Celebrating in another Rite

[JesuXPIPassio]

Is it ever licit for a priest or bishop of one Rite to celebrate Divine Liturgy in another Rite?

I recall seeing some pictures of John XXIII taking part in an Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy; he was in vestments, so apparently he was concelebrating. Is this a privilege enjoyed only by the Pope, or do other Catholic, non bi-Ritual clerics get to do this?

Also, Eastern Catholic Cardinals who were in Papal Masses wear their Eastern garb. They’re presumably concelebrating, as they weren’t in choir dress, and look like they’re in full vestments. Now, do can all Eastern Catholic clerics join in a Latin Mass like that? Or is it only a privilege for Cardinals? Can this be done when the Easterner is concelebrating with a Latin, or can the Eastern Catholic be the sole or main celebrant of a Latin Mass?

This question only pertains to cases where the cleric is of one Rite, not the bi-Ritual ones.

 

[Hesychios]

Ok, I am Orthodox, but I haven’t forgotten everything I used to know so perhaps I can help.

Clerics of different rites may concelebrate, but I don’t think that they have an automatic right to do so. They are not obligated to either. They must vest in the liturgical garb of their own liturgical rite. This was not always the case, I believe, but it is now for sure. That is what you asked about.

The exception is, if they are given “faculties”, which you are referring to when you state “bi-ritual”. I believe bi-ritual is an inappropriate term, for the reason that one must be given faculties by a specific bishop over that altar, not just any bishop of that rite. They just don’t become bi-ritual and go anywhere with a foot in each world, they remain for all practical purposes priests of their original rite, which is usually Latin, but sometimes others (the Syo-Malabar church has sent some of it’s priests to work in Latin parishes in the USA, if I recall).

I knew some Latin Benedictine priestmonks in Illinois who had faculties to serve at Ruthenian parishes in the eparchy of Parma, and Ukrainian parishes in the eparchy of St Nicholas of Chicago. They could stand in for the pastors of parishes in those dioceses when needed and vest according to that rite. They could also concelebrate vested in that ritual tradition in parishes of those dioceses. That is not to say that they could go into other Byzantine rite eparchies and do likewise, their faculties were very specific. If they were asked to participate outside of those particular eparchies, they would need a grant of faculties.

This is a little “iffy” on my part, but I think there are most likely some Latin priests who have faculties granted by the Pope or some Patriarchal authorities for a much wider range. For example I believe (not absolutely sure) Father Robert Taft (actually an Archimandrite), a noted author and scholar (and Jesuit) who is attached to the Russicum in Rome, has faculties which he can use in any Byzantine-Slavonic rite church. I am pretty sure he is technically still a Latin.
*
Michael*

 

[JuanCarlos]

As Bishop over the universal Church, the Pope is omni-ritual. But he primarily celebrates the Latin Rite Liturgy, as the particular head of the Latin Church

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

As Bishop over the universal Church, the Pope is omni-ritual. But he primarily celebrates the Latin Rite Liturgy, as the particular head of the Latin Church

Yeah, but again, is only the Pope allowed to do this, or do other clerics have the privilege? Would Cardinals, for example, have the right? A study of Canon Law shows that Cardinals get a lot of privileges, like being able to hear confessions anywhere and being under the sole jurisdiction of the Pope without needing to submit to the bishop of their area or even their religious order’s superiors. Do Cardinals also get to celebrate whatever Rite they wish?

P.S.: Juan Carlos – are you named after the King of Spain? My brother also has that name. It’s a very nice name.

 

[johnnydigit]

As Bishop over the universal Church, the Pope is omni-ritual. But he primarily celebrates the Latin Rite Liturgy, as the particular head of the Latin Church

“omni-ritual” lol. sounds pretty cool. “bishop of all trades”. when he consecrates, his arms and hands move in matrix-style slow motion. “where’d He go? where’d He go? wrong, He’s in my left hand!”

sorry…

 

[edward_george]

This, for me, raises another question of jurisdiction and whatnot, and if you all feel that I’m hijacking this thread, let me know and I’ll promptly repost this issue in another thread.

