www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Eastern Catholics have much to offer US church, cardinal tells bi

Although it is unclear how the author asserts that Cardinal Sandri's comments were "tersely reiterated" without having heard the delivery (presumably), the effect has been clear, and indeed these words were received as "terse" by many (ironically, uttered as part of an otherwise thoughtful speech in several respects).

IMHO, it is not the issue of celibacy per se (though I have a strong opinion about it), it is precisely what Kelleher suggests in this statement that warrants most careful consideration:


While I pray he is wrong, the numbers speak for themselves: The Eastern Catholic Churches 2011 (CNEWA) [cnewa.org]

I hope you are right, but clerical celibacy does needlessly narrow the vocations pool, and is less true to the traditions of the church.

And in my completely subjective experience, married priests are a tremendous, profound God-given blessing.

God bless them all! Many happy years to them all!

My principal concern is the ultimate restoration of unity between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The Church of Rome says many nice things to the Orthodox Churches in ecumenical discussions: that Rome treasures the spiritual patrimony of the East, that Rome and the Orthodox are Sister Churches, that there need be no compromise on the Tradition of the Church, that Rome does not seek either subordination or assimilation of the Eastern Churches.

It's kind of hard to take any of this seriously when one looks at the subordination, subjugation, assimilation and general lack of respect with which the Eastern Churches already in Rome are treated on a daily basis. Father Serge of blessed memory once described Eastern Catholics as "spiritual helots". He wasn't wrong, and the Orthodox see this, and ponder the sincerity of Rome.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Greetings, All.
I think this recent post ( http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2012/05/that-they-may-be-one ) in First Things has a great summary of what seems to have transpired from the ad limina visit. Regardless of whether the original article was a faithful recording of the words of Cardinal Sandri, it's clear that what's being discussed is an important ongoing issue for Eastern Catholics as witnesses to the Light of the East.

With the Light of East in Mind, note the following podcast from Fr. Thomas Loya about the concept of married priests:
http://www.catholicradiointernational.com/LightoftheEast/mp3/lote_399051512.mp3


In Christ,
J. Andrew

Glory forever!



It was clearly recorded before the quote attributed to Cardinal Sandri was reported. Fr. Tom had a similar program #281: Married? February 16, 2010 [catholicradiointernational.com] beginning at 17:35

Agreed about the timing, but I would point out that upon listening one sees that Fr. Thomas makes many points about why we are trying to reintroduce this as a more common practice in this country (meaning, not for the purpose of fostering 'liberalism', but instead becoming more ancient and true to our roots), and the how's surrounding it (meaning, by fostering more a culture that is opened to supporting the Church, Her priests, and Her priests' families).

Thanks,
J. Andrew

Therein lies the real irony and how words and labels get misused so much these days.

To traditional minded and centrist Roman Catholics the concept of a married priesthood is a 'liberal' innovation to be resisted and opposed at all costs.

To a well versed Eastern Catholic, the concept of the married priesthood and the reintroduction of the same in the New World is a correction of an historical error and a 'conservative' move in line with Eastern Christian tradition and praxis.

No wonder why this issue is so contentious within the Catholic Church, as traditionalist minded Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics are in reality the most 'conservative' members of the Church of Rome and the ones with the greatest shared patrimony with us Orthodox.

So, an opportunity for necessary catechesis on the Roman Catholic side is squandered, and instead there is rejoicing as we are politely corrected for the error of our ways in desiring that we are permitted restoration of our traditions and disciplines.

Again, in the interest of full and fair disclosure, I know I am in a small and shrinking minority of ECs (Ruthenian, at least) who have actually been blessed with living the experience of a married priesthood at the pastoral level. Soon, there will be none left who have that perspective. That perhaps this is the very goal is not all that unimaginable at times, especially when such statements are uttered from Rome.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
See below for a follow-up letter meant for First things, written by Fr. Thomas Loya about his letter to our Bishops, and the coverage that it received via First Things.
In Christ,
J. Andrew


