www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Presov and Mukachevo eparchies have new bishops

Both eparchies are very much against being part of the Ukrainian Catholic Synod of Bishops. Asking the cardinal archbishop to consecrate would have really cause an ethnic brouhaha.

Which synod should they belong to? Neither are part of the Ukrainian Catholic Church in Ukraine and the cardinal archbishop is not their chief hierarch. One can make a reasonable argument that the Eparchy of Mukachevo should belong to the Ukrainian synod since it now lies within the border of Ukraine. The Eparchy of Presov does not since it is in Slovakia. Many ethnic Slovaks would never accept being under the jurisdiction of the Ukrainians. Maybe this is why the whole thing was done in Rome? Can you imagine the Canadian Council of Catholic Bishops being made part of the United States Council of Catholic Bishops? Or the Ukrainian Catholic Church in America being broken from Kiev and made part of a non-ethnic Byzantine Catholic Church in America?

I think the reality of the situation is far more complex that it appears.

EEEEK !!! !!!

dear Admin: I beg you Please! I NEVER SUGGESTED that His Beatitude Patriarch Lubomyr do the ordination!

If by "Herbingy" you mean me?

I said quite the Contrary - that they should be ordained by the chief hierarch of their own Church and the other eparchs of their Holy Synod.

And last I check, the Slovak Greco-Catholic Church was its own Autonomous Church & not part of the Kyivan Church, n'est-ce pas?

Besides which His Beatitude Patiarch Lubomyr is a member of an entirely Other Autonomous Church, though the 2 Churches use the same rite.

Herb

The polemic problems of the Prjashev Eparchy have nothing to do with the Greek Catholic Church of Ukraine. The problem is that the true ethnic Slovaks of the Prjashev Eparchy are very few, and have been using politics to gain control of an Ruthenian/Rusyn Eparchy for decades. If this wasn't the case, then why did that the late Eparch, Pavlo Gojdich constantly complain to Rome about the mistreatment of the Ruthenian/Rusyn majority by the Slovak chauvanists who were a minority? The Slovak chauvanists blocked the appointment of Vasyl Hopko as the rightful successor of Bishop Gojdich. Since the 1960's, there have been on going problems in the Prjashev Eparchy due to these Slovak chavanists. The problems certainly continued under the leadership of Jan Hirka. These eparchial problems will continue until the the chauvanistic policies end. I hope the newly-concecrated bishop will correct these problems.

Herb,

Thanks for pointing out my typo. It was Brian who made the comment I was responding to. I misread the name on the post and apologize.

There is only one other Byzantine Catholic eparhcy in Slovakia (Kosice). The bishop of Pre�ov is chief hierarch of their own Church and the other eparchs of their Holy Synod. Maybe it would have made more sense for the retiring bishop to consecrate his successor?

--

Ung-Certez,

I am unclear on your post. How do you think that the consecrations should have been handled?

Admin

So much for larger Slavic Greek Catholic unity. I suppose it is their choice to continue to be consecrated by Rome instead of participating in a Slavic Greek Catholic synod and consecrated by a Slavic Greek Catholic patriarch.

We should worry less about some exaggerated "ethnic brew-haha" and more about Christian and Greek Catholic ecclesial unity. I don't think this is the appropriate path of Orthodoxy in communion with Rome. I understand that the Greek Catholic Archieratikon was not followed for these consecrations.

The consecration of a Bishop is, of course, an act of the continuation of apostolic succession. This is the setting aside of the bishop as the chief shepherd for his people. This role includes the bishop being the chief ecclesiarch for the people of his eparchy. As chief ecclesiarch he should be installed within the tradition of himself and his people. How can he be the liturgical father of his eparchy otherwise?

This would have been such a wonderful opportunity for the Ruthenian Greek Catholic people to have experienced, witnessed and been able to utter their "Axios" to a hierarchical consecration for their own shepherd in their own tradition. No, it was done outside of the homeland of the people, in a rite foreign to their tradition. No "axios" was uttered, they were not presented by the archdeacon of their church, etc. etc.

