15. Between Moscow and Warsaw

The Council was over, but there remained for the Church the task of implementing its message, both with regard to her internal life and her relations with other Christian bodies and with the whole world.

For Bishop Sipovich who had taken an active part in the work of the Council and some of its commissions, the immediate effect was that he could have more time for other matters. As Superior General of Marian Fathers he still had to be resident in Rome, and make canonical visits to Marian communities throughout the world. Thus in 1966 from 22 February to 20 March he was visiting Marian communities in Brazil and Argentina. In 1968 he spent four months, from 7 May to 9 September, in a round-the-world trip from Rome via London to the United States, New Zealand, Australia, India, the Holy Land, and back to Rome. Then from 15 February to 21 March 1969 it was South America again: Brazil (Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, Brasilia, Curitiba, Porto Alegre) and Argentina (Buenos Aires, Rosario, Cordoba). Although the affairs of Marian congregation were the main reason for all these travels, Bishop Sipovich took the advantage of them, often making side trips, to meet Belarusians wherever he went, celebrating liturgy, preaching, giving talks etc. Thus in 1968, apart from New York, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Washington etc. where he had already been before, he visited for the first time Belarusian communites in Los Angeles in the U.S.A., as well as in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth in Australia. Where there was no organised Belarusian life, as in Brazil, Argentina and New Zealand, he tried to visit individual Belarusian families.

Despite his heavy commitments with the Marian Congregation, after the end of the Council Bishop Sipovich had more time for Belarusian matters. In particular he spent more time in London at Marian House which he considered his home. There were many things going there. First of all the St Cyril's House and the presence of a group of young boys brought new life to the place. In summer, when the boys were on vacation, there was a summer camp at St Cyril's House for other children of Belarusian families; this was organised with the help of the Association of Belarusians. Apart from religious activities, there was also flourishing cultural life. Thanks to the Anglo-Belarusian Society in 1965 there appeared the first issue of The Journal of Byelorussian Studies, an English-language publication dedicated to the problems of Belarusian history and culture. In 1966 the Society launched its first Course of Belarusian Culture (in English), which became an annual event. All this attracted to  Belarusian studies a number of English and other Slavic scholars. The English poet Vera Rich who had been coming regularly to Marian House since 1953 conceived then idea of an anthology of Belarusian poetry in English translation. The idea found enthusiastic support on the part of Father Haroshka. His knowledge of Belarusian literature proved invaluable in helping Vera Rich to choose the authors and their works and in preparing interlinear translation. Before appearing in book form several works of Belarusian poets in Vera Rich's translation were printed in various periodical publications, including Vera's own poetry journal, "Manifold". There were also memorable poetry evenings in honour of well known Belarusian poets, such as Ianka Kupala and Iakub Kolas in 1962, Zmitrok Biadula in 1967 etc. The anthology of Belarusian poetry in English translation, Like Water, like Fire, appeared in 1971 under the auspices of UNESCO.

In 1966 Bishop Sipovich finally succeeded in bringing from Poland to London another Belarusian Marian priest. He was Father Felix Zhurnia, a friend of Bishop Sipovich from Druia and Vilna, where they had studied together. After the expulsion of the Marians from Druia Fr Zhurnia had remained in Poland, where he finished his theological studies and was ordained priest in 1943. A man of great goodness and profound faith, he was also a convinced Belarusian. In Poland he was the only one of the Belarusian Marians who regularily read the Belarusian paper Niva which had been published in Bialystok since 1956, and kept in touch with the Belarusian Club in Warsaw. He came to London by the end of August 1966. Despite his poor health and failing eyesight, he at once began to work. In particular he became a regular contributor to Bozhym shliakham, beginning with the first issue of 1967 onwards. Father Zhurnia belonged to the Roman rite. A special chapel was arranged at St Cyril's House for him; this was also used by a Slovak priest who at that time lodged at Marian House.

On 3 December 1966 deacon Robert Tamushanski was ordained priest by Bishop Sipovich. The ordination took place at Koenigstein seminary. Soon afterwards the new priest came to London where he celebrated his first Liturgy on Sunday 18 December. He was appointed assistant to Father Nadson who by then had become head of St Cyril's House. Father Robert's young age (he was 28), musical and linguistic talents, and the fact that he, like the boys, was born outside Belarus and could therefore understand their mentality better, made him very valuable in work with  young people.

One of the effects of the Vatican II Council was the development of the ecumenical movement within the Catholic Church. Ecumenism is a movement seeking the ways of uniting all Christians within the One Church of Christ. Its basis is the universal character of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, thanks to which all men are called to be children of God. A strong impulse to the ecumenical movement was given by Pope Paul VI with his pilgrimage in 1964 to the Holy Land and his meetings with the Patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras I. In 1967 the two met twice: in Constantinople in June, and in October in Rome.

