www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese

Slava Isusu Christu!

I was visiting the the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese website at www.acrod.org [acrod.org] and viewed some of their new photos. I noticed one of the old protopresbyters was wearing a Roman MSGR's cassock I think it was the first Dean of Christ the Savior Cathedral; they have such a wonderful Cathedral. Does anyone know if they are pretty latinized or is it from parish to parish? Are they pretty close to us ecumenically? I heard some rumor a while back that many of them were interested in uniting with Rome since the major stumbling blocks that they encountered in the past are mostly removed.
Any info on this?

In Christ and the Theotokos:


Chief Among Sinners, Robert

Robert,

The American Carpatho-Russian Greek Catholic Diocese is a break away group from us int he early 20th century. The generally reject a Hungarian or Ukrainian orientation among our people, prefering a Rusyn or Pan-Russian.

They also have a reluctance to accept the imposition of Great Russian practices, hence the reason they did not join what is now the OCA, as some Carpatho-Rusyns did.

We have improving relations with them based on a common patrimony and cultural history. The existance on non-confessional Carpatho-Rusyn societies has helped in this ecumencial endeavor.

They do not minister west of the Mississippi. They do not elect their own bishop; he is appointed from overseas. I find their congregations very Christ centered. They seem unconcerned to the fact they have priest who wear the Roman cassock, are titled Msgr., or have churches that lack icon screens. They do have some excellent preachers.

Sadly, they continue to decrease in numbers, even more rapidly than our our Metropolia. In the 1960's several of their parishes came back to us and a couple of our priests left for them. Nowdays, the communities are fairly settled, though they still use the title "Greek Catholic" in their names for legal reasons.

In a few places with declining Rusyn-American population, they have takenonthe minsitry of a pan-Orthodox parish.

K.

Hi Kurt, I'm not sure what you meant by this last sentence.

Most of their "pan-Orthodox" parishes are either new missions in places like Florida, Georgia, Virginia, and North Carolina, or have come into the Diocese from other jurisdictions and were already "pan-Orthodox."

I wouldn't say they have any pan-Orthodox parishes in places of declining ethnic population such as northeast and southwest PA. Although their parish in suburban Cleveland (North Royalton) titles itself "American Orthodox." Although I would not be surprised to find a decent number of converts in a lot of their parishes, since they are not so strict as is, say, ROCOR. Thus the ACR Diocese may be more attractive to a lot of people than the semi-monastic lifestyle the more conservative jurisdictions seem to expect of their laypeople.

Rather more unusual are a few of their parishes which used to belong to the old Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic "Metropolia" (pre-OCA) where the priest still wears high-back Russian vestments, the music is choral and not prostopinije, and Russian customs are followed (e.g., the priest carrying the plascanica on sticks & supported by a board, and not loose in the hands). They also have a few former Ukrainian Orthodox churches which use a variety of musical traditions. Goes to show that they don't impose one liturgical style or ethnic recension.

The 1938 split of the ACROD (part of the patriarchate of Constantinople) from the Ruthenian Catholics in America was over the enforcement by Rome of the ban on ordaining married men and over the bishop's taking ownership of Ruthenian church properties. Yes, for much of its history it was the most latinized Orthodox Church in the world (not a judgement, just an observation) with the use of the monsignor's title — even though actual monsignori are "papal chamberlains&#8217 — and cassock, bination (two liturgies a day on the same holy table) and a few iconostas-less churches like St Nicholas in Manhattan. Today only four ACROD churches lack iconostases and like its Ruthenian parent the ACROD is busy delatinizing. The Ruthenians even may be outpacing it!

After a long, understandable deep freeze in relations (split families and nasty court cases over church buildings), today things are pretty good in that department, with the two seminaries in Johnstown and Pittsburgh exchanging visits and the two Churches jointly sponsoring a yearly Byzantine Spirituality Weekend in Pittsburgh.

