www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Rome says no go for UGCC Patriarchate

Dear all. I know Im new and I recognize I do not know the Canon Law for Eastern Churches, but one thing I believe we need to consider is that, as sad as this can be, the Vatican's agenda is ruled by people like Kasper, and the Pope, because of its age and illness has become more like a puppet of the Roman Curia that is only longing for power and keeping its privileges above everything. I truly believe that if the Pope was not as sick as it is now, things would be a lot different, specially since he has shown great interest in promoting Eastern Christianity. The worst part in this situation is that it is tending to bring another schism within the Catholic Church.

God bless you all.

A clarification needs to be made: Rome has not given any official decision (yes or no) to a Ukrainian Catholic patriarchate.

According to what Cardinal Waltar Kasper has publicly stated ( www.risu.org.ua/article.php?sid=1192&l=en [risu.org.ua] ), the Holy Father has not made any decision as yet. Cardianl Kasper says he is opposed to a UC patriarchate, but the decision lies with the Pope.

We must pray for the Holy Father as he makes his decision. It will not be an easy one for him. He very much desires to grant the Ukrainian Catholic patriarchate, but he also desires to strenghthen relations with the Russian Church. Whichever the Pope's decision is, he risks upsetting either the UCC or the ROC. Would you want to be in his shoes?

Let us pray that the will of Almighty God be made manifest through the Pope's decision, and that we have the humilty to accept it.

I'm not too worried about a schism.

The most the UGCC will do (which unfortunately I suspect will be all too unlikely) is unilaterially (but this time seriously :rolleyes: ) declare itself a patriarchate and take itself seriously and not wait for (for some reason all-powerful and sine qua non only validating) immediate recognition from any one of it's Sister Churches such as the Greek Greek-Catholic Church, the Russian Greek-Catholic Church, the Slovak Greek-Catholic Church, the Italo-Albanian Greek-Catholic, or even.....the Latin Catholic Church.

The UGCC has no intention of going into Schism. And this act is not one of Schism.

The only possibility of an schism that I can imagine at this point is that the Latin Church would freak out over this and break communion with us.

If that (unlikely) should happen, then the UGCC would become one of the Orthodox Churches NOT in Communion with Rome.

In which case, Cardinal Kasper would initate dialogue with us, cap in hand, bend over backwards to accede to any outrage statements and demands we make, apologise profusely for all there wrongs, in order to establish reconciliation and inter-communion with us!

And we, being gracious, would accept to his total and unconditional surrender, and deign to concede to enter into inter-Communion with the Catholic Churches.

Hey....wait, a minute... This sounds like a PLAN...!!!

Herb.

ps: Plan B

Let the Latin Church dismantle it's Dioceses and Ecclesiastical Province (or whatever it is that they set up) in Russia, in order to appease the MP.

If they want to bargain with the MP, let them bargain with their own chips, and not use those of their sister's (church)!

Dear Herbigny,
As you mentioned the UGCC has no intension of being considered shismatics as we already are classified as such by Moscow anyway, but what alternatives do Ukrainians have anyway? Cardinal Kasper's action of dealing with the fate of the Ukrainian people's church in Moscow without the participation of Ukrainian representatives from the UGCC was and is disrespectful. If you are going to deal with so called "problems of the church in Ukraine". These issues should be dealt with in Ukraine and with Ukrainians and not with outsiders. Ukraine has recieved the Pope with open arms, and if I'm not mistaken the Ukrainian government has given a green card to the Pope to come and visit Ukraine anytime he wishes without all the fuss of visas and what not. What will the Vatican really gain by not recognizing the Ukrainian Patriarchate? Probably nothing, maybe a standing ovation by the Patriarch of Moscow and his bishops. What will the Vatican lose if it doesn't recognize the UGC Patriarchate? It will probably lose the respect of millions of Ukrainians? I wonder which is more important.
Lauro

Dear Friends,

There is nothing new in Rome's decision here at all.

Rome will not "grant" a patriarchate to the UGCC, not before, not now, and not in the future.

Church politics have been at play here and since 1596 when the Jesuits first roped Ruthenian Orthodox bishops to join the Union of Brest.

I'm sorry if any of this offends our RC friends.

But we Ukies have had to put up with Rome and its political machinations for far too long for us to see in any of this "God's Will" or anything Divine-like.

Frankly, the good news here, if any are to be had, is that for much of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, the Vatican has largely become irrelevant to it in its daily life at the parish and eparchial levels.

We have a relation to the Pope, but that is where our vision of our link to Rome tends to stop.

We will continue to develop into a truly united Particular Church and will continue to forge deeper links with our Orthodox brothers and sisters.

