www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Ukrainian and Byzantine

If someone would like to start a parish wherein all the services were celebrated in Spanish and they had beans and rice at the social afterwards they are more than welcome to do so but have enough respect for my culture to not impose it on me. I certainly am not doing it to you.

Dear Jason. I suppose this must be just an example. In fact the number of Hispanic Eastern Christians is less than the 0.5%.

I believe it is very important to respect the Byzantine character of the liturgies, and the Orthodox tradition in its fullness. In this case, the Orthodox Churches seem more open to these faithful, the OCA has parishes were the liturgy is served in mexican language sometimes, but always respecting the majority in the parish.

The idea that culture can make you a better Orthodox, or that the Latin Church is called to sereve westerners and the Eastern one only Easterners is not real at all. I recall the example of some Americans who become Orthodox and start eating Borsh, mititeyi and Russian foods, and wearing long beards thinking that they'll get more Orthodox that way.

I would say that the big advantage of having a liturgical language such as Greek or Church Slavonic is that they aren't either Ukrainian or Arabic (living ethnic languages), and that the parishes can mix them with a bit of vernacular (English, Spanish, Ukrainian, Arabic or whatever).

Subdeacon Peter & Bro Alex,

Thank you both and forgive me for not responding earlier but I was out of town, and I will look more into Alex's suggestion.

Pokoj,
james

Dear Friends,

I think this is a great discussion!

The fact is that Churches have ALWAYS reflected the cultural characteristics of the communities in which they have grown up and continue to serve.

The UGCC is no exception!

The Acts of the Apostles shows two different ritual Churches already arising - one for the Jewish Christians and the other for the Hellenes.

In the East especially the various Orthodox Churches became "incarnate" in the national/cultural communities in which they existed and became, over periods of oppression, truly great defenders of their peoples - their language, culture and even their survival - the Turkish Yoke, the Soviet Yoke etc.

That's just the way things are!

And we cannot go about measuring things using a North American assimilationist yardstick.

That there should be an English Orthodox/Eastern Catholic Church here - of this there can be no doubt.

But this has nothing to do with me or Jason or Diak or Lauro or any other Ukie here - the fact remains that the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church is simply there and here and isn't about to lose its jurisdictional boundaries. The Administrator is free to try and convince them.

But he will fail in this regard, nomatter how much he contends that if the UGCC doesn't follow his futuristic vision of a North American Byzantine Catholic Church, it is not living up to the Gospel!

That's the impression I get from the Administrator's voluminous jottings here!

In terms of converts, well my English language only friends, the UGCC takes a back-seat to no one.

We have English liturgies and English-language parishes.

My parish even has an English language Anchorite who was tonsured in our parish in English in the middle of a Ukrainian-language liturgy.

She was a former Protestant who came to us from an RC monastic order. Our parishioners welcomed her with open arms and she has felt at home with us ever since. We support her as our very own anchorite.

Do you guys south of the border where everyone seems to lose the power to speak in a language other than English have one of these?

I think that's a pretty good indication of our outreach potential.

We don't only attract mixed marriages either.

My priestly friend in ST Catharines, Ontario tells me that half of his parishioners are RC's who have LEARNED the Ukrainian language liturgy.

And they WANT to sing it in Ukrainian - he's told them he'll bring in an English language liturgy, but they told him, "No, Father!"

I respect our Administrator's sincere (if misguided and pastorally insensitive ) desires to have one Byzantine Catholic jurisdiction.

I reject completely his unwarranted insinuations that to do otherwise is to sin against the Gospel, brotherly love etc.

He should go tell that to the Eastern Churches.

And he should tell it to the Pope himself who has set an example in terms of promoting "national Churches" that reflect national cultures.

The Pope is a strong Polish nationalist and son of the Polish Catholic Church.

The Administator's desire here is simply, therefore, an attempt to impose the American melting pot on the Eastern Churches, much as he will oppose that view.

Let us have English language liturgies and even an English language Byzantine jurisdiction.

But leave the existing national Churches, Orthodox and Catholic, to do what they've always done best.

And these ARE witnessing to Christ in the Eastern tradition. AND they are attracting converts.

I can give you lots of information about our converts.

And about converts who ultimately went to the OCA and the ROCOR through us.