I know that for a Byzantine priest to serve Divine Liturgy in a Latin parish, he must have permissions from both his bishop and Latin bishop who holds jurisdiction over the Latin parish–both bishops have to write the other, thereby making it a mutual permission. If a Latin priest had faculties for another ritual, would he be able to make use of a Latin parish for Divine Liturgy without any permissions from the bishops–both the Latin one he is subordinate to and the Eastern one who gave him faculties?

-ACEGC

 

[Aramis]

Is it ever licit for a priest or bishop of one Rite to celebrate Divine Liturgy in another Rite?

Any priest, vested in the vestments of his native rite and church, may concelebrate any Divine Liturgy in any Catholic church of any Rite.

Only a priest granted specific faculties to do so may preside over the Divine Liturgy of a Rite other than the one in which they were ordained an enrolled.

A bishop may celebrate any Rite which is in use in his see; I do not know if he may vest in either Rite. There are few occasions for this, but the Russian Catholic Church sui iuris is comprised of parishes without Russian Catholic bishops; the US Russian Catholic parishes’ bishops are the local Roman Church ordinaries.

The pope is essentially “omni-ritual”…

The so-called “Biritual Faculties” are granted to priests (and occasionally deacons) by their bishops, with the agreement of a bishop of a church of the Rite for which they are being granted permission to celebrate in.

For example, Fr. Mike, a Latin Priest, was granted his faculties by The Archbishop of Anchorage (Roman) and the Bishop of Van Nuys. Since he is now effectively incardinated into Van Nuys, and the current Abp of Anchorage wants no confusion as to which parish he’s assigned to, Fr. Mike has been instructed to vest Byzantine even when saying the Latin Mass within the Archdiocese.

Being a latin priest, he can say the OF or EF Roman Mass as presiding presbyter.
Having Ruthenian Biritual Faculties, he can say the DL of St John and the DL of St Basil as presiding presbyter, and does so vested as a Byzantine.

If Fr. Mike were at a Melkite parish while on vacation, he could vest as a byzantine, for while it is a different church, it is still a byzantine rite liturgy. He could, if the need were genuine, even preside.

Now, Fr Leo, another Roman priest, could concelebrate with Fr. Mike in either rite’s liturgies… but may not preside over the Divine Liturgies of St. John or St. Basil, since he lacks the faculties. And, in such concelebration, he would still vest as a Roman Priest.

And if Either of them went to a Maronite Quorbono, neither would vest as a Maronite, and neither could preside, but both could concelebrate with the Maronite priest presiding.

Further, a non-biritual priest may say their “native” divine liturgy at any catholic altar, if there is need.

So, say, (Heaven Forbid), Fr. Mike were to take ill… A Roman priest could come and say the Roman Mass on the Byzantine Altar. Or a Maronite say the Quorbono. Or a Coptic Catholic Priest say the Coptic DL.

Likewise, a Byzantine Rite priest could say the Byzantine DL on a Roman Altar. It’s done occasionally for educational benefit of the Latin Rite Catholics… And it is often done at byzantine missions, most of which start at a Roman parish.

Deacons seldom get biritual faculties, but a few have when the bishops involved saw it as having a valid benefit.

 

[Aramis]

This, for me, raises another question of jurisdiction and whatnot, and if you all feel that I’m hijacking this thread, let me know and I’ll promptly repost this issue in another thread.

I know that for a Byzantine priest to serve Divine Liturgy in a Latin parish, he must have permissions from both his bishop and Latin bishop who holds jurisdiction over the Latin parish–both bishops have to write the other, thereby making it a mutual permission. If a Latin priest had faculties for another ritual, would he be able to make use of a Latin parish for Divine Liturgy without any permissions from the bishops–both the Latin one he is subordinate to and the Eastern one who gave him faculties?

