www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Particular Law Promulgated

I little explanation about my "American " comments. First, I share everyone's extreme disappointment and hurt over this special dispensation issue. It really does seem that the "sui iuris" which we are so proud comes across as a sham.

However, there is an historical perspective that we should also keep in mind... You can argue til the cows come home as to where fault lies (heck,if you want to, blame it on Uzhorod), but the point is that until VERY, VERY recently that we have begun to act as a sui iuris Church. I'm not offering excuses just some background.

First, although our alleged sui iuris label has been a round for a number of years, in reality how long have we been operating in that mode? It was only just a few years ago that it seems the eparchies have begun operating in unison and that Metropolitan Judson (God bless him.) has truly taken on a leadership role. But even now, there are differences in Liturgies, devotions, and practices among parishes and dioceses. (Is this the mark of a unified Church?).

How recently has it been since infant communion was reinstated as the norm and First Communion a la the Roman Church phased out? How many churches don't have icon screens or if they did, they've been removed? How many of our people still go to "mass" and not Divine Liturgy? Remember, we still have a generation or two of very dedicated, sincere Faithful who are Latinized (no disrespect) They and/or their parents may have even had to face the decision of entering into Orthodox communions over celibacy and church property issues instead of remaining within the Ruthenian Church.

Second, our Church, along with most if not all the other Eastern Churches, are Churches of diasporas. Ironically, they have flourished in their diasporas with only vestiges left in the "old country." (How many cradle-born Eastern Catholic (or Orthodox for that matter) Christians are returning to the homeland now that their Church is legal?)

Is the Metropolia of Pittsburgh a jurisdiction for entire Byzantine (Ruthenian) Church or just the jurisdications here in America (diaspora)? Seems to me that if we speak of a truly sui iuris Church then it should include everyone from Scranton to Spish.

Third, it's tragic that all the bickering here in America between those Rusyns living north of the Carpathians (now called Ukrainians) and those on the southern slopes (Ruthenians) caused Rome to "step in" and create two distinct "Churches." People talk about the flight to the Orthodox churches because of celebacy, but look what was done in the name of "ethnicity" ...such as a cantor not singing Christos Voskrese in the "Ukrainian" melody. (One church in Pennsylvania allegedly split in two because of just this.)

Fourth, we do not have an historical Patriarch... Judson is the closest to it we got. But the Melkites do, the Ukrainians do, the Armenians do... albeit not in the U.S.

In closing, I guess it's just what side of the fence you choose... is it our hierarchs once again kowtowing to Rome; or is it our hierarchs taking a conservative, one-step-at-a-time approach in the evolution of our Church?. For me, I personally hope it's the second, even though I want it to happen and happen now.

In response to Elias' point #9. Although the celebacy issue came from the AMERICAN RC bishops, other latinizations mostly came from the Faithful themselves in an attempt to fit in and be American Catholics and not to be labeled as "those heathen Orthodox."

I guess in attempt to "prove" we were "Catholic," we REALLY took to heart the statement that I hear most people still give when asked if we are really Catholic. "Oh yes, we are under the Pope!"

Yes, there were RC clergy who were either ignorant of and/or downright hostile to BC's. But it wasn't the RC's who made us not include icon screens in our Churches, or stop infant communion, or dress up our kids for their first Holy Communion. Please understand that I am not laying blame on previous generations. What I am saying is that in America, it's been a two-way street... we can't attribute our entire current state solely to Rome.

I am rather slow of wit, I freely admit but I can't help but wonder if our Hierarchs ever care enough to read these posts which come forth from bruised and beaten hearts.
Most unworthy monk, Silouan

Well, first of all I think reunion with the Orthodox is totally hopeless if we can't even give the presumption of good faith to the Vatican and our own bishops.

For those who view Rome as some evil force bent on illicit domination of the Byzantine Church I would say first, stop standing around with your cup out. If you think the Byzaintine Church is a subsidy, it is a very unprofitable one. If the Catholic Church was run like General Electric, we would be closed down or sold off.

