Sviatoslav Shevchuk, from the "Religious Information Service of Ukraine"
Louis Epstein gave us a heads up on Sviatoslav Shevchuk’s election, the very day it was sanctioned by the pope, i.e., March 25, 2011.
This is what Louis, a cardinal-watcher, said on that day: “The election as Major Archbishop of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church of a man who will not turn 50 until May 2020 and will certainly be a Cardinal by then opens the door to a new elector-under-50 unless Benedict XVI lives as long as Leo XIII.”
Today, Marko B. of Croatia, another cardinal-watcher, sent me an e-mail with a subject line along the lines of the title of this post. He went onto add: “Since Lubomyr Husar turn 80 in February 2013, Shevcuk could become cardinal by 2015 (I expect the next consistory in November 2012), which would make him by far the youngest cardinal.”
That he opts for a youthful, immaculately-trimmed goatee as opposed to an unkempt mangy beard definitely makes me like him (even more). Way to go. Who knows, my successor may even have the pleasure of considering him a papabile c.2050! [That will NOT be the Next Pope, but most like the one after that.]
Here are some links:
1/ Wikipedia — short bio.
2/ Kiev Post on his election.
3/ Ukrainian News agency on his election.
80 Responses to “40-Year Old Bishop, Sviatoslav Shevchuk, Elected Major Archbishop of Kiev-Galicia — Immediate Cardinalabili”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
If you would reduce the Apostles´ number to a pure “statistical” level – yes it is right that there are altogether 13 BUT for a deeper understanding you have also to know that in the Early Church “the Twelve” had an exceptionally symbolic meaning – the Church being the “New Israel” was founded on the 12 Apostles (as a kind of institution) in the same way how the fundaments of “old” Israel were the 12 tribes. I already wrote that St. Paul had certain difficulties to be accepted by the other Apostles but finally he was accepted by them – it is known that he himself called “the least one” or even “miscarriage” when he compared himself to the other Apostles.
Paul was not married to consecrate himself to his mission – in this context it is also known that he took the (yet mentioned) Nasirean oath which in Judaism was very well known and demanded from the person concerned to live in an ascetic manner.
I am sure that there always have been those to whom the Holy Spirit made His revelations – certainly that is not as spectacular as it was on the day of Pentecost in the Primitive Community of Jerusalem but there are without any doubts who are (as we Orthodox would say) “Bearers of the Holy Spirit” which can be seen by their lives and deeds.
Once again concerning Irenaeus: If you read the sequel of the text already mentioned (AH III,3.4) you will learn the following: “But Polycarp can also be mentioned. Not only that he was the Apostles´ disciple and lived together with many of those who saw the Lord he also was appointed by the Apostles (…) as bishop of the Church of Smyrna”. Hereby it is clear that for St. Irenaeus (and not only for him – the Church Father summarizes hereby what was commonly believed by all) the Churches of Rome and Smyrna are undoubtedly on the same level according to the criterionof apostolicity and the dignity linked to that. In that very consequence I am honoured to say that I AM a part of this apostolic succession which according to Irenaeus´ witness was equally given to all local churches preserving apostolicity and orthodoxy (in the sense that they confessed Christ as Lord and Saviour).
As for Pius XII and all the stuff linked to his ponificate I have only to repeat “relata refero” – I referred to a contemporary commentary, you draw your conclusions…there we are. Concerning Tardini there is also the witness of one of his closest collaborators that in his relationship to John XXIII (besides there was a kind of mutual esteem among them) he did not hesitate to show all the emotions which he had to suppress or to hide under Pacelli´s pontificate.
Salvador Miranda notes in Cardinal Confalonieri’s biography that in 1937,Pope Pius XI intended to name him Sostituto of the Secretariat of State,but the then Secretary,soon Pius XII,got him to name Montini instead…Confalonieri turned down an archbishopric from Pius XII in 1939 but accepted one in 1941,got the cardinalate from John XXIII,and eventually buried Paul VI in his capacity as Dean.
Father,
I am indeed HUMBLED to be interacting with a bona fide successor to the Apostles. Wow.
Father, can you still PLEASE clarify a few points. Short answers would be best … because I am kind of real pressed for time … as you may have noticed.
1/ You said: ‘If you would reduce the Apostles´ number to a pure “statistical” level …’. I am still confused. You, NOT me, said 12. Then YOU added Saul. That is 13. So there is no statistical anything. I just want to know why you said black if you meant white.
2/ Can YOU please send US your Apostolic Succession, ASAP. I will be HONORED to publish it.
