www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople is against UGCPatiarchate

A question to anyone who may answer this one:how many Greek Catholics were in the Ukraine prior to the Soviet Revolution almost ninety years ago?

Cyril

Dear Cyril,

In 1596 most of the bishops of Kyiv (Kiev), and what is now Ukraine and Belarus signed the Union of Brest. At the time, these bishops found themselves in the largest European Kingdom - The Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.

The following is a list of the Greek Catholic dioceses with the modern countries in which they are located next to them, and the empires in which they were found at the time of the Russian Revolution (WW1):

RUSSIAN EMPIRE

(1) Kyiv (now Ukraine)
(2) Lutsk (now Ukraine)
(3) Volodymyr-Volynsky (now Ukraine)
(4) Kholm (now Poland)
(5) Pinsk (now Belarus)
(6) Polotsk (now Belarus)
(7) Smolensk (now Russia)

AUTRO-HUNGARIAN EMPIRE

(8) Lviv (now Ukraine)
(9) Stanislaviv / Ivano Frankivsk (now Ukraine)
(10) Peremysl (now Poland)
(11) Mukachiv (now Ukraine)

Between the time of the signing of the Union (1596) and the Russian Revolution (WW1), the boarders changed significantly. The Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth basically vanished, and the Russian Empire expanded significantly.

As the Russian Tsar took over these lands, the Greek Catholic Eparchies were forcefully converted to Orthodoxy. By the time the Russian Revolution occurred after WW1 the first 7 eparchies of the Greek Catholic Church had vanished (forced conversion to Russian Orthodoxy).

Eparchies numbers 8, 9, 10, and 11 were the last to join the Union, but survived because they were part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire until the Russian Revolution.

After WW2 eparchies number 7 - 11 were forced to join the Russian Orthodox Church and by 1946 all of the Eastern European Greek Catholic Eparchies had vanished. Greek Catholic parchies continued to exist in the diaspora only.

After the fall of the Iron Curtain, Eparchies numbered 1 - 3, and 7 - 10 were able to re-establish themselves. Number 9 within modern day Poland but very near the Ukrainian boarder. Eparchy number 4 has mostly vanished but father Peter does post every now and then . A new 'northern' eparchy was created in Poland.

There are now additional eparchies in modern day Ukraine and one extra in Poland.

Now to answer your question:

If you are asking how many Greek Catholics there were at the time of the Russian Revolution within territory which was the old Empire, the answer would be - very few since the Tsar had forced them to convert to Orthodoxy over the 300 plus years since the Unia was initiated.

If you are asking how many Greek Catholics there were at the time of the Russian Revolution who would be today located on the modern territory of Ukraine, then my answer would be about 5 - 6 million.

Sorry Cyril, but there are never easy answers to these types of questions.

Hritzko

Cyril,

The on-line Catholic Encyclopedia, which is a republication of a the text begun in 1905 and completed in 1914, in discussing the Eastern Catholic Churches, attempts to put a number to each of the then "Rites". While admittedly probably lacking in accuracy, it clearly expresses the knowledge and understanding of the time and is probably the "official best estimate" of the time.

As to the "Ruthenians", into which it groups all of what we would now term Churches of the Byzantine Slav Tradition (other than the Bulgarians and Romanians), it reports:

Many years,

Neil, who prayerfully hopes that we will not now be subjected to a dissection of this number :rolleyes: .

(1) Should state:
After WW2 eparchies numbers 8 - 11....

(2) Should state
After the fall of the Iron Curtain, eparchies numbered 1 -3, and 8 - 10 .........

Church statistics are notorious unreliable anyway, and after 1875 "Greek Catholic" was not an acceptable entry on Tsarist census data. Moreover, as has just been remarked, the Empire of Tsar Nicholas II did not include all of Ukraine. However, it did include some of Ukraine. Even though the Greek-Catholic Church was unrecognized and persecuted, it was not totally absent.
Kholm Eparchy: for the sake of convenience, I'm using this heading to include all the territory of the Eparchy of Kholm suppressed by state force and violence in 1875 and located in Tsarist areas. In 1905, about 250,000 Greek Catholic faithful who had been denied any access to the Catholic Church since 1875 returned en masse, making use of the limited freedom of religion granted by Nicholas II in 1905. Although these were certainly Greek Catholics, the government would not permit them to use the Byzantine Liturgy, so they went to Polish RC churches. Just over a decade later, at the time of the Revolution, this territory wound up in Poland and several dozen parishes withdrew from the Russian Orthodox Church and returned to the open practice of Greek Catholicism.
Volyn: we may use this heading, again for the sake of convenience, to include the Greek Catholic Church in the rest of the Tsarist Empire, where the Greek Catholic Church was suppressed in 1839. Even eighty years later, when the Russian Revolution made it possible to return to the Greek Catholic Church, parishes, clergy and lay people chose to do so, which indicates that in the intervening years an attachment to the Greek Catholic Church remained alive (the same is true of Belarus, but the question was restricted to Ukraine).
There were trace elements in other places, but these are the two largest groupings.
Incognitus

