Prof. Roman Reynarowych, (J.S.D.)
Box 87 Jerome Ave Sta.
Bronx, N.Y. 10468
His Eminence John Cardinal Krol,
Archdiocese of Philadelphia,
277 North 17th Street
Phila., Pa.
December 30, 1971
Your Eminence:
We received a transcript of an interview which you held on Monday, Nov. 1971, on channel 3. at 7:30 P.M., Mr. Vince Leonard was interviewing.
After careful consideration of its contents, we came to final conclusion that in order to serve the justice we must reply to your allegations.
During the interview Your Eminence stated that. There was a dedication of a church (of Sts. Sergius and Bacchus in Rome) and the Cardinal Slipyj used the occasion. He is seventy or seventy-nine eighter years old, I believe. He invited people to the dedication of this church and in the process he says he was convoking the 5th synod. Actually, the bishops were meeting, and under suggestions of Secretary of State that they form a conference of bishops as we have in the United States, as other groups have. And they — they met at a number of occasions for this purpose. Cardinal Slipyj uses the word SOBOR as a Ukrainian word which means an assembly or meeting. Now, that can be used in a general term. But it was in no sense a canonical synod because he does not have the authority to call it. The bishops who attended were not under any impression that this was a canonical synod. They were simply there to as the bishops of the United States or any other rite, have a conference of their own to discuss common needs and problems.»
To begin our reply we must state with a grief that you ignored completely the canon law Cleri Sanctissimi, promulgated June 2, 1957. The Sacred Congregation for the Eastern Churches issued on December 23, 1963 a declaration, according to which «the Ukrainian Catholic Metropolitan of Lviv is to be regarded as Major-Archbishop in accordance with canons 324 – 339 Cleri Sanctissimi». Thus, declaration recognized only the status quo which existed with the Metropoly of Lviv. Furthermore, can. 327, no. 2, 1° of the above law states that «Archiepiscopus hàbeat Bynodum permanenter constitutam vel Consilium de quibus servari debent praescripta can. 288-297 «At this point we would like to bring your attention to the fact that according to the cited law Archbishop Major and Metropolitan of Lviv, Joseph Cardinal Slipyj «habeat Synodumpermanenter constitutam», but not, as you put it,» it was in no sense a canonical synod because he does not have the authority to call it».
We need clear understanding of laws which are the only answer to the whole problem.
The dogmas accepted at the Vatican II must be respected and followed through. The reason for this is clear: The unity of the Catholic Church cannot be built on betrayal of truth. And the truth of the matter is that the Council «solemnly declares that the churches of East fully enjoy the right and are in duty bound to rule themselves. Each should do so according to its proper and individual procedures (art. 5 Decree on the Eastern Catholic Churches). In reference to the Eastern Rite Patriarchs the art. 7 of the above Decree states that «By the name Eastern Patriarch is meant the bishop who has jurisdiction over all bishops (including metropolitans), clergy, and people of his own territory or rite, in accordance with the norms of law and without prejudice to the primacy of the Roman Pontiff». This canon was also approved in «Cleri Sanctissimi», can. 216, no. 2. Further, the art. 10 of the Decree tells us that «What has been said of Patriarchs applies as well to major archbishops, who preside over the whole of some individual Church or rite.» This law was based on «Romanum Pontificem», Feb. 28, 1596, and «Cleri Sanctissimi», can. 324-327. Finally, the art. 11 of the Decree concludes that «Inasmuch as the patriarchal office is a traditional form of government in the Eastern Church, this Sacred Ecumenical Council earnestly desires that where needed, new patriarchates should be erected». In application of all cited laws, we must conclude that the Ukrainian Catholic Church has all legal rights to establish its own Patriarchate.
By virtue of that, His Beatitude, Major Archbishop, Joseph Cardinal Slipyj, Head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, was entirely justified to convoke the Fifth Synod, or SOBOR of the Ukrainian Cath. Church in Rome. Furthermore, the work “SOBOR” is termed in history of the Ukrainian Church only to legal Synods of the Church Fathers, but not, as you put it «an assembly or meeting». The bishops who attended the Fifth Synod of the Ukrainian Cath. Church in Rome were fully aware of. the fact that they attend the canonical Synod or «SOBOR». They were in no sense attending «a conference of their own, as the bishops of the United States or any other rite», because they came from diaspora and the Major Archbishop, Metropolitan of Lviv, Josyf Cardinal Slipyj «presided over» that Synod according to art, 10 of the Decree on the Eastern Catholic Churches.
In conclusion we assert that your interpretation of the legal status of the Ukrainian Catholic Church is invalid because it is inconsistent with the Decrees on the Eastern Catholic Churches accepted by Vatican II Synod.
Sincerely,
Roman Reynarowych