Let's also be clear on the sui iuris status. As the Orthodox will be the first to admit (as they recognize their own North American situation to be totally irregular) there is nothing in tradition or the early ecumencial councils to justify the creation of a sui iuris church within the jurisdiction of an existing church. The Pope, excerizing authority totally beyond what tradition assigns him, except for the agruement of the signficant pastoral benefit of his unprecedented action, created by his own decree the sui iuris Church of Pittsburgh.

>>>Well, first of all I think reunion with the Orthodox is totally hopeless

if we can't even give the presumption of good faith to the Vatican and

our own bishops. <<<



Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.



>>>>For those who view Rome as some evil force bent on illicit domination of

the Byzantine Church I would say first, stop standing around with your

cup out. If you think the Byzaintine Church is a subsidy, it is a very

unprofitable one. If the Catholic Church was run like General Electric,

we would be closed down or sold off.<<<



That assumes that money is the criterion by which the Roman Church makes such decisions. It is not. That aside, there have been several attempts to "close down or sell off" the Eastern Catholic Churches--particularly in the United States. The Eastern Catholics have survived only by maintaining constant vigilence against the unlawful encroachments of the Latin hierarchy and the papa curia upon their legitimate rights. That Rome has not once in 400 years lived up to the letter, let alone the spirit, of the union agreements, should make us wary. It certainly gives the Orthodox food for thought.



>>>Let's also be clear on the sui iuris status. As the Orthodox will be the

first to admit (as they recognize their own North American situation to

be totally irregular) there is nothing in tradition or the early

ecumencial councils to justify the creation of a sui iuris church within

the jurisdiction of an existing church. The Pope, excerizing authority

totally beyond what tradition assigns him, except for the agruement of

the signficant pastoral benefit of his unprecedented action, created by

his own decree the sui iuris Church of Pittsburgh.<<<



Ah, I see. Even dogs are allowed crumbs off the master's table. Funny, I never envisioned myself as the Syrian woman.

Friends,

I have read the posts on this thread with interest and sympathy. I understand the frustrations expressed, and share many of them.

I hope we will take law, for what it is. It is only law. A casual read of the new canons for the western Church could lead to a discussion more lively than this. There are many points in them we might discuss. But law is only law. The Church is not defined or limited by its laws, but by the Spirit of God. Laws are not infallible or without error. They are tools for order, that keep chaos at bay. They do not define me. They do not confine God.

As legislation goes, these laws are sloppy. But that does not mean our Church is all sloppiness. I was at the 75th anniversary of our Church this past weekend in Pittsburgh. It was a celebration to remember. Every aspect of the celebration made me proud to be a member of this Church. The Liturgy was a prayer I will never forget. It was celebrated with boldness and joy. I was present with several thousand people, filled with the Spirit, glad in their Church and proud of its ministers.

As 'sui juris' Churches stand (I am not an expert in this) I suspect we are by far the youngest such Church in the Catholic communion? Any other, (Melkite, Ukrainian, Syrian etc. etc.) is significantly older by hundreds of years. This is a new Church, 75 years old! That everything is not perfect is no reason to dispair.

I am amazed at how far this new 'sui juris' Church has come in it short life. My impression at the celebration this weekend is that our Church is only awakening to its place, only beginning to realize that its future is in its own hands. I think this Church is coming of age, and is at the threshold of fulfilling its vocation from God.

I pray that we don't focus on a few sloppy or infelicitous phrases in a law not very well thought out. I believe this Church has already moved beyond where it was a few years ago when those laws were drafted. The momentum of the Spirit at work always leaves legislation on the shelf, and the fact that canons are dated, and always in need of revision, is testimony to their static nature in a fluid Church, they cannot keep pace with a Church that is alive!

Criticism of the legislation is fair, in fact, I have more criticisms that have not yet appeared here. I ask you to remember that laws are our servants, and we are not slaves to them. I also ask you to speak kindly of my Church. We are praying, and though weak and sinful, we are trying to follow where the Spirit is calling us. Our Church is like an adolescent among Churches, with newfound freedom and untried judgement. But it is stepping out, full of hope and promise.

"...speak the words men need to hear, words that build up and strengthen..."

Elias, monk