The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Regf2, SomeInquirer, Wee Shuggie, Bodhi Zaffa, anaxios2022
5,881 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
3 members (theophan, 2 invisible), 107 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
Topics35,219
Posts415,299
Members5,881
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#277115 02/06/08 03:08 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,964
T
Member
OP Offline
Member
T
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,964
EWTN posted a story of a woman in Florida cured of cancer by the intercession of Blessed Karl of Austria.

Quote
Kissimmee Baptist Edges Emperor toward Sainthood

Orlando, Feb 5, 2008 (CNA).-

Karl von Habsburg, the last emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire moved a step closer to sainthood last week, the Orlando Sentinel reports. A Florida woman has claimed that by praying for the intercession of the emperor, she was cured from breast cancer.

The Baptist woman from Kissimmee, Florida received the ruler�s holy card from a friend, Paula Melancon, who became interested in Emperor von Habsburg on a trip to Europe. The cancer sufferer prayed that Karl intercede on her behalf.

Doctors as well as a judicial tribunal of the Diocese of Orlando agreed that there appears to be no medical explanation for the woman�s recovery.

Karl, who was emperor during World War I, opposed the war, censored obscene materials, closed brothels and increased the chaplains sent to troops. He was exiled and died of the flu at the age of 34. In 2004, he was beatified by Pope John Paul II.

Orlando Bishop Thomas Wenski said, "It is an honor for our diocese to be part of something that is larger than all of us. Miracles are not done for show. Jesus didn't do miracles because he was a showoff.�

-----------------------------------------------------------

www.ewtn.com [ewtn.com]

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
What's a Baptist woman doing praying to an early 20th century Catholic emperor is the question! LOL. Good for her.

Alexis

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342
Originally Posted by Two Lungs
EWTN posted a story of a woman in Florida cured of cancer by the intercession of Blessed Karl of Austria.

Quote
Kissimmee Baptist Edges Emperor toward Sainthood

Orlando, Feb 5, 2008 (CNA).-

Karl von Habsburg, the last emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire moved a step closer to sainthood last week, the Orlando Sentinel reports. A Florida woman has claimed that by praying for the intercession of the emperor, she was cured from breast cancer.

The Baptist woman from Kissimmee, Florida received the ruler�s holy card from a friend, Paula Melancon, who became interested in Emperor von Habsburg on a trip to Europe. The cancer sufferer prayed that Karl intercede on her behalf.

Doctors as well as a judicial tribunal of the Diocese of Orlando agreed that there appears to be no medical explanation for the woman�s recovery.

Karl, who was emperor during World War I, opposed the war, censored obscene materials, closed brothels and increased the chaplains sent to troops. He was exiled and died of the flu at the age of 34. In 2004, he was beatified by Pope John Paul II.

Orlando Bishop Thomas Wenski said, "It is an honor for our diocese to be part of something that is larger than all of us. Miracles are not done for show. Jesus didn't do miracles because he was a showoff.�

-----------------------------------------------------------

www.ewtn.com [ewtn.com]

Shlomo,

I too have prayed to Blessed Karl of Austria. I was a history major, and one of my favorites was the Austro-Hungarian Empire. I have always felt, that if the Empire had not been broken up, Hitler could not have risen as he had. If one looks at the history of the Empire, you would have seen what today is called the EU decades earlier.

The parliament was representitive of the peoples of the Empire. Further, here is what the Constitution stated:

Article 19:

All races of the empire have equal rights, and every race has an inviolable right to the preservation and use of its own nationality and language. The equality of all customary languages ("landes�bliche Sprache") in school, office and public life, is recognized by the state. In those territories in which several races dwell, the public and educational institutions are to be so arranged that, without applying compulsion to learn a second country language ("Landessprache"), each of the races receives the necessary means of education in its own language.


They even had an Irishman serve as Prime Minister. Wilson, with his stupidy destroyed the center of Europe and gave rise to Hitler and his mad dogs.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Quote
What's a Baptist woman doing praying to an early 20th century Catholic emperor is the question!

I read an article v�a the blogosphere that told more. Apparently the woman has a Catholic relative who visited Europe and mailed her a prayer card.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear Friends,

Let's remember that even atheists are writing to the Vatican to say they're prayers to Pope John Paul II have been answered - what is a Baptist or two?

