Pope
Benedict’s gesture is only possible, and perhaps only warranted, in the our day
and age. No Pope has stepped down for six-hundred years and, until the late
twentieth century, bishops only resigned in extraordinary circumstances. When a
bishop was no longer fit to govern his diocese, a coadjutor was appointed to
govern while the bishop officially retained his headship.
Then
came the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) and the sweeping reforms that
followed. Of these reforms was the
introduction of mandatory retirement for all pastors of souls and for church
officials. Bishops and priests were required to submit their resignations upon
reaching the age of seventy five.
In 1970 Pope Paul VI extended this law to cardinals who, nonetheless,
were permitted to continue to take part in the College of Cardinals until the
age of eighty years, at which time they automatically ceased to be
decision-making members of the Roman Curia. Yet the head of the Universal Church, the Pope, was not
subjected to this legislation (indeed the Roman Pontiff is the lawgiver).
Mandatory
retirement caused controversy within church circles. Some protested, some
complained, some grumbled under their breath, while others accepted retirement
willingly and even gladly. Over
the years, once bishops had submitted their resignations, the Pope sometimes
chose to extend their governance beyond the retirement age, until a suitable
replacement could be found. At the
end of the twentieth century, Pope John Paul II mitigated his predecessor’s law somewhat, allowing
cardinals the over-eighty to take part in initial conclave discussions, up to
but not including the closed voting in the Sistine Chapel.
In
the Eastern Catholic Churches the introduction of mandatory retirement for
bishops caused not a little controversy. Some argued that such a reform did not
suit the traditions nor theological sensibilities of the East. An key issue
concerned the Fathers and Heads of Eastern Catholic Churches, such as
patriarchs and major-archbishops.
Many argued that, like the Pope, heads of their Particular Churches (sui
iuris), should not be subject to mandatory
retirement.
In
the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church Cardinal Yosyf Slipyj strongly opposed such
reforms and would not retire at eighty. Two other Ukrainian bishops followed his example: Neil
Savaryn of Edmonton and Isydor Boretsky of Toronto. In the case of the two Ukrainian Canadian bishops, the
Apostolic See appointed administrators to effectively replace them. In Slipyj’s case, however, Pope John
Paul II convoked the Synod of Ukrainian Bishops to elect a coadjutor and future
successor, while Slipyj continued to head the Church until his death in 1984.
Part
of the retirement issue was resolved in 1990 when John Paul II promulgated the
Code of Canons of the Eastern Catholic Churches. While requiring all Eastern Catholic priests and bishops to
submit their resignations, the Eastern Code did not make a similar stipulation
regarding patriarchs and major-archbishops. Neither does it stipulate what
measures should be taken when the Head of the Particular Church reaches the
point where he is unable to effectively govern.
Both
Slipyj and his successor Myroslav-Ivan Lubachivsky became very frail at the end
of their mandates. While their spiritual headship was preserved, the important
question arose as to who was to govern in their stead. To resolve such questions the Apostolic
See appointed administrators. The Synod of Ukrainian Bishops selected Bishop
Lubomyr Husar as locum tenens and, upon
Lubachivsky’s death in in 2001, it chose Husar as Major-Archbishop. Within
hours of confirming the election, Pope John Paul conferred the cardinatial
dignity upon Husar, making him a member of the de facto Senate of the Universal Church.
Over
the centuries, not a single one of the Ukrainian cardinals (Isydor of Kyiv
+1463, Mykhaylo Levytsky +1858, Sylvestr Sembratovych +1898) attended a
conclave. In 1978 Slipyj was excluded due to age and, thus, in 2005 Lubomyr
Husar became the first Ukrainian cardinal to cast his vote in a papal election.
However, by that time, he had already lost his eyesight and had to recite the
oaths from memory, which eventually led Husar to ponder if he could continue to
effectively lead the Ukrainian Church.
Although
not required to resign, Patriarch Lubomyr could certainly do so voluntarily. In
2011 confered with Pope Benedict before making his decision to step down. And
since then two other Eastern Patriarchs have followed Husar’s example and
retired due to age and infirmity.
Perhaps Benedict XVI considered these resignations in making his own
decision to abdicate.
In
2011, the Synod of Ukrainian Hierarchs selected a very young and energetic
successor to Husar, Sviatoslav Shevchuk. Immediately after his election,
Major-Archbishop (Patriarch) Sviatoslav traveled to Rome to manifest ecclesial
communion with the Roman Pontiff.
It was very telling to witness the Universal Pontiff addressing this
young man as “Your Beatitude”, and to hear the new Head of our Church call the
Bishop of Rome “Most Holy Father.”
Once
again, in 2013 no Ukrainian cardinal will be able to take part in the impending
conclave. Cardinal Husar turns eighty only a few days before, and the
retired Latin Archbishop of Lviv, Cardinal Marian Jaworski, exceeded the
age-limit in 2006.
While
all Catholics feel a great loss at the abdication of their Universal Father,
Ukrainian Catholics still look forward to the day when, God willing, Pope
Benedict’s successor will call upon Patriarch Sviatoslav to join the universal
Senate, becoming perhaps the youngest member of the College of Cardinals.
Evolutio: Despite the absence of Ukrainians within the electoral college, the new Pope's white cassock might be sewn by two women from Lviv who, for in recent years, have been working for the papal taylor Annibale Gammarelli.
Evolutio: Despite the absence of Ukrainians within the electoral college, the new Pope's white cassock might be sewn by two women from Lviv who, for in recent years, have been working for the papal taylor Annibale Gammarelli.
