www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Why I do not plan on changing jurisdictions

I was raised and formed in the Roman Catholic Church, but have worshiped for some time in the Byzantine Church, finally joining a Ruthenian parish a year and a half ago. However, I have no plans to "officially" change rites. Why?
Change of rites at the present time is allowed only once in a lifetime. As the Church is presently structured this means allying oneself with a particular ethnic expression of Byzantine Christianity: Romanian, Syrian, Carpatho-Rusyn, and so on. My ethnic backrground, however is Scots, Irish and English. As much as I enjoy the Carpatho-Rusyn culture in which I find myself immersed it is not mine. What if I were to change rite and then move somewhere where there are no Rusyn Catholics? Or what if I fall in love with, say, a Melkite parish?
I know not officially making the change does present certain canonical difficulties, but none of them seem insurmountable.
The only developments that I can foresee that would lead me to change rites [in a heartbeat] are:
1] The establishment of a pan-ethnic American Byzantine Catholic Church. There would exist within this ethnic parishes and even eparchies, but the Church would be established on a purely spiritual basis: love of the Divine Liturgy and Eastern spirituality. This, for me, would be the ideal development. I am under no illusions that this is likely in the near future. You'd never get the Ukrainians to agree, for one thing, unless all were subsumed under their not-yet-existent patriarch.
2]Establishment of a Celtic Byzantine Eparchy. I know, totally unprecedented; I present this mostly tongue-in-cheek.
3]Elevation of the Russian Catholic faithful to an eparchy [I would make an exception to my ethnic hesitation in this case in light of my Russophile tendencies] I'd say the odds of this are less than the establishment of the Celtic Byzantine Eparchy, in light of the Holy See's sensitivity to the Russian Orthodox. It is highly unlikely that anything would be done to raise the profile of the Russian Catholics.
So, there you are. Can anyone give me a reason, outside of Latin legalisms, for making the change, given the current structure of our jurisdictions?

Welcome to the state of Greek Catholicism in America. But really, unless you are seriously considering holy orders, there is no compelling reason to change immediately. You can certainly pray and receive the Mysteries in any Catholic Church of whatever liturgical tradition.

There are certainly others besides the Ukrainians who would be stubborn to give up provincial notions of, say music and liturgy, in favor of a larger Greek Catholic unity [just read a bunch of posts on this Forum] and would not only like to impose their own version but also call themselves solely "Byzantine".

Regarding your point #3, that would make life much simpler for many besides yourself. I just had a long talk a week ago with Subdeacon Kyril from San Francisco about that very subject.

Considering Rome won't even recognize the largest Greek Catholic church as having Patriarchal status, it is even less likely Rome will do anything to change the status of the Russian Catholics. But if there is continued growth like Denver, this Church will have to be reckoned with.

In most cases, probably including yours, "changing rites" is a rather pointless formality; one can lead a rich, full Christian life without bothering about it - and, as I have written on another thread, if you wish to attend divine services in our churches every day of your life, you are entirely welcome (provided, of course, that a service is being held that day - and if there isn't, you are welcome to complain and assure the priest that YOU are prepared to chant the responses if he will serve).
There are quite a few Irish people here and there in the Eastern CAtholic Churches (the present bishop of the Slovak Eparchy in Canada is the son of a lady whose maiden names is Hennessey); there are some Welsh people, and even a few Scots (don't know of any Cornish, Bretons, or Manx, but that may simply mean that I don't know of them). If there is sufficient interest in a Celtic/Byzantine operation, there's no reason why that could not be discussed, although starting out by demanding an instant Eparchy is just a tad unrealistic. But there are possibilities.
As for the Russians, part of the problem is that nobody is putting sufficient heat on the bureaucrats in Rome to support - or even maintain - the Russian Greek-Catholic Church. The first obvious necessity is the appointment of a new Exarch (since the previous two have been beatified and are therefore unavailable for comment).
All of this, of course, involves work. If you feel like doing some, do let me know.
Incognitus

Find a group you enjoy being with and stay with them. Only you can decide if you want to make a formal change. Now you know that none of us Byzantines in our right minds would ever advocate Latin legalisms.

Iconophile,

as one moves West, one will witness the growth of the Eastern Churches, Orthodox and Catholic, beyond the ethnic expressions. Within the Eparchy of Van Nuys, one can find African-, Asian-,Filipino-,German-,Greek-,Hispanic-,Irish-,Italian-,Slavic-, or any other hyphenated American among the faithful. In our own parish setting, Asians, Germans, Hispanics, Hungarians, Irish, Italians, and Slavs come together to praise and worship God. One would find the same groups represented at the local OCA and Antiochian Orthodox Churches. The local Greek Orthodox Cathedral stages an annual Greek festival, and one year the person guiding the church tour was a Southern Baptist convert from Texas. Working the various booths could be seen Orthodox faithful not of Greek ancestry.

