www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization A Few Moments

I think the Administrator asked me "Do you have any information on why the Ukrainians never really embraced the term �Byzantine Catholic�?"
Yes - it was used in inter-war Poland as a means of dividing a significant number of parishes from the hierarchical structure of the Greek-Catholic Church and subjecting them to Latin dioceses. Hence its unpopularity among Ukrainian Greek-Catholics.
There are a small number of Ukrainian parishes which nevertheless do use this term - often in such a form as "Byzantine - Ukrainian - Catholic".
Whether Bishop Daniel and the eventual Metropolitan Constantine actually made an agreement on the subject, I simply don't know -I certainly wasn't there! However, the reason for the abandonment of the term "Greek-Catholic" is not mysterious: the American courts had ruled that this term was ambiguous, and could mean Orthodox, Catholic, or Independent as the context might indicate. Two significant court cases involving this issue concerned Saint John's Church in Perth Amboy and Saint Michael's Church in Binghamton (in the latter case the judge's decision is reminiscent of Solomon ordering the baby sawn in half, but that's another discussion!). As late as the nineten-sixties Metropolitan Orestes issued a formal, written declaration in the Pennsylvania courts to the effect that his diocese is "a federation of independent Greek-Catholic parishes", which is ecclesiological nonsense. So one can understand Bishop Daniel's concern.
The Melkite parishes in the US returned to the use of "Greek-Catholic" because sometime - I think in the nineteen-seventies - the Holy Synod decreed that the official name should be "Melkite Greek-Catholic".
But there is a specific problem with some Ukrainian Greek-Catholics. Some Ukrainian Greek-Catholics actively and emphatically do NOT want to acknowledge that a specific common identity links all those who share two characteristics: ecclesial communion with Rome, and the liturgical/theological tradition which developed in New Rome and has since spread around the world. I have no solution to offer; there is none so blind as the man who will not see.
As for the "we're not Greeks" argument, well, most of us aren't. Very few of us indeed, however, were born in the Queen City or have any claim to be "ethnic Byzantines", if indeed such an ethnos exists! Nor do most Roman Catholics of my acquaintance trace their ancestry to the city on the Tiber. Let's not be silly.
Incognitus

Hey, cut the poor Carpathians some slack; they can't agree whether they are Rusyns, Rusins, Ruthenians, Carpatho-Russians or Slovaks [I am probably omiting some terms]. The old photos of my parish's old building show the cornerstone reading "St Nicholas Russian Greek Catholic Church"!
I entirely support the Administrator's campaign for a trans-ethnic Byzantine Catholic Church, whatever it is called.

"What's in a name?" I suppose this thread shows the limitations of any kind of ecclesiastical distinction outside of the land of origin. It also shows the shortfalls and dangers of oversimplification of such distinctions, and also that discussion of such can lead to interesting if not silly, discussion.

Admin, we'll just have to agree to disagree. The co-opting of "Byzantine" as a sole name, when there are other Churches who make use of the same Constantinopolitan tradition, will admittedly likely never set well with me. It is apparent what the Melkites, Ukrainians, Russians and Romanians call themselves ecclesiastically, and in official documents.

Although certainly someone can choose to informally use another term to abbreviate themselves [especially a hierarch] the more prevalent usage of these terms ecclesiastically is apparent for the majority of Greek Catholic jurisdictions in the USA [which more often then not do not include only calling themselves "Byzantine"].

In Canada, they have wisely avoided this issue by avoiding the use of the name "Byzantine" as a sole denominator for any individual jurisdiction. Once again, the wisdom of the North. And to reiterate a point I made earlier, what sense would it be for the Ethiopian Catholic Church to simply call herself the "Alexandrian Catholic Church". Silly, yes, but a very fitting and close simile.

Iconphile, I would also wholeheartedly support a unified Greek Catholic church in the USA, provided it was tolerant and open to various ethnic, musicological, and liturgical manifestations within the larger Constantinopolitan tradition.
This will take an act thinking beyond one jurisdiction and hierarchy, beyond one set of music and liturgical norms.

Once again, I point to the OCA as an excellent example of how this can work with space for all to truly evangelize in diverse forms, and not be bound to forms and ways dictated from one place [i.e. a major city west of Philadelphia].

