Russian Greek Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter russialover
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
5Loaves said:
If there were canonically Russian Catholics who were ordained as priests and served our parishes I’m not aware of that. I’m especially unfamiliar with our parishes in other countries.
Click to expand...
Probably the last (cradle) canonically Russian priest to serve any of the parishes in the diaspora was Father Archimandrite George (Brianchaninoff), one of the emigrant community from Harbin, now of very advanced age, who served the Russian parish in Australia until his retirement. Father Archimandrite Alexei in El Segundo, prior to his ordination to the presbyterate, was a member of the parish and canonically Russian by enrollment.
We were served for many decades by the Jesuits who are of the Latin Church.
Click to expand...
The Jesuits who served in SF, LA, NYC, and the late lamented temples in Boston and Montral were ordained to the service of the Russian Church; their biritual faculties were in the Latin Church, not the other way around.
As far as I know Russian Catholics in the US been served by bi-ritual priests, either Latin who have faculties to serve the Russian Church or another ECC priest with faculties to serve a Russian Church.
Click to expand...
Only in recent years - and only in NYC and SF.
 
Hesychios said:
This brings up a subject I am not too familiar with, so I thought I would ask …

If the bishop ‘sends’ a candidate to a seminary, does that imply that the bishop is paying the tuition? I believe it would be the case for a member of a monastery or active religious order, the order or house would send a member for studies and pay for it, but I don’t know what the diocesan practice is.
Click to expand...
I know that in the Antiochian Archdiocese there is a fund for those studying to enter the Priesthood, and if I’m not mistaken the Archdiocese pays for their Seminary schooling, but as was stated, they have to attend the Seminary of the Metropolitan’s choosing. Normally they send them to St. Vlad’s, which I hear is a great Seminary, but I don’t know why they don’t send more students to Holy Cross (the Greek Orthodox Seminary) because they are in the byzantine tradition. I don’t find anything wrong with sending their seminarians to a pseudo-russian tradition school. I suppose they have a good byzantine music program. I guess since St. Vlad’s was good enough for the Metropolitan and the rest of the Bishops of the Antiochian Archdiocese, then its good enough for the priests as well. Also, someone stated that the person looking for vocation may be able to get their education at PAOI or St. Vlad’s. I didn’t know that Orthodox Seminaries accepted non-Orthodox in their schools. I guess to be an accredited school they must have to accept students of all backgrounds. This would make sense though, since more and more priests in America have a better opinion of Ecumenism than other Orthodox. They must be in an atmosphere where they are taught to be more accepting, and less “narrow minded” about ecumenism (which I have to say is not something I’m thrilled about. Let’s continue to dialogue, but signing statements that say that you don’t accept that your church is the one true Church seems to suggest a lot of relativism.) I don’t want to derail this thread, but I still just can’t wrap my head around why either the Orthodox or Catholic churches would be so involved in ecumenism. Just my thoughts…which I have to admit aren’t worth too much! Haha

The sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Mother of God save us!
 
Actually, accepting non-Orthodox has nothing to do with accreditation. Orthodox and Catholic seminaries (Latin, as well as Eastern) have been accepting cross-registered students for several decades - reaching back to the 60s, as memory serves. As well, both not infrequently participate in theological consortiums that include divinity schools of other faiths. The reality is that there are diverse resources to be had in libraries and in faculties that make this a worthwhile and important venture for all such institutions.

The faculties of both Orthodox and Eastern Catholic seminaries also frequently include members, at least as adjunct faculty, from the other Church.

As to why certain Churches might utilize the facilities of one rather than another, consider strongly that personalities have and still can play a very real role.
 
russialover said:
Ok thanks. Ive noticed that Eastern Catholicism really doesnt establesh missions in the states, yet the OCA and other Orthodox bodies due, and they have success with evangelisation. Why is that?
Click to expand...
It would seem that the reason the RC church doesn’t establish eastern catholic missions in the US regularly is that A) there probably isn’t a huge demand among the faithful and B) those that have been established here are for the ethnic groups that need them. The reason Orthodox churches establish more missions here is that we see more converts than most eastern catholic bodies do.
 
