22. The Setting of the Sun

Bishop Sipovich wrote in his diary on 8 October 1979: "Not feeling very well, I went to see Doctor Jordan... He sent me to the hospital for an X-ray. I took a taxi to hospital, but  decided to walk back from the hospital. I reached Marian House with great difficulty. Deathly weakness, nausea. I thought I would die. The heart. An ambulance was called, but, thinking that I might die on the way, I refused to go. Doctor Nurse came, diagnosed an infarct and ordered 5-6 weeks' rest. I prayed much to the Apostle Peter".

The Bishop's state of health had been giving cause for concern for some time, but this was the first major crisis. As time progressed such incidents became more frequent. One of them happened on Sunday 16 March 1980 in Rome: "I slept well, but in the chapel I could hardly finish celebrating the Liturgy of Saint Basil. Weakness, dizziness, heart pounding, legs giving way. Several times I had to sit down and read the prayers sitting". In London he often felt too weak in the morning to get up to celebrate the Liturgy. But all this was known only to those who were nearest to him.

Obviously the time for round-the-world travels was over, but he still insisted on going to Rome to see to Belarusian church affairs. In autumn 1980 the Bishop visited Paris where on 28 September he celebrated Liturgy for Belarusians who came from all over France, Belgium and Spain. This was to be his last major pastoral engagement outside London, and he found it very exhausting.

Towards the end of 1980 Bishop Sipovich was invited to give a series of lectures on the Belarusian Greek Catholic Church at the London branch of the St Clement Ukrainian University, which was founded by Cardinal Joseph Slipyi. The first lecture took place on 11 December. On 28 January Cardinal Slipyi wrote a letter of thanks to Bishop Sipovich, in which he said: "I express my sincere gratitude for this sign of your cooperation and brotherly understanding of our Church and Nation. The fate of the Belarusian People is more tragic  than ours, and their sufferings and the serious danger to their existence have never been properly understood (by the outside world – A.N.). In history we, the Ukrainians, had so much in common with the Belarusian people. In my public interventions on various occasions I have remembered Your People and their Church, and shall do it in the future". Thus the rift which appeared in 1972 between the two prelates because of the difference of views on the relations between the Belarusian Church and the Ukrainian Patriarchate, was healed at last. More lectures were planned for 1981, but had to be cancelled because of the deterioration of the Bishop's health.

The last years of the Bishop's life were clouded by a hate campaign, unleashed against him by someone whom he considered to be a close friend. His name was Joseph Pazniak. He was a Catholic Belarusian. Sipovich had known him since 1948, and helped to obtain for him a place at Louvain University where he failed in his studies. In 1954 Pazniak returned to London and married an English Catholic girl. It was Father Sipovich who officiated at their marriage. The couple and he became close friends. In the late 1950s the Pazniaks emigrated to the United States. They first settled in New York, but in 1972, after Joseph took early retirement for health reasons, moved to Florida. Bishop Sipovich tried not to miss visiting them whenever he was in the United States, although it was not always easy or convenient. There is a note in the file with their correspondence, in which he wrote: "I did not always want to visit them because I was busy, but I did it at their insistence and invitations". The couple had no children, and when they retired to Florida in 1972, Joseph was about 50 years old, with plenty of free time on his hands and nothing to do. The Bishop advised him, for his own sake, to find some interest or occupation. In 1978 Pazniak's attitude towards Bishop Sipovich suddenly changed. Initially it seemed to be wounded pride: Pazniak accused the Bishop of showing no appreciation for his goodness and generosity. As time progressed, the accusations became more strident and irrational. In one of his letters he wrote: "You have surpassed the Germans and the Bolsheviks". He also began writing letters against the Bishop to all Belarusians whose addresses he had, and to the church authorities. Most people knew Bishop Sipovich too well to believe the accusations. For instance  the Orthodox Bishop Mikalay (Matsukievich) wrote to Bishop Sipovich, of 31 July 1980: "Today I received a letter from Joseph Pazniak. In the end of his letter he writes: 'I ask your advice where to find help'... Please write to me a few words about Mr Pazniak, so that I may know about him. I am afraid to get involved in some sort of trouble, because there are many provocateurs in our days". The whole affair, which lasted three years, brought much suffering and pain to Bishop Sipovich and certainly did not help his already weak health. But he always referred to Pazniaks as "my friends" and refrained from saying anything bad about them. Some sort of reconciliation took place in 1981, shortly before Bishop's death. The sudden change of attitude on the part of Pazniaks and the intensity of their hate campaign escapes any rational explanation. Some people considered it to be Communist-inspired, because its beginning coincided with the visit of Pazniak's brother from the Soviet Belarus. Bishop Sipovich was attacked several times in the Communist press with a view to discrediting him in the eyes of Belarusians.

