www.byzcath.org
Posted By: Carson Daniel If this be true - 02/10/09 04:15 AM
If the following is true and we all buy into it and it leads inevitably to the ECs cessation what would you do. Since we don't have polls I will offer a few options.

1. Become Orthodox.

2. Do whatever your priest does.

3. Become Roman Catholic

4. Become Protestant.

5. Other

Ukraine Greek Catholics Main Obstacle in Russian Orthodox/ Roman Catholic Relations, Says UOC-MP

09.02.2009, [16:47] // UOC-MP / RISU.ORG.UA
KYIV— The head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP), Patriarch Volodymyr (Sabodan), held a press-conference on 3 February 2009 in which he shared his thoughts about the recent hierarchical and church-wide sobors [assemblies] of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). Responding to a question about Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic relations, he noted that the relations between those churches remain quite complicated mainly because of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. «Our relations with the Roman Catholic Church were not established today. They have a history and are backed by a certain experience. This dialogue should take place, for we are called to certain unity and joint service to the Lord and people. Of course, we will not compromise Orthodox traditions and rules. Neither is the Roman Catholic Church going to do so. Our relations have been quite complicated, and remain so. Frankly speaking, the main reason for this status quo is the [Ukrainian] Greek Catholic Church,” said Metropolitan Volodymyr.
Posted By: Apotheoun Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 04:26 AM
I'll never be Protestant again. smile
Posted By: Diak Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 04:41 AM
This is the same person who just said his own Church is not ready for and does not deserve autocephaly, while a growing majority of believers in Ukraine apparently do not agree with him in belonging to other Orthodox jurisdictions [especially the UOC-KP]. And neither is it surprising that a bishop of the MP continues to question the need for the existence of the Greek Catholics or accuse them of being the stumbling block to unity. The other Orthodox hierarchs in Ukraine have not done this nor called the existence of the UGCC a stumbling block. Some things have unfortunately not changed since the Soviet era.

It is a bit premature to be singing "Vichnaya pamyat" for any Greek Catholic Churches. But in any case I would trust the decision of my Patriarch and Synod.
Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 04:45 AM
Roman Catholics seem to have little use for us as well. Right now I'd follow my priest.

CDL
Posted By: Diak Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 04:50 AM
As Patriarch Josyp said after his release from the gulag, we Greek Catholics carry two crosses - one of separation from our Orthodox brethren after the Union and one of misunderstanding and lack of respect by the Latin majority, even though we have given the sacrifice of millions of martyrs for fidelity to the Union. It can be a great opportunity for witness to unity.
Posted By: DewiMelkite Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 05:04 AM
I would become orthodox probably
Posted By: Fr Serge Keleher Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 10:09 AM
Since the claim that we are the stumbling block to Church unity in Ukraine is both false and ridiculous, trying to imagine what one would do if it turned out to be true (and just, how, pray, could that happen?) is a complete waste of time and effort.

Fr. Serge
Posted By: The young fogey Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 11:36 AM
Blaming the Ukrainian Greek Catholics - often accusing them of stealing Orthodox churches in the Ukraine when they were taking back the ancestral parish churches the Communists stole from them! - is standard from many Russian Orthodox leaders as an excuse not to talk to Rome.

No, people who've been under Rome for 400 years and happy to mind their own business - no threat at all to the Russian Church - aren't the stumbling block.

Irreconcilable beliefs on the scope of the Pope are.

If the Greek Catholic churches somehow disappeared tomorrow most of the Galician-Ukrainian and Ruthenian rank and file, certainly in North America, would become Roman Catholic. (Galician-Ukrainians for understandable historical reasons don't like Poles and so are not Roman Rite but I think they don't like Russians more. Thanks to assimilation and self-latinisation the Irish RC bishops in North America like the late John Ireland have largely got their way; the Greek Catholics are disappearing.) The Orthodox in communion with Rome in North America (very few) would do what they've been doing anyway and become Orthodox.

(Once met a Romanian family who at least functionally have been Roman Rite since the Communists handed over the Greek Catholics to the Orthodox.)

Rome will not hand over the Greek Catholics to the Orthodox: competing one-true-church claims make that impossible.

What Patriarch Josyp said is true. The million-dollar question is does the only Roman distinctive in all this, the scope of the Pope, make that inevitable for Eastern Catholics? Yes, say most Orthodox. No, say the OicwR. 'What? We're under the Pope and not Orthodox; we're Catholics', say most Greek Catholics.

The 'extracurricular' Ukrainian Orthodox, at least the KP, seem to cosy up to the UGCC as part of their nationalism.
Posted By: The young fogey Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 12:06 PM
P.S. The Orthodox in America have attrition thanks to assimilation as well.
Posted By: JohnS. Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 12:37 PM
Originally Posted by The young fogey
If the Greek Catholic churches somehow disappeared tomorrow most of the Galician-Ukrainian and Ruthenian rank and file, certainly in North America, would become Roman Catholic. (Galician-Ukrainians for understandable historical reasons don't like Poles and so are not Roman Rite but I think they don't like Russians more. Thanks to assimilation and self-latinisation the Irish RC bishops in North America like the late John Ireland have largely got their way; the Greek Catholics are disappearing.) The Orthodox in communion with Rome in North America (very few) would do what they've been doing anyway and become Orthodox.

