www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Pope Sviatoslav I

"A Slav Pope will sweep out the Churches and make them clean within."

With every clueless pundit in the secular commentariat tossing out his or her lists of papabile, these days, I figured I might as well toss my own useless predictions into the mix. Instead of cowardly tossing out five or ten names, however, I'll be so daring as to narrow my prognostication down to a single candidate: His Beatitude Major-Archbishop/Patriarch Sviatoslav Shevchuk

I know, it's a long shot, and considering that any time I venture to make a prediction about something of this calibre, the opposite happens. That having been said, I don't think the idea is really all that far-fetched. Here's how I imagine it happening...

The surprise abdication of Benedict XVI came right out of left field, so to speak, taking everyone off guard. It was an event unheard of in modern times, and has turned every convention concerning the papal succession topsy-turvey. This completely extraordinary event, I predict, will leave its mark on the collective psyche of the College of Cardinals when they gather together in Conclave.

I predict that there will be a long-ish conclave during which no cardinal clearly emerges as Benedict's replacement. After many failed votes, one daring cardinal--inspired by Pope Benedict's abdication to think outside the box--will suggest to his colleagues that they, for a refreshing change, look outside of the Sacred College for Benedict's successor. The idea will be resisted by the Italian bloc, but will catch on amongst the other cardinals. Following the first abdicated pope in 596 years will emerge the name of the first non-cardinal to be elected pope in 635 years.

The cardinals will recall that there sits in Kyiv a young (age 43), brilliant, energetic, dynamic, well-regarded, and entirely orthodox prelate whose rise to the top has been meteoric. Looking for a new, young, fresh face and a name that doesn't reek of the public relations disaster that has become the modern Vatican, they will observe that this non-cardinal from the East is, in fact, very papabile.

And so I submit the name of Sviatoslav Shevchuk as my sole prediction for the man who will succeed Benedict XVI as Bishop of Rome and Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church.

Which means they'll elect an uninspiring old Italian.

Considering he isn't a cardinal, I highly doubt it. Too bad that he's not; I think it's only because Patriarch-emeritus Husar is still under 80 (but unfortunately, two days before Pope Benedict's resignation becomes effective, he'll turn 80). So neither man will be eligible to vote and thus neither is likely to be elected.

I wonder if the Byzantine Forum is monitored by the Vatican...maybe they will take your suggestion into consideration.

Ray

Well, I suggested this before, considering that Patriarch Sviatoslav was always passionate to be visiting the Vatican and to celebrate Divine Liturgies from time to time in Rome, so there is that possibility that he could very much have been eyeing the Papacy for a while.

Pray that Patriarch Sviatoslav will be seriously considered.
What the Church doesn't need is another man over the age of 75 elected as Pope. Otherwise, we'll have another resignation a few years from now. It's puzzling that bishops are to request retirement when they reach 75, but someone over the age of 75 can become Pope. As they say in Italian: "She no mayka da sense".

Bob,

I think it's untoward to imply that His Beatitude has been angling for the Papacy. But, he's quite young, will inevitably be made a cardinal soon (likely at the next consistory since +Husar turns 80 in a couple of weeks), and so, I imagine, a couple more chances at least will await him.

Alexis

Alex - the chances of Patriarch Sviatoslav being made a Cardinal in HB Lubomyr's lifetime are slim . Reasoning for that is a bit complicated , but this is how someone tried to explain it to me.

1) As far as it is known , there has never been an Eastern Catholic Church which has had more than 1 Cardinal at a time .

2) Should the Major Archbishop / Patriarch of an Eastern Church be given a Latin Church honour ?

3) If the current Archbishop of Lviv is a Cardinal and retires at the age of 75 do you then offer it to his replacement ? In this situation that would be 2 Cardinals in Lviv for what is, in most peoples eyes, a minority Church - or do you wait till his predecessor turns 80 ? Now that is really a messy situation.

4) Just supposing HB Sviatoslav was made a Cardinal - what Church would he be given in Rome ? HB Lubomyr was given Sancta Sofia - can you really give Ss Sergius and Bacchus to HB Sviatoslav ? He is the head of his Church - can you really give him a lesser Church than HB Lubomyr ?

Why would a bull want to be an ox?

The Maronites have it right now.

Pavloosh:

IMHO, they ought to look for a candidate of teh age range of Pope John Paul II--at his election. Someone youthful enough to stand the rigors of the office, someone able to steer a course for a number of years into the future, and someone tough enough to take on the many issues facing the Church.

RI:

IMHO, the UGCC is very fortunate to have His Beatitude as their leader. He has plenty to do in rebuilding a Church forced to be underground and still having lots of growing pains. Why would they want to lose him? Good men are hard to find.

Bob

In my opinion, they should choose someone who is already in the clergy of the Metropolitan Province of Rome, and they should insist that he act foremost as diocesan Bishop of Rome, not appointing an Apostolic Administrator to handle the unpleasant chores of governing unruly Romans. With luck, it will take up so much of his time he won't have much left over for interfering in the life of other Churches. In fact, with any luck, he'll realize he can't run the Western Church as a one-man band, and will establish autonomous, territorially-delineated patriarchal Churches , with their own Patriarchs elected by synods whose bishops are elected locally.

My Stuart, what a very Orthodox thing to say! I knew there was a reason I liked you!

I had the same thought. The way I see it (and I readily admit that I see such things inexpertly, as a newcomer), Sviatoslav's position as chief shepherd of the Ukrainian Greek Church gives him a status that is rather more august than that of a cardinal.

Making the head of the UGCC a cardinal almost seems like a move that somewhat robs him of his autonomy and his unique place in the Church and makes him just another member of the Papal Court. The way I see things (again, placing no great value on my own insight), the Patriarch of the UGCC should be made a papal elector without being named a cardinal.

Perhaps the same could be argued of any patriarch, actually. Making patriarchs cardinals really just sort of marks them as the Pope's men. I'm not sure they ought to be so marked, at least not to such a degree. In communion with the Pope? Of course. His electors? Yes, I think so. But his cardinals? I don't know; it strikes me as a diminishment of their status rather then an augmentation. Especially when we're talking about the patriarch, not just of an historic see, but of a sui juris Church.

Granted, the Major-Archbishop of the UGCC is not yet in unquestionable possession of the rank of patriarch, but he is styled as such by his own flock, and prayed for as such in the liturgy, and therefore it can be easily argued, I think, that he is a patriarch for all intents and purposes. Whatever his style may be, his position is a unique one. It seems to me that it would be rather narrow of the conclave to write such a figure off as papabile, simply because he doesn't wear scarlet robes.

Well, this would be like predicting that Metropolitan Archbishop William Skurla would be the next Pontiff, even though he leads the Ruthenian Byzantine Church here in America, and is another Eastern Rite Catholic that is of a leadership role, but I'm not so sure of his eligibility, either. After all, the Ruthenian Church went through the same growing pains as the UGCC did, but I don't think that they have any ranks above Metropolitan Archbishop that I know of in the BCC.

No, that would be like comparing a patriarch to a primate, really; not quite the same thing.

Bear in mind, I regard my 'prediction' as the longest of shots; I would hardly bet the ranch on it. But I find it a tantalizing and completely plausible idea. My prediction is more or less a wish that the cardinals in conclave would have the same idea. And if any of them are monitoring this forum (I suppose anything's possible), well...idea planted.