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: Serge ]

A Brief History of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Church (in their own words).
The American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese


In July 1935, 37 parishes who were in opposition to latinization attempts by the Roman Catholic Church petitioned that a Church Congress be called to decide the future of Carpatho-Russian Churches in the United States. The first Diocesan Council-Sobor was called in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on November 23, 1937 by Father Orestes P. Chornock who was appointed administrator of the Diocese being formed. The Sobor abrogated the 300-year old "Unia" and returned the Carpatho-Russian people to the ancestral Orthodox Faith. The clergy at this Sobor elected the Rt. Rev. Orestes P. Chornock as the Bishop-Nominee of the new Diocese.
The Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Church prior to the "Unia" was under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Because Carpatho-Russians received Christianity from Saints Cyril and Methodius from Constantinople, and because the Patriarch of Constantinople held canonical jurisdiction over all new churches in the diaspora, the First Diocesan Sobor decided to petition the Ecumenical Patriarchate to accept the Carpatho-Russians into Orthodoxy and canonically establish a new Diocese.
The Ecumenical Patriarch accepted the petition and received the Carpatho-Russian Church into Orthodoxy as a self-governing Diocese. On September 19, 1938, the Diocese was canonized by Patriarch Benjamin I, of thrice-blessed memory, in the name of "The Holy Orthodox Church in Christ" under Patriarchal Decree number 1379. This was the first Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Church since the infamous Papal Unia.

Father Orestes P. Chornock was consecrated the day prior, September 18, as bishop of the Diocese.
The Carpatho-Russian Youth Organization was founded during the first year of the new Bishop's administration. In 1946, the official newspaper of the Diocese, "The Church Messenger" was established and continues to print a bi-weekly paper to this day. The American Carpatho-Russian Youth (A.C.R.Y.) was re-organized in 1947.
Christ the Saviour Cathedral was established and incorporated in 1950, thus making Johnstown, Pennsylvania the seat of the Diocese. In 1951, Christ the Saviour Seminary was permanently relocated to Johnstown. Students formerly were taught in temporary quarters located in New York City, Nicholson, PA and Bridgeport, Connecticut.


During the ensuing years, many achievements were realized and once the Diocese was stable and growing, Bishop Orestes began to seek a bishop to assist him in his responsibilities. The Ecumenical Patriarchate elected and appointed

Bishop Peter (Shymansky) as auxiliary bishop in 1963. Shortly after his consecration he became ill and after serving only 6 months he reposed in the Lord on May 17, 1964.
On January 1, 1966 at the Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in New York, Bishop Orestes was elevated to the rank of Metropolitan.
On August 16, 1966, the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate appointed and elected Bishop John (Martin) as auxiliary to His Eminence, Metropolitan Orestes. Bishop John was consecrated in Christ the Saviour Cathedral on October 6.

During his episcopacy, the new Bishop revamped numerous aspects of diocesan administration. An English Liturgy book for the pews was published. The Seminary curriculum was revised. Three new mission parishes were established. A clergy pension fund was established. The Distinguished Diocesan Donors giving program was inaugurated, which eventually led to the building of a camp and retreat center named Camp Nazareth located in Mercer County, Pennsylvania and completed in 1977.

On February 17, 1977, His Eminence, Metropolitan Orestes reposed in the Lord, and the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate appointed Bishop John as Ruling Bishop of the Diocese.
In 1978, a monastic community for men was established at the Monastery of the Annunciation in Tuxedo, Park, New York.
On September 30, 1984, Bishop John died unexpectedly and was buried on October 4 with Archbishop Iakovos presiding.


The clergy of the Diocese nominated Bishop Nicholas (Smisko) as their new hierarch. Bishop Nicholas was consecrated as bishop on March 13, 1983 for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The Holy Synod elected Bishop Nicholas as the Ruling Bishop of the Diocese on March 20, 1985. On April 19 he was enthroned by Archbishop Iakovos. Bishop Nicholas immediately sought to improve relations with Carpatho-Russian Orthodox in Europe. He gave a great deal of attention to liturgical matters and published a new prayer book entitled "Come to Me" which since has sold thousands of copies. A Diaconate program has graduated some 25 deacons in the last several years.