---

True.
Posted By: JohnS. Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 01:11 PM
Originally Posted by The young fogey
Thanks to assimilation and self-latinisation the Irish RC bishops in North America like the late John Ireland have largely got their way; the Greek Catholics are disappearing.) The Orthodox in communion with Rome in North America (very few) would do what they've been doing anyway and become Orthodox.
---
To elaborate: It depends on how well catechized Greek Catholics are as to where they might go next. It also hinges on how the local Greek Catholic Churches perceive themselves in terms of vision, mission and ecclesiology. With the Kievan-Constantinopolitan Slavic Churches as an example… The ecclesiology of the UGCC hinges on an understanding of "particularity and communion." I have never seen the BCCA articulate how it understands itself. I would be grateful if someone could share the G2.

Some see us as a catalyst in the quest for reunion between east and west.
Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 01:39 PM
Originally Posted by Serge Keleher
Since the claim that we are the stumbling block to Church unity in Ukraine is both false and ridiculous, trying to imagine what one would do if it turned out to be true (and just, how, pray, could that happen?) is a complete waste of time and effort.

Fr. Serge

No one seems to be operating on reality but upon perception. Doesn't Balamand make us redundant?

No matter what the reality, I'm with John S, I sure wish our hierarchs would deign to tell us what reality is and then lead us in living it.

CDL
Posted By: Ghosty Re: If this be true - 02/10/09 09:27 PM
I put my thoughts on the "Are we redundant" thread, and I won't repeat them fully here, but I'll throw out a little thought.

We are not a project, we are not a "mission of reunion", we are Churches and Faithful as fully Apostolic and grounded in the Ancient Traditions as any Latins or Orthodox. We exist because (I hope) we believe we should, namely that we should be fully Eastern AND we should be in full Communion with Rome and the Pope. That we are viewed as a stumbling block by some (or at least set up as a scape-goat) doesn't change these fundamental facts about us at all. It reflects on those who would make such accusations, not on us. It shows that they're still trapped in the mindset of "uniatism" and "us versus them", and don't have an appreciation for was a true Church really is. I feel sorry for them, but it doesn't affect my identity in any way. If my Church was somehow "dissolved", I'd likely go to the local Antiochian Orthodox Church and be a vocal, constant, and staunch advocate for Reunion with Rome. I like to hope that we'd be right back at 1724. laugh

I realize that being tied with the Melkite Church my perspective may be a bit different than that of our Eastern European brothers and sisters (and the members of those Churches), but I figure my view has its place as well.

Peace and God bless!
Posted By: Ivan Putovati Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 01:44 PM
It is true. Sure we are redundant...at least in the Pittsburgh Metropolia we are.

Personally, I would become Orthodox. As Young Fogey correctly states, "the Orthodox in communion with Rome in North America (very few) would do what they've been doing anyway and become Orthodox."

There are very few of us left. The seminary is a ghost town and we are not evangelizing the world around us. We are importing priests from the old country, but refuse to seriously grow our own vocations. Why do we exist? An accident of history. It seems that our little church doesn't have the will to survive. It isn't really Rome's fault. We let multiple opportunities slip away to be ourselves. Why? 10 years from now we will have a few parishes left scattered across the country. Perhaps some kindly Latin Bishop will protect us.

Are we really tending to our spiritual needs?

It seems like the Church has ground to a complete halt since the New Divine Liturgy dropped out of the sky on us little people here in holupki land. That was the scope of renewal this time around.

Most Holy Mother of God Save Us!
Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 02:01 PM
Ivan,

I agree. Do you think there is a chance for the few who stick it out to someday rise up and do something significant? There are people, perhaps like yourself, who are waiting to help the Church grow. Perhaps a private conversation might make some difference.

CDL
Posted By: Dr. Eric Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 02:36 PM
Originally Posted by carson daniel lauffer
Roman Catholics seem to have little use for us as well. Right now I'd follow my priest.

CDL

You seem to have been dealing with Romans who resemble the parts of human anatomy that most people cover up.

Some of us Romans (I would venture to say most of us) actually are interested in and want to learn more about our Eastern brethren.
Posted By: Lawrence Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 02:58 PM

I'm still a little confused as to how exactly Roman Catholics have little use for Eastern Catholics ?
Posted By: ajk Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 05:05 PM
Originally Posted by carson daniel lauffer
Ukraine Greek Catholics Main Obstacle in Russian Orthodox/ Roman Catholic Relations, Says UOC-MP
...Patriarch Volodymyr (Sabodan), ...noted that the relations between those churches remain quite complicated mainly because of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church...Frankly speaking, the main reason for this status quo is the [Ukrainian] Greek Catholic Church,” said Metropolitan Volodymyr.
Dear Met. Volodymyr, too bad, that's the way it is -- Our choice, not yours.
Originally Posted by Ivan Putovati
It is true. Sure we are redundant...at least in the Pittsburgh Metropolia we are...Personally, I would become Orthodox.

