www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Union of Uzhorod

Hi all,

Does anybody know where I can find the text of the Union of Uzhorod online?

Yours in the Theotokos,

Darrenn

Dear Darrenn,
Christ is among us!
I do not know where you could find a copy of the Union of Uzhorod on-line. No copy of the Union exists to the best of my knowledge. When I was in Seminary we learned about a detailed discription of the Act of Union recreated by some of the signators a few years later. It was in a "Sources" text compiled by the late Fr. John Slivka. For many years he was pastor of St. Elias Church in Brooklyn, NY.
Fr.V

Fr. Vladimir

Fr. Vladimir,

Is there any source, either online or not, that we can point to with any certainty and say, "That's what was agreed upon between the Ruthenian Orthodox Bishops and the See of Rome."? As Stuart K pointed out to me on AOL instant messenger, if it was based on the Union of Brest (which is most likely), then there also is the problem of acknowledging that Rome violated nearly every single sentence.

Yours in the Theotokos,

Darrenn

The Union was not between the Ruthenian Orthodox Bishops and the See of Rome. It was between the clergy (no bishop) and the King of Hungary.

The Union of Brest promised the right of the Ukrainian bishops to sit as members of the Polish Senate. This Holy obligation has NOT been honored by the See of Rome.

K.

Kurt,
Don' t blame Rome for this failure. Senate seats for eastern bishops, not only Ukrainian but also from eparchies in the territory of nowadays Belarussia, was not a matter of religion but of constitutional law in polish - lithuanian commonwealth. So the pope was not able to promise them. He was not against this solution but he could only urge polish kings and parliaments to change law and to that majority of representants and senators was unfortunately strongly opposed.
Only in 1791, in famous May 3rd constitution was Greek - Catholic metropolitan allowed to senat, although he was preceeded by all latin rite bishops. This was not so important since after 4 years Poland tottally collapsed and was parted between , Kingdom of Prussia, Russia and Austria.
Only eparchies wich were on the territories seized by austrian empire exist until today. Byzantine catholicism under Tsar rule was almost tottaly extinguished.
In Christ

Certainly the present Nuncio could at least send a diplomatic Note expressing the Holy See's view that our bishops sit in the Senate.

A deal is a deal, right?

K.

Kurt,

Yes, you are right, no Ruthenian bishops were involved. But both of us know that the Union of Brest guaranteed (in writing) more than the right of Ukrainian Bishops to sit on Polish Senate.

Yours in the Theotokos,

Darrenn

More yes. But the least observed part are the Senate seats. Let us fix the gravest wrong first!

K.

Dear Darrenn,

Yes, but the senate was the least of the worries of the Eastern Catholic Church then.

In addition, although Rome promised this or that, the Polish Sovereign could NOT be brought to honour anything, even with the direct request from Rome.

According to one writer, Poland would sometimes suspend its union with Rome if it didn't like something in terms of papal policy.

In fact, if one counted up the total years in which Poland was in schism from Rome along this vein, it would amount to about 200 years since the official reception of Christianity by Poland.

Rome was in no political position to dictate policy about Greco-Uniates to the Polish King.

In any event, as a result of the infighting between Orthodox and the Greco-Uniates, Poland later became very much against the Unia since it upset the peace of the Kingdom (see Leo Sapieha and his letter to St Josaphat).

Neither East nor West wanted the Greco-Uniates (their original name as was "Orthodox in union with Rome").

But Piotr is correct. They at least survived under Poland, something that didn't happen in Russia, even with heavy Latinization and Polonization.

Also, given the fact that most of the Greco-Uniate bishops were hand-picked by the Polish King, the people and the Church would have received practically no benefit from having them as members of the Polish Senate.

Alex

[ 02-06-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

Interesting piece of information. I had no idea that it was such a political thing.

Of course, if one is to follow current Roman Catholic Canons, the clergy are precluded from holding any political office whatsoever. The stimulus for this was Fr. John Drinan's election to Congress from Massachusetts. As a lawyer (yuk!) and former Dean of the Boston College School of Law, he was eminently qualified to hold the post. But it rubbed some fur the wrong way, and the edict came out. I must admit that Fr. Drinan was an excellent scholar, but personally, I had some problems with him. Once, at Georgetown University, in the Jesuit residence, I was in the common room (sort of a huge living room) in my cassock. He came in, scoped me out (there was no one else there) and said: "What the hell are you wearing that for?" After counting to 10, I told him I was on my way to our local Greek-Catholic community for liturgy and that the people expected clergy to be suitably attired. His response was something like: these people must be backward. My response was: "these people have been around doing philosophy and science when your people were still swinging from trees." And then I left. (I subsequently went to confession to ask forgiveness for being rude to a priest.) But, NO ONE shows disrespect for our peoples without a "word" from me in response. (Guess it's the pride that's still there.)

Blessings!

APOSTOLIC LETTER
OF POPE JOHN PAUL II
THE 350TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNION OF UZHOROD

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j...jp-ii_apl_19960418_union-uzhorod_en.html

Blessings

Tom

Alex,

Is the period you're referring to when Poland annexed western Ukraine? I think there was a time when Poland did that and was subsequently visited by the Cossack Charitable Society and the Peasant Demolition Squad, resulting in the burning of Krakow. Anyhoo, how did the Poles justify their interevention between Rome and Eastern Catholics (like appointing their bishops)?

I do like the title "Orthodox in union with Rome" tho.

Dr. John,

If I was your confessor, I would have let you off easy

Yours in the Theotokos,

Darrenn

Dear Darrenn,

Yes, indeed, this was when "Little Poland" or western Ukraine was under the Polish Crown.

Candidates for the Orthodox episcopacy needed to be ratified by the King and certainly the King would ratify those candidates who were the most sympathetic to his politics, to be sure.

The Kozaks could definitely be feisty. But history is written by the winners, ultimately.

Your note on the Kozak attack is only a miniscule percentage of the wider picture of what went on at that time.

As for the peasants, they had guts.

Alex

Dr. John,

Great reply re: "your people swinging from trees."

Whatever your personal feelings are regarding lawyers, could you please refrain from saying "yuck" even in jest? My fiancee Michaela will be going to law school, and she intends to use her degree decently and morally, and to help our society.

The lawyer I work for helps Hispanics who are injured on the job and not payed. He is very hardworking and oftentimes will do pro bono work.

I do know some bad lawyers, though!

In Christ,

anastasios