His Grace has led several Pilgrimages of faithful to the Holy Land and to Europe, notably the 1988 Pilgrimage that celebrated the Millenium in Russia. Bishop Nicholas was elevated to the rank of Metropolitan in 1998.
His Eminence initiated a Pro-Life movement in the Diocese, leading faithful to Washington, DC for the annual "March for Life" since 1987.
The Seminary curriculum was revamped and an "Annual Giving Appeal" for the theological School was initiated. The Diocesan Newspaper, "The Church Messenger was consolidated in Johnstown. Five new parishes were received. The Diocese celebrated its Golden Jubilee of Canonical Establishment in 1988 amidst thousands of faithful, numerous bishops and representatives of the Patriarch of Constantinople, including His Eminence, Archbishop Iakovos.
A bold program of missions and evangelization was begun in 1992 and is known as "Harvest 2000." Five new missions are flourishing, and several others are being contemplated.


The present Diocesan Board of Trustees, assisting His Eminence is comprised of:


The Most Rev. Metropolitan Nicholas
Very Rev. Protopresbyter Frank P. Miloro, Chancellor
Very Rev. Protopresbyter Ronald A. Hazuda, Treasurer
Very Rev. Protopresbyter Michael Polanichka, Consultor
Very Rev. Protopresbyter John Fedornock, Consultor
Very Rev. Protopresbyter Richard Salley, Consultor
Very Rev. Protopresbyter Michael Rosco, Consultor
Very Rev. Protopresbyter Lawrence R. Barriger, Consultor
Mr. Alex Breno, Mrs. Sharon Winkler
Mr. Michael Fetsko, Mr. Stephen Hall
Mr. Lou Mihalko, III, Attorney Michael Ristvey, Diocesan Legal Counselor
Mr. William Oldham, Mr. Robert Hubiak
Honorary Trustees; Mr. Frank Finui and Dr. John Ristvey.
Under Metropolitan Nicholas's supervision, a new lodge for staff was constructed at Camp Nazareth, with a Carpathian-style church being designed for erection in the near future.
�
�

Infamous papal unia?
It doesn't sound very nice.
I think it would be better if they say "infamous Irish bishops" who forced the assimilation of your people, and not against the russyn catholic church.

Serge states:

[Today only four ACROD churches lack iconostases and like its Ruthenian parent the ACROD is busy delatinizing. The Ruthenians even may be outpacing it!]

Serge:

I think it's more tha four that lack Iconostasis. Besides St Nicholas in NYC the two local ACRO parishes in upstate Pennsylvania where I grew up (Lansford & Nesquehoning) lack Iconostasis and have Latin style Altars. So that's three. What is the forth you know about? I am sure there are others.

OrthoMan

Some learned people here. Let me ask a question. I believe the ACROGCD has a second parish in New York -- St. Mary's on 7th Street. What is their story? I've been to St. Nicholas many times but never St. Mary's. I think I walked by it, is it next to a Polish RC Church?

K.

St. Nicholas in NYC ("Saint Tenth Street" to the folks) installed an ikonostas last year for their 75th anniversary.

St. Nicholas in Lansford has a partial screen: the two "main icons" (Christ and Theotokos) without any connecting doors or arch, no royal doors either. The "altar icons" of Saints Peter and Paul in Central City, Pa. are in an almost identical arrangement.

Saint John the Baptist in Ellwood City, Pa. has never had an ikonostas.

There were a number of small ACROGC parishes in the midwest (now closed) which did not have an ikonostas.

St. Nicholas in Scranton still lacks one. Ten years ago, the church's sign in the front yard read "Saint Nicholas Greek Catholic Church - Masses Sun. 8 a.m. 10 a.m." This parish was never in union with Rome. They have replaced the sign, though...

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: RichC ]

I posted the following in relation to another matter that was brought up on a different thread of this forum (news-Horizons). It is somewhat appropriate to the subject matter here, regarding the early days of the ACRD and what led up to its formation:

My historical instincts rose up when it was mentioned about "what happened to the ARV before its GCU days." There are a few of us who remember or are acquainted with, the role that the "Amerikanskyj Ruskyj Vistnyk" ("American-Rusyn Messenger") played in the life of the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church before it evolved into what we know today as the "Greek Catholic Union Messenger."