I'm really surprised that thre are those who think that converts can't cross language barriers.

The Holy Spirit was doing that long ago . . . at Pentecost especially .

So, I have two questions for the Administrator, if he is still talking to me .

1) You speak of "preaching the Gospel" by our churches - Sir, what of the fact that the Eastern Catholics in this country CANNOT make converts to their own churches, but only to the Latin Church?
Shouldn't you be going after Rome before you come after the "ethnic" churches?

2) To what extent does our Eastern "obsession" with rites, rituals, vestments, liturgical rubrics et al. affect our ability to "preach the Gospel," as the charge is often laid at our feet? Aren't we already focused on the spiritual culture of Byzantium, let alone the later modern cultures, to get into preaching the Gospel? Where do our English language churches "preach the Gospel?"

Respectfully if emotionally submitted,

Alex

Alex,

Thanks for the post.

The point I think you are missing is that we are responsible to establish a Byzantine Church in North America just like the Greeks established a Byzantine Church in the Slavic lands. As I have stated numerous times, I applaud those who hold strong ethnicities and wish to retain them. I only ask that they make room in their parishes for others � North Americans � to place their ethnic gifts upon the altar (side by side, not over or under). For some reason many people conveniently forget that while the Greeks presented the Christian Faith to the Slavs within the context of the Greek culture they did not insist that the Slavs adopt Greek culture in order to become Christians. The Slavs then took the Faith and matured into the Kievan Church. We need to follow their example and present Christ to North America and allow those who see Christ in our Churches to join us without having to also accept our particular ethnicities. Just as the Slavs developed the Kievan Christian experience so we must follow the example of the Greeks to help North America develop a Christian Experience that is neither Greek nor Slav but one that intermeshes with the North American culture and is at home in it. Why is a reminder of this responsibility is such a threat to those wishing to preserve ethnicity?

You are correct that most people with strong ethnic identities reject my position. The fact that they do is why our respective Churches have lost 80% of their people since the 1950�s and why we will close more than half our parishes in the next 10-20 years. I am horrified that people prefer to choose to maintain ethnically pure parishes instead of sharing them with others. Canada is, of course, a bit different in that the emigration from Europe is more recent and larger. Nevertheless, your Church does have the same responsibility to make disciples of all Canadians.

With all due respect, being open to others doesn�t mean just having English language liturgies. It also means allowing people of other ethnic identities to be on an equal footing with the majority of ethnic folk in the parish. It also doesn�t mean offering the Slavic or Arab languages and culture as part and parcel of the Christian Faith. Your example of people in St. Catherines wishing to learn the Ukrainian language is an example of people feeling the need to adopt a Ukrainian identity in order to become Byzantine/Greek Catholic. Or, possibly since you mentioned that they are mostly Roman Catholics, it could be that they see the language as an equivalent to Latin (i.e., an acceptable liturgical language).

Is it pastorally insensitive to ask the various ethnic Churches to work towards forming one ecclesial jurisdiction in order to evangelize? No, it is not. It is well within the example of our Byzantine Church. What is pastorally insensitive is to allow a Church to continue on a course in which it will soon cease to exist instead evangelizing all peoples. What is pastorally insensitive is to allow people to believe that Byzantine Christianity belongs only to Slavs and Arabs and is not something the average North American should embrace.

Alex�s post of Pope John Paul II�s comment about promoting national Churches is a wonderful example. Our responsibility as Byzantine Christians is to establish a similar national Church here in North America, one that reflects the North American culture. Since North America is an amalgamation of many cultures this means creating a North American national Church that places all cultures on an equal footing. Now, some claim that they have no responsibility to do this because they are content in their Ruthenian or Ukrainian or Melkite parish. Others may feel that this is an imposed melting pot. Both are wrong. God led our ancestors to North America for a purpose. We � the current generation of Byzantine Christians � are charged with the Gospel responsibility of evangelizing all the peoples of North America and converting them to the Byzantine Catholic Faith. Who will create a Byzantine Church for all North Americans if we refuse to evangelize?

People should not be forced to learn Church Slavonic, Ukrainian or Arabic in order to become Christians and members of our parishes. SS Cyril & Methodius presented the Gospel to the Slavs in a language the Slavs could understand. Cyril even created an alphabet to assist in proclaiming the Gospel. How can we say that our mission to North America is anything less? How can we say that our tradition is to demand converts to learn a language and a culture other than the one they know?

