Can the Latin Church deny the appointment of Eastern Catholic Bishops?

[Thomas48]

Hello Friends,

I was wondering what are the powers of the Latin Church in regards to the appointment of Eastern Bishops outside their proper territory? I ask this question in correlation to the previous appointment of an auxiliary bishop to the St. Thomas Syro Malabar Eparchy. Recently it came to my attention that their was much speculation the Syro Malabar Synod had in fact elected a Knanaya Catholic priest to be appointed auxiliary bishop of the St. Thomas Syro Malabar Eparchy of Chicago. However Rome had denied this appointment and instead another priest, (now bishop Mar Joy Alappat) was appointed instead. The Syro Malabar church had wanted to appoint a Knanaya priest in order to represent this community in the United States, however for whatever reason the Vatican sought not to allow this.

Please do not take this post in the wrong way, I am not in anyway in-sighting that they should reverse the decision made. Mar Joy Alappat is an outstanding Syro Malabar priest who serves his diocese with dedication and pure faith. I am just wondering what the powers of Rome are in response to the election of Eastern Catholic bishops.

 

[RCTechGeek]

As far as I know, the way it works with the selection of eastern bishops is that a synod in the particular church chooses the next bishop and then it goes to the pope for final approval. Most of the time, the pope gives his approval (either he or perhaps through the congregation for the eastern churches?) for the appointment and everything goes on as normal. However, it’s possible for the pope to not approve the appointment. My own personal theory behind why the choice of the Knanaya priest was denied is because of the Knanaya support of endogamy.

If I am wrong, someone please correct me.

 

[phil19034]

I might be wrong, but I believe the Pope (not the Latin Church) can veto the appointment of any Eastern Bishop. Though, the Pope typically does not interfere with the appointment of Eastern Bishops, but again, can veto.

 

[Thomas48]

As far as I know, the way it works with the selection of eastern bishops is that a synod in the particular church chooses the next bishop and then it goes to the pope for final approval. Most of the time, the pope gives his approval (either he or perhaps through the congregation for the eastern churches?) for the appointment and everything goes on as normal. However, it’s possible for the pope to not approve the appointment. My own personal theory behind why the choice of the Knanaya priest was denied is because of the Knanaya support of endogamy.

If I am wrong, someone please correct me.

Thank you for the replies! And yes I am also assuming endogamy is the reason for the denial. Seems that the Syro Malabar Synod and the Congregation for Eastern Churches have two different views on the matter.

It is a shame because having a Knanaya auxillary would have given the community a more higher representation and a greater voice in the diocese. The Knanaya do in fact make up a large portion of the Chicago Eparchy. It is also peculiar for them to be under a Syro Malabar bishop.

 

[SyroMalankara]

It is possible that the recommendation was denied by certain people that advise because it seen as fracturing the Eparchy. It would be perceived that Mar Jacob is “their” bishop by Knanaya and the Knanaya Fr. is “ours”. Already, some Knanaya parishes commemorate only the Knanaya bishops in India and don’t mention the Eparch.

 

[Tomdstone]

I might be wrong, but I believe the Pope… can veto the appointment of any Eastern Bishop.

My guess is that the Eastern Orthodox Church would see this as a stumbling block to any reconciliation or reunion with the Roman Catholic Church. I doubt that they would accept this provision enthusiastically.

 

[Thomas48]

It is possible that the recommendation was denied by certain people that advise because it seen as fracturing the Eparchy. It would be perceived that Mar Jacob is “their” bishop by Knanaya and the Knanaya Fr. is “ours”. Already, some Knanaya parishes commemorate only the Knanaya bishops in India and don’t mention the Eparch.

This could also be a possibility. You are right in the fact that the majority of the parishes still act as if they are apart of Kottayam Archeparchy. Archbishop Mar Moolakkattu has at times even promoted non-communication with the Chicaco Eparchy, which stimulates this outlook of separateness. Most recently after the Syro Malabar Church established their Melbourne Eparchy in Australia, the Melbourne Knanaya Community refused to join as a mission because the eparchy would not grant full-endogamous rights, again Mar Moolakkattu supports the communities actions. They are waiting for the Church to somehow extend the jurisdiction of Kottayam Archdiocese or grant them their own eparchy. Mar Moolakkattu is actually promoting abroad missions (apart of or not apart of the Syro Malabar Eparchy) because he has said time and time again that his future goal is for the Knanaya Missions to grow world wide and for the Archeparchy to one day become its own particular church.

