Can we establish our own church/parish?

[ConstantineTG]

I've read the history of our local OCA parish here and it is interesting how they came to be. They started as members of the local Russian Orthodox Church but because they wanted services in English, they asked the bishop if they can establish their own parish for english services. The bishop agreed and at the beginning they did reader services for lack of clergy. Eventually they got a wonderful priest and they built a church under the OCA.

I'm wondering if something similar can be done with an Eastern Catholic Church, or has been done.

[andrewstx]

I know it's done in EO missions that become parishes. Start having readers services and eventually you will get at least a preis at times.

[ConstantineTG]

It does seem acceptable to Orthodox which is wonderful. I mean if we want to practice our faith in a certain way the Church allows, why will the Church not allow it?

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG

I've read the history of our local OCA parish here and it is interesting how they came to be. They started as members of the local Russian Orthodox Church but because they wanted services in English, they asked the bishop if they can establish their own parish for english services. The bishop agreed and at the beginning they did reader services for lack of clergy. Eventually they got a wonderful priest and they built a church under the OCA.

I'm wondering if something similar can be done with an Eastern Catholic Church, or has been done.

Many of the original set of Byzantine Catholic temples in the USA (I am not sure about Canada) were set up without permission. They began as something like mutual aid societies for immigrants, as the older members started dying off, and with the stillborn children, etc. the members began to consider they needed a priest of their own rite. Usually (due to church policy) the Latin bishops refused. In a few instances then, the groups built their own temples and sent for priests from Europe.

The priests would be sent, but instructed to introduce themselves to the local bishop and receive his permission. It was at this point that the accusation of disobedience would come to the fore. First, the congregation forming and building a temple without permission (and holding the title to the property), then an unexpected and unacceptable priest showing up, expecting or at least hoping to be incardinated.

Now according to the canons, one bishop does not have a right to send a priest into another bishop's territory. This is technically what was happening, because the Latin local ordinary was not asking for these priests, they were showing up at the door uninvited. It was regarded as something of an affront to their authority.

The Eastern Catholic parishes were eventually separated from the control of the Latin bishops by an act of the Pope. The Latin bishops in general were upset by this.

Now there is a new hierarchy, established by the Pope, specifically for the Eastern Catholics. The UGCC exists in north America because the Pope allows it. These bishops have responsibility for establishing new congregations where needed, and would not appreciate an affront to their own authority.

I would suggest setting up as prayer and reading group first. Once that has been going with some stability a petition can be crafted, then the reader's services can be started with permission.

It must be recognized that the bishop might not allow it, or require that the prayer group join a parish already in place. His motivation might be to infuse new life into an old collapsing parish. It can be a recipe for disaster because the old timers might resent the newcomers severely, if they come in wanting to change things.

Perhaps a way around it would be to appeal to another jurisdiction, like the Slovak Catholic church. That bishop might like the idea of starting a mission in your area and may be agreeable to your hopes.

[ConstantineTG]

Originally Posted by Hesychios

Many of the original set of Byzantine Catholic temples in the USA (I am not sure about Canada) were set up without permission. They began as something like mutual aid societies for immigrants, as the older members started dying off, and with the stillborn children, etc. the members began to consider they needed a priest of their own rite. Usually (due to church policy) the Latin bishops refused. In a few instances then, the groups built their own temples and sent for priests from Europe.

The priests would be sent, but instructed to introduce themselves to the local bishop and receive his permission. It was at this point that the accusation of disobedience would come to the fore. First, the congregation forming and building a temple without permission (and holding the title to the property), then an unexpected and unacceptable priest showing up, expecting or at least hoping to be incardinated.

Now according to the canons, one bishop does not have a right to send a priest into another bishop's territory. This is technically what was happening, because the Latin local ordinary was not asking for these priests, they were showing up at the door uninvited. It was regarded as something of an affront to their authority.

The Eastern Catholic parishes were eventually separated from the control of the Latin bishops by an act of the Pope. The Latin bishops in general were upset by this.

Now there is a new hierarchy, established by the Pope, specifically for the Eastern Catholics. The UGCC exists in north America because the Pope allows it. These bishops have responsibility for establishing new congregations where needed, and would not appreciate an affront to their own authority.