Eastern Catholics can certainly bring converts directly into the Church. I�ve seen it done numerous times. Yes, sadly there are still some canons that still favor the Latin Church in certain situations but these canons should not be used as an excuse not to evangelize. One can work to change the canons while evangelizing. And, more importantly, reminding Byzantine Catholics that they have an obligation to share the Good News with all of North America and welcome all peoples is hardly going after the ethnic Churches.

Rites, rituals, vestments, liturgical rubrics, liturgical chant and etc. are all part of our Byzantine Christian experience. They affect our ability to witness the Gospel only when they become more important to us than the Gospel. You are right that this is a matter of focus. I submit, however, that our focus must not primarily be on the spiritual culture of Byzantium. It must always remain on Jesus Christ. It is my experience that the majority of �our people� do understand this in their hearts. Many seem to only lack the skills to place the confession of Christ on their lips and share it with others. Sadly, many have come to believe that Byzantine Christianity is only for ethnics and are fearful of sharing their experience of Christ with others.

Where do our English language churches "preach the Gospel?" It depends. A parish can celebrate all of the Divine Services in English and still be closed to outsiders. Some parishes are called to go door to door to invite people into the Church. Others are called to help the needy. All are called to right worship and true hospitality.

Our Byzantine Catholic Faith is a wonderful lamp that deserves to be placed on a lampstand that everyone in North America can see. We need to invite all of our neighbors to receive that Light, to take it home with them and to make it their own.

Admin

Dear Amado:

From what I understand, the word "Pope" simply means "Father." We indeed view His Beatutide Lubomyr is indeed the current Father of the Kyivan Church. He is our Patriarch and, as far as I'm concerned, the jurisdictional "buck" stops with His Beatitide with regards thereto.

I used the word conclave purposely. It suggests a closed, super-secret society to which no outsider may enter.

Yours,

kl

Dear Administrator,

I don't disagree that there should be an English language witness in North America.

There should be an English, North American Church.

I just don't see that our various Particular Churches that have their branch-plants here will form together to create that Church.

And that's not me - that's the Churches themselves.

If you are saying that our "ethnic" Churches are preventing converts from entering them - you know as well as I that that is not the case.

Converts may prefer not to join an Eastern Church not only because it is "ethnic" in the contemporary sense, but also because of its equally "ethnic" Byzantine flavour - cupolas, swinging censers, and bearded cantors and priests!

In other words, when defining "ethnic" we might be wrong to stop at "Ukrainian" or "Ruthenian" only.

Our Churches lose people to RC Churches for other reasons as well - someone like me might do a study in this respect and I could interview someone like you for data

It could be that they might wish to join what they perceive to be a "mainstream" Church, a Church that is seen as "less flamboyant" in its liturgical styles, nomatter what language it uses, and one where services are shorter and "more reasonable."

Again, my niece graduated from Ukie school on Saturday at a big, fancy-schmancy hotel event where the Deputy Premier was in attendance and spoke some words in Ukrainian to the audience.

The Ukie community up here isn't giving us its culture or its Particular Ukrainian Churches just yet .

Our Church does indeed see itself as the Church of Ukrainians dedicated to "churching" its own Ukies.

I've never, Sir, throughout this discussion EVER said there shouldn't be an English NA Byzantine Church!

I just said that any notion of bringing the Particular Church "branch-plants" together under one such English jurisdiction isn't going to happen.

And arguments cited to indicate that people leave the "ethnic" Churches because they don't understand the language and can't relate to the "ethnic" cultures - well, that is being overly simplistic.

As a sociologist of religion, I believe there is more to it than that, although it includes that. It relates to an overall model of "Mainstream religion vs minority religion." And anyway you cut the Byzantine cake, we're in a minority - even though our brightly coloured vestments and bearded clerics do make us stand out!

And, in the final analysis, Sir, I think I'm being more democratic than you in this regard. You would bunch us up under a mainstream English Byzantine cupola in the hope that our people will stop leaving and others will come and join us.

I would argue that the problem in mainstream North America has more to do with the cupola itself!

