Scholarly conference at LaSalle University examines Union of Brest (01/19/97)

Scholarly conference at LaSalle University examines Union of Brest

PHILADELPHIA - A year of commemorations of the 400th anniversary of the Union of Brest, during which the Kyivan Church re-established communion with the Apostolic See of Rome, culminated with a scholarly conference held at La Salle University here on December 6, 1996. The conference focused on the history of the Eastern Churches, the cultural and political aspects of the union, as well as on its religious and theological significance and consequences.

The conference was opened by Prof. Leonid Rudnytzky, who thanked two co-organizers - the Shevchenko Scientific Society and the St. Sophia Religious Association of Ukrainian Catholics - for their contribution to the event. Following the invocation delivered by Brother Charles Echelmeier, director of La Salle's Campus Ministry, and welcoming remarks by Brother Daniel Burke, president emeritus of the university, the first session dedicated to the history of the union was called to order.

The opening paper authored by the Rt. Rev. Petro B. T. Bilaniuk (St. Michael's College of the University of Toronto), and in the absence of the author read by Prof. Andrew Dolan (Temple University), was titled "Graeco-Latin Council of Nicaea and Nymphaion (1234) and the Definitive Schism Between the Latin and Byzantine Churches." It addressed the questions of when the actual schism occurred and why the union or re-union was necessary.

It concluded with the statement that "since the apostolic times until the Union of Brest, the Church in Ukraine has not been in any schism with either Eastern or Western Churches, for [it] never committed any material or formal schismatic acts." The paper provoked a lengthy discussion guided ably by Prof. Geffrey B. Kelly, a noted Dietrich Bonhoeffer scholar (La Salle University).

The Rev. Alexander Baran (Ukrainian Academy of Arts and Sciences, Winnipeg) analyzed thoroughly the impact of the Council of Florence on the Union of Brest, and the Rev. Ihor Moncak (St. Clement Pope Ukrainian University of Rome) dealt with the "Articles of the Union." He stressed that the Union of Brest was, in fact, an ecclesiastic treaty accepted by the Apostolic See of Rome, which never disavowed or contradicted it. However, whenever the "bureaucrats of the Roman Curia desired" any deviation from the "Articles," they applied pressure on individual bishops to make them back down "voluntarily" from their acquired rights.

The second session, titled "The Spirituality of the Union," presented the Catholic and the Orthodox perspectives on the event. The speakers were Bishop Walter Paska of the Ukrainian Catholic Church and Bishop Vsevolod of Scopelos, representing the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in America.

Bishop Paska provided a brief history of the union, including an analysis of the events that preceded and followed it. He interpreted some selected articles of the union and in summing up stated that "the essential and paramount goal of the actions of 1596 was sharing in the Gospel truths as propounded by the one, holy, catholic, apostolic Church. It is undeniable that other motives intruded themselves, for human frailty rarely allows us to act in perfect accord with the goal we seek."

He concluded with a quotation from the Decree on Ecumenism, Vatican II: "While preserving unity in essentials, let all members of the Church, according to the office entrusted to each, preserve a proper freedom in the various forms of spiritual life and discipline, in the variety of liturgical rites, and even in the theological elaborations of revealed truth. In all things, let charity be exercised."

In a lengthy position paper titled "An Orthodox Perspective on Brest and its Consequences," Bishop Vsevolod introduced his exposition by stating that "our efforts are intended to clear the path for genuine, authentic union, to heal the schism which divides our Church of Kyiv, and to heal the schism which divides Eastern Orthodoxy from Roman Catholicism. In pursuit of these lofty goals, we must be prepared to accept the pain which inevitably accompanies honest discussion."

Upon analyzing the bull "Magnus Dominus," by which Pope Clement VIII received the Ukrainians and Belarusians into the Roman Catholic Church, as well as other papal documents, Bishop Vsevolod emphasized that "the Ruthenian bishops, the clergy and the faithful were canonically received into communion with the Roman Church, not as a metropolitan Sister Church, but simply as individuals, coming to the Church from 'outside' and asking individually for reunion."

Quoting Archimandrite Victor Pospishil, Bishop Vsevolod challenged the validity of the terms "union" and "re-union," and insisted that the term "submission" is the more correct designation for the event of 1596. He subsequently discussed Metropolitan Petro Mohyla's views of the union and of the Roman primacy, and commented extensively on recent ecumenical efforts between Catholics and Orthodox.

In praising Bishop Lubomyr Husar for his support of Metropolitan Elia's recent ecumenical initiatives, Bishop Vsevolod concluded his paper on the following personal note: "I remain always an optimist in these matters. Of course there are obstacles and setbacks; of course there are those who do not wish to understand. But we must have confidence in the healing power of the Holy Spirit. Of course our own unaided efforts are sufficient to overcome our divisions, but we should realize that our prayerful efforts are necessary, to prepare ourselves to receive the good gift of full unity that God wishes us to have."

The session of the two bishops was chaired by Prof. Thomas E. Bird (Queens College, CUNY) who also introduced Metropolitan Stephen Sulyk, archbishop of the Philadelphia Archeparchy of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, who attended the conference.

The third and final session, which was dedicated to the aftermath of the union, was chaired by Prof. Albert Kipa (Muhlenberg College, Allentown, Pa.). Prof. David Goldfrank (Georgetown University) offered a cogent analysis of the treatment of the Union of Brest in imperial Russian historiography by focusing on leading Russian and Ukrainian historians of the 19th and early 20th century, among them: Solovyov, Kliuchevsky, Maksymovych and Hrushevsky.

Prof. Vasyl Markus (Shevchenko Scientific Society, U.S.A.) drew some parallels between the unions of Brest and Uzhhorod, while cautioning that the latter cannot be considered a separate event of equal magnitude and significance to that of Brest, but rather an acceptance of the act of 1596, and Prof. Bird commented on selected papal documents dealing with the Union of Brest, while also presenting a compelling summary of the papers read.

The conference was attended by scholars from several neighboring institutions of higher learning, among them: the University of Delaware, Immaculata College, King's College, Manor Junior College, the University of Pennsylvania and Temple University. Members of La Salle's faculty and students as well as representatives of the Ukrainian community of Greater Philadelphia also took part in the individual sessions.

In his concluding remarks, Prof. Rudnytzky thanked La Salle's faculty and administration for their support and cooperation in organizing and hosting the conference. The entire conference took place in the de La Salle Chapel of the university, which contributed to the spiritually heightened atmosphere of the event. Plans are being made to publish the proceedings of the conference in a separate collection.

| Home Page |