-ACEGC

The permissions he needs are only for Public liturgies. Private liturgies need only the Pastor’s permission. (Note that private liturgies are not encouraged in the Eastern traditions, either…)

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

The permissions he needs are only for Public liturgies. Private liturgies need only the Pastor’s permission. (Note that private liturgies are not encouraged in the Eastern traditions, either…)

A quick, really basic question – what’s the difference between a public and private liturgy? I didn’t even know such a distinction existed until I read something about the recent Motu Proprio and private Tridentine Masses. I don’t get what it means exactly.

My first impression is that it just means which can have people and which cannot, but I learnt not to make quick judgements with Ecclesiastical terms because they tend to have different meanings. Could you clarify this a bit for me?

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

A bishop may celebrate any Rite which is in use in his see; I do not know if he may vest in either Rite.

How about cases where the territory has members of a different Rite but do not fall under the jurisdiction of that Bishop?

For example, what if there were, say, a Latin Bishop of San Francisco and a Melkite Bishop of the whole West Coast? The Latin doesn’t have jurisdiction over the Melkites who may reside in the territorial limits of his diocese. Would the Latin Bishop be able to celebrate according to the Melkite Rite? And for that matter, can the Melkite celebrate according to the Latin Rite, even though he has no jurisdiction over any Latins?

 

[Hesychios]

… Would the Latin Bishop be able to celebrate according to the Melkite Rite? And for that matter, can the Melkite celebrate according to the Latin Rite, even though he has no jurisdiction over any Latins?

No.

He may concelebrate with the appropriate cleric in his own rite’s vestments.

They probably can follow private liturgies as training in other rites for good reason. For instance, if they are contemplating a transfer or adding faculties. Priests more than bishops would need this kind of help.

They are not supposed to do it just to be different (or for “fun”), even in private. The church expects them to practice their own rite faithfully.

In the Byzantine rite, there are no private Masses, every liturgy must have something representing a congregation. But seminaries can provide the setting for very small groups to serve liturgy for training purposes.

Aramis supposes there to be a See with more than one liturgical rite, I doubt it officially (except perhaps in Ethiopia). Some bishops are the Local Ordinary (invariably a Latin bishop) and he has responsibility for all Catholics in his diocese who have no church of their own. But this is usually satisfied by welcoming them do worship in Latin parishes, with some allowances like permitting infants to receive communion.

Sometimes there are small mission parishes erected under the Local Ordinary for other rites. If the bishop concelebrates at that altar he will normally vest as the Latin he is. Bishops of the other rite can be flown in when needed for ordination of deacons, and that sort of thing.

Michael

 

[Diak]

Since he is now effectively incardinated into Van Nuys, and the current Abp of Anchorage wants no confusion as to which parish he’s assigned to, Fr. Mike has been instructed to vest Byzantine even when saying the Latin Mass within the Archdiocese.

Typically unless one has been officially excardinated from his Latin diocese (which entails a full transfer to another Church sui iuris for a Latin) he remains a Latin priest, and as such when not using his Byzantine faculties vests as a Latin priest.

Eastern faculties are given for a length of five years and are renewable; an Eastern Catholic bishop may also grant faculties on an ad hoc basis for up to a year pending the fuller granting of faculties assuming, of course, the Latin hierarch has consented to giving permission to the priest to serve in the particular Eastern Catholic church. The Latin priest, even with his Eastern faculties, remains incardinated in his Latin diocese unless specifically requesting excardination and a transfer to more fully serve the particular Eastern Catholic Church.

We have two priests in our area who are Latin but have faculties to assist in our UGCC parishes; both vest as Latins when serving Latin parishes as that is their church of incardination.

Other than some historic photos of Fulton Sheen I have yet to see a Latin bishop vested as an Eastern Catholic hierarch; even when the Latin bishop visits Russian Catholic parishes he vests as the Latin hierarch that he is.
FDRLB

 

[Ungcsertez]

Typically unless one has been officially excardinated from his Latin diocese (which entails a full transfer to another Church sui iuris for a Latin) he remains a Latin priest, and as such when not using his Byzantine faculties vests as a Latin priest.