Alex

Alex,

I agree that our various Byzantine Churches are not interested working together to form a common future for our Church here in North America. My point is that we are obligated to witness the Gospel and that people like you who are leaders in the Church have an added responsibility to educate people about this responsibility. I have found that the people who care about the future of the Church are interested in these discussions and get emotional about them. Those who do not care simply do not get involved in these types of discussions.

Oddly, no one seems to be willing to address the fact that, if we do not begin inviting our people to embrace newcomers and welcome them as they are, we are not only shirking our responsibility to witness but we are also hastening the day on which we will forever close the doors to many of our parishes. The survival situation is less acute in Canada because of more and larger recent emigration from Europe but the responsibility to witness is equal.

Are our ethnic Church preventing converts from joining them? Yes. They are. And anyone who believes otherwise has his or her eyes closed. I answer numerous questions at this website each week. Over the last 7 years I have referred hundreds of interested people to parishes � Ruthenian, Ukrainian, Romanian and Melkite � across America and Canada. I cringe with embarrassment every time someone writes back and tells me that they went, that the liturgy was nice, but that they could never join that parish because they did not feel welcome, as they were not Slavic or Arabic. It�s not the cupolas or the censors making them feel unwelcome. It�s the attitude of the people. �Our people� are steeped with the attitude that people are welcome only insofar as they accept the fact that the parish is primarily for ethnics and will always remain an ethnic parish. You cannot imagine how many people report back that they were greeted with �Are you Ukrainian/Ruthenian/Arabic?� instead of simply �Welcome to our parish, please stay for the coffee hour!� Those who do find homes in our parishes do so despite the hurdles we have established.

Our Churches loose people to the Roman Catholic Church for many reasons. When there is intermarriage the Roman Catholic Church is seen as the place to go since it already embraces people of many ethnicities. Regarding evangelization, the Roman Catholic Church is seen as the place to go simply because most of �our people� believe that it is the place for converts to go. We have not instilled in �our people� that we Byzantine Catholics are THE CHURCH. We are whole and complete. We are not just an ethnic subgroup. Nothing is less attractive then seeing that the people of a particular Church judge themselves with the measuring stick of another particular Church. When people see this they naturally go to the Church that we measure ourselves by.

No one is asking it to. How does welcoming others and treating their ethnicity as equal to our own give up culture?

The notion that the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church only has an obligation to church �its own Ukies� should be repulsive to any Christian. The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church has an obligation to Christianize all nations. I believe that it is strong enough do this.

I don�t have the numbers handy but I do know that in Canada there are numerically more Ukrainian Greek Catholics than there are Episcopalians. Episcopalians are considered mainstream and pan-Canadian while Ukrainian Greek Catholics are not. What steps can the larger Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church take to work toward being the societal equal of the Episcopal Church? [I also pose the same question to Americans. Added together Byzantine Catholics of all ethnicities outnumber some of the individual Protestant denominations. Most have heard of groups like the Evangelical Lutheran Church. It is not all that much bigger than we are. Why do people know them and not us?]

Admin

Admin,

I've always observed that if Ss. Cyril and Methodius had had the sense to teach the Slavs Greek before they taught them the Faith, we wouldn't be in this mess today. Obviously their priorities were askew.


Sharon

(P.S. My husband calls Slavonic Sundays "hum-along Sundays.")

Sharon,

I respectfully disagree.

I think that SS. Cyril & Methodius knew that one best understands the faith in one�s native tongue. I do not think that the Kyivan Church would have developed into the wonder that it is if people were required to learn Greek in order to become Christians.

Admin

PS: Is your husband enrolled in Church-Slavonic classes? :p [Very tongue in cheek!]

Dear Administrator,

Well, the fact is that Churches in the East especially have become culturally specific and this truly has spilled over to the branch-plants in North America.

It is not, and I didn't say that, the case that the Ukie Church is called to serve its "own people only."

In fact, and if you'll bear with me here for a minute, the cultural makeup of the Kyivan Church historically has been varied.

The Saints of the Kyivan Church include "St Moses the Hungarian" the "Lithuanian Martyrs Anthony, John and Eustace" Siberians, some Goths, Tatars, Belorusyans, Carpatho-Rusyns, Greeks, several Germans, Roman Popes, Great Russians et al.

