F
Fr_Ambrose
Guest
Something from Dr Alexander Roman who is quoted on the Forum as an expert on Uniate/Greek Catholic things.
Use of the Word "Uniate"
unicorne.org/orthodoxy/articles/alex_roman/useoftheword.htm
As a Ukrainian Catholic, I don’t know why the word “Uniate” or “Greaco-Uniate” would be offensive to anyone. It is, in fact, the earliest name for those members of the Orthodox Church who came into union with Rome at the Union of Brest in 1596. There are publications dating from that time that (proudly) use that term. Another early name for us then was “Orthodox in union with Rome” or “Orthodox Uniate.”
Throughout our evolution as a Church, our name changed and developed. The Austro-Hungarian Empire preferred the term “Greaco-Catholic” and this is in vogue today among Ukrainian Catholics of the Byzantine Rite in Ukraine.
What is in a name? Well, spiritual identity for one thing. We need a name that underscores our Byzantine Rite and heritage. The Byzantine Catholics have done a marvellous job in this department and I wish that Ukrainian Catholics could follow suit.
The fact that “Uniate” has taken on a pejorative term is not only something that derives from certain Orthodox circles, but also from Roman Catholic ones. Roman Catholic ecumenical commissions studying the history of the Union of Brest and others have come to the conclusion that such “Unia” were historically wrong for the Roman Church to pursue as they divided Churches and peoples (see the Catholic Encyclopaedia on this topic). Roman Catholic scholars involved in ecumenism with the East have also dismissed the “Unia” as a model for any future Church agreements on unity.
At least the term “Uniate” reminds me of my Orthodox heritage and ethos, and those of my ancestors before me, which should still be part of our spiritual experience as Eastern-Rite Catholics. Even His Holiness the Pope, in celebrating the 400th anniversary of the Union of Brest said that the Union is that old and did not make any statements about the “existing” union prior to AD1054. Why did His Holiness say that the Union is only 400 years old?
Because he spoke the truth! Yes, the Churches were one in the first Millennium. The issues of the Filioque and others deriving from that fundamental issue in understanding the Trinity still divide us and must be addressed before a real resolution to Church unity can take place.
As for Ecumenism itself, I find the Orthodox perspective much more spiritually refreshing than that of the Roman Catholic Church or the Protestant churches. The Orthodox will not water down or else compromise, or else be seen to be compromising, their Faith. My point is, if you believe that something is true, then don’t try to hide the fact for the sake of ill-advised ecumenical “togetherness.” This doesn’t mean that ecumenical discussion can’t take place. It just means that differences of faith must be taken seriously. I have met Roman Catholics who have left their Church over this and other issues. They are now Orthodox Christians of Western Rites.
In terms of terminology to describe the Ukrainian Catholic Church, there is no accepted name for us.
Originally, those Orthodox bishops and their flock who came into communion with Rome at the Union of Brest-Litovsk, were called either “Orthodox in union with Rome” or else “Greco-Uniates.”
I believe that the term “Uniate” acquired a pejorative connotation during this century as a reaction against “creeping Uniatism” and such expressions and feelings toward these Churches.
As a term, it simply means “united.” As a matter of fact, members of the formerly excommunicated Old Rite Orthodox Believers who came into union with the Moscow Patriarchate beginning in the nineteenth century were also called “uniates” or “United Believers.”
I can see “Uniate” being pejorative in the sense that it doesn’t provide for an integral Church Identity for members of the Ukrainian Catholic Church. But, then again, neither does the term “Ukrainian (Greek) Catholic.” Remember, that the term “Greek” in our title itself comes from the former “Greco-Uniate” term of the seventeenth century. Also, at the beginning of this century, “Greek Catholic” was a term adopted by many Orthodox communities in North America.
“Ukrainian Catholic” or even the newly proposed “Kyivan Catholic” really does little or nothing, from my point of view, to underline our Eastern Church Identity and our historical, ecclesial roots. I prefer the proposition of others regarding the term “Orthodox Catholic.” Russians in union with Rome refer to themselves this way ( I think they may even call themselves, “Catholic Orthodox”). In terms of theological, liturgical and other areas, there is minimal difference between our two Churches, although that “minimal” is still enormous enough to divide us. With the term “Orthodox Catholic,” we can begin a real Eastern Rite reform in our Church with a beginning of an appreciation for the spiritual riches of the East.
I don’t want to be a “Uniate.” I want to be fully Orthodox and Catholic from the perspective of the Church Fathers of the first 1000 years of the Church.