As a rule of thumb, only the Greek Catholic Eparchies which were located in areas which were 50% or higher ethnographically Ukrainian (Rusyn) were able to truly survive from WW1 to present. Here is evidence of my theory:

The Kholm eparchy (now in Poland) is gone except for perhaps one or two parishes. The Poles did a fantastic job at assimmilating the vast majority of the pre-WW1 Greek Catholics into the Latin rite church (some whent to the Polish Orthodox Church). As I mentioned earlier, father Peter does post now and then and we hope to hear a lot more in the future from him..

The Peremysl eparchy (now in Poland) because it was 50% Ukrainian (Rusyn) was doing well until the second world war when most of it's Greek Catholics were either deported to the newly acquired 'German' lands or into Soviet Ukraine. The Ukrainians who were deported on mass to the newly acquired German lands were settled with no more than two famillies per village to ensure their rapid assimmilation into the larger Polish Latin rite Catholic Church. Some returned to their ancestral Peremysl eparchy and some escaped deportation. The total numbers have greatly diminished. The church remains alive and in many ways is experiencing a renaissance but has been greatly diminished.

The Priashiv / Presov (now Slovakia) eparchy suffered severe Slovakization in the interwar period, and this was accellerated after WW2. The level of deportation of ethnic Rusyns / Ukrainians was less severe than in Poland but did occur. There was however a systematic forced assimmilation of the Rusyn (Ukrainian) Greek Catholics into the Slovak Latin rite Catholic Church. Some whent to the Czechoslovak Orthodox Church.

The Belarus government statistics of the early 1990's puts the Greek Catholic adherance population at about 100,000 for the whole country. The area south of Pinsk (South) remains highly populated with ethnic Ukrainians. There are no bishops and only a very few registered parishes. The government treats the Greek Catholics poorly and does all possible to stop their growth. The two historical eparchies of Greek Catholics in Belarus are Pinsk (south) and Polotsk (north). Although Smolensk is in Russia, it was historically Belorussian until the Russians decided otherwise. Belarus remains in grip of Russia and for this reason it is very difficult for the Greek Catholics to re-emerge.

Hritzko

Dear Hritzko,

WWII ended in '45 and the Greek Catholic Church was suppressed in Czechoslovakia in '50. From '50 to '68 how was the "Slovakization" you cite accelerated? Since '68 I can see it but not before.

I wish all a profitable Great Week.

Tony

Dear Tony,

Your point is well taken and probably correct. I have seen the adherance statistics before for the Greek Catholics in Czechoslovakia over the decades but do not have them with me. I think you can get them from CNEWA if you look hard enough.

When the Russian Orthodox Church took over the Greek Catholic parishes after the war, the only other alternative was to transfer to the Roman rite churches. Initially, there were few transfers.

The ROC continued using Church Slavonic which was familiar to the Greek Catholics, and initiated other reforms to return the church to Orthodoxy. Superficially, this would appear to have been good, and perhaps it was to some. For the majority of the Carpatho-Rusyns in Czechoslovakia, the Russian Orthodox Church represented the oppressor, the empire which came and destroyed religion (and a lot more). The Russian Orthodox Church was seen as an appendage to the state's secret police and could not be trusted in the same way as the Greek Catholic clergy once were. For example, the ROC confessional and the local communist party were always in communication. The same was not true with the Latin rite Church.

In 1968 during the 'Prague Spring' the Greek Catholic Church emerged. About 200 of the original 300 Greek Catholic parishes emerged and remain after the Soviets crushed the uprising. They were 'legalized' but had few resources.

Unfortunately, the Greek Catholics were left without churches, seminaries, and other 'basics' which they had prior to the war. The fact that this was still a communist era meant that it was almost impossible to acquire funds to rebuild their church from scratch. They were in a dire predicament.