These consecrations llustrate a reality, not a "complexity". Small sui iuris churches devoid of patriarchal structure are completely dependent on Rome. They are even occasionally still treated like Roman bishops when consecrated. They can dress up in whatever vestments they wish but in this case they participated in a Roman Catholic consecration service. Right or wrong, agree or disagree, that is the reality.

No one has ever asked or requested them to join the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The consecration could have at least been done in Grottoferrata, the Russicom or some other Byzantine chapel in the environs of Rome out of respect for the Byzantine hierarchs. It could have been done in Presov by Patriarch Ignatios and co-consecrators from the Eastern Congregation in the rite of the bishops to be consecrated if they are so frightened of Patriarch Lubomyr.

And with regards to this so-called "brew-haha" , while not minimizing ethnic differences please remember that Blessed Theodore Romzha had no problem keeping both his Ruthenian identity, taking great care of his faithful of Uzhorod-Mukachevo while participating fully in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Synod and fully supporting Metropolitan Sheptytsky. I don't recall Metropolitan Sheptytsky ever asking him to prostrate and kiss a tryzub.

"because I know there probably would have an ethnic brouhaha if the Ukrainian Cardinal Archbishop of Kiev"...please. Our Synod has elected him Patriarch. You may continue to use Latinized terms for your own hierarchy, but please respect ours and our desire to establish a patriarchal church truly sui iuris in communion with Rome.

And it should be remembered also that Metropolitan Sheptytsky attempted to make use of other Greek Catholic hierarchs, including Bishop Dionisii Nyaradi of Krizhevtci, Bishop Mikhail Mirov of Bulgaria, etc. to have consecrations performed when ethnic sensitivities were to be considered. In the case of Exarch Leonid Federov, he had Bulgarian Bishop Mikhail Mirov perform the ordination so as not to offend Russian/Ukrainian sensitivities.

Sorry, but I guess I am taking the "glass half-empty" approach to these consecrations. I am happy that hierarchs have been appointed and consecrated, please don't get me wrong there. Mnohaja i Blahaya Lita to the new hierarchs!

But if we are to identify ourselves as Greek Catholics, and demand respect for our traditions and sui iuris status as Greek Catholics, that respect from Rome has to be instilled at every level, ecclesially and liturgically, down from the top. I think some opportunities were missed on this occasion.

Diak,

With all due respect my choice of words was not because I am a hopeless latinized Byzantine Catholic. The reality of the situation is that the Ukrainian synod does not have the authority to elect a patriarch. It needs confirmation by others in the Church. In a united Church it would fall to the patriarchal synod of Constantinople to allow this. In the current structure it would fall to Rome to raise him to the rank of patriarch. Obedience and order in the Church are important.

I support the creation of a Ukrainian patriarchate in Kiev. Electing a patriarch and calling him a patriarch doesn't make him one. It needs to be done properly.

Likewise, I support a Byzantine Catholic patriarch for the United States. I would take all of the ethnic jurisdictions and form them into one patriarchate. We're not going back to Europe to live. It's time we began the task of converting America to Byzantine Catholicism. Let's build our home here, not there.

Admin

Dear Administrator, with all due respect the historic form of ecclesial governance in the Eastern Churches has been patriarchal. And with respect to the Kyivan or any other patriarchate, if we are to return to being fully Orthodox in communion with Rome, that includes return to synodal government.

I can appreciate your concern for adherence to canon law written by Romans for non-Romans, and I do not wish to ignore nor disparage canon law but we must continue to grow and reclaim our full identity as Orthodox in communion with Rome.

Are you advocating an American or English-speaking patriarchate? Very interesting...and in terms of being "here" verses "there" I would remind you that most Melkites are happy with their patriarchal situation.

But these patriarchal questions are completely tangential to the issue at hand, and the focus of this thread, i.e. the consecrations. A Byzantine bishop shouldn't have to be consecrated in a Roman service.

An opportunity was missed for these bishops to receive the "axios" of their people. In fact the "axios" of the people was ignored. If they are to serve as authentic Byzantine bishops, they should receive the chierotonia in their own church in their own rite in front of their own people. This goes beyond just liturgical considerations and includes communal considerations as well.

"Like it or not you are not in the same position as the cradle Orthodox who participate here. Any criticism of Byzantine Catholicism you offer must be well thought out and substantiated and presented without a hint of judgmentalism. Otherwise it will be seen as bitterness."

As a Byzantine priest I find myself fully in agreement with the points brought up by Tony. Our Church is all too willing to compromise in its liturgical and theological patrimony just to look good or to get 'ordained by the Pope' (wow!) I find the administrator's comments regarding cradle orthodox as insulting! The insinuation that being born Orthodox gives one the upper hand in understanding Orthodoxy is preposterous!!! Let us not resort to pedigrees and birth rights otherwise we might as well be living under a caste system. I support Tony in his statements and no I do not find them offensive or bitter. I find his comments to stem from a deep passion and understanding of our Tradition and Theology...don't knock it!!!!

Dear Mr. Administrator,
What could Slovaks and Ukrainians be holding against a mountain range?

Please, the name for the people I believe you were trying to refer to, in their own language, is Rusyny or Rusnaci. I don't know how that can be translated as "Carpathians" but I am not going to call into question your linguistic knowledge. You clearly are very well-versed in most other topics you discuss here.

Nevertheless, since you have here claimed in the past to be proud to partake in that particular heritage, it remains for you to demonstrate that by naming it. Nobody will fault you for picking a name, whether it is Carpatho-Russian, Ruthenian, Rusyn-Ukrainian, Slavish, Ugrorusski, what have you. But "Carpathians" are mountains--and most of their geographic zone is not the land of the Rusyny/Rusnaci.

And if Diak, Two Lungs, Herbigny, et al. believe that the Eparchy of Presov is some sort of Ukrainian Church, I encourage you all to go there sometime and see it for yourself. Start at the Cathedral on Main street in Presov. If you think that there is any chance of that Eparchy or the Exarchate of Kosice becoming part of the patriarchal Ukrainian Catholic Church, see what happens online at http://grkat.nfo.sk (e.g., http://msg.nfo.sk/viewtopic.php?t=49&sid=0628eb13c2b85b4bea48186a8a3166f5 or http://msg.nfo.sk/viewtopic.php?t=63&sid=0628eb13c2b85b4bea48186a8a3166f5 ) or
at the eparchy's official site discussion forum, http://www.grkatpo.sk/forum/?zobrazit=miestnosti&PHPSESSID=27c582ad85ad5700ece27c29 ae1742ba [grkatpo.sk] , when any national feeling other than Slovak is dared to be expressed -- the poster is shouted down. (Unless it's a "rusin" with lowercase letters who admits this identity but excuses himself by declaring how the Slovak language is the only appropriate one for use in the church or society.)

For what it's worth, at its heart the consecration in Rome was completely appropriate except perhaps for the Presov eparchial bishop -- even the new apostolic administrator of Mukachevo is canonically a Latin Catholic, remember.

But finally, I agree with the Administrator that the plurality of liturgical Traditions in a territory (or parallel jurisdictions of different Traditions, in its modern phenomenon) is at its root an anomaly. Even though all bishops are equal (at least in Orthodox theology), the Pope is not only the Patriarch of the West, he is also universal pontiff and in this he stands above all particular Churches. In that role, why should it matter which ritual is used to consecrate a bishop? Whoever the Pope is should use the ritual appropriate to his native Tradition. And if the Pope is and is reasonably expected to be a Latin Catholic, then what's wrong with what happened? If His Beatitude Ljubomyr is accepted by the universal Church as Patriarch of the Ukrainian Church / of Kyiv, wouldn't it be wonderful if he might occasionally serve as the chief consecrator for new Roman Catholic bishops in Ukraine?

What's wrong with being consecrated in your own country for your own people? In your own liturgical tradition? Regardless of where that is? Just asking.

And Lemko, it has been pointed out numerous times before that the Eparchies of Krizhevtci and Macedonia have had very close relations with and been members of the Ukrainian Catholic Synod without losing any of their own ethnic or ecclesial identity. No one is forcing anyone to become Ukrainian. That's just silly.

There's nothing wrong with it at all. In my mind, that is absolutely preferable. But the fact remains that to be consecrated by the Pope is considered to be a great honor, not just for the bishop himself, but for the entire eparchy/Church he represents.

Without arguing my views or the points you are making, I'm just emphasizing how un-Ukrainian (not anti-Ukrainian) the Eparchy of Presov is. Most of the people are Slovaks, and like other Slovaks in Slovakia, their (perceived) affinity with Ukraine and Ukrainians is almost nil. And I guarantee that any talk of becoming part of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church would mean to them that they would be forced to "become" Ukrainians. Which is about the same reaction most American (Ruthenian) Byzantine Catholics would have to such a proposal. They know nothing about Ukraine or Ukrainians and have no interest in such. The Administrator was making this point too, I believe. And I agree with his assessment.

Administrator,

Thanks for being more or less succinct. It was quite na�ve of me to imagine that I could have the same privileges as an anonymous BC or cradle-Orthodox poster! I should know that the rules of this game are preconceived notions, stereotyping and caricaturizations.

Live long and prosper!

Reader Anthony

Friends,

Do not forget our Holy Fathers the Apostles and Teachers of the Slavs, SS. Cyril and Methodius were ordained bishops in Rome, by the Pope, probably according to Latin ritual, possibly without particiaption of other Byzantine bishops.

In Christ,
Lance

Cyril was made monk and died in Rome, Methodius was made bishop.

I agree. The reality of the situation, however, is that it needs to be accomplished properly. Self-proclamation isn't really the way to go. It is not a matter of my preference for canons written for us by Romans. If you have been reading the Forum you know that this is not my position.

Yes, I am advocating an American patriarchate for all Byzantine Catholics. If one advocates strongly for a patriarchal form of ecclesial governance in Ukraine it only makes sense to argue for one here in the United States.

I agree. It would be a great honor to be consecrated bishop by such a holy man as Pope John Paul II. But the Byzantine rite of consecration should have been used in a Byzantine liturgy.

--

Dear Fr. Eliyahu,

Thank you for your post. My comments had nothing to do with a cradle having an upper hand in understanding Orthodoxy. I was merely pointing out that since Tony had made a conscious decision to formally move from Byzantine Catholicism to the Orthodox Church in America (because of his negative experiences in our Church) that anything negative he says about our Church will automatically be considered suspect by many Byzantine Catholics. A non-church example would be the employee who has a bad experience at one company and then moves to another. Even if he does not mean to be overcritical about his former employer anything negative he says about the former employer will carry heavier negative connotations than it should. That is human nature.

I have previously wished Tony well on his chosen path and continue to do so.

--

LR,
If I were to use the terms and spelling you suggest you would be happy but others would be upset. If I use "Carpatho-Russian" people complain because the heritage is not really Russian. If I use "Ruthenian" people complai because it is a Latin word. I have not used "Rusyn-Ukrainian" because there are significant numbers who will complain about the term "Ukrainian" not being proper. And when I used to use "Rusyn" people used to complain either that I was spelling it incorrectly or that they preferred another term. Therefore, I use the term Carpathian to cover everyone who lives in that region since there is no pleasing everyone no matter what term one uses. No matter what term one uses someone is going to object!

Exactly. The governance structure for Ukraine should have a patriarch as its head and it should be he who would enthrone all bishops in that country - Byzantine and Latin.

--

Not the rules of the game but just the realities of life. It has nothing to do with privileges. Since you have formally chosen to leave our household for another anything you say will always be interpreted with the knowledge that you chose to leave us. Members of the OCA would behave the same way to someone from their jurisdiction who transfers to our Byzantine Catholic jurisdiction. It has nothing to do with you. It is human nature. It would be the same situation for anyone moving from one jurisdiction to another. Please see my post to Fr. Eliyahu.