www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West New UGCC Catechism Reaffirms Papal Infallibility?

That is indeed our task once full communion is re-established.

"That they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me." (John 17:21)

So His Grace Bishop John Michael has said: "We Greek Catholics have a vocation to disappear".

I think this is a good/quick overview. The Taboric Light - The Filioque Controversy. [sites.google.com] For information on the ecumenical efforts on this issue see http://www.scoba.us/resources/orthodox-catholic/2003filioque.html wherein you'll see under recommendations "•that the Catholic Church, as a consequence of the normative and irrevocable dogmatic value of the Creed of 381, use the original Greek text alone in making translations of that Creed for catechetical and liturgical use."

I long for the day that this happens.

Well, an attempt to assimilate us in borg-esque fashion was made back in the 1940s - and although the ROC-MP's efforts were provoked and supported by the NKVD - and even to this very day regarded by Metropolitan Hilarion as an appropriate thing to do - it didn't happen.

Must have been a nasty and infuriating disappointment to them when we emerged, wounded but alive and kickin', from the Soviet-imposed catacomb existence.

It was one of the happiest days of my life.

One could just as easily - and correctly - declare that the Orthodox Churches will be absorbed into the Catholic Communion of Churches once full communion is re-established.

Only I don't envision it happenening in cahoots with anything like the NKVD; or, for that matter, like the Borg.

Except that they are the mother Chruches from which our Churches sprang. As a Melkite I have no problem with the idea that we will be "absorbed" or - as I prefer to say - reunited with our mother Church in the Middle East.

Perhaps the Latinized UGCC will be absorbed by the Roman Church, since its (i.e., the UGCC's) new catechism regurgitates the modern Latin theory of the papacy.

I am not sure how happy I am with the repeated references on here to the 'Latinised' UGCC.

While I entirely accept that the UGCC appears to be very Latinised in various quarters, this - as many of you will know - is a result of many historical influences that have largely passed now. The Basilians remain as an order, and the Ukrainian Redemptorists retain control of a good number of parishes (at least in Canada), but in places like the UK and the rest of Europe, and parts of Canada (and these are only the places I have experience of), there are some very good things going on.

Young priests and deacons of the UGCC everywhere (together with their Patriarch!) are working to re-educate the faithful on their inheritance, and we would be loath to think that Latinisers have had the final say.

That said, I was conversing with my parish priest this morning about the catechism, and while he has not yet seen it, he expressed that he would be surprised if there was a Latin view of papacy in it, as he knows people who were involved in its composition, and they would not countenance such a thing.

Of course you do not have to agree with me on the issue of theological Latinization in the UGCC, but after having watched on Youtube some of the liturgical celebrations at the UGCC's Immaculate Conception Cathedral in Philadelphia I came away with a sense that - not only theologically, but also liturgically - it has a rather modern Roman Catholic approach to the faith.

That is my impression, and I make no apologies for it.

P.S. - At least in the videos I watched - unlike at the UGCC parish I personally visited some years ago in Pittsburgh - there were no altar girls. I was thankful for that small blessing.

If the translation at the beginning of this thread is accurate, it follows that the new UGCC catechism has presented a basically Latin view in connection with the position and authority of the bishop of Rome. Why would it reference Vatican I if it were not presenting a Roman take on primacy (or as Western Catholics often prefer to say - supremacy)?

I must admit I remember reading an article by someone working on the UGCC catechism a few years ago where he spoke about documents coming out of Rome as "universal," and that gave me pause to wonder whether or not the individual had an orthodox view of the nature of the Church. After all, Rome is not "universal" and thus somehow above all the local Churches; instead, each and every local Church is the full realization of the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

.

It's also possible that, if the "Latin view of the papacy" is in the new UGCC Catechism, it could be because the final editing was done in Rome by the Eastern Congregation. According to page 3 this report [stjosaphateparchy.org]:


I had asked one of the people who had been involved in some of the early preparation of the Catechism if it would teach papal infallibility and they replied they couldn't say since they had not seen the final text. I took that as a good sign as they did not quickly give a yes to my query. It appears, however, that the final text does teach papal infallibility in section 291.

I have since noted that two paragraphs later in section 293 the new Catechism quotes the Council of Florence. Can someone who has the text and who can read Ukrainian confirm if it is quoting from the papal bull from Florence which in discussing the Pope says:

Apotheoun,

It is undeniable that the UGCC was in bondage to the Latin Church, throughout the same period that Ukraine was in bondage to the Soviets. And probably even before.

So, I am not looking for an apology.

I am saying, however, that it would be unfair to describe the present UGCC as 'Latinised' as if that is an accurate term in the present. There are people who are pouring their guts out with a view to seeing the Church restored to the tradition which gives it its raison d'etre, beginning with Blessed Andriy Sheptytsky.

The fact that the Cathedral in Philedelphia is called 'Immaculate Conception' makes me cringe, but such examples (among many, many others) should only serve to spur 'renewers' on in their work. In which case, I would beg others not to consign us to the 'Latinised' dust bin. Just keep us in your prayers.

In any case, for better examples of what we are doing, look for YouTube clips of the Patriarch's enthronement Liturgy in Kyiv, or at the incredible work coming out of Saint Elias in Canada. Or even, dare I say it, the remarkable revival going on in my own humble parish...

With respect to the catechism, though, I am going to do some investigating. I want to know who the theologians are that have been involved in its composition, and how they were selected to work on it.

Not mush has been said about it here. In fact, not much at all. It makes me wonder if it is analagous to one of the many 'para-catachisms' that were composed by any number of well-meaning RCs in the decades before the CCC was released.

As I find out more, I will post.

*EDIT: I hadn't read DTBrown's post before posting this. Obviously the answer to my question is in what he wrote. But that being the case, then it would look like whatever is in the Catechism is the Eastern Congregation's teaching and not the teaching of the UGCC. Which may explain why it hasn't met with much fanfare.

Please let us know what you find out. As for the history of the development of the new UGCC Catechism, a good recap is given here. [catholicukes.org.au]

This new Catechism is not only officially produced by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church but it was also vetted by Rome. As such, what it presents on issues related to differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy is significant.

I have expressed elsewhere that I hoped this Catechism might be a model for finding common ground on these issues between our Churches. If these initial translations are correct, I think that it could not be such.

I just want to add that I believe there most likely is much good in this new Catechism from an Eastern point of view. My guess is that there are only a few paragraphs that focus on the traditional Catholic differences with the East. I'm sure this new Catechism will provide much good instruction to the UGCC and these few paragraphs should not overshadow the rest of the text.