Mergers

  • Thread starter Thread starter Madaglan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Madaglan

Guest
What are your thoughts of the idea of merging, say, the various Byzantine Catholic churches in America (e.g. Ukrainian, Melkite, Romanian, Ruthenian) under a single jurisdiction–e.g. The Byzantine Catholic Church in America?
It would seem that this would resolve some of the problems with over-lapping of jurisdictions, but how would it affect the particular expressions of these churches?
 
Dear brother Madaglan,
Madaglan said:
What are your thoughts of the idea of merging, say, the various Byzantine Catholic churches in America (e.g. Ukrainian, Melkite, Romanian, Ruthenian) under a single jurisdiction–e.g. The Byzantine Catholic Church in America?
It would seem that this would resolve some of the problems with over-lapping of jurisdictions, but how would it affect the particular expressions of these churches?
Click to expand...
Forgive me everyone if I am speaking out of place, since I am an Oriental and this is a question for Easterns, but perhaps the following will have some relevance.

As far as I understand it (and ecclesiastical politics is admittedly not my strong suit), there is no such concept as “overlapping jurisdictions” within the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does not operate under the notion of territorial patriarchy, but rather ritual patriarchy. It is perfectly fine within the Catholic paradigm to have different jurisdictions of different ritual Churches within the same geographical area.

The same is true of the Oriental Orthodox. For example, the Armenians have their own bishop in Egypt, and there is an Armenian and a Coptic hierarchal presence in Jerusalem, despite Jerusalem being Traditionally within the omophorion of the Syriac Patriarchate (back in the 13th century, this caused some tension) . The SOC, for one, has explicitly stated that an ecclesiology that is nationalistic (I forget the specific name for that ecclesiastical theory) is a heresy.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
One of the reasons for the separation into “Ukrainian” and “Ruthenian” jurisdictions was the claimed, or perceived, differences in culture and spirituality and liturgical practice.

The Ukrainians rejoice that they are part of the largest sui juris Catholic Church in the world after the Roman.

The Melkites delight in being part of one of the oldest Patriarchates–and a Petrine see, at that.

The Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh sui juris is the only sui juris Ruthenian Church in the world.

And so it goes.

There would be as many and as great problems in merging them all into a united American Byzantine Catholic Church as would exist in a united American Orthodox Church.

Not that these are bad ideas.
 
mardukm said:
Dear brother Madaglan,

Forgive me everyone if I am speaking out of place, since I am an Oriental and this is a question for Easterns, but perhaps the following will have some relevance.

As far as I understand it (and ecclesiastical politics is admittedly not my strong suit), there is no such concept as “overlapping jurisdictions” within the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does not operate under the notion of territorial patriarchy, but rather ritual patriarchy. It is perfectly fine within the Catholic paradigm to have different jurisdictions of different ritual Churches within the same geographical area.

The same is true of the Oriental Orthodox. For example, the Armenians have their own bishop in Egypt, and there is an Armenian and a Coptic hierarchal presence in Jerusalem, despite Jerusalem being Traditionally within the omophorion of the Syriac Patriarchate (back in the 13th century, this caused some tension) . The SOC, for one, has explicitly stated that an ecclesiology that is nationalistic (I forget the specific name for that ecclesiastical theory) is a heresy.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
I understand the different jurisdictions of different ritual Churches within the same geographical area. I don’t foresee an “Eastern and Oriental Catholic Church of America.” You’re right about the ritual distinctions, and I see them as especially holding true for the Armenians, Copts, Syro-Malabar, etc. It seems to me though that the Melkites, Ukrainians, Ruthenians and Romanians all share the Byzantine rite, even if their chant styles and local practices differ somewhat.

Wouldn’t these four be different jurisdictions of the same rite?
 
I see what you mean. OK. I have a few more comments before leaving this thread, since this is obviously intended for my Eastern brethren.

You ask a relevant question - how would the particular ritual distinctions be preserved in such a merger? If such distinctions are to be preserved, what use is there for a merger? Finally, how would such a merger affect the financial support given to the Mother Churches of these particular Churches in the U.S.?

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Madaglan said:
What are your thoughts of the idea of merging, say, the various Byzantine Catholic churches in America (e.g. Ukrainian, Melkite, Romanian, Ruthenian) under a single jurisdiction–e.g. The Byzantine Catholic Church in America?
It would seem that this would resolve some of the problems with over-lapping of jurisdictions, but how would it affect the particular expressions of these churches?
Click to expand...
The differences in expression, while relatively minor, underly some very fundamental differences in the approach to liturgy.

We have Ruthenians, Ukrainians, Romanians, Melkites, and Russians… each with slightly different rubrics. The Ruthenians have trimmed almost all the litanies, and the ukrainians keep most of them. We each have different melodies (the Ruthenians have 3 sets in use… 1917, 1965, and 2006).

See, in concelebrations, it is no big thing… do as the principal concelebrant (who usually is the host) does… just chalk it up to differences by church, and move on. The laity, however, often grumble about it. But when you try to impose one rubric on everyone, you get massive grumbling.

Plus, it would be counter to the declarations of Vatican II, and proclimations by Pious IX, Pious X, Pious XII, Paul VI, and John Paul II.
 
Aramis said:
The differences in expression, while relatively minor, underly some very fundamental differences in the approach to liturgy.

We have Ruthenians, Ukrainians, Romanians, Melkites, and Russians… each with slightly different rubrics. The Ruthenians have trimmed almost all the litanies, and the ukrainians keep most of them. We each have different melodies (the Ruthenians have 3 sets in use… 1917, 1965, and 2006).

