The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Colleen Ev, That latin friend, Deacon Eric, Pastor Freed, Sebastian
5,837 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 members (1 invisible), 67 guests, and 25 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
Topics35,155
Posts414,847
Members5,837
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,707
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,707
Quote
Originally posted by CaelumJR:
He hands out canonizations like the Clintons hand out last-minute presidential pardons!

Oops - I broke my Lenten fast and brought up politics!

A thousand pardons...
ROFL biggrin So true. There have been so many canonizations in recent times, they have lost a lot of their significance - assuming one could even keep up with all of them. biggrin

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 36
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 36
There's something very pertinent about Metropolitan Andrew's cause that I thought I'd share here. At the first annual Saints Cyril and Methodius Lecture in Pittsburgh on 8 May 2001, the guest speaker Fr. Bob Taft was asked why Metropolitan Andrew had not yet been beatified. Here is his reply:

"To the problem of why Andrij Sheptytsky has not yet been beatified is because the person who is in charge of preparing the dossier to bring this forward didn't do his work. And I could mention his name and give you his address if you want but I won't do it here. And since he's a member of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, they have nobody to blame but themselves. First answer.

Andrij Sheptytsky certainly is deserving of beatification and will be beatified and is not being beatified now during the Pope's visit to Ukraine towards the last week of June because the preparations of the beatifications were a rush job. And the reason for the rush job is that, even though my schedule fills up two years ahead, the Pope can announce something three months ahead and the whole world jumps, if I don't arrange my life two years' ahead the whole world doesn't jump. So they had to prepare in considerable haste and people were working very hard to prepare these reports and the way they managed to get the number of beatifications, some 24 or 25 I think, was that the congregation in Rome that moves these cases forward agreed to the proposal that all of these people would be listed as martyrs. That was a very interesting decision because very generally speaking a martyr has been determned by the fact that somebody is actually killed in other words, killed for the faith. Whereas many of these people that have been designated as martyrs were not actually executed so to speak but because of their sufferings and imprisonment, a type of imprisonment in the Soviet gulag which was clearly designed to wipe them out even though they weren't actually executed, they did die but they died from their sufferings, sufferings that were imposed upon them unjustly. So those people have been declared all to be martyrs and it's much easier to push a martyr through than it is someone who is going to be beatified exclusively on the basis of his virtue. So, that's the reality.

Sheptytsky, I think, would be beatified already had the papers been prepared but they weren't prepared and that's not Rome's fault. Secondly, the others were moved through quickly because the Vatican congregation agreed that they could all be designated as martyrs. Thirdly, I think that the independent Eastern Catholic Churches, that is say those that have patriarchal level of jurisdiction should do their own beatifications, if you want to know my point of view."

Needless to say, his third point was greeted with much applause.

Fr. Matthew

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Come now, the truth hurts!

I hope that it was just inadvertence on the part of those UGCC promoters (or of the unnamed UGCC postulator) and not otherwise!

Amado

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Amado,

Yes, we Ukies are so used to being told that everything (no saint Andrew, no patriarchate, no this, no that) is all our fault that, after a while, some of us begin to actually believe it.

For your information, a Ukrainian scholar recently wrote a nasty letter about the Pope to our local Catholic paper - and I wrote back defending His Holiness - my letter will be published in the next issue.

(Not that that will get me any brownie points with the Vatican , mind you!)

Alex

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Although the comments of Charles and Gordo above are probably meant to be in jest, it smacks of their ignorance, actual or feigned, of the canonization processes adhered to by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints.

The Pope's proclamation is just the culmination of a long and tedious process, commencing from the work of the postulator.

This is where the UGCC postulator miserably failed in Met. Andrew's cause.

Amado

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,707
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,707
Quote
Originally posted by Amadeus:
Although the comments of Charles and Gordo above are probably meant to be in jest, it smacks of their ignorance, actual or feigned, of the canonization processes adhered to by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints.

The Pope's proclamation is just the culmination of a long and tedious process, commencing from the work of the postulator.

This is where the UGCC postulator miserably failed in Met. Andrew's cause.