Our first order of business is indeed evangelization. Absolutely the first. In as wide of a swath as we can cut using the full wealth of the rich Constantinopolitan traditions as received. And with that goes love and tolerance, and thus hopefully God allows us to praise Him in many ways than one or two sets of music.

In deference to Neil's good will and very uplifting post, I suggest to all that any more semantic battles [a new computer game in the making??? ] be transferred to another thread.

Neil, thanks for that inspiring opening post and I apologize for my contributions which have led it astray.

This sounds like - gasp - a major case of Pennsylvaniaphobia. But you are right that the OCA has been able to define and concentrate on its core mission, without getting distracted by trivia.

Where I'm from, pardner, anything east of the Mississippi is suspect...

Yes, the great vision of Father Alexander Schmemann of blessed memory has indeed to a great extent come to fruition with the OCA. What a great example of the possibilities of evangelism with vision, open minds and hearts.

DOH! Another detraction from Neil's subject. Sorry again, Neil. That's all for me on this one.

Neil,

Thanks for sharing some more and especially about Richard Cardinal Cushing. In the story I posted after yours the newly ordained 'bishop' I mentioned was an Archbishop(my mistake previously). The incident was reported to our Byzantine Catholic parish(not the one I am in now, but one on the other side of our state) by the parish priest. He spoke to the people at a special meeting after the Divine Liturgy on a Sunday. The priest was very insulted that at the ordination of the Archbishop he was made to sit next to an Protestant clergy person and many that morning at our meeting joined him in that dismay. Ironically this meeting was held on "Forgiveness Sunday."
[I don't know whether that priest ever accepted the Archbishop's apology or replied at all.] Some of us did suggest he do so and that he accept the Archbishop's invitation to meet. Also, our priest lived across the state and it is a vast state. I do know that the particular priest in question is no longer in active ministry nor pastors a parish for other reasons. He lives in another State now.

Anyway, the thing I was trying to say I think was that an Archdiocesan staffer in charge of the seating arrangements was unaware of what Byzantine Catholicism was and simply made a mistake. However, the Archbishop was right to make an ,apology because someone should have made the staffer more aware. The Archbishop humbly took the blame, however, and he did attempt to make amends for the mistake.

That is good to know about the Richard Cardinal Cushing who was, in my memory, a very good guy!

I sure would give them a call if I were you. It will help awaken them and inform them. The Byzantine parish in Anchorage, Alaska (We moved from Anchorage some years ago) was included in the R.C. Archdiocese Directory of parishes up there. Even though they were listed as under the Eparchy of Van Nuys their address, phone number, and priest's names were included.

I believe the Holy Spirit had you in that particular place to encounter that young woman. God is good!

Blessings,

Mary Jo

Administrator:

Who is doing excellent work specifically?

Smar

First of all, the OCA does not univerally define itself as such. There are a number of "ethnic" churches beneath the OCA's umbrella including the Albanian and Romanian.
Secondly, the whole idea of using a universal term for the Eastern Catholics runs the risk if the imperialism that the RC Church was responsible for during their rapid "evangilization expansion". The ethinic identities of suri uris churches is not really about ethnic identity, it is about "spirituality" which is intrinsically tied to ethnicity at times. To lose the specifications regarding these churches would be to smother their spiritual identity as much as their ethnic. What makes the Catholic church universal is its universality. It was clearly a failure when Rome tried to make ALL churches Roman as defined as universal. The same error is at risk with the use of the generic term "Byzantine".

Slava Isusu Kristu,

If I may comment on Irish Mike's original post, it does my heart good to hear that those who come to out Church in New Orleans express their faith so well wherever they go. Catholicims in my town has a special flavor whether "Byzantine" or otherwise.

May St. Louis, King of France and Protector of New Orleans, watch over this woman and her new parish home (even if it in not Ruthenian :p ).

Dmitri

Dear Administrator,

I'm sorry you find the use of the word 'Ukrainian' offensive. However, given the destruction of our church by the Russians after WW2, it became imperative that the Ukrainians remain visible and active as a distinct group in the diaspora to ensure that the church could be revived when the time was right in Ukraine. Without this ethnic mentality we would not have had the success we have had to date. For example, our North American church produced a Patriarch who is consistently polled as the most beloved hierarch in Ukraine and has a resonable chance of joining all of the apostolic Ukrainian churches.

