www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West UGCC Patriarch Lubomyr - Greek Catholics - East & West

"all the Rus" works fine in French, Italian, and perhaps some other languages - but it does not work in English. "Kyiv and All Rus" refers to geography, not to demographics. "All Ireland" can be found on a map; "all the Irish" are all over the world these days.

Fr. Serge

Yes, it would be very interesting to know what his Beatitude thinks about difference between Orthodox and Greek Catholics

If his previous interviews (including one given on EWTN) are any indication, his answer would be, "Between the Orthodox and the Greek Catholics, there are no theological differences". That is a direct quote.

"Rome has not granted His Beatitude Lubomyr the title of Patriarch. Commemorating him as Patriarch during the Liturgy does not make him such. Only Rome granting him that title will make it official."

Well, that's very, um, papist of you, Etnick. Let's try to remember that the Holy See promised Patriarch Josef the Confessor that the Church of Kyiv would be elevated to a Patriarchate, and he and all of his successors have been recognized and commemorated as such ever since. How long should the Ukrainians wait for the Holy See to honor its word? Not that the Holy See's record with regard to the Eastern Catholic Churches would be something about which it should boast.

"Well, that's very, um, papist of you, Etnick."

As far as you are in communion with the Church of Rome you have to accept the Papacy as laid out by the doctrine of the Church of Rome.

As far as I understand it is not a democracy, neither is it a relationship where you can pick and choose what you like or don't like.

The Ukranian Catholic Church is a "Sui Juris" Church in communion with the Church of Rome, it is not its subserviant but a Sister Church, it has the right to elect its own bishops and a Patriarch, and then announces the fact to the Bishop of Rome. It does not seek his apporval.
Stephanos I
PS It is about time that the Eastern Catholic Churches reflect what they truly are. I like the Air Force approach: It is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

I totally agree with Stephanos. The ecumenical implications are vast, because the autonomy it promises to the Orthodox in the event of restoration of communion is not given to the Eastern Churches already in communion with Rome, rendering Rome's commitments hollow.

"Force approach: It is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. "

Always thought that was the Marine Corps.

This comes down to a fundamental question: is the Union of Brest an act of submission or a bi-lateral agreement? Most Ukrainian Greek-Catholics consider the Union of Brest a bi-lateral agreement, and secular courts have upheld that view.

Examining just what is "the Papacy as laid out by the doctrine of the Church of Rome" with regard to the Christian East can yield interesting results.

Fr. Serge

To paraphrase a friend of mine "scratch an Eastern Orthodox, find a Papist"

More seriously, if a Patriarch is something more than just a secular title applied to a Bishop it must be something that has a fundamental authority and weight that goes beyond mere titular recognition. In the case of Patriarch Lubomyr, he has the real authority of a Patriarch in every meaningful sense, and is honored as such not only by his own flock, but by most other Catholics. If that doesn't make him a Patriarch, then the title of Patriarch has absolutely no meaning in any Communion.

Peace and God bless!

Let us remember how most Eastern Orthodox autocephalous Churches got their independence: they declared it unilaterally, suffered through a wave of anathemas from their Mother Church and others aligned with it, and, after a period of time, when the new patiarchal crown got a suitable patina, one Church after another established communion with them. Might take as long as fifty years, but in Orthodox terms, that's the blink of an eye (back in the fourth-fifth centuries, it took Rome fifty years to recognize the First Council of Constantinple).

I have suggested at various times to a number of Ukrainian Greek Catholic priests, and even a bishop, that the UGCC should simply declare itself to be a Patriarchal Church (the concept of a "Major Archepiscopal Church" has no canonical standing), and double dog dare Rome to do something about it. Rome cannot, after all, interdict or excommunicate the largest Oriental Church in communion with her--it would put a positive end to any ecumenical approach to the Orthodox ("After you treat them like that, what can we expect from you?").

Rome promised Patriarch Josef that it would recognize the UGCC as a patriarchal Church. Still waiting for Rome to deliver on its promise.

[i][/i]"Examining just what is "the Papacy as laid out by the doctrine of the Church of Rome" with regard to the Christian East can yield interesting results."

I have. That is why I am an Orthodox Christian

An adversarial approach in this case doesn't seem worth while. After all, Patriarch Lubomyr has already been commemorated as such in front of the Pope; it's not as if there is any need for a combative attitude to achieve anything substantial. The historical approach of schism-induced autocephaly is hardly a model to be emulated, IMO; it continues to be one of the "thorns in the flesh" of the Eastern Orthodox Communion.

Peace and God bless!

Ghosty,

The matter comes to a head when the UGCC must choose another leader. The difference between the election of a "major archbishop" and a "patriarch" in Catholic canon law is quite significant. The former is must definitely subordinate and sufragan to the Pope, while the latter is, in form at least, his equal in grace and dignity. There is also the matter of precedence in inter-ecclesial affairs, and I would wager that, if he were Patriarch de jure as well as de facto, Patriarch Lyubomir would not have accepted the red hat of a Cardinal. Lacking the full legal status of a patriarch, he needs the leverage provided by being a member of an institution particular to the Latin Church and alien to the Tradition of the Byzantine Churches.

I agree that an adversarial approach is not optimal, but it is also clear that the Latin Church has no intention of honoring its commitments to Josef the Confessor and the UGCC. When confronted by such obstinacy, there is nothing to do but move ahead regardless. Change the titles on the letterhead and the plaque on the Chancery door. My guess is, confronted by a fait accompli, the Holy See will quickly concede the point.

Excuse me? Not only is a "Major Archbishop" not suffragan to the Pope; to the best of my knowledge the Bishop of Rome has no Eastern Christian suffragans at all - a suffragan bishop is the bishop of a diocese which forms part of a Metropolitanate; the Bishop of Albany, for example, is suffragan to the Archbishop of New York.

What follows has nothing much to do with what has gone before, but we could all do with a smile. A number of years ago, the Episcopalian (=Anglican) Bishop of Central New York took to signing himself "+Henry Albany", in medieval style. He kept this up until he received a letter from the Episcopalian Bishop of Western New York signed "+Buffalo Bill"!

Fr. Serge

"The erection, restoration, modification and suppression of patriarchal Churches is reserved to the supreme authority of the Church" (CCEO can. 57 § 1). Thus, in terms of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1990, only the Roman Pontiff or an Ecumenical Council can establish ("erect") a new patriarchal Church.

As a purely internal matter of the Catholic Church, I believe the Pope should establish the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church as a patriarchal Church and His Beatitude Lubomyr should be elected Greek-Catholic patriarch of Kyiv-Halych. But we have to recognize what an extremely provocative act this would be in the eyes of the Russian Orthodox Church and the other Orthodox Churches. Would the pain be worth the gain? And yet, we're not going to achieve full communion with the Orthodox any time soon, and Orthodox opposition to a Greek-Catholic patriarchate of Kyiv is not going to go away either, so perhaps it would be better to just get the matter of a Ukrainian Greek-Catholic patriarchate over and done with as soon as possible?