The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Sergiusz, zeroneet, Atomic Parakeet 1, Anna777, HeraclitusTheObscu
5,830 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 members (Charbelknox), 89 guests, and 18 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Byzantine Nebraska
Byzantine Nebraska
by orthodoxsinner2, December 11
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,141
Posts414,751
Members5,830
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
#1950 07/13/05 06:16 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
I
Member
Offline
Member
I
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
Dear Alex,
Have you considered seeking spiritual links with the Cao Dai? They have a pantheon of saints which includes such luminaries as Victor Hugo.

Incognitus

#1951 07/13/05 07:18 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Dear Incognitus,

Have YOU considered seeking links with a Ukrainian history society? smile

There are also a number of warrior saints in the Orthodox calendar that even Orthodox Christians have told me shouldn't be there. Not to mention certain Latin saints that are likewise controversial.

Shevchenko is ahead of all of these by a long shot! But then again, I grew up with Shevchenko, memorized his poems for recitation, did a paper on him for public presentation at the age of 15 and the like. I would think your experience of Shevchenko would be of a more disconnected, intellectual sort.

And he has been privately venerated and very highly by Ukies for a long time.

I doubt if he'll be canonized. But his courageous condemnation of oppressive regimes of his day, supported by both the Roman Catholic and Russian Orthodox Churches, is something that has made him the national bard of the people.

Vox populi or something like that . . .

Alex

#1952 07/13/05 07:47 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,075
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,075
Friends,

Are metropolitans Michael and Stephen now officially recognized by Metropolitan Mefodiy in Ukraine and do they sit on the Synod of bishops of the UAOC, or are they not recognized but merely claim to be so, as I have seen UAOC websites from Ukraine saying they are not part of the UAOC.

Then I hear that these two bishops consecrated this Moisey fellow and sent him over to Ukraine and that he then broke with metropolitans Stephen and Michael and started his own church, ordaining new bishops for the USA.

All the while we have Patriarch Filaret and friends running their own patriarchate, and a Russian Metropolitan in Ukraine. So what's the story at least with metropolitans Stephen and Michael?

Anastasios

#1953 07/14/05 01:42 AM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
Question for all you Ukrainophiles: why does Patriarch Filaret wear the white head-covering-with-two-little-flaps-that-fall-on-his-shoulders thing, while Patriarch Lubomyr does not?

ISTM that this is generally a Slavic Eastern Christian thing; at least, I've never seen this type of headcovering on the heads of Mediterranean Orthodox leaders.

But since +Husar is Ukrainian and Slavic, why doesn't he wear this little jobbie?

Logos Teen

#1954 07/14/05 01:08 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Dear Anastasios,

Since no branch of the UAOC is recognized as being canonical, I don't see the issue! smile

The issue you also raise is about the divisions.

In fact, Met. Vladimir Sabodan always categorically rejects that there are is more than one Orthodox Church in Ukraine or that there is a "UOC-MP." It is just the "UOC" and he is its Primate.

He refers to the others as "groups" or "organizations" repeatedly throughout interviews he gives to the press.

I don't know whether Met. Vladimir is an ethnic Ukrainian or not, but his Ukrainian is excellent and he is a respected Orthodox theologian and professor - even among the various UAOC groups who mostly had him as a prof at one time or another. He defends the UOC as the only Ukrainian canonical church and not as a Russian/Muscovite church at all.

The UOC-KP and the UAOC in western Ukrainian are now in unity talks, but this won't prevent small "UAOC" groups from declaring their own patriarchates and the like.

This is largely due to the Ukies' sense of individualism, brought on by middle class conditioning from the time of the Kozaks, as Russian historians also conclude. And also because the Ukies don't have the tradition of a single, unified nation under one secular leader, having been divided up as part of more than one empire.

Perhaps the Moscow Patriarchate could serve as a model of reunification efforts here. It is striving to bring back ROCOR and the Old Believers (and there is an Old Believer Patriarch and other divisions among them). And there are break-away Russian Orthodox "organizations."

