Ukrainian vs Ruthenian

[ByzCathCantor]

Originally Posted by Marhitych

I wonder if this is the same Ukrainian government as the (Ukrainian?) government of the predominantly Rusyn (Ukrainian?) region of Zakarpattia that, in 1939, voted to proclaim an independent state called Carpatho Ukraine, with the same flag, anthem, langauge as Ukraine, set a goal of "re-uniting" with the western Ukrainain Peoples Republic and Ukraine into one state, as well as having the same logo as the King of Kyiv Volodymyr did?. After all, the political party they were from as the Rusyn Christian Democratic Party.

Or were they just imposters? .

Well, unless the entire government of current day Ukraine (to which I was obviously referring) were all alive and constituted the entirety of the government you referenced, which existed some 72 years ago, the answer would likely be "no".

[Marhitych]

Originally Posted by ByzCathCantor

the obvious connection between the separate agreements - the Union of Brest and Union of Ungvar (Uzhgorod) - and the related, separate sui juris

It is important to examine why those seperate agreements took place - i.e., was the country they were from one and different agreements were signed just because? Or was it controlled by completely different states, which would leave people (especially in the 16th century) relatively unaware what their brothers were doing across the border?

Originally Posted by ByzCathCantor

to deny the dignity of peoples with different origins and customs is another.

But in this case, the eastern Church is doing the Orthodox method of giving every ethnicity their own Church. As such, it's really important to decide where they are one people, because if they are, one people having two Churches isn't right . It would be like there being a Serbian Orthodox Church and then a Belgrade Orthodox Church.

Originally Posted by ByzCathCantor

There is a distinct liturgical praxis here as well. History is full of poor examples of the execution (pun intended) of such views and policies.

Obviously, which is why something that existed seperately for 500 years can't be united in one year. The goal of uniting is the main thing. Like in Ukraine when the UGCC and Ukrainain Orthodox Church always talk about uniting. Everyone knows it will take an enormous amount of time and no one has an idea what exactly it would mean. Some say it means not recognizing the Pope anymore which is unthinkable, or the UOC recognizing the Pope, others say "one Church, two systems" or something like that. But the goal of uniting is there.

[Marhitych]

Originally Posted by ByzCathCantor

Well, unless the entire government of current day Ukraine (to which I was obviously referring) were all alive and constituted the entirety of the government you referenced, which existed some 72 years ago, the answer would likely be "no".

I wasn't trying to be rude, I was just trying to illustrate that it's not exactly as black-and-white as it seems (i.e. a cruel oppressive government destroying another nations identity), and that there was a Rusyn-led government that thought the same way I am writing.

[ByzCathCantor]

Originally Posted by Marhitych

It is important to examine why those seperate agreements took place - i.e., was the country they were from one and different agreements were signed just because? Or was it controlled by completely different states, which would leave people (especially in the 16th century) relatively unaware what their brothers were doing across the border?

Question answered with a question.

Originally Posted by Marhitych

But in this case, the eastern Church is doing the Orthodox method of giving every ethnicity their own Church.

So, there is an ethnic identity here. And it's not the Eastern Church doing this - it is the Catholic Church.

Originally Posted by Marhitych

As such, it's really important to decide where they are one people, because if they are, one people having two Churches isn't right . It would be like there being a Serbian Orthodox Church and then a Belgrade Orthodox Church.

That example would only be relevant if there was a distinct praxis and origin in Belgrade versus the rest of Serbia.

Originally Posted by Marhitych

Obviously, which is why something that existed seperately for 500 years can't be united in one year. The goal of uniting is the main thing. Like in Ukraine when the UGCC and Ukrainain Orthodox Church always talk about uniting. Everyone knows it will take an enormous amount of time and no one has an idea what exactly it would mean. Some say it means not recognizing the Pope anymore which is unthinkable, or the UOC recognizing the Pope, others say "one Church, two systems" or something like that. But the goal of uniting is there.