It would have been much easier for us to assimmilate and forget about the suffering of our families and ancestors in the old world. There is much work to be done. Somehow, I doubt if Jesus thought we did (and continue to do) the wrong thing. As a person who was raised in multicultural Canada, I can assure that your views are very American 'melting-pot' ethnocentric.

Incognitus,

It was the Austro-Hungarian empire which gave the Ruthenian Orthodox in communion with Rome the term 'Greek-Catholic. When the Austro-Hungarian empire crumbled during the first world war, the Poles won much of the Galician and Lemko (now known as Ukrainian) territories and did everything possible to assimmilate them into their Roman Catholic Church. You correctly state that they began to use the term 'Byzantine Catholic' to try and divide an subjugate. This Polish Assimmilatory Byzantine Catholic movement was revived with a real zeal in the late 1980's on Polish territory when it became evident that the Ukrainian (formerly Ruthenian) Catholic Church was re-asserting itself within the Galician and Lemko Ruthenian / Ukrainian lands.

From my understanding Patriarch Slipij also agreed to have the term Ukrainian Greek-Catholic changed in the mid 1960's because it was confusing (ie: are they Greeks or Ukrainians ) to people outside of the old Austro-Hungarian Empire. The name was changed to Ukrainian Catholic - Eastern Rite (or something very close to that). The important part was that the word 'Greek' was removed. That nasty Polish assimmilatory group was still there, so the word Byzantine could not be used.

After independance in the early 1990's there were two reasons for changing the name back to Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church:

(1) The Russian Orthodox Church which aided the communists in destroying the UGCC, said that the 'Ukrainian Catholic' church was a foreign body which could not claim title to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine. They claimed that our Patriarch had created a new foreign church in the 1960's which had no rights to the property in Ukraine. They changed the name back to resolve a legal dispute.

(2) The Roman Catholics in the Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires were about 90% Polish. Fast forward through a century of conflict and Ukraine suddenly emerges as an independant country with a Roman Catholic population. They would become members of the 'Roman Catholic Church of Ukraine'. Now compare 'Roman Catholic Church of Ukraine' with 'Ukrainian Catholic Church - Eastern Rite' and ask the 'average person' to try to sort out the confusion . They decided to put the word 'Greek' back in.

From my understanding, the Slovaks still use Greek Catholic in addition to the Ukrainians.

I prefer the word Byzantine, and we may still go in that direction, but in a pan-Ukrainian coordinated fashion.

Hritzko

Hritzko,

Unless the Slavs in North America plan to move back to central and eastern Europe, North America is not the diaspora. Our homeland is here, not there. We live here, not there. Yes, we have an ongoing obligation to help the Church of our spiritual fathers and mothers but our greater obligation is to proclaim the Gospel and baptize all nations � starting with our own.

I agree fully that Ukrainians had an imperative to remain visible and a distinctive group after WWII. I disagree that the Ukrainian Catholic Church needed to discriminate against non-Ukrainians in order to support the Church in Ukraine. Certainly today there is no need for such extreme nationalism.

As I noted earlier I respond to several e-mails each week and provide information to requests for the closest Byzantine Catholic parish. My responses always include information for Ukrainian Catholic and other Byzantine Catholic Churches that are geographically close to them. I cringe for your Church when I get an e-mail back from someone who has visited a Ukrainian Catholic Church who writes back and tells me that the first question they were greeted with was �Are you Ukrainian?� I cringe even more when they tell me that the second question was �Then what are you doing here?�

And what has this policy of extreme nationalism produced for the Ukrainian Catholic Church? The Ukrainian Catholic Church in the United States has lost 34% of its members since 1990 (now averaging 290 persons/parish). The Ukrainian Catholic Church in Canada has lost 44% of its members since 1990 (now averaging 262 persons/parish). A friend who is very active in the Ukrainian Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia tells me that more than half of their 74 parishes will close in the next 5 years because there are not enough people to keep them open (the average age of parishioners is over 65). At current declines by 2010 the 184 Ukrainian Catholic parishes in the U.S. will be reduced to about 70. In Canada the numbers will go from 433 to about 150. All this because outsiders were not welcomed.

