Celebration of a Liturgy without Biritual Faculties

[Denho]

What is the canonical penalty for a Latin priest who celebrates a Liturgy of another Church sui juris without the requisite biritual faculties granted by the Eparch?

 

[ConstantineTG]

I guess if it is private, ie., at home with family and a few friends, then there is none. The Eparch has no jurisdiction on the priest and certainly they do not have ownership of a Rite. Now the issue would be, did the priest minister to his flock? If not, I don’t think the Eastern bishop has any jurisdiction over the priest. If the priest ministered to the bishop’s flock, then he has a right to complain to the bishop of the priest. If the Liturgy is not something done open to the public, I don’t think the Eastern bishop can do much about it.

 

[fordhamstudent]

Interesting question. I would love to hear the answer.

 

[mardukm]

What is the canonical penalty for a Latin priest who celebrates a Liturgy of another Church sui juris without the requisite biritual faculties granted by the Eparch?

The canons don’t spell out the penalties for a priest not celebrating in his own Rite, only that he must. So that’s an interesting question. The penalties in Canon law are only imposed if the act violating the canon is done with malice or negligence. I suppose such an act could fall under “negligence.” but I don’t know what are the conditions for a determination of “negligence.” The Latin Code also states that if the law is violated due to the “omission of diligence” (Canon 1321), the violator is not automatically punished. I don’t know what the difference is between “negligence” and “omission of diligence.”

If the priest had knowledge of the Rite and did it in an emergency situation, I doubt there would be a penalty.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ConstantineTG]

If the priest had knowledge of the Rite and did it in an emergency situation, I doubt there would be a penalty.

When does a Liturgy needed to be celebrated in an emergency situation? Even with the Sacraments the bare essentials of a Sacrament is only what needs to be done during an emergency, so no need to celebrate an entire Rite (like for example the Byzantine Rite of Baptism).

 

[ConstantineTG]

Normally in the Byzantine Rite one would need the antimens to consecrate Bread and Wine. The ordinary minister of the Eucharist is the bishop and the priest only celebrates the Eucharist because the Bishops have given him the permission to do so. This is, at least, the core understanding in the Byzantine Rite. In Orthdoox theology a priest separated from the Church has no power to consecrate. So a priest without antimension cannot celebrate the Liturgy no matter what. I know Catholic teaching is different in this regards, so from the Catholic perspective the priest can celebrate whatever Rite he wants to and it will be a valid Liturgy. As long as it is not public, then the other bishop has no say whatsoever. His own bishop will have.

 

[Denho]

The canons don’t spell out the penalties for a priest not celebrating in his own Rite, only that he must. So that’s an interesting question. The penalties in Canon law are only imposed if the act violating the canon is done with malice or negligence. I suppose such an act could fall under “negligence.” but I don’t know what are the conditions for a determination of “negligence.” The Latin Code also states that if the law is violated due to the “omission of diligence” (Canon 1321), the violator is not automatically punished. I don’t know what the difference is between “negligence” and “omission of diligence.”

If the priest had knowledge of the Rite and did it in an emergency situation, I doubt there would be a penalty.

Blessings,
Marduk

For the sake of argument, lets assume the priest had more than sufficient knowledge of the pertinent canons to rule out omission of diligence and that under the circumstances we can conclude that there was no emergency situation.

 

[mardukm]

When does a Liturgy needed to be celebrated in an emergency situation? Even with the Sacraments the bare essentials of a Sacrament is only what needs to be done during an emergency, so no need to celebrate an entire Rite (like for example the Byzantine Rite of Baptism).

A Latin priest who has knowledge of the Rite visits (not in an official capacity, but maybe for a retreat or vacation) a remote desert village in the Middle East or a remote mountain village in Eastern Europe which normally has a visiting priest in their own Rite who comes only once a month, and someone asks him to perform a marriage or requests a Mass/DL for a special intention.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

For the sake of argument, lets assume the priest had more than sufficient knowledge of the pertinent canons to rule out omission of diligence and that under the circumstances we can conclude that there was no emergency situation.

(Geez, it took me a while to find that smiley).

It really depends on his bishop. Canon 1327 of the CIC states that particular law (established by the local bishop) can establish exemptions or mitigations of the general law. So one bishop may find it particularly offensive, and another bishop might not. If a bishop does find it sufficiently offensive (unlikely), the priest can be punished with the penalties indicated in CIC 1336 - 1340. It could be nothing more than light penance.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ConstantineTG]

A Latin priest who has knowledge of the Rite visits (not in an official capacity, but maybe for a retreat or vacation) a remote desert village in the Middle East or a remote mountain village in Eastern Europe which normally has a visiting priest in their own Rite who comes only once a month, and someone asks him to perform a marriage or requests a Mass/DL for a special intention.

Blessings,
Marduk

That is not an emergency, and he can always do it in his own Rite. Most priests wouldn’t do something that is not the Rite they are trained to do. My son was going to be baptized and our priest suddenly took a vacation (probably related to his reassignment which was later announced), I talked to the substitute priest to do the baptismal rite. He refused because he is Chaldean with biritual, but says he doesn’t know how to do baptism in the Roman Rite. He can only do Mass.