Uniting Catholic and Orthodox is not the same as uniting sui juris Catholic Churches. Why not say that all Catholic Churches should be Roman Catholic?

Oops! Almost forgot - that's been tried already ...

While I agree that there may be merit and advantages to unity on certain levels in this instance, it is objectionable to read here notions of real suppression simply because two Eastern Catholic Churches exist in the same country. In the US, Ukrainians, Ruthenians, Melkites, Russians, Italo-Greeks, etc. Should they all be merged simply because they exist within the same political borders? What of the notion of churches of equal dignity in the Catholic Communion?

Personally, I would rather see other developments in the EC world beforehand, including the elevation of the UGCC to a Patriarchial Church.

[Marhitych]

Originally Posted by ByzCathCantor

Uniting Catholic and Orthodox is not the same as uniting sui juris Catholic Churches. Why not say that all Catholic Churches should be Roman Catholic?

Oops! Almost forgot - that's been tried already ...

True, but don't forget that the ultimate goal of Christendom must be to unite and to falicate re-unification of everyone. In geopolitics, dividing states into little tiny republics is a tactic to make some states stronger and make those states weaker.

Regional differences are fine, but I dream of a day when, as a Christian from Spain, you can go anywhere in Russia or Asia and find a Christian Church just like that one back home...

[dvdjs]

Mr. Marhitych:

If you were knowledgeable about these matters, you would understand this discussion of Rusyn vs Ukrainian has been going around for a long, long, long time, that you are bringing nothing new to the discussion, and that ultimately, people who identify as Rusyns, like most any folk, do not like having that sense of identity contorted or denied by others.

The goal of unity is a great one. You may sincerely be for it. But your discussion tends to be heavy handed - at the level of denying differences that are important to others. However obvious the real history and its meaning is to you, there are reasons why there are separate Ukrainian and Ruthenian jurisdictions in this country, and why there is a special status of the Mukachevo church, apart from the UGCC.

You may have very innocently linked to discussions about an eponymous group who with whom you also share an agenda and some common rhetorical themes. I have already linked to more of their material. Surely, you can take it from there: search the linked site for even more links to this organization. Their stuff has some vicious content that is very likely to undercut certainly undercut efforts at unity. But I am delighted to hear that you do not mean to be rude.

[Marhitych]

Originally Posted by dvdjs

If you were knowledgeable about these matters

You angry, bro?

Originally Posted by dvdjs

Rusyn vs Ukrainian has been going around for a long, long, long time

It actually hasn't, in fact, untill 1920 or 1930, no one called themselves Ukrainian.

Originally Posted by dvdjs

that you are bringing nothing new to the discussion

I actually believe for many, I did: for example, the gentleman who thought that there was a Rusyn state learned it was actually a Ukrainian state made by Rusyns .

Originally Posted by dvdjs

people who identify as Rusyns, like most any folk, do not like having that sense of identity contorted or denied by others.

As a Rusyn myself, I agree completely. That's why I'm here .

Originally Posted by dvdjs

there are reasons why there are separate Ukrainian and Ruthenian jurisdictions in this country

That's like saying "there are reasons why there is slavery". If they are not good reasons they hold no ground.

Originally Posted by dvdjs

You may have very innocently linked to discussions about an eponymous group

I ask you again: please give me the website or a phone-number of this group. I don't know who you're talking about; it sounds like conspirology to me.

Originally Posted by dvdjs

who with whom you also share an agenda and some common rhetorical themes.

I ask you again: please give me the website or a phone-number of this group. I don't know who you're talking about; it sounds like conspirology to me.

Originally Posted by dvdjs

I have already linked to more of their material. Surely, you can take it from there: search the linked site for even more links to this organization.

I ask you again: please give me the website or a phone-number of this group. I don't know who you're talking about; it sounds like conspirology to me.

Originally Posted by dvdjs

Their stuff has some vicious content that is very likely to undercut certainly undercut efforts at unity.

I ask you again: please give me the website or a phone-number of this group. I don't know who you're talking about; it sounds like conspirology to me.