In its heyday, the "Vistnyk" was the forum for much debate on current events in the church, so much to the point that it was sanctioned several times by Bishop Takach, for its views opposing Rome and the Ruthenian hierarchy on the issue of clerical celibacy and other matters.. It was particularly the fiery editorials of Fr. Stefan Varzaly that personified the opposition. (Father Varzaly, one of the leaders of the "movement for independence" and eventually, the new Orthodox Greek Catholic jurisdiction, later moved on to the Russian Church, creating further division among parishes, and even was on the McCarthy "list" of suspected communists, stemming from of his support of all things Russian.)

Really, it was because the GCU had the courage (if you will) to challenge Bishop Takach in his implementation of the decree "Cum Data Fuerit" (issued by the Vatican on March 1, 1929) that it eventually was given the choice to either "tow the line" or cease to be part of the Greek Catholic Church. This included not only the editorial board of the Vistnyk but also the executives of the "Sojedinenije" (Union), as the Greek Catholic Union was then known. If my memory of American-Ruthenian history serves me well, it was only after repeated threats from the bishop's curia, that the leaders of the Sojedinenije acquiesced and no longer supported those who were on the "excommunication list" such as Fathers Varzaly, Molchany and (soon-to-be bishop) Chronock. Once the organization was rid of these "troublemakers" it was free to continue as a Catholic fraternal society. Of course, in another "theatre" of the "war against celibacy," things were complicated by the fact that the "Sojedinenije" threatened to foreclose on the bishop's residence in Homestead, to which it held the title, located across from St. John the Baptist Cathedral (since moved to Munhall in the 1990s).

It was when Bishop Takach and his curial cohorts, among them, Msgr. George Mihaylo and Fr. Julius Grigassy (I don't mean to comment on the sincerity of these two priests' ministries), used certain legal tactics against them, that the Sojedinenije executives gave in. There was too much at risk financially, in regards to insurance policies and assets, that somehow, in the judgment of certain courts, could be frozen or absorbed by the church, if the organization no longer maintained a Catholic affiliation. Interesting, to say the least. Those were indeed, "the days" when matters became heated (and even violent at times, requiring police intervention), because of many people's conviction to live by their traditions and the guarantees of the Uzhorod Union.

The GCU leaders held out as long as they could, because they honestly supported the struggle against celibacy and other latinizations. At its 21st Convention held in Detroit in 1932, they formed the KOVO, or "Committee for the Defense of the Eastern Rite" (Komitet Obrorony Vostochnoho Obrjada), aimed at defending the church against such Roman innovations. The Sojedinenije renewed the call for the tradition of "rule by the people" or "sobornopravnist" that we still hear about today, in struggles going on in other jurisdictions. But these were the 1930s, the days of the great depression, financial pressure was heavy upon all Americans, especially such institutions such as the GCU. Beginning in 1936, with the election of a new Sojedinenije president, the tides began to change.

As we all know, the battle ultimately ended in the creation of the "American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Diocese of the USA" under the auspices of the Constantinople Patriarch and the leadership of Bishop Chornock on the one hand, and the total "hierarchization" of the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church on the other, with enforced celibacy and the turning over of property rights from the parish boards to the bishop. After that, the path was clear for unlimited latinization in the Pittsburgh Exarchate.

Despite the promising administration of Bishop Daniel Ivancho (1948-54), who attempted to heal wounds and divisions and return some of the Eastern flavor to the church (he instituted programs for cantors, good relationships with his priests, established the seminary in Pittsburgh, with it's Byzantine style chapel and made plans for a beautiful Eastern cathedral in the Oakland section of Pittsburgh, which unfortunately was never realized.), after Bishop Ivancho's untimely resignation from the Pittsburgh See, latinization and hierarchical control reached its climax during the reign of Bishop Nicholas T. Elko, in the 1950s through the mid 60s. Those were the days of the removal of iconostasis from far too many traditional churches and the erection of some of the "modern" Roman-style churches that we still see today. Interestingly, despite Bishop Elko's fierce program of making the Greek Catholic Church appear only ever so slightly different from the Latin Rite, he did favor certain "formalities" and loved the pomp of Byzantine worship, including almost always vesting ceremoniously in the church and multiple pontifical liturgies. He shared this personal partiality for "high" services and flair with Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, who was often his guest at large liturgical gatherings.

