www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Election of Our Next Pope

Hopefully the Cardinals will also look outside their own College group for a well qualified candidate such as charismatic Major Archbishop [aka Patriarch] Sviatoslav Shevchuk of the worldwide Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. He is deeply spiritual, a forward thinking leader, multilingual and young.
The Catholic Church breathes with two lungs - the West and the East. It is indeed time for an Eastern Catholic hierarch to become Pope!

I completely agree!!!
The cardinals do not necessarily have to vote for a fellow cardinal.

Curious. In what way do you mean that His Beatitude is "forward thinking"?

I think that the college of cardinals would see that for the kicking of the hornets nest that it would be. Not that would rule it out: the election of Pope John Paul II of blessed memory kicked it too, but I think the Major Archbishop's insistence on the patriarchal title has ruled him out. I don't know how important the cardinals as a whole place on relations with Moscow, and how much they would want to play a wild card.

Not going to happen, or even be considered. It would be a clear signal by Rome to the entire Orthodox world that there was no purpose to the ecumenical dialogue between the Catholic church and the Orthodox over the past half century and that any gestures, such as the return of relics, joint statements etc...were a sham.

IAlmisry,
I don't know what disqualifies or doesn't from the considerations. But I would like to think that cardinals would at least be aware of and sensitive to the ecumenical effect of their choice. Whatever one might think of him as a candidate for papal election, I imagine that most observers would agree that electing the Ukranian Catholic Patriarch as Pope of Rome would certainly anger the Orthodox, (particularly and directly, the Patriarchate of Moscow.)

Pavloosh, I really don't mean to dispute any of the glowing things you have to say about His Beatitude. But I must say that I would be concerned if he were considered because it is my impression that the UGCC seems not to be on board with the same ecumenical approach adopted by Rome. By saying this I don't mean to accuse or attack, but only to offer an observation. Perhaps I am wrong about this, but as I understand it, both the Ukranian and the Rumanian Catholic churches have criticized sharply the Balamand statement, and neither has signed on to it. (It's not shocking to me that this might be the case, nor do I mean to initiate a debate about it--but it would represent a problem. If I am wrong, I am sure you will correct me.)

I have no candidates to propose. My only hopes are that the next pope will be 1) committed to the Vatican II in a ressourcement sort of key and likewise 2) that he will be committed to strengthening the collegial dimension of ecclesial governance and 3) committed to ecumenism and 4) accordingly committed to the re-imagining of the papal office.

Hmm. Maybe a Melkite Pope would be just as much worth the while, but I agree that Patriarch Sviatoslav seems to be a popular option. Either way would work out for the Eastern Rite.

Please read, if you haven't already, the following:
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/athos_bal.aspx

In brief, the document tells us that "we the Orthodox are Right and everyone else is WRONG"!
Electing Patriarch Sviatoslav as Pope would clearly demonstrate that the Catholic Church is a Universal Church with one head and not a myriad of Orthodox heads depending upon the language you speak.

That sounds true. But, still, having a Melkite Pope would be great, too, since in the Middle East, Catholicism and Orthodox is under attack in that part of the world, and I think having the representation of the Catholic Church from the Middle East would certainly help in terms of aiding Christianity throughout the world, and to help to overcome all the persecution in the world as well.

Why is it that people have such a hard time understanding that being Pope requires one to belong to the Church of Rome? Is it that dumb "Catholic is Catholic" mentality?

I wondered how long it would take you.

And I concur, nobody wonders what would happen if the Archbishop of Milan was elected Patriarch of Antioch...

What are you talking about and what is your point?

LOL. Doing something because you have something to "prove" usually proves a disaster.
He's a "major archbishop," at least according to the supreme authority of his church and his canons. Perhaps you need to have him prove his "patriarchate" to that "one head."

We Orthodox, btw, have one head. In a myriad of languages: Ιησούς Χριστός يوع المسيح Їисъ Хрїстъ Иисус Христ Иисус Христос Ісус Христос Iisus Hristos Ježíš Kristus Jezus Kristus Jesus Christ...

How about the Church of Avignon?

When Pope John Paul II was born, Lviv was in Poland. Rome was never in Poland.

There have been Latin Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem...and a Latin bishop of Lviv. Why not a Greek/Arab/Slav etc. bishop of Rome?

Plus with all those titular churches in Rome...it wouldn't be a problem.

Why can't the Italo-Greek/Albanians have one of their own as Metropolitan of Italy?

Patriarch Sviatoslav is our Patriarch regardless of what any Russian says.

Orthodox have one head you say? How cute!