www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News The [ true!] Order of St. Constantine the Great

I guess I should have distinguished between the "military orders" and the Euro folks and our own U.S. Knights of Columbus. The KofC guys are great because they get down and dirty and raise funds for sick children, the elderly, the needy and for the Church. My hat is off to them. I had no intention of lumping them in with the European military order folks and their exclusivity. Most of the KofC guys I know are straightforward honest Joes, they welcome anybody who is willing to roll up his sleeves and work; and I apologize for not having made it clear that they are not what I had in mind. Although the KofC was an American Catholic response to the Masons, Moose, Elk, etc. organizations (which wouldn't admit Catholics), they are clearly different in that they do a lot more than dress up.

For a lot of Greek and Near East folks, the remnants of the "Crusaders" and "military order" presence is found in castle ruins dotting the landscape. While they were ostensibly there to rid the Holy Land of the Moslems, the presence of (sometimes massive) fortifications indicate their intention of establishing a permanent presence probably for commercial purposes. And their treatment of local Christians was oftentimes little better -- if any -- than their treatment of the followers of the "Prophet". They stabled their horses in Christian churches. And set up a Latin patriarch in Jerusalem since the local bishops apparently weren't good enough for their high minded purposes. So, when I hear "Sir Knight this" or "Commander That", the hairs on the back of my neck stand up, and I wonder: "Now what?"

Blessings!

Alex,

My friend, I hope you don't feel that I am out to prove you wrong or be contentious. I suppose the legitmacy of historical actions lies in the eye of the beholder. But the arguement that an Orthodox could not legitimately be the superior of a Catholic religious order always made a lot of sense to me. Much in the same way a Latin titular patriarch could not legitimately hold the title to the see of Constantinople, even though this was historically done as well. However, I do find it encouraging that many knights you know do consider him legitimate. Quite ecumenical of them I think. In any case, please take no offense to the way I present information, which I know can come across as short and/or contentious. I am by no means an expert in this area, simply an enthusiast.

Dr. John,

I agree with your assesment of those who like to have exclusive or secret societies or dress up and play nobility or advertise their acts of charity. However, we must be careful to distinguish between secret societies like the Masons, Self-styled orders of knighthood that are nothing but pretentions, orders of knighthood given as awards by monarchs, dynastic lines, states, and even the Holy Father, and the Orders of St. John of Malta and the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem.

The last two are recognized religious orders of the Catholic Church. Membership in both involves vows varying from full monastic profession to simple vows similar to Third Orders. Their vesture is a simple monastic habit in choir (basically a mandyas) or a military style uniform form for state occasions.
They also go about their works quite quietly and unnoticed. It is in large part because of them that the Holy Places are able to be maintained (which both Catholics and Orthodox enjoy the use of). Hospitals, leprosariums, and other charitable works are supported wholey or in part by them. In fact the most public act I have seen them perform is at Lourdes, where the Knights of Malta (dressed in simple black shirts and pants) help disabled pilgrims to get to the shrine by pushing wheelchairs, assiting those with crutches, carrying some on stretchers, driving shuttles, or outright carrying them in their arms. I remember seeing one picture of a Knight carrying a small disabled child. He wore a broad smile as he talked with child he was carrying. I can only guess what he was saying, but I imagine he was assuring the child of Our Savior's love for her and the power of his Mother's intercession. This man was a true knight in deed, embodying all those things in the stories I read as child. I also remember reading that Mother Teresa was grateful for the Knight's generous gifts to her Order. I have the highest respect for these knights and we must be careful not to lump them in with the dress up and pretend orders rampant today.

As for the crusaders remember, St. Bernard wrote the rule for Hospitaller Orders and St. Francis accompanied them as a chaplain's assistant (he was a deacon not a priest). Not all were the pseudo-crusader pillage and rape Fourth Crusade type. Many were humble monk-knights who defened pilgrims and cared for the sick. We Byzantines should not judge the Hospitallers by the actions of the mercenaries who got involved wth the crusades for their own gain.

As for my statement:"Only a Roman Catholic can be head of a Roman Catholic religous order." That wording was poor. I should have said only a Catholic in communion with Rome can be superior of a Catholic religous order. Indeed, Roman orders can be headed by Eastern Catholics. In fact the superior general of the Jesuits is currently an Armenian Catholic. I assume any Roman order with Eastern provinces or members, like the Redemptorists, Franciscans, or Salesians could elect an Eastern member superior general.

A question though, are not the Basilian Salvatorians a distinct order seperate from the Roman rite Basilians? Or are you refering to the fact that they are an order of pontifical right? I agree that this is problematic. As I see it, Eastern orders or monasteries should either be subject to the bishop in whose eparchy they reside or to the patriarch (archbishop, metropolitan) of the Church of which they are members. The idea of an Eastern order being of pontifical right (or an eparchy being directly subject to the Holy See) contradicts the idea of a Church being sui iuris and the patriarch being father and head of his Church. You are correct the Armenian Mekhitarist Order, as well as the Byzantine Order of St. Basil the Great, are of pontifical right and the Maronite Orders and the Chaldean Antonine Order probably are as well, although I am not sure. Someday we will hopefully get it right and start acting like real autonomous Churches.

In Christ,
Lance, deacon candidate

The Patriarchal Order of the Holy Cross of Jerusalem

http://www.cam.org/~stcroix/menuang.html