www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization Evangelism

What exactly is the Evangelical Mission of the Byzantine Catholic Church in America?

How does it relate to the Gospel?

Can the BC Church stand the test of times with its message?

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Edwin ]

What exactly is the Evangelical Mission of the Byzantine Catholic Church in America?

How does it relate to the Gospel?


I'll attempt a response, if it's OK with the Byzantine Catholics here. By "Byzantine Catholic Church in America' I trust you mean the Ruthenian metropolia. Much of this should apply to Melkites too, only substituting "Arab' for "Ruthenian'.

In theory, and I imagine the various eparchies' corporate-style "mission statements' say something similar, its mission is to "go... and teach all nations (all peoples), baptizing them...', which means being the Church, a fount of grace, to both familial-generational members (usually ethnic Ruthenians) and people from other Catholic Churches who want to join, and reaching out to Protestants and the completely unchurched to evangelize. This first part would cover worship and sacraments, catechesis and monasticism. The second part of the mission would be charitable work, like for example the fine prolife witness SS. Cyril & Methodius Church in Cary, NC does supporting Project Rachel. (Support for prolife is practically an additional mark of the true Church as far as I'm concerned.)

In practice, it seems the Byzantine Catholic Church exists in America to minister to its congregations of both familial-generational members and an increasing number of former Romans fleeing the Novus Ordo (blunt and un-PC - not what Catholic officialdom wants to hear, but true), offering a refuge that, as the refugees get acclimated, can become a home. (The whole can of worms complaining about alleged latinizing refugees is beyond the scope of this post and outside my experience.) Charitable work and outreach to the unchurched may be limited by the church's small size and limited resources, plus perhaps some residual deference to the Romans. (As Stuart would say, time to stop acting like "uniates'.) And Ruthenian monasticism of the Orthodox tradition is just getting off the ground in places like Newberry Springs.

I truly believe solicitation of Orthodox, banned officially, really is out of the picture in practice.

From my admittedly limited view, it seems there is two-way traffic: for every younger ethnic who goes Novus or out of the Church altogether on leaving home (Pennsylvania, Ohio) there is an enthusiastic, Orthodox-minded convert. I dare say the Byzantine Catholic Church will survive in this new century!

http://oldworldrus.com

Serge,

Teach all nations what?

Dear Edwin,

As a Byzantine Catholic, I see our mission as one of preaching the Gospel by word and example in the West from within the specific spiritual/cultural context of our Eastern Church and traditions.

Our paradigm is rooted in the resurrectional optimism of the Glory of Christ, Who died on the Cross and rose from the dead, ascended to Heaven and continues to live in His Church, the members of His Body through the Holy Spirit, justifying, saving and divinizing them by means of His Grace.

This message of God's beautiful Glory and divinizing Light and Grace is something that goes beyond the perspectives of Protestantism and Roman Catholicism.

It is something that the West has a hunger for as is evidenced by the growing numbers of disaffected Western Christians who are attracted to the Eastern Church for this reason.

Although I have a deep appreciation for contemporary Roman Rite Catholicism and its devotions, the Eastern theology and spirituality alone move my heart to indescribable joy as I feel I lose myself in glorifying God in the Holy Trinity with the Most Holy Mother of God and the Saints who share in the experience of Theosis in Christ through the Holy Spirit.

Enduring? Until the end of time, my friend, until the end of time . . .

And, Serge, I agree that "converting" the Orthodox is a no-no. Most of you guys are all right, you especially, but you really do have to remind me from time to time that you are Orthodox and not Eastern Catholic, you know . . .

Alex

Alex,

Is the paradigm you state early in your post understood by all?

I ask this because most debates or topics discussed (from my POV) center on the papal role and the status of Byzantine Catholics, but not much on the words or teachings of Jesus.

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Dear Edwin,

You make an excellent point, to be sure!

Sometimes Byzantine Catholics are encumbered by what I personally would call a "seige mentality" where we spend too much time trying to pin-point differences with the West so as to defend them etc, including the Papacy, the rights of a Particular Church etc.

