www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Eparchy of Mukachevo is now Ukrainian Greek Catholic

Participating and voting in Synods, at least in the historic and usual Byzantine sense, is a far closer relationship than the Admin intimates here such as our bishops going to a meeting here or there with RC clergy.

It means you are at least symbolically part of that church. Having students in UGCC seminaries and having your priests directly working in UGCC eparchies (in Ukraine, USA, Canada, and elsewhere) is also a bit of a closer relationship than that presented above.

I also do not intend to open up any ethnic can of worms, nor advocate any eparchy to give up a sui iuris status but would appreciate a bit more balanced interpretation.

For anyone who has travelled to the Uzhorod region lately, they will give you a far higher percentage of parishes using modern Ukrainian in the Divine Liturgy and other services, especially those in religious communities which may have provincials or mother houses attached to L'viv, including Basilians, Redemptorists, and Studites, all of whom have representation in the Eparchy of Mukachevo.

I also would like some documentation that an agreement was refused by L'viv based on ethnic concerns. L'viv certainly has not tried to interfere with the "ethnicity" of Father Sergei Golovanov nor Serge Gajek. Some of us are just a bit skeptical about this whole thing as presented here.

Administrator,

Can you please explain how one goes about donating funds in a secure way directly to our seminaries over there?

Joe

Diak,

Thank you for your post.

I agree that participating in voting in synods suggests a close relationship. I did not mention it in my summary since neither Father Taras Lovska, the rector of the seminary in Uzhorod nor Father John Zeyack, a professor at that seminary, did not talk about it. I only summarized what was actually discussed. As I stated in my earlier post, relations with the UGCC are friendly and the Rusins do participate in some meetings, much like our bishops in America participate in the national bishops� conference. To me that would indicate that they vote as part of the synod on things affecting the entire country of Ukraine but not on matters internal to the UGCC. I would expect that the Roman Catholics in Ukraine do the same. That would be similar to the involvement that Eastern Catholic bishops in the United States have in the USCCB.

There was a direct question to Father Taras regarding the languages used in worship. The 90% Slavonic figure is his, not mine. Since he lives there and is protocyncellus I defer to his estimate and accept it as accurate. But he spoke to the parishes and your comments seem to speak to the religious communities. Since parishes and religious communities are two different groups you could both be accurate. It is logical that religious groups with provincials or mother houses attached to Lvov / Lviv would be more Ukrainian orientated in all things.

If you consider my information to lack balance, I would be happy to give you contact information for a few people who attended the talk, for the pastor of the parish, or for the priests themselves. Those who attended were very happy that the Church is recovering in Uzhorod and across Ukraine and in the other Slavic countries.

You might consider the possibility that those who desire that the Ruthenian (Carpatho-Rusin) Church be absorbed into the UGCC are themselves capable of bias. If Ukraine transforms itself into a free society (something I am praying for) I have no doubt that the minorities will eventually forget their own languages and ethnicity and embrace that of the larger Ukrainian nation (something I would not like to see but which is probably inevitable). It has happened here in America and is happening today in places like Slovakia and Poland. Time will be the determining factor.

Admin

Joe,

Several people asked that question and a few people even wrote checks on the spot (Father John Zeyack was collecting them). I had planned to follow up with a check myself but was out of town for 10 days and haven�t gotten to it yet. I will obtain this information this weekend and post it here on the Forum.

Admin

Admin & Diak,

I can't put my fingers on it at the moment, but it seems to me that reports of the Mukachevan hierarchy's involvement in the UGCC Synod, which has been a springboard for heated discussion of this issue in the not too distant past, have identified their role as that of observers, not as participant (i.e., voting) members. I haven't yet seen anything that suggests differently.

Many years,

Neil

What Neil says makes the most sense. The Eparch of Mukachevo is invited as a guest to the meetings of the Holy Synod of the UGCC, but is not a voting member - as are the RC's that might observe as guests.

Still, there is a distinction between being a member of a "syond" and a member of a "conference." Otherwise the USCCB would be called the "United States Synod of Catholic Bishops."