Eastern faculties are given for a length of five years and are renewable; an Eastern Catholic bishop may also grant faculties on an ad hoc basis for up to a year pending the fuller granting of faculties assuming, of course, the Latin hierarch has consented to giving permission to the priest to serve in the particular Eastern Catholic church. The Latin priest, even with his Eastern faculties, remains incardinated in his Latin diocese unless specifically requesting excardination and a transfer to more fully serve the particular Eastern Catholic Church.

We have two priests in our area who are Latin but have faculties to assist in our UGCC parishes; both vest as Latins when serving Latin parishes as that is their church of incardination.

Other than some historic photos of Fulton Sheen I have yet to see a Latin bishop vested as an Eastern Catholic hierarch; even when the Latin bishop visits Russian Catholic parishes he vests as the Latin hierarch that he is.
FDRLB

What about Latin Cardinal Tomko? When attending Byzantine Catholic ordinations, installations he is dressed as an Eastern Hierarch. Does he have Bi-Ritual rights to do so?

U-C

 

[Aramis]

A quick, really basic question – what’s the difference between a public and private liturgy? I didn’t even know such a distinction existed until I read something about the recent Motu Proprio and private Tridentine Masses. I don’t get what it means exactly.

My first impression is that it just means which can have people and which cannot, but I learnt not to make quick judgements with Ecclesiastical terms because they tend to have different meanings. Could you clarify this a bit for me?

A public liturgy is scheduled, and the people are invited to attend, either explicitly by publication or implicitly by being at the customary time and place.

A private liturgy is, per Latin canon law, one that is neither advertised nor at the customary time. The people can be present, and in fact the faithful may not be turned away if the liturgy is in a public chapel.

Mass in solus is in fact forbidden except in certain emergencies. A priest is supposed to have at least one other person before saying the Latin Mass. (The exception: When the Tabernacle is empty, and the Eucharist is needed for viaticum, but none of the faithful are available…)

The most common cause for private liturgies was the pre-Vatican II requirement for each Latin priest to celebrate the mass daily, but concelebration was not allowed. (A warped form of concelebration exists in the actual use for the old liturgy, in that the Subdeacon and Deacon may actually be priests, and that met their requirement to say the Mass.)

Given the post-V II allowance for proper concelebration, the need for missae privatae is extremely low. Marriage Masses, Funeral Masses, and special association masses (like K of C or Legion of Mary special masses) technically can be private masses, especially if not published for the general public.

In the East, even less so, since most celebrations that would require the DL will be done at the regular scheduled DL.

A byzantine priest on vacation who finds a byzantine family could seek the local Latin pastor’s permission to do a private divine liturgy for the family, but it would not be permitted to “replace” the normal scheduled liturgies. (The pastor is required by the CCEO and by the CIC to verify by letters of introduction, or by calling the visitor’s bishop, the current canonical status of the visiting priest.)

**Michael: **the Russian Catholic (Byzantine Rite, Slavic Tradition, Russian Orthodox derivation) parishes in the US are in fact assigned to the care of Roman Rite Bishops, even though they remain byzantine rite parishes and technically part of a different Sui Iuris church. The Russian Catholic Church Sui Iuris currently lacks ANY hierarchs of its own.

 

[Hesychios]

**Michael: **the Russian Catholic (Byzantine Rite, Slavic Tradition, Russian Orthodox derivation) parishes in the US are in fact assigned to the care of Roman Rite Bishops, even though they remain byzantine rite parishes and technically part of a different Sui Iuris church. The Russian Catholic Church Sui Iuris currently lacks ANY hierarchs of its own.

Yes, I am aware of this.

I am still actually interested to find out if the parish in Denver was erected from a petition of actual Russian Catholics.

If you can find any information on it I would appreciate it.

Thanks,
Michael