And to paraphrase Fr. Taft's statement: Rome can go to hell!

Have a nice day everyone!

Alex

Dear Alex,
I hope that our Orthodox brothers and sisters (True Ukie Orthodox)stand by us. We need them you know.
Lauro

dear Lauro:

Thanks for the posting. Good points.

My thing is not so much Rome.

"Rome, Rome, Rome", we Greek-Catholics are always talking about Rome. Why are we so obsessed with Rome? If Rome didn't recognize our Ukrainian-ness, would we be afraid we weren't Ukrainian any more?

And if we need Sister Church recognition so bad, why don't we ask for recognition from Antioch?! (Since were not (yet) in communion with our Mother Church (Tsarhorod)!)

After all, the Patriarch of Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem is:
1. our rite
2. of our rite, the most ancient and venerable Patriarchate
3. whose Patriarch is "Pontiff of Pontiffs and 13th Apostle"
4. plus is the 1st See of Peter, Prince of the Apostles and Keeper of the Keys.

I think we gotta "grow up", and become a Church, and not just some sorta backwater "nunciature" or "succursale" of our "Big Sister" church.

Rome's gotta do what's Rome gotta do. May God bless it.

Why don't we do what we gotta do?

If there's any blame to be placed, I don't blame Rome, I blame us. If we can't do even this, how could be possibly imagine we in any way "deserve" or even "can handle" being a patriarchate.

my 2 pence,

Herb

Dear Herb,
Once again I agree with you, but you live in a country where the Basilians are not the dominant force in the UGC parishes. This of course makes a very big difference. Once again I would like to make it clear that it's not all Basilians that are Latinizers, some of them are very eastern and strong patriarchalists as well. Here in Brazil I would say that at least 70% to 75% of the parishes are in their hands, and this is not good and as you know they are very Rome, Rome, Rome. The UGCC must and needs to go through a reform and in my opinion they need to start with the Basilian order. In my opinion the Basilians have improved in the last few decades but they still have a very long way to go before you could even start comparing tyhem to let's say the Studites, and since I mentioned it, I would like to take advantage and say that "WE NEED STUDITES DOWN HERE!!!"
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

"Basillians schmallians!

A patriarchate will either be established by Rome (which everyone seems to doubt) or by our own hierarchs. It will happens once a Christian Democratic president is elected in Ukraine (ie: 2004). Any UGCC bishops who dissagree with this happening for any reason will be: 'OUTED' and pressure will be put on them to resign - FAST.

Ukraine IS the UCGG. Nobody should believe for a moment that an eparchy such as British Columbia, or Saskatchewan (both in Canada) with their respective 5,000 and 20,000 (?) adherants are going to stop the rapid, natural, and essential evolution of the mother church into a patriarchate. There are probably mega-parishes in urban centers of Ukraine which have that many adherants. Are we to give them an equal vote also ?
ANSWER: Only if they vote for the immediate establishment of the patriarchy

Hritzko,

PS: perhaps you could tell us a little bit about the history, life, and other interesting tid bits about the UCGG in Brazil. There recent Ukrainian Orthodox Church post in the Town Hall section. Perhaps you could offer some details.

Are there still any UGCC or Orthodox churches left in Paraguay and Uruguay ?

Dear Hritzko,
In Paraguay the Ukie Orthodox are doing fairly well, although after speaking with Kyr Jeremiah of the UAOC here in Brazil a few weeks ago there seems to be a split amongst them and a few of the Ukie Paraguayans want to be part of the Ukie Orthodox Church Kyivan Patriarchate. The Ukie Greek Catholics in Paraguay are in a smaller number.
I don't believe that there are any Ukie parishes in Uruguay, at least I've never heard of any.
Kyr Jeremiah of the UAOC in Brazil is a very nice person, I would say a "people's bishop".
He says I sing well.
Lauro

Dear Friends,

I simply don't see what a new Kyivan government will have to do with establishing a UGCC patriarchate!

Are the Ukrainian Orthodox united in wishing that we have a patriarchate?

And, Hritzko, what more do you need to see that Rome will NEVER affirm a UGCC patriarchate?

Are you like the optimist who, when sent into a room full of horse dung, continued to dig through it all in search of a pony?

There is no pony anywhere in the far-flung horse dung coming from the Vatican toward our Church, Big Guy!

And our people are highly unlikely to do anything about the fact.

And if you join the UAOC in protest against Rome, I don't think too many others of the UGCC would join you!

