Churches without hierarchy

  • Thread starter Thread starter twf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

twf

Guest
Theologically, how are we to understand churches sui iuris sans hierarchy? “Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.” - St Ignatius of Antioch. A church without a bishop is a body without a head - incomplete by definition. I understand that these churches are very small but would it be so difficult to find a hierarch for them? Take the Russians - there could be one bishop appointed with global jurisdiction. It would be a difficult task, but at least the Russians would have a bishop of there own. The Anglican ordinariates are very small at present, but they have still been given ordinaries with quasi-episcopal power.
 
Theologically, how are we to understand churches sui iuris sans hierarchy? “Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.” - St Ignatius of Antioch. A church without a bishop is a body without a head - incomplete by definition. I understand that these churches are very small but would it be so difficult to find a hierarch for them? Take the Russians - there could be one bishop appointed with global jurisdiction. It would be a difficult task, but at least the Russians would have a bishop of there own.
It seems to me to be similar with the so-called Western-Rite Orthodox which do not have their own hierarchy and are directly dependent on the Orthodox Metropolitan. In the end, despite the lack of hierarchy, both the so-called “sui juris Churches” (how they can be “sui juris” without their own hierarchies strikes me as a little odd but never mind that) in union with Rome and the so-called Western-Rite Orthodox do have bishops, albeit that those bishops are of other jurisdictions/traditions.
The Anglican ordinariates are very small at present, but they have still been given ordinaries with quasi-episcopal power.
I think one has to draw a distinction between actual “sui juris Churches” and the AU Ordinariates (which do not comprise a Church of themselves but rather are part of the Roman Church). But even so, I suppose one could make a parallel in that both those “sui juris” Churches without hierarchy and the Ordinariates are directly under Rome.
 
Theologically, how are we to understand churches sui iuris sans hierarchy? “Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.” - St Ignatius of Antioch. A church without a bishop is a body without a head - incomplete by definition. …
The pope is their bishop.
 
Not in any case that I know of; but that’s certainly a possibility if e.g. there are some Russian Catholics living in Rome.
The Pope is the direct head of the Latin sui iuris church, in addition to being the Supreme Pontiff. He would also be the direct head of any other *sui iuris *church without its own hierarchy. Thus, you have a proper church.
 
I really don’t understand any of the responses here to the OP.

A sui juris Church is, by definition, self governing. If the “governing” see is sede vacante, an apostolic administrator is appointed. While they do not have the powers of a bishop, they do have authority to run the Chancery and ensure that the life of the Church continues, thus handling administration as required in connection with the sacraments (marriages, baptisms), etc. They generally cannot reassign priests or, in the case of the larger Churches, reassign bishops, nor can they promulgate changes to liturgical practices or discipline, etc. Everything runs as it had under the most recent bishop, and in accordance with establlished norms of particular law and canon law, more generally.

For example, before the current Major Archbishop of the UGCC was appointed (His Beatitude Sviatoslav Shevchuk), the governing see was administered by the current Metropolitan Archbishop of L’viv, Vladyka Ihor Vozniak, C.S.S.R. While he did not have the powers of Major Archbishop, he was appointed as apostolic administrator and was responsible to call the Synod that led to the nomination of the current Major Archbishop, according to the previously established norms of particular law for the UGCC.

The Pope is never directly in charge of a sui juris Church, just as he would never become the proper ordinary of any Latin diocese. In a Metropolitan Province of the Latin Church, the Metropolitan Archbishop automoatically becomes the administrator of a suffragen see in the case of a vacancy.

However, another hierarch can be assigned to oversee an Eparchy or Eparchies under certain extreme circumstances, as was the case for certain jurisdictions subject to Communist rule in Eastern Europe. In fact, the Bishop of Warsaw, later Blessed Pope John Paul II, served in such capacity for several Eparchies throughout Eastern Europe at one time.

The bishop (or in the case of a sede vacante see, the apostolic administrator) is accountable to the Holy See as per the CCEO, depending on the form of the Church (Patriarchate, Major Archiepiscopal, Metropolitan, etc.), yet is always the ordinary of their jurisdiction, subject to Canon Law and in communion with the Holy See.
 
