Which Eastern Catholic Churches are experiencing the most growth?

[AnthonyJ]

In their homelands and abroad? Thanks.

 

[VanSensei]

My guess is that Maronite Catholicism is the fastest growing due to its substantial percentage in Lebanon and abroad.

 

[Thomas48]

I would think, looking at statistics, that it would the Ukrainian Greek and Syro Malabar Churches.

 

[Rafkqa]

I would think, looking at statistics, that it would the Ukrainian Greek and Syro Malabar Churches.

Not that I would profess to know the answer to the OP’s initial question, but can I ask which statistics you are referring to and where they apply?

 

[Thomas48]

Not that I would profess to know the answer to the OP’s initial question, but can I ask which statistics you are referring to and where they apply?

Looking at the two Archeparchial Churches by sheer size compared to the others. Ranking one and two of the Eastern Catholic Churches in total population, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church numbering in 5.3 million adherents with 31 eparchies and 44 bishops and the Syro Malabar Church 3.8 million adherents with 27 eparchies and 40 bishops. The Maronites are close behind ranking number 3, the Maronite Church has 3.3 million adherents 25 eparchies and 41 bishops.

 

[Rafkqa]

Looking at the two Archeparchial Churches by sheer size compared to the others. Ranking one and two of the Eastern Catholic Churches in total population, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church numbering in 5.3 million adherents with 31 eparchies and 44 bishops and the Syro Malabar Church 3.8 million adherents with 27 eparchies and 40 bishops. The Maronites are close behind ranking number 3, the Maronite Church has 3.3 million adherents 25 eparchies and 41 bishops.

I have no reason to doubt those statistics and assuming they are correct, they really do not tell us too much about individual growth…

 

[MorEphrem]

The Maronite Church has 3.3 million adherents 25 eparchies and 41 bishops.

I doubt that statistic for reasons of political understatement. I mean the eparchies and bishops I won’t contest, that’s easily confirmable. The number of adherents however has probably been grossly underestimated for certain political gains.

 

[AnthonyJ]

What political gain would be gotten from understating the number of Maronite adherents? I’m asking sincerely. I don’t know anything about the politics involved, but I would think overstating the number of adherents would help with any political situation. Thanks.

I doubt that statistic for reasons of political understatement. I mean the eparchies and bishops I won’t contest, that’s easily confirmable. The number of adherents however has probably been grossly underestimated for certain political gains.

 

[Rafkqa]

I doubt that statistic for reasons of political understatement. I mean the eparchies and bishops I won’t contest, that’s easily confirmable. The number of adherents however has probably been grossly underestimated for certain political gains.

While I have no clue where those statistics are from and my point really was just that they tell us nothing about growth - I have to agree with MorEphrem that the number of adherents would be unreliable - whether it be for political reasons or otherwise.

For example in Australia when we do the national Census (which is compulsory and carries a penalty if not completed). It will ask your religion. It has the standard categories such as Catholic, Anglican, Muslim etc. If you wanted to identify as Maronite - or any other Eastern Church for that matter, you need to tick the “other” box and write it in your religion. You would have to assume that a good proportion just tick the Catholic box and move along. So any statistics captured about any of the Eastern Churches in that Census would absolutely be understated.

The only other way of capturing the statistic is through the Eparchy. Again this is very unreliable. The Eparchy recently attempted to undertake a Census. While I know nothing about the participation rate I know I never got around to completing it. If someone like me who is very involved has not filled it out, how likely is it that those who may come to the Parishes rarely are filling it out. How do you capture those Maronites working in remote areas in regional and country Australia for example?

Also adherents is a very misleading term. Do they count themselves as Maronites? Do they go to Maronite Church or were they originally Maronite and now just go to the local Latin Parish down the road. South America is an interesting example, lots of people from Maronite heritage have lost touch with their Maronite roots. My mother in law’s family didn’t see or hear from her sister after she left Lebanon for Brazil for nearly 40 years. When they reunited recently, she had not been into a Maronite Church since she left Lebanon and her children had grown up not knowing the Maronite Church at all. I mean have they been counted in those statistics?

Regardless of all that - the number of adherents really tells us very little about which Church is experiencing the greatest growth.

 

[SyroMalankara]

You have to set a defined criteria for growth to answer this question.

The Syro-Malankara Church went from 5 members in 1932 to somewhere around 500,000 in 2010, that’s a large number, but what does it mean?

 

[Aramis]

You have to set a defined criteria for growth to answer this question.

The Syro-Malankara Church went from 5 members in 1932 to somewhere around 500,000 in 2010, that’s a large number, but what does it mean?

That the Malankara Orthodox have had about 500,000 people decide union with Rome is a good thing? Probably a little lower. And perhaps, a number of those became Roman Catholic when they translated, but now are returning to the Malankara praxis, much like the former Anglicans have the option to do now.

My parish has good records going back 30+ years on how many were at every liturgy. Number of registered parishioners, however, is almost unrelated, as the local Roman Archbishop and Bishops have assigned it as the parish of record for all Eastern and Oriental Catholics in the Ecclesiastical Province (except Russian Greek Catholics*)… which in this case, is the entire state of Alaska. There are canonical parishioners on the books who have never set foot in the narthex… they attend the nearest Catholic parish. 2 in Nome, a family in Barrow, a couple in Kodiak…

*The bishop keeps them if they want Roman praxis. He sends them our way if they want Byzantine praxis. We’ve gotten 3 families that way in 30 years. Most of the local Russian Orthodox converts WANT Roman praxis, and the rest find it too far to drive; further, they’re numerous enough, given that OCA Russian Orthodox is the second largest faith in state.

 

[SyroMalankara]

That the Malankara Orthodox have had about 500,000 people decide union with Rome is a good thing? Probably a little lower. And perhaps, a number of those became Roman Catholic when they translated, but now are returning to the Malankara praxis, much like the former Anglicans have the option to do now.

I don’t understand these first two sentences. Not sure what you mean by the second sentence, almost none became Roman Catholic, except for some very few individuals here and there.

 

[Aramis]

I don’t understand these first two sentences. Not sure what you mean by the second sentence, almost none became Roman Catholic, except for some very few individuals here and there.

It means that the board messed up the post.

it should read: “It means that the Malankara Orthodox lost about 500,000 people? People who felt Union with Rome was Good. Probably a little lower. And perhaps, a number of those had become Latins, and then returned to Malankara praxis when the Syro Malenkara church was created.”