I am very encouraged, surprised and humbled at what has been given voice as a result of my communication to my new Archbishop and which was also a communication meant for all Eastern Catholic bishops. There is a burgeoning Eastern Catholic force simmering beneath the surface like a mighty army waiting for their leader to simply say, "Let's take that hill. I will be the first man to charge up the hill and the last man to leave." I believe that if this power is unleashed it would serve Eastern Catholic bishops well. They could ride the crest of a small but mighty Church that can make a difference certainly in America. I would hope that Eastern Catholic bishops would be very encouraged, motivated and inspired but the insight, zeal and energy revealed in these posts and in other communications.
My own bishop, John Kudrick, kindly and graciously mentioned to me the potential of my message to Archbishop William being interpreted as rebellious or hostile to Rome, even taunting the idea of union with Rome. To help make sure that nothing of the sort would even enter my mind I appreciated and point to the message here by Mary Hicks about my family.
My family legacy and myself personally have always been and remain fiercely loyal to unity with Rome. I studied in Rome and loved every minute of it. Yet, it actually serves Rome, indeed the whole Church for the Eastern Catholic Churches to be the best versions of themselves, to function from a position of inner strength and absolute equality with the western "lung" of the Church. It is much like a marriage. It serves the marriage for both spouses to be strong. Even though, for instance, a husband may feel bigger and stronger and enjoy a certain feeling of dominance because of that, it does not serve the husband if the wife is in anyway co-dependent, to see herself in any way as inferior or lesser than her husband. I believe the "original sin" of the Eastern Catholic Churches has been a feeling of inferiority. I believe this accounts for ALL of our problems. I do not think that we have to "prove" that we are equal to the west. That should be automatic as a sui juris Church. We just have to believe it and live it.
I still prefer to say as I always have, that the Eastern Catholic Churches must be 'razed to the ground and rebuilt according to their authentic and best selves.' Rather than gasp at this statement, hopefully the reader will simply recognize the basic death and resurrection rhythm of Christianity and of Jesus’ teaching: "Unless a grain of wheat fall to the ground..."
The renewal of Eastern Catholicism must be this foundational, this "radical" and comprehensive. Every aspect of Eastern Catholic life, down to the last detail, must be examined with scrutiny, honesty and courage. Nothing less will do and nothing less will serve the Church as a whole. I must paraphrase and apply one of my favorite points from G. K. Chesterton to our situation as Eastern Catholics: If we love something for a reason we will very likely destroy that thing for the sake of preserving that reason. But only the person who truly loves something is free enough to tear it apart and rebuild it into the New Jerusalem. My request to my Archbishop, to all Eastern Catholic bishops and to all Eastern Catholics is do we love God and our Church deep enough to walk the journey and pay the price that will turn it into the New Jerusalem?
Yes, indeed we need vision. But I think what we need most is courage. In our Ruthenian Church we extol our martyred bishops like Romzha, yet we do not follow their example. They paid the supreme sacrifice yet for us all intelligent discussion, creative thinking, all proposals for real change stop at the discomfort and fear of the first nasty letter of protest, the first threat that someone "will leave." We are a Church that allows ourselves to be held hostage by fear and in this sense we do not honor our Romzha’s. We have enshrined convenience rather than commitment, sacrifice and devotion all out of the fear that if we ask this of our people we will lose the few people we have. Yet, ironically, as a Ruthenian priest said to me just this week; "our Ruthenian Church in America is hemorrhaging people." Out of a sense of inferiority we think everyone else has a better idea, that we cannot clean up our own house, that we have so little to offer. Yet, I believe, as I mentioned in my letter, that we alone can supply what is lacking in the whole Church and in modern western society.
In light of what I see that must be for the Eastern Catholic Churches in our day and age and especially in America, and if anyone is taken aback by my thoughts, I will be so bold as to say, if anyone is not willing to 'raze our Church to the ground and rebuild it into the New Jerusalem,' I must question their degree of love and motivation for God and our Church. Do we love our Church or do we love our particular idea of it which although it is killing our Church, it suits us personally just fine? No pain, no discomfort, everything conveniently predictable and manageable for me. Dying? Oh well. I hear from laity and clergy alike in our Church: "As long as the Church is here to bury me, I don't care what happens after that. It is not my worry."
I know the journey that I am proposing is frightful to many. But I say what I say because in certain ways I have walked the journey that I propose, especially at my parish of Annunciation. I can assure everyone that the New Jerusalem is worth the pain and effort. So let us "be not afraid."
-Fr. Thomas J. Loya, STB.,MA.

