Does the Byzantine Catholic Church have a valid Eucharist?

[Peter_J]

That list doesn’t say Byzantine Catholic Church. The Church’s whole name is The Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh, but it’s called the Ruthenian Church by a lot of people.

Well, more precisely the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh is a **part **of the Ruthenian Catholic Church. (Incidentally, I do applaud the Metropolia’s decision not to have “Ruthenian” in their name … a decision that I believe signifies their welcoming of Catholics in America regardless of ethnicity. )

 

[malphono]

Well, more precisely the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh is a **part **of the Ruthenian Catholic Church. (Incidentally, I do applaud the Metropolia’s decision not to have “Ruthenian” in their name … a decision that I believe signifies their welcoming of Catholics in America regardless of ethnicity. )

Not that I’m a Byzantine or that the matter directly concerns me, but I do NOT applaud the absence of “Ruthenian” in the name. The designation as it has become seems to me to create a false impression that it is the “Byzantine Catholic” Church, and of course that isn’t in the least bit true.

The apparently much-reviled “ethnic element” is the very reason the Ruthenian Church (and its particular usage) still exists. Rather than being ashamed of it, or trying to ignore or minimize it, it seems to me they should be proud of it. But, I guess that’s why, despite all the “official” efforts to eliminate it, the term “Ruthenian” does, indeed, persist in popular use.

 

[CDB1718]

Well, more precisely the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh is a **part **of the Ruthenian Catholic Church. (Incidentally, I do applaud the Metropolia’s decision not to have “Ruthenian” in their name … a decision that I believe signifies their welcoming of Catholics in America regardless of ethnicity. )

The American Ruthenians came from the Eparchy of Mukačevo, but are now distinct from Mukačevo in every way.

The Eparchy of Mukačevo has an unusual status that remains in flux. I think it is currently considered an eparchial Church. They’re attending UGCC synods but retain autonomy. They don’t claim any jurisdictional authority over those in the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh despite the shared patrimony and recension. Everywhere else they migrated, people from Transcarpathia were included in the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church.

The only reason the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh was given autonomous status in the United States was the historical realities that cut them off from their mother church and left them open to abuse, which was rampant in the US. By granting them autonomous status, they were able to provide their own clergy and protect their people.

There are now three distinct Churches with Ruthenian origins: the Apostolic Exarchate for Catholics of the Byzantine rite in the Czech Republic (Slovak Catholic), the Eparchy of Mukačevo in Ukraine, and the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh. They do not form one Church.

 

[Peter_J]

Not that I’m a Byzantine or that the matter directly concerns me, but I do NOT applaud the absence of “Ruthenian” in the name. The designation as it has become seems to me to create a false impression that it is the “Byzantine Catholic” Church, and of course that isn’t in the least bit true.

Good point. I should have said “I applaud the Metropolia’s decision not to have “Ruthenian” in their name inasmuch as the intention was to be more welcoming of Catholics in America regardless of ethnicity.”

And I definitely dislike when people say or imply that we Melkite Catholics are not “Byzantine Catholics”.

 

[Peter_J]

The American Ruthenians came from the Eparchy of Mukačevo, but are now distinct from Mukačevo in every way.

The Eparchy of Mukačevo has an unusual status that remains in flux. I think it is currently considered an eparchial Church. They’re attending UGCC synods but retain autonomy. They don’t claim any jurisdictional authority over those in the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh despite the shared patrimony and recension. Everywhere else they migrated, people from Transcarpathia were included in the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church.

The only reason the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh was given autonomous status in the United States was the historical realities that cut them off from their mother church and left them open to abuse, which was rampant in the US. By granting them autonomous status, they were able to provide their own clergy and protect their people.

There are now three distinct Churches with Ruthenian origins: the Apostolic Exarchate for Catholics of the Byzantine rite in the Czech Republic (Slovak Catholic), the Eparchy of Mukačevo in Ukraine, and the Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh. They do not form one Church.

The Ruthenian Catholic Church is a sui iuris church … doesn’t that obviously mean that it is a church?

 

[CDB1718]

Well, more precisely the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh is a **part **of the Ruthenian Catholic Church.

The Ruthenian Catholic Church is a sui iuris church … doesn’t that obviously mean that it is a church?

There is not one Ruthenian Catholic sui iris Church. Shared Ruthenian patrimony is seen in three distinct jurisdictions:
Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh (a sui iuris metropolitan Church, I think raised from an exarchate in 1969 but I could be wrong on that date)
Slovak Greek Catholic Church (changed from an exarchate to a sui iuris metropolitan Church in 2008)
The Eparchial Church of Mukačevo (I haven’t followed it, but the last time I looked the status was in flux and differently labeled on contemporary official sources)

Some people call the first or the last a Ruthenian Church. Some people say that 2 or three of the autonomous jurisdictions together form one Church. I’m understanding you to say the latter. Please forgive me if I’m misunderstanding.