See, in concelebrations, it is no big thing… do as the principal concelebrant (who usually is the host) does… just chalk it up to differences by church, and move on. The laity, however, often grumble about it. But when you try to impose one rubric on everyone, you get massive grumbling.

Plus, it would be counter to the declarations of Vatican II, and proclimations by Pious IX, Pious X, Pious XII, Paul VI, and John Paul II.
Click to expand...
I personally agree with you on the slight differences of rubrics.
 
There is a lesson from the history of our separated brethren.

When Lutherans from different parts of the world came here, they kept their original langauges and liturgical uses.

Eventually they merged into presently about a half-dozen groups.

When they first did so, about 100 years ago, they all agreed to use the same English liturgy for services in that language, regardless of their services in languages from the “old country.”
 
Cluny,

What is the lesson learned?

The Lutherans have 3 “mainline” jurisdictions, not in Eucharistic communion with one another and dozens of smaller and independent jurisdictions all over the map…

maybe I’m misunderstanding the point
 
My point is they agreed to have a common ENGLISH liturgy, regardless of what their services were like in German, Swedish, Latin (yes, there are Lutherans who still use Latin) or anything else.

Of course WW1 did a lot to suppress German as the liturgical language of Lutherans in this country.

Following this precedent, perhaps the Orthodox and Byzantine-rite Catholics (either separately or together) decide on a common English text and ceremonial for the US–and American Typicon, if you like, regardless of how they celebrate in Greek, Slavonic, or other languages.

I’m not losing any sleep or holding my breath though.
 
Cluny said:
Following this precedent, perhaps the Orthodox and Byzantine-rite Catholics (either separately or together) decide on a common English text and ceremonial for the US–and American Typicon, if you like, regardless of how they celebrate in Greek, Slavonic, or other languages.
Click to expand...
That serves no purpose, other than suppression of favored forms of specific ethnic groups.

Heck, the Russian Orthodox are still 3 jurisdictions in the US, not counting at least 3 Old Believer groups.
 
Cluny said:
…perhaps the Orthodox and Byzantine-rite Catholics (either separately or together) decide on a common English text and ceremonial for the US–and American Typicon, if you like, regardless of how they celebrate in Greek, Slavonic, or other languages.

I’m not losing any sleep or holding my breath though.
Click to expand...
I think it is a good idea.
 
Cluny said:
My point is they agreed to have a common ENGLISH liturgy, regardless of what their services were like in German, Swedish, Latin (yes, there are Lutherans who still use Latin) or anything else.

Of course WW1 did a lot to suppress German as the liturgical language of Lutherans in this country.
Click to expand...
Despite WWI and WWII, German is still used by several Lutheran congregations in the NYC area.
Cluny said:
Following this precedent, perhaps the Orthodox and Byzantine-rite Catholics (either separately or together) decide on a common English text and ceremonial for the US–and American Typicon, if you like, regardless of how they celebrate in Greek, Slavonic, or other languages.
Click to expand...
Might just as well take the ICEL version of the Novus Ordo, and use it with an Iconistasis: voilà: instant American-Byzantine. No muss, no fuss.

To my old eyes, the idea here smacks of what I will call “over-assimilation” where traditions are blurred and ultimately obliterated in favor of an artificially-created “American” identity. The whole “melting pot” thing. I’ve never agreed with it and never will. IMO, it’s a terrible thing.
 
mardukm said:
What’s a good idea? That he shouldn’t lose sleep over it? 😃 Just kidding.

So you think it is good to suppress the distinctions in favor of uniformity?

Blessings
Click to expand...
No, I think it’s a good idea for all the jurisdictions to cooperate on a translation of the liturgy.
 
for whatever my 2 cents are worth, I think it’s a good idea as well, because it would help foster a sense of brotherhood in working together for a common goal.
 
Patchunky said:
The Archeparchy of Presov was established in January of 2008 with Metropolitan Jan Babjak as it’s head. So, that means there are 2 Ruthenian Archeparchies…
Click to expand...
That is right.

I had often thought that it would be good for the Sub-Carpathian church to have a Major Metropolitan for all the ‘Ruthenian’ churches across national borders, including the Pittsburgh Metropolia.

Perhaps Presov would be suitable for the purpose.
 
Hesychios said:
That is right.

I had often thought that it would be good for the Sub-Carpathian church to have a Major Metropolitan for all the ‘Ruthenian’ churches across national borders, including the Pittsburgh Metropolia.

Perhaps Presov would be suitable for the purpose.
Click to expand...
From your mouth to God’s ears!:byzsoc:

I have a feelling that Metropolitan Jan wouldn’t put up with some the stuff that’s happened to the Church in America in the last couple of years!:byzsoc:
 
There’s been an idea thrown around other fora about the consolidation under two Greek Catholic Patriarchates, one for churches of Slavic liturgical usage (in Kyiv) and one for Greek liturgical usage (in Damascus). That would only be for Greek Catholics, as the Orientals are another story entirely. It’s never really caught on and is likely not to. Sadly the only thing likely to create a “merger” is the attrition of one particular Church to the point of deeding property or a parish to another.

The most encouraging joint endeavor in recent time is the Generations of Faith project between the UGCC and Ukrainian Orthodox. This is the sort of joint venture I would like to see, and is entirely in the spirit of Orientale Lumen. gofbyzantine.org/ A far more important goal to me is the restoration of communion with our sister Orthodox Church and working along those lines.

I think having an Archbishop in Presov for all Rusyn Catholics would be a good idea, however I do not think the American hierarchy is ready to relinquish any sui iuris status for a number of reasons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top