I know I succumb to the same temptation and have even been known to get angry when the Ukrainian Catholic Church is attacked. I know that is hard to believe, but there you have it!

Christ and the Mother of God are never closer to me when I approach the Mystery of their Persons from within the perspective of the Eastern Churches and the Fathers.

But I hope that I am not an "Eastern fascist" in so doing.

As a matter of fact, I must share with you that I am very much into the work and spirituality of St Louis de Montfort. I have seen an icon of him praying before an image of the Mother of God of "the Sign" with Christ in a medallion on Her Chest, relating to his prayer, "Jesus living in Mary."

I find much of what he says to reflect the spirituality of St Seraphim of Sarov and the prayer of the heart.

And the ecumenical part of all this is that we really do share our liturgical spirituality with our Orthodox brothers and sisters.

There is so much they can teach us in this and help us confirm our basic faith.

I just don't like it when some among the more zealous of Orthodox speak a little disparagingly of us Eastern Catholics ("Uniates").

I know they do it lovingly. Fortunately, we have the likes of Serge who should really win a medal or something for all he has done for Catholic-Orthodox relations.

Perhaps the Administrator could develop an award of this kind for Serge to start off this renewed site with a real bang?

Just a thought . . .

By the way, Edwin, is your choice of that beautiful name indicative of your devotion to St Edwin of Northumbria?

Just to show you that I know something about Western Saints as well . . .

Alex

Thanks, Alex.

Edwin asked:

Teach all nations what?

That there is a God, the Source and End of all being — "I am who am', that this is the God revealed to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the prophets, to the Jews in the Old Testament, and that this God is Three Persons, one of Whom, the Son, became a man, Jesus who is called the Christ (messiah, anointed one), who left the Church on earth. In short, that there is a God, and Jesus Christ is God. (Sounds like a Christian version of the Muslims' Allahu akbar!) Of course, along with that go a lot of the ethical and moral teachings many other religions have (variations of the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule).

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Serge ]

Serge,

That there is a God, the Source and End of all being , that this is the God revealed to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the prophets, to the Jews in the Old Testament, and that this God is Three Persons, one of Whom, the Son, became a man, Jesus who is called the Christ (messiah, anointed one), who left the Church on earth. In short, that there is a God, and Jesus Christ is God.

What a summary ! You left me speechless. Thank you for that.

Angela

Dear Alex,

It is good to read your words again! You have much to share.

I wonder though if you could clarify how the paradigm that you present as peculiarly Eastern is different from the paradigm that we Christians in the West share. The statement of the paradigm that you make is indistinguishable from the one within which I and other Western Christians live and breathe. It is quite like the theological explanation that the Latin Church presents to help us understand what happens in the Liturgy.

I know that there is a world view and approach to the Eastern Christian paradigm (phronema?) that is quite different from that of the west. I think that it is that which the Byzantine Church can share with us in the West and with those who do not believe.

Perhaps that is what you are saying after all. It could be that I did not perceive the elements of the paradigm that make Byzantine Christianity distinctive.

It is good to share this space with you and the others who come here.

Steve

Please do not permit the written expression to impede the meaning or the love.

JOY!

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Inawe ]

Inawe,

Your observation, my friend, echoes the words of Schmemann where the late professor states "What is East and West?" (my paraphrase)

What is it of the East and/or the West that adds to or improves the paradigm where the paradigm fails?

There seems to be a lot of post-paradigm arguments outstanding that still need to be settled, but has our attention to polemics bankrupted our ability to see that paradigm clearly?

When was the last time you worshipped at a Byzantine Catholic Church and a parishioner came up to you to discuss the message of salvation, God's kindgom, and the meaning of the parables rather than the differences between East and West?

What does evangelism mean to contemporary Byzantine Catholicism? Is our focus off the locus?

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Dear Inawe,

As always, I am "in awe" of your wisdom and insight!

It was not my intention to present Eastern Christian theologies as being totally different from that of the West historically, or even that much in contemporary times.

This is an issue of emphasis, I believe.

The West emphasized the Crucifixion of Christ, the East the Resurrection.

For the West, the Oneness of God is important. For the East, the fact the God is Trinity is the emphasis.

