www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News New Byzantine Catholic Bishop in Slovakia

Why does the bishop-elect have to be concecrated
in Rome on January 6th? Why send the newly-elected bishop away during the Nativity celebration (at least those parishes of the Prjshev Eparchy that are "Vostochniks" and celebrate according to the traditional Julian calendar date)? In the past when Greek Catholic
eparchs were concecrated in Rome (as Bl. Pavlo Gojdich was), they were concecrated at St. Athansius Church at the Russicum College by Eastern Catholic hierachs. Is this just another way of letting Rome "govern" a local Eastern Church's affairs??

Ung-Certez

Hey maybe Im wrong but I thought that the Eparchy of Mukachiv was part of the Synod of the UGCC (their Bishop attends reunions of the Synod doesn't he?) If not, why does this Eparchy remains separated from the UGCC if it is in Ukrainian territory?

Isn't this system of separated sui iuris Churches a little bit complicated? Why not a united Slovak Greek Catholic Church?

I have a question. Bishop Hirka looked very young and healthy. Why did he decided to retire? maybe he will be appointed in a new mission in Rome? do you have some information?

Bishop Jan Hirka evidently reached the age of 75, when bishops are required to submit their resignations to the Pontiff. He has led the Prjashev Eparchy for a long time, since the late 1960s, when the Greek Catholic Church was legalized once again in Czechoslovakia. He was appointed Administrator of the eparchy, even though there was an auxiliary bishop alive and active, in the person of the Venerable Bishop Vasyl Hopko, STD. Bishop Hopko was appointed and consecrated while Bishop Pavlo Gojdich was still free, before the communist occupation of the country. Together with Vladyka Pavlo, Bishop Vasyl was sentenced to many years of hard labor in concentration camps/prisons. During the Prague Spring of Dubchek (1968), he was released from prison but kept under close surveillance by the government.

The struggle for the administration of the Eparchy of Prjashev was characterized by a simultaneous conflict over ethnic identity. According to most commentators, Bishop Hopko was oriented towards the "Ruthenian" or "Rusyn" cultural milieu of his people, while the communist government favored a unified "Slovak" platform. Bishop Hopko traveled to Rome to defend his rightful claim as successor to the Ordinary of the eparchy (Bishop Gojdich - with whom he worked closely), but politics intervened and the then priest Jan Hirka was given the position of administrator instead of the bishop.

Upon departing Rome, Bishop Hopko was handed a letter which informed him that he would not become the eparchial bishop but remain in the position of auxiliary, with limited privileges and no administrative authority, a decision which no doubt hurt the bishop deeply but which he accepted with characteristic humility and obedience to the Holy See. Fr. Hirka administered the eparchy as a priest throughout the remainder of the communist era and was only consecrated bishop after the fall of the iron curtain. Surely his role was also a difficult one under those complicated political conditions. Bishop Hopko died in 1976, being the last Greek Catholic bishop of the Prjashev Eparchy until the consecration of Bishop Hirka some 14 years later.

I don't know when Bishop Hirka reached 75. Andreios could surely tell us more. It could very well have been some time ago, and the Pope just now decided to accept the resignation and appoint a successor.

Fr. Joe

Bishop Hirka is already 79 years old, which he reached on November 16.

Good evening.

To answer a couple of questions. The new eparch does not have to be consecrated by the Pope. He was invited to be consecrated by the Pope, as was Bishop-elect Sasik. In the past, several bishops have declined to be consecrated by the Pope, most of them wanting to be consecrated in their own cathedral churches. Over the years, Pope John Paul II has consecrated several bishops of various sui iuris churches.

Bishop Hirka celebrated his 79th birthday this past November 16th. He was consecrated on February 17, 1990 by Cardinal Jozef Tomko. His co-consecrators were Bishop Michael Rusnak, CSsR, of the Slovak Eparchy in Toronto, and Bishop Slavomir Miklovs of Krizevci.

Peace,

Charles

Would it not be better to be concecrated by an
Byzantine Catholic Eparch? Just as Bp. Hirka opted for being concecrated by a Latin prelate(i.e. Tomko, who even had the nerve to wear Byzantine vestments), don't you not think it gives the appearance of these "sui juris" Eastern Churches as being viewed "inferior" to her "superior" Latin Particular Church??

Ung-Certez

From a spiritual viewpoint, the sui iuris church to which the ordaining bishop belongs does not matter. Holy orders are just that - holy orders.

