There most certainly are still Eastern Catholic churches named for the Immaculate Conception and the Sacred Heart. The Eparchy of St Nicholas was in fact consecrated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus by none other than Andrey Septytsky.
Code:
Your problem, if you'll look deeper isn't actually with powerless Roman Catholic lay persons like myself, but rather with the Eastern Catholic faithful who in many cases chose to embrace these devotions of their own free will.
Quite frankly when I hear comments like your's I can't help but see the hypocrisy and double standards applied to things like Papal Infallibility. How quickly it can go from "We are not under the Pope, my patriarch is in communion with him" to "Rome has commanded-ordered us to de-latinize" And then of course there's the claims about the greater respect shown to Bishops in the Eastern Rites, than that shown by Traditional RC's, until of course one decides that an Eastern bishop or priest, is in there opinion, of a Latin mindset. Think I'm exaggerating, just check various forums for what get's said about some of the Ruthenian bishops past or present.
I can’t speak for anyone else, only myself. I am under the Pope - under his fatherly care - and I am not aware of having ever shown disrespect to any Eastern bishop (even though I may not happen to agree, for example, with the way in which the bishop handled the SSJK, or with the translation of the Divine Liturgy we have to use). I personally am probably more ultramontane than most Roman Catholics; I know that’s not typical for Byzantine Catholics and some will even tell me I think like a Roman but that’s me; and I would agree that it could appear like a double-standard when people strongly emphasize their Eastern identity and their Orthodoxy against schismatic Orthodox complaints of subjugation to Rome and “Uniatism” but then appeal to the Pope when he is combatting the problems and errors in our Church. What we should be doing is not giving in to the schismatic rhetoric but coming to a theological understanding - we are “under” the Pope not in the sense of being subjugated to him but rather being under his paternal care; if we practice more autocephaly than the Roman Rite it is because the Pope does not intervene when we are already doing things right, and he is not our local primate (he is the Patriarch of the West), and our obedience to him is only in his capacity as universal pontiff.
I also don’t complain about Traditional RC’s; if I practiced in the Roman Rite then I would be one. What’s right for the Roman Rite is right for them, and what’s right for us is right for us, and mixing the two rites is just bad. The committee that crafted the Novus Ordo was trying to imitate the Byzantine Rite (or so some Dominicans once tried to tell me), a comparison which the Byzantines find frankly insulting. Tearing down iconostases, having spoken Liturgies, and putting pews and kneelers in churches (all Latinizations) are less reverent and less orthodox in the Byzantine rite, while standing during Communion, throwing out statues, and having the Words of Institution done out loud (all false implementations of Byzantine practice - or maybe just Protestantizations) are less reverent and less orthodox in the Roman Rite. Each rite has its own integrity, and the body language (kneeling, standing) means different things. In the Roman Rite standing doesn’t have the significance as a form of reverence as it does in the East, while in the East kneeling is solely a penitential practice and is therefore FORBIDDEN - by the canons of the Council in Trullo, which are still authoritative in the East - on Sunday when we celebrate the Lord’s Resurrection.
The devotion to the Sacred Heart is alien to the Eastern expression of the Faith. The heart or “nous” is more like the ground or essence of one’s being in the East, and it’s not compatible with - or means something different from - the heart as expressed in the Latin devotion (which is more the source of sentimental feelings than is the “eye of the heart” which was discussed by St. Basil). It also feels bizarre for us to worship just a part of the body, especially after we went to so much effort to crystallize our Christology to avoid all the heresies which tried to separate Our Lord into different human and divine persons (Nestorianism), or a human body without a human soul (Apollinarianism), or a divine nature without a human nature (Eutychianism), or any number of other false divorces and dichotomies introduced into Our Lord’s nature.
Roman Catholic traditionalism and “Orthodoxy in communion with Rome” are the same movements using the same principles applied to different rites of the Church. Sorry for my bluntness and lack of tact, but there are few things I have seen sillier and more self-contradictory than Roman Catholic traditionalists who want to Latinize the Byzantines and Byzantines infatuated with the Novus Ordo Mass. Both want to preserve the integrity of their own rite; one ought to devote a little bit of understanding to the other rite before rushing to approve the deformed versions.
.