www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News 2005 stats for the world's Eastern Rite Catholics

Father Deacon, I thank you for your positive comments on my assessment of the BCC. I went East myself in 1996 for the same reason you did. I have spent the last 10 years, for the most part, between the BCC and the UGCC. My observation is that the Eastern Catholic Churches are just lagging behind the Novus Ordo by about 15 years.

When I was trying to get my wife, a former Lutheran, converted, the BCC priest at the parish we were attending told me: "leave her alone if she is comfortable where she is". This priest does not believe that his religion is necessary for salvation. In fact, I was told not to make the error of Fr. Feeney in my attempt to convert her. In the end, I had to enroll her in the Latin RCIA (an abomination in itself)to get her converted. And they wonder why the numbers are dropping exponentially year after year with nobody new to replace them? That's funny!

Like I said in my original post, if the BCC is to be saved it will be the Lutherans, Presbyterians, RC's and Episcopalian/Anglican's who will save it. And that is only going to happen if the BCC becomes a haven of tradition for these people to escape liberalism. If this does not happen, and I really don't think it will when priests tell people to stay in the Lutheran (or any other) church and support liturgical novelties, I doubt the BCC has 20 years left.

Again, Fr. Deacon, I appreciate your positive comment. It makes me feel better to know that there is at least one person in Holy Orders who agrees with this line of thinking.

Yes, I am biased but despite the Novus Ordo the Latin Church in the U.S. (and in Africa and Asia) is growing steadily.

Why don't the Eastern Catholics care to investigate the reason(s)?

Amado

The growth in the RCC is do to a evangelical-charismatic influence...though its not my cup of tea.

The fields are ripe with many unhappy people...why don't they go and harvest them...

james

I've love to get a wager going on this. First, I agree that it will not be the case that the BCC will "be saved" by "Lutherans, Presbyterians, RC's and Episcopalian/Anglican's", as much as I appreciate the presence of former "Lutherans, Presbyterians, RC's and Episcopalian/Anglicans in the BCC. But I haven't the slightest doubt that we have twenty years left. Whaddya say, AOSB, how much are you willing to wager?

You are right, djs, the key word that I missed was FORMER. It is going to take FORMER western christians to pull the BCC out of this slump. I was basing the 20 year figure on the statistics of this thread where over half of the American BCC membership was lost in the past 15 years. If the membership if cut in half again in the next 15 years where are things going to stand? How many of these "15 year periods" will it take to get the BCC to a point where it can not longer support itself?

I hope you are right, djs. My figure was just based on some quick math and the assumption that some SERIOUS intervention is not done during this period.

I wouldn't feel right betting on the continued existance of the BCC like it was a horse race. I do, however, hope you are right and I am wrong.

AOSB:

On the math. If the your idea of first-order decay with a half-life of 15 years were correct, then you would anticipate a decline of ~5% over the past year. But the numbers are not even close to that over the Archeparchy. So the apparent rate of decline is much less, in recent years, then you are assuming. Not good - and clearly much work needs to be done - but not horrific. The big drops, as we discussed in earlier threads, are related to counting schemes e.g. baptized BC's versus regular parish members. (And FYI, the OCA has this same apparent "drop"; cf the Hopko letter.) I agree with Gordo's comment that it would be nice to tabulate actual attendance figures.

I wasn't quibbling about "former". I think, however, that converts will be saved by the church, rather than the other way around.

DJS Wrote: So the apparent rate of decline is much less, in recent years, then you are assuming. Not good - and clearly much work needs to be done - but not horrific. The big drops, as we discussed in earlier threads, are related to counting schemes e.g. baptized BC's versus regular parish members. (And FYI, the OCA has this same apparent "drop"; cf the Hopko letter.) I agree with Gordo's comment that it would be nice to tabulate actual attendance figures.

Numbers, numbers, numbers....we can count till the cows come home gentlemen, but until we see the demographics, a true picture of the Byzantine Church will remain blurry.

Do we have mostly older people in the pews, empty nesters or young families? That's the question we need to ask. The solution will come out of that answer.

I agree, Cathy, that the demographics are more important than the head count.

It seems the few real parishes in the BCC that are growing are drawing Catholics and Protestant converts who want to be Orthodox Catholics. These are the folks who have icon corners in their houses, read Holy Scripture and the Fathers of the Church, thirst for the full and complete rescension and really want to experience authentic Eastern Christianity. Our Vladykas should be worried about these folks leaving the BCC. They will undoubtedly turn to Orthodoxy if our Church continues to wither. Let�s see the real demographics!

Hi Cathy! Good points.

The nerve of that Vatican sometimes, eh? But seriously, do you happen to remember which document(s) that is? (It's possible I've read it before, but I'd like to read it again anyhow.)

Thanks in advance and welcome to the forum,
Peter.

djs,

I agree with you that placing a fixed time for estimating the demise of the BCC was done in haste. However, the point stands that there is significant decay which is in dire need of an intervention.

True, converts may be saved in the spiritual sense by the Church. But I still stand be the idea that the BCC must be saved in the temporal sense by massive conversions, most likely from western christian churches.

I am interested in the Hopko letter you mentioned. Would you please point me to it?

Thank you!

I agree totally with you, John. You and Cathy are right in requesting to see the real demographics. Just numbers from a head-count do not tell us much.

This is true, but first our parishioners must be open to accepting those people without Slavic last names. Atleast in the Cleveland-area, time and time again they feel that the Byzantine Church belongs solely to the Slavs -- and then don't do anything to encourage their own children to belong to the Byzantine Church once they marry "outside." Actually,it strikes me as really odd.

The sooner these people are brought into the loop about the state of their church, the sooner they can do some soul searching and reach out to the general public. Ultimately, it may be the people outside of Cleveland & Pittsburgh that revitalize our church.

I've highlighted the portions relevant to this discussion (at least as I understand it) of Fr. Hopko's letter (posted 5/22/06 by Gordo):

http://www.ocanews.org/news/Hopkoletter319.html

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fr. Thomas Hopko's Letter
to the Metropolitan Council

Decried by Bishop Tikhon as "an unconscionable and mob-inciting RANT" in the days following the dismissal of Fr. Kondratick, OCAnews has obtained a copy of the Fr. Thomas Hopko's March 19th letter
addressed to the Metroplitan and the Metropolitan Council.

In the letter Fr. Hopko, former dean of St. Vladimir's Seminary, outlines some of the challenges currently facing the OCA. Fr. Hopko writes:
Your Beatitude, Reverend Fathers,
Brothers and Sisters,

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I ask Your Beatitude's blessing.

Given the present condition in our Orthodox Church in America, the hour has clearly come for Your Beatitude and the Metropolitan Council to insist upon a carefully organized and in-depth analysis and discussion of what happened to our beloved church that has resulted in:

� the financial scandal we are suffering

� the financial crisis we are now facing

� the divisions in the Holy Synod and the church we
are now witnessing

� the lack of communion and communication we are now enduring

� the anger, frustration, depression and outright cynicism among the clergy and informed lay people
we are now experiencing

� the disagreements that exist among us about the nature of episcopacy, authority and decision-making in the church (including our disagreement about the relationship between bishops, priests and lay people, the function of Orthodoxy in a pluralistic democratic society and the significance for our church of the
1917-1918 All Russian Church Council)

� our church's failure to integrate our archdioceses and dioceses into one cohesive, fully cooperating, ecclesial body

� our church's failure to be a powerful and effective force for the administrative and structural unity of Orthodoxy in North America

� a synod of Bishops that refuses to respond to questions and requests of the faithful, including a formal appeal of 70 highly respected senior priests

� a synod of Bishops that appears to have no need for the counsel of others in the church, including the church's priests, monastics, scholars and thinkers

� the reluctance and often outright refusal of some bishops to speak face to face with their priests and people about church doctrine, liturgical practices and parochial, pastoral and personal problems

� the failure of our bishops to meet together, and the priests to meet with each other, for the purpose of giving an account of their ministry, receiving and answering questions, and fostering unity of teaching and practice

� the impossibility to get a serious discussion on practically any church issue among the church's bishops and priests, and between the clergy and lay people

� the ordination of men to the clergy and the appointment of people to church positions lacking the ability needed to conduct their ministries fruitfully

� the absence of a system of formal performance assessment, continuing education and 'on the job training' of our clergy and church workers

� our church's failure to care for its trouble clergy
and their families

� the virtual reduction of church life among many clergy to liturgical services and ritual practices,
with uncritical imitations of old world practices and subjective alterations of our received rites and texts

� the virtual reduction of supra-parochial church life to liturgical services, ecclesiastical celebrations and social events

� our church's failure to attract American born Orthodox young people to our seminaries and monasteries (for if we did not have the converts, those born abroad, and the clergy children that we do in our seminaries and monasteries, we would have almost no seminarians and monastics at all!)

� the failure of our seminaries and monasteries to interact and cooperate with each other as a matter
of normal policy

� our church's failure to support and foster a vibrant monastic and missionary movement

� the disagreement among us about how our church and its parishes, institutions and faithful members should relate to non-Orthodox people, especially to Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Protestant Christians of various kinds

� the confusion among us about how we are to deal as a church and as individual believers with contemporary social, political, military, economic, sexual and bioethical issues

� the misrepresentation in and outside the church of its statistical figures (such as that our church has 400,00 members when less than 30,000 identify themselves as members)

� dioceses that have fewer members than their cathedral churches alone had 50 years ago

� the point where a church of 200 people is considered to be large

� the loss of the influence and respect that our church and many of its leaders once had among Orthodox and non-Orthodox in North American and abroad.
These are just some of the most obvious issues and conditions in our church that require detailed, study, analysis and debate. Why are things the way they now are? Why do our bishops, clergy, and lay people think and act as they do? What has happened? How did it happened? Why has it happened? And what should
we do about it?

An in-depth study and debate on such questions as these will hardly be pleasant or easy. But it must be done. And it must be long, serious, free, candid, patient and charitable. The life of our church, and indeed, our eternal lives with God, depend on it.

Your Beatitude and respected members of the Metropolitan Council: Please do whatever it takes to see that such a study and debate take place. Do it for the clergy and lay people who elected you. Do it for our whole church, especially our children and grand- children. Do it for the people desiring to join the Orthodox Church. And do it for all Orthodox Christians and, indeed, for all Christians and all people who are suffering in their own ways as we are now suffering in our dear Orthodox Church in America.

I ask for your forgiveness and prayers.
May the Lord's Will be done.

Yours in Our Saviour,

Protopresbyter Thomas Hopko

cc: Holy Synod of Bishops
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a generational aspect to this that I think you are alluding to and that is vital to consider. This shift is described in the book, "The New Faithful: Why Young Adults are Embracing Christian Orthodoxy".

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0829416455/002-0541710-9582405?v=glance&n=283155

Here is a link to an article on the book:

http://www.facsnet.org/issues/faith/carroll.php

In the article, the author offers this insight:

Worship is the key - and rediscovering the liturgical dimensions of life which flow from and go beyond the church sanctuary into our homes and the marketplace helps to counter the secularist sickness and functional atheism that pervades society. (Not to mention the materialism and target-market saturated evangelicalism offered in some sectors...exactly how many types of worship services do you need in one mega-church???) People, especially young adults, want more tradition, not less. But they want it done well...that is the challenge!

There is an evangelical dimenion to our worship, which can be described as "Liturgical Evangelism". The locus of church life, mission and teaching is the Divine Liturgy, and we need presbyters and deacons who will preach the Gospel (in Word and Mystery) and laity who will fully participate in this worship and then exercise their ordo in the "liturgy after the liturgy".

Do you think that maybe we have forgotten how to discern the Gospel in our worship in order that we too might be "evangelized" every Sunday? To Athanasius' point, have we, immersed as we are in the means of salvation, forgotten the fundamental need to be saved?

It's time to unleash the Byzantine Orthodox lion in our churches and be who we are: Orthodox Catholics - believers in and disiciples of the true Faith of Christ!

Gordo