Originally Posted by carson daniel lauffer
Ivan, I agree.

Yes, become Orthodox thereby confirming Met. V's appraisal.
Originally Posted by Ivan Putovati
Most Holy Mother of God Save Us!
...from ourselves. Amen.
Posted By: Dr. Eric Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 05:14 PM
Originally Posted by Lawrence
I'm still a little confused as to how exactly Roman Catholics have little use for Eastern Catholics ?

And, I wouldn't let other people use me.
Posted By: JohnS. Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 05:25 PM
Perhaps it is the shear number of Latins here in the states in comparison to us Eastern Catholics. Most Latins I encounter refuse to believe that we are Catholic. If anything, they think that we are Orthodox. Some degree of hegemony is here...
Posted By: Etnick Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 06:18 PM
Originally Posted by JohnS.
Perhaps it is the shear number of Latins here in the states in comparison to us Eastern Catholics. Most Latins I encounter refuse to believe that we are Catholic. If anything, they think that we are Orthodox. Some degree of hegemony is here...

Ain't that the truth. I've encountered this my whole life. They refuse to believe that funny looking church with onion domes and three bar crosses, and that funny sounding liturgy could actually be Catholic! crazy
Posted By: JonnNightwatcher Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 06:41 PM
screw 'em.
Much Love,
Jonn
Posted By: Dr. Eric Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 07:11 PM
Originally Posted by Etnick
Originally Posted by JohnS.
Perhaps it is the shear number of Latins here in the states in comparison to us Eastern Catholics. Most Latins I encounter refuse to believe that we are Catholic. If anything, they think that we are Orthodox. Some degree of hegemony is here...

Ain't that the truth. I've encountered this my whole life. They refuse to believe that funny looking church with onion domes and three bar crosses, and that funny sounding liturgy could actually be Catholic! crazy

Unfortunately, ignorance abounds no matter where anyone goes. This can only be a teaching tool. I repeatedly have to give witness for my faith, especially Biblically, when people find out I'm Catholic. I would venture to guess it is easier to convince a fellow Catholic that you are one than to convince an Anti-Catholic Fundamentalist that you don't worship Satan and "The Death Cookie."
Posted By: Lawrence Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 07:26 PM

I've been closely involved at a UGCC parish for almost 2 years now, and I've never had a single experience like that. When I attend Latin Mass in the city, I quite often mention to people that I usually attend a Ukrainian Catholic Church on Sundays, and I've never gotten a strange look or comment from anyone.

For whatever it's worth, perhaps the worst thing that can be said in regards to Roman Catholic attitudes towards Eastern Catholics, is that for many, there are no attitudes, because they barely know of your existence. That may feel like a slight but for all practical purposes it has little bearing on your church's survival in the 21st century.
Posted By: Logos - Alexis Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 10:52 PM
This thread is interesting, frustrating, and sad for a Latin Catholic to read, all at the same time (no offense, guys).

Alexis
Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/11/09 11:27 PM
What's frustrating is there seems less and less hope that the Orthodox and Catholics will ever unite and Islam and Secularism continue to expand their nets. Maybe if it gets really bad the two groups (whatever they are to be called) will finally take reunion seriously. In the interim we seem to be content to die.

CDL
Posted By: Ivan Putovati Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 12:07 AM
Are all the Eastern Catholic Churches closing shop like the Metropolia? I thought good things were happening with the Ukrainian Greek Catholics and the Melkites.
Posted By: theophan Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 12:37 AM
CDL:

Sadly it may take us all being in the same gulag together before we "get it." Something like the experience of those under the communists. When you face the same fate in the morning, lots of things that used to be a big deal suddenly aren't.

BOB
Posted By: asianpilgrim Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 01:33 AM
Originally Posted by Ivan Putovati
We are importing priests from the old country, but refuse to seriously grow our own vocations.

At least you are importing priests from the old country, where priests and vocations are plentiful
Posted By: JohnS. Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 10:14 AM
I think we have only brought over a handful of priests from the mother eparchies to help us. That said, importing priests and bi-ritual priests are only short-term band-aids. We have been here formally for about 125 years. If the BCC is really to thrive, we have to incarnate ourselves in this American culture in a tangible way. I think the OCA is starting to do this now.

We need vocations from our parishes to labor in Christ's vineyard. We need to offer this country Christ. There are many who remain unchurched around our parishes. Also, planting new parishes and missions should be part of our strategic plan. We also need to understand our situation, agree on a plan and execute on that plan.

