www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization The Ukie Parish of the future

Permit me to say that this sort of begrudging attitude toward the use of English is exactly what's killing the UGCC in North America. The use of English is not something one has to "cope with." It should be the norm. Let me state it bluntly: the language of choice for the UGCC in North America should be English. Period. (French, perhaps, in Quebec; Spanish in certain parts of the US, but English everywhere else). This pattern of retaining Ukrainian in most parishes has turned most of them into museums, fit to be gawked at once a year in the local 'ethnics in their cute costumes with quaint cuisine' pageants and festivals, but no more.

Retaining Ukrainian has turned off an entire generation, and increasingly two, with the result that the average age in most parishes is well over 60; and in 20 years the vast majority of these parishes will be closed.

The arguments in favour of English are simple and twofold: it is the vernacular of this land--and Eastern Christianity has always insisted on the vernacular; and it is the only sensible tool for evangelization, important not only to keep our churches from closing but above all because souls are starved for the true, the beautiful, and the good, and if we don't give it to them they will find it elsewhere (eg., the rapidly growing Mormons and other cults).

As one who has spent considerable time (and money!) in Ukraine, who maintains rich friendships with people over there, and who has lectured publicly and published in support of that country and the UGCC, I am not against all things Ukrainian--far from it. (I'm even taking Ukrainian lessons myself.) What I AM against is an unwillingness to change, an obstinancy on these questions that is nothing short of cancerous and therefore suicidal. I am, further, against this self-imposed ghetto in which most parishes live, functioning not as CATHOLIC churches for the proclamation of the gospel but as ethnic enclaves or quasi-private clubs for the propagation of dying cultural and linguistic bric-a-brac. (The very name is highly off-putting, and must be ditched. We are, if pressed for a label, Kyivan Catholics.)

There is a striking difference in these questions among those who are full-blooded Ukrainians, whether in Ukraine today or recently moved from there, and those who grew up in North America but staunchly maintain their Ukrainian heritage (even though many of them have never set foot in the 'homeland'). This former group consider it unremarkable and logical that English should be the common language of the Church in North America, just as Ukrainian is in Ukraine. Many of them whom I know find it odd indeed how fiercely some people here cling to their Ukrainian (much of it badly spoken, I'm told, or with a vocabularly frozen c. 1935) rather than using the vernacular of the land, English.

The latter group--those born here--is largely intransigent, absurdly proud (and thus over-compensating for a manifest inferiority complex), generally impervious to reason, and possessed of only the most superficial acquaintance with Orthodox Christianity. For them the local parish has little or nothing to do with spreading the gospel and everything to do with buttressing their wobbly and pathetically insecure identity.

The time has come--and in many places long past, with the sad result that they are dying or dead--to make the use of English widespread and not optional. The time has come to move from being an ethnic club to a genuinely Catholic church that exists for everyone to spread the gospel everywhere.

The paradox is this: precisely to keep alive the Kyivan-Galician tradition of Byzantine Christianity, it must not be preserved exactly as is but must be allowed organic growth. Insisting on Ukrainian has brought us to death's door; allowing English might--just might--permit the patient to recover some of his health and live a while yet.

Replace "UGCC", "Ukraine", "Ukrainian", "Kyivan", with equivalent words appropriate to any other Eastern Catholic Church and Adam's statement would be equally true and applicable. Our Churches will only survive and thrive to the extent that they and we are able to adapt.

Adaptation does not mean the loss of individual Church identities - it means making our Churches inviting to others and inclusionary. To the extent that we allow or choose that they be exclusionary, we will assure our Churches mention in a future edition of Ehrman's "Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew".

Many years,

Neil

Dear Adam,

I agree but there are many factors that work against English in the liturgy in our Church.

I know Western Canadian Ukies who know NO Ukrainian, but who insist on Ukrainian liturgies BECAUSE their forefathers were persecuted by the Canadian government etc.

There are others in my parish who travel a long distance to come to a Ukrainian liturgy even though there is an English language parish (in Newmarket) but who say they refuse to tolerate "English only" liturgies - even though they barely "speaka da language" themselves.

When our bishop asked our urban parishes to have one English liturgy, everyone ignored him and pretended that he didn't say that . . .

On the other hand, I think those in our Church who promote English liturgies would go farther if they weren't also seemingly promoting a "modernization" agenda along with it.

St Demetrius may be an example of this where English liturgies and "with it" modern church architecture and the like go hand in hand.

When you say "English liturgy," here, more often than not people understand this as being a form of complete assimilation - spiritually and culturally.

And while those who promote English in our Church see it as a means of preserving our Church for the future, the ones who are against English see the introduction of such liturgies as an indication that our Church is already in its death throes.