Of course the coming together of all Christians did not always go smoothly. There were many who were not very keen on the ecumenical movement. Bishop Sipovich noted an interesting episode, which happened on 30 June 1966 during the Te Deum at the Westminster Cathedral, celebrated by the Apostolic Delegate, Archbishop Cardinale to mark the anniversary of the coronation of Pope Paul VI: "The Apostolic Delegate is quite nervous. Apparently he wanted the Orthodox, Armenian and Anglican bishops to be in the presbyterium (sanctuary), but the canons objected on the grounds of the 'lack of space'".

Bishop Sipovich's attitude towards the Orthodox had always been ecumenical: he was on the best of terms with many Orthodox priests, and wherever possible tried to cooperate with them without, of course, compromising his faith. In fact he had as many, if not more, friends among the Orthodox as among Catholics. After the Ecumenical Council he became still more open. He had many interesting encounters. Thus on 1 and 2 January  1966 when he was in Nottingham, he met the new Belarusian Orthodox priest, Fr John Ababurka. In his diary he made the following note: "Fr J. Ababurka... made a very good impression on me: modest, pious, a patriot". On the following day Fr. Ababurka came to see Bishop Sipovich and they had a long talk: "In the morning Fr J. Ababurka came to see me. During our conversation he said: 'I don't see any difference between the Orthodox and Catholic churches. One has to be, however, cautious in our pastoral work, because people are still not ready for Christian Unity'".

On 11 October 1967 Alexander Marhovich, a young and promising Belarusian scholar and a graduate of the Catholic University of Louvain (Leuven) died in Munich. He was Orthodox. It was a sad loss for the whole Belarusian community. The Orthodox priest from Belgium, Father Eugene Smarshchok (also former student of the Louvain University and friend of Marhovich) and Bishop Sipovich went to his funeral. Father Smarshchok conducted the funeral service, while Bishop Sipovich presided. He wrote in his diary of 16 October: "Father Smarshchok celebrates, assisted by a deacon from the Ukrainian Orthodox church. I am assisted by Mgr Salaviej and a Ukrainian Orthodox priest. During the entire service I perform everything which belongs to the bishop: give the blessing 'Peace be to all', recite the prayer of absolution. In the cemetery Father Smarshchok gave a homily (he began: 'Lord, give the blessing')". Such a joint service would have been unthinkable before the Ecumenical Council.

At the start of his round-the-world journey in 1968, on 11 May in New York Bishop Sipovich was at a reception, which was held in the hall of the Belarusian Orthodox church. It was the Belarusian Orthodox Bishop Basil who in his speech stressed the need of unity among Christians, and recalled the meetings between the Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras. Later in many places Bishop Sipovich had the opportunity to talk to the Orthodox about religious matters and Christian Unity. There was a great interest. It was particularily vivid in Australia, where Belarusians had an opportunity to meet a Belarusian Catholic Bishop for the first time. At a meeting in Sydney on 9 August there was "Discussion about Church unity. When shall it come? What is being done about it? etc.". The same thing in Melbourne. On one occasion on 12 August  he was bombarded by a Belarusian with various questions. "I tried to answer him calmly and sincerely", he wrote in his diary. "At one point he said: 'Now I know, My Lord, why they call you a soul-snatcher!'".

In Rome Bishop Sipovich had the opportunity to meet Orthodox priests from the Moscow Patriarchate. One of them was Father Vitalis Baravy (Borovoi), a Belarusian, a former professor of the Leningrad Theological Academy and observer at the Vatican II Council. After the end of the Council he was appointed observer of the Moscow Patriarchate at the World Council of Churches in Geneva. In spring 1967 he was in Rome. On 2 March he came to see Bishop Sipovich, and they had a long conversation. Bishop Sipovich made a few notes about Baravy's views on certain problems and persons: "Archpriest Baravy is very loquacious, intelligent and quite open. About the Vatican Council he said: It would be better if it had not happened at all, if after the Council they do not put its decrees into practice. About the Holy Father he says: An intelligent, even too intelligent man! He has not yet made a single mistake; and he will not make any, because he studies every detail, thinks a lot; and will not achieve any great decisive things, because he will see all obstacles... About Vatican diplomacy: it is conducted very wisely, but in certain of our affairs the wise Casarolis do not understand much. They need the help of the Slipyis and Sipovichs. It is also necessary for Vatican diplomacy to cooperate with the Orthodox Church, otherwise the Communists will fool them as they fooled d'Herbigny... About Belarus he said: she will be neither capitalist nor communist. But she also will not be such as the Belarusians in London and elsewhere want her to be... During  supper he spoke about his hard life, imprisonment and how he had become professor of the Leningrad Academy... Now the 'guardian angels' from the Soviet secret police no longer watch him, and that is why he feels much better. But before, he says, they watched not only what he was doing and how, but even when he was asleep... Before departing he repeated a few times: 'Zhyvie (Long live)'. I answered: 'Zhyvie!'. All Belarusians are well aware that this means 'Zhyvie Belarus!' (Long live Belarus!)".