The newly emerged Greek Catholics became very dependant on the Latin rite church which of course took full advantage of their predicament. The Roman Catholics USURPED power from the Greek Catholic bishops who had been released from prison (they were imprisoned for being Greek Catholics). The apostolic succession from the original Carpatho Rusyn Unia of Uzhorod was broken (please forgive my lack of relgious language).

The Carpatho-Rusyns of Ukraine on the other hand continued apostolic succession in the underground right up until the declaration of independance in the early 1990's. The UGCC web site has a great schematic presentation of this succession in the 'Church in Catacomb -Lviv Museum' section. It should be of great interest to all Carpatho-Rusyns.

By the late 1960's the Latin rite church began using the vernacular of the land - Slovak, which was perhaps better understood than Church Slavonic by many Rusyns. This coupled with the perception that Church Slavonic was the language of the 'oppressor' more than it was of the 'natives' made it easy to move much of the services to the Slovak language.

You are correct in stating that the next 30 years proved to be the most severe Latinizing period for the Greek Catholics. At least they remained Christians. The first 30 years of the Soviet Union resulted in the almost complete loss of the Christian faith as we know it. The Soviets 'de-churched' the population. The Slovaks just moved them from one rite to the other and changed the liturgical language for many - ie: they were Slovakized / Latinized.

Hritzko

What is fictional here is that the uniate movement in these lands was in any way voluntary or propelled with genuine arguments and an informed and educated populace or that the idea that the return to Orthodoxy of many of these dioceses was involuntary on the part of the majority of these populations. Why, even in Lvov during the First World War, Russian Orthodox clerics served and were received with courtesy, without protest, and the return of Galicia to Orthodoxy was considered a foregone conclusion. This all being said, what has exacerbated the "uniate question" has been three things:
A). The quasi-nationalistic movements disguising themselves as papal loyalty groups to receive Rome's support.
B). The barbaric treatment of certain populations by the bolsheviks, many times engaging in genocidal and craven programs of discrimination, disguised as "ukrainization" oto prevent the "rise of counter revolutionary sentiment and the rightest reaction of the stifled workers' revolution of 1905". There is a "slovak" and "magyar" and "polinizing" corollary to this.
C). Unscrupulous and idiotic religious persecution and "reunification" of the uniate populations of Southwestern Rus' by the stalin regime without ANY type of religious instruction or actual, meaningful explanation as to "why?"
I recently read a book where the contention is once the monarchy was toppled in Russia, the union of the peoples of Rus' dissolved much as it had during the times of fratricidal strife during the period of Kievan Rus'. In this I must concur. Although the monarchy itself was many times no panacea, what it did represent was a legitimate structure of equality without discrimination and a thorough connectedness with the history, custom and life of the people from ancient times. Destruction of the monarchy meant destruction of unity if not for only one reason other than it represented the destruction of a center and its ideology which unified the people of Rus'. Today, I believe that recriminations between various denominations and Orthodoxy serve no religious purpose save to promote polarization and an eventual reaction on the part of the majority which serves no Christian end. Dialogue and education will more than combat intolerance and ignorance and Truth will prevail. Ostensibly, the unia represents Byzantine Christianity and examination of that with a "byzantinization program" will only bring honest affirmation of Orthodoxy and may indeed help to promote reconociliation between Rome and the Orthodox Church. What cannot be done is imposition of religion on a sovereign conscience, either true or false, for such activity simply promotes future rebellion. Likewise, imposition of a belief system disingenuously on uninformed and unchurched populations is just as despicable and totalitarian.

Dear Balaban,

Yes the sun is setting on the Russian Empire.

You are requesting twenty five years of 'exclusivity' on 'traditional Orthodox territories' for the ROC to re-establish itself on the territories of Ukraine. Not bad, considering the ROC has requested 'perpetuity'.

The ROC has had almost 13 years of exclusivity in the Eastern lands of Ukraine, yet the Assembly of God sect which has faced nothing but stiff resistance from the government has just announced that they will be building a 50,000 person 'megatemple' in Kyiv. Clearly, they are able to attract ACTIVE adherants which the ROC is not.

Do you really think that 12 more years would provide the ROC with what it needs to re-establish itself ?

The answer of course is no.

For the ROC to attract true ACTIVE adherants it must first de-stalinize. It not only refuses to do this but actually awards prizes to the communists 'for outstanding services to the people and the church'. How can any living, thinking, Christian tolerate such a hierarchy and the church it represents ? They can't and that is why so many are turning to other churches.

Do you think that a return to the Russian monarchy would bring people back to the ROC ?