Much of this was outlined by Fr. John Slivka of Brooklyn, in his very helpful and priceless collection of articles and documents entitled, "Historical Outlines." I don't think it is still in print anywhere, but I've been trying to get a few extra copies for years. It should be republished, with the cooperation of Fr. Slivka's family. Its contents witness to the "flavor" of church life in those days, when religious matters really were a big deal to Ruthenian Greek Catholics and before the age when people became complacent about having any voice in church matters.

Well, that's the Ruthenian history class for today. I don't mean to lecture about things you may already know, but I do enjoy reminiscing about the "old days" and think it is important that members today, regardless of their own particular family origins, understand the historical road of the Ruthenian Church, both here and in Europe. A familiarity with it is absolutely necessary to the understanding of the spirit of the church in our own time. This is a proud heritage that all of our faithful are the beneficiaries of. God bless you all.

Joe Lavryshyn

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Joe ]

St. Mary's on 7th. Street was a parish of the former "Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America - Ecumenical Patriarchate" (now joined with the UOC of the USA)until around a decade or so ago, when it joined the ACRD. I don't know if it was originally a break off from our St. Mary Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church on 15th. St. or from St. George or separate, but I would suppose that the origins are intertwined.

Joe

FYI: Russophilism, the return to Orthodoxy, and Rusyn Greek Cartholics


Date last modified: February 21st, 2000 Institute of History of the Jagiellonian University
and
The St. Vladimir Foundation in Cracow
Conference on:

Ukrainian Political Thought in the Twentieth Century
May 28-30, 1990

Paper:
Moscophilism Amongst the Lemko Population...
Paul Best

Political Science Department
Southern Connecticut State University
New Haven, Connecticut 06515
U.S.A.

Moscophilism Amongst the Lemko Population in the Twentieth Century

The present writer is a Political Scientist who specializes in Soviet and East European politics, with a focus on Polish-Ukrainian relations in general and, in particular, the shifting herder area in "East" Central Europe where Ukrainian-Orthodox-Byzantine and East European culture clashes with Polish-Catholic-Roman and "West" European civilization. One point of especially strong contention Is that triangle of land which has its base on the Oslawa River in South-East Poland and its western apex at a point in the Dunajec River Valley, south-east of Cracow. This territory, which includes the Beskid Sadecki and Beskid Niski mountains, is variously known as Lemkowszczyzna (Polish) Lemivshchyna (Ukrainian) or Lemkovyna (local). At the beginning of the twentieth century it was inhabited by a little-known micro-ethnic group of East Slavs called Lemko.

These Lemkos, living north of the Hungarian border in the Austrian part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, spoke an east-Slavic language which was heavily influenced by Polish and Slovak. These people were Greek Catholics, that is, members of a Byzantine-Slavonic Rite church which recognizes the Roman Pope as its religious leader. Living in remote mountain valleys, their pastoral and agricultural ways of life were relatively little affected by changes going on in the outside world. However, as the twentieth century progressed, pressures to change and to conform to the requirements of one or another larger national community forced these people to political and nationality choices they were little prepared to make. Religious conflicts (Orthodoxy versus Greek Catholicism), linguistic struggles (selection of a literary language, which would determine political orientation -- Russian, Ukrainian, Rusyn, Slovak, Polish) and World War I created mutually-opposed camps supporting the various alternatives.

A certain historical drama was played out amongst these Carpathian slavs in the twentieth century. They began to develop feelings as Russians, as the Lesko part of a Carpatho-Rusyn people, or, perhaps, as part of the Ukrainian nation. Prof. Paul Magocsi of Toronto University has already written an extensive monograph about this process in the sub-Carpathian (south slope) region. The pre-Carpathian Lemkos were under different influences from those of the sub-Carpathian Rusyns in that they lived in the Austrian part of Austria-Hungary and had not experienced the 1,000 years of Magyar domination found south of the Carpathian crest.