The Metropolia is aging. It has faced a series of almost unbelievable events and personalities that would have crushed and destroyed just about anything. God has a plan for us and for this fragile Church. We all play a part.

Each day I hope and pray that the Lord will stir the embers of the BCC and do something great and wonderful with us. I pray for our four bishops too. The odds seem overwhelming at this point and the work that needs to be done is massive. We are rapidly declining and the muscle we once had is long gone--and new muscle has not been added to the body. We do have some Romans flowing into the ranks, but hardly enough to sustain us.

Like the athlete of St. Paul the Apostle's epistles, we must train and strive to win the imperishable prize of communion and union with God.

Otherwise--to circle back to CDL's provocative post that opened this thread--it will be true...at least for the BCC.

Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 12:55 PM
Father Loya has often said that we must die before we can live. We must tear this old structure down so we can rebuild an authentic BC Church. I believe he's right or I wouldn't keep coming. Perhaps that death is part of God's plan for the eventual resurrection. I pray often to have the level of hope and faith that he has. I can't imagine being anything but BC. I plan to exhaust myself supporting the vision of a truly renewed BC.

CDL
Posted By: ByzBob Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 02:02 PM
A few things come to mind reading this thread. The first being my own recent frustrations in the BC. The genesis of the frustrations is difficult to pinpoint. It feels at times that we are a failed experiment – Balamand didn’t help in that regard. On the one hand we are told to read Orthodox sources for theology/spirituality, and our seminary bookstore stocks works from Orthodox writes such as Lossky, Schmemann, etc. These writers show that the eastern approach to theology does not fit easily, if at all with Roman Catholic developments after the separation. Which takes us to the issue of the post-schism councils – what is their status? Every RC source I’ve looked at lists them as ecumenical. So where does that leave us in terms of our valid theological approach? Is it enough to simply not deny what the councils said, or must we believe what they defined as dogma? My RC friends seem to think we must, but I fail to see how we can and still remain eastern. Further compounding the problem is the message we have been receiving from Rome. Rome seems to want us to return to a more authentic eastern expression, but doesn’t tell us how we can do that if we are required to follow their doctrines. If we are not “required,” to do so then are the councils truly ecumenical? It seems unfair to our RC brethren to say that they not, when that is part of their beliefs, and if they are they should be part of ours as well.
I have been wondering, especially in light of the RDL, what benefit do we derive from union with Rome? The RDL is not in keeping with the instructions on Liturgical reform given by Rome, but we have it anyway. Rome has not intervened, even though it would have been legitimate if it had done so. We don’t evangelize, and I think that is because of an identity crisis. People interested in becoming Catholic join the RC, those interested in the east typically become Orthodox. I think that the BC, at least in this country, never was in the position of having to evangelize, and not only lacks the knowledge but also lacks the will to do it now. Most of the parishes in my area tend to be older folks who are second/ third generation BC’s who have a certain comfort level being a mix of Latin and Greek. Thus, going back to a more authentic eastern approach isn’t always warmly received, which is sort of understandable. They have been worshipping a certain way their entire lives. This post is probably all over the place, but to answer the question what I’d do if we were suddenly dissolved, I would probably become Orthodox.
Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 02:16 PM
ByzBob,

You are stating many things that continually rumble around in my mind as well. Annunciation does some evangelization but I believe we would be doing a good deal more and more effectively if we weren't struggling with an identity crisis. Does that same crisis effect our hierarchs as well?

CDL
Posted By: Dr. Eric Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 02:24 PM
Originally Posted by carson daniel lauffer
What's frustrating is there seems less and less hope that the Orthodox and Catholics will ever unite and Islam and Secularism continue to expand their nets. Maybe if it gets really bad the two groups (whatever they are to be called) will finally take reunion seriously. In the interim we seem to be content to die.

CDL

Solovyov wrote in his book on the Antichrist that it would take the reign of the Abomination of Desolation to unite all Christians together.
Posted By: ByzBob Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 02:30 PM
I think so. An example, from the Metroplia of Pittsburgh, would be the lack of desire to ordain married men to the priesthood. I see no reason for hesitation in this area other than an identity crisis.
Posted By: ajk Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 05:35 PM
Originally Posted by ByzBob
... On the one hand we are told to read Orthodox sources for theology/spirituality, and our seminary bookstore stocks works from Orthodox writes such as Lossky, Schmemann, etc. These writers show that the eastern approach to theology does not fit easily, if at all with Roman Catholic developments after the separation. Which takes us to the issue of the post-schism councils – what is their status? Every RC source I’ve looked at lists them as ecumenical. So where does that leave us in terms of our valid theological approach? ... Further compounding the problem is the message we have been receiving from Rome. Rome seems to want us to return to a more authentic eastern expression, but doesn’t tell us how we can do that if we are required to follow their doctrines... The RDL is not in keeping with the instructions on Liturgical reform given by Rome, but we have it anyway... We don’t evangelize,...
There is nothing wrong with the basic theologies of Lossky, Schmemann, Meyendorf, Zizioulas etc., from a Catholic viewpoint, but don't expect them to endorse or explain (Latin/Roman/Westen) Catholic theology -- they're Orthodox! That's not their calling, that's OUR, Eastern Catholic, BBC responsibility. They are going to be critical of Catholic theology when they can, often because they don't understand or because they base conclusions on their own false caricatures, e.g. the evil scholastic boogeyman --- and we simply believe them? We don't do the job; I repeat myself here:

Quote
A Failure of our Church ?

