Hi all. I'm not sorry to see this thread going again -- and I'm particularly interested to see if anyone will disagree with the conditional statement that I quoted earlier from Phillip Rolfes,
If we follow the camp that believes St. Josaphat did not in fact kill Orthodox Christians or burn their Churches (nor was complicit with those who did so), then my original analogy still holds up.
-- but I would also like to say, just for the record, that I don't think PR and I have the same purpose in discussing this or the same attitude. I say this in light of what he said more recently:
The fact of the matter is that he is revered as a saint among Ukrainian Catholics. The rest of us just have to deal with it. :p
Right believing Ukrainians, i.e. Pravoslavnij, do not.
In fact, he was revered as a saint among the Latin Poles. THEY pushed for his canonization, not the Ukrainians/Ruthenians, and given the Poles' tyranny over the Ruthenians in Galicia at the time, it would seem it was not without an agenda. The Poles, NOT the Ukrainians/Ruthenians (much less the Belarus, his nation at least in ancestry) dedicated churches to his memory shortly after his canonization, in not only the Old World, but the new. Poles, not Ruthenians nor Ukrainians, founded the Basilica of "St. Josaphat" in Milawaukee in 1888
and Kashubians, not Ruthenians nor Ukrainians, built "St. Josaphat" parish in Chicago (I got thrown off of CAF when I admitted that I walked out of my way not to go by it and have to cross myself). It would seem that he is revered as a saint among Polish Latins. The Ukrainians/Ruthenians just have to deal with it, or so the Vatican said in 1868, at the Poles' urgings (and payment). Given the history of the "union of brest" in the hands of the Latin Poles, the agenda would be obvious.