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

Just a comment on what was said by Administrator. The Patriarch of Constantinople did send in Archbishop Anastasios to Tirana bacause the Albanian hierarchy had been totally decimated by Communism (the Country was declared to be the first totally atheistic one in the world by Enver Hoxha). However, the current situation in the Czech and Slovak Republics is that they together form one autocephalous (and recognized by World Orthodoxy) Church. Therefore, the selection of any bishop (or the Primate Metropolitan) is solely under the internal domain of the Orthodox Church of the Czech and Slovak Lands. The Ecumencial Patriarch has no say whatsoever (or neither does any other Orthodox primate, for that matter).

Christ Is Among Us!
Indeed He Was, Is and Ever Shall Be!

Three Cents

Well, this stereotype is not entirely true.
For instance, Polish Jesuits were very active
at the pre-war neo-Unia. They had a center in
Albertyn (Byelorussia - so in Byelorussian it would be "ALBYARTSIN" perhaps ). Fr. Walter Ciszek SI worked there(among others).

And now we have in Lublin a bi-ritual Jesuit
Fr. Marek (Mark) Blaza, a Pole from Silesia
(just imagine: his mother's name is Hildegard ), who celebrates in both Ukrainian and Romanian variations of Byzantine Rite. Well,
I can say nothing about his Romanian, but his Ukrainian (not only language, but also ability to
celebrate our Liturgy - including good voice) is
quite well!
Fr. Mark is also doctoral candidate at our University and teacher at so-called UCU in L'viv.

Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

Yes, it is VERY complicated. And maybe a unified
Patriarchate for all Byzantine Catholic Slavs
would be even better solution?

Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

PS. Anyone who'd be going to accuse me of being a
Ukrainian church nationalist should know that
I'd prefer a totally unified Byzantine Catholic
Church headed by Melkite Patriarch instead of present-day situation.

Theoretically, yes - but canon law has always
forbidden ordination by a bishop from another
tradition (a Roman indult has been required).

Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

In a previous post I wrote: "From a spiritual viewpoint, the sui iuris church to which the ordaining bishop belongs does not matter. Holy orders are just that - holy orders."

Subdeacon Peter replied: "Theoretically, yes - but canon law has always forbidden ordination by a bishop from another tradition (a Roman indult has been required)."

The Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, Can. 86, states (in part): The patriarch is competent ...(2)to ordain metropolitans ...and, if particular law stipulates, also to ordain all bishops." The corresponding canon relating to the election of bishops states that the bishop elect is to receive episcopal ordination within three months of the proclamation, but it does not state who is to ordain him, although by inference it should be the patriarch, if stipulated by particular law.

The CCEC does not allude to the need for an indult for an Eastern bishop to be ordained by a bishop of another tradition. In the case of the two new bishops to be consecrated by the Pope, no indult would be needed since the nominating authority is the same person who will be consecrating the bishops.

The only instances in which I can envision a bishop being ordained by a bishop of another tradition would be (1) when the consecrating prelate is the Pope and (2) in times of persecution when recourse to a bishop of one`s own tradition would be impossible.

The consecration of bishops of various Eastern traditions by the Pope is not new, even though it is not an everyday occurence. I recall Pope Paul VI consecrating the current Ukrainian eparch of Brazil as well as Romanian and Syro-Malabar bishops. Pope John Paul II also consecrated the now retired Maronite eparch of Australia. In all of these instances, the bishop in question was nominated by the Pope, in many instances after consultation with patriarchal synods.

It may be of interest to know that more than one-quarter of living bishops in Viet Nam can trace their apostolic succession through the Chaldean Church. There are several bishops in the Caribbean whose succession is Maronite.

Peace,

Charles

Dear Charles,

I mean general rules on ordinations (see CCEO,
can. 748.2 and CIC, can. 1021).
Can. 746.2 of CCEO suggests, that the first (main)consecrator should be from the same autonomous Church (although it's not clearly written).

However, despite of all juridical stuff and praxis you mention, I don't like such situations. IMHO it's quite artificial and even ridiculous to go to Pope in order to get ordained in Latin rite (note, BTW, that such papal consecration may be celebrated in proper Rite - Archbishop Myroslav I. Lubachivsky's khirotonia is an example).
There are many Byzantine Catholic Bishops closer.
Not only Ukrainians...


Sincerely,
subdeacon Peter

I believe that Subdeacon Peter and others have offered good analyses of this issue and I agree that a bishop should generally be consecrated by another bishop of the same suri iuris Church.

It is a wonderful privilege, however, to be invited to Rome for any ordination, episcopal, priestly, diaconial or to minor orders. One can also note that there are political advantages to such a course of action. In my opinion the new bishop, being consecrated by the Holy Father himself, will have an added prestige within his own country simply because he was invited to Rome for his consecration. Not using bishops of other ethnic Churches supports the idea that these Byzantine Catholics are fully native to Slovakia and its culture (watch for the Presov eparchy to be raised to the status of archeparchy). If the Latins do not treat him or his flock as equals the new bishop is already speaking from an advantageous position. If Bishop Jan Babjak is an advocate of the restoration of our authentic Byzantine patrimony (as we all hope and as many believe that his predecessor, Bishop Jan Hirka, was not), then Pope John Paul II will be credited with taking a concrete action towards making this restoration (which he has spoken of so eloquently) a reality. Such an action will not go unnoticed by the Church at large.

