WI: A Ukrainian Pope?

Pesigalam

Banned
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubomyr_Husar
His Eminent Beatitude
  • Lubomyr Husar
  • Любомир Гузар
Cardinal, Major Archbishop Emeritus of Kiev-Galicia


Lubomyr Husar MSU (Ukrainian: Любомир Гузар, Liubomyr Huzar; born 26 February 1933) is the major archbishop emeritus of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, a minority church in Ukraine but the largest sui juris Eastern church in full communion with the Holy See. He is also a Cardinal of the Catholic Church.
...
Cardinal Husar was one of the three Eastern Catholics to participate in the papal conclave, 2005, the others being Ignace Daoud of the Syrian Catholic Church and Varkey Vithayathil of the Syro-Malabar Church. (Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir and Stéphanos II Ghattas of the Maronite Church and Coptic Catholic Church respectively were both over 80 and therefore could not take part.) At that papal conclave, he was one of the cardinals considered papabile, something unusual for an Eastern Catholic...
...
On 26 February 2013, 2 days before the announced resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Husar turned 80 and lost his right to participate in a conclave.
So, what if His Eminent Beatitude Lubomyr Husar had become Pope -- either in 2005 or sometime before 2013 (assuming here that Pope Benedict XVI abdicates a bit earlier than he did OTL)?

How would this impact the relations between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches?
What are some policies Pope Husar might pursue?
How would this impact global politics?
What if he still pope during something like the OTL Ukraine Crisis? OTL, Patriarch Filaret (the head of the Kiev Patriarchate Ukrainian Orthodox Church) has officially announced that Putin is a "modern-day incarnation of Cain" and is "governed by Satan" -- what would be the fallout if the pope were to say something along those lines?
 
I suspect that the Orthodox Churches generally, the Russian Orthodox Church particularly, will be upset by what they will see as a Western Catholic intrusion into traditionally Orthodox territory. This may be lessened in Ukraine, or alternatively become more intense.

I see no easy way this could avert the political deadlock in Ukraine which would eventually lead to something like what happened OTL. Ukraine ended up being invaded by Russia because the Ukrainian state was weak and divided. How could a Ukrainian Pope have changed this?
 
I suspect that the Orthodox Churches generally, the Russian Orthodox Church particularly, will be upset by what they will see as a Western Catholic intrusion into traditionally Orthodox territory. This may be lessened in Ukraine, or alternatively become more intense.

I see no easy way this could avert the political deadlock in Ukraine which would eventually lead to something like what happened OTL. Ukraine ended up being invaded by Russia because the Ukrainian state was weak and divided. How could a Ukrainian Pope have changed this?

So?
The Soviets, I'm sure viewed the election of a Polish pope 'as a Western intrusion into traditionally Soviet territory.', and the Communist Part of the USSR had a lot more clout than the Russian Orthodox church does.
 
The Ukrainian Pope could be an intermediary that prevents the Ukrainian government from attempting to massacre people in the Euromaidan. This brought the crisis to a head. Furthermore, he could put greater pressure upon Yanokovich to respect human rights should he get elected prior to the Euromaidan crisis.
 
IIRC it's been an unofficial convention that Eastern patriarchs would not seek to head Western sees. So it's probably unlikely, though not totally ASB. It does create headaches legally, though.
 
???Why?
Why would it create any legal problems at all?

The Pope is also the head of the Latin-rite Church, and individuals can't really transfer between rites without special kinds of dispensation. It's problematic legally, therefore, that an individual from another Rite would become head of the Latin Church
 
The Pope is also the head of the Latin-rite Church, and individuals can't really transfer between rites without special kinds of dispensation. It's problematic legally, therefore, that an individual from another Rite would become head of the Latin Church
But, the Pope is primarily the head of the whole Roman Catholic church. That's a pretty minor quibble. Election as Pope really ought to count as all the "special kinds of dispensation".

Also, saying a Maronite or a Ukrainian or whatever can't become Pope is really saying that they're not 'real' Roman Catholics, that they're second class citizens as it were, and I really, really don't think you or the Vatican want to send that kind of message. I mean, it may be true in practice, but you don't want to make it official.
 
But, the Pope is primarily the head of the whole Roman Catholic church. That's a pretty minor quibble. Election as Pope really ought to count as all the "special kinds of dispensation".

I wouldn't call that a "minor quibble". The Bishopric of Rome is a serious and integral part of the Latin Church as much as it is for the whole Church.

