www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Canonizing our own saints

Thank you for the good advice, esteemed Alex!

I don't feel particularly drawn to the Methodist Rule of Life, because ISTM that there are as many greats ways of life inside the Church.

I was under the impression that pne born into a heresy (which of course Methodism along with the rest of Protestantism is, however well-meaning its adherents) is a material heretic, while one choosing heresy not by birth is a formal heretic.

I know this is from the Roman POV. Is it not the same with the Eastern Churches?

ChristTeen287

Dear Alex,

I am interested in knowing more details about Rome's acknowledging of the sanctity of the Russian saints in 1904. Was this a document that was published by the Vatican, or a public statement? Was this done personally by the Pope or by the Vatican Congregation of the Saints? I remember reading a couple of books that mentioned Rome's acceptance of the sanctity of St. Sergius of Radonezh and allowing veneration of him.

Also, would you believe me when I tell you that while doing an internet search I came across a St. Josaphat Ukrainian Orthodox Church!!!!! Yes, I am not kidding; the same Byzantine Catholic Saint Josaphat. This was a few years ago and I have not been able to find the site again. I believe though that it was an independent Ukrainian Orthodox parish. If I find the website again , I'll post the link.

What about glorifications done by non-canonical Orthodox Churches, specifically ROCOR?

Several Orthodox saints underwent dual glorifications by ROCOR and the OCA, such as St. Herman of Alaska and Peter the Aleut.
If I am correct, ROCOR glorified them first, yet they were not recognized by the OCA.

ROCOR also glorified saints years before the Moscow patriarchate did, such as the Czar Nicholas and the Royal Family, St. Xenia, St. John Krondstadt, Grand Duchess St. Elizabeth. With the exception of the Jerusalem patriarch, there was no recognition of these glorifications by the other Orthodox patriarchs until the Moscow patriarchate glorified them.

Yet, when ROCOR glorified St. John Maximovitch, his venerartion was accepted by the OCA, at least by the OCA eparchy of the West . I find this interesting. Why would the OCA accept the glorification of a ROCOR bishop? Wouldn't that be a conflict of sorts, considering the current relationship between ROCOR and the OCA?

Would glorifications done by ROCOR be accepted by Rome and Byzantine Catholics?

There is nothing to stop individual believers from venerating saints that have not been officially accepted by the Church. However, it is relatively safe to say that, as far as various Orthodox churches are concerned including those in communion with Rome, there is no official recognition of saints declared by ROCOR alone. It is possible for someone in an isolated diocese to imply recognition, I suppose, but even within the OCA its Holy Synod decides such things, not individual bishops by themselves. At least, it's supposed to be that way.

Dear Griego,

Please forgive me . . . I HAVE to reply here . . .

I don't know that ROCOR is considered "non-canonical" - it depends who one is talking to.

My own POV is that it is truly a great Orthodox jurisdiction that practices Orthodoxy most sincerely.

And our Nikolai will soon be a member of it .

I've seen articles written by Moscow Patriarchate theologians who, for example, mention the fact that ROCOR glorified Theophane the New Recluse of Poltava and said this in a most encouraging way as if to imply that it is a "vote of confidence" in Theophane's sanctity that would soon lead to his eventual canonization in the MP etc.

Saints can be and are canonized more than once.

"Beatification" is a "local canonization" in fact.

In Orthodoxy, saints are glorified as such for different geographical levels of veneration, that can be from anything like a monastic establishment (Mt. Athos, Mt Sinai) to saints of international fame.

The saint can be canonized more than once for the purpose. St John the New Confessor (the "Russian") was canonized a total of three times, by the EP, the Church of Greece and, in 1962, by the MP.

Or one jurisdiction may simply decide to adopt a saint from another Church's calendar and to begin to venerate that Saint liturgically - this happened recently in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate, that accepted Patriarch St Gregory V the New Hieromartyr for public liturgical veneration.

The case of St John Maximovich is interesting. A ROCOR saint, his cult has become so widespread that even an Episcopal parish contemplated adopting him as their parish patron (I don't know if they actually went ahead and declared him such).

He has great international appeal. On the day of his glorification in San Francisco, many grown-up orphans he saved and nurtured participated in the ceremonies and liturgical services were held in his honour in a number of languages around the world at the same time.

He founded the French, Netherlands and Spanish Orthodox Churches, and reintroduced the veneration of Western saints prior to AD1054.

Even the RC's honoured him and in France he was called "St Jean nus pieds" the "barefoot" and RC priests pointed out his ascetical lifestyle (he did not sleep in a bed for over forty years) as "proof" of God's influence in our lives.

Plus the fact that he was Ukrainian - so everyone loved him, of course . . .

Again, with reference to Jim's question, the head of the Church need not canonize or beatify everyone - that is precisely the point.

