National Shrines Should Belong to Nation and Not to One Denomination

PJ

Taxiarches
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
6,494
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
New England
Patriarch Sviatoslav: National Shrines Should Belong to Nation and Not to One Denomination

12 March 2012

Patriarch Sviatoslav of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church sent an address to Parliament Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn and Ukrainian deputies with a request to withdraw from consideration Bill 9690 on Making Alterations to Certain Laws of Ukraine (regarding transfer of objects of cultural heritage to religious organizations)....




You have been warned for 7 days for posting an entire article instead of the rule that you are to post a few sentences and the link.  You have been around oc.net long enough to know this rule.  -username! section moderator, I have also modified your post to fit within the rules.
 

Ortho_cat

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
5,392
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Wichita, KS
If the shrines belonged to the UGCC, they would be as quiet as a church mouse no doubt...  ::)
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Peter J said:
Patriarch Sviatoslav: National Shrines Should Belong to Nation and Not to One Denomination

12 March 2012

Patriarch Sviatoslav of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church sent an address to Parliament Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn and Ukrainian deputies with a request to withdraw from consideration Bill 9690 on Making Alterations to Certain Laws of Ukraine (regarding transfer of objects of cultural heritage to religious organizations).

The head of the UGCC considers unacceptable the transfer of national shrines, which belonged to the unified Kyivan Church, to only one denomination, namely, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate. 

“This way of response to the European recommendations regarding the restitution of church property is a distortion of the essence of restitution which envisages complex settlement of property problems for the sake of repairing the material harm done by the Godless regime,” reads the address, the Information Department of the UGCC reports.

Patriarch Sviatoslav warned in his letter that the transfer of the spiritual shrines of the Ukrainian nation “only to one denomination is a clear threat to the interdenominational peace and agreement which have been established in our state in the recent years.”

“Do the authors of the bill understand that by their initiative they are again pushing our Motherland into the whirlpool of the interdenominational (and, in this case, also interethnic) confrontation with unpredictable consequences?” asked the patriarch.

“In our opinion, the issue of the restitution of church property should be considered fully, transparently, from all the viewpoints and without prejudice by the All-Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations representing 18 denominational trends and over 95% of Ukraine’s believers,” stressed the hierarch.
UOC-MP isn't a denomination.  It is the continuation of that united Church of Kiev and All Rus'.  It owned all the properties before the Bolsheviks confiscated them.  It is the one to whom they should be returned.

This is very rich coming from a primate who ecclesial community just celebrated with great pomp the confiscation of the Churches of the Orthodox, that united Church of Kiev and All Rus'/Little Rus' and Galicia, and celebrated on the ground where they raised the Orthodox Cathedral to erect theirs (returned to Orthodox once the Habsburgs and Polish Republic no longer had Lviv in their grip; seized by this hierarch's correligionists before Kiev's authority could be established in the region with the fall of communism).  They can have this back:


He can consider it unacceptable all he wants-like he considers it unacceptable to use the title of major-archbishop given him by his canons, and instead ignores all those canons of his and calls himself "Patriarch."  His supreme pontiff hasn't rubberstamped his title inflation, his government is under no obligation to bow to his opinions.

The UOC-MP should consider pulling out of the "All-Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations" if Bill 9690 is withdrawn.

The UGCC has questionable claims to shrines in Galicia. It has absolutely NO claims, valid or otherwise, in Kiev and elsewhere, which the UGCC is coveting and squatting.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Ortho_cat said:
If the shrines belonged to the UGCC, they would be as quiet as a church mouse no doubt...  ::)
yes, the mouse that roared.
 

PJ

Taxiarches
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
6,494
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
New England
ialmisry said:
 It owned all the properties before the Bolsheviks confiscated them.  
So the Bolsheviks didn't confiscate any properties from the UGCC? Yeah right.
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
Peter J said:
So the Bolsheviks didn't confiscate any properties from the UGCC? Yeah right.
Right. Officially there had been no Eastern Catholics in Russia.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
The reality of the situation on the ground is more complex than either the zealots of the Greek Catholic or the Orthodox 'sides' in this debate would have it.

History has a way of making 'right' the 'wrongs' which another generation perpetrated on the 'losing' side - be it religious or secular. For goodness sake, it is tough for an American to make these arguments about 'seizing' property in the 16th or 20th centuries in the face of American history and all of the broken treaties between the Federal Government and the Native Indian Tribes during the 19th century.

Things become what they now are and those of us living today have to come to grips with those realities. As I have said before, the Muslims view the loss of Cordoba in the same way we view the loss of Constantinople. Neither side is going to give the other city 'back.'

That being said, this Ukrainian debate is probably more about nationalism and less about religion than it may appear on the surface.

 

PJ

Taxiarches
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
6,494
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
New England
Michał Kalina said:
Peter J said:
So the Bolsheviks didn't confiscate any properties from the UGCC? Yeah right.
Right. Officially there had been no Eastern Catholics in Russia.
Oh right. :wink:
 

Schultz

Taxiarches
Joined
Oct 17, 2002
Messages
6,690
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
45
Location
BaltiCORE, MD
Website
www.theidlegossip.com
Michał Kalina said:
Peter J said:
So the Bolsheviks didn't confiscate any properties from the UGCC? Yeah right.
Right. Officially there had been no Eastern Catholics in Russia.
What about Ukraine?

And there was an official Eastern Catholic Exarchate in Russia during the early Soviet Union, headed by Blessed Leonid Federov, who had his church's building and sacred vessels confiscated and who died in exile.
 