Also, saying a Maronite or a Ukrainian or whatever can't become Pope is really saying that they're not 'real' Roman Catholics, that they're second class citizens as it were, and I really, really don't think you or the Vatican want to send that kind of message. I mean, it may be true in practice, but you don't want to make it official.

The Church isn't a Western Democracy. This is mostly irrelevant. There's no promise that "anyone can become the Pope" - the opposite of that is true.
 
I wouldn't call that a "minor quibble". The Bishopric of Rome is a serious and integral part of the Latin Church as much as it is for the whole Church.
True.... But, which is more important?

The Church isn't a Western Democracy.
True, but irrelevant
This is mostly irrelevant.
No, it's not. If you officially announce that a vast part of the Church doesn't count, you will demoralize them heavily, and very much hurt those branches.

There's no promise that "anyone can become the Pope" - the opposite of that is true.
Actually, it IS close to being true. Nominally, the Holy Spirit can lead the Cardinals to pick any celibate Roman Catholic male. While we're talking bishop, not Pope, Ambrose wasn't baptized yet, IIRC, let alone a priest when elected bishop of Milan back when.

I will admit that it's been centuries since the last Greek speaker/Greek rite pope was elected (i.e. before the split - but different rites were used east and west), but it has happened.
 
True.... But, which is more important?

It's not a selection.

True, but irrelevant

No, it's not - you've made a Western liberal point about some Churches being angry they don't have some degree of equality. They know the score.

Actually, it IS close to being true. Nominally, the Holy Spirit can lead the Cardinals to pick any celibate Roman Catholic male. While we're talking bishop, not Pope, Ambrose wasn't baptized yet, IIRC, let alone a priest when elected bishop of Milan back when.

By acclamation of the people, as was common. This is also how Popes were selected for a time and is for the most part totally irrelevant. I'm not saying it can't happen - the Holy Spirit selects whomever he wants (or, if you don't believe that, the political intrigues of the College does) - I'm just saying it's mostly improper.

I will admit that it's been centuries since the last Greek speaker/Greek rite pope was elected (i.e. before the split - but different rites were used east and west), but it has happened.

Most of them were installed by the Byzantine Emperor, not elected.
 
I don't know that much about Church rules, and am not a christian so not an expert of Greek Catholic/Ukrainian Patriarchate/Moscow Patriarchate. However I imagine a strong condemnation of Russia, and pressure on the Italians/Spanish/Portugese to maintain heavy sanctions on Russia.
 
The Ukrainian Pope could be an intermediary that prevents the Ukrainian government from attempting to massacre people in the Euromaidan. This brought the crisis to a head. Furthermore, he could put greater pressure upon Yanokovich to respect human rights should he get elected prior to the Euromaidan crisis.
Why would Yanukovych follow advice of a powerless cleric who has no divisions at his disposal? Over 90 percent of Ukrainian Catholics supported the opposition anyway, so he had no reason to make any concessions to their leader.

Also, violations of human rights were necessary to entrench the regime: Yanukovych was overthrown not because he robbed, jailed, tortured and ultimately massacred his compatriots, but because he was unable to massacre enough people to instill fear. That is, had he followed the Constitution, he would be a harmless democratic figurehead, like Yushchenko before him, and he would get to sit out his term and safely retire (like Yushchenko did), but he was no Yushchenko: he wanted absolute control, and to establish and maintain it, he needed to commit crimes. Do you really think that Pope Husar would have dissuaded Yanukovych (who is technically Orthodox, BTW) from striving for absolute power?
I don't know that much about Church rules, and am not a christian so not an expert of Greek Catholic/Ukrainian Patriarchate/Moscow Patriarchate. However I imagine a strong condemnation of Russia, and pressure on the Italians/Spanish/Portugese to maintain heavy sanctions on Russia.
It might happen ITTL, since Cardinal Husar is an ardent Ukrainian patriot OTL. On the other hand, if elected Pope, he would understand that his office is now universal in nature, and not intended to be used for nationalist purposes (and his pressure would likely backfire anyway, since no European politician would take kindly to a Ukrainian Pope trying to influence governments just because they happen to be majority Catholic).
 
enhanced-11505-1393450632-19.jpg


enhanced-24745-1393451796-9.jpg

^
Reminds me of this

https://www.buzzfeed.com/miriamberg...inian-priest?utm_term=.tqy2wNXq72#.bvJVeZ2Y8V
 
Top