Alex

Dear Alex,
I read an article last Thursday or Friday from a KP source that questioned Cardinal Kasper's actions and defended the UGCC saying that we should have at least been invited to participate in the talks. The KP's may not exactly be very keen on a UGCC Patriarchate but I've seen no official protests on their part. Maybe they're saying somethinng like: "Well, if the Melkites have a Patriarchate Why can't the Greek Catholics?" I haven't seen any obscene language or gestures from the KP's nor the UAOC. I believe that the majority of the people's dreams is to have one united Ukie Church headed by a Ukie Patriarch.
The issue of the next presidential elections in Ukraine and the outcome of it, in reality does play an important role of church unity and there's no doubt about that either.
Imagine a government that all of a sudden says that the MP's no longer play ball in official state affairs. This is something for them to worry about and seriously.
Lauro

I agree that giving the Vatican more chances to establish a UGCC Patriarchate is pointles - the cards have all been played. I was just being polite. . Patriarch Husar has now openly stated that there is no more time Mr Vatican.

We should also refrain from villifying Cardinal Kasper (me included). He is doing his job in executing the Vatican's long term goals of unifying all Christians into one church. If we spend our precious resources trying to have him removed, the Vatican' curia will simply replace him with another individual who will simply want to execute the same 'master plan'.

Since two cardinals (Kasper & Husar) in the Catholic church are giving the Pope conflicting recommendations, then the Pope can be said to be doing his job by remaining neutral. A father never wants to favour one son over another.

Now it's up to our UGCC bishops to do their job and declare a Patriarchate. Their next synod can only have one item on the agenda with one outcome. If there is Basillian, Brazillian, Jamaican, other type of resistance - the public will be made known of the fact. Let your imagination go from there.

Victor Yustchenko, the presidential wannabee, if elected will ensure that the UGCC patriarchate is established. He will go so far as to put Rome on the spot - in a very public way (ie: are the needs of the Polish Roman Catholics in Siberia and the pseudo Russian Orthodox more important than those of Ukrainians ?).

Let's face it, the only reason the ROC has this global influence and illusion of power is because they get the full support of President Putin of Russia and his ex-KGB cronnies. The president of Ukraine FEARS his ex-KGB neighboor and will never openly support the UGCC over the ROC. The fear is in fact highly suspected to be 'blackmail', but that's for another thread.

It should also be made clear that Yustchenko does not want to establish in Ukraine a ROC model (ie: difficult to tell where then lines are between the church, the secret police, communists-turned-businessmen, communists, etc...). Yustchenko's Christian Democratic government would like to establish a fair playing field for Christian Churches in Ukraine. Not one favorable to those who collaborated and continue to work with communists, and another for those who resisted and continue to resist the communist (and their members turned 'businessmen-mafiosa).

Although the UOC may not be openly suporting the UGCC Patriarchate, the fact that they are not against it is a tacit form of approval. Nobody could expect Patriarch Filaret to do much else.

The fact that the UAOC is in support of it, is indicative of the fact that they would join a church under the leadership of Patriarch Husar. These are all clear signs of a new super church emerging.

Does anyone know when the next UGCC bishop's synod will be held and where ?

Dear Lauro,

No one is denying that our churches are getting along famously now in Ukraine.

The idea of one Church headed by a Ukie patriarch is nice - the issue is that the UGCC or many parts of it would insist that that patriarch be in union with Rome.

It would also be nice to have a Kyivan government that is supportive of Ukrainian church autonomy and the like.

That is still a big "IF."

But even if that occurred and the government was supportive of the Ukrainian church - and even if the government were to ask Rome to affirm a UGCC patriarchate, let us say - that still does not mean that Rome will acknowledge it.

Rome would then have an even greater argument AGAINST acknowledging that patriarchate - that the government or secular, nationally-oriented forces are getting mixed up in church affairs.

And His Beatitude Lubomyr has said he would not welcome government involvement in church affairs - something Hritzko assumes is a 'given.'

And, frankly, a UGCC patriarchate will NOT change the way business is done in our Church by very much.

Rome would still keep a tight grip on our Church throughout the diaspora etc.

In terms of their powers, EC patriarchates do not compare in the least to their Orthodox counterparts.

What you and Hritzko (and me) and others here would like from a patriarchate is something that only an ORTHODOX patriarchate can provide.

If you want to talk about a united Orthodox patriarch of Kyiv, then, I say, let's talk.

Alex

Dear Alex,
What you are refering to is very delicate talk indeed. The question is: Are our bishops willing to say "Buvaite zdorovij" to Rome? To be honest with you I think some of them would have no problem in doing so, but than again there are the others. I guess we just have to sit back and see what cards are going to be played.
Lauro