Kyivan Orthodox missionaries in Siberia tended to bring back the cult of Siberian saints Christianized by them such as St Basil of Mangazea whose icon is in the Church of St Volodymyr of Kyiv today.

It was and is a Particular Church with, alas, an orientation to Old Slavonic and now Ukrainian. Yes, it has become rather "ethnically" Ukrainian.

But it does represent an inculturation of Christianity and not everyone will be happy with it.

I think I can make the case that the cupola as a symbol of Byzantine religious culture can scare away OUR OWN people (I've no doubt you are correct on the score of outsiders finding them interesting ) who may want to become more mainstream.

Again, a study of this is necessary before we can say anything with more certainty.

And I've also had the experience of introducing people to our UGCC parishes. Indeed we have parishes with English language liturgies up here and I woudn't dream of bringing those people to a parish like St Nicholas etc.

So I've always made the distinction between the parishes and there are parishes up here I wouldn't attend myself (Thank you for the compliment but I'm hardly a "leader" of anything in my Church! Even my wife tells ME where to go . . . ).

There are people who would find Antiochian parishes too "liberal" as my priestly friend in the OCA did.

So we're never going to get one ideal parish anywhere - we need to know the parishes themselves.

We also should extend some understanding to our "ethnic" churches against the backdrop of their histories in their ethnic homeland.

The Ukrainian Orthodox churches have a long history of being under Russia where their cultural self-expression was forbidden.

The argument of the "Ukrainianizers" there was that the Russian cultural dominance was scaring Ukies away from the Church - period!

These Churches are more adept at encouraging English language liturgies, but not all of them are. It's about that "resist to the death every last change" attitude . . .

So if we say that we all must proclaim Christ to the world - we would be right.

We are not in competition with others in terms of membership.

Do we need to bring as many Western people to the Eastern Catholic Churches as possible?

I don't think we do, unless they wished to.

The RC's I mentioned probably do see the Ukie parish they attend as the "next best thing to a Tridentine parish."

The fact that we Eastern Catholics also help bring converts to Orthodoxy shouldn't be surprising.

I've spoken to some who wanted to become Orthodox through their association with a UGCC parish, but then wanted to join a Western Rite.

I don't think our job is to make North America Byzantine Catholic. We should be accommodating to those English speaking individuals and communities who wish to become BC, to be sure.

Here in Ontario we have Hungarian, Byelorusyan, Romanian and other national/cultural parishes within our UGCC Eastern Eparchy.

Before that, we had the great Slovak Greek Catholic Church.

We also have a growing number of English-only parishes such as in Newmarket, Ontario.

And a number of our Toronto parishes are having English-only Liturgies.

And so, what is wrong?

We adapt to the people over time and, as in my father-in-law's Basilian parish, they are too happy to have members from outside the Ukrainian community, in addition to those who are both Ukrainian and Russian Orthodox.

The association of the Mother of God of Zhyrovitsi that you so kindly helped me get organized is one that already involves non-Ukrainians and Ukrainians who no longer speak the "blessed Ukrainian tongue."

To add to everyone's surprise, I told them that the icon itself is not "Ukrainian" but from Belarus.

The fact is that the Kyivan Church has sent missionaries around the world. St Seraphim of Sarov and St Herman of Alaska both felt themselves to her spiritual offspring. English is certainly a growing liturgical language within the Kyivan Church tradition.

But I think that our role in the West is to do even more than "preach Christ."

Our role is to present our respective Eastern spiritualities that help give us a renewed understanding of the Christian way of life and of the Gospel message, with its emphasis on Theosis, the Trinity, the Resurrection and the glory of the Theotokos and all the Saints!

The fact that there are ethnic parishes that are unwelcoming to "outsiders" is simply that, a sad fact.

The fact that more and more people who look to the East are also finding the Eastern Catholic experience to be lacking and prefer to go to the "real thing" in terms of the OCA or other Orthodox jurisdictions - that is also a fact.

The more the Byzantine Catholic Church emphasizes its "Orthodoxy," the more your membership will be going the OCA-wards, especially if there Church identity will be largely "de-ethnicized."

Our maintenance of our Ukie Church up here is largely about a comprehensive spiritual-cultural identity of which the Eastern Church aspect is but one such aspect.