Early in 1968 two Orthodox priests from the Moscow Patriarchate came to Rome on study leave. They stayed at the Russicum. This had apparently been arranged by Archbishop Nicodemus, the chief observer of the Moscow Patriarchate at the Vatican Council. One of the priests, Peter Raina, was a Belarusian and a former student of Father Baravy. The other priest,  Vladimir Rozhkov, was a Russian.

On 17 March Bishop Sipovich gave a lecture at the Oriental Institute on Francis Skaryna, the first Belarusian printer and translator of the Bible. Among those present was Father Raina who afterwards came up to Sipovich and said: "You spoke about Skaryna with national pride".

On 8 April Raina came to see Bishop Sipovich, and they had a long conversation. Here are a few extracts from the notes made by the Bishop in his diary: "(Fr Raina) told me the following fact. He was the parish priest of an Orthodox parish near Orsha. One Sunday a woman came to him and asked whether she could make her confession and receive Holy Communion and still remain a Catholic. Father Raina answered, why not?  On the following Sunday 10 Catholic women came, and then about a hundred... To my question: 'How big was your parish?', he answered: 'We do not count and do not record. We try to serve everybody who comes to us. The Metropolitan of Minsk Pitirim, – he was a wise man, – told us to do this'. During the time of Khrushchov about 800 Orthodox churches were closed. The man responsible for this was the Orthodox bishop Barlaam who deserves to be called a devil... He closed the seminary in Zhyrovitsy where Fr Raina studied and Fr Baravy was professor... Krushchov and Bishop Barlaam destroyed the Church... 'The most important thing now, – says Fr Raina, – is to preserve God in the hearts of men. The people in Belarus are good. The churches are full. Let us hope it will not become worse'".

On 16 April, after the dinner at the Russicum on the occasion of the two Orthodox priests being recalled to Moscow for the Orthodox Easter, Bishop Sipovich wrote: "How can one understand all this? One should admire the courage of the Jesuits, but also of Metropolitan Nicodemus who agreed to send his priests to the centre of Christendom under the care of the Jesuits... It is worth noting that until now the Russicum has represented fully the old tsarist 'holy' Russia with all its aggressive and imperialistic ambitions. These two priests are Soviet men! And, say what you will, the Soviet Union is not Russia. One of them is conscious of his Belarusian nationality and admits it. Certainly, 'Orthodox' ritualism covers everything, but is it not time for the Russicum to become the 'Sovieticum'?".

On 10 December 1968 Bishop Sipovich made the following entry in his diary : "Fr Peter Raina came from the Russicum to see me. He told me an interesting and for him unpleasant incident. A few weeks ago he and his colleague Fr Vladimir Rozhkov were going to pay a visit to Cardinal J. Slipyi. When the secretary of the Cardinal rang, it was Fr Peter Raina who took the call. Unable to find Fr Vladimir he went alone to see the Cardinal. When they met later, Fr Vladimir angrily shouted: 'Who gave you authority to go and see the Cardinal? We shall talk about this in Moscow...'. Thus Fr Vladimir betrayed his true character and showed that he was an 'authorised' informer".

Bishop Sipovich and Father Raina became friends, and corresponded for many years long after both left Rome. Father Raina helped Bishop Sipovich to obtain certain books from  Belarus, as well as photocopies of all the Francis Skaryna editions which were held in the State Library in Moscow.

Another problem which occupied Bishop Sipovich in the post-Conciliar period was that of Apostolic Administrator for Catholics of the Roman rite in Belarus.

The situation of the Catholic Church in Soviet Belarus was very bad. There were a few   dozen Catholic priests, most of them elderly, but no bishop or apostolic administrator or any formal hierarchical structure. Most priests were Poles or polonised Belarusians. They were concentrated for the most part in the western regions which before 1939 had been under Polish rule and formed part of the Vilna and Pinsk dioceses. For the portions of those dioceses which after the 1939-45 war remained in Poland administrators were appointed with seats in Bialystok ("Belastok" in Belarusian) and Drohiczyn. No doubt these administrators (who were usually of bishop's rank) looked upon the territories east of the Polish-Soviet border as being within their jurisdiction. But the real power was in Warsaw. On 1 December 1968 Bishop Sipovich had a long conversation with Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Archbishop of Warsaw and primate of Poland. In his diary he wrote: "The Cardinal has jurisdiction over those parts of the Pinsk and Vilna dioceses which belonged to these dioceses when they were under Polish rule. He must be very cautious in exercising this jurisdiction in order not to harm priests in their pastoral work in Belarus. From time to time he ordains priests for Belarus, but about this absolutely no one must know. He maintains contacts with Belarus with the help of nuns".

