It is true that the Pope names bishops for the Eastern churches, outside of the home Patriarchal territory of the particular church.
This is another symptom of the problem all churches have had to face with colonization or migration to new world sites. The Orthodox churches have chosen one way to deal with this issue, the Catholics another.
I quote a Melkite
website which touches on the subject:
The authentic Eastern form of Church governance is synodal, that is, the Patriarch governs the Melkite Church together with the Synod or Assembly of Melkite Bishops. The Patriarch exercises executive power and the Synod of Bishops exercises legislative power, similar to the American civil government. That is the reason that all the Melkite Bishops throughout the world gather at Rabweh every year for the annual meeting of the Synod of Bishops. There, under the presidency of the Patriarch, all major decisions affecting the Melkite Church are discussed and enacted.
Code:
However, the present Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches distinguishes between the powers of the Patriarch and Synod of Bishops inside the patriarchal territory and outside of it; and it expressly states that their powers are exercised validly only inside the patriarchal territory, with certain limited exceptions. The basic reality is that all laws enacted by the Synod and promulgated by the Patriarch are effective inside the patriarchal territory, but for us Melkites in the United States, the only laws that are currently effective are liturgical laws.
The reason for this distinction is that, from the very earliest times, Patriarchal power or jurisdiction has been subject to a geographical limitation. This restriction, known as the Patriarchal Territory, refers to those regions in which the proper rite of the Church is observed and in which the Patriarch has the right to establish ecclesiastical provinces, eparchies and exarchies. Only the highest authority can change the Patriarchal Territory. The Patriarchal Territory of the Melkite Patriarch is Antioch, All the East, Alexandria and Jerusalem.
I do not consider this an ideal situation, and neither do other Eastern Catholics, we are hoping the situation becomes rectified in the future (many Roman Catholics will think it’s just dandy the way it is) but over time more and more people are migrating out of their home territories and the percentage of the population of these Sui Iuris churches directly under their own Patriarchs is gradually shrinking, a transferal of the population into the administrative authority of Rome is not the best solution we have but the only option at present.
This is actually an improvement (!) over the situation before the establishment of hierarchies by Rome, as the only legitimate bishops in the new world(s) were Latin rite bishops and they had an abysmal record of meeting the needs and properly serving the Eastern Catholics, whom they regarded as just another resource for their building projects. The situation in the past was canonically correct: one city, one bishop. But it was prone to abuse.
I would be happy to see all Byzantine rite churches in North America directly under the supervision and appointments of the Patriarch of Antioch for the Melkites. I doubt that my Ukrainian friends would like it though. Human nature.
Another issue no one ever seems to raise is that there are Latin rite faithful in the traditional home territories of the eastern patriarchs. Canonically these need to be put under the control of the local Patriarchs with Eastern bishops serving as local Ordinaries. The problem for Catholics is that there are multiple traditions emanating from the same regions, primarily Syria and Lebanon and southern India (something the Orthodox do not yet need to concern themselves with) and it really would be a challenge to determine which Eastern bishop would take priority as the local Ordinary, leaving the other equally valid traditions behind!
The fact is, there already is overlapping of jurisdictions in the old world among Catholics. If the Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox (non-Chalcedonians) were to ever resolve their differences (as there is current dialogue to that end it could happen) the Orthodox churches would need to address this very same issue.
{continued}
+T+
