www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News New apostolic administrator for Eparchy of Mukachevo

Dear Joe,

I am not Diak, nor do I play one on the web. However, it seems to me that each of these Churches needs to come to its own decision. But it also seems to me that each should pledge its loyalty to a future Patriarch of Kyiv and all Rus (and also all Non-Rus).

Interestingly, Cardinal Husar, aka Patriarch Lubomyr has said that he would serve under another, if there were to be a united Ukrainian Church at ST. Sophia in Kyiv.

Patriarch Josyf Slipyj, in his last testament, asked to be buried at St. Sophia, under a united Church.

But each part of the Church will have to decide how to proceed.

Have a Blessed Saint Josaphat Day !!!

John
PIlgrim and Odd Duck

No, but you do much better than I, John. You can say something better with far fewer words. Great point about Patriarch Josyp. May he rest one day in Kyiv as he wished.

But at some point we need to get together and speak with one voice of the Kyivan-Ruthenian tradition. Unity is not served by further sui iuris internal divisions.

I think Patriarch Lubomyr is "da man" and with enough charity, humility and love we can make it happen. As Patriarch, in accord with canonical provisions, he would exercise authority both in Europe and in the diaspora, as does Patriarch Gregory for the Melkites.

The example of the Melkite patriarchs, who were tenacious in upholding Eastern tradition and patrimony in the recent past should be a signpost towards where to go next. The historic visit of Gregory III to Patriarch Lubomyr is yet another hint towards where we should be going. This has historical significance as the Patriarchate of Antioch has supplied ecclesial support to the Kyivan church during its past at critical times.

At http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/ I found that both Bishops Ivan are over 81 years of age. (I couldn't sort whether para 2 of the Canon 210 refers to retirement for reasons of health or of age). (Bishop Djura is 46 and Bishop Milan is 50.)

Interestingly I found that while all the daughter eparchies of Mukachevo as described as either Byzantine (in Europe) of Ruthenian (US) in rite, the Mother eparchy is described as Ukrainian in Rite. Perhaps the anschluss has already begun.

I can't find a Lechina, SK. Closest thing: Lechnica, (Spis) at Lat 49� 22' 60N Long 20� 23' 60E Altitude 582 meters. It lies about a mile from the Cherveny Klastor, a former Carthusian monastery that was built in 1319.

Only other reference I found or "Milan Sasik" on-line was this:

"W imieniu Zgromadzenia Księży Misjonarzy dziękuję za obecność Wyższym Przełożonym Zakonn�w i Zgromadzeń w Polsce, na czele z O. Parzyszkiem, Przełożonym Konsulty Zakon�w Męskich; dziękuję za uczestnictwo zakonnikom, a także moim konfratrom ze Zgromadzenia Księży Misjonarzy, kt�rzy przybyli z zagranicy, jak ks. Roman G�rowski (USA), ks.Michał Ciurej (Austria), ks.Milan Sasik (Ukraina), ks.Jaroslav Jasso (Ukraina) i z całej Polski."
http://www.fund.pl/grafika/teksty.htm

which seems (on-line translation is rough) to place Him in the Ukraine already in 2001.

Anyone have any idea of the word on the street in Carpatho-Rus'?

djs,

The very rough translation is as follows:

"I thank in name of assembly of missionary priests for the presence superior rearrange(?) zakonn�w(?) and in Poland assemblies, from the head of parzyszkiem(?), rearrange(?) order men's konsulty. I thank the monks for their participation, as well as the assembly of missionary priests from my confraternity, who have arrived as priest from foreign countries - ks. Roman G�rowski (USA), ks. Michael Ciurej (Austria), ks. Milan Sasik (Ukraine), ks. Jaroslav Jasso (Ukraine) and from the whole of Poland."

I apologize to any Poles out there for this poor translation. Please correct if need be.

He was mentioning foreign countries. Was Milan Sasik acting as a representative of Mukachevo, which is in Western Ukraine territory?

Hello Everyone,
I hope I see the day of a Kyivan Patriarchate,where there will be one Patriarch for Kyivan-Rus. I'm a Ukie, but I can understand the Carpatho-Ruthenian Church's position and I also believe that they would be extremely helpful if they put in their two cents and tell Rome something like "Hey! Give the Ukies their Patriarchate!" I think that afterwards they could sit back and see what happens and then decide if they want to belong to this Patriarchate or not.
Lauro

What about Alex's Top Ten list?

I think that by you having to continue to ask about it, is your answer.

I think it would have been best if Alex would have kept that to himself.

One could come up with just as outrageous and mean spirited top ten list for not being in communion with Rome.

The funny, or sad, thing is, Alex would have been one of the first to jump on an orthodox poster if they posted what he did.

Alex also said;
Yet I seem to remember a thread of the past where he said that he would welcome this because after all, as he said, "you (ruthenians) are ukrainians".