But more than 25% of those saying they are "Ukrainian Orthodox" also say they don't belong to ANY Orthodox jurisdiction.

There is a real problem there and one that will take time to resolve.

What is certain, however, is that the Ukrainian Orthodox don't want the kind of Moscow-dominated church they have had, they want one that reflects their cultural identity and Kyivan Church heritage.

This is why Met. Vladimir and someone like "Patriarch Moisei" appeal to Ukrainian national sensibilities in competing for membership (and also for survival).

Whether a church is "canonical" or not matters not to the Ukrainian Orthodox, it would seem.

What matters is whether it is truly "Ukrainian" in identity and separate from Moscow.

And when all Ukies are together in what probably will be an uncanonical grouping - that is when Orthodoxy and the world will recognize them as canonical.

Alex

#1955 07/14/05 01:11 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Dear Teen Logo,

Lubomyr Husar does not acknowledge himself as a patriarch - and he won't without Rome's O.K.

This is probably the reason.

Alex

#1956 07/14/05 06:31 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Dear Alex:

I am just a little bit bothered by your statement that Cardinal Husar has not/does not "acknowledge" himself as Patriarch.

I think he did and he does. For if not, his election by the Holy Synod of the UGCC as Patriarch comes to naught, unless there is a retraction we do not know?

Further, the matter was submitted to Rome for consideration and is "pending."

In the meantime, Cardinal Husar is merely putting on hold his exercise of the authority and powers of a Patriarch until the formal approval by Rome of the elevation of the UGCC as a Patriarchate.

This is where the incendiary talks between the MP (and world Orthodoxy) and the Holy See came and come in.

Amado

#1957 07/14/05 10:20 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
I
Member
Offline
Member
I
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
To Amado,
It is of scant importance whether one acknowledges oneself to be a Patriarch - insane asyla are full of people who each acknowledges himself to be god, but does not thereby become divine!
A Major Archbishop, as Rome styles Patriarch Lubomyr, already has the authority and powers of a Patriarch, so one expects the Patriarch to exercise them (and he does in fact do so).

To Alex,
I have nothing whatever against Taras Shevchenko. I also have nothing against Victor Hugo.

Incognitus

#1958 07/15/05 12:54 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Incognitus:

The difference between a Major Archbishop and a Patriarch matters to the UGCC's Holy Synod and to all Ukies I presume.

The bestowal of the title by the Holy Synod is a grand act on its part that needed/needs acknowledgement by the recipient. Cardinal Husar did acknowledge such bestowal as shown by our discussions here and as reported universally elsewhere.

Only, the exercise of a Patriarch's prerogatives was short circuited by the cold treatment by Rome and, of course, by the belligerence of world Orthodoxy orchestrated by the MP.

The Eastern Code does grant the semblance of patriarchal accoutrements to a Major Archbishop but, really, the title "Patriarch" carries more hierarchical dignity wherever one goes, if you ask me!

I should be the last one to care whether Cardinal Husar is a Patriarch or just a Major Archbishop. The wimpiness of the principals now, which Alex seems to convey, runs surprisingly foreign to the understandable, and appreciated, bravado of the Ukies when such a courageuos act of UGCC's Holy Synod was first made public.

It adds doubt to the UGCC's avowed steely spine against further degradation by Moscow (and by Rome)!

Amado

#1959 07/15/05 01:14 AM
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 979
Those Muscovite Orthodox Church "leaders" can all go take a flying leap into the Volga.

We Ukrainian Catholics do indeed have a Patriarch - his name is Lubomyr Husar.

Mnohaya Lita Vladeko!!!!

#1960 07/15/05 01:53 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Dear Amado,

First of all, I know Patriarch Lubomyr, have met him and am related to him by marriage.

I support him even if I didn't and wasn't.

He does NOT sign his name as "Patriarch." When he was here for the consecration of our new Eparch for Eastern Canada, he was not officially called "Patriarch" and did not call himself that.

I know because I was there for the consecration and the banquet and was introduced to him by my wife's cousin who is his niece.

