Catholics in Ukraine — and Ukrainian Catholics throughout the world — have a new bishop. On March 23, the Synod of Bishops of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church elected Sviatoslav Shevchuk, 40, as major archbishop of Kiev. He succeeds Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, major archbishop since 1994. Cardinal Husar, 78, retired because of his health.
Archbishop Shevchuk’s election was confirmed by Pope Benedict XVI on March 25. When he was installed March 27 at the Cathedral of the Holy Resurrection of Christ in Kiev, the new major archbishop commented: “The death of hundreds of thousands of our laity, priests, monks and nuns — led by our bishops — was a death on the cross and, therefore, a giver of life.”
In a wide-ranging discussion, Taras Antoshevsky, director of the Religious Information Service of Ukraine (RISU), shed light on Archbishop Shevchuk’s election and what it means for the Catholic faithful in Ukraine and beyond. He spoke from his office at the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv. Mariana Karapinka of RISU translated his comments into English.
The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, with its nearly 10 million faithful, is the largest Eastern-rite Church in communion with Rome. It celebrates the Byzantine Divine Liturgy and maintains the spiritual heritage associated with Orthodoxy. The Church in Kiev reunited with Rome in 1595.
During the Soviet occupation of Ukraine, the UGCC was forcibly merged with the Orthodox Church and made illegal. When Ukraine won its independence in 1991, many Catholics in the country returned to their religious roots, reclaiming Church properties that had been given by the government to the Orthodox. Tensions arose.
At the time of his election, Archbishop Shevchuk had been apostolic administrator of the Ukrainian Catholic Diocese of the Protection of the Mother of God in Buenos Aires, Argentina. A moral theologian, he also served as rector of Holy Spirit Seminary in Lviv.
Archbishop Shevchuk hopes that Rome will grant him the title of “patriarch,” a status the Vatican has been reluctant to bestow upon the head of the Catholic Church in Kiev, lest it complicate matters with Moscow.
What do you think about the fact that someone who is only 40 has become head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church? Is there precedent for such a choice?
I think one should not view the young age of the new head of the UGCC as a weakness. Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytskyi became head of the UGCC at an even younger age and managed to accomplish a great deal during the 44 years of his leadership.
Patriarch Sviatoslav has great experience … in administrative work at the Curia of Cardinal Husar, missionary work in Greece, work as the rector of Holy Spirit Seminary, and his bishop’s ministry in Argentina. All this is based on a more solid theological education than that of many older bishops.
Why do you think he was selected over others, including such presumptive top contenders as Archbishop Ihor Vozniak of Lviv?
I think that the members of the [bishops synod] who elected him understood that he was faced with the possibility of a potentially very optimistic future for the UGCC. We can only guess about the other details of the choice, due to the secrecy of the process of the synod.
What challenges will he face? Do you foresee any crises for the Church in Ukraine?
There are several challenges for the UGCC. First of all, there are internal matters [i.e., within Ukraine versus those within the Church’s several million-strong worldwide diaspora]. The status of religious freedom in Ukraine has changed for the worse. It became clear during the first year of Viktor Yanukovych’s presidency [elected in February 2009] that he definitely sympathizes only with the UOC-MP [the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in communion with the Moscow Patriarchate, versus the Autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church centered in Kiev], as he found no time to meet with the members of the All-Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations. He was not obliged to do it, but it has already become a tradition in Ukraine for the leadership of the state to try and hear the opinion of that council, which reflects the interests of nearly 90% of the believers of Ukraine representing various religions. In the last decade, the UGCC has become the mouthpiece of the council.
His Beatitude Lubomyr [Cardinal Husar] repeatedly and quite publicly put forward initiatives to improve interreligious relations and criticized violations [of ecumenical amity].
He became a great authority as an arbitrator of social and religious life in Ukraine.
On the other hand, the UGCC has certain internal problems where treatment is required. For instance, it is necessary to make parish life more active, promote the development of lay initiatives and communities, and conduct a more active mission in the north, east and south of Ukraine. [The bulk of UGCC faithful within Ukraine live in the western third of the country.] The problems among the diaspora, which is being secularized and assimilated overseas, remain.
Tell me about the question of Rome recognizing the head of the UGCC as a patriarch.
The question of recognizing the patriarchate of the UGCC remains. Actually, the whole Church prays during the liturgies for the blessed patriarch, and he is recognized as such by other denominations in Ukraine, but he is not officially recognized by the Apostolic See. We understand well that it is not an internal Church problem. But the believers in the UGCC are hurt by the fact that the Vatican pays more attention to the position of the Russian Orthodox Church in this regard than to the aspirations of the faithful Catholics themselves.