To effectively articulate why, as eastern, orthodox Christians we are, and why one should be Catholic – we, who are living (though perhaps rather imperfectly) the desired unity.

Hence confusion. Rather than advancing an East/West synthesis as we should be able to on the basis of our Eastern church union with the Western church -- our lived experience -- we instead estrange ourselves from both East and West, often by equivocation.

Rome's Liturgical Instruction to the Eastern Churches was for the most part on the mark. We should have been able to product such a document ourselves, even a better, more informed one. Instead we produced the RDL.

Of course we don't evangelize in the usual sense; we need first to evangelize ourselves.

Posted By: ByzBob Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 06:20 PM
Originally Posted by ajk
There is nothing wrong with the basic theologies of Lossky, Schmemann, Meyendorf, Zizioulas etc., from a Catholic viewpoint, but don't expect them to endorse or explain (Latin/Roman/Westen) Catholic theology -- they're Orthodox! That's not their calling, that's OUR, Eastern Catholic, BBC responsibility. They are going to be critical of Catholic theology when they can, often because they don't understand or because they base conclusions on their own false caricatures, e.g. the evil scholastic boogeyman --- and we simply believe them?
We are left to either believe them, or to deduce that they don't know eastern or western theology well enough to be an authority. If we say they know eastern theology they should likewise know what views are incompatible with it.
If that is the case why are we told to read them at all? Why don't we have our own authors who can better synthesize the eastern and western views? The efforts I have seen at this have been well intended, but leave more questions than they answer. For instance on the question of the councils after Nicea II. We would seem to want to downplay them, but the RC holds them up as ecumenical councils. At least two, Lyons and Florence were “reunion,” councils, and should hold significance for us. Yet I haven’t found anything written from a BCC perspective on either one. RC’s are fond of telling me, however, that I must follow their understanding of purgatory, indulgences, the filioque, etc., because of the councils. If, however, we believe that the liturgy is pedagogical then liturgically speaking we don’t understand these issues in the same way. I think that is a legitimate that we don’t, but I haven’t had this confirmed by an authority within the Church.
Originally Posted by ajk
A Failure of our Church ?
To effectively articulate why, as eastern, orthodox Christians we are, and why one should be Catholic – we, who are living (though perhaps rather imperfectly) the desired unity.
Hence confusion. Rather than advancing an East/West synthesis as we should be able to on the basis of our Eastern church union with the Western church -- our lived experience -- we instead estrange ourselves from both East and West, often by equivocation.
Rome's Liturgical Instruction to the Eastern Churches was for the most part on the mark. We should have been able to product such a document ourselves, even a better, more informed one. Instead we produced the RDL.
Of course we don't evangelize in the usual sense; we need first to evangelize ourselves.
I’m not sure there is enough time to evangelize ourselves before we can began outreach. Thanks for your thoughts.
Posted By: Logos - Alexis Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 07:13 PM
Quote
ByzBob said: People interested in becoming Catholic join the RC, those interested in the east typically become Orthodox.

Are there none out there who perhaps want Byzantine worship and theology but feel that union with Rome is the imperative of all Christians?

Alexis
Posted By: Two Lungs Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 07:35 PM
5. Other

We are the Church. We need to reach out in all directions and make use of all the spiritual resources available. There are many who have an inadequate Christian education. There are many who have a "not invented here" point of view.

The UGCC is moving to develop its resources to form better priests and to do better pastoral work. Some of this seems to involve bridging of East and West. The following are recent stories from the UGCC website.
----------------------------------------------

Bishop Ken Nowakowski, Head of Patriarchal Commission, chairs meeting of rectors and spiritual directors of Seminaries of North & South America in Brazil

http://www.ugcc.org.ua/news_single.0.html?&L=2&tx_ttnews[pS]=1229278679&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=570&tx_ttnews[backPid]=2&cHash=02f01801a7
-----------------------------------------------

Quote
With the blessing of His Excellency Ihor (Voznyak), Archbishop of Lviv ... seminar’s aim is to gather active young people of the Lviv Archeparchy and acquaint them with the preventive system of education of Saint John Bosco.


St. John Bosco is an Italian Saint who was noted for establishing vocation schools and work-study programs for Italian youths. His ideas have been spread around the world by the Salesians.

http://www.ugcc.org.ua/news_single.0.html?&L=2&tx_ttnews[pS]=1229278679&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=586&tx_ttnews[backPid]=2&cHash=1d6730e772
...............................................................