Canada has a monarchy and for this reason the government puts the Queen's picture on all postal stamps. It use to make me sick that I had to lick the Queen's back every time I had to mail a letter in Canada ( ). Do you think that by licking the Czarina's back Russians would be drawn back to the ROC ?

Muscovy / Russia is a big country. There is much work to be done on re-evenagelizing the population. Perhaps you should first re-establish the monarchy in Russia, then prove how it can benefit Muscovy's (Russia's) Orthodox Church, THEN make your case in Ukraine. This should take no more than 40 to 60 years. I'm sure once you have made your point, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church will gladly join the ROC. Also, the Ukrainians may even enjoy licking the Czarina's back every time they mail a letter in Russia.

Peace.

Hritzko

With due respect, the post of 25 years of "active evangelization" was in regard to another topic. And you, yourself, concede that there has been no "active evangelization or real program". The whole issue of destalinization is astonishingly requisite on both the part of the MP and mr. denisenko's organization, which is the benefactor of continued sergianism. One must also remark that despite the structural impediments to the UOC-MP, it still is the majority Church in the Ukraine. Now, if one is to base ones view of a church structure in a vaccuum discounting 80 years of coerced dechristianization at the point of a bayonet or deportation to a concentration camp or in a mass grave, then, indeed, the statistics for regular church goers must be astoundingly low; however, it seems, 70% of the population is nominally Orthodox which is still a greater nominal, believing proportion of the population than western, "free countries" like Germany, France, England, even Canada. That in and of itself manifestly attests to the legacy of what Russian Orthodoxy was under the empire, for even after millions of martyrdoms and a theomachist onslaught not seen since Roman times, the Faith is still upheld. Moreover, hardly is it inappropriate to see Kiev (I rely on the historical spelling of the Chronicles) and her ecclesiastical territories as foreign from Rus'. Arguing such is akin to arguing that Berlin is really Prussia and unconstituent of Germany. The link between north and south has been cemented since St. Peter of Volhynia, Kuzma Minin-Sukhoruk and the work later of monastic centers such as Kiev Caves Lavra and Pochaev Lavra. Needless to say, the territory in question did exist before 1848 and Dragomanov's and Kostamarov's narodnik condecensions and escaped the derussification policies of the Austrian secret police. Moreover, in lands detached from Rus' for over a thousand years, namely in the Carpathians, the old identity was never forgotten or replaced. One can rail against the old order and the history of a nation if one is prepared to admit that one is unrepresentative of that, even opposed to it. But when one tries to reinvent it without any factual grounds, one is left with only innuendo and a hate for the legitimate rulers of Rus'. I neither hate Rurik nor do I hate the Holy Royal Martyr Nicholas II, for my people swore an oath of fealty before God unto to the ages of ages to preserve Rus' and Holy Orthodoxy. That oath was borne from the Black Sea to White Sea, from the Bug to the Pacific. In no wise was a revolutionary mentalite ever espoused by the builders of Rus' nor was it even contemplated by its populace as anything more than evil. One need only remark that the vast majority of General Denikin's Volunteer Army was comprised of Galicians and Carpatho Russians. Moreover, in the immigration, prior to the Second World War, the hetmanite movement, one advocating restoration of the monarchial order and federation of all of Rus', is what prevailed amongst the majority of the people in question. To me that expresses a very different take on the monarchy and on the people of Rus' than certain disinformation would otherwise indicate.

Dear Balaban,

Thank you for your interesting post.

Ukraine is in the process of creating the world's largest Orthodox church (see today's RISU post for more info). Clearly this can not make Russian Imperialists happy since at least 55% of all "Russian Orthodox Churches" are located in Ukraine, and most of these, if not all will be tranformed into a new 'Super Sized Ukrainian Orthodox Church' or the SSUO. Once created, the church will enter into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

Rejoice for the Ukrainians-Rusyns who have endured centuries of bondage, slavery, famine, war, deportations, death, and missery at the hands of their Imperial masters. They are finally becoming masters in their own home, including church life. As a Christian this should be more important to you than a ROCOR oath of loyalty to the Empire.

The Ukrainians have a plan for rebuilding their nation, churches, and culture. The UGCC, UOC-KP, and UAOC have made peace with each other and are showing the Christian world how brothers in Christ should live. There is little doubt that except for some of the UOC-MP hierarchy, the citizens of Ukraine want to create one Orthodox Church for the nation.

