www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News New Russian Catholic parish being created

What??? Sts. Cyril and Methodius weren't even alive in AD 700.

--Joe Thur wrote: Frank, Again, I can't help you there. I use what works. Joe --


Rumor is that the new liturgy texts and music will be mandated for use in all parishes starting September 1 and will make it�s debut at the Uniontown Pilgrimage. If this is true you�ll find out soon enough just how bad it is. Our churches will empty out very quickly.

http://www.orthodoxworld.ru/english/istoria/

1326-863=463, rounding off to one significant figure: 500.

Finally! Thank You! I did not see that (can't see the forest for the trees?). Curious that the RC Archdiocesan article didn't have that tidbit.

I earlier posted this " There are already two (02) Byzantine Catholic parishes in this city, according to the article from the Denver Archdiocese, one Ruthenian and one Ukrainian. Why then will this new "Russian" parish go under the RCs? Why not at least function out of one of these other buildings? Maybe I am missing something but it seems like almost any BC parish would be more adequate than a RC parish for this."

Any ideas?

I don't recall seeing this before, a Catholic parish named after a modern Orthodox saint (meaning lived since the Union). I heard rumors of one such parish in Canada but never saw any evidence of it.

Tony, since the death of the last Russian Catholic exarch and the pressures of the Vatican Ostpolitik, another has not been named. I hope they eventually will organize and name an Exarch. In the interim, they are canonically directly subject to the local Latin ordinary. A very funky and strange position.

I think Patriarch Lubomyr would be in an advantageous position, as Metropolitan Andrey before him, to offer his omophorion and also allow the Studites to assist with formation of monastics.

Dear djs,

You are more than correct on both counts!

Yes, the Metropolitans of Kyiv governed their Church for that amount of time before moving northwards to Vladimir on the Klyazma and then Moscow - and they kept the title "of Kyiv" for a long time afterwards.

For some reason we too have those who see in the Russian usage the "ultimate" of Eastern practice, as if our own just didn't measure up (especially with respect to the high-backs . . .).

That is disconcerting and our people have, quite rightly, seen that as "Russification" in terms of overall attitudes of subservience to the Great Russians.

Actually, I find the Russian usage to be rather "over the top" at times and definitely NOT in the "duch" of our spirituality.

I don't know what our Cantor Joseph is tired of waiting around for ( I can guess ), but I don't think the Russian usage is ultimately worth the wait .

Good for you! You and Lemko speak on behalf of both Rusyn and Ukrainian traditions!

But I like Cantor Joseph too!

A Byzantine dilemma . . .

Alex

Dear Tony,

You mean the Ukrainian Catholic parish of St Seraphim of Sarov in Toronto, served by Fr. Serge Keleher?

Yep, it was here all right!

And St Seraphim is today recognized a saint within Roman Catholicism as a whole.

Russian Orthodox in communion with Rome do venerate the Royal Martyrs, including St Elizabeth in their parishes.

In 1904, in response to a petition to this effect from Andrew Sheptytsky, the Vatican recognized the Russian Orthodox Saints in the Orthodox calendar for veneration by the Russian Catholics.

As Fr. Keleher told me, we don't question each other's canonizations and it is a long-standing tradition for any Orthodox Church coming into communion with Rome to maintain devotion to its Orthodox saints.

Alex

Alex, you were extolling the glories of the OCA only a month or so ago when you described an ordination you attended... djs - the Kyivan princes Askold and Dyr likely converted in the late 9th century. Askold took the name Nicholas upon his baptism. Also likely mission work from Kherson moved up contemporary with the work of Sts. Cyril and Methodius.

If I think I read you correctly you are implying that the Muscovite Church is a relative latecomer and not implying a transCarpathian church is older than the Kyivan? If that is the case I definitely agree.

Dear Diak,

I also admire the Ethiopians for their tradition of St Pontius Pilate - but I don't want to begin a Ukrainian Catholic brotherhood in his honour as a consequence!

