www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall The Fall Of Orthodoxy

Dear Friends,

The Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has ended and they published a document on Mission Outreach.

I've summarized much of it in my English report on it in "News and Events" above, if you would like to see it above.

Alex

So if understand you correctly, Alex, you are implying that we should have helped get Orthodoxy back on its feet during the nineties rather than, at its expense, re-establishing the Greek-Catholic churches in Eastern European lands. How interesting!

Shlomo (Peace in Aramaic)Alex,
Apology accepted.

As to Rome telling the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church where it can or can not establish its eparchies, I agree with the Ukrainians. It is NOT Rome's concern. It is solely a concern of their Holy Synod, not the Colonial Office (aka the Congregation for Eastern Churches).

I agree with your point about the Russian Greek-Catholics also, I hope that one day that their needs will be met by their own hierarchs.

You state: "[t]he Catholic Church is not the native Church of Russia." That is correct, but it is the native Church of the German, Polish, and Lithuanians who live in, and are citizens of Russia (some for centuries). Are you willing to deny them?

Your cultural arguement does not fly with me, sorry. If a person is un-Churched then they can be evangelized by any and all.

The point about ecclesial/cultural sensitivity goes against the Christian Message as I understand it. It is the same one that people use to keep non-(you choose racial group) out. Using your case in point, the Eastern Orthodox Church should not be in Africa, since the majority of Christians (as well as territorial divisions) would be given over to the Roman Church, the Coptic Church, and the Ethiopian Church. I am sure the Eastern Orthodox in Africa would enjoy this idea.

Alex, please name just one Western European country that forces its citizens to be any religion.

I have never said that Roman Catholics would be the ones that would do the evangelization. I am for have the Byzantine Catholic Churches take on that role, since they share many of the same cultural traits.

It truly does not matter if 50% of 50 people are un-Churched. If they un-Churched, then they can be preached to by any and all.

You state: "[i]ts Church suffered persecution for Christ the likes of which Roman Catholicism has not known - thankfully." That is true of Roman Catholicism, but not true of many of us who are Eastern Catholic. My Church has had to withstand many times of suppresion and death at the hands of our opponents, including the Byzantine Empire.

Further, a perfect example of where the Byzantine Church forced its culture on a non-Byzantine Church is the Melkite one. It went from a Syriac Liturgical style to a Byzantine one under the sword of the Empire.

I agree, that "religious liberty ... has everything to do with respect and sensitivity." But respect and sensitivity should not be seen as a licence to exclusivity.

Poosh BaShlomo (Stay in Peace),
Yuhannon

Shlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
I just thought that those that have been following this thread, might want to read the one on "Saint Charbel in Russia." I think that it in and of itself helps to disprove that the lay people of Russia are anti-Catholic in general, or anti-Eastern Catholic in particular.

This story is an example of where the heirarchy should learn from the Body of Christ, the people.

Poosh BaShlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
Yuhannon

Dear djs,

Please, I never said what you are accusing me of saying.

I was only talking about Russia.

Rome itself takes seriously the notion of jurisdiction etc. and this is why it refuses to allow Russian Byzantine Catholics from formally organizing in Russia.

If you don't like that, take it up with Rome.

I'll compare relatives who were martyred for the Greek Catholic Church with you any time.

Alex

Dear Yuhannon,

I'm only saying what is Rome's formal policy in Russia already.

Colonial or not, Rome will NOT set up Russian Byzantine Catholic eparchies for the reasons I gave, exclusivity notwithstanding.

Rome's policy, and of course we agree with it, is to have RC Churches in Russia to only serve the existing RC population there.

Russia's concern is that RC actions have gone beyond its stated policy and there is active proselytism of Russians going on.

If Russians wish to become RC, they should have that rite, I mean, right

But we Eastern Catholics, when we get Western converts, we are formally obliged to send them to the Latin Church.

So what you are protesting against (and I actually agree with your protest) is something that has been part and parcel of official RC practice, not to mention Orthodox practice, for centuries.

Alex

Shlomo Alex,
I understand that that is Rome's formal policy.

Just one point to correct you on. Anyone who converts to the Catholic Church from any of the Protestant sects has the right to choose which Church they will belong to. It is no longer Canon Law that Western Protestants become Roman Catholics.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Dear Yuhannon,

Yes, you are right!

I don't think that anyone who wishes to join an Eastern Catholic Church will worry too much about what Rome thinks nowadays . . .

But that policy was strict until now.

I have an old Greek Catholic prayerbook from the 19th century where it is emphatically stated that while Greek CAtholics may approach Holy Communion in the Latin Church, Latin Catholics are expressly forbidden from doing so in a Greek Catholic Church.

Happily, that no longer applies either!

Alex

Shlomo Alex,
I understand, we TRUE Easterners (to us in the Middle East, Constantinople was the Western Church), we never had to deal with Roman Catholic Civil Officials. To us, the Romans were and are so small, that they do not registar on our screens. You should see what we do to them on Ash Wednesday :rolleyes:

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Dear Yuhannon,

You raise a very important point, one that Qathuliqa Mor Ephrem has represented as well in the past.

We Byzantines belong to the Western Church, the "Elder Romans/New Romans - strange as it may seem to us Byzantines, but true.

This especially comes home when we deal with the iconoclastic crisis.

In fact, the Oriental Churches saw this as a local problem in the Byzantine Church - and not even a problem that touched the Church of Elder Rome either.

God bless and maybe we can get together for lunch sometime!

Alex

Shlomo Alex,
I would love to do lunch some time.

As to your point about the iconoclastic crisis, and the latter Ecumenical Councils that came after the breaks; I think that the Pope has shown the way that those issues can be taken care of, that is they were basically local councils, that still hold the weight of Orthodox Truth, just as the Councils of Hippo and Carthage were local Councils that taught a universal Orthodox Truth. Or that the latter Catholic Councils would also be such. For example Trent is purely a Latin Council issue.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Alex

So what year did it become acceptable for Latins to take Holy Communion in a Greek Catholic Church ? and did the reference you made, apply to Ukraine, Canada or everywhere ?

I must be very thick - I do not understand what Lawrence is meaning here.

A Greek Catholic Churc h is a Catholic Church

At some point in time was it not ??

Anhelyna again

The Latin (Roman) Catholic Church was not in full communion with the Byzantine (Greek) Catholic Church for several centuries following 1054. Full communion was reestablished with the Ukrainian Church in 1596, with the Ruthenian Church in 1646 and with the Melkite Church in the 1750s.

Dear Lawrence,

Actually, I don't know when this rule was changed to allow Latin Catholics to approach Communion in the Eastern Catholic Churches!

The rule was universal when it was written.

Father Ireneaus Nazarko, OSBM, in his book on the Metropolitans of Kyiv and Halych discusses at least two local Latin Synods in western Ukraine in the 17th century that forbade the adoption of certain Eastern practices by the Latins.

He quotes one bishops as saying that the "Uniates are worse than the Orthodox because the Uniates infect our people with their (schismatic) practices."

They particularly didn't like Latin seminarians and priests growing beards and wearing long, wide-sleeved robes (!).

Perhaps this rule shows a certain kind of "second class Catholic citizenship" accorded the early Eastern Catholics with respect to the Latin Church.

If he reads this, I'm sure our brother, djs, will respond by saying, "How interesting!"

Alex