You have helped the old country but you have killed yourself in the process.

Please don�t think I am trumpeting any great successes in my own Church. While our ethnicism has not been as extreme as that in the Ukrainian Church it has hurt us greatly. We have lost almost as many people (percentage-wise).

Admin

I agree with much of what you have stated. Until 1991 (independance) our churches could not be separated from our national liberation movement. There was a real need to generate the peoples, ideas, money, energy, and direction to ensure that we could provide and do everything possible to assure Ukraine's eventual independance, and the re-establishment of her native Apostolic churches.

Non-Ukrainians were often viewed as being counter-productive since they could not fully contribute to the direction of the church, and therefore little time was expended in attracting them. However, my experience has shown me that couples from mixed marriages, and 'friends of Ukraine', or people who have a genuine fondness for the byzantine rite, have always been welcomed in our Ukrainian Greek Catholic Churches. My father (the Ukrainian nationalist) was always impressed when a non Ukrainian would join our parish. Further, unlike you, I do not think that it is strange to ask non Ukrainians why they would want to join an ethnic church which is not their nationality. Just out of curiosity, I might ask the same thing, but I certainly would not refuse anyone who wanted to join in good faith. In fact I would be quite honored to have a non Ukrainian join my parish.

The statistics you have mentioned are quite distressing and I must admit I have never heard such grim news about the fate of our church. The 44% drop in Canada must be more in the western part of the country where the immigration is old and the churches have been largely rural and small. We have had a rush of new immigrants in the past 10 years who in many cases have refilled the urban churches. The Ruthenian Church has not received this boost in the past decade because of the language barrier. The Carpatho-Rusyns comming from Ukraine speak Ukrainian (IMHO it's the same language as Ukrainian) and feel more comfortable in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Churches. I wonder how many craddle to grave UGCC members would feel more comfortable in a Byzantine American Church because of the use of English ?

The rural Western Canadian (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and for argument sakes British Columbia) country churches are more problematic since few new immigrants gravitate to these small towns as they once did a 100 or more years ago. I think that the Pensylvannia situation is similar and that is why the Carpatho-Ruthenian and Ukrainian churches in Pensylvannia are shrinking rapidly. Odly, unlike the United States, these two churches have always existed as a single entity in Canada and that is what made them strong. If they were estabished before WW1 they were called by their historic name Ruthenian, and after the WW1 by their modern name Ukrainian. In fact, here is a little news story of a Carpatho-Ruthenian Greek Catholic priest (born in Czechoslovakia) who is part of the Ukrainian Catholic Church in Western Canada. It would appear that he has published several articles about the history of the Mukachevo eparchy;

Monsignor Baran - Part 1 [stnicholaschurch.ca]

If the above link does not work, you can go to:
www.stnicholaschurch.ca/ [stnicholaschurch.ca] then go to the bulletin news section.

Monsignor Baran - Part 2 [mts.net]

I will make it my summer project to analyze the situation here in the Massachusetts area by attending as many of the UGCC and Orthodox churches within a 90 minute drive of Boston. I will give you an analysis in a few months with my action plan. I bet I could even get Harvard University's faculty of Ukrainian Studies to co-sponsor my summer fun .

Some informal and unscientific questioning has produced the tentative information that recent Greek-Catholic arrivals to the USA from Transcarpathian Ukraine are attending Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Churches, AND tht recent Greek-Catholic arrivals to the USA from Eastern Slovakia are attending Slovak Roman Catholic Churches - in both cases because of linguistic considerations. Make of that whatever you will.
Incognitus

Dear Greg:

The Admin's "vision" is all the more relevant in today's situation re the Eastern Catholic Churches, given the impossibility of "transporting" from the respective motherlands all Greek Catholic believers into North America.

A "unified" organizational structure for all Byzantine Catholics in (North) America appears to be a "critical" move.

Is it that difficult to adopt an English version of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom as a "gateway" for Western inquirers?

In reality, a 6 million-member UGCC cannot achieve, much less demand, a commanding presence in North America! Frankly, as the Church in Ukraine stands, the UGCC might not even be able to attract the other 3 parallel jurisdictions to join her, thus remaining a minority within Ukraine itself.

I think its time for UGCC apologists to step down from their ivory tower.

Amado