In  1981 the Belarusians in London intended to mark solemnly the tenth anniversary of the Francis Skaryna Library. The celebration was planned for the weekend of 16-17 May, the nearest to the original date of the opening of the library ten years before, which took place on Saturday 15 May. Before that, on 21 April the Bishop planned to go to Rome for a forthnight to take part in the General Chapter of the Marian Congregation.

On 19 March Father Nadson went to Paris where he stayed till 31 March. On his return to London he learned that Bishop Sipovich had been taken on Saturday 28 March to hospital for  prostate operation. The Bishop was in considerable pain, but still optimistic, hoping to be out before Easter. Unfortunately he had to undergo three operations, on 3, 16 and 24 April, the first two being unsuccessful. The day before his last operation he was very weak and received the Sacrament of the Sick. On the day of the operation he made the following entry in his diary: "All my sufferings I offer for the Catholic Church, and especially that God may call more good priests from among Belarusians".

The Easter of that year fell on 19 April, and with Bishop Sipovich still in hospital, it was obvious that the library celebration would have to be postponed. It was also in hospital that he heard the news of the death on Holy Saturday, 18 April of Bishop Boleslaus Sloskans at the age of 88.

Bishop Sipovich left hospital on 8 May. He was very weak and exhausted, yet insisted on celebrating the Liturgy on the following morning, but could not finish it, and a doctor had to be called. However as the time passed he seemed to improve and regain his former energy. He even wanted to go to Rome, but the attempt at the Pope's life on 13 May put an end to this plan. He decided to visit Rome in the autumn soon after the celebration of the library anniversary which was fixed for Sunday 4 October.

On Sunday 5 July Bishop Sipovich presided at the concelebrated Mass at the Farm Street Jesuit church in central London in honour of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Apostles of the Slavs, whom the Holy Father proclaimed patrons of Europe jointly with Saint Benedict. In his homily he said that before engaging in the work for Christian unity it is necessary to examine one's conscience and get rid of prejudices which may be obstacles in this work.

On 6-9 August the 31st annual international Congress "Kirche in Not (The Church in Need)" was held at Koenigstein near Frankfurt. Although Bishop Sipovich was not sure of his strength, he decided to take part in it. He even prepared in German a paper on the state of the Church in Belarus. Copies of the text of his paper were distributed among the participants. On Sunday 9 August, at the conclusion of the Congress, there was a solemn Pontifical Liturgy. On previous occasions the chief celebrant had usually been the Ukrainian Bishop Platon Kornyliak from Munich. On this particular occasion it was Bishop Sipovich.

The Bishop returned from Koenigstein very tired, but there was no time to rest: 4 October was not far away. There were unexpected and serious drawbacks. Early in September Mr Jan Michaluk had a stroke. Bishop Sipovich felt it very deeply because of the close friendship which existed between the two men, and also because, as chairman of the Association of Belarusians, Mr Michaluk was scheduled to play an important part during the library anniversary celebration. Fortunately the stroke was not severe, and after some three weeks he recovered sufficiently to take part in the forthcoming event.

On Sunday 27 September there was the "Pilgrimage of Crosses" for the persecuted Church to Walsingham, the most famous English Shrine of the Mother of God. Fifteen ethnic groups of refugees from the Communist-dominated countries took part. It fell to Bishop Sipovich, who came with a group of Catholics and Orthodox Belarusians, to lead the procession of 1200 pilgrims from the centre of the town (the "Friday Market") along the Holy Mile to the Slipper Chapel, Walsingham's Catholic shrine (there are also Orthodox and Anglican shrines), where the Holy Mass was celebrated. He said on this occasion: "We are expressing our solidarity with persecuted Christians of every nation and bringing our sorrows to Our Lady who is the Mother of us all". It was a very tiring day, but the Bishop came back feeling happy and at peace.