I feel that is a pretty acurate conclusion, orthodox josh, i dont understand why the east doesnt have a right to evangelize in latin lands, is it that the USCCB wants to keep us all latins?
 
I would think that there are some in the Latin church who would want to make the Eastern churches latinized because it is more comfortable for them. The RCC doesn’t seem to be as comfortable with the Eastern Rite as we have been (St. John Maximovitch, etc.) with the Western Rite in our own Church.

The sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Mother of God save us!
 
That is true, i think because they (bishops and priests) think that one has to be Latin, and a modern Latin at that, in order to be Catholic, however the Western Rite in Orthodoxy has been byzantinized, too.
 
russialover said:
I feel that is a pretty acurate conclusion, orthodox josh, i dont understand why the east doesnt have a right to evangelize in latin lands, is it that the USCCB wants to keep us all latins?
Click to expand...
It’s not the USCCB. It’s the side effects of the Plenary Councils predating it, and of Cum Data Fuerit, and of the dominant protestant culture in the US.
 
OrthodoxJosh said:
It would seem that the reason the RC church doesn’t establish eastern catholic missions in the US regularly is that A) there probably isn’t a huge demand among the faithful and B) those that have been established here are for the ethnic groups that need them. The reason Orthodox churches establish more missions here is that we see more converts than most eastern catholic bodies do.
Click to expand...
The reason that the RC church does not establish EC missions is simply that it has no business doing so. What an idea!

EC churches do establish missions, but it is fair to say that only in that last few decades have these missions had an evangelical outlook - as is much the case with the EOCs - aprt from the early Alaska missions. The past attitude was informed by much of the same factors in both groups: parishes were being established to serve immigrants and their families, primarily in regions in which the population was fully churched.

It is fair to say that some of the EO jurisdictions are establishing missions more rapidly than the ECCs. These jurisdictions are the least ethnic ones and those that took the risk of bringing in large convert groups en masse. It will take a generation to see how that all works out.
 
OrthodoxJosh said:
I would think that there are some in the Latin church who would want to make the Eastern churches latinized because it is more comfortable for them. The RCC doesn’t seem to be as comfortable with the Eastern Rite as we have been (St. John Maximovitch, etc.) with the Western Rite in our own Church.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
Mileage varies.

I have had little exposure to people in the Latin church who “would want” much of anything about the EOCs. Some are in the dark, and those who know a bit are intrigued to know more. I really haven’t experienced much of the people who you talk about.

By the same token, surely you know that the Western rite is controversial in the EOC. There is much on the web charging and defending against the charge of “reverse uniatism”.

Do you have any data to support your conjectures?
 
dvdjs said:
The reason that the RC church does not establish EC missions is simply that it has no business doing so. What an idea!

EC churches do establish missions, but it is fair to say that only in that last few decades have these missions had an evangelical outlook - as is much the case with the EOCs - aprt from the early Alaska missions. The past attitude was informed by much of the same factors in both groups: parishes were being established to serve immigrants and their families, primarily in regions in which the population was fully churched.

It is fair to say that some of the EO jurisdictions are establishing missions more rapidly than the ECCs. These jurisdictions are the least ethnic ones and those that took the risk of bringing in large convert groups en masse. It will take a generation to see how that all works out.
Click to expand...
The mission activity is split between the eastern and Latin Churchs, but outside the traditional eastern territories or eastern established jurisdictions, it is the competence of the Roman Curia: Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples and the Congregation for the Oriental Churches.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/orientchurch/index.htm

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cevang/index.htm
 
Dear brother dvdjs,
dvdjs said:
The reason that the RC church does not establish EC missions is simply that it has no business doing so. What an idea!

EC churches do establish missions, but it is fair to say that only in that last few decades have these missions had an evangelical outlook - as is much the case with the EOCs - aprt from the early Alaska missions. The past attitude was informed by much of the same factors in both groups: parishes were being established to serve immigrants and their families, primarily in regions in which the population was fully churched.