Dr. Alexander Roman alex@unicorne.org
Use of the Word "Uniate"
unicorne.org/orthodoxy/articles/alex_roman/useoftheword.htm
As a Ukrainian Catholic, I don’t know why the word “Uniate” or “Greaco-Uniate” would be offensive to anyone. It is, in fact, the earliest name for those members of the Orthodox Church who came into union with Rome at the Union of Brest in 1596. There are publications dating from that time that (proudly) use that term. Another early name for us then was “Orthodox in union with Rome” or “Orthodox Uniate.”
Throughout our evolution as a Church, our name changed and developed. The Austro-Hungarian Empire preferred the term “Greaco-Catholic” and this is in vogue today among Ukrainian Catholics of the Byzantine Rite in Ukraine.
What is in a name? Well, spiritual identity for one thing. We need a name that underscores our Byzantine Rite and heritage. The Byzantine Catholics have done a marvellous job in this department and I wish that Ukrainian Catholics could follow suit.
The fact that “Uniate” has taken on a pejorative term is not only something that derives from certain Orthodox circles, but also from Roman Catholic ones. Roman Catholic ecumenical commissions studying the history of the Union of Brest and others have come to the conclusion that such “Unia” were historically wrong for the Roman Church to pursue as they divided Churches and peoples (see the Catholic Encyclopaedia on this topic). Roman Catholic scholars involved in ecumenism with the East have also dismissed the “Unia” as a model for any future Church agreements on unity.
At least the term “Uniate” reminds me of my Orthodox heritage and ethos, and those of my ancestors before me, which should still be part of our spiritual experience as Eastern-Rite Catholics. Even His Holiness the Pope, in celebrating the 400th anniversary of the Union of Brest said that the Union is that old and did not make any statements about the “existing” union prior to AD1054. Why did His Holiness say that the Union is only 400 years old?
Because he spoke the truth! Yes, the Churches were one in the first Millennium. The issues of the Filioque and others deriving from that fundamental issue in understanding the Trinity still divide us and must be addressed before a real resolution to Church unity can take place.
As for Ecumenism itself, I find the Orthodox perspective much more spiritually refreshing than that of the Roman Catholic Church or the Protestant churches. The Orthodox will not water down or else compromise, or else be seen to be compromising, their Faith. My point is, if you believe that something is true, then don’t try to hide the fact for the sake of ill-advised ecumenical “togetherness.” This doesn’t mean that ecumenical discussion can’t take place. It just means that differences of faith must be taken seriously. I have met Roman Catholics who have left their Church over this and other issues. They are now Orthodox Christians of Western Rites.
In terms of terminology to describe the Ukrainian Catholic Church, there is no accepted name for us.
Originally, those Orthodox bishops and their flock who came into communion with Rome at the Union of Brest-Litovsk, were called either “Orthodox in union with Rome” or else “Greco-Uniates.”
I believe that the term “Uniate” acquired a pejorative connotation during this century as a reaction against “creeping Uniatism” and such expressions and feelings toward these Churches.
As a term, it simply means “united.” As a matter of fact, members of the formerly excommunicated Old Rite Orthodox Believers who came into union with the Moscow Patriarchate beginning in the nineteenth century were also called “uniates” or “United Believers.”
I can see “Uniate” being pejorative in the sense that it doesn’t provide for an integral Church Identity for members of the Ukrainian Catholic Church. But, then again, neither does the term “Ukrainian (Greek) Catholic.” Remember, that the term “Greek” in our title itself comes from the former “Greco-Uniate” term of the seventeenth century. Also, at the beginning of this century, “Greek Catholic” was a term adopted by many Orthodox communities in North America.
“Ukrainian Catholic” or even the newly proposed “Kyivan Catholic” really does little or nothing, from my point of view, to underline our Eastern Church Identity and our historical, ecclesial roots. I prefer the proposition of others regarding the term “Orthodox Catholic.” Russians in union with Rome refer to themselves this way ( I think they may even call themselves, “Catholic Orthodox”). In terms of theological, liturgical and other areas, there is minimal difference between our two Churches, although that “minimal” is still enormous enough to divide us. With the term “Orthodox Catholic,” we can begin a real Eastern Rite reform in our Church with a beginning of an appreciation for the spiritual riches of the East.
I don’t want to be a “Uniate.” I want to be fully Orthodox and Catholic from the perspective of the Church Fathers of the first 1000 years of the Church.
Dr. Alexander Roman alex@unicorne.org
As well as that he even needs Pope Benedict’s approval to shift a bishop from one diocese in the Ukraine to another diocese! This is a sign of how tightly even the largest of the Greek Catholic Churches is under the control of Rome.