Sunday 4 October turned out to be a beautiful autumn day, sunny and warm. Bishop Sipovich was up very early, saying his prayers in the chapel and getting ready for the celebration of Divine Liturgy. The people began to arrive at about 10 a.m. The chapel had rarely seen such gathering of people. The Belarusians came from all parts of Great Britain, and also from the United States, Canada, France, Belgium, Spain, Germany and Poland. There were British guests, many from the academic world, others from the Society of St John Chrysostom, and just friends. There were also representatives of the Ukrainians, Czechs, Slovaks, Poles and many other national groups.

The Liturgy started at 10.30 a.m. The choir under direction of Guy Picarda sang exceptionally well. After the Gospel the Bishop spoke in Belarusian and in English.  His main theme being the right of every nation to develop freely the spiritual gifts given to it by God, and thus achieve its own fulfilment within its own tradition.

After the Liturgy there was a tour of the library and then a reception. Bishop Sipovich greeted the guests and thanked all those who had made possible the success of the library over  the ten years of its existence. Those turned out to be his last words. When he finished and sat down to listen to others' speeches, he suddenly slumped and lost consciousness. An ambulance was called, and the Bishop was taken to Barnet General Hospital, where shortly after being admitted he died  of a massive coronary thrombosis. Father Nadson was with him and gave him absolution.

Such were the dramatic circumstances the end of Bishop Sipovich's life on this earth in the middle of what had to be one of his greatest triumphs. Although, on reflection, one could see that this was a beautiful death: he died at peace with his God, surrounded by friends, without prolonged suffering and having seen the results of his efforts. But this reflection came later... At the moment when it all happened there were the feelings of shock, great loss and sorrow that prevailed among all present. These feelings were shared by all who knew Bishop Sipovich throughout the world as soon as the news reached them.

The funeral of Bishop Sipovich took place on Tuesday 13 October in the local parish church of Saint Alban, because the chapel at Marian House was far too small to accommodate the large number of the faithful who came to pay their last respects. The principal celebrant was Archimandrite Uladzimir Tarasevitch who flew over specially from Chicago, together with Father Nadson and four other priests. Presiding at the Liturgy were bishop Patrick Casey of Brentwood representing the English Hierarchy, and Philip Harvey, auxiliary bishop of Westminster, representing Cardinal Basil Hume. There were also many Roman rite clergy, including several Marians. The Belarusiamn Orthodox Archpriest Eugene Smarshchok came specially from Belgium. With him were also Fathers John Ababurka from Manchester and John Piakarski from Stevenage near London. The homily after the Gospel was preached by Bishop Casey. At the end of the Liturgy Father Nadson spoke in Belarusian and Archimandrite Tarasevitch in English. The final Commendation and Farewell were performed in both rites, first by Bishop Casey and the Roman rite clergy, and then by Archimandrite Tarasevitch and Byzantine rite Catholic and Orthodox priests. Then to the accompaniment of the chant "Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal one, have mercy on us", the mortal remains of Bishop Sipovich were escorted from the church and taken for burial at Saint Pancras Cemetery. After the short burial service, Jan Michaluk, chairman of the Association of Belarusians in Great Britain and Bishop Sipovich's close friend, made a brief eulogy. Then all Belarusians sang the religious hymn "Mahutny Bozha (O, God Almighty)"; it was followed by the Latin hymn in honour of the Mother of God, "Salve Regina", which was sung by the Roman rite priests and faithful present. Bishop Sipovich was laid to rest beside the graves of Fathers Haroshka, Padziava and Hermanovich.

=================

Bishop Sipovich died in the 67th year of his life, 43 of which had been spent outside his native Belarus. Humanly speaking he could have had at least another ten or fifteen years of useful life. But God had other plans for him. Our life is such that, as Archimandrite Tarasevitch aptly put it, "we cannot promise ourselves not only tomorrow but even the rest of the present day".[64]