But Alexis raises another fascinating historical point with respect to hagiography.

If one receives a miracle from a holy person belonging to another Church or tradition, does that mean the individual who received the healing/miracle should convert?

In fact, this has often been the case. At the back of the Orthodox Pochaiv Lavra in western Ukraine are paintings of various individuals receiving healings, including an RC woman who was cured of her blindness there. She converted to Orthodoxy. And vice-versa.

In Philadelphia, there is the amazing story of a woman in hospital who was frequently visited by a young boy who encouraged her and told her not to give up hope. She got through her serious operation and then just as she was about to leave the hospital, the boy came by and took her by the hand into the next room. There lay a woman who, as it turned out, was that woman's long lost daughter whom she gave up for adoption years before and had lost all track of!

The boy left and that was the last she saw of him, never even knowing his name.

As she was leaving the hospital, she collected her things, including the devotionals sent to her by family and friends. Among them was a picture of St John Neumann CSsR a friend had put by her bedside.

As she looked at it, she turned it over to see the prayer to the Saint. But there, incredibly, was a picture of St John Neumann when he was a boy.

Yes, it was the same boy she had come to know while in hospital and who had taken her to see her long-lost daughter.

Sorry, but I didn't bring any Kleenex with me . . .

P.S. our Monarchist League up here is promoting the Cause of Bl. Karl of Austria.
Alex

Last edited by Orthodox Catholic; 02/06/08 02:43 PM.
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
I think Empress Zita was saintly as well.

Yuhannon,

You're right, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was awesome! So Baroque, so Catholic...it's everything good about Germanic culture (with a lot of other cultures in the mix, too) with none of that bad northern German Protestant yuckiness. wink

Alexis

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear Alexis,

And the Habsburgs were among the most humane of all Royal families.

There was one Habsburg who fell in love with Ukraine, "Vasil Vyshyvany" since he liked to wear embroidered Ukrainian shirts who led a Ukrainian division in World War I. He was well-esteemed by Met. Andrew Sheptytsky (who was a monarchist in any event) and there was even a movement to have him declared "King of Galicia" which he said he would be if a referendum on the subject was ever held and he was wanted as such.

The West should have left the Habsburgs on their thrones and promoted the enthronement of further Habsburgs - would have been a better 20th century for Europe.

Alex

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Quote
There was one Habsburg who fell in love with Ukraine, "Vasil Vyshyvany" since he liked to wear embroidered Ukrainian shirts who led a Ukrainian division in World War I.

They were also unfortunately the people who established and ran Talerhof.

The Habsburgs were probably no better or worse than any of the other European dynastic families when looked at on the whole. I'm not one for historical recriminations, and the Habsburgs certainly were responsible for many good things. If you were a religious or national minority in the Austro-Hungarian Empire however, or an advocate of political reform or representative government, you were probably no fan of the Habsburgs. They did good things, they did a lot of bad things.


Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Quote
If you were a religious or national minority in the Austro-Hungarian Empire however, or an advocate of political reform or representative government, you were probably no fan of the Habsburgs. They did good things, they did a lot of bad things.

Let's ammend this to be a little more historically accurate. "If you were a religious or national minority in the Hungarian half of the Austro-Hungarian Empire..." The Austrians were generally (but not without exception) very kind to the minorities in the empire. The Hungarians, however, are a different matter...

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Certainly, no one is without sin!

Emperor Franz Joseph was very well esteemed by many among the minorities of that empire. The Russians didn't like the Habsburgs but then again it was "empire eat empire." And frankly, those with a decidedly "European Catholic" bent saw Russia as a "foreign danger" and there is the conflict with the Russophile Orthodox AND Eastern Catholic clergy (St Maxim Sandovich, St Alexis of Carpatho-Rus' and the like).

In Ukrainian areas where there was too much of an assimilationist pull toward RCism, Russophilism became one way to counteract this. And in other places where Russophilism became overwhelming, Austrophilism was the norm.

As they say, "One cannot understand this without some vodka!"

Alex


Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Originally Posted by Byzantophile
Let's ammend this to be a little more historically accurate. "If you were a religious or national minority in the Hungarian half of the Austro-Hungarian Empire..." The Austrians were generally (but not without exception) very kind to the minorities in the empire. The Hungarians, however, are a different matter...

