Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:39:10.598Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Ruthenian Uniate Church in its Historical Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Ludvik Nemec
Ludvik Nemec
Affiliation:
Professor of Oriental Religions, Rosemont College, Rosemont, Pennsylvania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

To consider the Ruthenian Uniate Church in its historical perspective, and to encompass its complex phenomenon in a few pages is difficult for the historian who must treat this matter as an exception to the rule rather than an isolated historical event. It stands in sharp contrast to the historical precedent of the Kievan state whose inception and development, always represented politically, culturally, and ecclesiastically, the unity of all Russia. The division of Kievan Russia into principalities governed by members of the Rurik dynasty did not inhibit the cultural evolution, nor did it cut Russia off from contact with Western Europe. Rather, the cultural evolution developed in the general direction it had been given by Kiev, and contact with the West was further intensified in the principalities of Galicia-Volhynia and Novgorod. In addition to Kiev, several new centers of Russian political life developed in proportion to the number of principalities which increased as fathers divided their appanages among their children.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , December 1968 , pp. 365 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Dvornik, Francis, “Byzantine Political Ideas in Kievan Russia,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Nos. 9–10 (Washington, D.C., 1956), 75–121.Google Scholar

2. Literature on the Ukraine is extensive especially in recent years. Following are listed the more important contributions of relevance to the material under consideration: Welykyj, A., Documenta Pontificum Romanorum Historiam Ukrainae Illustrantia (1075–1953), 2 vols. (Romae, 1953–1954)Google Scholar; cf. Doroshenko, D., History of the Ukraine (Edmonton, 1939)Google Scholar; Hrushevsky, M., A History of Ukraine (Yale University Press, 1948)Google Scholar; Chadwick, N. K., The Beginnings of Russian History (Cambridge, 1946)Google Scholar; Chamberlin, W. H., The Ukraine (New York, 1944)Google Scholar; Vernadsky, G., Kievan Russia (New Haven, 1948)Google Scholar; Krupnyckji, B., Geschichte der Ukraine (Leipzig, 1938)Google Scholar; Korduba, E., “Die Entstehung der Ukrainischen nation,” Contributions à l'histoire de l'Ukraine au VII e. Congrès international des sciences historiques; (Lwów, 1933)Google Scholar. Also valuable are Vlasovsky, A.'s two volume History of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (New York, 1958)Google Scholar, and Luzntysky, Gregory's The Ukrainian Church between East and West (Philadelphia, 1954Google Scholar. In the most recent history texts, the Ukraine is treated in connection with Russia.

3. Chubaty, N., “The Ukrainian and Russian Conceptions of the History of Eastern Europe,” Proceedings, Shevchenko Scientific Society, I (1951), 17–18Google Scholar. cf. Vernadsky, G. and Karpovich, M., A History of Russia (New Haven-London, 1951) I, 96–98Google Scholar; Winter, E., Byzance und Rom in Kampf um die Ukraine (Leipzig, 1942), p. 1–71Google Scholar.

4. Chirovsky, Nicholas L. F., Old Ukraine: Its Socio-Economic History Prior to 1781 (Madison, N. J., 1963), pp. 1–4Google Scholar.

5. Dvornik, F., The Slavs in European History and Civilization (New Brunswick, N. J.: Rutgers University Press, 1962), XXI–XXVIIIGoogle Scholar.

6. Martovych, O., Ukrainian Liberation Movement in Modern Times (Edinburgh, 1958), 24 ff.Google Scholar; cf. Chirovsky, N. F., The Economic Factors in the Growth of Russia (New York, 1957), pp. 160 ffGoogle Scholar.

7. Rudnycky, Y. and Sichynsky, V., Nazwa, , “Ukraine” Encylopedia Ukrainoznavstiva (Munich-New York, 1949), pp. 14–16Google Scholar.

8. N. L. F. Chirovsky, op. cit., 3; cf. Simpson, G., The Names “Bus” “Russia,” “Ukraine” and Their Historical Background (Winnipeg, Manitoba, 1951)Google Scholar; Dorošenko, D., “Die Namen “Russland,” and “Ukraine” in ihrer historischen iuid gegenwartigen Bedeutung,” Abhandlungen des Ukrainischen wissenschaftlichen Instituts in Berlin, III (1931), 3–23Google Scholar.

