www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News New Chaldean Archbishop

VATICAN CITY, SEP 29, 2003 (VIS) - On Saturday September 27 it was made public that the Holy Father:

- Gave his consent to the canonical election by the Synod of Bishops of the Chaldean Catholic Church, who met in Baghdad, Iraq October 16-24, 2002, of Fr. Louis Sako, pastor of the Parish of Perpetual Help at Mossul, to the Archeparchy of Kerkuk of the Chaldeans (Catholics 5,095, priests 3, religious 2), Iraq.

Dear Lance,

Someone once said here that the Chaldeans might just elect the Assyrian Patriarch as their own and reunite themselves.

I guess not, eh? ("eh" is a Canadian ethnic expression which means, as I believe, "looks like it?" ).

Alex

I did catch a blurb somewhere that said that while the holy father did accept this archbishop, there is a name on his desk for patriarch that has yet to be accepted or announced. So, we'll just have to see, eh?

The Holy Father can not decline the election of a patriarch, however if after 15 days the Synod does not elect a patriarch it devolves to the Holy Father to choose one. I read on a Chaldean news forum this was the case for the Chaldean Synod. 14 of 22 votes constituted the required 2/3. One bishop got twelve, another got 8, one bishop did not attend the synod, one abstained from voting. How they got this info or how reliable it is I don't know. The election is to be secret, but given the current status of Baghdad anything is possible I suppose.

Dear Lance,

Perhaps they got that info from the CIA then?

Alex

The Holy Father can do whatever the heck he wants to.

There may be a 99.9% chance that he wouldn't refuse the elction of a Patriarch, and such may not be prudent, but he could refuse it if he so chose.

Dear PaxTecum,

The Holy Father wanted to beatify AND canonize Mother Teresa of Calcutta on October 19th.

But he was advised not to.

The Holy Father respects the rights of self-government of the Patriarchal Catholic Churches of the East.

This is all laid down in the Decree on the Eastern Catholic Churches which I'm sure you've read and know all about too . . .

Such a move by the Pope toward the Eastern Churches in communion with him would have bad impacts on ecumenism with the East as a whole.

And don't forget that Eastern Catholics can and have disobeyed Rome at times over matters of discipline.

Alex

Pax,

No he can't. The CCEO, which the Holy Father himself promulgated, states that once elected by his synod a patriarch is patriarch, period. The Pope could refuse ecclesial communion with him (extremely unlikely), but once elected the patriarch-elect is enthroned by his synod and is patriarch.

In Christ,
Subdeacon Lance

Dear Subdeacon Lance,

In the unlikely event that the Pope refuses ecclesial communion with a Patriarch he doesn't like, what is the fate of that particular Church and its Synod? Is the Patriarch isolated, and the Synod runs the Church, which remains in communion with Rome? Does the whole Church--clergy and laity--cease to be Catholic? Do the canons address this?

Congratulations on your upcoming ordination. God bless!

Dear PaxTecvm:

The more appropriate Papal act in regards to a DULY elected Patriarch of an Eastern Church is "granting communion."

He cannot, as Rev. Fr. Deacon Lance observed, technically decline such an election. But the Pope can refuse to grant communion when and if the newly elected Patriarch opts to request such communion with the Bishop of Rome.

But before such a request from the duly elected Patrtiarch is considered by the Holy Father, as the Supreme Pontiff of the universal Church, there should be a showing/determination that the Patriarch's election was in consonance with existing canonical laws applicable to that Eastern Church.

I think there were 22 (now 23, with the elevation of a parish priest to the archbishopric of Kirkuk, Iraq) bishops of the Chaldean Catholic Church who participated in the recent (August 2003) Holy Synod to select and elect the successor of the late Patriarch Rafael Bidawid, who died in July, 2003.

There is no credible source if the Chaldean bishops did elect canonically a Patriarch. Or, if they did, the matter pending in Rome is a request for communion by the newly elected Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans.

Is he Archbishop Delly or any of the other senior bishops? I personally cannot advance a conjecture.

So, I think your comment is off-line.

AmdG

Dear Amado,

I think we're going to adopt you as an honourary Eastern Christian.

Don't worry! You won't have to give up indulgences or statues or anything like that

Alex

Phil,

I suppose the Synod could: 1. depose him and call a new election or 2. stand behind him and break communion with Rome or 3. remain in dual communion with both?! Let's hope it never happens.

In Christ,
Subdeacon Lance

Dear Lance,

As you know, we Ukies have that issue involving the Patriarchate too . . .

In the time of Joseph the Confessor, we were divided over whether to commemorate him as "Patriarch" or not. Pope Paul VI at the time asked him to drop it, and he would not, nor would many priests, bishops and laity.

Today, however, the Ukrainian Synod in L'viv is fully supportive of the title and the movement to ask Rome to approve it is strong - even among, yes, Basilians.

But many of our parishes call His Beatitude "Patriarch" with or without papal approval.

As far as I know, Rome hasn't excommunicated us or told us to return to our Mother Orthodox Church.

Not yet, anyway . . .

Alex

Dear Alex,
Unfortunately, I still haven't heard the word "patriarch" be pronounced by our clergy during the Liturgy here in Brazil. Than I came to the thinking that maybe these guys have problems and I was thinking of contracting some professional help in the area of phonetics for our priests down here.
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

Are the people with the problems Basilians or Salesians?

Our Basilians up here seem to like using "Patriarch" during the liturgy now.

But that could be local for here .

I remember when Patriarch Joseph the Confessor was in Toronto and a number of our bishops referred to him as "Cardinal" or "Major Archbishop" while the Ukie Orthodox bishops had no problem calling him "Patriarch."

You just don't know who your friends are any more!

How's the weather down there?

Alex