Habsburg history goes back much longer than the dual monarchy (would you have wanted to be a Czech Protestant in the 17th century for instance?). The dual monarchy itself was one system that existed with both sides as participants and supporters, even if many of the policies as exercised in the Hungarian were much worse for minorities (and indeed they were, though both sides played the minorities off against each other at times). You can't absolve one or the other of responsibility for the whole system. They both benefited and maintained it for their own selfish reasons at the expense of others; and both at times would employ the most brutal forms of repression when they felt they needed to. That is what an empire is about.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear AMM,

Or the Czech that was burned on July 6, 1415 . . . His Goose was truly cooked . . . smile

Also wanted to say that I enjoy your insightful and also refreshing (and intellectually satisfying) analyses.

You defy predictability from an intellectual standpoint - which is a great testimony to your versatility and dedication to critical thought, yet within a committed religious perspective.

Alex


Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
P.S. our Monarchist League up here is promoting the Cause of Bl. Karl of Austria.
Alex

How can I join this Monarchist League? After all, I am a Christian Monarchist!

Dn. Robert

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
The West should have left the Habsburgs on their thrones and promoted the enthronement of further Habsburgs - would have been a better 20th century for Europe.
Alex

We have in our Eparchy several Basilian priest/monks from Hungary (who have ties to the Greek Catholic shrine at Mariapocs). One of them, a friend for quite some time, puts the blame for the collapse of Christian Monarchy in Europe after WWI squarely at the feet of Freemasonry. I am told that most of the politicians who grabbed power after the collapse were, in fact Masons. Jan Masyryk, for one, was a Mason. I believe that this was also true of Woodrow Wilson, since American Presidents who were not Masons are the exception to the rule (JFK was one exception).

Dn. Robert

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
The Masons are about as much responsible for the current state of world affairs as the Elks Club.

Christian monarchies failed because in the end they weren't very Christian, and one of the primary problems of apostolic Christianity has been its identification if not outright fusion with autocracy, monarchy and absolutism. The Christian monarchies of Europe came crashing down not because of a nefarious mason plot, but because of their own failings; failings that unleashed a bloodbath in Europe and launched us in to the modern world as we know it.

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Dear John the Pilgrim,

Thanks very much for posting the information on the miracle attributed to Blessed Charles of Austria - that is most welcome news!

I would not wish to be a Czech Protestant at any time in history, or at present, nor at any future time I can imagine! The risk of defenestration is ever-present.

Emperor Charles did not fall, he was pushed off his thrones by Lloyd George, Georges Clemenceau, and Woodrow Wilson. Now guess which social and benevolent organization all three of them belonged to? Hint: so did Masaryk! Austria was ready to fight to retain the Emperor, but Charles refused to allow it - his people had suffered more than enough. Hungary nominally did keep the Apostolic King (the same person as the Emperor), even though the Big Three would not allow him in Hungary: Horthy functioned as Regent, first for Charles, then for Otto.

The Empress and Apostolic Queen Zita, God rest her, was indeed a woman who led an outstanding Christian life; the cause for her beatification has already been opened. She spent the last 20 years of her life in a women's monastery in Switzerland, taking it in turns every day to pray for a different country of her crowns - she said that was the one Imperial and Royal duty that no one could deprive her of; no matter what, she could pray. Her funeral in Vienna and Budapest in 1988 was amazing.

The icon of the Righteous Emperor Charles which Bishop Hlib consecrated here on Theophany is now blessing my humble abode, enthroned on the living room wall (we shall be bringing it to church for the major feasts and of course for Pascha). I shall have holy cards printed from it as soon as possible.

It is true that things were much better for both the Orthodox and the Greek-Catholics in Austria than they were in Hungary. St. Maxim Sandovich was killed for political reasons, not religious reasons (anybody who wanted to become Orthodox in Austria could do so - but this meant joining either the Old-Ritualists, or the Autocephalous Church in Bukovina, not the Russian State Church).

Talerhof was horrible - and the Poles bear a significant share of the blame. Nevertheless, Father Titus Myshkovsky, a well-known Galician Russophile in non-political terms, was treated with kid gloves and held in Cisleithania under very light house arrest, and had the good grace to die of natural causes just before World War II.