In the life of Ceslaus Sipovich there had been a number of what, for the lack of a better word, may be called coincidences. As a young Roman Catholic clerical student and a member of the Belarusian Marian community, he was no doubt looking forward to being a priest in his native country and among his own people. The expulsion of the Belarusian Marian Fathers from Druia put an end to these expectations. Four weeks after the expulsion he accepted the offer of the Superior General, Father Tsikota, to continue his theological studies in Rome on condition that he changed to the Byzantine rite and promised to work later among Russians in Harbin. This sudden decision must have taken many by surprise, because before that moment there is no record of Sipovich showing any particular interest in Eastern Christianity or the "conversion" of Russia. It proved to be the turning point of his life. During the whole period of the Second World War Sipovich remained in Rome and continued his studies undisturbed. The same war, and the post-war political situation prevented him from joining other Belarusian Marian Fathers in Harbin. This did not seem to make Sipovich very sad. In fact, despite his loud protestations that he would fly there like a bird, he was in no particular hurry to go. During his years in Rome Sipovich had ample opportunity to observe the unenviable situation of Belarusians in the Church. Soon after the cessation of hostilities he met Belarusian priests and refugees. These meetings, especially with Father Haroshka, determined the future direction of his life and work, from which there was no turning back.

Bishop Sipovich was a man of vision and courage. Once an idea took hold of him, he was not deterred by difficulties in the way of its realisation. He had the qualities of a great statesman or a succesful businesman, and he could easily have become one of them, if he were not a priest. But he was a priest first and foremost, and the only business he was interested in was God's business: spreading the message of Salvation and gaining the souls of men for God. Deeply attached to the Catholic Church and secure in his religious convictions, he yearned for the moment when all Christians would be again united. But he had no patience with the crude and aggressive proselytism which may be regarded as the religious equivalent of headhunting. Bishop Sipovich was an ecumenist long before "ecumenism" became a household word in the Catholic Church. His ecumenism was based on the notion of the universal value of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, for which reason everyone, irrespective of his or her religious convictions, was a potential son or daughter of God. That was why he treated everyone with equal friendliness and respect.

Bishop Sipovich was a Belarusian. Despite the fact that he spent two thirds of his life far from Belarus, his love of his native country and people never diminished. There is nothing reprehensible in loving one's own people and wishing it to be free and prosperous, provided it is not at the expense of other peoples. In the case of Belarus there had existed for too long a situation in which anyone who insisted on speaking his or her native tongue was accused of being a nationalist by those who attempted, often by force, to impose their language and culture on Belarusians. This offended Bishop Sipovich's sense of justice. What pained him most was to see priests among the chief offenders. He understood that banning people's native tongue from church use was a sure way of keeping those people from the Church. Thus the Bishop's strong uncompromising stand on the Belarusian national issue, in particular as regards the language, was not crude nationalism: it was the affirmation of the right of Belarusians to have their place in God's family of nations.

Bishop Sipovich was an intensely loyal person. For him friendship meant friendship for life. Several times he was hurt by those who betrayed his trust in them, but he never ceased to consider them his friends.

Loyalty to the Marian Congregation made Bishop Sipovich make one mistake which, given the circumstances, was bound to end in failure. This was the idea of the "New Druia" at Marian House in London, with Belarusian Marian Fathers permanently established there and in charge of the Belarusian Catholic Mission. Bishop Sipovich refused to the end to entertain the idea that one day there might be no Belarusian Marians left at Marian House. But that was exactly what happened. In January 1982 the Oriental Congregation appointed the present writer Rector of the Belarusian Catholic Mission of the Byzantine rite in England and charged him to help "to settle all questions relating to the succession of the deceased, first of all the titles of ownership of various houses". It took him nearly two years to prepare the report. The Marian Fathers did not like it at all and refused to discuss its merits. Instead, they signed an "agreement" with Sipovich's successor, Bishop Uladzimir Tarasevitch, according to which  they leased Marian House to him on an annual basis (later increased to three years). The Mission was thus put in an impossible situation. The rector, after having resisted the initial temptation to resign, suggested what seemed to him an equitable solution, namely that the Marian Fathers should sell the house to the Mission for a nominal fee, thereby satisfying the requirements of honour and justice. His suggestion remained without answer. In 1991 Belarus became independent. For the Marian Fathers who tried to extend their activities there, the Marian House affair could become a cause of serious embarassement. In 1999 they handed the property over as a gift, at no cost to themselves, to the Oriental Congregation, without previously consulting, or at least officially informing, the rector of the Belarusian Mission.