It is all a mess in my opinion that is rooted in the fact that Knanayas are allowed to act as if their own distinct Sui Juris church in Kerala with much self-administration and governance. When these same privileges are not granted as a diaspora, it only makes sense that problems such as these would arise. With all this in mind, I am very curious to know what the Major Archbishop thinks of one of his metropolitans and communities acting as if in open rebellion

 

[Lucretius]

I don’t think the Pope has to approve a Bishop, but I do think that having his holiness approve a Bishop appointment is a fitting sign of humility and loyalty on the part of the Eastern Churches to the universal Church.

Christi pax.

 

[SyroMalankara]

I don’t think the Pope has to approve a Bishop, but I do think that having his holiness approve a Bishop appointment is a fitting sign of humility and loyalty on the part of the Eastern Churches to the universal Church.

Christi pax.

It would bea great sign of humility and loyalty to the universal Church if every Latin bishop appointment in Eastern areas involved the bishop-elect kneeling before the Eastern Patriarch/Catholicos and professing unity. Would it not?

 

[Lucretius]

It would bea great sign of humility and loyalty to the universal Church if every Latin bishop appointment in Eastern areas involved the bishop-elect kneeling before the Eastern Patriarch/Catholicos and professing unity. Would it not?

I think we’ve actually seen this. I know in the Diocese of Pittsburgh, when a Latin rite priest is being ordained, the candidate kneels before all the priests present individually, including Eastern rite ones. My one aquantiance, for example, did so. That’s not an example of a Latin Bishop though.

Christi pax.

 

[Ubenedictus]

It would bea great sign of humility and loyalty to the universal Church if every Latin bishop appointment in Eastern areas involved the bishop-elect kneeling before the Eastern Patriarch/Catholicos and professing unity. Would it not?

That is a bit extreme, the latin bishops aren’t under the eastern patriarch, kneeling before him is a bit extreme. The pope confirming a bishop has to do with his primacy…(even though i think the church in question should be allowed to chose her own bishops without been second guessed. )

 

[Axiosaxiosaxios]

The actual wording of the document that goes to Rome is certification. Typically these documents get passed through the Cong.Oriental Churches without much of a blink; if there was a rejection of the candidate, there must be some serious concerns with him.

 

[Thomas48]

The actual wording of the document that goes to Rome is certification. Typically these documents get passed through the Cong.Oriental Churches without much of a blink; if there was a rejection of the candidate, there must be some serious concerns with him.

The concern was most likely not with the candidate, it is simply that Rome does not want endogamous churches in the United States, which is understandable on their part. My community, the Knanaya Catholics, strongly hold to the practice of endogamy. Having a Knanaya auxiliary, would strengthen and promote the Knanaya demand for completely endogamous churches. It would also in the near future push for a separate Knanaya Catholic eparchy in the United States, none of which Rome would like to see if the eparchy is to hold to endogamy.

 

[malphono]

The concern was most likely not with the candidate, it is simply that Rome does not want endogamous churches in the United States, which is understandable on their part.

That’s possible but it’s also distinctly possible that Rome simply rejected the proposed candidate for one or another different reason. It wouldn’t be the first time that a Synodal candidate was rejected and it surely won’t be the last. This mainly happens in the diaspora, but there are cases of it even within the Patriarchal Territories.

 

[Vico]

Hello Friends,

I was wondering what are the powers of the Latin Church in regards to the appointment of Eastern Bishops outside their proper territory? I ask this question in correlation to the previous appointment of an auxiliary bishop to the St. Thomas Syro Malabar Eparchy. Recently it came to my attention that their was much speculation the Syro Malabar Synod had in fact elected a Knanaya Catholic priest to be appointed auxiliary bishop of the St. Thomas Syro Malabar Eparchy of Chicago. However Rome had denied this appointment and instead another priest, (now bishop Mar Joy Alappat) was appointed instead. The Syro Malabar church had wanted to appoint a Knanaya priest in order to represent this community in the United States, however for whatever reason the Vatican sought not to allow this.