Anyone who wants a thorough lesson for what happens to those who guess wrong should note how the Soviets treated the Galician Russophiles.

And anyone who thinks that Charles was a baddie should tell me just whom he prefers: Hitler or Stalin?

Even Franz Joseph - he was no Saint, but he was not anxious to repress people or precipitate a blood bath either. What was he supposed to do when his Heir, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, was assassinated, pat the Serbian Ambassador on the head and say "don't mention it!"? We know now that the assassination really was bought and paid for in Serbia.

Beloved and Righteous Emperor Charles, intercede for us!

Fr. Serge

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
Well the Hungarians were VERY independent-minded and the Habsburgs had to fight that for centuries.

Alexis

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
"would you have wanted to be a Czech Protestant in the 17th century for instance?"

I wouldn't want to be Protestant in any place or time! wink

Alexis

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
You certainly wouldn't have in the wake of the Battle of White Mountain when the leaders of those seeking freedom for Bohemia were excecuted and religious toleration there ended; with Protestants either being forcibly converted or driven out. That unfortunately is often how Christian Empire has acted.

One thing this thread did remind me of was Rusyn history

Quote
The sixteenth century began a period of transformation in the socioeconomic and religious life of Carpatho-Rusyns. North of the mountains, Polish landlords expanded their estates into the Lemko Region where the local Rusyn peasant population became enserfed. This meant that landlords steadily acquired control over all aspects of a peasant's life, including the amount of work a peasant family had to perform on the landlord's estate, the amount of taxes a peasant household had to pay, even when and to whom peasants could marry. In order to ensure that these duties were fulfilled, Rusyn peasants were forbidden to leave their property, even temporarily, without the permission of the landlord. In effect, the serf became legally tied to the land.

South of the mountains the Hungarian government also passed laws (1514) that established serfdom in the countryside. Those laws were for some tirne not enforceable, however. This is because Hungary was invaded by the Ottoman Turks, who annihilated the Hungarian army in 1526, and who within a few decades came to control nearly three-quarters of the country. For nearly the next two centuries all that remained of Hungary was a small strip of territory under Habsburg Austria (primarily what is today Slovakia and part of Croatia) and the semi-independent principality of Transylvania (present-day central Romania) in the east. The Catholic Habsburgs spent as much time fighting their rivals for control of Hungary -the Protestant princes of Transylvania- as they did the Ottoman Turks.

Tucked in between Transylvania and Habsburg-controlled Hungary was Carpathian Rus', which for most of the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was ravaged by the contlicts between the military forces of Catholic Austria and Protestant Transylvania. Villages were frequently destroyed by marauding troops and the size of the Rusyn population declined because of flight or death by disease brought in the wake of foreign soldiers. Frustrated with their fate, many Rusyns joined Hungary's independent Transylvanian princes in their struggle against the Habsburgs. For instance, during the last great anti-Habsburg rebellion, the armies of the Transylavanian Hungarian Prince Ferenc II Rakoczi (who was raised in the farnily castle of Mukacevo) was made up largely of Rusyn peasants. Even though Rakoczi was finally defeated in 1711, a Hungarian legend arose about Rusyns and how they proved to be a people most faithful (gens fidelissima) to "their" prince and country. Another result of the defeat of Rakoczi was the full implementation of Austrian Habsburg rule throughout all of Hungary.

For Carpathian Rus' this meant the influx of new Austro-Ger manic landlords, like the Schonborn family, which during the eighteenth century came to control large tracts of land and numerous Rusyn villages. The Carpatho-Rusyn Orthodox church in Hungary was also caught up in the political rivalry between Catholic Austria and Protestant Transylvania. At the same time, Poland's Catholic rulers were becoming increasingly alarmed at the rapid spread of Protestantism within their realm. Faced with such political and religious rivalries, several Orthodox priests and a few bishops, first in Poland and then in Hungary, decided to join the Catholic church and to recognize the authority of the Pope. This was confirmed by agreements reached at the Union of Brest (1595) and the Union of Uzhorod (1646), after which the Uniate church came into being. In the course of the next century, the Orthodox church was banned and all Carpatho-Rusyns became officially Uniate or, as they came to be known after the 1770s, Greek Catholic.