His position is that as a Church in communion with Rome, he wants Rome to acknowledge the reality of the UGCC Patriarchate.

It is a perfectly reasonable position to take as Head of our Particular Church. It has meant that our Basilians and other Latinophrones support him in his quest.

But there is no doubt in the minds of, for example, our Eparch that he is NOT yet a Patriarch in the full meaning of that term precisely because he is not acknowledged as such by Rome.

The ball is in Rome's court. Everything that our church suffered was because of Rome.

Rome should at least have the decency to do the right thing here.

Or so we Ukies believe.

No wimpiness - just facing up to realities.

Rome is not off the hook here, nor should it be.

Alex

#1961 07/15/05 01:58 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Dear Incognitus,

What I find offensive is your comparison of Shevchenko with Hugo.

On the religious plane, and some others, the two have precious little in common.

I remember visiting the basement of the former Church of St Genevieve in Paris which has been turned into a shrine for every French atheist thinker around. There is even a video about how the French revolutionaries and their successors tried to develop a "canonization" ceremony for their atheist and agnostic "worthies."

That heritage has nothing to do with what Shevchenko stood for all his life in defending his people against their enemies that were crushing them - and their enemies' churches.

If you do not know that, then you do not know Taras Shevchenko.

Alex

#1962 07/15/05 06:21 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Hi

It would be of interest to you that some of this Ukrainian non-canonical Churches have started their own missions in Latin America (they even want it to be "western rite").

One of them is the Kyivan Patriarchate under Filaret whose Church establish a diocese formed by a few Milan Synod and other itinerant priests. Do you remember Bishop Yuri Yurchik (the one who made a public abjuration of heresy and was received by the Roman Church)? Well he incardinated them as clergy of his Donetsk Diocese (I wonder how P. Filaret keeps him there after the previous scandal).

Another "Ukrainian Church" also established a Diocese in Ecuador!

#1963 07/15/05 07:48 AM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Global Moderator
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
For those who haven't seen it yet, the UAOC-C's Midwest US Diocese now has it's own website [uaocmoisey.org] .

Quote
Originally posted by KO63AP:
From what I've seen on the Internet it appears that their clergy to faithful ratio is about 1:5.
Kobzar,

Having checked the UAOC\'s synodal webpage [uaoc.org] for the first time in a while, I think you might be mistaken - looks to me as though their hierarch to faithful ratio these days may be more like 5:1 biggrin

And if you look at the UAOC-C\'s synodal webpage [soborna.org] , they may have an even higher ratio eek .

Quote
Originally posted by Mexican:
It would be of interest to you that some of this Ukrainian non-canonical Churches have started their own missions in Latin America
Remie,

The UAOC have an Eparchy for Colombia & Venezuela[/b] [geocities.com] .

Quote
Originally posted by Mexican:
[b]Another "Ukrainian Church" also established a Diocese in Ecuador!
The UAOC-C claims to have an Ecuadorean Diocese, as well as several other Latin and South American jurisdictions (Mexico, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Guadalupe, and the Caribbean), at the very least.

Alex,

It seems to me that the lesson to be learned from all this is that, if you are Ukrainian and you can't find an Eastern Church with which you are comfortable, you aren't hardly trying biggrin

Many years,

Neil, amazed to find that there is finally a place, Ukraine no less, with more Patriarchs than there are of Antioch wink


"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
#1964 07/15/05 12:23 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,243
Likes: 14
Dear Neil,

Yes, perhaps one more patriarchate for the UGCC isn't such a good idea after all!

He may get lost in the crowd!

I believe, though, that God will guide things and we'll eventually have a single canonical Patriarchate of Kyiv for all Ukrainian Orthodox and Catholics.

Fr. Petro Bilaniuk, a theologian up here (+eternal memory) actually argued for a Ukrainian "Catholicosate" based on the Oriental Orthodox model who would have universal jurisdiction over all Ukies.

That got him into real hot water with our Latinophrones, I can tell you, who had tremendous trouble digesting the idea of a simple patriarchate!

Alex

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Father Anthony 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5