Theosis is much more underlined in the East, and this is shown in iconography etc.

The West is more rational, the East more mystical.

The West more active in its spiritual approach, the East more passive.

The West underlines the Humanity of Christ, the East His Divinity.

These and other emphases distinguish one from the other, but they are found in both traditions.

I remember getting into a bit of a conversation with someone about three-bar Crosses and their use in the East.

In fact, three bar Crosses were also in vogue in all early Western depictions of the Calvary Cross.

In any event, the radical Resurrectional optimism fo the East is unique to it and I just never got a sense of the same level of emphasis in the West. The same is true of the theology of Light and Beauty in the East.

I think these are also the same elements that attract Western Christians to the East, among some others such as ritual and liturgical conservatism etc.

Both are the Two Lungs of the Church and both perspectives are needed.

Both have their contributions to make as legitimate expressions of the Faith of Christ.

Am I making any sense?

Alex

Edwin,

You are very right. Our duty is to go and teach all nations. We do it in many ways. If by Christian living one encourages others in the life of the Church, we are evangelizing. if we materially support Catholic evangelization efforts, we are evangelizing. It really makes little difference (to God) if we are evanglizing people into this rite or that rite. I give to the missions in Latin America. I want them to know God, through which rite is not a consideration.

However, we do have a nuance in the charge, "teach all nations". This is not simply "all people". Without going too far in the other direction towards nationalism, the term "nations" recognizes that particular social communities -- those with a bond of a common culture -- may be evanglized in a particular way, so that one can build up community within that culture.

K.

Alex,

I think your litany of Western/Eastern differentials is arbitrary. The East doesn't emphasize the Resurrection any more than the West.

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Edwin,

Have you ever been to a Byzantine Divine Liturgy or a Roman Holy Mass? The list Alex provided isn't a list of arbitrary differences but a list a different emphases, rooted in tradition, that are most certainly there. Since I was raised a Latin Catholic and am now a Byzantine Catholic deacon candidate I lived those different emphases.

The Byzantine tradition most certainly emphasizes the Resurrection. Look around the Church, icons of Christ the Pantocrator, the Light-giver, the Judge abound. In a Roman Church, the most signifigant features are the Crucifix and the Stations of the Cross. The Byzantine Church emphasizes the Resurrection, while the Latin Church emhasizes the Passion. There is nothing wrong with having differing emphases, but they are certainly there and I don't believe they are arbitrary. Ask a devout Latin whose parish has replaced the Crucifix with an image of the Risen Lord if they think the difference is arbitrary.

In Christ,
Lance, deacon candidate

Dear Alex,

Of course you are making sense! In my experience, you have always made sense.

It was never my intent to suggest that there are merely semantic differences among the Churches. I posted simply to ask if you would make clearer for me, the other Latin Catholics, the protestants, and unbelievers that there is a true difference in emphasis and perspective as well as practice between East and West. The Reality we share is the same, it seems to me.

Do you think that it is safe to say that our different emphases, perceptions and practices are God's way of sharing Images of Himself with us? These make it possible for us to receive, know and experience that Incomprehensible Reality in a more complete way? I believe that to be true. On that basis differences become most important. They are sources of illumination and joy rather than things to be denied and hidden and feared.

There are many reasons that this Forum and others such as such as the Lumen Orientale Conference and the Society of St. John Chrysostom are precious to all of us. One of the most important is that they give members of all of the churches, who are not involved in formal ecumenical discussions, a place to talk with and to learn from each other. The Forum does this in the context of our coming to this place to learn about Byzantine emphases, perceptions and practices.

In short, this Forum, it seems to me is a clear example of evangelization at its best. I really appreciate your quick response to my posting. In it you share Byzantine emphases and perceptions in a clear and concise way. Thank you for that.

In other postings you have elevated various members to ecclesiastical positions. I'd like to point out that you and the other Eastern Christians, Catholic and Orthodox, here are exercising an office on a regular basis. You are evangelists to those of us here who come bringing different emphases, perceptions and practices!

Thank you all for that.

Steve

Please do not permit the written expression impede the meaning and the love.

JOY!