Gathered for their ad limina, Eastern Catholic bishops from the U.S. were addressed last week by Prefect of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, Leonardo Cardinal Sandri. His injunction—made not about abortion, the HHS mandate, war, wealth redistribution, or gay marriage—could have a critical influence on the Christian response to all of the above.
Among the Cardinal’s remarks was a tersely reiterated expectation of celibacy for priests serving the Eastern Catholic Churches in diaspora—in this case the U.S. The message may not have been carried directly from the hand of Benedict but the effect has been unpleasant to say the least.
Enter Thomas Loya, a Ruthenian Catholic priest of the Parma Ohio Eparchy, writing his eparch in response.
In addition to being chillingly reminiscent of the demeaning attitude of the Latin Rite bishops toward the Eastern Catholic Churches during the beginning of the last century in America, the Cardinal's remarks about celibacy seem to confirm what so many Eastern Catholics in America have suspected for too long: Rome and the Latin Rite see the Eastern Catholic Churches in America as essentially inconsequential, perhaps even in the way of ecumenism between Rome and the Orthodox Churches.
The chilling reminiscence refers, in part, to an exercise in aberrant ecclesiology—more a power play—engineered by Archbishop John Ireland that resulted in an entire body of U.S. Eastern Catholics breaking communion with Rome.
I’m not about to jump into the trenches on the issue of celibacy (I would rather the comments box not turn into a Mixed Martial Arts cage). I’ll simply repeat the known fact that celibacy it is not a dogma of the Church but a discipline, and that its normative status in the Latin Church is not of ancient provenance. Moreover, Loya’s point is not about celibacy per se but ecclesial integrity and mutual respect.
What moves us onto this more sensitive landscape is his suggestion that Rome views the Eastern Catholic churches as “in the way” of relations between itself and the Orthodox Churches. I can certainly see why it would occur to him and he’s not the first to say it. For centuries, the existence of the so-called Uniate Churches has been a vexed point in those relations.
But I wonder how much help he can realistically expect from the Eastern hierarchs. Too many Eastern Catholic bishops behave as though their mandate actually is to allow their Churches to die a slow, palliated death.
If Loya is correct, it’s difficult to see how Cardinal Sandri’s words advance the ecumenical agenda. In fact, it would seem to do the reverse. For, what possible inducement to deepening trust could the Orthodox find in Rome’s insistence that Eastern Churches compromise their traditions the moment they hit the customs line at JFK?
This is, at best, a very mixed signal. When added to other actions, however, it can begin to seem otherwise.
In terms of impeding the cause of reunion, perhaps the most inexplicable move in recent years was Rome’s decision suddenly to drop the title “Patriarch of the West” from the list of papal honorifics in the 2006 Annuario Pontificio.
As Adam DeVille points out in his superb, Orthodoxy and the Papacy: Ut Unum Sint and the Prospects of East-West Unity, of all the titles claimed for the Pope, it is the office of Patriarch that is most meaningful to the Orthodox. It is the one most serious ecumenists agree holds the greatest potential to serve as a model for the “new situation” John Paul II invited all Christians to help him imagine and make real.
The practical stakes of this are high. As Loya goes on to say,
The Eastern Catholic Churches, and in particular the Ruthenian Church, are actually in a position to indeed supply what is lacking in the whole Church in America and to confront secular society with a type of vocabulary and spirituality that we alone can bring to the war on secularism and moral relativism. It seems that Rome understands none of this about us.
I’m not sure why he feels the Ruthenian Church is in the particular position he describes. I also wish he hadn’t chosen to depict the resistance to secularism as war. But, those are fairly minor points. Fr. Loya is doing something important by addressing the tip that reveals the presence of an iceberg—something I earlier suggested could and should have a critical influence on the Christian response to our myriad problems.
Others have suggested, as have I, that a quantum leap in cooperation between the Roman and Orthodox Catholic Churches is indispensable to the cause of revitalizing a Western culture suffering as a result of its repudiation of or indifference to the treasure of its Judeo-Christian heritage. Given how things have unfolded in the reformed churches over the last fifty or so years, it is imperative that Rome and its sister churches of the East do all within the scope of their human power to rise to this challenge.
Fr Loya is to be commended on his appeal for ecclesial integrity and mutual respect. They are not easy to come by. The historical and political obstacles are formidable, as those laboring in this cause well know. But without them the world will continue to be deprived of the fullness of the Body of Christ. And we will continue struggling in a sea of resentment, instead of rejoicing beside the sea of glass.
Tim Kelleher is the new media editor for First Things.
Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.
Comments:
"An Orthodox bishop once noted that the Vatican seems to pay more attention to what Orthodox bishops say than what Eastern Catholic bishops say, and that, on more than one occasion he had been asked by an Eastern Catholic bishop to represent the concerns of Eastern Catholics to the Holy See, "because they don't listen to us".
"For that reason, I think it would behoove the Orthodox bishops of the United States to send an open letter to the Congregation for the Oriental Churches indicating just how distasteful and unhelpful Cardinal Sandri's comments were, with copies to the Pontifical Commission for Promoting Christian Unity and His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI."
I also noted at the time that the entire concept of "ad limina" visits by the Eastern Catholic bishops was unseemly and not consistent with the concept of "Sui juris" Churches:
"By the way, I find the whole process of having bishops of one sui juris Church summoned to an interview with the head of a different sui juris Church objectionable. Does anyone think that, when communion is restored, the various Orthodox patriarchs will tolerate such a demand, or that they would allow their suffragan bishops to comply with it.
"Voluntary visits for mutual exchange of ideas and concerns is one thing. Mandatory ones are different, and imply a degree of subordination that is not consistent with the Holy See's repeated insistence that restoration of communion will not mean subordination or assimilation, but true communion in the Holy Spirit. Once again, the Vatican is tone deaf to Orthodox concerns and perceptions. How, precisely, can the Orthodox take the Holy See at face value about how good things will be when they are in communion with Rome, when they see the lack of respect extended to the Churches that are already in communion with Rome?"
A Roman Catholic participant in the discussion seconded my idea:
"I think both of your posted points should be joined in a letter to Rome by the Orthodox bishops and that it should also be made part of the discussion in any future ecumenical agenda about primacy and how it is exercised. All these academic discussions about primacy can go on until the Second Coming, but until the practical applications currently in place are brought up and labeled for what they are no serious steps to full communion will ever take place.
"While we're on that subject, how is it that this cardinal seems to have some sort of authority over heads of sui juris Churches and their suffragan bishops? I would think that the Vatican II documents would have long ago called for the Oriental Congregation to be downgraded in relation to the Eastern Catholic Churches if the documents were to be taken seriously."
Finally, an Orthodox member, the son and grandson of Orthodox priests who left the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church over the celibacy issue, wrote:
"While the Orthodox frequently complain about the Eastern Catholic churches in their midst (such as Metropolitan Hilarion's recent comments discussed earlier this year), the reality is that Orthodox leaders who open-minded to dialogue with the Church of Rome (as well as those who profess more suspicion) more accurately view the Eastern Churches as a 'canary' in the mine shaft. The recent developments were received by us with sadness as they indicate a lack of 'oxygen' in the process.
"There is no way that any definition of 'primacy' as Rome applies the concept to the Eastern Churches presently in communion with the Holy See would be acceptable to the Orthodox, as indicated by Stuart."
“Teacher,” said John, “we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”
“Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us.” Mark 9