About two years earlier, on 28 February 1967, Bishop Sipovich had spoken to Mgr C. Krivaitis, a Lithuanian priest from Vilna on a visit in Rome, who told him: "Polish priests do everything possible to polonise Belarusians. They bring (from Poland) various liturgical and other books. Cardinal Wyszynski has appointed three priests as his representatives: Aronowicz, Aloisius Tomkowicz, P. Bartoszewicz. All three fanatical Poles".

Thus, despite many political and social changes, not to mention the far-reaching reforms of the Vatican II Council, Belarusian Catholics, alone among the peoples in the world, were still deprived of their right to pray and hear the word of God in their native language, presumably all in the cause of preserving the unity of the Church...

There were of course exceptions in this gloomy picture, the most notable of them being the parish of Vishnieva, some 50 miles north-west of Minsk. The parish priest there was Father Uladyslau Charniauski (1916-2001), a member of the Marian Congregation. He obtained his secondary education at Druia and in 1937 entered the novitiate of Marian Fathers. After the fall of Poland in 1939 Charniauski was accepted by the Lithuanian province of the Marian Fathers and did his theological studies in Kaunas and Vilna. In 1944 he was ordained priest and worked for some time in various Lithuanian parishes. But in 1953 he asked permission to return to Belarus, because, as he wrote to Bishop Sipovich on 12 December 1965, he "wanted at least once in his life to speak to the people in the native tongue". He stayed in Vishnieva for the rest of his life. As he said in the same letter: "Somehow I got used to the people, and they got used to me and understood me. I mean my priestly work plus Belarusian spirit".

In his work Father Charniauski suffered many difficulties and unpleasantnesses from the Communist authorities, but mainly from other Catholic priests who, as he wrote in his letter to Bishop Sipovich on 26 February 1966, "take their cue from Warsaw and Bialystok in their pastoral work, and behaving thus, they wound and destroy the national consciousness, feeling and dignity of our brothers and sisters, making them spiritual cripples. They deny them the right to pray and hear the Word of God in their native tongue. In my time I had to suffer much when I started to pray and preach in Belarusian".

Bishop Sipovich first heard about the work of Father Charniauski in 1964 from Lithuanian priests who came to Rome on the occasion of the Ecumenical Council. In 1965 a direct contact was established between the two men by means of correspondence, observing certain precautionary measures. Towards the end of 1964 Bishop Sipovich approached the Vatican Secretariate of State, informing them of the state of the Catholic Church in Belarus and stressing the need to appoint a Belarusian Apostolic Administrator, preferably with the rank of bishop. As a candidate for this post Bishop Sipovich proposed Father Charniauski. The proposal was taken seriously and an official of the Secretariat of State, Mgr Gabriel Montalvo, was appointed to deal directly with it. The study of the proposal took time, because the problem was new to the Vatican and the Vatican Council was still in session, which took precedence before everything else. But it was not forgotten, and eventually the Vatican accepted the proposal of Bishop Sipovich. On 6 December 1965 a letter, signed by the Secretary of State, Cardinal Amleto Cigognani, was sent to Father Charniauski, asking him whether he would agree to accept the office of Apostolic Administrator in Belarus, circumstances permitting. Since there was no answer (apparently the address was incorrect), a second identical letter was sent on 20 December. As it happened Father Charniauski received both letters on 28 December.

Father Charniauski was not in a hurry with his answer, and wrote to Bishop Sipovich only two months later, on 26 February 1966. First he went to Vilna to ask the opinion of his Lithuanian friends who advised him to go and see the civil authorities in Minsk. Before doing this he wanted to ask the advice of Bishop Sipovich. He also asked the Bishop's help "to convince the Primate in Warsaw (i.e. Cardinal Wyszynski – A.N.) and his other bishops that they not only should not make obstructions in this matter, but, once the question of Administration is positively decided, accept his authority and not interfere in the gradual introduction of the Belarusian language in preaching and liturgy, in accordance with the decrees of the Fathers of the Council. If this is not done, then, despite the establishment of the administration, everything will remain as it has been till now".