9. Hanak, Walter K., The Subcarpathian-Ruthenian Question: 1918–1945 (Munhall, Pa.: The Bishop B. Takaeh Carpatho-Russian Historical Society, 1962)Google Scholar; cf. Nemee, L. and Moudry, V., The Soviet Seizure of Subcarpathian Ruthenia (Toronto, 1955)Google Scholar; Markus, V., L'Incorporation de l'Ukraine subcarpatique a l'Ukraine sovietique 1944–1945 (Louvain, 1956)Google Scholar; Seton-Watson, H., Eastern Europe Between the Wars (Cambridge, 1945)Google Scholar; Feierabend, Ladislav K., Soumrak Ceskoslovenské Demokracie (Washington, D.C., 1967), p. 106–115Google Scholar; Shandor, V., “Carpatho-Ukraine in the International Bargaining of 1918–39,” The Ukrainian Quarterly X, No. 3 (New York: 1954)Google Scholar; Heisler, J. and Mellon, J. B., Under the Carpathians: Home of the Forgotten People (London: 1946)Google Scholar; Hodinka, A., “L'habitat, l'économie et le passé du peuple ruthene an sud des carpathes,” Revue des études hongroises et finno-ougriennes II (1924), 244–275Google Scholar.

10. Koneneko, Konstantyn, Ukraine and Russia: A History of the Economic Relations Between Ukraine and Russia (1654–1917) (Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Marquette University Press, 1958)Google Scholar, passim.

11. Peleoz, J., Geschichte Jer Union der ruthenischen Kirche mit Rom, 2 vols. (WurzburgWien, 1881)Google Scholar.

12. Sehmurlo, E., Le Saint-Siège et l'Orient Orthodoxe Russe (Prague, 1928), XVIIIGoogle Scholar.

13. Halecki, Oscar, From Florence to Brest (New York, 1959)Google Scholar.

14. Quépin, A, Un apôtre de l'union des églsses au XVII siécle, St. Josaphat, 2 vols. (Paris: 1897–1898)Google Scholar; cf. Boresky, Theodosia, Life of St. Josaphat (Cornet Press Books, 1955)Google Scholar; Newman, Eberhardt, A Summary of Catholic History (St. Louis: Heisler, 1961) IIGoogle Scholar; Halecki, O., A History of Poland (New York: Roy Publishers, 1943)Google Scholar; Idem, Sacrum Poloniae Millenium (Rome, 1958).

15. Steven, Runciman, The Fall of Constantinople 1453 (Cambridge University Press: 1965), pp. 145–180Google Scholar. Cf. its review by Nemec, L., The Ukrainian Quarterly 22 (New York, 1966), 281–3Google Scholar.

16. There are several studies concerning this matter: Rrajcar, J., “The Ruthenian Patriarchate. Some Remarks on the Project for its establishment in the 17th Century,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 30 (1964), 65–84Google Scholar; cf., Tanczuk, D., “Questio Patriaarchatus Kioviensis Tempore Conaminum Unionis Ruthenorum (1582–1632),” Analecta OSBM 7 (1949), 128–144Google Scholar; Andrusiak, M., “Sprawa Patriarchatu Kijowskiego za Wladyslawa IV,” Prace Historyczne w 30-lecie dzialanošci profesorkiej Stanislawa Zakrzewskiego, (Lwów, 1934), 271–85Google Scholar; Baran, A., “Progetto del Patriareato Ukraino di Gregorio XVI,” Analecta OSBM 3 (1958–1960), 454–88Google Scholar.

17. Theodosia Boresky, Op. Cit., pp. 46 ff.

18. Jugie, M., “Moghila Pierre,” Distionnaire de Théologie Catholique, 10 vols., 2063–2081Google Scholar; Cf., Ionesco, T., La vie et l'oeuvre de Pierre Movila, metropolite de Kiev (Paris, 1944)Google Scholar.

19. Florovskij, G., Puti russkago bogoslovija (Paris, 1937)Google Scholar.

20. Günther, O. E., “Der Vertag von Perejaslay in Widerstreit der Meinungen,” Jahrbücher für gesehiehte Osteuropas II (1954), 232–57Google Scholar.

21. Borschak, E. and Martel, R., Vie de Mazepa (Paris, 1931)Google Scholar.

22. Hefele-Leclerecq, “Histoire des Conciles II 1339–40.”

23. O. Halecki, Op. Cit., pp. 33–45.

24. Welykj, A., Documenta Pontificia (Rome, 1954) IV, 203Google Scholar.

25. Dvornik, F., The Making of Central and Eastern Europe (London, 1949), pp. 298–304Google Scholar.

26. Hahayevsky, I., Kyrylo-Metodiyivske Khrystiyanstvo v Rusi-Ukrayiyi (Rome, 1954)Google Scholar.

27. Schematismus Cleri Graeci Ritus Catholicorum Diocesis Munkacsensis ad A.D. 1908, ed. Unio in 1908Google Scholar.

28. Documents collected by Petrov, Op. cit., pp. 89–175.

29. Hofman, G., Documents Concilii Florentini de Unione Orientalium, 3 vols. (Rome, ed. Gregoriano, , 1935)Google Scholar.

30. Lacko, Michael, Unio Uzhorodensis (Rome, 1955), p. 81Google Scholar. It is the belief of this author that Jusko was never consecrated.