A disk with a sign-language recording of the Liturgy was prepared in Lviv

http://www.ugcc.org.ua/news_single.0.html?&L=2&tx_ttnews[pS]=1229278679&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=566&tx_ttnews[backPid]=1&cHash=4b4aa40378
------------------------------------------------

I think the following hs been posted elsewhere on the forum. I hope it will be made available on DVD in English.

Excerpts from the first audio book of His Beatitude Lubomyr, "The way to one’s self," can be seen on YouTube

.................................................
.................................................

Not all Eastern Catholics are trying or willing to disappear.
Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 07:53 PM
Originally Posted by Logos - Alexis
Quote
ByzBob said: People interested in becoming Catholic join the RC, those interested in the east typically become Orthodox.

Are there none out there who perhaps want Byzantine worship and theology but feel that union with Rome is the imperative of all Christians?

Alexis

That is clearly my desire. The Pope is content with that or at least the more recent ones are so it is hoped that we will not be crushed again as we have in the past by outrageous demands.

I was reading again Article II of section on the Proofs for the existence of God in St. Thomas' Summa. I note again that the second objection to being able to have such proofs was set forth by St. John of Damascus "that the subject matter of demonstration is that something exists, but in the case of God we cannot know what exists, but only what does not, as Damascenus says (Of the Orthodox Faith, I., 4.) Hence that we cannot demonstrate God's existence." This is classic Eastern thought characterized as the via negativa. I realized as I read this that while I love our mystical theology that I believe St. Thomas. I do believe that it is possible to know God or at least know with certainty that He exists. Apparently St. John's argument is based upon Hebrews 11 that an article of faith obviates any evidence that we might have. Yet, the entire chapter is set forth as evidence of the existence of God and then there is St. Paul's argument in Romans 1:19-20.

Now it could very well be that St. Thomas has misconstrued St. John's argument but whether he has or not I find St. Thomas' position very compelling.

I deduce from this that at least to some degree I have internalized a Byzantine Theology that that neither simply Eastern or Western but a synthesis of both.

Furthermore, as I examine the Catechism of the Catholic Church I note that there are numerous articles about Theosis which shows to me that even in Roman Catholicism there is a serious recognition as St. Cyril of Alexandria set forth that confession is not simply for repentance but vision.

CDL
Posted By: ajk Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 08:24 PM
Originally Posted by carson daniel lauffer
...I deduce from this that at least to some degree I have internalized a Byzantine Theology that that neither simply Eastern or Western but a synthesis of both.

Furthermore, as I examine the Catechism of the Catholic Church I note that there are numerous articles about Theosis ...

These are very good examples, a witnessing, of the needed synthesis that I have mentioned. Thank you.

Posted By: Paul B Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 08:33 PM
Originally Posted by Logos - Alexis
Quote
ByzBob said: People interested in becoming Catholic join the RC, those interested in the east typically become Orthodox.

Are there none out there who perhaps want Byzantine worship and theology but feel that union with Rome is the imperative of all Christians?

Alexis

Alexis, let me give you my soulful feelings, at the risk of offending my brothers and sisters. Eastern spirituality should be Pneumatological, that is, guided by the Holy Spirit, more so than by ecclesiological theology (Magisterium led). This is the basic strength of Eastern Christianity. It is guided by Tradition and the Early Church Fathers, but not limited by them. This is theoretical "perfection," as much as is humanly possible.

The Western Church, led by what I call Ecclesiological Theology, is nourished by the Holy Spirit and has the ability to constantly evolve to human society. So you see a more dynamic Church, even at the expense of dramatically modifying (to the point of reversing) its rules, recommendations, whatever you choose to call them. For example, fasting, rituals, regulations regarding Sacraments (age of First Communion, Chrismation).
This dynamism is the strength of the Western Church and because of its (most times) positive changes. This makes me spiritually joyful that as a Byzantine Catholic I am a part of the Eastern Lung of the Universal Catholic Church.

The WEAKNESS of the Western Magisterium is the inability to create various EQUAL Churches within the Catholic Church. For example, I see no reason why the fastest growing region (Black Africa) doesn't have its own Rite and rituals. I can imagine Saint Paul blasting the Magisterium for its rigidity, the same as he did to Saint Peter. Until the Roman Catholic Church can break this inability to accept diverse ritual under a common basic theology I don't see a reunion of East and West. The West will simply dominate the East and re-create a new schism.

The weakness of Eastern (Orthodoxy)Christianity is that they are not just ancient Churches, they do not know how to be responsive to the Holy Spirit on a universal level. The Churches are too splintered and .... I apologize for being offensive to my beloved Orthodox brothers... too politicized, nationalized and stubborn... to change as the Spirit moves them.

