www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall New bishops for the Ruthenians???

On a recently tread, mention was made that the Ruthenians, more than likely, would have two new bishops by the end of 2008.

Any truth to this?

who would be retiring?

Bishop Andrew Pataki [catholic-hierarchy.org] - b. 30 Aug 27 - age 79.86
Archbishop Basil Schott [catholic-hierarchy.org] - b. 21 Sep 39 - age 67.80
Bishop John Kudrick [catholic-hierarchy.org] - b. 23 Dec 47 - age 59.54
Bishop William Skurla [catholic-hierarchy.org] - b. 1 Jun 56 - age 51.11

Details taken from The Hierarchy of the Catholic Church [catholic-hierarchy.org].

I've listed the hierarchs by age. Following the Roman rule for retiring at 75 one sees that only Bishop Andrew qualifies.

I couldn't possibly comment on who will be replaced and when.

75 yoa is mandatory age for submission of request for permission to retire.

M.

Thank you, Mary. I've now corrected my original post.

I think the word "mandatory" is not used in the Canons, East and West.

Only this: any Bishop (including Cardinals and Archbishops) who has completed his 75th year of age is requested to offer his resignation from office to the Pope, who, taking all circumstances into account, will make provision accordingly, i.e., he may or may not accept such offer of resignation.

Thus, we see some Bishops (and Cardinals and Archbishops) continuing to hold office past 75, even after submitting their offer to resign.

There is no mandatory resignation or retirement at age 75, but there is that "obligatory" act of offering to resign at this age borne out of practice and "tradition."

A timely example of the subject at hand as reported by the Catholic News Agency today:

My understanding over the last several years is that Bishop Andrew has not submitted a resignation. (I have been told this by several members of the clergy in the BCC over the years.) The wording that has been utilized by several members of the clergy is that he refuses...the reason that is given, is he does not feel obligated to that tradition as an eastern bishop. Believe me, with the trouble his grace has caused over the years, I think Rome would have accepted it.

Chris

True. I spoke colloquially.

M.

I heard thru the "grapvine" that Bp. Andrew will step down. A three-Eparchial trade is in the works, including one Eparch north of the border!

U-C

I am not so sure, and THAT is what makes me more nervous than anything else. Perhaps today, but not a year ago. There has been a terrible price.

Mary

On second reading I think you missed the second part of my sentence. It seems to me that mandatory or obligatory can be interchanged here.

I never did say that there was a mandatory resignation.

I said they there was a mandatory request for permission...one that could either be accepted or denied.

M.

"I heard thru the "grapvine" that Bp. Andrew will step down. A three-Eparchial trade is in the works, including one Eparch north of the border! "


I'm almost afraid how it will be decided--rock, paper, scissors? Nothing would surprise me! Maybe a game of "slaps" would be in order.

Tim

Canonically (and legally) speaking, "mandatory" and "obligatory" are not interchangeable.

There can be no eliding a "mandatory" canon; it is so commanded or so ordered for outright obeisance. It is a unilateral act of the Supreme Authority in the Church.

An "obligatory" canon allows the passing of an "offer" from the obligor and the "acceptance" or "refusal" by the obligee. There is an active and mutual exchange of "obligations."

Trades always make me nervous...the initial thought is another eparchy is looking to "unload" their problems as well...good case in point...when his grace Andrew assumed the helm of the Passaic eparchy...it came on the heals of the unrest he was causing in Parma...so what was apparently good for Parma (although that's debatable) was the "death nail" for Passaic...

Chris

For general information [bold is my emphasis]:

EAST
CCEO: Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium

Canon 210 - 1. An eparchial bishop who has completed his seventy-fifth year of age or who, due to ill health or to another serious reason, has become less able to fulfill his office, is requested to present his resignation from office.

Can. 210 - � 1. Episcopus eparchialis, qui septuagesimum quintum annum aetatis explevit aut ob infirmam valetudinem aliave gravi de causa officio suo implendo minus aptus evasit, rogatur, ut renuntiationem ab officio exhibeat.

WEST
CIC: Codex Iuris Canonici

Can. 401 �1. A diocesan bishop who has completed the seventy-fifth year of age is requested to present his resignation from office to the Supreme Pontiff, who will make provision after he has examined all the circumstances.

Can. 401 - � 1. Episcopus dioecesanus, qui septuagesimum quintum aetatis annum expleverit, rogatur ut renuntiationem ab officio exhibeat Summo Pontifici, qui omnibus inspectis adiunctis providebit.