Contrary to what you state, Ukraine is not ruled by Czars, despot dictators, or ancient Rus figures such as Rurik. Ukraine is a modern European nation which has a democratically elected president and national parliment. The country will probably join NATO and the EU within the next decade.

The man who heads the Russian Orthodox Church otherwise known as the Moscow Patriarch will not bring people back to the church. Putin will not be able to deliver the conversions to our Lord Jesus. After thirteen years of freedom, church adherance is no more than 1 or 2 % and there is no chance of this changing.

We hope that you are successful with your conversion strategy for Russia. Please do give details on how you think this will be achieved.

Hritzko

Again you are simply factually incorrect. The Russian church as a whole both in Russia and in the successor states has a 70% + adherence at least nominally, depending on which survey you read. Russia accounts for 100 million Orthodox Christians, the Ukraine for additional 40 million Orthodox Christians, Belarus' for an additional 9 million Christians, the Baltics an additional 5 million, Kazakhstan 5 million, etc. That's about 160 million Orthodox Christians. In the Ukraine, the UOC-MP, even with sergianist sponsorship of mr. denisenko still accounts for 50% + of the Orthodox, that means at least 20 million, or at least 140 million total members of the MP, the largest Orthodox local church. Now, what may have been true in the times of the soviet union is not true today. If one were to include the Ukrainian parishes of the MP, they would amount to no more than 35% of the grand total of all parishes. But the Ukrainian church has been granted autonomy and is no longer factored in to the figures. Moreover, one could argue that these are nominal numbers, but they almost mirror the nominal numbers of Christians in the USA, long considered one of the more religious of countries and they way outnumber the nominal numbers of Christians in Scandinavia, France, England, Canada, Germany. True, the Greek population is nominally 90% Orthodox, but they have not undergone coerced and brutal secularization at the point of a bayonet, in a concentration camp or in a mass grave over the last 80 years. That being said, these "nominal numbers" are quite remarkable as to the resiliency of the MP and state that Orthodoxy is far from perishing in Russia. The fact that hospitals, public schools, the Duma, the military,the workplace now have Orthodox instruction and religious information available surely insists that this dynamism is far from stagnant or even dead. Give us 25 more years and we'll both see the reunification of all of Orthodox Rus' and much more substantive numbers. Now as to my supposed ROCOR affiliation, you could not be more wrong. True, I am a Russian Orthodox Christian but my allegiance is free of any compromising political jurisdictions. And, lastly, isn't it strange that you now assert the revolutionary and novel concept of "ukrainoznavstvo" and disregard the history of Rus'? And isn't it also peculiar that you, a supposed "true" descendent of Rus' have repudiated her name and legacy in favor of an ideology composed by Great Russian utopian socialists, Dragomanov and Kostamarov, who considered the people they were "experimenting with" nothing more than ignorant savages and that their "work" was championed later by the Austrian secret police. One marvels at the inconsistency, especially since the godless and worthless "moskali" treasure their heritage and their inheritance from Rus' and do not their identity and history for a revolutionary myth. That is why bolshevism failed and Rus' prevailed, at least in the north and also in right bank Ukraina.

Dear Balaban,

Yes you are correct - the sun is setting on the Muscovite (Russian) Empire.

After 13 years of near exclusive government, communist, and their businessmen turned mafia support for the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, the church has an ACTIVE adherance rate of only 1 - 2%. Contrary to what you state, this is far inferior to North America or Europe.

Ukrainians are searching for an Orthodox Church free of Czars, Commissars, and despot rulers. The ROC fails to meet the needs of the people on all three points. The EXPONENTIAL growth of sects, including the 'Kingdom of God' in the territories where the ROC had almost exclusive control in Ukraine is a testement to this. Even the Ukrainian Government no longer believes the ROC can succeed and for this reason is attempting to establish a true National Orthodox Church for Ukraine.

PS: Your rambling non-structured posts border on the nonsensical.

Hritzko

Dear All:

Allow me to add something to the discussion here. I was in Salt Lake City recently on business. Having a little bit of downtime, I took a walk through Temple Square when, low and behold, one of the missionary-tour guide young ladies was wearning a Ukrainian flag.

So, we started talking. She is from Donetsk, is a lawyer by training and speaks Ukrainian, Russian and English. A very bright young lady, to be sure.

I asked her what attracted her to the Mormons and away from Orthodoxy. Her reaction was that the only Orthodox church in Donetsk is the MP and that, for most people there, it is a "twice a year" thing.

The MP church, according to her, is all but invisible in an area of Ukraine where it would seem to have a monopoly.

Yours,

hal