3/ So this now means all priests rather than Bishops are part of the Apostolic Succession including the ones convicted of the recent sex abuse? Right?
4/ Saul being an Apostle is based PURELY on his words. Right? As far as I know, and I could be wrong, Jesus didn’t pop back over to Jerusalem … after he knocked poor Saul off his horse … and say to his brother ‘Hey, James … guess what. I got us a convert that will change the whole game.’ Didn’t Peter and James have issues with Saul.
5/ So per what you are telling me … anybody who CLAIMS that they were visited by the HS is an Apostle. Right? If it works for the goose it must work for the gander. Didn’t Pius XII have a Jesus moment in the Vatican gardens? Or was that Paul VI? But, so … whichever … should also now be an APOSTLE … rather than Apostle/Petrine successor. Right?
6/ Saul and the Nasirean oath. Is someone living an ascetic life permitted to go to a stoning and throw stones? That doesn’t sound too ascetic to me. Wasn’t be selling expensive Oriental rugs to tourist with guaranteed shipping anywhere in the Roman Empire?
Thanks father. I am SO excited about YOU. Wow. Yes, yes I have dealt with Archbishops … but that was different.
All the best. Cheers.
Louis,
Few things. This comment about Confalonieri. Are you trying to buttress my contention that some prelates did not want to be too closely associated with Pius XII or are you trying to make another point? If so … can you please spell it out because I didn’t get it. Sorry.
When you talk about Manchester it would be helpful if you said Manchester, NH (the Queen City) so that folks like ME don’t automatically think you are talking about Manchester, Lancashire with its peerless football teams, hallowed cricketing legacy and very comely maids. As for my bishop from NH not being the next pope … that is no surprise. He is American and I have already established, conclusively, that there will be no US pope in YOUR lifetime. But a cardinal? Don’t you think the Vatican should reward him for his sterling service to the Church. Basically he didn’t do anything different to Cardinal Ratzinger. Louis, I have to say I am saddened by the bishop, the pope and the Vatican. I yearn for the bad old days. Shouldn’t the bishop have excommunicated the guy … obviously via FaceBook … on the spot? What is it with all this hand wringing. The guy is a practicing Catholic. Excommunicate him. That is my take.
******
This week … once I put Eris to bed … I will work on another post. IF you can get me a kosher oldest cardinals list … merging everything that has gone before in these comments … I will post it.
Just looked up when Passover is. They are selling Matzo at the local Supermarket. They only do that for passover! I love Matzo Brie. So that has been my breakfast for the last few days. The Supermarket sells all Passover products 75% off the week after. We go and buy everything including the candles!
Thanks. Cheers.
Every LDS ordained to any level has a documented “line of authority”,of course they have that shortcut of Peter,James,and John coming down from Heaven to ordain Joseph Smith.
That was in New York state … right? Close to you?
I should remember. I have read some about LDS. All three came down. Not the HS?
Cheers.
Anura,
to begin with and to prevent a wrong interpretation: When I mentioned my example I did that only to illustrate that all bishops, priests an deacons theoretically belong to the yet mentioned Apostolic Continuity which on the other hand is conditioned by fidelity to the Holy Tradition handed down by the Apostles. If this is not preserved the continuity is broken – this may happen by introducing doctrines which do not correspond neither to Revelation nor to Tradition. In this sense I do not have a “particular” succession, but through my bishop and the jurisdictions he belongs I am linked to the Orthodox ecclesiastical community which holds the unchanged Faith proclaimed by the Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church.
Concerning the number of the Apostles I yet told you how this was understood, I already mentioned the symbolism of the number being an equivalent to the tribes of Israel…there had to be a minimum of 12 – therefore it came that the Apostles elected a new “confrere” to replace Judas but there is no limitation “to the top”. There are even those who are named “equal to the Apostles” – in Orthodox tradition one of those is Mary Magdalene…
According to Orthodox understanding being a part of the Apostolic Tradition is closely linked to the yet mentioned fidelity to these values; from this point of view I certaily do not accept that Roman Catholic bishops and priests (I suppose that you allude to them) fully represent the authenticity of Tradition as it is understood by the Orthodox Church.But let us suppose that the Roman Catholic understanding of apostolicity could be accepted then it is a fact (even if it may sound quite cynical) that the moral condition of their office holders nothing to do with the validity of their succession…this would be broken only if such a bishop or priest would be deposed.
It is also important to note that a priest for himself cannot be a part of the Apostolic Succession if his bishop is not…for Orthodox ecclesiology the canonical communion with a bishop (being the “head” of a local church called diocese) is absolutely necessary.