Amado
We were kidding of course, but that "long and tedious process, commencing from the work of the postulator," is not anywhere near as long and tedious as it once was. The whole process has been streamlined considerably - some would say too streamlined.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Charles:

Good, if you accept that the current process is not as long and tedious as before, and it is now "streamlined," i.e., "simpler," how in the world did the UGCC postulator "missed" it?

Or, does the UGCC even know what a postulator is? Or, because it is steeped so much in Latinisms that the UGCC simply cannot proceed with Met. Andrew's cause?

It is clear that the non-declaration of sainthood or, at least, the non-beatification, of Met. Andrew is not Rome's fault.

Of course, some UGCC particularists have tended to do their own way.

Amado

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,707
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,707
It was implied in another post that the postulator did not do the necessary paperwork. Even with the streamlined process, the necessary paperwork has to be done. It sounds like someone dropped the ball on this. I am not familiar with the UGCC, so I don't know what their motives are. I do know from doing 4 years of paperwork to help some Latin Trads get an approved mass in this RC diocese, that once you start a process, you had better be determined to see it through to completion.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Charles:

Thanks for clarifying your position on the matter.

Amado

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Amado,

Actually, I really do think that we can make too much of the "long and tedious" whatever.

When the review of the lives of the New Martyrs of Ukraine, Russia and Ruthenia was completed at the Eparchial level, His Holiness simply waived the need to send the information to Rome and approved their beatification (his trip there was coming up quickly).

There is a controversy surrounding Met. Andrew that those on the outside might not be familiar with (yes, I mean you wink ).

That was the conflict between the Ukies and the Poles - and also with the Russian Orthodox.

There have been at least two works (and there could be more) published in Polish against Met. Andrew. He is not held in esteem by the Poles, but is considered something of a traitor to Poland and more "political than holy."

There were even demonstrations of Polish students in Lviv against him in front of his residence on St George's Hill (St George being the patron of Lviv as well). They decried him, with the Metropolitan within earshot, and shouted, "Pan Sheptitski na lyatarnyu!" (or a call for him to be hanged).

He doesn't fair much better with the Russian Orthodox either (Met. Andrew was arrested and imprisoned after the Russian Tsarist forces entered Galicia and he publicly urged EC's not to join the Orthodox Church which he said was a "government church." This was reported by the Russophile "Subcarpathian Rus'" the next day and Met. Andrew was placed under arrest).

So Fr. Taft, great Byzantine Jesuit that he is, may also not be willing to consider this other side of the issue.

I also once read on EWTN news a report that Poland's bishops suggested to the Pope that now is not the time for the beatification of Met. Andrew for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with clerical lateness and disorganization. (I know I read it, but I didn't keep a copy of it).

However, there have been other saints that have had controversy surrounding them, such as St Sarkander et al. but this didn't seem to hurt their chances for the altar.

Alex

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Dear Alex:

Thank you for your candor!

Amado

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
Quote
Originally posted by Orthodox Catholic:

He doesn't fair much better with the Russian Orthodox either (Met. Andrew was arrested and imprisoned after the Russian Tsarist forces entered Galicia and he publicly urged EC's not to join the Orthodox Church which he said was a "government church." This was reported by the Russophile "Subcarpathian Rus'" the next day and Met. Andrew was placed under arrest).
That famous sermon in Dormition church certainly
wasn't the only reason for Metropolitan's inprisonment. Russians found some papers hidden
in the basement of St. George Palace. A copy
of Metropolitan's memorandum on "what the Central Powers are to do with Ukraine" was among them.

Sincerely,
deacon Peter

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 348
Quote
Originally posted by Orthodox Catholic:

That "Shymansky" was my wife's direct ancestor . . . smile
How? He was a celibate and had no children...
Did a miracle occur? wink

Sincerely,
deacon Peter

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Father Deacon Peter,

Yes, I'm sure he was spying for them too! smile

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Father Deacon,

The relatives, I meant to say.

I am related to Met. Sheptytsky, but, as you know, he didn't have any children either!

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