 

[Peter_J]

Some people call the first or the last a Ruthenian Church. Some people say that 2 or three of the autonomous jurisdictions together form one Church. I’m understanding you to say the latter. Please forgive me if I’m misunderstanding.

Yes, all three jurisdictions together are one sui iuris church.

See cnewa.org/source-images/Roberson-eastcath-statistics/eastcatholic-stat12.pdf (scroll down to the top of page 8).

 

[CDB1718]

Yes, all three jurisdictions together are one sui iuris church.

See cnewa.org/source-images/Roberson-eastcath-statistics/eastcatholic-stat12.pdf (scroll down to the top of page 8).

Fr. Ronald explained why he combined them when adding numbers. I don’t know which edition of his book CNEWA posted, but it has to be at least 5 years old because it doesn’t mention the 2008 change of the Slovaks from an exarchate to a sui iuris metropolitan Church.

cnewa.org/default.aspx?ID=70&pagetypeID=9&sitecode=US&pageno=1

The Ruthenian Catholic Churches
In sum, today there are three distinct Ruthenian Catholic jurisdictions: (1) the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Metropolitanate in the United States, a metropolitan church sui iuris, (2) the eparchy of Mukačevo in Ukraine, which is immediately subject to the Holy See, and (3) the Apostolic Exarchate in the Czech Republic. The relationship between the three has not been clarified. The bishop of Mukačevo is listed below as head of the church, but he has no authority over the other two jurisdictions. The membership figure includes the combined statistics for all three entities.

Location: Ukraine, United States, Czech Republic
Head: Bishop Milan Šašík (born 1952, appointed 2010)
Title: Bishop of Mukačevo of the Byzantines
Residence: Užhorod, Ukraine
Membership: 598,000
Website: www.mgce.uz.ua

 

[Aramis]

Not that I doubt you, because I don’t, but from where did you derive this list?

While I’ll continue to try to steer him towards Roman Catholic, it’s good to know that he is looking towards a Church that is officially recognized.

Thank you very much for the information ^^

You can find the list in the Anuario Pontificio Statistics appendix. Romans have a separate appendix.

In much higher detail - all the sees, and their reported memberships.

CNEWA has the 2012 stats up.

cnewa.org/source-images/Roberson-eastcath-statistics/eastcatholic-stat12.pdf

 

[Peter_J]

cnewa.org/default.aspx?ID=70&pagetypeID=9&sitecode=US&pageno=1

The bishop of Mukačevo is listed below as head of the church, but he has no authority over the other two jurisdictions.

That is a little bit surprising, but not in the way you might think. I was aware that none of the three jurisdictions has jurisdiction over the other two; but I was unaware that the Mukačevo bishop is listed as head.

 

[Farmer88]

If he is interested in one of the Eastern Catholic Churches, by all means, encourage him to go to them. Don’t try to influence him towards the Latin Church. I have friends who converted from Protestantism to Eastern Catholic (Or Protestantism to Latin Catholic then canonically transferred to Eastern Catholic). The Eastern Catholics are awesome and their practices and traditions and theology are all extremely beautiful. Now, if he was looking at Orthodoxy, that’s a whole different situation. But if he is seriously interested in Orthodoxy, it usually takes very little to take that extra step and go Eastern Catholic.

 

[Peter_J]

Well said, Farmer. I always that, if someone is Orthodox, I wouldn’t encourage him/her to convert to Catholicism … but if someone is neither Catholic nor Orthodox, and is thinking about possibly joining one or the other, there’s nothing wrong with giving them a “nudge in the right direction”.

 

[Farmer88]

And, to be completely honest, going Eastern Orthodox is leagues better than basically any other Christian group aside from Catholicism. I have a few friends who went Orthodox, and I was basically like “…eh, close enough.” Especially since a couple of these guys weren’t going to bite the Catholic bullet.

 

[rciadan]

Take a look at your OP

I have a friend who, in his studies, has begun to be drawn to the Byzantine Catholic Church. I am curious to know if it is an officially recognized rite of the Catholic Church, and if it has a valid Eucharistic celebration.

and combine that statement with (also your own words)

:While I’ll continue to try to steer him towards Roman Catholic, it’s good to know that he is looking towards a Church that is officially recognized.

I think you may be in danger of working against God and the Holy Spirit! If he is drawn towards Eastern Catholicism, you must ask yourself, “by whom is he drawn?”. If by the Holy Spirit, and you intervene, are you not doing the work of the Devil?!