Once again concerning Apostle Paul: Read Acts 9,26-28 indicating that St. Paul was accepted as Apostle (by the way I really dislike the flippant manner you are writing of him)…the “issues” (as you write) which the other Apostles had with him did never concern his apostolicity, there were conflicts concerning the question how those who were of pagan background are to be integrated in the Church
WHERE did I write that those who are visited by the Holy Spirit are to be called Apostles using exactly these words ???… I really do not understand your further argumentations/questions…to be in Apostolic Succession is not necessarily linked to personal revelations of the Holy Spirit though Roman Catholics as well as Orthodox do believe that the fundament of the ecclesiastical hierarchy is the Grace of the Holy Spirit.
St. Paul took the Nasirean oath after his conversion to Christ – Acts 18,18 indicates that this happend when he did his missionary work in Corinth…so your quite despising comment is rather superfluous…
All the best !
Father,
You now say: St. Paul took the Nasirean oath after his conversion to Christ.
My question was … as a good Jew … why wasn’t he married PRIOR to this. Wasn’t he in his 30s by then. Weren’t most Jewish men, Jesus being an exception, married by then? At that stage you said he took the Nasirean oath. Well … see! That didn’t answer my question. That is why I continued to probe it.
Cheers.
Father, you said: ‘I certaily do not accept that Roman Catholic bishops and priests (I suppose that you allude to them) fully represent the authenticity of Tradition as it is understood by the Orthodox Church.’
Father, that is MUTUAL … right? Roman Catholics don’t accept that the Orthodox as fully representing the Tradition either … right? But, to the victor the spoils.
Anura,
concerning the chronology of his life it is rather difficult to say when exactly St. Paul was born but it is supposed that at that time when he lived at Jerusalem he was about twenty to twenty-five years old. At that time he prepared himself for becoming a scribe or a rabbi being a “student” of the then renowned Rabbi Gamaliel and also an religious official charged by the High Priests with the destruction of the Christian community (see Acts 8,3). You are certainly right that according to the Traditions of Judaism marriages generally are contracted as soon as possible but it also may not be forgotten that Paul (at that time still Saul) had to be considered as disciple who was about to get his social status in the full sense of the word after having finished his formation. Even if it is not exactly known at what stage of his formation Saul´s life changed in this most radical way there are no doubts that according to the customs which are valid even today Paul would have had to marry before being made a rabbi but then he evidently took the decision to opt for an unmarried way of life. There were some efforts to explain this – one interpretation states that the Apostle doing his missionary work in the Greco-Roman world imitated in a certain sense those philosophers who for idealistic reasons wanted to be free of any kind of a “too close” human relationship…but this is merely a theory.
All the best !
It is only the question HOW this victory is to be understood…
That was very helpful. Thank you.
Father,
Have you heard of the book ‘Paul: The Mind of the Apostle’?
I have it, BUT I haven’t read it. About three years ago while doing some commuting, in the Winter, I listened to the first part of it on tape.
Given that I was driving (in winter) I couldn’t give it undivided attention and I am tend to be better and remembering things I read.
OK … but now I am going back and looking.
When I said he sold rugs … BOY … I was close. He sold tents, WITH leather floors! That is where I remembered rugs. So … I was kind of on mark there. Leather floors … rugs.
I just looked up the rabbinical stuff. Mr. Wilson has a different take to YOU. I will come back to that … later tonight. Wife is buzzing me.
Thanks. Cheers.
The ordination of Joseph Smith as an Apostle was supposedly performed by Peter,James,and John in 1829.This is distinct from the visitations of the Angel Moroni,and the “First Vision” of years before,which (only in the versions told after 1838) involved the Father and the Son both appearing to Joseph.
I was trying to point up the complicated history with Pius and his protonotaries apostolic.I don’t know just what Confalonieri felt about Pius and wonder if he ever left memoirs.
I will shortly be restocking on Matzo…and on Coca-Cola,which only in this season is available from USA bottlers in a formula that still uses sugar rather than the cheaper high fructose corn syrup (which is not accepted by Ashkenazi Jews under the more stringent requirements of “kosher for Passover”).Look for the yellow caps on the bottles.
