www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Patriarchy

This is a good point and no quibble at all.

In current canon law (like it or not) there are different "levels" of sui iuris Churches.

Patriarchal churches elect their own patriarchs. The election is announced immediately and afterwards the new patriarch requests (and invariably receives) "ecclesiastical communion" from the Pope. An example of this is the recent election of the new Maronite Patriarch Béchara Boutros (Raï).

Major archiepiscopal churches elect their own major archbishops. The election, however, is only announced after it has been confirmed by the Pope. An example of this is the recent election of the new Ukrainian Archbishop Sviatoslav (Shevchuk). There is another election coming up very soon in the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church in India following the recent death of Archbishop Mar Varkey (Cardinal Vithayathil).

Metropolitan churches, such as the Byzantine Catholic Church in the United States, do not elect their own metropolitans. Instead, the Council of Hierarchs prepares a list of three names which is sent to Rome. In Rome, it is the Congregation for the Eastern Churches and ultimately the Pope who chooses the new Metropolitan. This, inevitably, takes time.

In other words, metropolitan churches are not fully self-governing in the same way as patriarchal and (to a slightly lesser extent) major archiepiscopal churches.

There is a very good study by Chorbishop John D. Faris entitled Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution and Governance (Brooklyn, St. Maron [stmaron.org], 1992) which explains all this much better.

Yes. That's one of the many reason I favor Kyivan reunion.

The head of the Byzantine Catholic Church in America is not a Major Archbishop and this means a different approach to replacing the Metropolitan.

Exactly. That's what I just said

I do understand our present situation. Our as in BCC. What I wonder is this, would we not be better off under at Eastern Catholic Patriarch?

Perhaps the long-term goal should be the creation of an American Byzantine Catholic patriarchate?

And may God have mercy on our souls!

Oh, dear. I'm not old enough for this to be happening . . .

That was my initial reaction, too, and then I looked to see if it was an old post, because . . . with the transfer of Bishop William and his replacement with Bishop Dino, I at some point added that Bishop Basil was installed at the same time--instead of having passed.

So since Bishop Basil succeeded, uhh, himself, the Pittsburgh see wasn't vacant, leading me to wonder who else could possibly consider merging with the Ukrainians . . .

*ouch*

Anyway, a merger in the US of the Ukrainians and the PM seems impractical and then some: the Ukrainians, as far as I can tell, are joyfully ethnic, while the PM now has a small Ruthenian minority, at least inthis part of the country.

The second mouse, however, gets the cheese!

No.

So, I guess we simply take our lumps and let it go at that. I understand.

I personally see the Ruthenian Church as on the cusp of something wonderful. I pray our new Metropolitan will lead us into a new spring time of growth, Liturgical renewal, return to our Orthodox Traditions, the planting of new monastic communities, and support greater cooperation with our fellow Byzantines both Orthodox and Catholic.

Perhaps, I am too optimistic but I do believe and pray it happens!

Hopefully one day there will be greater unity within the various Greek Catholics jurisdictions in this country.

Thank you.

This is a wonderful vision for the future. Pray God it may come to pass.

I was going to say "What are the prospects of the two metropolias merging and becoming a major archepiscopal church?" but your idea is even better.