As I read through this thread I found myself agreeing wholeheartedly that the BCC doesn't have any apologists other than Patriarch Sheptynsky, St Josaphat, and Bishop Olsavsky. Archmandrite Taft is our most renowned speaker and writer, yet he speak on an Eastern Christian plane, not a an Eastern CATHOLIC. I haven't seen a defense or justification of Union from him.

The most formative articles that I have read are by Msgr Basil Sheregy, where he fits Greek Catholicism in the context of a Universal Catholicism. His articles are not PC right now and are probably not available.

Until we have new authors and apologists who are willing to have eastern and western "stones" cast at them we will continue to seek our "identity." I personally have no problem with my identity of a Eastern Christian within the Universal Catholic Church.

Fr Deacon Paul
Posted By: Ghosty Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 08:49 PM
Quote
I was reading again Article II of section on the Proofs for the existence of God in St. Thomas' Summa. I note again that the second objection to being able to have such proofs was set forth by St. John of Damascus "that the subject matter of demonstration is that something exists, but in the case of God we cannot know what exists, but only what does not, as Damascenus says (Of the Orthodox Faith, I., 4.) Hence that we cannot demonstrate God's existence." This is classic Eastern thought characterized as the via negativa. I realized as I read this that while I love our mystical theology that I believe St. Thomas. I do believe that it is possible to know God or at least know with certainty that He exists. Apparently St. John's argument is based upon Hebrews 11 that an article of faith obviates any evidence that we might have. Yet, the entire chapter is set forth as evidence of the existence of God and then there is St. Paul's argument in Romans 1:19-20.

Now it could very well be that St. Thomas has misconstrued St. John's argument but whether he has or not I find St. Thomas' position very compelling.

I don't want to derail this thread too much, but I think for everyone's edification it's worth pointing out that St. John does argue that the existence of God can be proven, and St. Thomas was well aware of this. His statement of the "Objection" is not to refute St. John of Damascus (who actually uses many of the same proofs that St. Thomas does, such as the contingency of natural existence, to show that there must be a God), but to show how people might twist St. John's words to make an argument that he himself never put forward.

This is an important point because you mention that you like St. Thomas' arguments; if that's the case then I recommend reading St. John of Damascus, because he was the popularizer of systematic theology. St. Thomas Aquinas was simply following in his footsteps, and said as much himself. Systematic theology, like that of Aquinas, originated in the Byzantine East and was quite popular there until recently, so you're not breaking with the Byzantine tradition at all (in fact, St. Thomas Aquinas was lauded by many in the East as being the greatest theologian in those areas where East and West agree). grin

Peace and God bless!
Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 08:54 PM
Gentlemen,

Perhaps it is time to stir up the embers of the Spirit within each of us and start writing, not just here on this board, but well beyond it. Let us not waste time complaining about what is not. Let us write what is.

CDL

Posted By: Carson Daniel Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 08:57 PM
Ghosty,

Thank you so much. All I have of St. john is his "Three Treatises on the Divine Images". What else do you recommend?

CDL
Posted By: Ghosty Re: If this be true - 02/12/09 09:05 PM
I recommend everything you can get your hands on, quite honestly. laugh

As far as ease of access goes, though, you can't beat "An Exposition on the Orthodox Faith", which is available online and is wonderful. If you enjoy systematic theology, but want to maintain a "Byzantine perspective", that's the work for you. It was also one of Aquinas' favorite works, and one which had a huge influence on him.

It can be found here:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3304.htm

Peace and God bless!
Posted By: lanceg Re: If this be true - 02/13/09 12:32 AM
Originally Posted by Ghosty
Quote
I was reading again Article II of section on the Proofs for the existence of God in St. Thomas' Summa. I note again that the second objection to being able to have such proofs was set forth by St. John of Damascus "that the subject matter of demonstration is that something exists, but in the case of God we cannot know what exists, but only what does not, as Damascenus says (Of the Orthodox Faith, I., 4.) Hence that we cannot demonstrate God's existence." This is classic Eastern thought characterized as the via negativa. I realized as I read this that while I love our mystical theology that I believe St. Thomas. I do believe that it is possible to know God or at least know with certainty that He exists. Apparently St. John's argument is based upon Hebrews 11 that an article of faith obviates any evidence that we might have. Yet, the entire chapter is set forth as evidence of the existence of God and then there is St. Paul's argument in Romans 1:19-20.

Now it could very well be that St. Thomas has misconstrued St. John's argument but whether he has or not I find St. Thomas' position very compelling.

I don't want to derail this thread too much, but I think for everyone's edification it's worth pointing out that St. John does argue that the existence of God can be proven, and St. Thomas was well aware of this. His statement of the "Objection" is not to refute St. John of Damascus (who actually uses many of the same proofs that St. Thomas does, such as the contingency of natural existence, to show that there must be a God), but to show how people might twist St. John's words to make an argument that he himself never put forward.