If either of the new bishops had a metropolitan, it would be proper for them to be ordained by him. Bishop Hirka could have asked any bishop to consecrate him, but he requested Cardinal Tomko. I am not privy to why Bishop Hirka chose Cardinal Tomko, but if one recalls that he was consecrated soon after the fall of Communism in the former Czechoslovakia and that Cardinal Tomko was the highest ranking Slovak prelate in the Catholic Church at that time, I think that those factors may have played a part in his decision.

I do not think that the consecration of these two bishops by the Pope has anything to do with the superiority or inferiority of any particular church.

Peace,

Charles

I am so sorry I got confused with the picture of another Bishop :p yes I understand why he retired. I hope that the Eparchy will now be very succesful with this new Bishop.

What do you think about hierarchs who were ordained in the Latin Church and then become Eastern Rite Bishops? Why do you think they are more exposed to latinization than those who were born Eastern?

The relations are quite good. Sometimes better than relations between greek Catholics and Roman Catholics.

andreios
Byzantine Catholics in Slovakia [grkat.nfo.sk]

I just added the English translation of the message on http://grkat.nfo.sk/eng/

Lemko Rusyn, thank you again (I corrected a little bit the text - precised some facts).

andreios
http://grkat.nfo.sk

You are not right (IMHO). Our new vladyka Jan is not a "foreign" bishop. He was trained under a very Latin environment, but than studied few years in Rome tne Eastern spirituality. As the founder and director of the Centre of Spirituality of Michal Lacko, SJ, he made good work for knowing better the history and spirituality of Byzantine Catholics in Slovakia. He organized conferences... And he helped much vladyka Milan, the Exarch of Kosice, when the Exarchate was established.

Basilians are more latinized than jesuits (in Slovakia).

I do not think so. Bishop Hirka was imprissoned during communism and pressed to be orthodox. So he was carrefuly as far sa relations with Orthodoxs. New vladyka is much more younger and is doctor of theology. I hope, he will have a "wide see" and I hope the relations will grow to be better.

Jan Babjak is indigenous (if I understood well your question), he was born near Humenne in a Greek Catholic family.

If vladyka Milan would be nominated for the bishop of Presov, someone else has to be nominated for the bishop of Kosice.

andreios
http://grkat.nfo.sk

??? Bishop Hirka looked young? He is already 79 (born 1923, november 16), he was 7 years imprissoned! He is really old now. The service of a vladyka needs more physical and psychical power.

I do not think so, but I have no informations. Have never heard on something like this.

andreios
http://grkat.nfo.sk

On January 6th, Jan Babjak will not be bishop yet, so it would nothing help if he would stay in Slovakia.

And only very few villages celebrate Nativity according to the traditional Julian calendar date (I think no one parish, only some fillials).

After Father Jan will be consecrated to bishop, then he has to be inaugurated and after that, he will be the bishop of Presov Eparchy and will have the power to do anything in the Church.

andreios
http://grkat.nfo.sk

Dear Father Joe and Brian,

I too honour Oscar Romero highly and his beatification process is underway.

Our Eastern Churches have been doing "political theology" for years, defending our people, and assisting them in a plethora of ways.

But political theology as it is done in Latin America tends more toward a baptism of Marxist ideology and class struggle, if this is possible.

The political theologians try to get around the contradictions with Christianity by, for example, saying that class does not "absolutely" condition ones' consciousness etc.

The critique of the Church as having been too closely allied with the statist-establishment ideologies of feudal times until today makes a valid point.

That critique is rooted in a questioning of how the Church of Christ can be allied with ANY ideology at all.

That also goes for "Christian Marxism" and other attempts to subvert the genuine uniqueness and truly liberating focus of the Gospel of Christ.

Marx himself repudiated any kind of an alliance with Christianity.

The history of religious repression by the offshoots of Marxist ideology in the Soviet and other states speaks for itself.

Although, of course, Marxists today say that the USSR wasn't really a socialist/communist state.

I, for one, tend not to accept that reasoning.

Alex

Alex, I think this is one example where having Eparchies of the Ruthenian Church united under the Kyivian Patriarchate would be an advantage. At least then new eparchial bishops would be concecreted by an Eastern heirach and wouldn't need to "run to Rome" everytime a new bishop is selected. I would much rather have a Ruthenian Eparch selected by a Patriarchial Synod than being
"appointed" by Rome.

Ung-Certez