Thus it was a conditional acceptance on the part of Father Charniauski. On 2 April Mgr Montalvo told Bishop Sipovich that the Holy Father had been informed and had given his approval. Then began long and delicate negotiations with the Soviet authorities. The Pope, having in mind the bitter experience of the policy of D'Herbigny, did not want to do anything secretly, because that would make the situation still more difficult: sooner or later the Soviet authorities would learn about the appointment of the Administrator and may arrest him and send him away from Belarus. On the other hand the Holy See did not want to ask the permission of the Soviet authorities. The explicit instruction of the Pope, written with his own hand (con proprio pugno) was to inform and not to ask (annunciare, non chiedere). Father Charniauski on his part was instructed to approach the relevant civil authorities in Minsk and in Moscow.

On 27 April 1966 Pope Paul VI received the Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Hramyka (Gromyko). Bishop Sipovich made a note in his diary: "I hope that in conversation with Hramyka the matter of the Apostolic Administration in Belarus was raised". But according to Cardinal Slipyi who had an audience with the Holy Father on 2 September, "the meeting of the Pope and Hramyka was a flop". Incidentally, although  Hramyka tried hard to forget it, he was a Belarusian, born in the village Staryia Hramyki in the Homel province in South-East Belarus.

On 17 October 1966, at a special meeting of bishops Samore e Dell'Acqua (Secretariat of State), Brini (Oriental Congregation), Willebrands (Secretariat for Christian Unity), Brazys (Apostolic Visitor for Lithuanians) and Sipovich a decision was made to invite Father Charniauski to Rome. To make the things easier he was appointed Counsellor (Consultor) of the Sacred Congregation of Rites. This was normal, because Father Charniauski had been working for some time on Belarusian translations of Latin liturgical texts.

On 30 January 1967 the Pope received the "president" of the Soviet Union (in fact Speaker of the Soviet Parliament) Podgorny, during which, as the Vatican paper L'Osservatore Romano reported, he raised with him "problems relating to the religious life and the presence of the Catholic Church in the territory of the Soviet Union". Bishop Sipovich made a note in his diary: "Let's hope that the Pope at that moment had in mind also Belarus and the Apostolic Administrator in Belarus". According to the same L'Osservatore Romano, the Pope gave a gift to Podgorny, "as a manifestation of his special esteem and his living affection for the great Russian people (a manifestazione della sua speciale stima e del suo vivo affetto per il Grande Popolo Russo)". Bishop Sipovich made the following comment: "The phrase in the L'O. R. 'A manifestazione...' sounds somewhat false. 'Il Grande Popolo Russo' is taken straight from Soviet newspapers. Podgorny himself is a Ukrainian and the president of the Soviet Union, and not the representative of 'the great Russian people'".

The reason why the Vatican agreed to contacts with high Soviet representatives was an attempt to improve the fate of millions of Catholic faithful (of Roman rite, because the question of Byzantine rite Catholics there was notraised) of various nationalities in the Soviet Union. The Soviet authorities, on the other hand, wanted to gain "respectability" by  being  recognised even by the Vatican. In these circumstances it was not unthinkable that, if it suited their purpose, they would agree to the Apostolic Administration in Belarus.

Apart from the Soviets, there were the Poles who considered the Catholic Church in Belarus as their exclusive pitch. That is why his Lithuanian friends, and in particular Mgr Krivaitis, advised Fr Charniauski to exercise extreme caution, lest the Poles hear about the proposed Apostolic Administration and start making difficulties. However, the news somehow got out, and the rumours began to spread. Bishop Sipovich wrote in his diary on 29 March 1967: "Monsignor Tatarynovich rings me late at night and asks: Why do you keep secrets from me? I ask, what secrets? He says that he received a letter from Poland from Fr Barysevich who writes that there are rumours that Fr Charniauski, a Marian from Druia, is going to be appointed Administrator of Belarus and consecrated Bishop of Minsk in April this year! After this conversation I could not sleep for a long time".

In fact Fr Victor Barysevich from Grygaly near Olsztyn in Poland in a letter, written in Belarusian and dated Easter 1967, i.e. not later than 26 March, wrote: "I don't know if it is true, but apparently Father Uladyslau Charniauski, a Druia Marian, who has been appointed Apostolic Administrator for Belarus, in April is going to receive the Minsk diocese and that part of our diocese (i.e. Pinsk – A.N.) which is there".

The cat was out of the bag, and this did not help.

One year passed since the decision to invite Father Charniauski to Rome had been made, and still nothing happened. Bishop Sipovich was on the point of going to the Holy Land. Suddenly, on 8 December 1967 he received a telegram: "Depart by train 9 December. Carriage Moscow-Rome. Meet me 11 December in the morning".

Bishop Sipovich wrote in his diary: "There is no doubt: the telegram is from Father Uladyslau Charniauski. And exactly on the day of our greatest Marian feast. This is a gift from the Immaculate Mother of God!". The Holy Land trip had to be cancelled.