Unlike the Orthodox, the Uniate/Greek Catholics were recognized as a Habsburg state church, and in 1771 received their own independent Greek Catholic eparchy (diocese) of Mukacevo. Financially supported by the Austrian Habsburg authorities, the Greek Catholic church by the late eighteenth century operated elementary schools and academies for seminarians in which the Rusyn and Church Slavonic languages were taught. From these institutions came Greek Catholic clerics (Ioanniky Bazylovyc, Mychal Luckaj), who during the second half of the eighteenth and first half of the nineteenth centuries wrote the first histories of the Carpatho-Rusyns.

http://www.carpatho-rusyn.org/cra/chap4.htm

I believe the situation for the Orthodox, Protestants and Jews in Habsburg lands changed primarily with the edict of Joseph II (probably a Mason himself) granting limited religious freedom.

I would imagine most of the people immigrating here were glad to see both the Habsburgs and the Tsars in their rear view mirrors; where they could live out their faith and lives free from the interference of the state.


Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Quote
Habsburg history goes back much longer than the dual monarchy (would you have wanted to be a Czech Protestant in the 17th century for instance?).

I just assumed that since the Austro-Hungarian Empire was mentioned that the reference was to the Habsburg empire after the Ausgleich. Please forgive me being a stickler, but I am half German-Austrian and I majored in European History in college.

Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,293
Likes: 17
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,293
Likes: 17
"there was even a movement to have him declared "King of Galicia" which he said he would be if a referendum on the subject was ever held and he was wanted as such."

The Emperor and Apostolic King already was King of Galicia:

His Imperial and Royal Apostolic Majesty, Charles the First, by the Grace of God, Emperor of Austria, Apostolic King of Hungary, of this name the Fourth, King of Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, and Galicia, Lodomeria, and Illyria; King of Jerusalem, Archduke of Austria; Grand Duke of Tuscany and Cracow, Duke of Lorraine and of Salzburg, of Styria, of Carinthia, of Carniola and of the Bukovina; Grand Prince of Transylvania; Margrave of Moravia; Duke of Upper and Lower Silesia, of Modena, Parma, Piacenza and Guastalla, of Auschwtiz and Zator, of Teschen, Friuli, Ragusa and Zara; Princely Count of Habsburg and Tyrol, of Kyburg, Gorizia and Gradisca; Prince of Trent and Brixen; Margrave of Upper and Lower Lusatia and in Istria; Count of Hohenems, Feldkirch, Bregenz, Sonnenberg; Lord of Trieste, of Cattaro, and in the Wendish Mark; Grand Voivode of the Voivodship of Serbia.




My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Quote
His Imperial and Royal Apostolic Majesty, Charles the First, by the Grace of God, Emperor of Austria, Apostolic King of Hungary, of this name the Fourth, King of Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, and Galicia, Lodomeria, and Illyria...

Here's a question I have: was the Emperor of Austria ever commemorated in the Divine Liturgy like the Czar was in the Russian Orthodox Church? We Latins retained the commemoration up until the very end (eventhough the title of Holy Roman Emperor had long been dropped, and this was only done by priests celebrating Mass within the Empire).

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Originally Posted by Serge Keleher
Dear John the Pilgrim,

Thanks very much for posting the information on the miracle attributed to Blessed Charles of Austria - that is most welcome news!

I would not wish to be a Czech Protestant at any time in history, or at present, nor at any future time I can imagine! The risk of defenestration is ever-present.

Emperor Charles did not fall, he was pushed off his thrones by Lloyd George, Georges Clemenceau, and Woodrow Wilson. Now guess which social and benevolent organization all three of them belonged to? Hint: so did Masaryk! Austria was ready to fight to retain the Emperor, but Charles refused to allow it - his people had suffered more than enough. Hungary nominally did keep the Apostolic King (the same person as the Emperor), even though the Big Three would not allow him in Hungary: Horthy functioned as Regent, first for Charles, then for Otto.

The Empress and Apostolic Queen Zita, God rest her, was indeed a woman who led an outstanding Christian life; the cause for her beatification has already been opened. She spent the last 20 years of her life in a women's monastery in Switzerland, taking it in turns every day to pray for a different country of her crowns - she said that was the one Imperial and Royal duty that no one could deprive her of; no matter what, she could pray. Her funeral in Vienna and Budapest in 1988 was amazing.