Yours,

hal

Thanks, Hal, those were the words I was looking for. But I believe that Bishop Ivan Margitych did actually vote in the Synod.

Perhaps the voting status has been clarified to some degree, or I am mistaken, but that Eparchy definitely has a very active relationship with L'viv, I would posit even closer than Prjashev. Some of the students in the Ukrainian Catholic Education Foundation (UCEF) intensive summer camps have been from the Eparchy of Mukachevo.

I have also spoken at length with persons who were at the talk, who understood its purpose and organization, and I stand by my opinions based on their observations. I thank the Admin nonetheless for his offer and response.

I realize it is difficult for some to realize that the inhabitants of the Eparchy of Mukachevo now are within the geographic and political boundries of Ukraine, but that is indeed now reality (and has been for some years). There are admittedly some with fears of Rusyn absorption, perhaps more outside of Ukraine than within it, which may historically not be completely unfounded. However we should be looking at a much more visionary future evangelical agenda removed from elements of mutual xenophobia.

I do not advocate any loss of status sui iuris as that is between the churches involved and their superiors in Rome who they must answer to. I only wish to find the quickest means to unite our Greek Catholic churches in the interest of evangelism and remove the artifical barriers of jurisdictionalism which often hamper and divide our efforts.

A church composed of micromanaged sui iuris units dependent on Rome when geographically and ecclesiastically the opportunity presents itself for membership in a synodal and ultimately Patriarchal form of governance, much more Byzantine, continues to suggest the promotion of Uniatism.

Again, I would like to see some written documentation that L'viv refused an ecclesiastical agreement based on a request to maintain ethnic identities. I will be doing some independent checking in the meantime into that allegation. That simply is not logical and raises additional suspicions.

I also think a request to Patriarch Lubomyr to personally and publically deal with this allegation would be reasonable. I encourage everyone to request him to do so, because something here is simply not adding up.

On another tangent, I see little difference between the scenario of a united Greek Catholic church in Ukraine and the proposed approach of a unified Greek Catholic jurisdiction for those of Slavic liturgical use which has been discussed for the USA along the lines of the OCA, of which I am an advocate.

The keeping of a Rusyn eparchy/usage within a patriarchal church, certainly seems possible in the light of those churches which are under the omophorion of the Patriarch of Constantinople.

Exarch Leonid of blessed memory was fully a member of the UGCC of Blessed Andrey Sheptytsky's leadership, was never rejected because of his Russian ethnicity, nor was the Russian character of the Russian Greek Catholic Church ever compromised by their allegiance to the UGCC. In fact, Metropolitan Andrey convened a Synod for them (and later Patriarch Josyp clandestinely) to exercise a synodal identity and governance for themselves, and strongly adjured them to keep their Russian (either Nikonian or pre-Nikonian as they chose) liturgical, cultural, and spiritual traditions.

Shlomo Lkhoolkhoon,

What is being discussed here is similar to what when on between the Maronite Church and the Syriac Catholic Church. The Syriac proposed back in the 70's that our Churches become one since they share the same Traditions. The Maronites refused.

The reasons were many fold. One was nationalist, ie that most Maronites are Lebanese. But the more important part is that with merger, the issue of the Syriac Orthodox Church would be at our front door. Since we do not have any type of Orthodox counterpart, we are a lot freer to advocate for Christians throughout the Middle East,with little discord from other Christian groups. By having an Orthodox counterpart we fall into politics we do not like.

From the Ukrainian perspective they may look at the Rusins and say that since the vast majority of Rusins are Catholic within there region, whereas we are not it might not be a good idea to have them join us at the present time since we are still dealing with the Catholic-Orthodox issues that do not at present involve them.

They may also be looking at the situation in America, where they see that the Byzantine Churches (which have been here for over 100 years) are not merging nor really looking at doing so.

Poosh BaShlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
Yuhannon

Yuhannon, good points. But in that case the Maronites and Syrians have quite different liturgical usages compared to one another. In this case all use the same Rescension (Ruthenian Rescension) of the Divine Liturgy.