It is fair to say that some of the EO jurisdictions are establishing missions more rapidly than the ECCs. These jurisdictions are the least ethnic ones and those that took the risk of bringing in large convert groups en masse. It will take a generation to see how that all works out.
Click to expand...
I have a question:

Non-Latin Catholics certainly do evangelize. We have several missions, AFAIK. Our “home base,” so to speak, is, of course, always those of our own Tradition, and we expand through word of mouth to those outside our Traditions (iow, we set up missions to serve members of our Churches first in that new area, and expand from there to the unchurched or others who may want a taste of our non-Latin Traditions).

My question is: who has the competence to authorize the establishment of our missions - is it the local Latin hierarch who has territorial jurisdiction, or is it one of our own non-Latin hierarchs who has personal jurisdiction? I’m sure it must go through at least the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, but who makes the petition to establish the mission - the local Latin hierarch, or our own non-Latin hierarch?

Blessings,
Marduk
 
The local Ruthenian mission was set up by the Pastor with the permissions of the Eparch. The Eparch did consult with the local Roman Archbishop prior to authorizing it, but the authorizations came via the Eparch.

One major problem with a mission: if the pastor isn’t supportive, it dies of neglect even if the faithful are strong and numerous, as the canonical rules make it so that the faithful aren’t supposed to have reader services as regular scheduled functions, only as ‘emergency’ functions. As in, if the faithful know that the priest will be absent, they are supposed to go to a divine worship service lead by a priest if they can… and most EC missions, that means the local Roman parish.

Our mission took a HUGE step backwards with the arrival of the new Pastor - he reduced the mission to one service per month. (It had been weekly.) I know some of the parishioners, and several would prefer reader or deacon lead Typica services to Roman services… but we have no deacon, and reader services are not supposed to be used when cleric-lead services are available.

My home parish started as a mission to convert the Orthodox - approval of the local Roman ABp was obtained, but it was the Eparch’s authorization. Note that it failed in its assigned role; it was mostly Romans. There are some Ukranians, and some ethnic Ruthenians (doing the research, I’m ethnically one of the two, despite the Polish passport of my great grandfather - his photos are annotated in Slavonic!). We’re getting a steady influx of protestants. (About 1/4 of the parish are former protestants who came in directly to the Ruthenian Church. And Climbing.)
 
Vico said:
The mission activity is split between the eastern and Latin Churchs, but outside the traditional eastern territories or eastern established jurisdictions, it is the competence of the Roman Curia: Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples and the Congregation for the Oriental Churches.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/orientchurch/index.htm

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cevang/index.htm
Click to expand...
What do mean, by “split” and by “competence”?
Is there a connection between the links you posted and the claim that you made?
 
Dear brother Aramis,

When I was in the States, I sometimes contributed to an “Alaskan Mission,” because of my contact with a very orthodox Latin-Rite pastor who was temporarily transferred to Alaska. He has since returned to his home parish in Southern California.

I am currently in the Philippines, and mail service here is not exactly trustworthy, but when I return to the States, I would like to start making contributions again to the “Alask Mission.” But I would like to make my contributions directly to your Ruthenian mission in Alaska.

Can you provide me an address?

Thank you.

Blessings,
Marduk
Aramis said:
The local Ruthenian mission was set up by the Pastor with the permissions of the Eparch. The Eparch did consult with the local Roman Archbishop prior to authorizing it, but the authorizations came via the Eparch.

One major problem with a mission: if the pastor isn’t supportive, it dies of neglect even if the faithful are strong and numerous, as the canonical rules make it so that the faithful aren’t supposed to have reader services as regular scheduled functions, only as ‘emergency’ functions. As in, if the faithful know that the priest will be absent, they are supposed to go to a divine worship service lead by a priest if they can… and most EC missions, that means the local Roman parish.

Our mission took a HUGE step backwards with the arrival of the new Pastor - he reduced the mission to one service per month. (It had been weekly.) I know some of the parishioners, and several would prefer reader or deacon lead Typica services to Roman services… but we have no deacon, and reader services are not supposed to be used when cleric-lead services are available.