If all you have is the de-ethnicized mainstream North American Anglo-conformity model in the Byzantine Catholic Church in the U.S. - so what if you became OCA? What is preventing you from doing so?

At least in the OCA you don't have Big Brother Rome telling you you can't have married priests, or controlling your episcopal nominations etc.

For us, the Ukie Church is "OUR CHURCH" in at once a spiritual and cultural-ancestral way.

You have to be one of us to really understand this, I think.

But if we became as "Eastern as all get out," we would have not one temptation to become Orthodox, because of this comprehensive identity our Church provides us with. It is the home of our ancestors, our martyrs, our parents and our heroes in general.

We are on good terms with our Ukrainian Orthodox brothers and sisters - very good in fact.

But our Church is the source of our sense of who we are individually and collectively.

We are not North Americans, even though we "walk the walk and talk the talk" (and munch the hotdogs).

Our Church's particularity and distinctiveness is what differentiates us from the rest of the world.

Don't ask us to give that up - we won't.

And if people wish to join us in our experience, we will make room for them, and we have.

Alex

Dear ADMIN:

Your foresight comes crystal clear that the failure to grasp, or the refusal to recognize, the forbidding, perhaps foreboding, reality of emasculated Eastern Catholic Churches 10 or 20 years from now could very well signal the beginning of their death knell?

The Latins have launched their "New Evangelization" campaign, with renewed vigor and zeal, not satisfied with more than 200 Archdioceses and dioceses in the U.S. encompassing more than 19,000 parishes, up from 1 diocese and 35 diocesan priests in Maryland in 1789, about 211 years ago.

The Roman Church IS arguably the exemplary model for a multi-enthnic Church and such international flavor adds diversity (read "universality") as enjoined by the Master Himself.

Perpetuation of one's cultural heritage I think depends in the main on numbers, lending to its ascendancy or predominance in any given situation. Of course, qualitative measurement does play a big role but survival even of the fittest presupposes a sufficiency in number.

Further, people tend to forget the adjectival function of ethnic appellations to their respective Churches: the Church is Catholic, first and foremost.

Amado

Dear Amado,

Our Ukrainian Church is not being emasculated at all.

But, in all sincerity, your Roman Catholic Church is becoming emasculated via a number of policies that should have gone the way of the dinosaur long ago.

The RC Church in the U.S. is quite emasculated right now, to be sure!

And, if anything, the RC Church in the U.S. is becoming less mainstream English and more "Ethnocultural."

In the next ten years, about half of all U.S. Catholics will be non-English.

And, as one observer predicts, as a result of this, foreign languages, and not English, will be increasingly used in Latin liturgies.

And the Mother of God will become more central in Latin devotion in the U.S. as a result.

So you guys are actually moving away from the mainstream rather than toward it.

And there have always been "national Catholic Churches" in Europe and Latin America.

The grand universal Catholic ideal is simply a myth and the example of our current Pope shows it to be a myth as well.

Alex

Yes, I understand perfectly. Don�t forget that I am also an ethnic Slav. The problem is that �OUR PEOPLE� believe that �OUR CHURCH� belongs only to the Slavs. The Kyivan approach to Christianity does not belong to the Slavs. It belongs to the entire world.

YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!

We are to invite all people who do not know Christ to become members of our Churches.

We are to invite all people who do know Christ and who do not have the fullness of the apostolic Faith to become members of our Churches.

We are to invite all people who do know Christ but who do not yet have a spiritual home to become members of our Churches.

This is the essence of our Christian Faith!

Dear Alex:

You said:



I beg your pardon?


Amado

Dear Administrator,

Perhaps one day you could show me how I could make a bunch of "No!" as you did "Yes!"

Anyone who wishes to worship with any Church should be enabled to do so.

To convert to Christ and to convert to a Particular Church are two different things.

If you insist that they are the same, then you would be wrong.

You would be mixing "beans with cabbage."

In my career as convert-helper, I've come across people who didn't want to join the Eastern Catholic Church. Some preferred the Latin Church (heaven help them ), others the Western Rite Orthodox, still others the OCA, the ROCOR and the Antiochians.

It didn't bother me not a wit that they didn't want to become BC or UC.

It doesn't mean they are any less Christian.

Over to you, Administrator.

Alex