At last came Monday 11 December: "In the morning I am hurrying to the station... Mgr Montalvo from the Secretariat of State also came to the station. We talk, wait. Exactly at 8.30 a.m. the train from Trieste arrives, and with it the direct carriage from Moscow. Near the carriage we see Father Uladyslau Charniauski with a suitcase and briefcase. Deeply moved we greet each other. After 30 years we meet again! He looks well. The suit of almost brick-red colour, a cap on the head. Typical Soviet citizen!".

On Wednesday 13 December there was a meeting with Archbishop Agostino Casaroli from the Secretariat of State. Father Charniauski informed him about the religious situation in Belarus, and Bishop Sipovich acted as interpreter. In his record of the meeting there is an interesting detail: "From the account of Fr Charniauski it appears that the authorities in Minsk would like to have an Apostolic Administrator, but can do nothing without Moscow. His. Exc. Casaroli says: 'Is this not the sign of the Republic's Belarusian patriotism?' We answered that that's what it looks. It sounds strange, but the official responsible for religious affairs in Minsk told Fr Charniauski that in Rome he should ask the Vatican to put pressure on Moscow!".

The days that followed were filled with meetings with various Vatican officials and waiting for a Papal audience which was not easy to arrange, as it was Christmas time. In the meantime Father Charniauski's permission to stay abroad, given by the authorities in Minsk, was running out. On 3 January 1968 he went to the Soviet consulate where he was received by a consul called Youdkin. He was charming and said that if this is the Holy Father's wish, then Fr Charniauski should remain and need not worry about anything. He also said that he, and perhaps even the ambassador, would like to talk to Fr Charniauski before his audience with the Holy Father.

Two weeks later, on 16 January, it was Youdkin himself who rang. Fr Charniauski went to see him and was told to ask the Vatican to arrange the papal audience as soon as possible, because the authorities in Minsk may be not pleased with his prolonged stay abroad. He also asked Charniauski whether he knew of any other candidate, apart from himself, for the post of Apostolic Administrator. This made Fr Charniauski worried.

The Papal audience took place on Monday 22 January. In a sense it was a formality, but a very important one, because it was during this audience that the official announcement of the appointment of an Apostolic Administrator was expected. Unfortunately, because of the illness of Archbishop Casaroli negotiations with the Soviet authorities were suspended, and without their agreement nothing could be done. That is why the Holy Father said to Father Charniauski in Latin: "To you is given the office of Apostolic Administrator (Tibi confertur munus Administratoris Apostolici)", adding in Italian to Bishop Sipovich: "You know on what conditions (Lei sa sotto quali condizioni)". This was not very satisfactory, but it was the best that could be done in the circumstances.

Father Charniauski stayed in Rome for another week. On 27 January he received an official letter from the Secretary of State, Cardinal Cicognani, which said among other things:

"The August Pontiff desires once again to testify his benevolence towards you and assure you... that he has always before his eyes the needs and hopes of many Catholics of the noble Belarusian people, for whom he nurtures a special feeling of love.

Because of this, His Holiness who has recently received you, has made clear to you that he has in mind to appoint you Apostolic Administrator and equally to elevate you to the episcopal dignity.

However, as you know, this cannot be yet put into effect, because there exist not a few conditions with regard to the civil authorities. Nontheless, the hope is sustained for the future that, either through the efforts of the Holy See or your own before those authorities, all difficulties will soon be overcome"[42].

Two days earlier, on 25 January, Fr Charniauski had received a letter from the Congregation of Rites. in which there are enumerated his duties as Councillor (consultor) of this Congregation. In particular the letter says:

"You are therefore entrusted with the translation of Latin liturgical texts into your native Belarusian-Whiteruthenian language according to the Constitution and Decrees of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and Instructions of this Sacred Congregation of Rites, and to send your versions to Rome for the necessary approval"[43].

On Monday 29 January Father Charniauski left Rome for Belarus. Bishop Sipovich was ill in bed and could not see him off.

The results of Father Charniauski's visit to Rome were rather disappointing, but not unexpected. On 2 January Bishop wrote in his diary: "There are very many obstacles on the way to establishing the Apostolic Administration in Belarus. God, help us to overcome them all!". Both the Bishop and Charniauski viwed their chances realistically, as can be seen from the Bishop's entry on 10 January: "After we came out of St Peter's basilica, our conversation with Uladyslau turned to our affairs. God only knows how they will end, but we have arrived at the point when they have become the concern of top people: the Pope and the Soviet government. In human terms this is already a considerable success for Belarus. We both agree on this".

What was worrying was the change of attitude of the Soviet consul, who on 16 January was definitely cool; and his mysterious question implying the possible existence of another candidate for the post of Apostolic Administrator.

