www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News NAME FOR UKRAINAIN CHURCH

One can but hope and pray. I've found some prayers for clergy, but I feel they aren't quite strong enough. I personally have next to zero creativity - would any of our more eloquent types consider composing a prayer for the granting of strong backbones for our hierarchs? I was originally going to suggest a different feature of anatomy, but some might consider it rude

Andrij

Almost forgot...

TO all our sister Catholic Churches: don't think of the slap as a violent blow, but a "wake up call"

Andrij

I don't know what's gotten in to me today.

Dear Andriju:

You and me both. Maybe a week of eating meat to our hearts' content does some wierd physiological thing or ... whatever, I'll stop.

Yours,

kl

Dear KL,

Well, it seemed to me that what you were saying about Fr. Prof Chirovsky strongly suggested that we somehow needed to seek "communion" with Rome and Constantinople at the same time etc.

That smacked of servility to me.

Not that Ukie Catholics aren't already servile!

As for the backbone bit, there is a story about the former communist president of Ukraine falling down and hurting his backbone.

An assistant ran into his physician's office, shouting to him to come and treat his patient, the president, who just hurt his backbone . . .

The physician replied, "Impossible! I've known comrade president for years - and I know he has no backbone!"

Alex

KL, that was well said.

Maybe with all of this meat eating (I really enjoyed meat today ) we are all starting to get some of that ol' Rurik fighting spirit back That wake-up slap is exactly what is needed.

The idea of dual communion with Kyiv and Constantinople was a common current throughout the Kyivan Church up through the Union of Brest. The Melkites will undoubtedly accept the Kyivan Patriarchate once it is proclaimed. At least this is what Patriarch Gregory has told some privately including Father Serge Keleher.

We need to decide ecclesiastically what is best for our church and act on it. I definitely agree with Fr. Andrij Chirovsky. Our Kyivan ancestors understood the nature of dual communion while retaining a very unique spiritual, liturgical, and ecclesiastical identity.

We should simply proclaim the Patriarchate as an act of the Synod of the Kyivan Church (did we decide what we are going to call ourselves?), notify Old and New Rome of the results and proclaim communion. If they or any sister churches refuse communion, so be it. I do not think with the current pontiff Old Rome will refuse. And if Old Rome accepts, all of those sui juris churches such as the Ruthenian who are directly dependent on Old Rome will surely follow.

As far as the Third Rome goes, no matter what happens if any kind of Kyivan autocephaly is involved Moscow will defintely oppose it if she can't control Kyiv. The Third Rome will have to take the ball home because no one wants to play by his rules. At some point the diplomacy has to give way to taking care of the spiritual needs of the people.

I'm with you kl, back to the future! But all of this is unfortunately not quite reality. There are still some vocal segments of the UGCC who are latinized and unsupportive of anything gained without getting it from Rome on bended knees...

Father Mark said:
I often, sometimes daily, feel like we are backed against the wall with our ecclesial identity. You are very right, Father Mark. With regard to the Old Believers who entered into communion with the UGCC such as Sts. Patapy Emelianov and Eustachy Susalev, Metropolitan Sheptytsky was far more accomodating and sympathetic to them and their Old Believer congregations than was the Muscovite hierarchy.

CHRIST IS RISEN !!!



But who should be invited to the Synod of the Kyivan (as opposed to Ukrainian) Church? Would we invite Metropolitan Basil Schott and companions? Would we invite Metr. Nicholas of the Johnstown Diocese? (I would) Would they show up if invited?



Kyiv is the legitimate Third Rome. Moscow is just a cultural and ecclesial usurper. :p But we don't want to control them, we'll just trade recognition of Patriarchates.

David B's objections to being called "Ukrainian" points out the problem of a name which identifies a nationality. But what if Metr. Basil & Company are called upon to decide whether to become part of a Patriarchate of Kyiv, or remain independent, under Roman appointment processes? How will the Byzantine Catholic Church in America decide? Or will they declare a Pariarchate of Pittsburgh?

