Browse results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 19 items for :

  • Just Published x
  • Search level: All x
Clear All
Fourteenth-Century Scholar, Bishop, and Polemicist
This book presents an overview together with a detailed examination of the life and ideas of a major thinker and protagonist of the first half of the fourteenth century, Richard FitzRalph (1300-60, Armachanus). A central figure in debates at Oxford, Avignon and Ireland, FitzRalph is perhaps best-known for his central role in the poverty controversies of the 1350s. Each of the chapters collected here sheds a different perspective on the many aspects of FitzRalph’s life and works, from his time at the University of Oxford, his role as preacher and pastoral concerns, his contacts with the Eastern Churches, and finally his case at the Papal court against the privileges granted to the Franciscans. His influence and later reputation is also examined.

Contributors include: Michael W. Dunne, Jean-François Genest†, Michael Haren, Elżbieta Jung, Severin V. Kitanov, Stephen Lahey, Monika Michałowska, Simon Nolan O.Carm, Bridget Riley, Chris Schabel, and John T. Slotemaker
Volume Editors: and
In 1946 the ‘Lviv Sobor’ voted to liquidate the Ukrainian Greco-Catholic Church. The Moscow Patriarchate considers it a ‘triumph of Orthodoxy,’ while the Catholic Church condemns it as an illegitimate council convened by Soviet authorities. What is the truth? This volume presents the contexts of the ‘Lviv Sobor,’ its aftermath, and reception from various perspectives. Although there is no common narrative, scholars have concluded that the decisions of the ‘Lviv Sobor’ were coerced by Soviet authorities, the Russian Orthodox Church was forced to collaborate, and that reconciliation depends on acknowledging these facts in order to move toward reconciliation.
This book solves the long-standing mystery of a Christian monastery near Samarkand, seen and described by two Arab travellers in the tenth century. Despite several attempts made since the 1890s, its precise location had never been established. The first part covers the quest, the find, and the archaeological excavations’ results. Then the author proceeds to search for a mediaeval Christian enclave near modern Tashkent, which appears to have been washed away by a river that changed its course over centuries.
Apart from the Christians, the book also touches upon the Manichaeans, Buddhists, Zoroastrians and other Sogdians, their languages, faiths, and material remnants.

Abstract

This article argues that taking the ‘long view’ of 1596–1946 simultaneously creates and solves problems. It gives context to the pseudo-sobor, but the past is also used to justify the sobor, allowing actors in the twentieth century to evade their responsibility. 1946 is thus a microcosm of a problem for Christians outside the Soviet context grappling with the relationship between historical truth and theological claims while avoiding the traps of confessionalism, nationalism, and historical relativism.

In: The ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946 and Its Aftermath

Abstract

One of the most contentious issues concerning the reception of the events of 1946 is the question of canonicity and legitimacy. This paper examines the his-tory and canonical regulation of church councils in the first millennium and compares this with the gathering in Lviv. Both church representatives and scholars have noted that the sobor was not convened by a legitimate Church authority, the ‘Initiative Group’ leaders were no longer members of the Church for which they pretended to act, the delegates were not elected, no bishop of the UGCC was present, arbitrarily appointed representatives of the ROC participated, and the Soviet authorities intimidated the participants. These critiques are analysed in the context of early canonical legislation, such as the Council of Trullo and the Seventh Ecumenical Council (ad 787), where the intrusion of civil authorities in church life was a problem, as well as Catholic canon law at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century, which established the norms by which a synod or council of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church in 1946 should have been convened. In no way can the gathering of 1946 be considered a legitimate church council.

In: The ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946 and Its Aftermath
Author:

Abstract

This paper traces the history of the ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946, examining its preparation, the details of the gathering itself, and its aftermath. Archival documents of the Council for the Affairs of Religious Cults of the USSR, the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church, and other state and secret service archives provide detailed information on the planning and preparation of the gathering by the ‘Initiative Group’. Personal memoirs of participants and observers also round out the picture of these events. From a Catholic perspective, the gathering can be viewed only as a pseudo-sobor, it was an act of violence and injustice in regard to many Greek Catholics, and the participation of the Russian Orthodox Church in this movement, initiated by Soviet state authorities and security services, was wrong and unjust.

In: The ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946 and Its Aftermath

Abstract

Despite the attempted liquidation of the Ukrainian Greco-Catholic Church (UGCC) in 1946, the church continued its existence in Western Europe and North America. This paper analyses responses to the pseudo-sobor of Lviv by the UGCC between 1946 and 1989, and for the same period, the attitudes of the UGCC to the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). Three periods are examined, namely the initial responses in Exile (1946–1963), the Second Vatican Council and the return of Cardinal Josyf Slipyj from Soviet exile (1963–1984), and the period after Slipyj (1984–1989). Initial responses lacked unity and coherency, but with the return of Slipyj a more unified position on various issues was developed, although not always accepted by the UGCC. The 1980s witnessed the first public attempts at reconciliation with the ROC, which can be judged as a break-through to developing a more nuanced, even ecumenical, position. However, those first steps at the highest ecclesiastical level were made with great hesitancy and even fear.

In: The ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946 and Its Aftermath
In: The ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946 and Its Aftermath

Abstract

This paper presents all papal pronouncements on the events of 1946, from Pope Pius XII to Pope Francis. Before 2006, the Holy See had never spoken officially and directly on the ‘Lviv Sobor’ as such, let alone on its canonicity. Nevertheless, the Holy See has always recognized the existence of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, not only in the diaspora, but in Ukraine itself, which may be considered as an indirect recognition of the invalidity of the synod of Lviv. Pope John Paul II elaborated on the role which the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church is called to play today in the ecumenical movement, while Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis were the first to refer to the Lviv gathering as a ‘pseudo-synod’. The paper also presents exchanges between the Holy See and the Russian Orthodox Church regarding the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church and ecumenical dialogue.

In: The ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946 and Its Aftermath
In: The ‘Lviv Sobor’ of 1946 and Its Aftermath