On 31 January Bishop Sipovich left for London. There he received a letter, dated 14 February, from a Lithuanian Marian Father, Casimir Vaishnora, informing him that a Polish priest from Hrodna in Belarus, a certain Father Arkadiusz, a Franciscan conventual friar  had suddenly appeared in Rome. A few days after the departure of Father Charniauski, Father Arkadiusz paid a visit to the Lithuanian College in Rome, where, according to Fr Vaishnora he said, that "Charniauski does not enjoy good reputation among the priests in Belarus, he is too nationalistic, ingenuous, a gossip, too well disposed towards the authorities in Minsk. There is no need of any hierarchy in Belarus, because the administration functions well: there are deans who receive the necessary faculties from Bishop Sawicki in Bialystok (i.e. from Poland – A.N.). To tell the truth, there are no Catholic Belarusians in Belarus (they are all Orthodox), only Poles, therefore the liturgical language in the churches can only be Polish etc... Mgr Tulaba (rector of the Lithuanian College in Rome – A.N.) says that he does not act in person and directly, but through the medium of Mgrs Rubin (later cardinal – A.N.) and Filipiak who act as champions of his cause in relevant (Vatican – A.N.) departments".

On his return to Rome on 12 March Bishop Sipovich made inquiries about this Father Arkadiusz and reported his findings to Archbishop Casaroli in a letter dated 4 April. According to him Arkadiusz arrived in Rome on 12 January and left no later than 6 March. He knew Father Charniauski personally and was aware of his presence in Rome, but kept quiet till the latter's departure from that city. He wanted to see Archbishop Casaroli but failed because of the Archbishop's illness. In Rome Father Arkadiusz lived in the Franciscan convent near the church of the Holy Apostles, and was helped by another Polish Franciscan friar, Father Slominski. The latter, in a conversation with Bishop Sipovich said: "It would be good, very good if Fr Charniauski became a bishop. There is chaos now in Belarus. Cardinal Wyszynski must not interfere".

Incidentally, as a Soviet citizen, Father Arkadiusz had to register with the Soviet consulate immediately on his arrival in Rome. Thus Youdkin knew about him when on 16 January he asked Fr Charniauski about another candidate for the post of Apostolic Administrator.

There is a Belarusian saying, "Dzie koratka, tam rvietstsa (short string breaks easier)". Normally after Fr Charniauski's Roman visit there should have been a follow-up. Unfortunately, apart from Bishop Sipovich, there was no one in Rome who would make sure that the matter of an Apostolic Administrator in Belarus should not be forgotten. It so happened that in 1968 the affairs of the Marian Congregation kept Bishop Sipovich  away from Rome for nearly six months. On 6 May, the eve of his four-month trip around the world, he had a meeting with Archbishop Casaroli who told him that: 1. since the departure of Fr Charniauski he had not seen the Soviet ambassador; and 2. the Secretariat of State had been receiving letters from Poles protesting against the appointment of Father Charniauski.

The feelings of the Polish clergy can be judged from the letter, dated 23 October 1968, from Father Michal Wilniewczyc, professor at the Seminary in Drohiczyn (Poland) to Father Aleksy Petrani, professor at the Catholic University in Lublin and former protege of d'Herbigny. Wilniewczyc wrote: "I don't remember if in my last letter I told you that I was on the other side (of the frontier, i.e. in Belarus – A.N.); it was in August. Our priests there are despondent because of the announcement of the candidate for the ordinary, Fr Charniauski, a Marian, Belarusian fanatic (szowinista) that as soon as he becomes bishop, the first thing will be the introduction of Belarusian language in all churches; and any priest who does not obey, will be dismissed and replaced by Marian Belarusians... Fr Charniauski is a tactless and imprudent man and, what is worse, a Belarusian fanatic who intends to spread the kingdom of Belarus rather than that of Christ. Our priests are unanimous in saying that what the Soviets did not succeed in destroying, will be destroyed by the Church; that the Vatican does not understand that the Church of the faithful in Belarus consists of Poles and not Belarusians; that Belarusians in their overhelming majority profess the Orthodox and not the Roman Catholic faith; that if the Belarusian language is introduced in the churches there will be a rebellion among priests and faithful, who will not want to obey such anorder None of our priests is able to speak Belarusian; they would sooner speak Russian... Personally I had the impression that the Church as an organised community and the Polish cause are in a terminal state. The young generation don't understand Polish; Poles and their language are ridiculed. With few exceptions parents don't teach Polish to their children...". The letter is a good illustration of the situation in Belarus, where a Polish priest did not even bother to learn the language of his parishioners, but expected them to learn his; while a Belarusian priest who spoke his native language with his people was called a fanatic.