Knowing how Bishop Sipovich felt about Druia and the Marian Congregation, his mistake was almost inevitable. It was doubtless a case of misplaced trust. As to the Marian Congregation, their behaviour was sadly typical of many ecclesiastical institutions, defending their narrow caste interests, remaining blind to the merits of the matter and its wider implications, in particular the effect on the faithful, whom they treated with total disregard. It is as if the Vatican II Council with its Constitution on the Church and Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity had never happened.

Putting aside the manner in which Marian House was acquired, the idea of establishing a strong Belarusian religious centre abroad was certainly a sound one. There was nothing wrong with this centre being run by Marian Fathers, provided there was a sufficient number of new vocations to secure its future. Unfortunately by 1969 out of four members of the Marian Congregation at Marian House the youngest was 55 years old. The attempts to bring over a few surviving elderly priests from Poland, even if they had been successful, were not a solution. It was time to think not about the Belarusian Marian fundation, but about the future of pastoral work among Belarusians.

The problem of priestly vocations in the Belarusian diaspora was an acute one. Belarusian priests did their best to care for the scattered Catholic families and provide religious education for young people. But they were few and working in isolation from each other. A general plan of action and regular reunions would have been a great help. However, nothing happened for over ten years. After the reunion of 1960 which resulted in the appointment of a Belarusian bishop, the next important meeting took place only in 1972 (the reunions of 1961 and 1962 were little more than informal meetings). One reason for this was no doubt the fact that Bishop Sipovich was the Superior General of the Marian Congregation between 1963 and 1969 – a post which required his full-time attention. There was a feeling among the non-Marian priests that the first and only Belarusian Catholic bishop had been "kidnapped" by the Marians. Thirty years earlier, in 1933, the Superior of the Belarusian Marian Community in Druia, Father Andrew Tsikota, was elected Superior General of the Marian Congregation. He was replaced in Druia by a Pole...

Bishop Sipovich's dedication to the cause of the Belarusian Greek Catholic Church, as well as his considerable achievements, speak for themselves. It was largely thanks to his efforts that Belarusians were no longer considered as a mere "apt instrument for the conversion of Russia", but as a people in their own right, whose spiritual needs and national aspirations must be taken seriously. It was also he who did much to dispel the myth that the only Catholics in Belarus were Poles. His failure to establish a strong basis for the further development of the Belarusian Greek Catholic Church was not so much his fault, as the result of the difficult situation within the Belarusian diaspora. Nonetheless one cannot help feeling that he could have done more if he had not been so closely involved in the affairs of the Marian Fathers. On becoming bishops, members of religious congregations are usually exempt from all duties within their congregation. It is a pity that this wise rule was not observed in the case of Bishop Sipovich.

Ceslaus Sipovich was appointed bishop by Pope John XXIII, who in less than five years transformed the Catholic Church, making her face the modern world. Belarusians had been for too long ignored as a nation by the world at large and, unfortunately, by the Church. For many of them the appointment of a Belarusian bishop for Belarusians was an act of justice long overdue. For Ceslaus Sipovich it was first of all a sense of responsibility. As the first and only Belarusian Catholic bishop he felt responsible for all Belarusian Catholics irrespective of their rite, whether in or outside Belarus. As the first Belarusian Greek Catholic bishop in over 120 years he considered it his duty to prepare the ground for the restoration of the Greek Catholic Church in Belarus. In particular he was conscious of the need to break down the age-long prejudices and misunderstandings, fed by hostile propaganda, between the Greek Catholics on one side, and the Roman Catholics and Orthodox on the other, and try to establish with them relations based on mutual trust and respect. Last but not least, because of his position, he felt it to be his duty to act as the "ambassador" of Belarus and her people in the Church and the world. There were mistakes and failures, often painful. This was to be expected, because in many cases he was blazing a new trail in an unknown territory, without the benefit of precedent or previous experience. He accepted his failures with humility, but was not discouraged by them, or diverted from his purpose. Indifferent to personal honours or praise, he never failed to give thanks to God, whom he loved more than everything, to his Blessed Mother, and to Saint Peter, for whom he had particular devotion and who, according to him, had never let him down. If one were asked to define briefly the essence of Bishop Sipovich's life, one could not do it better than in the words of Saint Paul: "By God's grace I am what I am, nor has his grace been given to me in vain" (1 Cor 15: 10).

Note: