www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Italo-Greek Ecumenical Patriarch?

Hello all-

This [crisismagazine.com] article from Crisis magazine (linked elsewhere) has a little write-up on the Italo-Greek Catholic Church.

It states that "in 1553, the Italo-Albanian metropolitan archbishop was confirmed by the patriarch of Constantinople, with papal authorization. Thus, the Italo-Albanians have never formally broken communion with the Orthodox Church."

Two questions:

1. Does anyone know more about this Metropolitan who became Patriarch?

2. If "the Italo-Albanians never broke communion with the Orthodox Church", does the same apply to the Orthodox Church (say, the EP) and the Italo-Albanian Church?

Thanks,

Marc

Marc,

A couple of things.

The terms "Italo-Greek" and "Italo-Albanian" are not synonymous.

To take a stab at your question...

1. Perhaps I'm being dense, but I don't see where you're getting the idea that this metropolitan of the Italo-Abanian Church became the patriarch of Constantinople. It states he was "confirmed" by the Constantinopolitan hierarch, which to me could mean anything from "installed by" to "recognized as canonical by," although I suspect the former.

2. Lots of Churches which no longer claim intercommunion never formally broke communion with one another. The case could be made that the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches never formally broke communion. Still, the popular understanding is that the two are not in intercommunion.

Logos Teen

The terms "Italo-Greek" and "Italo-Albanian" are not synonymous.

They aren't? Everyone uses them that way, and the "Albanians" who left Albania in the 16th century were actually Greeks from Epirus I beleive.

Anastasios

Anastasios,

The way I've always heard it, they aren't. Perhaps we should ask Andrew Rubis.

Italo-Greek refers to those in Megara Hellas/Magnae Graecia who were of Greek descent and who practiced the Byzantine liturgical tradition long before the Albanians ever arrived. Most Sicilians are descended primarily from their Greek ancestors (along with Saracen Arabs, Phoenicians, and I suppose a Norman or Aragonese here and there), so it would follow that their patrimonial liturgical tradition would be Byzantine. But, as you and I know, with the Norman invasion of Sicily, the Latin Rite replaced the Byzantine Rite even though the Normans didn't really mix ethnically with the Sicilians.

Italo-Albanians refers to those Albanians who arrived in Calabria and Sicily and brought back the Byzantine liturgical tradition with them in the 16th and 17th centuries.

I haven't heard the theory about the Albanians being Greek. In fact, I've read in Sicilian ethnological and sociological history that these Albanians "were of Illyrian stock."

Logos Teen

LT-

You're right. I misread " ... was confirmed by ... " and thought it actually said "was confirmed ..." or "was confirmed as....".

Sheesh! Who'd have thought that two characters would make such a difference!

[I actually just finished a business writing class, and my misunderstanding is actually just confirmation of a point the instructor drilled in our heads. Be careful in your use of the passive voice; people will sometimes read into your words what you didn't mean to say!]

Still, if anyone by any chance has historical detail of who this Metropolitan was and why Constantinople confirmed him I would be curious.

Marc,

It's my personal opinion that, generally, the passive voice is very, very evil!

I think it's pretty vague most of the time, not to mention sometimes only allows for awkward syntax and grammar.

Logos Teen

Marc,

I just worked my way down in the "today's active topics" list to this thread and, unfortunately, I'm too tired to stay up long enough to answer you. If Andrew hasn't weighed in by tonight, I'll answer your question and Adam's.

Adam,

The short answer is "no, they aren't synonymous".

Many years,

Neil