The Russian usage is good for the Russians - not for us "Khakhols" Don't you agree, Diache?

Alex

High back vestments reportedly developed in Poltava and Kharkiv, not Moscow. This alone can not be used as a yardstick to measure "Muscovisity". (Did I just invent a new term?) They are within the Kyivan tradition and if you look at the photos of the joint Moleben between the KP and the UGCC, you will see the KP priests wearing high-backs. And I think it is safe to say that many of the KP priests and clergy have no great love for Moscow.

But I agree, ja ne Muskovsky, ale ja vostochniki...

Diak,
I am happy to use the 863 date for the origin of the BCC. I am aware that others prefer to think of it as a daughter of Kyiv and thus of later origin. Ultimately the true history is not easily discerned; the historical tracts on the subject have many political overtones. So I am sticking with my preference: 863.

But I guess if one looks at the exile of St. Clement to Kherson on the Black Sea in the 2nd century, and his subsequent converts and missionaries that would pre-date 863 by 762 years. The Crimean was the home for many 2nd century Greek traders and Christian exiles as well. I'm comfortable with the late first century for the first emerging of Christianity in Ukraine. Kherson became a metropolitan see already in the late 8th century composed of the eparchies of Sugday (Surozh) and Fulla.

As you say, specifics are quite hazy when dealing with events that far back. It is apparent that after the conversion of the Bulgarians there was contemporaneous "higher gear" mission activity througout Slavic lands. 863 certainly applies to the conversion of Bulgaria. I would suggest even 860 A.D. as that is approximately when Sts. Cyril and Methodius visited Khazaria and would theoretically have already had some contact with Rusyns.

It is interesting that in the "Tale of Bygone Years" there is an account of St. Cyril meeting Rusyns and finding a Gospel and Psalter "in the language of Rus'" when he visited Kherson.

Diak,

863 is the mission to Moravia. Do I understand you correctly, are you now saying that the Ukraine was first evangelized by a Roman Pope?

Frank,

I will be surprised if Pittsburgh actually takes the lead during this century and promulgates something new before the other eparchies and actually puts it into practice in all its parishes. It will take a 'leader' to rally the troops. Who will that leader be? I haven't a clue.

Has Pittsburgh promulgated the removal of the Filioque yet or is it still a suggestion/option? Did it ever promulgate the Ordo Celebrationis? Has every priest re-instituted infant communion in the Archeparchy? Out here, this is old news that has come and gone. We're ready for the next step. Will the Archeparchy prove to be a good example in this?

The Ordo (read: Rome) states that a temple without an iconostasis is not fit for worship, yet a quick survey in the Metropolia's 75th anniversary book depicts half of the Archeparchy as being 'unfit' for its own Byzantine style of worship. A Latin High Mass maybe, but not a Byzantine Divine Liturgy!

So, I ask: Can leadership mandate anything this time around with a straight face?

Oh, I forgot. It did "mandate" celibacy.

Just wondering how this is going to work out being "mandatory" and all. It is a long haul from the gray pew book with High Mass instructions to a renewed Byzantine Liturgy and translation in the spirit of Vatican II and the Instructions.

And anyway, as one late Professor told me: volunteer cantors do not make a promise of obedience to their bishops. They aren't ordained nor are they sent to a parish by authority of their bishop to serve. Mandating something on a group of 'ordained' cantors is one thing, but mandating something on a group of 'volunteers' is another. We are working with a different animal here. I am for cooperation and unity in our endeavors, but when the Church has set itself up with volunteers only (they're cheap), then it will reep what it sowes - a "voluntary mandate" voluntarily ignored. Will there be a period of education? And what if it doesn't get received well? Will voluntary cantors get dismissed? Will uncooperative pastors get removed? Who will police its promulgation? The same liturgy police who looks the other way while half the church continues to celebrate a liturgy in an unfit temple? Just something to think about. I've seen the same stories in the business world. We're dealing here with the problem of the 'agency principle.'

Cantor Joe Thur