www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Ruthenian latinizations

Quod erat demonstrandum, to coin a term.

ita vero

It also seems to me that the Ruthenians really suffer from the lack of a "sister church" in the Orthodox Churches. Melkites are able to see an "Orthodox mirror" of themselves in the Antiochian Patriarchate, for example, and I am sure that this allows them to retain a shared history and identity that transcends the divide between East and West.

The Ruthenians don't seem to really have an Orthodox mirror or counterpart that transcends the East/West divide which could serve to anchor them in Eastern thought and practice. As such, they are left on their own to decide what "Ruthenian" means.

That alone doesn't fully answer the question, but in my mind it's significant. I think the other aspect of the answer is what is more commonly referenced, which is the difficult period of transition and acceptance within the Catholic Church in the United States.

I am curious, what is the relationship like between the Ruthenian Church in the US and the Eparchy of Mukacheve? Is the European eparchy similarly prone to this type of latinization?

Only because they would rather die than consider themselves Ukrainians.

Be that as it may, there is no Orthodox set of Ruthenians who would similarly rather die than consider themselves Ukranian. They are a Church that lacks a fraternal Eastern referent, and seem incapable (understandably or not) of maintaining a fixed Eastern self-reference.

Which again leads me to wonder what the Eparchy of Mukacheve, or what the Czech Exarchate think of the American version of Ruthenian Eastern Catholocism, and what the relationship is between them all.

Even if they did, the Ukrainians don't have a true mirror because the majority of Ukrainian Orthodoxy is Russified.

The ACROD in the US and the Autocephalous Church of Poland.

Glory to Jesus Christ!





Ok you two, cute with the latin and everything, but some of us, namely myself, am a convert if you will to Catholicism it self. Being confirmed only the Holy Saturday of '09. And it seems I did not get any "classical" studies to understand the minutest of latin or greek. So, what do these latin terms mean?

And also, for future reference for the admins/mods, can we suggest that whenever someone uses a different language that they translate it so that the uninformed like myself know what they are saying? Less it be something that should be known like kyrie eleison lol.

Kyrie eleison (cough cough Lord have mercy :-P )

Manuel

"Kyrie eleison" (cough, cough) is Greek, isn't?

Frankly, I think Google makes it quite easy to find out what some Latin phrase means. Anyway, "quod erat demonstradum" or q.e.d. is often used in mathematics. It means, roughly, "this is what we were going to prove (and we have done so!)". And "ita vero" simply means "indeed".

ارحمنا يا رب ارحمنا [dailymotion.com]

I didn't count ACROD because that split happened *after* latinization pressures and as a result of them. My hypothesis is that having a close Orthodox counterpart as a reference point helps keep the unique Eastern aspect of an Eastern Catholic church that moves into communion with Rome.

Is there such an affinity between the Ruthenian Catholic Church and the Autocephalous Church of Poland that I am not aware of?

Glory to Jesus Christ!



I see someone thinks he's funny :-P lol. But I have never heard that term in any math class. Though I've only taken up to pre-cal with trig so . . .

But you know secular education today, just want to tell you what is their truth and no real thinking or anything. But I'll stop here before I divert the conversation of another thread. Gotta stop diverting the main theme of a thread. Bad Manny lol.

Kyrie eleison,

Manuel

Actually, there are certain words and phrases--Alleluia, amen, Sabaoth, Mananatha, and yes, Kyrie Eleison, that the Church never bothered to translate out of their original language, either because everybody knew what they meant (and it was too much bother to alter the music), or because no adequate translation was possible.

Lots o' Lemkos.

The Greek Catholics have taken on a lot of flak over "latinizations', which seems to be customs, pious acts, prayer or movement which does not appear in Greek, Russian, or Serbian, etc, Orthodox Churches.

We MUST instill only pure provoslavne (true faith) traditions, private prayer; without crossbreeding nor contamination with Western practices or culture according to, shall we say, the conservative wing.

The "latinization" subject is somewhat justified, I agree. I only mention this as a preface to my related question which follows.

The question which I propose is this....Should the Roman Catholic Church purge the use of icons from their Churches, books, etc? If their people feel spiritually moved by icons why shouldn't they enter the Eastern Catholic Church?

I'm asking this because it seems relevant to the thread. If the use of icons is looked at approvingly by eastern Christians doesn't it seem a bit hypocritical when the reverse happens? Is it to be agreed upon that the Western Church has nothing to offer the East and vice versa?

Pondering....

Yes, else they will undergo mental Byzantinization! I was actually in New Haven a few weeks ago and took this [flickr.com] not very good picture of the interior of St. Michael's RC on Wooster Square. There is a clearly Byzantine looking Christ in the dome of the apse.

A while ago on a similar topic I mentioned we sing the Preterpivyj after presanctified in Lent. It was stated by someone that this was a "latinization". Worse yet, a Polish Latinization!!!