Louis,
Have you ventured this far up North? Strange State. One of the most homogeneous. When I moved here in 1986 there were very few non-whites and even fewer Democrats. In 1993 they did NOT have a kosher restaurant in the whole state. I had two ultra-orthodox Jews arriving from Israel for business. One meeting was at our house, in the evening. I was consulting for an Israeli company called Adacom. They were most helpful (and amused). They e-mailed me to stock up on CANNED coke. Sure enough when the two arrived ALL they would have was the canned coke from the can. Bottom line, though there is a Temple ~30 miles out (that we go to for their annual Summer food fair) not many Jews, one Sri Lankan, one Indian, no blacks that I have seen, 4 Chinese, no Japanese etc. etc. You get the picture. So DOUBT whether I will see Yellow Caps up here. I will look. Not that we will buy it. We drink v. little soda and that, always, diet. We were at a birthday party last Saturday … and each, separately was aghast that they didn’t have ANY diet soda.
Pius sure did have a complicated history. PERIOD.
******
Notice you been silent for the last 48 hours on the Apostolic succession discussion … leaving me to do all the batting.
******
Do you get TLC on TV? There is a program that you should watch. I just saw a few minutes of it.
Father,
The Wilson book on Paul is available on Google book. Here is the link.
Also the Amazon link I gave earlier. The book has ‘Look Inside’. So using one or both you can read some of the pages.
Please read pages 30 & 31. Even his Jewishness is questioned let alone him studying to be a rabbi.
Then please read page 51. Saul, definitely tent maker, most likely a trader in hides was also a temple guard. Yes, he appeared to have had some exposure to a Jewish scholarship but not to the extent you are saying.
Anyway ….
Cheers.
I don’t get much soda (A friend who visits often is a Cokaholic) but never get the “diet” version of anything.Canned Coca-Cola has the kosher-but-not-for-Passover sweetener in the USA.
Anura,
well, you are citing ONE opinion about St. Paul which by no means can be regarded as definitely prevailing…what about the other witnesses through the centuries including the Church Fathers and renowned biblical scholars – did all of them tell only lies then ? I am quite well aware of the fact that especially nowadays the Apostle has become an object of speculations – linked to that are for example accusations concerning his allegedly misogynic attitude and his “Christian antijudaism”. Furthermore there are some who state that Paul was the “real founder” of Christianity by putting the charismatic Message of Salvation given by Christ into a “dogmatic frame” but these hypotheses are quite often contradictory and sometimes even senseless.
All the best !
Concerning the question if the Apostle Paul was a rabbinic scholar, scribe or even Pharisee please look up
http://books.google.de/books?id=OPjJtJ3kTrsC&lpg=PP1&dq=apostle%20paul&pg=PA28#v=onepage&q&f=false
especially page 19;
likewise this is stated at
http://books.google.de/books?id=pQY7AAAAcAAJ&dq=apotre%20paul&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q=apotre%20paul&f=false
and
http://books.google.de/books?id=pbePRvOCPaAC&lpg=PP1&dq=paul&pg=PA13#v=onepage&q&f=false,
in particular on page 11.
Father,
I am ONE who subscribes, whole hardheartedly, to that last statement! It will take a lot to dislodge that opinion.
Thanks.
Louis,
I LEARNT that canned coke is Kosher after that visit. [That was kind of my point of telling that story.] I worked 90 hour a week for that Israeli company. It was a riot. Some of the NICEST people. But the HUGE swings in disposition. So one week I deal with folks who are kosher to the nth degree. Next week, I meet up with two … in Boston … go out for lunch and they make a POINT of ordering ham. Used to have a Jewish friend who lived in MA who owned a Cessna. Strict, modern Jew. Taught me how to make Matzo Brie. But, every Easter Monday, like clockwork, I would get a call at 9:30am. ‘OK, if I fly up for lunch?’ Deanna and I would crack up. He was coming up, flying 45 minutes, for our leftover Easter ham.
******
Louis, I guess you haven’t been to Israel. I did once. Nightmare trip. They treated me as a Palestine. Was not fun. They detained me at the airport for 90 minutes … and then just said ‘go … go’.
But, I learnt another thing. Most of the affluent households had THREE (3) refrigerators. I knew about the TWO(2). One for the dairy, one for the meat. The third caught me by surprise … though coming from Ceylon I should have guess. The third was for the pork.
In Ceylon pork is sold at open air markets as …. wait for it … wait for it. NOT pork. In Sinhalese it goes: ‘those that know … know.’ Brilliant … right.
Cheers.
Anura,
beyond any doubts St. Paul manged to formulate some essential elements of Christian belief even before any other canonical texts of the New Testament: The central message of Christ´s Resurrection is to be found in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 15 which was written about the year 50 (in contrast to that the earliest written Gospel is to be dated about the year 70). From that point of view it is evident that the Apostle certainly contributed to the formulation of Christology but I also have to concretize that my critical assessment was directed against those tendencies that Paul by taking some elements of the Early Church´s “Jesus tradition” did not hesitate to invent the “Christological myth” thus stylizing the Galilean rabbi to the Son of God and Redeemer. Closely linked to that is also the allegation that St. Paul by introducing principles of Church order a is to blame for having introduced concepts which are not immediately linked to the Church´s charismatic dimension.
