While the Russian Greek Catholic see in Russia is vacant, Bishop Joseph Werth has been "dual-hatted" as Ordinary for the Catholics of the Byzantine Rite in the Russian Federation since 2004. This mandate covers both Russian and Ukrainian Catholics in Russia (and any other Byzantine rite Catholics present there, but those are the groups that have parishes).
This situation is not ideal, but it at least provides some dedicated episcopal supervision within Russia. The canonical situation is more difficult in other parts of the world, most of which have no formal alternative to Latin episcopal supervision, which is usually disinterested and not infrequently overtly hostile. Ironically, it seems not to be the Russian Orthodox Church that has been the obstacle to provision, there are reasons to think they would not object, but Roman indifference.
I think the disruption to dialogue with the Orthodox could get Pope Francis out of a theological bind that he is in - that of Synodality. With the Russian Catholic Church having no hierarchy, and being Sui Juris, I am at a loss to see how Synodality could work without letting the clergy of the Russian Catholic Church elect bishops to the two vacant sees.
Presumably though, it's not just Moscow that would cringe at the pope erecting a new patriarch in Kyiv, right? Surely Constantinople, and the Orthodox Church of Ukraine it has midwifed into the world, would also look dimly on such a step? Has there been any statement from The OCU or Constantinople on the Pope's consecration? Given the geopolitical situation, perhaps the apparent window to take actions that antagonize Moscow would be balanced out by the antagonization of Ukraine's autocephalous church?
While the Russian Greek Catholic see in Russia is vacant, Bishop Joseph Werth has been "dual-hatted" as Ordinary for the Catholics of the Byzantine Rite in the Russian Federation since 2004. This mandate covers both Russian and Ukrainian Catholics in Russia (and any other Byzantine rite Catholics present there, but those are the groups that have parishes).
This situation is not ideal, but it at least provides some dedicated episcopal supervision within Russia. The canonical situation is more difficult in other parts of the world, most of which have no formal alternative to Latin episcopal supervision, which is usually disinterested and not infrequently overtly hostile. Ironically, it seems not to be the Russian Orthodox Church that has been the obstacle to provision, there are reasons to think they would not object, but Roman indifference.
I think the disruption to dialogue with the Orthodox could get Pope Francis out of a theological bind that he is in - that of Synodality. With the Russian Catholic Church having no hierarchy, and being Sui Juris, I am at a loss to see how Synodality could work without letting the clergy of the Russian Catholic Church elect bishops to the two vacant sees.
Is this the end of Realkirchepolitik?
Presumably though, it's not just Moscow that would cringe at the pope erecting a new patriarch in Kyiv, right? Surely Constantinople, and the Orthodox Church of Ukraine it has midwifed into the world, would also look dimly on such a step? Has there been any statement from The OCU or Constantinople on the Pope's consecration? Given the geopolitical situation, perhaps the apparent window to take actions that antagonize Moscow would be balanced out by the antagonization of Ukraine's autocephalous church?