It depends on your point of view and this is why I've always promoted the need for a chair for religious social studies at the Sheptytsky Institute.

Any ideas when that will be created?

Alex

I wholeheartedly agree with you, Adam. The OCA, for example, seems to have been able to keep an ethnic and cultural identity but made the liturgical transition to English, and are often enjoing success with converts.

At least in the Midwest, to a large extent the all-Ukrainian parishes are dying outside of a few hotspots of immigrants like Chicago. I have seen this first-hand.

And in defense of your post I would also point out the example of ROCOR in the last ten years in terms of promoting English liturgically while not diminishing a bit from their liturgical stance, cultural identity, etc.

Sts. Cyril and Methodius should be our models in this endeavor. Their primary purpose was precisely to make liturgical services, Scripture, etc. accessible in a language that the people could understand.

Diak,

You're right on target with the OCA's success with converts, but I'm not so sure what you mean by the OCA retaining an ethnic and cultural identity. Can you elaborate?

Dave

Dear Diak,

Happy St Avvakum the Old Believer's Day!

I guess I live a sheltered existence (this Forum makes me a bit more outgoing, I think).

The Canadian experience is different from the American in a number of ways - we don't have a strong focus on English language culture to begin with.

Nowadays "French follows English" in some government departments.

There are areas of Toronto where you can live without knowing English at all (like St Nicholas Ukrainian Catholic parish).

And I still believe that to equate assimilation to mainstream culture ONLY as a linguistic function is not the whole picture.

The entire Eastern Catholic Church culture, English liturgies or not, could be seen as an "ethnic" experience with RCism as the "mainstream church" etc.

English language liturgies or not, I don't see how people from our Church who want to be "mainstream" will continue to be comfortable with church cupolas, waving censors and bishops with great beards like I've seen here recently

Alex

You guys think you have problems!...I'm still trying to persuade the priests down here to commemorate Husar as Patriarch and to put an iconostasis in the church that I go to.
There aren't even bells on the kadylnetsia and even if I bought a new kadylnestsia with bells I'm sure that some idiot would remove them.
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

I thought that all the Ukie Basilians and Salesians in Brazil would have been taken in by the RC's by now - since they have such a shortage of their own celibate priests.

You are saying there are still some left?

The Basilians divided over the issue of commemorating the "Patriarch" or not . . . I love it!!

Poetic justice . . .

Alex

The Roman Catholic Church in Brazil is of course in a crisis but not as bad as in the Northern hemesphere I suppose. Brazil is a pretty big country as I'm sure you know and the Roman Catholics are pretty strong I would say but they do need more clergy.
As for our Ukie church in Brazil...too too many Basilians in my opinion (they're OK)but we need options, new blood, a new look, different points of view, different philosophy, different spirituality, that's what being modern is all about. That's why I'm suggesting in bringing down the Studites.
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

What about your Salesians? We don't have any up here in Canuckistan.

Alex

Dear Mr. DeVille:

All that I said is that for those of us who grew up speaking Ukrainian and attending Ukrainian-language services, the transition will be difficult.

The "coping" is something I myself will have to deal with when and if the time comes that my parish "goes English."

I am sorry if my "begrudging" attitude is somehow offensive to those who have not grown up speaking the language, but it is an issue of identifying with who I am and where I came from.

You do not and cannot understand what it means to me, nor am I asking you to try.

Finally, to the extent that you suggest that the lnaguage issue is the ONLY thing that is "killing" our Church in the diaspora, I respectfully disagree.

Yours,

hal

Dear Hal,

Couldn't have said it better myself - in either language .

"Movo ridne, Slovo ridne, khto vas zabuvaye, toy u hrudiakh ne serdenko, a lish kamin maye."

Loose translation:

"O language of ours, o word of ours, whoever forgets about you, that one has no heart in his chest, but only a stone."

And did you know that the Sheptytsky Institute officially uses "Kiev" in its publication? Isn't that disgraceful?

Alex

I do not believe that we have Ukie Selisians in Brazil I've never seen any. There are Roman catholic Salesians though. If I'm not mistaken the Ukie Salisians are located down South somewhere in Argentina and I think in Australia as well. Are these Salesians that you speak of "Patriarhalnyky"?
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

They are for the Patriarchate like I am for the teaching of Japanese in Ukrainian public schools.

Alex

You know this language issue is very sad indeed. When I take my old man to church and when the priest throws in some Portuguese into the liturgy I can feel from a distance the sadness and revolt my father goes through and than he looks at me as if he is asking "What did we do?" "Where did we go wrong"? That's why I'm against liturgies "Half na piv" as someone mentioned before. One Liturgy should be 100% Portuguese and the other 100% Ukie.
Lauro