One can see from the first addresses of Patriarch Sviatoslav that he sees these problems and has ideas as to how to solve them. The UGCC is developing a strategic plan of development, and all these questions are probably included in it.
How would you describe Major Archbishop Sviatoslav’s position toward the Orthodox? Will the relations between the UGCC and the Russian Orthodoxy change?
This aspect is of great interest, as Patriarch Sviatoslav keeps some distance from the rhetoric of Patriarch Lubomyr. The previous head of the UGCC often spoke about the necessity of having a unified Church in Ukraine, whereas the young patriarch stresses the necessity of a strategic alliance and partnership. That is, he speaks not of a great future, but about our own times. And this is more understandable and obvious for both sides, as we can see from the latest news.
It is very important to establish direct dialogue with the Russian Orthodox Church. For Moscow quite often views the UGCC as an objection in its relations with the Vatican. The UGCC itself is equated as synonymous with the Roman Catholic Church, which is in contradiction with the decision of the Second Vatican Council regarding the local Eastern Catholic Churches.
Therefore, I think, that it is this aspect where the theological and diplomatic skills of Patriarch Sviatoslav may manifest themselves. His young age and previous experience can only help him.
It really seems, to me, that from his first steps, the new head of the UGCC won great authority and provoked keen public interest. I think that in quite a short time he will provide many subjects to talk about and consider. We will see.
Register correspondent Matthew A. Rarey writes from Chicago.
Benjamin Wiker: Benedict XVI: Doctor of the Church
Comments
Post a Comment
As a Russian Orthodox man, we view “Uniates” (Those runaway Orthodox in communion with the Pope) as somewhat schizophrenic. They practice and allegedly believe in all that orthodoxy teaches. Yet, they strangely unite themselves with a church (the RC Church) that recites a different creed and has embraced beliefs that the orthodox deem heretical. Uniates will never be a successful bridge between Orthodoxy and Rome-ever. They need to decide..are they Catholic? or Orthodox? Which is it? You cannot have both. How can one give their allegiance and faith to two different belief systems? Unfortunately, I don’t see much changing at all under his leadership.
Roman Catholic here. I just want to point out that the description of the eastern Catholic Churches as “those runaway Orthodox in communion with the Pope” only makes sense from the Orthodox perspective. From the Catholic perspective, the Orthodox in general are somewhat similar to runaway Catholics (sorry, but that’s how this particular metaphor would work) and the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome as the Orthodox who stopped persisting in being runaways (or simply people who never left, but have their own (small t) tradition that developed because of geographical and cultural separation or whatever).
__
Some (most? all?) of the Eastern Churches may have Orthodox roots, but they are fully Catholic. Presumably those that used to not be Catholic worked out any differences at the time we reunited. Obviously, they think that the “different creed and ... beliefs that the orthodox deem heretical” are not heretical, that the Orthodox who believe they are are wrong, and that any parts of Orthodoxy still present in their Catholicism are not in fact in conflict with Catholicism. Whether the Orthodoxy agree or not is interesting and important from many points of view, but is completely irrelevant when it comes to the question of whether or not these particular Churches (that disagree with the prevailing Orthodox opinion) should be in union with the rest of the Catholic Church.
The Russian Orthodox church has been derailed by politics. It was united with the tsarist regime and was used as an instrument in the communist regime. Their creed is based on politics. They see themselves exulted as the third “Rome”. False leaders, false leaderships, riddled with horrific crimes against humanity. Ukrainian bishops and faithful in western Ukraine after WWII choose death and imprisonment rather than join their belief system.
Cousin Sergi,
????? Icycy Xpucty!/ ??????? ???????!
[Glory to Jesus Christ / Christ is risen!]
Starting out with the U word! How Machiavellian.
There are different perspectives between the Russian Church as the arm of the Russian State than the rest of contemporary Christianity. The Moscow Patriarch views “canonical territory” as if Ukrainians were still serfs (slaves) of the Empire. The USSR had 15 Republics yet Ukraine has HALF of the Moscow Patriarchate’s “people”. Moscow quotes real estate, Christianity counts souls. Catholics view Ukrainians as having a soul and free will.
Russia did not occupy the Greco Catholic section of present day Ukraine until the First World War. The 1946 “Synod” without bishops in Lviv was Soviet persecution yet the Moscow Patriarchate still hails it as a triumph of Orthodoxy? Who is heretical?
The Church is catholic it is the Faith that is orthodox. If the Ukrainian Greco Catholic Church joined an Orthodox Patriarchate in Kyiv would Moscow recognize it?
If not why? Loss of Russian chauvinistic control?