In seeking a larger national identity and an answer to the question "who are we?" -- beyond the obvious "we're from here" ("tutejszy," in Polish) response -- some Lemkos decided for the "Russian" solution. In simple terms this meant that the Lemkos were part and parcel of the Great Russian Nation whose territory stretched from the Carpathians to Kamchatka. This united/undivided people had several attributes: all spoke some version of Russian, all were orthodox christians dependent on Moscow and the Holy Synod and all recognized one great and holy leader, the Appointee of God, the Tsar of All Russia. As reality did not conform with this great "Russian idea" (Rusakays Idea)-Lemkos were Greek Catholics, in the Austria-Hungarian Empire (with an Emperor in Vienna) and the Lesko language was not comprehensible to a Moscovite and vice versa -- reality had to he changed.

In the 19th century, the so-called "Starorusin idea" slowly evolved from vague Pan-East Slavism into a strong Pro-Moscow tendency. In the Lemko territory (where ideas arrived with a rather considerable delay), by the 20th century, the intelligentsia and the active peasantry were in good part engaged in the Russophile movement.


The origins of this movement were several. First a very strong influence came directly or indirectly from Moscow -- or more precisely from St. Petersburg. After the defeat in the Crimean War Russian foreign policy focused, in part, on punishing Austria for lack of assistance. Here was a country (Austria) which the Russians had saved as an Empire in 1849 when Tsarist troops selflessly defeated the Hungarian rebels on behalf of the Habsburgs. Six years later, in the Crimean Crisis, the Austrians stood aside as neutrals and Russians could not forgive this ingratitude. Beyond that, in Russian Political-Religious circles there developed the idea of pan-Slavism which in its lesser phase included the East Slavic people of the Austro-Hungarian State, in its middle-sized form all the Orthodox Slavs and in its grandest phase all Slavs whether Orthodox, Catholic or even Moslem.
Beginning in the 1870s the Tsarist

regime began to take action. The first group to feel the pan-slavic pressures was the East-Slavic people of Austria-Hungary (we will not discuss here the other grander ideas of Pan-Slavism). At the same time in the self-same area the Ukrainian idea was taking root. While in the main Ukrainianism succeeded in Galicia the same cannot be said to be true in Lemkovyna.

In direct action the Tsarist regime funded newspapers and agitators and positions for Lesko youth in Russian Orthodox seminaries. The attempt was made to develop a base amongst the intellectuals and the general peasant population for the reception of Orthodox propaganda and, more importantly, for the reception of a trained (Russian) orthodox clergy that just started to emerge from orthodox schools at the beginning of the 20th century. Let us note clearly here, that -- whatever one's personal religious feelings (Or lack thereof) -- to join the orthodox church meant, for all practical purposes, that one declared oneself as a "Russian" and thus it was a strong "political" declaration. The magnetic pull of Russophilism was felt also among the Greek Catholic clergy, so much so that some priests entered orthodox service when the chance for such action arose during the Russian invasion of W.W.I.


A very powerful indirect influence on Lemkovyna came from North America where the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church sent missionaries. While it is true Russian Orthodoxy had old religious roots in Alaska and along the Pacific coast, the new missionaries came not to those areas but rather to the immigrant communities from Galicia and the Carpathians. These people felt themselves under attack from the hostile Protestant and Roman Catholic Churches (the local Roman Catholic bishops were particularly adverse to the Byzantine-Slavonic rite and a married clergy, perceiving such things as not being true "Catholic") The Russian church, on the other hand, accepted these long-lost brothers, priests and laymen alike, with open arms. The Tsarist regime was pleased and happy to fund clerical stipends and church buildings. This feeling of having found a home was reflected in correspondence with the old country and in attitudes of the re-immigrants in their old communities. Beyond that, money and publications supporting orthodoxy and Russophilism began to flow in from North America.
These Russian efforts began to bear fruit just before W.W.I when Orthodox quasi-parishes began to crop up in Lemkovyna and a pro-orthodox (Russian) newspaper, Lemko, began publication in Gorlice. However, all came to naught with the outbreak of the Great War.