The icon of the Righteous Emperor Charles which Bishop Hlib consecrated here on Theophany is now blessing my humble abode, enthroned on the living room wall (we shall be bringing it to church for the major feasts and of course for Pascha). I shall have holy cards printed from it as soon as possible.

It is true that things were much better for both the Orthodox and the Greek-Catholics in Austria than they were in Hungary. St. Maxim Sandovich was killed for political reasons, not religious reasons (anybody who wanted to become Orthodox in Austria could do so - but this meant joining either the Old-Ritualists, or the Autocephalous Church in Bukovina, not the Russian State Church).

Talerhof was horrible - and the Poles bear a significant share of the blame. Nevertheless, Father Titus Myshkovsky, a well-known Galician Russophile in non-political terms, was treated with kid gloves and held in Cisleithania under very light house arrest, and had the good grace to die of natural causes just before World War II.

Anyone who wants a thorough lesson for what happens to those who guess wrong should note how the Soviets treated the Galician Russophiles.

And anyone who thinks that Charles was a baddie should tell me just whom he prefers: Hitler or Stalin?

Even Franz Joseph - he was no Saint, but he was not anxious to repress people or precipitate a blood bath either. What was he supposed to do when his Heir, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, was assassinated, pat the Serbian Ambassador on the head and say "don't mention it!"? We know now that the assassination really was bought and paid for in Serbia.

Beloved and Righteous Emperor Charles, intercede for us!

Fr. Serge

Amen! Amen! Amen!
Dn. Robert

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Originally Posted by Serge Keleher
Hungary nominally did keep the Apostolic King (the same person as the Emperor), even though the Big Three would not allow him in Hungary: Horthy functioned as Regent, first for Charles, then for Otto.
Fr. Serge

This reminds me of the "Eastern European History" course which I took in college (many moons ago!). The professor was Hungarian-Jewish, having been a 1956 refugee to the U.S. He was a Hungarian patriot, and fiercely anti-Bolshevik (at Rutgers University-which also had it's share of Soviet sympathizers amongst the academics-Lenin would have referred to them as "useful idiots"). In discussing the aforementioned time period in Hungary, he said that it was commented by many that Hungary was a "kingdom without a king, being ruled by an admiral without a navy!"

Dn. Robert

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Given a choice of chancellor, first citizen, tsar or emperor I would take none of the above. Rule by force is as illegitimate as rule by chance of genetic inheritance.

The Habsburgs may have indeed have run a "kinder, gentler" empire in Eastern Europe than say those of France or Britain with their overseas possessions. Ultimately however it was built on the same principles though - superiority of a type of culture (Germanic) and mission to "civilize" others. These ideas were used as justification for maintaining rule over subject peoples and engaging in their economic exploitation. Empires exist as kleptocracies, and the empire of the Habsburgs was no different.

None of this impugns the personal sanctity or character of Karl I, but it remains a fact he sat as the head of a system that shouldn't have existed, and that it is good that this system is gone and will never return.

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 40
K
Member
Offline
Member
K
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by AMM
Given a choice of chancellor, first citizen, tsar or emperor I would take none of the above. Rule by force is as illegitimate as rule by chance of genetic inheritance.

The Habsburgs may have indeed have run a "kinder, gentler" empire in Eastern Europe than say those of France or Britain with their overseas possessions. Ultimately however it was built on the same principles though - superiority of a type of culture (Germanic) and mission to "civilize" others. These ideas were used as justification for maintaining rule over subject peoples and engaging in their economic exploitation. Empires exist as kleptocracies, and the empire of the Habsburgs was no different.

None of this impugns the personal sanctity or character of Karl I, but it remains a fact he sat as the head of a system that shouldn't have existed, and that it is good that this system is gone and will never return.

No offense, I find your logic flawed. It was the United States of America that commited genocide against the natives of North America, and it was the USA and her Anglo-Saxon defacto noility that ruled her during the late 19th century and created an empire (Spanish-American War, Indian Wars, annexation of Hawaii etc). Dose that make the current United States evil and unfit for existence?

The Austro-Hungarian was pretty different compared to Austrian Empire since the revolutions and wars that took place mid 19th century. By World War 1 is was pretty much a social democracy. I suggest you read Mien Kampf, Adolf Hitler makes it pretty clear that the Austrian-Hungarain Empire was hardly Germanic in any sence and far too tolerating of those "Slavs", he actually called it in several parts the "Slavic Empire".