Please do not take this post in the wrong way, I am not in anyway in-sighting that they should reverse the decision made. Mar Joy Alappat is an outstanding Syro Malabar priest who serves his diocese with dedication and pure faith. I am just wondering what the powers of Rome are in response to the election of Eastern Catholic bishops.

Outside the territory, the patriarchal and major archiespicopal churches elect a terna and submit it to Rome for appointment but the metropolitan and other sui iuris churches have the bishops appointed by Rome.

 

[Thomas48]

Outside the territory, the patriarchal and major archiespicopal churches elect a terna and submit it to Rome for appointment but the metropolitan and other sui iuris churches have the bishops appointed by Rome.

That’s possible but it’s also distinctly possible that Rome simply rejected the proposed candidate for one or another different reason. It wouldn’t be the first time that a Synodal candidate was rejected and it surely won’t be the last. This mainly happens in the diaspora, but there are cases of it even within the Patriarchal Territories.

Thanks for the replies, I hope to see the day when Eastern Churches can elect bishops outside of their proper territory without the approval of Rome. In all honesty, if things were to be equal, Latin nominees within the proper territory of Eastern Churches should have to receive approval from Eastern Synods, though this is obviously not the case since Latin diocese within Eastern territories do as they please. It seems that Rome holds dominion over all territories even though many are historically not theirs. This contradiction does not make sense to me besides of course the obvious and conspicuous response of the Primacy of Peter.

 

[Vico]

Thanks for the replies, I hope to see the day when Eastern Churches can elect bishops outside of their proper territory without the approval of Rome. In all honesty, if things were to be equal, Latin nominees within the proper territory of Eastern Churches should have to receive approval from Eastern Synods, though this is obviously not the case since Latin diocese within Eastern territories do as they please. It seems that Rome holds dominion over all territories even though many are historically not theirs. This contradiction does not make sense to me besides of course the obvious and conspicuous response of the Primacy of Peter.

I believe it is in Eritrea (Africa) that the Latin Catholics are in the care of the Eritrean Catholic Church because they do not have any Latin ordinaries there.

The Latin Church has a particular Ecumenical responsibility throughout the world and it is described in the canons.

 

[dvdjs]

Thanks for the replies, I hope to see the day when Eastern Churches can elect bishops outside of their proper territory without the approval of Rome. In all honesty, if things were to be equal, Latin nominees within the proper territory of Eastern Churches should have to receive approval from Eastern Synods, though this is obviously not the case since Latin diocese within Eastern territories do as they please. It seems that Rome holds dominion over all territories even though many are historically not theirs. This contradiction does not make sense to me besides of course the obvious and conspicuous response of the Primacy of Peter.

It is not the Latin church, but the Pope, who gives approval; this is not a matter of dominion but of of primacy. Some complain about this, but I think that it is a good practice.

In the US, for example, there are numerous bishops overseeing parishes of their sui juris in the same physical territories. For the well-being of the universal church, it is important, that the appointment and acts of these bishops are done with appropriate respect given to Catholics of other particular churches in a particular area, and, ideally with cooperation among the same. The Pope, exercising his primacy, enrues the balance of interestests of churches with overlapping territory.

 

[phil19034]

I think we’ve actually seen this. I know in the Diocese of Pittsburgh, when a Latin rite priest is being ordained, the candidate kneels before all the priests present individually, including Eastern rite ones. My one aquantiance, for example, did so. That’s not an example of a Latin Bishop though.

Christi pax.

This happens in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia too. The Ukrainian Archbishop of Philadelphia almost always attends ordinations by the Latin Archbishop of Philadelphia, esp for Bishops.

 

[twf]

I’m a Latin and I’ll take this a step farther. Yes, I would like to see all the Eastern Churches Sui Iuris granted the right to elect their own bishops without restriction. Furthermore, I would like to see the restoration of national / regional Synods in the Latin Church that would elect their own bishops (not these modern Conferences that lack real teeth). Regional / provincial primacy is greatly diminished in the modern Latin Church and the fact that Rome ultimately appoints pretty much every single bishop is a huge part of this.
If a major issue, the faithful or neighbouring bishops should always have the right to appeal to Rome. I don’t in anyway deny papal primacy…this is just a question of how its exercised.
That being said, I did see an excellent symbolic expression of provincial primacy this past summer when our (Latin) metropolitan archbishop consecrated a new bishop for one of the suffragan dioceses.