The Russian Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter ASimpleSinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But this is exact example of Roman bishop control - why should bishop of Italian city decide where Ukrainian church can appoint bishops. If Ukrainians now live in Germany - should be Bishops appointed not by Bishop of Rome but by Ukrainian Church. No, my friend, the entire system is demonstration of centralized authority in Rome - but willing to give Ukrainians manaement but only if they live in current Ukraina - those living in what is Ukraina historically in Poland are not control of such church, but decision of Bishop of Rome. This is foreign control.
I agree that it is improper and wrong that the Roman Church determines who is Bishop outside of the “home territories”, but that is different from Rome appointing all bishops and determining all decisions of the Ukrainian Catholic Church; the Ukrainian Church still retains its own teaching authority in the diaspora, it just doesn’t have the final say in the appointment of bishops (though it’s more that Rome has to approve the diaspora bishops, not that it imposes them). Sensationalistic claims don’t serve to help solve the problems, but merely antagonize. 🙂

Peace and God bless!
 
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church/Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP) cannot be considered either Ukrainian or independent. It is a so-called “autonomous” branch of the Moscow Patriarchate. It is lead locally by a Metropolitan, but the Patriarch is not a Ukrainain Orthodox Patriarch, but the Patriarch of Moscow.

The hierarchs for this church are selected in Moscow, not Kyiv. Anyone familiar with the ecclesiastical history will recognize the faith came from Kyiv to Moscow, not the other way.

I do not consider the UOC-MP to be a Ukrainian Church. Orthodox, yes, but not Ukrainian. Metropolitan Vladimir was chosen by Moscow, not by the Ukrainian people. The church affairs are driven from Moscow as they were in the Soviet era. He is only a Metropolitan, and must answer to the Patriarch of Moscow. It is well known in Ukraine that he has to get approval from Alexei for all major church decisions.

Patriarch Filaret was not chosen by any civil authority, but by a majority of voting presbyters and hierarchs who also chose to leave the Muscovite Church as there was little or no chance the MP would ever recognize an independent, truly autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church. As a member of the UGCC respecting the Apostolic Succession of these bishops, as I do of the UAOC, they are as Orthodox to me as any other.

Oh yes, I remember the ROCOR bishops stating the MP was “without grace” even back in the 1980s and an invalid hierarchy. All of that seems to have vanished and been forgotten with nary a peep. Graceless to full communion - funny how that happens.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church/Kyivan Patriarchate and Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church are Ukrainian Churches. The UOC-MP is a Muscovite Church with a Ukrainian branch. Want Ukrainian language prayerbooks? You can get them from the UOC-KP. Most of the UOC-MPs are in Russian or Slavonic, but they have recently discovered this weakness and are attempting to come across now as “concerned” for their Ukrainian faithful.

Once again I greatly applaud the efforts of the UOC-KP and the UAOC to both have recourse to Constantinople in the resolution of their respective church situations.

With respect to diasporal UGCC bishops, the Synod elects the candidate. The final decree usually reads something like “With the blessing of the Holy See” or something like that - it is a concurrance rather than Rome overtly selecting the candidate.

I would actually say within Ukraine the UGCC has more freedom to select her hierarchs than does the UOC-MP, which must be approved through Moscow as I understand in all cases.
 
Diak: Very interesting! Thanks for the information.

Sounds similar to the situation that existed until relatively recent history with regards the Melkite Church and the Antiochian Orthodox Church. Though a Patriarchal Church, the Antiochian Church was dominated by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, whereas the Melkite Church enjoyed high levels of independence within the Catholic Communion in comparison.

One thing I’ve learned in “going East” in the Catholic Church is that things are rarely as simple as polemics on either side would have you believe!

Peace and God bless!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top