is pretty bad considering Latin Catholics don't even do Stations tonight but the Mass of the Lord's Supper. Down here some of the parishes will be doing Vesperal Liturgy Thursday evening and the Passion Matins on Friday morning and others Vesperal Liturgy Thursday morning and Passion Matins Thursday evening. I know of only one parish that still does Stations at all in my Archeparchy.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Dear Fr. Dcn. Lance,

Yes, and for these folks things like "graduating to the Stations" shows real "progress!"

It shows they aren't in an "immigrant mind-set" and are ready to "assimilate" into the greater English (and RC) mainstream!

I can't IMAGINE Pascha without the 12 Passion Gospels!

Really sickening . . .

Anyway, what can one do.

And the parish priest approached me about my akathist to Andrew Sheptytsky to decry my calling him "Holy Hierarch" - "he's not canonized yet!"

Well, Da . . .

Let's not get each other upset . . .

A blessed Pascha to you and yours!

You too, Charles! (I can almost hear him lurking about . . .)

Alex

Going back to Dan's post last Tues (the one that started this thread), it doesn't really surprise me that Maximos IV has been vilified by a lot of Latins.

I'm not even surprised by the hostility contained in the quotation (especially "Remind me to mock the iconostasis sometime and come up with some completely spurious reason for tearing it down.")

Nor does it surprise me that such things are still being said 40 years later. What does surprise is which issue that poster decided to base his attack on: I would have thought the vast majority of VCII-related diatribes against Maximos IV -- and the other Eastern Catholic Patriarchs -- would focus on their refusal to sit behind the Cardinals.

(Of course, the person Dan quoted sounds fairly ignorant of VCII; so perhaps he isn't even aware of that fact.)

Peter,

Your post brought joy to my heart. I'm not particularly aware of VCII being a fairly recent convert. I'm delighted to read that the Eastern Patriarchs refused to sit behind the Cardinals. You've made my day!

Do you suppose I should remind them of that fact over on Defenders?

Dan L

Why sit behind the Cardinals. I have always like the Yankees better, anyway.

Under what circumstances do/did the Eastern Catholic Patriarchs (presumably Cardinals) "refuse to sit behind the Cardinals"?

If my memory serves me right, the liturgical precedence during consistories of the College of Cardinals is set as follows:

The Cardinals follow the Supreme Pontiff in descending order of precedence. Cardinal-Bishops (i.e., including Cardinal-Patriarchs) have the highest precedence within the Sacred College, followed by Cardinal-Priests and Cardinal-Deacons,
respectively.

Cardinal-Bishops follow the precedence listed below:

Cardinal Dean: Ratzinger (as Cardinal-Bishop since 1993.04.05, as Vice-Dean since 1998.11.06, Dean since 2002.11.30)

Cardinal Vice-Dean: Sodano (as Cardinal-Bishop since 1994.01.10, as Vice-Dean since 2002.11.30)

Other Roman Rite Cardinal-Bishops: (precedence is determined by the date of promotion to the suburbicarian see):

Gantin (as a Cardinal-Bishop since 1993.06.05, Dean from 1993.06.05 to 2002.11.29)

Etchegaray (1998.06.24)

L�pez Trujillo (2001.11.19)

Re (2002.10.01)

Eastern Rite Cardinal-Patriarchs:

Sfeir (1994.11.26)

Moussa I Daoud (2001.02.21)

Ghattas (2001.02.21)

Although they will join the procession in this order of liturgical precedence, all the Cardinals of the Order of Bishops, i.e.. including Cardinal Patriarchs, would sit side by side.

The above 3 Eastern Catholic Patriarchs (Cardinal Daoud is Patriarch Emeritus of the Syrians) are below 6 Cardinals of the Latin Rite in precedence by virtue of canonical provisions (as well as historical considerations). They are ahead of 172 other Latin Rite and 2 Eastern Rite Cardinals.

I don't know where to sit the non-member, i.e., non-Cardinal, Patriarchs when and if they are invited to the consistories.

Amado

Amado,

there is what is on the books and what actually takes place. I am told by reliable sources that when Metropolitan Judson was in Rome he was accorded precedence over the Cardinals since he was the head of a sui iuris Church.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Dear Fr. Deacon Lance:

This precedence of honor is accorded every chief hierarch of Eastern Catholic Churches sui juris, at least at the Metropolitan level, when they are visiting or are invited to Rome individually.

Thus, even more so for each Eastern Catholic Patriarch or Major Archbishop who officially visits, or is invited to, Rome in representation of his own Church sui juris.

However, during its ordinary or extraordinary consistories, i.e., when the Sacred College meets as a collegial body, the College of Cardinals follows the liturgical precedence as set "in the books."

Amado