Daniel,

the pan-ethnic American Byzantine Church is being established, not from the top down, but one soul at a time.

And not just from within one jurisdiction, either.

Since you mentioned the Russian Catholics, their numbers in the West have probably doubled with the recent addition of the thriving parish in Denver. Others have noticed the success of this parish and there are similar projects in the works.

Speaking of Irish, are you familiar with Fr. Serge Keleher? He is VERY Irish and VERY traditional about his observance of the Constantinopolitan liturgical tradition. He is the pastor of the Ukrainian Catholic parish in Dublin, which I understand has a very diverse population to which he is most sensitive in terms of liturgy and music.

I would like to see the Metropolia of Pittsburgh approve a Spanish liturgy.

This should be done before the obvious need rather than after.

I don't think the multiplication of ethnic jurisdictions is helpful, it can only be in reaction to the ethnic exclusivesness one will still find in some places (thankfully not my own parish).

Creating an ethnic Celtic (or Hispanic or African-American) jurisdiction in North America is too artificial and ultimately divisive. We can and should reach all of those people with the church structures we have in place and concentrate on merging them into a comprehensive church, a "Pan-ethnic" or multi-ethnic church.

I think it is fine that the Ruthenian Metropolia uses the moniker Byzantine. I wish that all the Eastern Catholic churches that rely on the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom would use the term Byzantine liberally. I wish that we could blur the distinctions between us to the point that outside inquirers would see no difference at all between us.

I have had similar concerns as Daniel about transferring jurisdictions, it almost seems pointless given the parallel jurisdictions divided along ethnic lines. In fact I have lately been considering returning to the Roman church on a permanent basis and chucking the whole thing. At least the Roman church makes no official distinction about the ethnic origin of the believer and intends to reach every single cultural group.

In Christ Always,
Michael

Dear Iconophile,

One reason I can think of for formally changing to Eastern Rite, would be to make it clear to Rome how many people ARE interested in the Eastern Church. If the many Roman Catholics who feel as you do were to up and change rites, then the "official" numbers of Eastern Catholics would reflect the liturgical feelings of the congregations, and possibly give Rome a bit to think about, in terms of how best to deal with the new influx of people.

As for your reasons for not wanting to limit yourself, in case of future more attractive possibilities, or future absence of a Church of a particular rite in your area, I am not certain that I understand your reasoning. (Although I understand the REASONS). If as a RC, you may attend all rites, does that change when you become EC? If not, then there would be no objection to your changing rites to where you are happiest, here, and then if your future or the future of the Church change your location or worship preferences, you can still attend another rite as an EC, of different rite.

In any event, I certainly agree with you about ethnic languages in various rites, but it isn't necessary to change one's entire cultural background, in order to achieve this. Yes, different saints will be commemorated, it is true, but if you had saints of your United Kingdom background that you had a particular devotion towards, you may consider quietly asking the priest whether he would consider reading their troparia, as well, on their feast days. Many priests would not have an issue with this, provided the requests were made well in advance, and provided that you undertook to provide them with music and verses, if needful...

Just my two cents.

Gaudior, in prayer that you find the best place for your soul

I, like most of the above posters, had for a long time felt the notion that unless you are entering holy orders, marrying, or having children, whether or not to change Rites was actually irrelevant. (Just as an fyi, I became Byzantine (Ruthenian) 15+ years ago, but I came in from Protestant religious background and a German-Irish ethnicity).

Over the last 7 years I have been involved with the establishment and nurturing of a mission community. And from these 7 years of blood, sweat, and tears, I've learned a few things (albeit possibly unique to our situation/ administration) that would encourage me to tell folks that if the Byzantine (Eastern Christian) form of Christianity sits best with your heart, soul, and mind (regardless of the ethnic, or over-ethnic emphasis of the parish), consider seriously making the change official.

Why? Two Reasons...

1.) When reporting the "numbers," we have been told in so many words that its the real Ruthenians that count ...and you can include the Ukrainians too. But any RC's or Protestants, in actuality, are only "attendees" and not real members. (By the way, it is my understanding that this is how Byzantines who attend RC churches are to be considered. Hmmmm.)

