While acknowledging DMD's valid criticism and how bad such statements look to the Orthodox I wouldn't put too much stock into this statement. Italian Cardinals keep pretending the ban is enforce and admonsihing us about it, canonists keep reminding them it was not renewed so it lost the force of law, and Greek Catholic bishops quitely keep ordaining married men, and the past two non-Italian Popes say and do nothing to stop it.

I think the point is that *quietly* ordaining married men without upsetting the Roman prefect of the Eastern Congregation is bad enough, without said prefect admonishing our bishops against it.

Again, it is my hope that the Eastern Churches are unanimous, assertive and clear in their response.

But, if so, why do the Popes keep appointing Latin-rite Italian cardinals to manage the Congregation for the Oriental Churches?

It is this talking out of both sides of the mouth that is so troubling to us, particularly those of us who try to be open-minded.

Truth be told, any attempt to enforce celibacy in say, Slovakia or better yet, Ukraine, would never be attempted. The rationale used here in the USA could just as well be used in say Slovakia, which is overwhelmingly a Latin-rite Catholic country, regarding celibacy. I suspect that outside of the far eastern counties of that country, the average Roman Catholic is probably as woefully ignorant about the Greek Catholic church as are their counterparts in the USA. It is even more pronounced in the Czech republic, where my cousin is a married Greek Catholic priest with a young family, where the presence of the Eastern Rite really came about following the war with forced relocations and after 1990 as a result of job opportunities. What is the difference? I would argue that it is the willing ignorance of the conservative Latin rite hierarchy in the United States which insists on perpetuating this situation, but that is just my opinion.

I wonder what Cardinal Dolan might have to say on the subject? He seems friendly enough to the Eastern Catholic cause, and he is now in a position where his voice is heard and he seems to be fairly well respected.

DMD,

I see your "Why do the Popes keep appointing Latin-rite Italian cardinals to manage the Congregation for the Oriental Churches?" and raise you a "Why not abolish the Oriental Congregation altogether?" It is simply not needed.

I have no doubt that internal pressure within the Latin Church to get rid of mandatory celibacy is the driving reason behind the current situation for Eastern Catholic Churches. However, the Greek Catholics are the only ones pushing the issue. The Oriental Catholic Churches seem all to happy to have only celibates in the US. Indeed, the Syro-Malabars and Syro-Malankars have adopted mandatory celibacy, and the Copts, Ethiopians and Syriacs seem to favor it. The Armenians, Chaldeans, and Maronites while not moving toward celibacy seem to be okay with the status quo in the US.

One can hope that Cardinal Sandri's assistant, Bishop Cyril Vasil' will have the courage to remind the good Italian that he misspoke. It seems to me that there's a disconnect somewhere; for the Congregations's profile does states:

"As an institution this Dicastery received from the Supreme Pontiff the mandate to be in contact with the Oriental Catholic Churches for the sake of assisting their development, protecting their rights and also maintaining whole and entire in the one Catholic Church, alongside the liturgical, disciplinary and spiritual patrimony of the Latin Rite, the heritage of the various Oriental Christian traditions."

In the Synod at the Vatican last year, Armenians, Chaldeans, Copts Maronites and Syriacs, along with Melkites/"Greek Catholics" asked that the mandated celibacy imposed on them be dropped.

http://catholicreview.org/article/life/s...rn-rite-priests

They shouldn't be asking. They should be telling Rome they will ordain who they see fit, period.

Indeed! Big litmus test for the new Metropolitan ...

Shlomo Lkhoolkhoon,

I also wish the new Maronite Eparch will withdraw the prohibition on ordaining married men to the clergy. I know a number of good young men that wish to be Maronite priests as well as married.

Fush BaShlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
Yuhannon

As regards the question of appointing an Eastern or Oriental patriarch who is also a cardinal to head the Congregation, that's a two-edged sword - do we want a patriarch to be 'elevated' to the cardinalate?

Lord knows, the issue has been argued here and elsewhere often enough and, if one counted the votes here on either side, I'm of the opinion that those who consider such an 'honor' to be no honor would be in the majority.

The current make-up of the Congregation:



Let's break that down -
29 (Latin, presumably) Cardinals*
1 Secretary (currently an EC Bishop)
1 Archbishop**
4 Bishops**
6 Patriarchs (1 EC, 5 OC)
4 Major Archbishops (2 EC - UGCC & Romanian; 2 OC - Malabar & Malankara)

45 Total

*all those EC and OC hierarchs who are presently Cardinals are already accounted for in the patriarchal and major archeparchial slots. The 29 include the Prefect, the 27 named by the Pope, and the President of the Pontifical Council

**If anyone has ready access to a current copy of the Annuario Pontificio, it would be nice to know whether the archbishop and 4 bishop members are Latin or EC/OC.