Amen to my Godly pastor's admonition. I do not understand why our bishops are so fearful of standing up and leading us. I do indeed understand that the fear exists. It is palpable in their actions and in their writings and in their personal communications in the rare times that I have met any of them. They reflect the idea that they don't really care if the Byzantine Church survives them or not. That is the part I cannot appreciate.

After visiting other Byzantine Churches I think that there are islands of hope among them but for the most part we are a sea of despair. I wish we would raze the Church as we know it to the ground so that God could make us into he New Jerusalem. What a glorious day when that happens.

We will be moving soon because of retirement. I will miss Annunciation terribly. We will be back from time to time but I know it won't be the same as it has been these last 13 years. These years have been the most grace filled of our lives. My wife and I stand ready to help as much as we can any Pastor with a positive vision for our Church and the courage to implement it.

Carson D. Lauffer

Here's what I tried to post on First Things. I'll keep trying.

I do not wish to name names of bishops in the Eastern Catholic Churches that act as if their mandate is "to allow their Churches to die a slow, palliated death." I love and pray for these bishops who I can name but will not in a public forum. I have and will contact them directly.

Suffice it to say, just look at the numbers. I can also say the Ruthenian bishops in the US do not seem willing to encourage or lead in much of any area.

As I re-read Father Tom's letter here, I was struck with a sense of what I can best describe as a 'sadness' contained within his words. As one who grew up among many clergy and family who chose the 'road less traveled' in the 1930's I can honestly say that the same sense of 'sadness' was always lurking beneath the surface of those who left the Greek Catholic church back then to form the ACROD - even to the end of their days.

Given what Father Tom stated was the 'fierce loyalty' to Rome that his family exhibited historically here in America, I sense that it must of pained him to write these letters. The sense of 'inferiority' he refers to likely has much to do with the very history of our Rusyn people - the people without a country who were tossed back and forth across empires and kingdoms for centuries - and who were as destitute and deprived as any ethnic group with the Hungarian realm. So those of us who became and remain Orthodox have always lived in the shadow of many triumphalist Orthodox who treated, and to some extent continue to treat our bishops and priests as 'second class Orthodox' just as the triumphalist Latin Catholics have treated the Ruthenian Greek Catholics.

The Ukrainians, Orthodox and Greek Catholic, have the benefit of a stronger national identity which gives them a leverage which the BCC and ACROD, with their far smaller numbers, lack in their dealings with their co-religionists.

So it should come as no great surprise that after all of these decades of acrimony and fighting, we ended up with our bishops and many of our priests and parishes finding some common ground upon which to stand as we watch the inevitable forces of time and numbers surround us.

The examples of Blessed Teodor and Blessed Paul, as well as the example of their contemporary, the late Metropolitan Orestes Chornock of thrice blessed memory, should serve to give us strength and courage in the face of seemingly insolvable adversity. All three men were products of the same time and the same system and all three faced challenges and divisions that never in their formative years could they have envisioned as being possible. All three made choices that their consciences required them to make and all three struggled spiritually and, as for the Blessed Teodor and Paul physically as well, as a consequence of their choices.

I pray that we all may find peace, that the ACROD will be served by a new and wise shepherd and that the BCC overcome her internal differences and that our people continue to be under the protection of the Most Blessed and Gracious Mother of God and of all of the Saints of the church and our people.

DMD,

Thank you for this kind and irenic post. My physical ancestry is not Rusyn. But I certainly understand what you wrote. I think many of the problems of the BCC are self inflicted. We do not need to be victims no matter what our background. I pray that our bishops and priests get over their fears and act with courage as Father tries to incite them to do.

Well said, Fr. Loya. I am ready to do some razing.

Have you grieved in Christ for souls lately as The Apostle Paul: "I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart.

For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen." (Romans 9)