I contend that there is an underlying pragmatism at work here (others, who are cradle-born Ruthenian, tell me it's purely Rusyn-ethnocentricity at work). But my feeling is that the marching orders are that since there are a limited number of priests and other religious/spiritual resources, those priests/resources must be directed first to the "members." In fact, in my dealings, I know of several "attendees" who have been referred/directed to have matters handled through an RC parish. Oh,and if you want to convert from a Protestant denomination to the Byzantine Church? ... join a local RCIA program... the Romans are already set up and have the resources. THEN, attend and give money for at least a year AFTER you have formally been received into the Roman Church and then will talk.

2.) I guess I have been fortunate that as far as the people in the two Ruthenian parishes that I've attended and the mission community I now attend, almost all have been very warm and welcoming. Yes, there is a Carpatho-whatever ethnic flavor here and there, but I enjoy it very much. I know there are parishes, and I've been to a few (Byz. and EO), that once folks found out my last name they kinda went their own way. That's their problem. All I know is that although I was raised in a Prot. tradition with good old Northern European roots, my heart and soul are Eastern.

Evangelization... outreach... growing the Church... whatever you want to call it, can it be done? In all honesty, I really don't know anymore. I do know that at times I have become very disillusioned. It is a fact, we do not have enough priests and it's only getting worse. Believe me, I know what it's like trying to arrange to have a priest for every Sunday let alone Holy Days or Great Fast services. As for other resources, they're out there, but often they are in the form of the laity. But it seems that the only thing us poor uneducated laity are capable of are cleaning the church (women) and running bingo (men).

Finally, in my mind, the worst absolute worst latinization that us Byzantines have acquired is using Roman legalizations when it is expedient instead of utilizing Orthodox "economy" when prudent.

Thank you all for your responses; in truth I was expecting more arguments in favor of making the change official.
As a registered parishoner doesn't that count in the censuses? That is my impression.
I'm glad no legalist chimed in, besides, as some of you have pointed out, I'm not breaking any rules!

There are some translations of the Divien Liturgy into Spanish; at least some of them carry some form of approval. I'm under the vague impression that a few Greek-Catholic parishes (of whatever stripe) have Divine Liturgy in Spanish. The Melkites in Argentina, Mexico and Venezuela would have something - could also check with the Ukrainian Apostolic Visitor in Spain.
Incognitus

Dear moncobyz,

Thanks for your input. I have to say I haven't stopped to think about how parish census information might affect administrative decisions. But what you have said makes a great deal of sense. It is one very good reason to make it official when one's heart and soul is truly in the Eastern church.

Dear Coalesco,

I agree with you on the ethnicity issue. Undoubtedly, those here who align themselves with one ethnic group, defined by one particular EC church, feel very comfortable with the status quo. However, their ethnic tradition has nothing to do with their being a member of the Body of Christ. It has more to do with social elements. It has the potential to make outsiders feel unwelcome. I believe any real growth and stability in the EC Churches will only happen when they share one common Byzantine name.

In Christ and the Theotokos,

Tammy

+Monsignior William Levkulic of blessed memory prepared and translated the Divine Liturgy into Spanish. If I recall the Archbishop of Miami approved of the translation since no one else at the time in the Metropolia of Pittsburgh understood Spanish. I happened to glance at a copy at Saint Nicholas in Fontana just this past week. I think a number of parishes in Florida use this translation. The Ukranians in Argentina have also prepared a Spanish Divine Liturgy.

Returning to Daniel's original post, canonically speaking, there can be no pressure on a person to request a formal change in ecclesial affiliation. Interestingly, besides baptisms, "changes of rite" are another indication of Church growth. At our recent clergy conference for the Eparchy of Van Nuys, the judicial vicar reported the number of approved "changes of rite". He also reported that the Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo, commented on something we in the West knew all along, "The Eparchy of Van Nuys is growing."

There are an estimated 200,000 recent Ukrainian immigrant who are now living in Spain. They continue to be organized and there is little doubt that the Spanish Divine Liturgy (thank you Argentina) will be used with increased frequency.

Hritzko

Spanish? this raises an intriguing linguistic question. The RC liturgical establishment has found it necessary to have TWO official translations of the Mass into Spanish: one for Spain and one for Latin America (apart from Brazil and Haiti, of course). Will the same be necessary for the Byzantine Liturgy - for the same reasons?
About 40 years ago, I think, Fr. Pablo de Ballester did a well-received translation of the Chrysostom Liturgy into Spanish, and there are one or two others from various Orthodox sources.
As long as they don't decide to use El Greco paintings in lieu of icons!
Incognitus