David

DavidB,

Yes. Thank you for your comments and concern. I was beginning to wonder about the questionable silence, especially after so many read this thread since yesterday. Does silence mean agreement?

Maybe the moderator will make comments? And maybe Alex just had a bad day and wrote things he really didn't mean? Or maybe this was a trial balloon to see how we'd react for an article he was writing for "The Onion?"

"The funny, or sad, thing is, Alex would have been one of the first to jump on an orthodox poster if they posted what he did."

That's intereting.

Joe,

I think that Alex was giving you the only answer he thought you will be happy with.

I am sure he will respond if he checks in between unpacking after his move.

Admin

Friends,

Cut Alex some slack. He is I am sure just venting as he stated. Given the Ukrainian Eparchy of Toronto's experience with Rome picked apostolic administrator's I can understand his reaction to this posting.

For those who don't know about the above situation, Rome tried to force retirement on Bishop Isidore of Toronto when he declined to render his resignation. They named Bishop Roman apostolic administrator without actually removing Bishop Isidore. The Eparchy split into two factions one recognizing Bishop Isidore the other Bishop Roman. Thanks for the help Oriental Congregation. :rolleyes: The issue was resolved with Bishop Isidore retiring and Bishop Roman being removed to Rome and Bishop Cornelius named new eparch.

In Christ,
Lance

Administrator,

Do you agree with Alex's top ten benefits for being in communion with Rome? Do you think he is being negative, seeing things in a negative light? How does his list help the church?

Thank you.

I actually found Alex's Top Ten really Funny!!!
and perhaps a font of 10 new Threads!

And Joe, I hear your concerns, really. But I don't think that Alex was seriously being disrespectful. And none of us have any serious doubts about his commitment to being both Orthodox and Catholic [i.e. InCommunionWithRome]. Plus he apologised in the next posting [which I thought was quite unnecessary] and kindly offered his virtual back for corrective Net-flagellation.

And to understand the posting, one has to understand the ecclesio-theological culture/attitudes of many of the people in the Canadian Ukrainian Metropolia. Given that , Alex's very Pointed and very amusing List, make total sense. In a lot of places ecumenism is bad and the word "Orthodox" is never used in Church, because they are the "Great Enemy", and I am not talking people who have actually had to escape the Soviet invasion or had to live an underground Church existence. These are people who were born and bred in the New World but have a deeply held chauvanism of Catholic vs "the benighted Orthodox" and would never think of themselves as "Orthodox" - if you'll forgive a little public "hanging out of our dirty laundry".

In any case, I thought that at least half, if not all the Top Ten, were really self directed - saying that We should be getting OUR Act together, e.g. re: glorification of our own saints, etc.

I sympathise with your concern for scandal.

On the other hand, it might do a LOT of good that on one hand, if read by Latins, they might begin to realize, that all is not "hunky-dory" in the present structure and dynamic within the Catholic Communion [which in my experience, many Latins think it is], and the acknowledgement of a problem is a good first step toward resolving it.

On the other hand, if read by Orthodox, then they would realize that We OrthodoxInCommunionwithRome, know all too well the problems extant presently and extant still within the structure of the Uniya, that we do not accept the present arrangement as final or ultimate, and yet nevertheless, problems not withstanding, we are totally committed to being in Communion with older Rome and the Churches with which it is in Communion.

Heck, it wouldn't be so bad if our own people read it and realized that all is not "hunky-dory", and that most of all, it falls to US to get our act together in improving the dynamics of the Uniya.

Being True a sister Church doesn't mean we cannot express our dissatisfaction with the hopefully pro tem. arrangements.

I didn't think that he was promoting schism, but being InCommunionWith doesn't 'mean never being able to "kvetch" ' a little (with apologises to Ali McGraw)

And if our Latin siblings have serious concerns about the issues raised by Alex, GREAT. Please feel free to raise raise them and we shall have a great Thread discussion edifying for all.

herb.

Herbigny,

I agree. I've always been an advocate of calling things what they are. I really did find Alex's Top Ten most excellent! I think he speaks for most of us. Each point can truly be a new thread.

We have to look at ourselves for who we are and what we are not. Understanding our history is recommended as well as a critical appraisal of that history.

I don't have Alex's charism and charm. He is special and a true Untouchable. A class-A mentor.

In my point of view, what Alex wrote, not everyone agrees with, but if we really want to be realistic much of what he wrote is true. We can't forget that there are Byzantine Catholics that would like to see their church celebrating the liturgies in the correct Byzantine form without any kind of Latin or Roman influence. The problem is that there are certain people and that includes priests, bishops, certain orders etc., that don't want to go back to the old religion and they are the ones who usually say "We don't need a Patriarch". "What do we need married priests for?" I think we can find these characters in many parishes throughout the world. I'm not against the Catholic Church, but I'm not always agreeing with what has been and is being done by the church. There are certain priests and bishops that I don't understand why they got ordained into the Byzantine tradition to begin with.
Lauro