www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News New Coadjutor for Ukrainians in Brazil

My freinds,
Thoughts in my head have been spinning. To be honest with all of you. We in Brazil are not supposed to know who the new bishop is going to be until Sunday Dec.14th during the liturgy. All the parishes are going to make the announcement after the liturgy. I got to know before hand from this forum, and after I finish writing all of this I'm going to sit next to the phone and call everybody I know. (Now that's a real kill-joy isn't it?).
To be honest with you people I do not know what to say, nor do I know what to think and I can't do much about it anyway. All I can do is pray that he be a good bishop.
I always have been willing to cooperate even with Basilians (I can't believe I'm saying this)but some of them could be really nice (small percentage though).
Let's see what happens, and please pray for our Ukie Church in Brazil and for me likewise. (I'm going to need it).
Lauro

Good morning Dear Alex:

Thank you for stopping by! (Where have you been hiding?)

Again, I would like to assure you of my unequivocal support for a patriarchal status of the UGCC, not only because it IS the largest of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

However, I think there are things needed sorting out in the Patriarchal See that Rome prefers to be done before an official recognition of such status is publicly announced.

My previous post was made in consonance with the current state of affairs: Rome has immediate and direct jurisdiction over non-Patriarchal sui juris Eastern Catholic Churches, Major Archbishoprics like the UGCC included, at least as far as the appointment of Eparchs in the diaspora is concerned.

I think this set-up speaks more for the organizational integrity of the Catholic Communion rather than an encroachment on the rights of sui juris Churches.

(BTW, the Papal Nuncio IS the "eyes and ears" of the Pope!)

AmdG

Keep in mind that the rights of a Patriarch to govern are not only not absolute, they actually have some significant limitations. Outside of the territories historically subject to the governance of a Patriarch, his de jure jurisdiction is limited to matters liturgical.

In all other respects, exempt canonical jurisdictions (those outside the historical reaches of the presiding hierarch's jurisdiction)are theoretically subject to the Congregation for the Eastern Churches. De facto, the Ordinaries of such jurisdictions frequently find ways in which to subtly sidestep such without being in actual disobedience, and it's generally overlooked by Rome (or Rome is oblivious to it) because the issues involved aren't sufficiently substantive to merit their concern.

So, even in Patriarchal Churches, candidates for episcopal offices in Sees of the diaspora are selected/nominated by the Holy Snyod, but the selection is technically made by Rome.

Many years,

Neil

Dear Neil:

Thanks for outlining the procedural practice obtaining in the Patriarchal Churches.

And, if I may add, the APPOINTMENT of a Patriarch (in any of the Patriarchal Churches) devolves upon the Pope where an impasse is reached, as in the Chaldean case, in accordance with the Eastern Code of Canons.

However, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, chose NOT to exercise such prerogative and allowed the Holy Synod of the Chaldean Church to meet in Rome and elect from among themselves the Patriarch!

AmdG

Dear Neil and Amado,

Well, however Rome would like to "play it" we Ukies just don't find it acceptable.

Some of our theologians have even posited the creation of a Ukrainian Catholic "Catholicosate" for the very reasons you give via the limitations.

Someone should tell Patriarch Lubomyr since he and his Patriarchal Synod have been appointing bishops AS IF he had every right to.

He appointed Bishop Stephen for Toronto two years ago and Rome then "approved" it just recently.

Such bureaucratic limitations were not outlined in the 33 points of the Union of Brest, they came with the "union package" later.

But if this is how Rome envisions "unity" with the Orthodox, then Rome should forget it altogether. The East will never agree to such jurisdictional meddling in its affairs and we Ukies have "come of age" in this respect as well.

As for the Eastern Congregation, that relic of the oppressive Roman past should have gone the way of the dinosaurs long ago.

It is an institution that has gone way past its "best before" date and is simply an example of enduring Roman effrontery toward the Eastern Churches.

Rome can create as much bureaucracy as it likes.

Don't mind us Ukies if we choose to ignore it.

And the next time Rome looks so innocently toward the Orthodox Churches and says, "What can we do to make unity a reality?" - how about treating some of your Eastern Churches that already have the honour of shouldering the Roman Yoke (sorry, I meant to say "Union") with Particular respect.

Rome shouldn't delimit Patriarchal authority among the EC's as it likes.

And if it believes it can do so, then no wonder I hear the kinds of things that Orthoman would say but from Ukrainian Catholics.

Alex

Dear Amado,

Yes, I'm grateful to my brother Neil for outlining the procedural practices as well!

I'm happy you are so fond of them.

And since I'm home now, I have less time to spend on the internet than when I was "busy" at work . . .

Alex

Dear Alex:

I think your (domestic) situation mirrors UGCC's coming home to the Catholic Communion.

As I have heard before, in union there is strength!

However, one or the other has to call the shots!

AmdG

Dear Amigo Amado,

It could be . . .

But Rome should still learn that if it "butted out" of the internal affairs of the Eastern Churches, that will help, not hinder, ecumenism with the East.

Alex

Dear Amado,

I remember when Patriarch Slipyj was alive what the protocol was for new bishops appointed by Rome for our church.

Rome would ignore the Patriarch and appoint candidates over his head.

But the candidates grew wise and when they received the appointment, travelled to Rome to seek the blessing of the Patriarch - which he always gave.

Those few candidates who refused to ask for the Patriarch-Confessor's blessing were shunned by many of their flock and their work was made difficult by them. I am thinking of three in particular . . .

There were some discordant notes at our new bishop's consecration since he seemed not to care about Eastern sensitivities concerning some aspects of the rites - that were later raised here by others, I won't raise them again.

Alex

Well I guess I will finally have the opportunity to see our Patriarch. I guess he'll be coming down here pretty soon to do what has to be done.
Maybe I'll get a chance to talk to him, maybe he'll bring Kyr Hlib Lonchena with him (That would be nice).
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

He's a very nice and approachable man.

Don't be afraid to insist on greeting him and asking for his blessing with a kiss on his hand etc.

You can use that opportunity to ask for some Studites for Brazil!

Alex

I'll be sure to do that. Maybe I'll be able to get a couple of photos of both of us together.
Lauro

Dear Lauro,

That is great.

Just remember to leave his beard alone . . .

Alex

Dear Lauro:

I echo what Alex said. Very nice and approachable. (Of course I'm biasedsince he and I belong to the same Plast fraternity.)

I would add that he appears to be genuinely interested in talking to the people in a "town hall" type of setting. The one we had here in Chicago was quite interesting.

Yours,

hal

I used to belong to "CYM", I hope he doesn't mind.
We used to be a noisy bunch as I'm sure you know, especially if we over did it on the booze.
Lauro