All Catholics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thinkandmull
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thinkandmull

Guest
In defense of the Novus Ordo mass, a lot of apologists argue that the Church’s universal laws cannot be heretical or invalid. Yet isn’t this a slap in the face to Eastern Catholics? The Latin Rite is NOT a universal rite
 
What regarding the Novus Ordo has to do with “universal laws” at all? And what does it have to do with Eastern Catholicism?
 
thinkandmull said:
In defense of the Novus Ordo mass, a lot of apologists argue that the Church’s universal laws cannot be heretical or invalid. Yet isn’t this a slap in the face to Eastern Catholics? The Latin Rite is NOT a universal rite
Click to expand...
Citation?
 
Fr. Brian Harrison and lots of others in arguments with the SSPX, for example, argue as if the Latin Rite IS the universal Catholic rite
 
Ignatius said:
Citation?
Click to expand...
Allatae Sunt (On the observance of Oriental Rites) Pope Benedict XIV:20. … Since the Latin rite is the rite of the holy Roman church and this church is mother and teacher of the other churches, the Latin rite should be preferred to all other rites. It follows that it is not lawful to transfer from the Latin to the Greek rite.
…
  1. We have dealt with transferring from the Latin to the Greek rite. Transferrals in the opposite direction are not forbidden as strictly as the former. Still, a missionary who hopes for the return of a Greek or Oriental to the unity of the Catholic Church may not make him give up his own rite. This can cause great harm.
    ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/B14ALLAT.HTM
 
Vico said:
Allatae Sunt (On the observance of Oriental Rites) Pope Benedict XIV:
20. … Since the Latin rite is the rite of the holy Roman church and this church is mother and teacher of the other churches, the Latin rite should be preferred to all other rites. It follows that it is not lawful to transfer from the Latin to the Greek rite.
…
  1. We have dealt with transferring from the Latin to the Greek rite. Transferrals in the opposite direction are not forbidden as strictly as the former. Still, a missionary who hopes for the return of a Greek or Oriental to the unity of the Catholic Church may not make him give up his own rite. This can cause great harm.
    ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/B14ALLAT.HTM
Click to expand...
That was referring to the missionaries in the east, IOW. the Latin Missionaries sent to the East cannot convert to Eastern rites.
 
thinkandmull said:
In defense of the Novus Ordo mass, a lot of apologists argue that the Church’s universal laws cannot be heretical or invalid. Yet isn’t this a slap in the face to Eastern Catholics? The Latin Rite is NOT a universal rite
Click to expand...
No, statements about the Novus Ordo has no connection with the Divine Liturgy of Eastern Catholics. Those statements are not about us, they are for the Latins.
 
Ignatius said:
That was referring to the missionaries in the east, IOW. the Latin Missionaries sent to the East cannot convert to Eastern rites.
Click to expand...
The first part of that section is:
  1. When Union was effected at the Council of Florence, some Latin Catholics living in Greece thought that it was lawful for them to go over to the Greek rite. They may have been attracted by the freedom retained by the Greeks for priests to keep wives after Ordination if they were married before being ordained. But Pope Nicholas V carefully applied a timely remedy to this abuse: “It has come to Our attention that many Catholics in districts with a Greek Catholic bishop are shamelessly going over to the Greek rites under pretext of the Union. We are greatly astonished, since We do not know what inspired them to leave the practice and rites in which they were born and reared for foreign rites. Even though the rites of the oriental church are praiseworthy, it is not permitted to confuse the rites of the churches. The holy council of Florence never allowed this” (constitution in Bullarii recenter Romae editi, vol. 3, part 3, p. 64).
 
  1. When Union was effected at the Council of Florence, some Latin Catholics living in Greece thought that it was lawful for them to go over to the Greek rite. ** They may have been attracted by the freedom retained by the Greeks for priests to keep wives after Ordination if they were married before being ordained. **
Click to expand...
Of course, what else could it have been :rolleyes:
They would never have been attracted by the beauty of the Divine Liturgy or the glorious worship of God as expressed in the East
 
Peter_J said:
etc.

I’m not doubting that that was written, but is it relevant to us today? Read the 1993 document “Uniatism, method of union of the past, and the present search for full communion.”

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/ch_orthodox_docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930624_lebanon_en.html
Click to expand...
The purpose of that sentence was to ensure that the faithful would not be harmed by a change of ritual church. Also in accord with the Balamand statement (although it holds no official authority). This is certainly relevant and is also given in the CCEO canon law. Coming into full communion is desirable when the faithful do so without proselytism (an attempt to convert).
Canon 31
No one can presume in any way to induce the Christian faithful to
transfer to another Church sui iuris.

Canon 35
Baptized non-Catholics coming into full communion with the Catholic Church should retain and practice their own rite everywhere in the world and should observe it as much as humanly possible. Thus, they are to be enrolled in the Church sui iuris of the same rite with due regard for the right of approaching the Apostolic See in special cases of persons, communities or regions.
 
Vico said:
The purpose of that sentence was to ensure that the faithful would not be harmed by a change of ritual church.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree that was the point of that sentence. Seeking the “conversion” (to use the common, if not entirely fitting, parlance) of other Christians to the Roman Communion was rather assumed by the statement.
 
Peter_J said:
Yes, I agree that was the point of that sentence. Seeking the “conversion” (to use the common, if not entirely fitting, parlance) of other Christians to the Roman Communion was rather assumed by the statement.
Click to expand...
It was clearely stated: “a missionary who hopes for the return of a Greek or Oriental to the unity of the Catholic Church”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top