All the best !
BUT I firmly believe in all that too! [smile] To me, and given my limited intellect and zero education I could be dead wrong [and when I am dead I can finally find the real answer], Jesus was born a Jew, lived as a devout Jew and died a Jew — maybe even thinking he was THE Messiah. All the rest is thanks to Saul. Nothing to get too worked up about. Same God. Different interpretations. That book … I quoted yesterday …. even has a sentence that stresses that Saul, like Jesus, also died a Jew. Don’t get me wrong. I am in AWE of Saul — the GREATEST marketer of all time. Changed world history. Even Steve Jobs or my buddy Don Listwin [who wrote the Preface to my third book], though they made billions, are not in the same league. Plus, I am eternally grateful to him for his stance on circumcision — not that I had anything to worry about. Sri Lankan dads are very enlightened on that subject. Thank be to God. [Ah ... before I forget ... must send a link to Louis.]
As a Brit I am also grateful that we had the SENSE to have a St. Paul’s. To me [again I stress I am but a shallow and totally lacking in erudition] this is much more apropos.
By the way, I don’t blame him for anything. Just hold him in utmost reverence. What a man. To me HE is THE MAN that changed the World. So, again, we are at one. Saul is not to blame. He is the man. Man of the double millennium.
Yes, I know … you are going to tell me that I am wrong. So what is new?
Cheers.
You never responded as to whether you can pick up TLC on your rabbit ears.
But, check this out. Somebody gave me a head’s up. I watched a bit of it last night, in between the World Cup. It was good. http://tlc.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=2.1213.56481.39612.3.
Enjoy. Well, maybe not.
Cheers.
Down to 30%. YOU better start doing some marketing. You would be good at that. I can see you … what is that scraggly beard … in Times Square … handing out pamphlets … ‘Be Like ME’
P.S., Ever thought about God. So what is it? Made in his image or something. Not sure of the exact wordings since OBVIOUSLY I was made from a different, oriental mold.
To tell you that you are wrong …why should I ? Generally said we are in accord, I absolutely agree with all the things you mentioned in your last comment. You referred to one of the crucial points to understand the Apostle – the fact that during his whole life he was deeply rooted in the rabbinic tradition. It would be totally wrong if Paul would be interpreted as somebody who intended to break up with the continuity of the so called Judeo-Christians of the Apostolic community of Jerusalem or even tried to draw a counter-image. Yes, it is known that there were conflicts concerning the admission of those who were of pagan background but finally the decision of the so called “Council of the Apostles” (held most probably in 48 or 49 AD) sanctioned the two ways to become a Christian. In the course of history St. Paul who is also called “Apostle of the Gentiles” was also shown as the main representant of those who were quite critical towards the Jewish rabbinic heritage…too often he was abused to serve as an example that he though himself being a former Pharisee, scribe, rabbi or something that like later on regarded all that as unnecessary and even had a hostile attitude towards that. In this very consequence also the moment of his “conversion” and all its consequences falsely were interpreted as a total “break with the past” while he himself never denied anything concerning his past, he only was firmly convinced that being aware of Christ´s Mystery is the fulfillment of the Old Testament Law and the Prophets. As for his presumable disposition to “law and order” in the Church I should even say that exactly concerning these aspects it is quite clear that he hereby was influenced by the esteem which the rabbis and scribes showed towards every kind of Divine Commandments.
All the very best !
Father,
I don’t think I ever said I believed that Saul was ‘deeply rooted in the rabbinic tradition.’ I said that I believe that he DIED a Jew. Not sure when he fully embraced Judaism. Doesn’t matter. He changed the world. I just wish more people, especially in this country would appreciate that. But, many in here believe that Jesus spoke English.
Lets end this discussion.
Thanks.
If the visit from those Orthodox was not during Passover,when stricter rules as to what is kosher apply,the kashruth of the cans is immaterial.Look at the cans…if they say “high fructose corn syrup” with no mention of “sugar” or “sucrose” as an alternative (not additional) ingredient,the cola therein is not kosher for Passover.That’s why the yellow-cap Coke emerges only at this time of year.
Louis, I did say this was in 1993. Are YOU paying attention or are you on a sugar high? [smile] So how come so many of my Jewish friends don’t know about shrimp?
1993 had a Passover just as any other year…