Gorazd

Archon
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
2,571
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Why does the MP want to privatise Pochayiv? i dont see how the current state ownership would prevent them of using the premises.
 

J Michael

Toumarches
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
11,549
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
People's Soviet Socialist Republic of Marylan
Schultz said:
Michał Kalina said:
Peter J said:
So the Bolsheviks didn't confiscate any properties from the UGCC? Yeah right.
Right. Officially there had been no Eastern Catholics in Russia.
What about Ukraine?

And there was an official Eastern Catholic Exarchate in Russia during the early Soviet Union, headed by Blessed Leonid Federov, who had his church's building and sacred vessels confiscated and who died in exile.
Maybe he means a different "Russia", as in Russia, Ohio 45363  ;D ;D. 
 

Gorazd

Archon
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
2,571
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
UOC-MP isn't a denomination.  It is the continuation of that united Church of Kiev and All Rus'.  
It is a continuation, albeit controlled by Moscow, just as the UGCC is such a continuation, but controlled by Rome. Just because the MP is a canonical Orthodox Church, that doesn't mean their lack of Respect for Ukraine is acceptable.

ialmisry said:
It owned all the properties before the Bolsheviks confiscated them.
Not correct. Pochayiv actually was owned by the Orthodox Church of Poland. And there already was an UAOC in the USSR etc.
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
Schultz said:
What about Ukraine?
There was not a subject of the international law called Ukraine back then.

J Michael said:
"Officially" according to whom?  The Soviets?
Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church ceased to exist in Russia in 1839 (with an exception of the Chełm Diocese which returned to Orthodoxy in 1875).
 

J Michael

Toumarches
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
11,549
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
People's Soviet Socialist Republic of Marylan
Michał Kalina said:
Schultz said:
What about Ukraine?
There was not a subject of the international law called Ukraine back then.

J Michael said:
"Officially" according to whom?  The Soviets?
Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church ceased to exist in Russia in 1839 (with an exception of the Chełm Diocese which returned to Orthodoxy in 1875).
Ceased to exist as in presto-chango, all of sudden no more Eastern Rite Catholics whatsoever at all...., or were made illegal?  There is a difference.  Although on a nit-picky level if they were made illegal then "officially" they ceased to exist.  Weren't there also a few of those nasty, pesky, heretical, schismatic  ;D ;D *Roman* Catholics here and there in "Russia" over the years?  I hear Ohio's full of them  ;).
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
Your lack of historical knowledge is directly proportional to your willingness to discuss it.

In the 1839 all of the Russian Eastern Catholic Churches, Hierarchs and Priests returned to the Orthodox Church (with an exception of the Chełm diocese that did the same 30 year later. Believers could choose whether to became Orthodox or Roman Catholic. Eastern Catholicism became illegal. There might have survived some Eastern Catholic believers but without clergy and immovables.
 

PJ

Taxiarches
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
6,494
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
New England
Michał Kalina said:
Your lack of historical knowledge is directly proportional to your willingness to discuss it.
I think that's one of the defining characteristics of "internet discussion forum".
 

Schultz

Taxiarches
Joined
Oct 17, 2002
Messages
6,690
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
45
Location
BaltiCORE, MD
Website
www.theidlegossip.com
Michał Kalina said:
Your lack of historical knowledge is directly proportional to your willingness to discuss it.

In the 1839 all of the Russian Eastern Catholic Churches, Hierarchs and Priests returned to the Orthodox Church (with an exception of the Chełm diocese that did the same 30 year later. Believers could choose whether to became Orthodox or Roman Catholic. Eastern Catholicism became illegal. There might have survived some Eastern Catholic believers but without clergy and immovables.
So I take it that Bl. Leonid Federov, his congregation and physical church building, as well as his official title within the Roman Catholic Church as Exarch of the Russian Catholic Church did not exist?

It doesn't matter if the state decided that Eastern Catholicism was legal or illegal.  They existed during the Soviet era and that, my friend, is a matter of history. 

As for Ukraine, since you want to split hairs, what about the UGCC that the Soviets confiscated in the Ukraine SSR?
 

J Michael

Toumarches
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
11,549
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
People's Soviet Socialist Republic of Marylan
Michał Kalina said:
Your lack of historical knowledge is directly proportional to your willingness to discuss it.

In the 1839 all of the Russian Eastern Catholic Churches, Hierarchs and Priests returned to the Orthodox Church (with an exception of the Chełm diocese that did the same 30 year later. Believers could choose whether to became Orthodox or Roman Catholic. Eastern Catholicism became illegal. There might have survived some Eastern Catholic believers but without clergy and immovables.
:laugh: :laugh:

Thank you for informing me--I do appreciate it, but do I detect a very slight note of intellectual snobbery  :D?

My lack of historical knowledge, in fact my lack of knowledge in general, is very well-known (see below my name to the left), profound, broadly based and indiscriminate.  The U.S.A. is still a free country (well, sort of, anyway) so, yes, I'm free and welcome to make as big a fool of myself as I like by showing my ignorance--and I frequently succeed, too  ;D!!  Unlike everyone else here  ;D ;D.  At my age I really don't care *too* much about that any longer. 

Did I mention that discussing things with and asking questions of one's intellectual superiors is one way of increasing one's knowledge base?  Besides, if one had to be tested on and reach a certain level of knowledge about any given area of discussion on this or any other board, I'm fairly certain the numbers here would dwindle considerably.  But....what do I know?

I know I can be grating and smart-alecky at times (I'm one of those "works-in-progress"), but quite often when I ask a question, it truly is out of ignorance and a desire to learn.
 
Top