It was not till the end of 1968 that Bishop Sipovich could attend to the problem of Apostolic Administration. During his meeting with Cardinal Wyszynski on 1 December he  stressed the need in Belarus for a Belarusian bishop; the cardinal replied that there certainly was a need for a bishop in Belarus. A subtle change of emphasis which made all the difference. The two men used the same words, but they might have spoken different languages. Bishop Sipovich finished his account of the meeting: "I hope that my conversation with His Em. Cardinal Wyszynski will not harm the cause of getting a Belarusian bishop appointed".

The meeting with Wyszynski may be considered the last major attempt to salvage the project of Apostolic Administration in Belarus. In the years that followed there were letters exchanged on this subject between Bishop Sipovich, Father Charniauski and the Vatican Secretariat of State, but it was becoming exceedingly obvious that their efforts failed to produce the desired result. This is not the place to consider the reasons for this failure, except perhaps to say that the Polish Catholic Church cannot escape her share of blame.

During the first half of 1969 Bishop Sipovich was busy with the affairs of the Marian Congregation because of the forthcoming General Chapter and election of a new Superior General. On return from the canonical visitation to South America, he wrote on 21 March in \his diary: "The General Chapter is not far away. I hope that God will free me from the duties of Superior General. Also my travels will come to an end, and I shall be able to work at home".

The Chapter began its work on 10 June and lasted till 30 July. The election of the new Superior General took place on Monday 28 July. On the eve of the election, 27 July, Bishop Sipovich wrote in his diary: "Members of the chapter consult each other about tomorrow's elections... My sinful person must not enter into consideration. Even if they elect me I shall have to resign. There are rumours (spread by Fr Bukowicz) that neither Card. Wyszynski nor the Polish Communist Party want me to be Superior General. If this is true, it is very sad! That I may be undesirable for them is quite understandable. Especially, as the rumours have it, because of the Apost. Administrator in Belarus and because of the Kostomloty parish".

Kostomloty was a small Greek Catholic (Uniate) parish on the west bank of the river Bug which formed the frontier between Poland and Soviet Belarus. The parish priest was a Polish Marian Father who, mainly thanks to the influence of Father Padziava, had taken up the Byzantine rite. The Greek Catholic Church was suppressed and persecuted in the Sovet Union and other Communist-dominated countries. The existence of one Greek Catholic parish right on the doorstep of the Soviet Union must have been a strong irritant to the Soviet Communists and a headache for their Polish colleagues. They blamed Bishop Sipovich for defending Kostomloty in Rome and before Cardinal Wyszynski.

Bishop Sipovich was aware of the forces against him. But they were not the main reason why he did not wish to serve for another term as Superior General of Marian Fathers. Being superior general of a religious congregation is a full-time job, but so is also that of Apostolic Visitor for Belarusians. The previous six years showed Bishop Sipovich how difficult it was to combine them both. Moreover his health was failing. So he had to make a choice, and there was no doubt which one it would be: while there were other candidates for the post of Superior General, he was the only Belarusian Catholic bishop in the world. And yet, on the following day he did not remove his name from the list of candidates for Superior General. Perhaps he wished to be given a chance to bow out graciously by resigning after the first ballot with the knowledge that he had the confidence of the majority of the congregation, as it was the case with Buchys in 1933. But it was not to be. There were three ballots. During the first ballot Fr Sielski (Pole) obtained 16 votes, Bp Sipovich – 13, Fr Rimshelis (Lithuanian) – 4, and Fr Rzeszutek (Pole) – 1. The results of the second ballot were: Sielski 17, Rimshelis 9 and Sipovich 8. Finally in the third ballot Sielski obtained 18 votes and was elected new Superior General. Rimshelis and Sipovich obtained 12 and 4 votes respectively. The voting was secret, but the final results reflected pretty closely the ethnic composition of the chapter. Wyszynski and the Polish Communists – an unlikely alliance – must have been pleased.

If Bishop Sipovich felt snubbed, he did not show it. Except perhaps a year later when the General Chapter met again to conclude the unfinished work from the previous year. Bishop Sipovich made the following entry in his diary on 22 June 1970, the first working day of the Chapter: "At 9 o'clock we gather in the big room. Father General (Sielski – A.N.) greets me and invites me to sit at the chairman's table. I decline this honour and sit together with Fr Matulis".

Thus ended six difficult years in the life of Bishop Sipovich. He wound up his affairs in Rome  and set out for London, where he arrived on 20 August 1969. On that day he wrote in his diary: " A new period in my life has begun. Six years were sufficient for me to feel slightly "out-of-touch" with London and our local problems. May God's will be done in everything! It is not by chance that again I have to live with these and not other people. It is not without purpose that God has gathered us in this house which I have bought, renewed and put in order".

Note: