Horizons (the newspaper of the Eparchy of Parma of the Ruthenians) just posted this. What happened to Bishop John Pazak?

Pope Francis Names Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted As Apostolic Administrator of the Byzantine Eparchy of Phoenix

August 1, 2018

WASHINGTON—Pope Francis has appointed the Most Reverend Thomas J. Olmsted, as the Apostolic Administrator Sede Plena of the Holy Protection of Mary Byzantine Catholic eparchy of Phoenix. Bishop Olmsted will also retain his current Office as Bishop of the Diocese of Phoenix.

The announcement was publicized in Washington on August 1, 2018 by Archbishop Christophe Pierre, apostolic nuncio to the United States.

Bishop Olmsted has served as the fourth Bishop of the Diocese of Phoenix since December 20, 2003.

Prior to his arrival in Phoenix, Bishop Olmsted served as Bishop of Wichita, Kansas from 2001-2003, after being ordained Coadjutor Bishop on April 20, 1999. Before serving in Wichita, he served as the Rector and President of the Pontifical College Josephinum, a Catholic Seminary in Columbus, Ohio. Since 1974, Bishop Olmsted has been a member of the Jesus Caritas ­fraternity of priests. He was ordained a priest for the Diocese of Lincoln, Neb., July 2, 1973.

For 16 years, Bishop Olmsted lived in Rome, where he obtained a master’s degree in theology and a doctorate in Canon Law from the Pontifical Gregorian University (1981) and worked more than nine years as an official in the Vatican Secretariat of State from 1979 to 1988. During his time in Rome, he was also an assistant spiritual director at the Pontifical North American College.

Bishop Olmsted is currently a member of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities.

The Holy Protection of Mary Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix (formerly known as the Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Van Nuys) is the Catholic eparchy (diocese) governing most Byzantine Ruthenian Catholics in the Western United States. The Eparchy's territorial jurisdiction consists of thirteen Western States. Currently, Holy Protection Eparchy of Phoenix has 19 parishes and one mission under its canonical jurisdiction.

The diocese of Phoenix, Arizona comprises 43,967 square miles. It has a total population of 4,734,036 people of which 1,188,243 or 25 percent, are Catholic.

---
Keywords: Pope Francis, Archbishop Christophe Pierre, apostolic nuncio, Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, Holy Protection of Mary Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix, Diocese of Phoenix, Byzantine Ruthenian Catholics.

Still waiting for clarification. No official announcements say anything about Bp. Pazak at all. Bp. Olmstead is Ap. Admin. "sede plena" but I don't know Latin so I have to rely on Google Translate.

Means the Apostolic Administrator has full power in the Eparchy.

That is what I figured. Thanks.

Actually, «sede plena» means that the bishop’s seat is not empty, opposite of «sede vacante». In other words an apostolic administrator «sede plena» takes over for the bishop who remains in office but is not able to carry out his duties for some reason. So Pavel Ivanovich is basically right

Incredibly the communication manages to make no mention of him. Rather it functions primarily to publicize the Latin Diocese of Phoenix and its bishop. Bishop Pazak is but he isn't? I think it's well past time for our church leaders to learn and practice transparency. What inept communication.

Links:
- https://www.byzcath.org/index.php/n...ator-of-the-byzantine-eparchy-of-phoenix (provides more details)
- https://dphx.org/pope-francis-names...tor-of-the-byzantine-eparchy-of-phoenix/ (press release at Diocese of Phoenix)

Thank you Bishop Olmsted (and John) for this explanation.

I am happy not to be informed about problems in our Metropolitan Church as they are being resolved. I am not happy to be informed about those problems in this way.

Is the Metropolitan church really so dysfunctional that they need an administrator appointed from Rome? What's going on?

This news report explains it all.

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...tine-eparchy-77863#.W2IUX8oXQw8.facebook

Oh my, dear. It's 2018. Isn't it time for the Ruthenians, Ukrainians, Melkites and other eparchies of Byzantine rite Catholics in the United States and Canada to unite into one North American jurisdiction, use a common liturgical English translation and praxis akin to our Orthodox brothers and sisters, and peacefully get on with the more serious task of Evangelization. The Holy Spirit is not going to bring this about; only serious, devote and holy bishops, imbued with the Holy Spirit will. Get on with it. The faithful are waiting now and unto ages of ages.

Akin to our Orthodox brothers and sisters? They have none of the things you named, sometimes even in the same jurisdiction. Which should clue you in to why we don’t either.

Well, I guess I was thinking of the OCA. They're not perfect, but at least they are trying to get over this ethnic hump that hampers us all, IMHO. In any case, I find it scandalous and evangelically counter productive.

I'm not sure that amalgamation of the ECs is a good thing, but evangelization is critical and the different ECs largely fail at it.

My immediate reaction was that this looks like the first millennium role of Rome that Orthodox speak of . . . a bishop has a dispute with th head bishop of his church, which made it to the civil courts. If Rome can handle this successfully, maybe it is a sign of hope.


The church formerly known as Ruthenian seems long past that . . .

hawk

So, my eparchy (guided by my bishop?) is suing my metropolitan as a co-defendant, and is claiming that its sister eparchies essentially stole money from it, and is asserting that our Maronite and Melkite brothers and sisters have different religious beliefs than we do. So a Latin bishop is being named to run my eparchy indefinitely.

Can’t figure out if I’m more upset at Met. William for letting something like this spiral out of control to such a degree or my own eparchy for alienating Melkites and Maronites that way.

The worst part of being an Eastern Catholic is not being unwilling to stand on our own feat within the Catholic communion, it is being unable to.

Forgive me, an outsider, for some observations.

It seems from these two paragraphs that there is a misunderstanding about the nature of the benefit program that the eparchy entered. Rather than a program of commercial insurance, it appears to be a self-insured program that involves a number of Eastern Catholic eparchies. Self-insurance programs are not uncommon in business. Sometimes self-insuring can be less expensive in the long run, given the risk assessments made, than commercial insurance where other entities are added to the pool of participants--some of whom may have members with much greater risks than a given business entity and similar businesses.

Somehow the benefits manager may not have understood what was being purchased and therein may be the root of the problem.

The theory of insurance is that members are in a "pool" where we share risks. This year I may need to tap the pool and others may not. They share my burden. Likewise next year someone else may need help and I do not but share his/her burden. The same assumption is made whether the insurance is commercial or a self-insured pool.

In no way is an insurance premium, whether in a commercial policy or in a self-insured program, a savings account that accumulates for the benefit of the person or entity that has paid the premium. The premium is a gamble, if you will, for a given period. I bet that I will need lots of benefits and the company or the self-insured pool bets I won't. At the end of a given period, a new premium is needed. Seldom is there an accounting of what was paid out and what was retained. There is always some part built in for the person(s) who administer the plan, whether commercial or self-insured program.

I'm taking a wild guess--my own--that the trouble comes because the eparchy feels that it was defrauded in some way. Either it did not understand that the plan was not commercial or it somehow feels that being self-insured means that it is putting money away for itself alone. If the insurance company didn't tell it what kind of program this is, that may arise to fraud: the lawyers will sort that out. If it was suddenly switched form commercial to a self-insured pool without a transparent explanation--again something the lawyers must sort out.

However, if the eparchy received the coverage that they were expecting for its employees, it will be hard to find a claim for some sort of refund just because they felt that others benefited from their pooled premiums.

Bob

I had the exact same impression that you did, Bob. The Law360 article goes into a bit more detail:

To me it's significant that Met. William was named as a co-defendant. I am not certain about the timing of his appointment vs when this plan was entered into by the eparchy, beyond the fact that they happened in the same year and he is apparently part of the "administration committee" of the plan in question.

If it was under his guidance that the plan was entered into by the eparchy, clearly there has since developed a breakdown of leadership and communication of significant scope to have led to these events.

Very sad.

Thank you, Bishop Olmsted, for telling us what is happening in our own Church. Unfortunately, our bishops do not have this much respect for us. They chase people away with their actions and then condemn them for leaving.

This may amount to fraud, but, again, the lawyers will sort this out. Full disclosure is always the best way to go.

What I find disturbing is the idea that the money would be "held in trust." That is puzzling because that is not how insurance works.

The other thing that I find disturbing is why anyone would agree to a "joint checking account." I wouldn't have a joint account with anyone other than my spouse because of a number of legal issues that go along with a joint account. Seen too many people cleaned out of joint accounts by their own children in my work, so that's where I come from.

An "understanding"? What's not on paper and signed andor notarized means nothing.

We have a saying in my family--Never Trust; Verify.

Bob