Patriarchs and Beatitudes can glorify saints for their Churches, as can local bishops and monasteries.

This belongs to our ancient Eastern patrimony and it is something that our Churches should recover.

Alex

Thank you, Alex, for your post!

So let me see if I have this right:

If an Orthodox Christian is glorified by the head of a monastery, veneration of that saint is limited to the monastery itself.

If glorification is done by a local bishop, then veneration is done within that eparchy.

If a patriarch or metropolitan glorifies that same person, then the level of veneration is extended throughout that particular Church.

Another option is that the bishop and patriarch could simply recognize the monastery's glorification and extend it throughout the eparchy or Church, respectively.

Also, a patriarch of a sister Church could glory that same person for devotion in his own Church or simply recognize that glorification.

So, glorifications done by monasteries and bishops are equivalent to Roman Catholic "beatifications", except in Orthodoxy the one glorified already is proclaimed a saint. Glorifications done by heads of churches are equivalent to the Roman Catholic "canonization".

Did I get it right?

Dear Griego,

You are more than correct!

And, of course, other jurisdictions may borrow saints from other calendars.

For example, Pope Liberius is a Saint in the Orthodox Church, but not in the Roman Church and there are many such cases.

The Pope of Rome may ALSO canonize and beatify for various jurisdictions that reflect his own titles.

When he beatified a Roman couple, their cult is limited to the City of Rome alone, even though a Pope beatified them - also the Bishop of Rome.

The same happened with St Thomas More forty years after his martyrdom.

The Popes approved of his veneration as a martyr within the City of Rome only and he was canonized a universal saint much later in 1935.

Alex

And it seems as if EVERY Orthodox Church of every jurisdiction has an icon of St. John Maximovitch. He is truly a miracle-worker.

I, too, have his icon on my icon corner!
:p

There are icons of St. John Maximovitch in the two Russian Byzantine Catholic parishes in California. Imagine that - a ROCOR saint in "uniate" parishes!!!! What would St. John think!!! Actually, I have this image in my head of St. John Maximovitch and St. Josaphat being the best of buddies in Heaven.

I had the opportunity to see his incorrupt relics while visiting the magnificent ROCOR cathedral in San Francisco. I really want to back again.

I believe I have found the location of the Saint Josaphat Ukrainian Orthodox Church, except it is now called St. Josaphat Monastery. I am sure this is it. The address is: St. Josephat's Monastery
East Beach Drive Glen Cove NY 11542 US

I have done a search and this monastery is not found on the Catholic or Orthodox directories. I believe it is an independent monastery. Does anyone have any info about this monastery?

I think good Saint John would have given a wry smile and blessed it!
It is truly a moving experience to visit his Relics at that most beautiful Cathedral! Whenever I go there, it feels like I am going back into Holy Russia. Did you get some of the Holy Oil???

Peace,
Brian

No, I was not aware there was holy oil. It was about eight years ago that I made my first and so far only visit to the ROCOR cathedral in San Francisco. The day I visited the cathedral was at the same time the first time I learned who St. John Maximovitch was. It was none other than a Byzantine Catholic priest who took me to see the relics!
I do have a holy card of St. John that I keep in my prayer book.

Hopefully, I'll get the opportunity to visit the cathedral again. In the meantime, I visit www.saintjohnwonderworker.org/pilgrim.htm [saintjohnwonderworker.org]
to see an image of the interior. Beautiful!!!!

Speaking about canonizing our own saints, the Synod of the UGCC has officially taken up the cause of Patriarch +Josyp (Slipyj), Bishop and Confessor. He's already canonized by some of us Ukie Catholics...

Dear Brian,

I really don't think St John of Shanghai would have blessed an icon of St Josaphat!

He repeated the quite anti-Roman Catholic biases of his environment, as did a number of Orthodox saints (e.g. St Theophan the Recluse et al.) - and as did RC saints toward the Orthodox East.

The whole history of St Josaphat is extremely touchy with the Orthodox (not in communion with Rome ).

I give just one personal example. My piano teacher was Orthodox and, one day, she spoke to me very disparagingly of St Josaphat.

My parents then stopped having her come over to teach me the piano.

Today, I'm really sorry that my relationship with that wonderful lady ended because of what is most assuredly a divisive religious issue.

I sometimes wish that when the Pope is at his pastime asking for forgiveness for the Church's mistakes of the past, he would ask for forgiveness for the Union of Brest-Litovsk and, yes, annul it so we can be one Orthodox-Catholic Church once more, sans Rome.

I really do feel that way sometimes . . .

And to the shadow of that wonderful Orthodox lady, my piano teacher, I say: "Madame! Forgive me! I loved you and still miss you!"

Alex