The Austrian Gendarmerie knew exactly who was a Russophil and who was not and, acting on orders issued under martial law conditions, the Austrian police and military security arrested, beat (killed), and shipped off to an Internment camp in the village of Thalerhof near Graz in Stelrmark, all Russophils that could be caught This is not the place to discuss the horrors of Thalerhof, but suffice to say that thousands died amongst the internees (who were aged from newborns to 90 years old) and that for the rest treatment was brutal. While there were a sprinkling of Ukrainians, Jews, Russophil Poles and even prostitutes the vast majority of internees were of the Russophil persuasion.
After the devastation caused by acts of war and the interments Lemkovyna slowly returned to some semblance of normality. However, in the 1920s and 1930s the Russophil ous Orthodox movement returned in full force.


The feelings of wrong done to the Lemko people during W.W.I, the aforementioned Tsarist preparations in the area and two previously occurring but now more strongly felt feelings, anti-Greek Catholic and anti-Ukrainian, caused a strong resurgence of the pro-Russian (orthodox), movement. Starting in 1926, 40 villages went over officially to orthodoxy and perhaps upwards of half the Lemko population, at least informally, joined this flow.


That some of the movement was not exactly pro-Russian or even in an exact sense pro-orthodox should be expanded on here. The aforementioned anti-Ukrainianism and anti-clericalism (anti-Greek-Catholic Clergy) was based upon perceptions that the "Ukrainians" helped the Austrians in pointing out "Russophils" during W.W.I and that Ukrainians treated the Lemkos as a lower cultured Ukrainian "tribe" with a "spoiled" language (with "foreign" influences and a constant accent, not a movable one like literary Ukrainian). With joining or being part of a Great Russian culture some Lemkos could reject Ukrainian accusations of Lemko separatism by Lemko-Russian accusations of Ukrainian separatism. Further, the exaction's of the Greek Catholic clergy for religious services were quite high (and in some few cases-rapacious) for a basically farming population living on the edge of poverty. The local Greek-Catholic priest also administered a not-infrequently a large piece of land, and perhaps a mill, which belonged to the parish but from which the priest derived income. This caused, no doubt, feelings of jealousy further enhancing anticlericalism. Orthodox priests accepted little or no money for services.


In 1924 the newly formed Polish Autocephalic Orthodox Church began a mission in Lemkovyna which yielded the previously mentioned results. This church and its clergy was initially made up of Russians, strictly speaking, and it (the church) was under very heavy pressure to conform to Polish reasons of state and in areas, other than Lemkovyna it found itself in sharp conflict with the ruling authorities. However, in the Lemko lands Polish Government and Orthodox goals coincided. In payback to the Catholic church for propagating the Neo-Unia amongst orthodox believers in Bielorus regions the Orthodox church counterattacked in Lemkovyna bringing into the orthodox church probably as many souls as it lost to the Neo-Unia. On the other hand, the polish government using all the means at its disposal to break the Ukrainian movement was pleased to support Orthodoxy in the Lemko territory, viewing it, rightly so, at that time, as an anti-Ukrainian movement.


World War II completely changed the issue, however. The destruction of the war, the "evacuations" of 1940 and 1944-1946 to the Soviet Ukraine and finally the resettlement/exile of the surviving Lemko population to the Northern and Western lands of post-W.W.II Poland shattered the Lemko people.

What there is left of a pro-Russian movement cannot be detected. Among Lemkos today we may detect two general national directions, a Lemko Carpatho-Rusyn one and a Ukrainian one. The religious issue, as far as Ukrainians are concerned, is more or less resolved, the Orthodox church (at least in the Przemysl-Nowy Sacz diocese), despite having a predominance of Bielorus clergy, accepts the Lemkos as Ukrainians, while the Greek Catholic church now calls itself the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The only echo of the Russophil movement is found among descendants of Lemko immigrants. It is estimated that 75% of the adherents of the Russian Orthodox Church in North America can trace their roots to the Carpathians (both sides) and Galicia.