This is an important point because you mention that you like St. Thomas' arguments; if that's the case then I recommend reading St. John of Damascus, because he was the popularizer of systematic theology. St. Thomas Aquinas was simply following in his footsteps, and said as much himself. Systematic theology, like that of Aquinas, originated in the Byzantine East and was quite popular there until recently, so you're not breaking with the Byzantine tradition at all (in fact, St. Thomas Aquinas was lauded by many in the East as being the greatest theologian in those areas where East and West agree). grin

Peace and God bless!

Also, St. John made use of Aristotle, like St. Thomas did.
Posted By: Collin Nunis Re: If this be true - 02/13/09 02:20 AM
I'll become Orthodox.
Posted By: Dr. Eric Re: If this be true - 02/13/09 01:56 PM
Originally Posted by carson daniel lauffer
Originally Posted by Logos - Alexis
Quote
ByzBob said: People interested in becoming Catholic join the RC, those interested in the east typically become Orthodox.

Are there none out there who perhaps want Byzantine worship and theology but feel that union with Rome is the imperative of all Christians?

Alexis


I was reading again Article II of section on the Proofs for the existence of God in St. Thomas' Summa. I note again that the second objection to being able to have such proofs was set forth by St. John of Damascus "that the subject matter of demonstration is that something exists, but in the case of God we cannot know what exists, but only what does not, as Damascenus says (Of the Orthodox Faith, I., 4.) Hence that we cannot demonstrate God's existence." This is classic Eastern thought characterized as the via negativa. I realized as I read this that while I love our mystical theology that I believe St. Thomas. I do believe that it is possible to know God or at least know with certainty that He exists. Apparently St. John's argument is based upon Hebrews 11 that an article of faith obviates any evidence that we might have. Yet, the entire chapter is set forth as evidence of the existence of God and then there is St. Paul's argument in Romans 1:19-20.
CDL

The first UGCC priest that I knew was a Dominican. I asked him how he reconciled Scholasticism with "Eastern" Theology. He said that St. Thomas was heavily influenced by "Eastern" Theology, was consistent with "Eastern" Theology, and only later did the Thomists start to diverge from what "Eastern" Theology already stated.
Posted By: Dr. Eric Re: If this be true - 02/13/09 01:59 PM
Originally Posted by Paul B
Originally Posted by Logos - Alexis
Quote
ByzBob said: People interested in becoming Catholic join the RC, those interested in the east typically become Orthodox.

Are there none out there who perhaps want Byzantine worship and theology but feel that union with Rome is the imperative of all Christians?

Alexis


The WEAKNESS of the Western Magisterium is the inability to create various EQUAL Churches within the Catholic Church. For example, I see no reason why the fastest growing region (Black Africa) doesn't have its own Rite and rituals. I can imagine Saint Paul blasting the Magisterium for its rigidity, the same as he did to Saint Peter. Until the Roman Catholic Church can break this inability to accept diverse ritual under a common basic theology I don't see a reunion of East and West. The West will simply dominate the East and re-create a new schism.
Fr Deacon Paul

Fr. Deacon Paul,

Have you not read then Cardianl Ratzinger's book The Spirit of the Liturgy in which he describes the Latin Rite in the Congolese Mode? There seems to be a provision for some "inculturation" with the Latin Rite.
Posted By: Paul B Re: If this be true - 02/13/09 05:27 PM
Dr Eric,

No, I haven't read "The Spirit of the Liturgy";I scanned the internet to try to get the flavor, but it didn't really confirm what you suggest. Do you have any quick references?

An pan-black-African Church is a good step forward, but there is a massive Roman shift needed to progress the concept to reality. Just as a Slavic Pope underscored the importance of the "eastern lung" of the Church, the Church needs a black African Pope to emphasize the importance of nourishing the faithful of the developing world.

Getting back to the principle question of this thread.... I agree with Father Serge that the question is non-relevent. But should the impossible happen I would seek faculties in another Eastern Church in Communion with Rome.
Eventually a "federated union" will be acccomplished. The Churches cannot continue stifling the Holy Spirit.

Fr Deacon Paul
Posted By: ajk Re: If this be true - 02/13/09 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by Dr. Eric
...Cardianl Ratzinger's book The Spirit of the Liturgy in which he describes the Latin Rite in the Congolese Mode? There seems to be a provision for some "inculturation" with the Latin Rite.

Originally Posted by Paul B
No, I haven't read "The Spirit of the Liturgy";I scanned the internet to try to get the flavor, but it didn't really confirm what you suggest. Do you have any quick references?

See [i]The Spirit of the Liturgy [/i]page 170 [books.google.com] and the previous page.
Posted By: Paul B Re: If this be true - 02/15/09 12:10 AM
ajk, Thanks for the reference.

It looks like a tidbit; there is much more to make Rome an "umbrella for a true Universal Catholic Church."

I pray that the Spirit moves quickly ...Islam now has more faithful than Catholicism.

Fr Deacon Paul
© The Byzantine Forum