31. Lacko, M., Unio Uzhorodensis Ruthenorum Carpathicorum cum Ecclesia Catholica (Rome, 1955)Google Scholar.

32. Niles, N., Symbolae ad Illustrandam Historiam Ecclesiae Orientalis in Terris Coronae S. Stephani (Oeniponte, 1885), II, 822Google Scholar.

33. Lacko, Op. cit., pp. 216–17.

34. Bobak, A, De Iure Patronatus Supremi Quoad Ecclesiam Ruthenicam in Hungaria (Rome, 1943)Google Scholar.

35. Niles, Op. cit., II, 855–56. This was the former Procurator General of the Basilian Fathers in Rome.

36. Maurer, J., Cardinal Leopold Kollonitsh Primas von Ungarn, sein Leben und sen Wirken (lnnsbruck, 1888)Google Scholar.

37. Barany, A., Eparchia Maramoriensis eiusque Unio (Rome, Gregoriano, 1959)Google Scholar.

38. Sheregy-Pekař, , The Training pf the Carpatho-Ruthenian Clergy (Pittsburgh, 1951)Google Scholar.

39. Baran, A., Epiakop Andrey Bachynsky (Yorkton, Sask ed. Legos, , 1963)Google Scholar.

40. The Bull “Relata Semper” of September 22, 1819; Cf., Welykyj, , Documenta Pontifioa…, II, 327–35Google Scholar.

41. Winter, E., Byzance und Rom in Kampf um die Ukraine, 955–1939 (Leipzig, 1942), pp. 178–79Google Scholar.

42. A. Bobak, Op. cit., passim.

43. The Bull Christi fideles Graeci Ritus of June 8, 1912, AAS IV (1912), 429–35Google Scholar.

44. Mydlowsky, Leo, Bolshevist Persecution of Religion and Church in Ukraine in 1917–57 (London: Ukrainian Publishers, Inc., 1958)Google Scholar; cf. Herbigny, D.Deubner, M., Evêques Russes en Exil 1918–1930 (Rome, 1939)Google Scholar; Sukiennicki, Viktor, “Stalin and ByeloRussia's Independence,” Polish Review, 10, no. 4 (Autumn 1965), 84–107Google Scholar; Bourdeaux, Michael, “Eastern Catholics in the Ukraine,” America, 116, no. 10 (03 11, 1967), 344–345Google Scholar; Bacon, Jack, “Fifty Years of Persecution,” Register, 43, no. 45 (Denver, 11 5, 1967), 10–11Google Scholar. There are numerous editorials concerning the 50th annivrsary of the Bolshevik Revolution in nfl leading periodicals in the United States and elsewhere, and all of them report on the persecution of the Church as a well established fact.

45. Boysak, Basil, The Fate of the Holy Union in Carpatho-Ukraine (Toronto-New York, 1963), pp. 210–228Google Scholar.

46. Nemec, L., Church and Btate in Czechoslovakia (New York, 1955), pp. 204–6Google Scholar.

47. Korolevskji, Cyrille, Métropotite André Szeptyckji, 1865–1944 (Rome, 1964)Google Scholar.

48. Shereghy, Basil, “Martyred Bishop of the Eparchy of Mukachevo, Theodore George Romzha,” The Byzantine Catholic World 12 No. 44 (10 29, 1967), I, 8–9Google Scholar; cf. A. Pekar, “Our Martyred Bishop Theodore Romaha,” Ibid., pp. 13–14. The entire issue was dedicated to the memory of Bishop Romzha on the twentieth anniversary of his death.

49. Mikuš, J. A., The Three Slovak Bishops (Passaic, N. J., 1953)Google Scholar; cf. Proces proti Vlastizradnym biskupuům: Vojtassákovi, Buzalkovi a Gojdičovi (Bratislava: Ministerstvo spravedlnoosti, 1951)Google Scholar.

50. Polak, George, “Slovak Greek Catholics in America,” Slovak studies V. (Cleveland Rome: Slovak Institute, 1965), pp. 295–65Google Scholar; “Byzantine-Rite Archbishop to Mark Silver Jubilee,” Catholic Standard and Times, 73, no. 12 (12 1, 1967), 11–12,Google Scholar for a detailed account of the Ukrainian Church, led presently by Archbishop Ambroze Senyshyn, successor of Constantine Boehachevsky. There is a review of “Catholics of the Eastern Rites” and a map of Ukrainian and Ruthenian eparchies in the world: U.S.A., Canada, Brasil, Argentina, Europe, and Australia. The map has the title “Roman Catholic Ukrainian Dioceses Outside the Iron Curtain.”

51. The name “Ruthenian” is a historic name, which has been replaced by the term Ukrainian. Even Vatican official terminology replaced recently the term “Ruthenian” with that of Ukrainian (cf. Annuario Pontificio 1967) while the term “Rutheninn” is still applied to the Pittsburgh and Passaic dioceses, although these have also a term “The Byzantine-Rite Dioceses of Pittsburgh and Passaic.”