 

[MorEphrem]

Take a look at your OP
and combine that statement with (also your own words)I think you may be in danger of working against God and the Holy Spirit! If he is drawn towards Eastern Catholicism, you must ask yourself, “by whom is he drawn?”. If by the Holy Spirit, and you intervene, are you not doing the work of the Devil?!

 

[Michael_M]

Not that I doubt you, because I don’t, but from where did you derive this list?

While I’ll continue to try to steer him towards Roman Catholic, it’s good to know that he is looking towards a Church that is officially recognized.

Thank you very much for the information ^^

You really don’t, and shouldn’t be trying to “steer” his towards the Church of Rome. Rome is not the only true Christian church. There are all the Sui Generis churches of the east that are part of the world-wide Catholic Church, and then there is the Orthodox communion, which is not in full communion with the Catholic Church but has valid sacraments, and a rich spiritual and liturgical life.

Let your friend go where God leads him. It is not your place to interfere with God’s work in shaping someone’s spiritual life.

 

[Miserissima]

In short defense of the OP doing any “steering,” I would want any of my friends to come with me into my tradition, be it any sui iuris church or a particular rite. It may be for selfish reasons, but not with any nefarious intent. Give the OP the benefit of the doubt here.

 

[mardukm]

Isn’t it not only discouraged but considered sinful by papal instruction for an RC to try to detract someone from an ECC?

**Inasmuch as the following protocols have seemed proper to ordain and sanction in Our Lord, by Our Apostolic Authority We do declare now that it is Our will and decree that the aforesaid decree of Benedict XIV originally promulgated respecting the Greek Melkites, now apply globally to all the faithful of any Eastern rite whatever.

Any Latin rite missionary, whether of the secular or religious clergy, who induces with his advice or assistance any Eastern rite faithful to transfer to the Latin rite, will be deposed and excluded from his benefice in addition to the ipso facto suspension a divinis and other punishments that he will incur as imposed in the aforesaid Constitution Demandatam. That this decree stand fixed and lasting We order a copy of it be posted openly in the churches of the Latin rite…

We have resolved upon this course of action; it is difficult to say with just how much zeal and devotion We hope to attempt it, to advance it, relying greatly, as We do, upon the support and resources of Catholics…

Therefore, whatever We have determined, declared, and sanctioned in this letter, We will and command to be kept inviolate by all to whom they pertain; these prescriptions cannot be stigmatized, called into dispute, nor infringed for any reason, excuse, or pretext, including one arising from privilege.**

Pope St. Leo XIII, Orientalium Dignitas

 

[Miserissima]

Any Latin rite missionary, whether of the secular or religious clergy, who induces with his advice or assistance any Eastern rite faithful to transfer to the Latin rite,

Pope St. Leo XIII, Orientalium Dignitas

Doesn’t that presuppose one is already an Eastern Catholic, not a catechumen, and would it apply to someone just investigating (i.e., the OPs friend)?

I can hardly blame the OP for not knowing that the EC has a valid Eucharist, as the original question posed displayed a lack of information regarding the Eastern Churches proper.

To go from that premise to accusing him/her of undermining the Holy Spirit…well, lacks charity toward the OPs intent.

It’s a big risk for a person to openly display a lack of knowledge on a topic and then to be accused of “poaching” from the Eastern Church. A correction was made to the OP that turned into bandwagon admonishment.

The offensive line about “steering” the friend may not be the work of the devil if all 23 churches are truly of equal dignity.

My words to the OP would be, “Since you read our replies and would still insist that your friend join the Roman Catholic Church over any sui iurus Church, can you explain why you feel this way? If your friend does decide on joining an Eastern Church, then you may be in danger of sin because…x.”

I doubt the answer to my question would be, “because I’m an unwitting agent of Satan,” but more, “I understand the Latin Rite better (as evidenced by having to ask if the ECs have a valid Eucharist), and I would rather guide my friend to/in what I know well than to learn more about the other lung of the Church proper.”

I am not at all unsympathetic to Easterns whose followers matriculated to the Latin Rite due to geography and simple poaching by clergy and laypersons alike who do not have as clear understanding as the members of the Eastern Churches proper, and understand the defensive posturing. But, please be as gentle with the n00b as you were with me when I was a n00b.

 

[Miserissima]

You really don’t, and shouldn’t be trying to “steer” his towards the Church of Rome. Rome is not the only true Christian church. There are all the Sui Generis churches of the east that are part of the world-wide Catholic Church, and then there is the Orthodox communion, which is not in full communion with the Catholic Church but has valid sacraments, and a rich spiritual and liturgical life.

Let your friend go where God leads him. It is not your place to interfere with God’s work in shaping someone’s spiritual life.