I would suggest setting up as prayer and reading group first. Once that has been going with some stability a petition can be crafted, then the reader's services can be started with permission.

It must be recognized that the bishop might not allow it, or require that the prayer group join a parish already in place. His motivation might be to infuse new life into an old collapsing parish. It can be a recipe for disaster because the old timers might resent the newcomers severely, if they come in wanting to change things.

Perhaps a way around it would be to appeal to another jurisdiction, like the Slovak Catholic church. That bishop might like the idea of starting a mission in your area and may be agreeable to your hopes.

So do you think it is possible to ask the Eastern bishop to support this idea?

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG

So do you think it is possible to ask the Eastern bishop to support this idea?

Yes, but he does not have to agree and that is not a foregone conclusion. Sometimes they have to be in a position where they have no choice but to agree.

Interestingly, there are two Rumanian Catholic parishes in Aurora, IL USA.

These are four blocks apart. One could go hundreds of miles and not see a Romanian Catholic parish, then suddenly here are two.

It was a result of some kind of internal conflict and the parish split. The old-timer I spoke to said it was a 'schism' in the parish. Perhaps one group threatened to become Orthodox, I don't know, but eventually the bishop agreed. The second parish had to worship in a basement for years, but eventually they finished the building.

Similarly, among the Ukrainians in Chicago, Ss Volodymyr and Olha parish separated from the cathedral. I do not know what prompted the split, but they are on different calendars.

[ConstantineTG]

Originally Posted by Hesychios

Perhaps one group threatened to become Orthodox

SOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Contarini]

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG

It does seem acceptable to Orthodox which is wonderful. I mean if we want to practice our faith in a certain way the Church allows, why will the Church not allow it?

Well, in my reading of the Fathers it's pretty darn important for all the baptized Christians in a given place to worship together.

I think the Roman Communion is actually far too tolerant of things that break apart the unity of local communities.

It starts to look a lot like Protestant denominationalism (the contemporary reality among mainliners and moderate evangelicals, not the sectarian version of denominationalism which was once more common, still exists in conservative circles, and is mistakenly believed by Catholics to be still the norm).

Everyone says in theory "we belong to the same Church" while everyone goes off and worships with a little niche group of like-minded people.

That's not the unity of the Church in the sense the Fathers spoke of it.

Surely there are ways to preserve "minority" liturgical traditions without creating local schisms.

Why not, for instance, just make all the Latin-Rite Catholics within a certain parish worship the Eastern way?

Just declare that there's a "preferential option" for the Latin Mass and the Eastern Rites

Moving from prescription to description, what you describe has recently happened in my area (Fort Wayne). There's a fairly new Byzantine Catholic community--I believe they still don't have a priest but a professor at a local Catholic university serves as deacon.

Edwin

[ConstantineTG]

Originally Posted by Hesychios

Yes, but he does not have to agree and that is not a foregone conclusion. Sometimes they have to be in a position where they have no choice but to agree.

Interestingly, there are two Rumanian Catholic parishes in Aurora, IL USA.

These are four blocks apart. One could go hundreds of miles and not see a Romanian Catholic parish, then suddenly here are two.

It was a result of some kind of internal conflict and the parish split. The old-timer I spoke to said it was a 'schism' in the parish. Perhaps one group threatened to become Orthodox, I don't know, but eventually the bishop agreed. The second parish had to worship in a basement for years, but eventually they finished the building.

Similarly, among the Ukrainians in Chicago, Ss Volodymyr and Olha parish separated from the cathedral. I do not know what prompted the split, but they are on different calendars.

On a more serious note, I do wonder how St. Elias came to be. They are obviously not a reflection of what UGCC parishes are in Canada. Though they should be the gold standard of what an Eastern Catholic parish should be.

[smad0142]

Originally Posted by Hesychios

Yes, but he does not have to agree and that is not a foregone conclusion. Sometimes they have to be in a position where they have no choice but to agree.

Interestingly, there are two Rumanian Catholic parishes in Aurora, IL USA.