The Pope is the direct head of the Latin sui iuris church, in addition to being the Supreme Pontiff. He would also be the direct head of any other *sui iuris *church without its own hierarchy. Thus, you have a proper church.
I don’t see how that relates to the post you quoted. I said “Not in any case that I know of” in regard to the possibility of the Pope being their bishop.
 
I don’t see how that relates to the post you quoted. I said “Not in any case that I know of” in regard to the possibility of the Pope being their bishop.
Likewise. There’s no such thing as a sui juris Church without a hierarch, other than via temporary vacancy.

Groups of faithful not organized under an Eparchial or temporary structure (Exarchate) are entrusted to the care of a local hierarch (historically, a Latin one).

Interesting to note, although entrusted to the care of Bishop Joseph Werth S.J., the Latin-Catholic Ordinary for the Diocese of the Transfiguration in Novosibirsk, Russia, recent priestly ordinations of Russian Greek Catholic clergy were actually performed by Bishop Milan Šášik of the Carpatho-Rusyn Greek Catholic Eparchy of Mukachevo with Bishop Werth presiding. There was some cooperation and effort shown here to ensure that the ordinations were done according to ritualistic and liturgical norms consistent with Byzantine-Slav tradition, as the Russian Greek Catholic Church in Russia continues to re-emerge.
 
Likewise. There’s no such thing as a sui juris Church without a hierarch, other than via temporary vacancy.

Groups of faithful not organized under an Eparchial or temporary structure (Exarchate) are entrusted to the care of a local hierarch (historically, a Latin one).
Well yes. I think the OP said “churches sui iuris sans hierarchy” meaning “churches sui iuris, no member of which is a hierarch”. (The Russian Catholic Church and the Belorussian Catholic Church.)

🙂
 
I don’t see how that relates to the post you quoted. I said “Not in any case that I know of” in regard to the possibility of the Pope being their bishop.
The OP asked how a group without a presiding bishop can be a church. The Pope recognizes the group as a church, and assigns them to the care of the local Latin-rite or other bishop of appropriate rite.

An ordinary governs a local particular church (diocese or eparchy). A sui iuris particular church does not need its own dioceses to be church; the Pope’s recognition is enough. The Pope isn’t their ordinary, but their hierarch.
 
Well yes. I think the OP said “churches sui iuris sans hierarchy” meaning “churches sui iuris, no member of which is a hierarch”. (The Russian Catholic Church and the Belorussian Catholic Church.)
But that’s the point. You can have faithful of a tradition who are not organized under a bishop as head of a sui juris Church, but that is not a sui juris Church without a hierarch - its a group of faithful of common tradition outside of an ecclesiastical church (e.g. peoples in diaspora or in a country where their faith tradition and/r Church was suppressed). A sui juris Church by definition has a hierarch.
 
The OP asked how a group without a presiding bishop can be a church. The Pope recognizes the group as a church, and assigns them to the care of the local Latin-rite or other bishop of appropriate rite.

An ordinary governs a local particular church (diocese or eparchy). A sui iuris particular church does not need its own dioceses to be church; the Pope’s recognition is enough. The Pope isn’t their ordinary, but their hierarch.
That’s not a Church (capital “C”) in the ecclesiastical sense. They are faithful of a given rite and tradition, under the care of a local hierarch.

sui juris Church” does not equal “Rite”
 
Theologically, how are we to understand churches sui iuris sans hierarchy? “Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.” - St Ignatius of Antioch. A church without a bishop is a body without a head - incomplete by definition. I understand that these churches are very small but would it be so difficult to find a hierarch for them? Take the Russians - there could be one bishop appointed with global jurisdiction. It would be a difficult task, but at least the Russians would have a bishop of there own. The Anglican ordinariates are very small at present, but they have still been given ordinaries with quasi-episcopal power.
Those sui iuris Churches that are neither patriarchal, major archepiscopal, nor metropolitan are in the jurisdiction of the Holy See.

CCEOCanon 174
A Church sui iuris, which is neither patriarchal, major archiepiscopal nor metropolitan is entrusted to a hierarch who presides over it according to the norm of common law and particular law established by the Roman Pontiff.

Canon 175
These Churches immediately depend on the Apostolic See; however, the hierarch exercises the rights and obligations mentioned in can. 159, nn. 3-8, as a delegate of the Apostolic See.