Multicultural Cathodox Church, Patriarchate of Parma, anyone?

Parma must be a very Holy city, I believe it has four Cathedrals. That's probably as many as anywhere. To avoid reinforcing nationalistic impulses, we can build a new one for our new Patriarchate!

John
Pilgrim and Odd Duck

Ok so we have this 80+ post thread discussing ideas for our Patriarchate of Parma, Kyiv, L'viv, Halych, Yaremche, Poltava, Kubanshchyna, Odesa, and All Rus-Ukraine :p

We have all of theese good ideas that we would like to see realized in our church, but will these ideas just stay to this forum? I doubt any of our hierarchy is reading this so lets take our ideas to our respective Eparchs. If they don't listen or seem to care, then go to your respective Metropolitan, or just call Patriarch Lubomyr

What I am trying to say is that we have all of these great ideas, but will they ever leave the forum. I say they should.

-ukrainiancatholic

Dear UC,

Since the Pope has full control over our episcopal appointments, perhaps the idea that we can even dream of having a patriarchate should leave this forum.

How about "Ukrainian Roman Catholic Church of the Byzantine Rite" for a new name for us?

Alex

Alex,
Getting a bit testy? :p

I thought Rome just rubber stamped who the Synod of Bishops appoints and then procalims it.


David

Dear David,

I pray the Vatican never runs out of rubber stamps then!

As for a name for our Church, given the state it is in, how about leaving the acronym "UGCC?"

It could stand for: Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Cardinalate.

At least the "Cardinal" thing is something Rome recognizes.

I wish someone in Lviv would explain what all this stuff about papal approval is about.

Does your Melkite Church need papal approval for its bishops?

Alex

I can live with any name your church chooses as long as it doesn't expect other churches to join it.

As for the Melkites, don't forget that I am just a visitor there, I am a Byzantine Catholic (yes I know, Ruthenian).

There is only one eparchy in the States for the Melkites, I don't understand why, should be more I think. I think there is only one eparchy in Canada also. I believe that it has been awhile since they have had to appoint a bishop, we will have to wait and see.


David

Dear Alex:

I may be wrong but as far as I understand, the reason Rome appoints bishops is that the Ukrainian Church is technically not a formal Patriarchate.

When it achieves full canononical recognition then Rome will treat it the way it treats other Patriarchal churches and just offer recognition of episcopal elections.

Rome sees the Ukrainian Church as being under their Western Patriarchate, recognition will be like granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church.

According to Patriarch Husar (who is also Cardinal Priest of the Church of St. Sophia of Rome, amongst other titles) when he was here this past winter, the decision to recognize the Patriarchate has already been made and only waits for the proper ecumenical timing.

The Russians as you may know are not in favour of a Greek-Catholic Patriarchate but I am sure they have already been notified by Rome.

Could I be wrong?


defreitas

Dear Jose,

The issue of Rome's involvement in our Church goes back to Pat. Slipyj, as you know.

The fact is that the UGCC is a Major Archbishopric that, by Rome's standards, is EQUAL to a Patriarchate in more ways than one.

And if Rome is getting ready to formally recognize a Patriarchate for the UGCC, then is this how it is recognizing the Particularity of a Church that, by its own admission, has always been a Major Archbishopric and therefore equal to the powers and dignity of a Patriarchate?

Or is this simply a subtle way Rome has of saying to the UGCC "Forget it?"

And how long do we wait for Rome's acknowledgement before we can interpret "Silence" for "Unwillingness?"

Alex

Rome doesn't have the courage to say "Forget it".
That's why they keep coming up with excuses and continue delaying the so called "official recognition". What I feel is something like, Rome isn't against us but then again they aren't with us.
There will be a time and day when Rome will run out of exuses and I feel that, that day is drawing near.
Lauro

Is it that Rome is reluctant to recognize any other Patriarchate besides the original Pentarchy? Were the national ethnic Churches an innovation "outside the tradition", as some Monks in Athos would say?