My home parish started as a mission to convert the Orthodox - approval of the local Roman ABp was obtained, but it was the Eparch’s authorization. Note that it failed in its assigned role; it was mostly Romans. There are some Ukranians, and some ethnic Ruthenians (doing the research, I’m ethnically one of the two, despite the Polish passport of my great grandfather - his photos are annotated in Slavonic!). We’re getting a steady influx of protestants. (About 1/4 of the parish are former protestants who came in directly to the Ruthenian Church. And Climbing.)
Click to expand...
 
dvdjs said:
What do mean, by “split” and by “competence”?
Is there a connection between the links you posted and the claim that you made?
Click to expand...
It is split because the Apostolic See is split between the east and west in the Roman Curia, which serve different segments of the Catholic Church. Competence here is the skill, knowledge, or ability, and the quality or condition of being legally qualified to represent the Holy Father in missionary work for their respective segment of the Catholic Church.

I posted the links in case someone wanted to read about the two dicastries.
There is no connection between the links I posted and the claim that I made. Pastor Bonus states it. See Congregation for the Oriental Churches (arts. 56-61) and Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples (arts. 85-92).
Art. 60 — In regions where Oriental rites have been preponderant from ancient times, apostolic and missionary activity depends solely on this Congregation, even if it is carried out by missionaries of the Latin Church.
Art. 85 — It pertains to the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples to direct and coordinate throughout the world the actual work of spreading the Gospel as well as missionary cooperation, without prejudice to the competence of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_19880628_pastor-bonus_en.html

CCEO Canon 585
  1. Each of the Churches sui iuris is to continually see that, through suitably prepared preachers sent by the competent authority according to the norms of the common law, the Gospel is preached in the whole world under the guidance of the Roman Pontiff.
  2. The synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church or the council of hierarchs is to establish a commission to foster a core effective cooperation among all the eparchies in the missionary activity of the Church.
  3. In the individual eparchies a priest is to be designated to effectively promote endeavors on behalf of the missions.
  4. The Christian faithful are to promote among themselves and others knowledge and love for the missions, to pray for them, to inspire vocations and support them generously with their own means.
 
mardukm said:
Dear brother Aramis,

When I was in the States, I sometimes contributed to an “Alaskan Mission,” because of my contact with a very orthodox Latin-Rite pastor who was temporarily transferred to Alaska. He has since returned to his home parish in Southern California.

I am currently in the Philippines, and mail service here is not exactly trustworthy, but when I return to the States, I would like to start making contributions again to the “Alask Mission.” But I would like to make my contributions directly to your Ruthenian mission in Alaska.

Can you provide me an address?

Thank you.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
Replying via PM with the address.

I’ll note, however, that the “Alaska Missions Fund” of the Catholic Extension Service funds the Roman missions & circuits to the villages… which is also vital. And those who want to see domestic US missions, donations to the Archdiocese of Anchorage, or the dioceses of Fairbanks or Juneau, for mission/circuit parishes will be gleefully put to helping keep the mission priests flying. Yes, Flying. All three dioceses have circuit priests who have to fly parish to parish. Anchorage also has a driving circuit. All three bishops have to have pilot’s licenses to reduce the costs to the dioceses… it’s cheaper and more reliable to have the bishop and circuit priests fly themselves in a small plane than to try to fly commercially (especially since most villages have no commercial service).
 
Aramis said:
I’ll note, however, that the “Alaska Missions Fund” of the Catholic Extension Service funds the Roman missions & circuits to the villages… which is also vital. And those who want to see domestic US missions, donations to the Archdiocese of Anchorage, or the dioceses of Fairbanks or Juneau, for mission/circuit parishes will be gleefully put to helping keep the mission priests flying. Yes, Flying. All three dioceses have circuit priests who have to fly parish to parish. Anchorage also has a driving circuit. All three bishops have to have pilot’s licenses to reduce the costs to the dioceses… it’s cheaper and more reliable to have the bishop and circuit priests fly themselves in a small plane than to try to fly commercially (especially since most villages have no commercial service).
Click to expand...
I so wish you’d make a collection of all these wonderful little tid bits about the Church in Alaska.

This one reminded me of a painting I love of Fr. Michael Oleska ringing, with a hammer, a bell he apparently made from an old plane propeller. I’ll attach it but it’s an old, small file and might not really show up well here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top