Canon 176
If common law remits something to particular law or to the superior administrative authority of a Church sui iuris, the competent authority in these Churches is the hierarch who presides over it according to the norm of law with the consent of the Apostolic See, unless it is expressly stated otherwise.
Such churches today are:Ukrainian
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Great Britain (Exarch Hlib Lonchyna)
  • Apostolic Exarchate of France (Exarch Borys Andrij Gudziak)
  • Deutschland und Skandinavien (Exarch Bishop Petro Kryk)
Greek-Melkite
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Argentina (vacant)
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Venezuela (Exarch Georges Kahhalé Zouhaïraty)
Armenian
  • Armenian Apostolic Exarchate of América Latina e México (Apostolic Exarch Vartán Waldir Boghossian)
  • Armenian Ordinariate of East Europe (Ordinary: Archbishop Raphaël François Minassian )
  • Armenian Ordinariate of Greece (vacant)
  • Armenian Ordinariate of Romania (vacant, Administrator: Archbishop György-Miklós Jakubínyi)
Syrian
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Venezuela (Exarch Hikmat Beylouni)
Syro-Malankar
  • Apostolic Exarchate of United States of America (Exrch Thomas Naickamparampil)
    Ruthenian (Not in the Jurisdiction of Metr. Arch. of Pittsburgh)
  • Eparchy of Mukacheve (Exarch Milan Šašik)
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Czech Republic, Faithful of Eastern Rite (Exarch Ladislav Hučko)
Hungarian
  • Eparchy of Hajdúdorog (Eparch Peter Fülöp Kocsis)
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Miskolc (Exarch Atanáz Orosz)
Italo-Greek, Italo-Albanian
  • Eparchy of Lungro (Apostolic Administrator Archbishop Salvatore Nunnari)
  • Eparchy of Piana degli Albanesi (Eparch Sotir Ferrara)
  • Territorial Abbacy of Santa Maria di Grottaferrata (Abbot Emiliano Fabbricatore)
Bulgarian
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Sofia of the Bulgarians (Exarch Christo Proykov)
Greek
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Greece, Faithful of Eastern Rite (Exarch Dimitrios Salachas)
Albanian
  • Apostolic Administration of Southern Albania (Apostolic Administrator Hil Kabashi)
Macedonian
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Macedonia (Apostolic Administrator Kiro Stojanov)
Former Republic of Yugoslavia
  • Eparchy of Križevci (Eparch Nikola Kekić)
  • Apostolic Exarchate of Serbia Montenegro (Apostolic Administrator Bishop Djura Džudžar)
Belarusian
  • Belarusian Catholic mission in Great Britain, London and Antwerp (Alexander Nadson, Apostolic Visitator)
Russian
  • Eastern Catholics in the Russian Federation (Joseph Werth, Apostolic Administrator of Siberia)
 
Thank you for the various answers…
Is there any official reason offered for why the Russians still do not have a hierarch of their own? Does the Church say that there must be “x” number of faithful to warrant a bishop? I don’t think so, as there are some pretty sparesly populated dioceses in the world… dioceses/eparchies can vary from several thousand faithful to several million (some of the larger Latin metropolitan sees come to mind). There’s certainly no attempt to have an equal distribution of faithful…(nor should there be). In many provinces the metropolitan archdiocese has more faithful than all of the other dioceses of hte province combined…
 
Those sui iuris Churches that are neither patriarchal, major archepiscopal, nor metropolitan are in the jurisdiction of the Holy See.
yes, and if not organized under an Exarchate they are a … sui juris Church ?

for example: Russian Greek Catholics
 
Same question I had back in post #3. 😉
Exactly - in the end it seems to be legal fiction… if the Church is going to recognize the Russians as a Church sui iuris in their own right… just give them a bishop! Goes back to my last question… has anyone offered a reason why the two Russian sees remain vacant year after year…? (I think there were two Exarchates originally?)
 
Exactly - in the end it seems to be legal fiction… if the Church is going to recognize the Russians as a Church sui iuris in their own right… just give them a bishop! Goes back to my last question… has anyone offered a reason why the two Russian sees remain vacant year after year…? (I think there were two Exarchates originally?)
Errr because of the attitude of Moscow ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top