****************

Regardless, and allowing for the fact that the sole living cardinal patriarch emeritus might fill 1 of the 27 slots allotted to the cardinalate, the best we could have in numbers would be 17 of 45 slots:

1 emeritus cardinal patriarch,
6 patriarchs,
4 major archeparchs,
1 archbishop,
4 bishops,
1 Secretary

**************

And, keep in mind that, since the Congregation's first Prefect was named in 1965 (from the time of its canonical erection in 1917 until 1965, the reigning pope was himself the Prefect):

- only 1 of its 8 Prefects was of an EC or OC Church:

HB Ignace Moussa I (Basile) Daoud, of blessed memory

From 1917 until the present,

- only 3 of its 9 Secretaries were of an EC or OC Church:

Gabriel Acacius Cardinal Coussa, BA (Melkite), of blessed memory,
Archbishop Miroslav Stefan Marusyn (Ukrainian), of blessed memory, and,
Archbishop Cyril Vasil’, SJ (Slovak)

Way to go, Rome!

Many years,

Neil

Addendum: Congregation's website

Glory to Jesus Christ!
We have to return to the original quote-embracing celibacy can simply be responded to by fostering more vocations to the monastic life. That all of our ordinations are not of celibates, be they deacons or priests, would not imply a lack of embracing celibacy.

But let's be honest, how many new vocations to the monastic life have we had? I can only think of two Eastern Catholic monasteries in this country who have had vocations over the last 5 years. Adding that to our seminarians, and we do not have the issue of some of the more conservative Roman seminaries in this country, and that of our Greek Catholic seminaries in places like Ukraine. We are not bursting at the seams with vocations, be they celibate or discerning marriage. If we respond to Cardinal Sandri with more fervent prayer, more donations to our seminary (as was wisely posted above) and monasteries, that would embrace celibacy.

And again, that this would be accompanied with a fervent embrace of all of the Eastern Tradition--not merely married priests, but matins, vespers, more fasting, the Jesus Prayer, pilgrimages, etc., this would be a different ad limina visit. Our Bishops have to report on how our eparchies are doing. If any of us were in their shoes, would there be resounding good news that we would be excited to report? I don't know this to be the case. We should pray for them as they speak to a faithfulness to the Eastern Tradition, and then pray that beyond speaking, we joined with them would all live that Tradition.

Ordination of married men has occurred in our jurisdictions over the past years, and I have a sense that there are more men being considered for the presbyterate who are married. If it continues as more of an exception to a rule over the next five years, so be it. If that is the case, we have all the more reason to ask ourselves how we have or haven't lived out our life of faith. If this exception to the rule ordination is somehow stopped, then I think that the kind of frustration that some of us have felt (myself included) would be truly justified. May God grant us a more beautiful witness to our Tradition, that our Roman Brethren would have more reason to be excited about us. I think the existing speech from Cardinal Sandri already makes that known, in that we have much to offer, etc. Let us offer that to the world, and embrace it for ourselves.

In XC,
J. Andrew

Slava Isusu Christu!!!

This may not make me very popular, I think is has to be said.
They will never learn, these LR Cardinals, bishops, etc keep stomping on themselves. Hasn't Abp. Ireland left any residual lessons for the church? If they pursue this inane celibacy policy to its logical conclusion, I can see the OCA, ROCOR, ACROD and other Orthodox Churches flourish. There are probably several successors to St. Alexis out there waiting in the wings. As long as there is the subservience on the part of the Eastern Metropolitans and Bishops to the Bishop of Rome, rather than the Collegial first amongst equals, the LR will continue to subjugate the Eastern Churches to their way. Each of the Eastern Churches MUST have their own elected Patriarch not appointed by Rome to be part of the governing body of the church, a synod of Patriarchs, not Cardinals. We don't need no stinking Cardinals in the eastern Churches. All of the separate churches at the Patriarchal level should be the only governing body of the Church Universal. The Latin Rite though will never willingly give up power.

If such a celibacy policy does come to fruition, like many of our members, I am not glued in my pew. This will do to the Eastern Laity what Vatican II did to the Latin Laity.

It truly saddens me, as an Orthodox Christian, to read your post. I share your pain and understand your opinion as it mirrors the world around which I grew up in following the last wave of returnees to Orthodoxy in the mid-twentieth century.

If it is of any consolation, the examples of the UOC-USA and ACROD, both of which have many historical ties to the Greek Catholic Church, do show that it is possible to go your own way within the framework of the greater world of Orthodoxy without becoming subservient to Moscow or the Hellenists.

However, I truly hope that a more optimistic and conciliatory approach may come out of these recent developments as those of us who lived in the aftermath of schisms, separations and loss of faith know that the pain involved is not always worth the potential gain.

Hang in there!

j.a. - with due respect, what "men"? I know of only one (Fr. Joseph Marquis - Sacred Heart BCC - Livonia, MI).

When has the Pittsburgh seminary accepted an American born candidate wishing to be ordained in one of the American Eparchies who either was or announced intention to marry before ordination?

By "our jurisdictions", do you mean the Ruthenian Eparchies, or all Eastern Catholic Eparchies in the U.S.?

If this is inaccurate, I would certainly welcome additional information.