In John 17:11 Jesus prayed ” they [plural] may be one [singular], as we [plural] are one [singular]”.
Russia is not the only mystery wrapped in an enigma, but we can trust in the Trinity.
Thank you to both Jacob and Elaine for your comments. Both of you have been blunt, as I have, and if you really re-read your comments, you see why we will never truly be united as two very distinct churches. We could spend all day throwing rocks at one another, however we both know that this battle has been going on for centuries. Throughout the Orthodox world, there has never been any disagreement whatsoever among the various jurisdictions about the true, original and correct creed in which the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15;26) read it for yourself. One of your Popes was present at the second Ecumenical Council in the year 381 where the original Niceno–Constantinopolitan Creed was formulated and all parties agreed to it including your Pope who presided over the council as the “first among equals”. Please fully read your church history people before you comment. then in the late 6th century your pope changed the words of the creed in violation of Canon VII of the 3rd Ecumenical Council on his own and without the backing of an ecumenical council. He has no authority to change anything on his own..but he did. Benedict XVI even recited the correct creed in Greek recently when he visited the Ecumenical in Constantinople! An full admission that the altered Roman Catholic creed is wrong. To Elaine…please read about the history of your popes and the Crusades before you accuse the Russian Orthodox Church of “horrific crimes against humanity” darling. Your Crusader slaughtered Orthodox in Constantinople on the way to Jerusalem. Plenty of blood on Roman Catholic hands over the centuries so you may want to re-think your point.
Jacob…we are not run away Catholics and have never been. Your church and your power obsessed popes who demand to control everyone broke away from the Churches of Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem which were the original four patriarchates. Rome was the fifth patriarchate. Again I urge you..PLEASE fully read all of church history before you comment. The original churches of the four patriarchates are still in full communion. Only Rome broke away..so who was a runaway from who? The only way for Roman Catholics and Orthodox to fully unite is for the Pope to agree to go back to the original ecclesiology , theology, creed, and belief system prior to the Great Schism of 1045..and we both know he will not. So all of these meetings and talks are a waste of time. there will be no reunification.
I wish you both no ill will. I only ask that you fully read the canons of the seven ecumenical councils and “complete” church history before you comment. Sadly many Roman Catholics are not aware of the full church history and have never read the canons of the 7 councils to get the full truth. Although some of our patriarchs and leaders want open dialogue with Benedict XVI and are open to unification with Rome, the vast majority of clergy and lay Orthodox do not. We’ve been doing fine since 1045 AD and see no reason to change. As Roman Catholics I know you are all doing your best to serve the Lord as you see fit. God Bless you in that. Maybe we should just all focus on solving the problems within our own individual churches before we explore any unification of the two. I wish you peace at the Holy Pascha of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ this Sunday. Christ is Risen! Truly he is risen! On that I know we all can agree.
Cousin Sergi,
????? Icycy Xpucty!/ ??????? ???????!
[Glory to Jesus Christ / Christ is risen!]
Starting out with the U word! How Machiavellian.
There are different perspectives between the Russian Church as the arm of the Russian State than the rest of contemporary Christianity. The Moscow Patriarch views “canonical territory” as if Ukrainians were still serfs (slaves) of the Empire. The USSR had 15 Republics yet Ukraine has HALF of the Moscow Patriarchate’s “people”. Moscow quotes real estate, Christianity counts souls. Catholics view Ukrainians as having a soul and free will.
Russia did not occupy the Greco Catholic section of present day Ukraine until the First World War. The 1946 “Synod” without bishops in Lviv was Soviet persecution yet the Moscow Patriarchate still hails it as a triumph of Orthodoxy? Who is heretical?
The Church is catholic it is the Faith that is orthodox. If the Ukrainian Greco Catholic Church joined an Orthodox Patriarchate in Kyiv would Moscow recognize it?
If not why? Loss of Russian chauvinistic control?
In John 17:11 Jesus prayed ” they [plural] may be one [singular], as we [plural] are one [singular]”.
Holy Russia is not the only mystery wrapped in an enigma, but we trust the Holy Trinity.
The fact that Rome is actually afraid to offend Moscow is not only a disgrace but shows how little they value Ukrainian Catholics. If Ukrainian Catholics had any sense they would support the Ukrainian Autonomous Orthodox Church and tell the Russian Orthodox to get out of Ukraine and take the Catholics with them if they don’t change. Catholicism was forced upon Ukrainians in Polishh occupied Ukraine. A pox on their two houses - Moscow and Rome. Kyiv should be the capitol of the Ukrainian church.
The correct title is Patriarch Sviatoslav, not archbishop.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.