Many Byzantine Catholics here in Slovakia hope that our new vladyka (bishop) Jan will stop the latinization of our church and will start restoration of our authentic Byzantine patrimony. You can read many such posts in our forum [grkat.nfo.sk] (it is only in Slovak language). And many people ask for the restoration of our authentic Byzantine patrimony. I hope, this will be realized by our new vladyka.

andreios
http://grkat.nfo.sk

It can't get any worse than what was allowed
under Bp. Hirka. The most Latinized Divine Liturgy I ever personally attended was during Pentecost 2001. I was in Kosice waiting for a flight back to the U.S. and I decided to attend a evening Divine Liturgy at the Kosice Cathedral. I was shocked and dismayed. How can a Cathedral with such traditional iconography
(and the only church in Eastern Slovakia that still had deacon doors attached) allow musical instruments (acoustic guitars) along with most of the liturgy being recited? I thought I was attending a Slovak Roman Catholic "Mass"! It really was a shock, since Kir Milan is such a
"vostochnik"! Bp. Hirka allowed too much liberty to certain parishes. No wonder there are numerous newly-built Orthodox churches being built
in areas of Eastern Slovakia where there never were in the past. I guess a lot of the traditionally-minded Greek Catholics probably were getting tired of their churches being Latinized and Slovakized by Bp. Hirka. I don't blame them for becoming Orthodox.
Ung-Certez

Dear Ung-Certez:

I thought the Eparchy of Presov belonged to the Slovak Greek Catholic sui juris Church and NOT to the Ruthenians NOR to the UGCC?

Therefore, Bp. Hirka had all the "rite" to "Slovakized" his Churches.

AmdG

Oh Holy Confessor Pavlo Gojdich, champion and defender of the Rusyn Greek Catholic Eparchy of Prjshev, please pray and intercede on behalf of the faithful followers of the Greek Catholic Church. May the new hierarch(s) be guided by your benevolent example, and help safe guard the future of the Greek Catholic Eparchy of Prjashev!

Ung-Certez

"It may be of interest to know that more than one-quarter of living bishops in Viet Nam can trace their apostolic succession through the Chaldean Church. There are several bishops in the Caribbean whose succession is Maronite. "

huh?
How is this? Viet Nam's christianity is 100% Latin if Im not mistaken. Does this mean that those Latin Bishops were consacrated by Eastern Bishops? That is quite interesting, but why? there are lots of Latin Bishops throughout the world. I also know that some Bishops of the Latin Church in VietNam had some conflicts later.

One of them, Bishop Thuc, was kinda famous when he consacrated several Bishops (including a Mexican)without permission of the Pope and declared the "vacancy" of the Holy See. And then some independent groups try to justify their apostolic succession through Eastern Churches

Hello Remie,

To answer your question, in 1929 Father Antonin Fernand Drapier,O.P., was named Titular Archbishop of Neocaesarea in Ponto and Apostolic Delegate in Mesopotamia. On 22 December of that year he was consecrated bishop at Mossul, in the Dominican church, by Bishop Francis Daoud, Chaldean eparch of Amadiyah, assisted by Archbishop Georges Dallal, Syriac Archbishop of Mossul, and Archbishop Jacques Nessimian, Armenian Archbishop of Mardin. In late 1936 he was named Apostolic Delegate in Indochina, where he remained until April 1950.

During his time as apostolic delegate, he consecrated 8 bishops in Viet Nam, the first among them being the late Archbishop Pierre-Martin Ngo Dinh Thuc. Of the 8 bishops, only two ever consecrated other bishops. One of them, a French Dominican, consecrated only one other bishop, also a French Dominican. However, Archbishop Ngo Dinh Thuc consecrated six bishops in Viet Nam, one of them being the future Archbishop of Saigon Paul Nguyen Van Binh. Archbishop Nguyen Van Binh and three other bishops consecrated by Archbishop Ngo Dinh Thuc consecrated one or more bishops, and many of those bishops in turn consecrated other bishops, all licitly consecrated. I make that note because after he retired to France, Archbishop Ngo Dinh Thuc travelled to Palmar de Troya, where he illicitly consecrated several bishops, and he did so again some years later. I will not venture into the topic of this archbishop any further as that would be for another forum.

As for the bishops in the Maronite succession in the Caribbean, Archbishop Paul F. Tabet was named Apostolic Pro-Nuncio to various Caribbean nations in 1980 and in 1981 he consecrated the present Archbishop of Castries, Kelvin Felix. Archbishop Felix has consecrated other bishops, and there we have the Maronite lineage.

I hope that I have not been too long-winded.

Peace,

Charles

Amado:
There is plenty of information available on the web that will help you to learn something of the difficult history of the Presov Eparchy during the last century.

Amen!

Charles:

Thank you for your explanation, That's very interesting.

Guitars!!! I doubt it is a Latinization, it is simply a liturgical abuse. Oh God I had never heard about that before in a Byzantine Catholic church... well once... a friend's husband who belongs to the ROCOR in Canada (from Russian origin) when we were talking about some awful liturgical abuses that appeared in the Papal Mass in Mex 1999, told me:

"Eastern Catholic Churches are part of the same body that permits such liberalisms, there are many parishes that also have guitar liturgies, rock liturgies... the spirit of Vatican II has arrived or will arrived soon, as we expect it"