Last edited by Kahless; 02/07/08 04:48 PM.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Offline
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
I have stated above that I am a "Christian Monarchist". That is my personal preference. However, as a Catholic, I have no problem sharing the same attitude as my Church toward the question of "form" of government. Officially, the Church blesses no "form" of Government (a historical fact-the City of Siena, Italy, during the Middle Ages, was a Catholic Nation-State, governed by a Representative Republic-the Church had no problem with that) but desires that governments obey the Natural Law, and, ideally, the principles laid down in Scripture and the Teachings of the Church (which is the essence of "Catholic Social Teaching"). No government on the face of the Earth, since time began, has ever been perfect, and that includes Tsarist Russia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and all other "Christian Monarchies". However, by comparison, the time period after the destruction of the "Old Order" (i.e. the system of Christian Monarchies) has been much bloodier and more horrific (under German National Socialism, i.e., Nazism, and Bolshevism-the latter being responsible for the cold-blooded murder of hundreds of millions of innocent human beings-when China is included), than at any time in history. If your choice is between Franz Josef and "Uncle Joe" Stalin, the choice should be a "no-brainer".

Dn. Robert

Last edited by Jessup B.C. Deacon; 02/07/08 04:39 PM.
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Quote
No offense, I find your logic flawed. It was the United States of America that commited genocide against the natives of North America, and it was the USA and her Anglo-Saxon defacto noility that ruled her during the late 19th century and created an empire (Spanish-American War, Indian Wars, annexation of Hawaii etc). Dose that make the current United States evil and unfit for existence?

I would certainly make the argument that the current process of American Empire building beginning with the coup d'etat and illegal annexation of Hawaii is really a turning away from our principles and a process that should be ended.

No political grouping of humans is going to be without some form of ill or evils (if you consider the point of government to be utilitarian and not utopian in nature anyway). The distinction in the example you gave is this. The republic we live in was founded on good principles with people's best interest in mind. That there have been deviations from these principles (even from the start), does not make the principles and visions of the republic illegitimate. Abuses don't mean we shouldn't exist, it means we need to stick our principles. When we simply renounce our principles, then we should cease to exist as a nation.

The Habsburg Empire was built on principles that were wrong - direct rule of others against their will, political authority derived from the randomness of genetics, etc. That is why there was no reason for their existence. I suppose you could say if it was the will of the Austrians to keep a constitutional monarchy for themselves, there is no harm in that. To that I would agree, but I would say the celebration and maintenance of monarchy perpetuates an ideal of social stratification that is not Christian at its core.

Quote
I suggest you read Mien Kampf, Adolf Hitler makes it pretty clear that the Austrian-Hungarain Empire was hardly Germanic in any sence and far too tolerating of those "Slavs", he actually called it in several parts the "Slavic Empire".

Consider the source and reasoning.

Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,293
Likes: 17
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,293
Likes: 17
Quote
Here's a question I have: was the Emperor of Austria ever commemorated in the Divine Liturgy like the Czar was in the Russian Orthodox Church?


The petition for civil authorities can be taken:

"For our divinely-protected Emperor N. (or King N.)...

in countries with an Emperor or King. This petition occurs in the Liturgicon so I would assume Greek Catholics of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire commemorated the Emperor as cited above.

Fr. Deacon Lance


My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 2
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 2
Quote
I would not wish to be a Czech Protestant at any time in history, or at present, nor at any future time I can imagine! The risk of defenestration is ever-present.

Well, Father, you just have to "bounce back" from such things smile

hawk

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Bless Father Archimandrite!

PLEASE let us know when those icon cards of Blessed Charles will be ready for purchase!

You promise?!

Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,

(And thank you for the information on the Cause of the Holy Empress Zita!!)

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear Esteemed Father Deacon!

Here is our website:

www.monarchist.ca [monarchist.ca]

Bowing low to you,

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear AMM,

Well, it should return in a constitutional monarchical framework and we Royalists pray that it will!! smile

And we monarchists believe that you republicans can sometimes be rather idealistic about your own system of government which can be dictatorial in a more subtle manner . . .