These are four blocks apart. One could go hundreds of miles and not see a Romanian Catholic parish, then suddenly here are two.

It was a result of some kind of internal conflict and the parish split. The old-timer I spoke to said it was a 'schism' in the parish. Perhaps one group threatened to become Orthodox, I don't know, but eventually the bishop agreed. The second parish had to worship in a basement for years, but eventually they finished the building.

Similarly, among the Ukrainians in Chicago, Ss Volodymyr and Olha parish separated from the cathedral. I do not know what prompted the split, but they are on different calendars.

The split was precisely over the calendars. Sts Volodymyr and Olha is colloquially known as the Old Calendar Cathedral.

[ByzCath89]

In the washington area, Holy Family and Holy Trinity UGCC's were separated by parishioner vote over the acceptance of the New Calendar.

[Diak]

After all that calendar frackus in the late 1960s and early 70s the UGCC bishops in the US let each parish decide, as trying to mandate the new calendar not only didn't work, but spawned parishes that sometimes turned out to be larger than those from which they originated. The Orthodox also had some issues with the calendar in some places.

To answer your question, yes, it is possible to start a new mission parish. Fr. Roman Galadza did just that with St. Elias, as it was not an established parish until he established it. Our UGCC mission here was only started in 2007 and St. Elias is definitely the inspiration for our mission. Several others have started as well in recent history in the UGCC in the US. We gathered some interested people, started having services together (even services like Vespers, Akathists, Matins, etc.) without a priest, and eventually found a place for our services and activities. We found a Latin parochial school that was closed and the classroom we have the chapel set up in doesn't have any pews.

I would recommend that you put out some feelers to see if there are interested people, and then make a proposal to the Bishop. I think Bishop +Kenneth will give a blessing to try something if there is demonstrated interest.

Another thing the bishop might suggest is having an additional English liturgy at the local parish and see what kind of interest that stirs up before granting permission for an entirely new apostolate or mission.

[ConstantineTG]

Originally Posted by Diak

After all that calendar frackus in the late 1960s and early 70s the UGCC bishops in the US let each parish decide, as trying to mandate the new calendar not only didn't work, but spawned parishes that sometimes turned out to be larger than those from which they originated. The Orthodox also had some issues with the calendar in some places.

To answer your question, yes, it is possible to start a new mission parish. Fr. Roman Galadza did just that with St. Elias, as it was not an established parish until he established it. Our UGCC mission here was only started in 2007 and St. Elias is definitely the inspiration for our mission. Several others have started as well in recent history in the UGCC in the US. We gathered some interested people, started having services together (even services like Vespers, Akathists, Matins, etc.) without a priest, and eventually found a place for our services and activities. We found a Latin parochial school that was closed and the classroom we have the chapel set up in doesn't have any pews.

I would recommend that you put out some feelers to see if there are interested people, and then make a proposal to the Bishop. I think Bishop +Kenneth will give a blessing to try something if there is demonstrated interest.

Another thing the bishop might suggest is having an additional English liturgy at the local parish and see what kind of interest that stirs up before granting permission for an entirely new apostolate or mission.

This is very helpful and inspirational. Thank you. I do plan to bring my concerns to the Bishop at some point probably after the Synod and we'll go from there. I just don't know how much of a "stable group" I can come up with given that our regular group is already on the edge of being unsustainable. But I can take inspiration from our local OCA parish which was a small group and priestless about 25 years ago, and today they have a packed church (albeit tiny) and they have 2 other mission parishes that came out of the original one.

[TrueLight]

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG

This is very helpful and inspirational. Thank you. I do plan to bring my concerns to the Bishop at some point probably after the Synod and we'll go from there. I just don't know how much of a "stable group" I can come up with given that our regular group is already on the edge of being unsustainable. But I can take inspiration from our local OCA parish which was a small group and priestless about 25 years ago, and today they have a packed church (albeit tiny) and they have 2 other mission parishes that came out of the original one.

What would be he proposed reason /mission of this new parish?

[ConstantineTG]

Originally Posted by TrueLight

What would be he proposed reason /mission of this new parish?

To keep Constantine a Catholic