Having come from a left-wing sociological tradition, I am all for . . . CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY!!

Have a great day, sir! smile

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear AMM,

And the last time I checked the Divine Liturgy (including the RDL wink ), it read "Blessed is the KINGDOM . . . "

No reference to republics at all!

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Bravo, Father Archimandrite, Bravo!! smile

(It's a good thing the Administrator moved this thread here - monarchists can be such boisterous people!)

God save all the Kings and Queens!

Alex

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674
What is the best biography of the blessed Karl?

Nick

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
And we monarchists believe that you republicans can sometimes be rather idealistic about your own system of government which can be dictatorial in a more subtle manner . . .

All systems are prone to excess, abuse and misuse. That's just a fact of life. I'm hopeful at some point we wake up and realize that our own empire building needs to end. Maybe we should just all be like the Swiss (since I'm 1/4 Swiss myself). Of course they gave us chocolate and clocks and not Haydn and Mozart...

Whether one is a monarchist or a republican however pales in comparison to the all important topic of whether one is Yankees or a Red Sox fan.

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Biography: I've not yet had the opportunity to read it, but I'm told that Bogle's A Heart for Europe is a good English-language biography of the Righteous Emperor Charles.

Fr. Serge

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear AMM,

Excellent points!

Personally, I believe constitutional monarchies provide a more adequate framework for that kind of reflection . . .

Alex

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Quote
The republic we live in was founded on good principles with people's best interest in mind. That there have been deviations from these principles (even from the start), does not make the principles and visions of the republic illegitimate.

NO system is perfect. Perfection will only be found in heaven.

Quote
The Habsburg Empire was built on principles that were wrong - direct rule of others against their will, political authority derived from the randomness of genetics, etc. That is why there was no reason for their existence.

Umm... correction. A majority of the people in the Austro-Hungarian Empire (and again I mean after the Ausgleich) were quite happy under the monarchy (with some notable exceptions). The Ruthenians and Poles were happy to be under Austrian rule, lest the Russians come and dominate them; many of the Hungarians were happy to be under the Habsburgs as this provided some stability and an 'impartial' ruler to keep the bickering nobles in check; the Muslim Bosnians were happy to have the Serbs off of their back; and the Jews who were allowed more freedom than any other place in Central or Eastern Europe save Germany. The groups who were dissatisfied were as follows: the Czechs, who wanted independence; the Romanians in Transylvania (though they made up only half of the population at the time, the rest being Saxon, Hungarian, and Romany i.e. Gypsy); the Croats, who felt humiliated by the Hungarians and would rather have been in the Austrian half of the Empire; and the Serbs of Bosnia who had been annexed.

It is very telling that most (but not all) of these ethnic groups did not seek independence until it was absolutely clear that the Habsburg monarchy would be no more.

Last edited by Byzantophile; 02/08/08 08:10 PM.
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear Byzantophile,

Well stated!

AMM is an extremely erudite and intelligent person.

But we do feel that monarchy is western civilization's, well, "crowning achievement . . ."

A good weekend to you!

Alex

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
I guess the risk is for every Karl I, you may get a Joseph II.

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 476
Quote
I guess the risk is for every Karl I, you may get a Joseph II.

Haha! Good point, but I suppose that's all how one looks at Joseph II. The most 'Enlightened' Habsuburg on one hand; or a whimsical, Masonic-influenced emperor who was no friend to the Church on the other. I've always seen him as the latter.

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Republican governments have a way of degenerating into the organized impudence of the bureaucrats. A constitutional monarchy represents at least an effort to avoid Scylla and Charybdis, so to speak.

Will the Hapburgs be restored? Heavens, I don't know. But as the Archduke Otto often remarks, history knows of many instances of republics being succeeded by monarchies and vice versa, so I wouldn't exclude the possibility. As the Soviet Empire was self-destructing, the last Communist regime in Hungary offered to restore Otto to the Hungarian throne. His Imperial and Royal Highness had the good sense to refuse, saying that he could not owe the throne to any one political party and he would only accept a restoration on the basis of a well-monitored referendum with a good two-thirds vote in favor.

Archduke Otto, incidentally, has a sign displayed on his office door. It reads: "If you have nothing to do, please don't do it here"!

Fr. Serge

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

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