 

[mardukm]

The ordinary minister of the Eucharist is the bishop and the priest only celebrates the Eucharist because the Bishops have given him the permission to do so. This is, at least, the core understanding in the Byzantine Rite.

Same in the Latin Rite, as in all the Churches. This is the basic ecclesiology of St. Ignatius of Antioch.

I know Catholic teaching is different in this regards, so from the Catholic perspective the priest can celebrate whatever Rite he wants to and it will be a valid Liturgy.

What do Eastern Catholics say about this comment? Is it true, according to ConstantineTG, that a DL can be validly celebrated by an Eastern Catholic priest without the antimension?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

That is not an emergency, and he can always do it in his own Rite. Most priests wouldn’t do something that is not the Rite they are trained to do. My son was going to be baptized and our priest suddenly took a vacation (probably related to his reassignment which was later announced), I talked to the substitute priest to do the baptismal rite. He refused because he is Chaldean with biritual, but says he doesn’t know how to do baptism in the Roman Rite. He can only do Mass.

If there were a bunch of deaths in the remote village and they wanted a Mass/DL for special intention, that’s certainly an emergency. Besides, the OP is asking a hypothetical question. Who cares if “most priests” would not do it. The OP is asking about a circumstance if the Latin priest WOULD do it.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[5Loaves]

A Latin priest who has knowledge of the Rite visits (not in an official capacity, but maybe for a retreat or vacation) a remote desert village in the Middle East or a remote mountain village in Eastern Europe which normally has a visiting priest in their own Rite who comes only once a month, and someone asks him to perform a marriage or requests a Mass/DL for a special intention.

Blessings,
Marduk

I had similar thoughts. We who live where we can easily and safely take part in a Liturgy are so removed from the various situations around the world where access to clergy is not so routine. And OP only says “without the requisite biritual faculties”. There are surely plenty of priests, I know some personally, who have had bi-ritual faculties, but have them no longer simply because they are not presently serving a community where they need them so the faculties would need to re renewed for them to return to serving on a normal basis.

I would question your suggestion of him presiding at the wedding. Weddings don’t take place in a Divine Liturgy, and include additional concerns beyond an ordinary Divine Liturgy.

 

[mardukm]

I’ve been to 6 weddings in my entire life (4 in the COC, and 2 in the Latin Church), and they always included Mass. I guess I always assumed Mass/DL was part of the Marriage ceremony. I guess it is different in the Eastern Tradition. Thank you for the extra knowledge, sister 5loaves. I love learning new things.

I would question your suggestion of him presiding at the wedding. Weddings don’t take place in a Divine Liturgy, and include additional concerns beyond an ordinary Divine Liturgy.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[5Loaves]

I’ve been to 6 weddings in my entire life (4 in the COC, and 2 in the Latin Church), and they always included Mass. I guess I always assumed Mass/DL was part of the Marriage ceremony. I guess it is different in the Eastern Tradition. Thank you for the extra knowledge, sister 5loaves. I love learning new things.

Blessings,
Marduk

The rite in the Latin Church may take place within an Mass, or outside of Mass.
The marriage in the East is quite different with the two distinct parts-- the Betrothal/exchange of rings which takes place in the vestibule, and the Crowning. No vows or oaths-- no “til death do us part” Within the Crowning portion the couple share a common cup of blessed wine. Wikipedia has a more detailed description than Orthodox Wiki although orthodoxwiki has working links to the GOARCH, Greek Orthodox, services of Betrothal, and of Crowning.

The Latin parish I have close ties to has had weddings within a normal Mass in the past two years. It was really a treat both times. I happened to know both couples and so knew the Sacrament was to be celebrated, but many people in the Mass had not known the marriage rite was going to take place and it really made for a happy group of surprised parishioners.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Same in the Latin Rite, as in all the Churches. This is the basic ecclesiology of St. Ignatius of Antioch.

No it is not the same. The Latin understanding of the Sacrament of Holy Orders state that once a priest, always a priest. And the ability to celebrate the Liturgy and consecrate the Eucharist is inherent in a priest, therefore a heretic and schismatic priest can still validly celebrate Mass and validly consecrate bread and wine into the Eucharist even if he is thrown out of the Church and defrocked. It is not licity, but it is 100% valid. You don’t need a bishop for a valid Liturgy.

In the Orthodox Church it is the opposite. If a priest is removed from the Church either by his own will or his bishop’s, he is not a priest anymore. Though the mark of the Mystery of Ordination will always be with him (he doesn’t need to be re-ordained to be reinstated), until the bishop reinstates him he can never function as a priest of the Orthodox Church. No valid Liturgies, no valid Eucharist, no nothing. He is by all intents and purposes, a lay person. Think of it this way, the Church is a body. Imagine the priest to be a finger. If you detach the finger from the body, it still looks like a finger but it is useless. The same as the priest, they still have the mark of the priest but can no longer function as a priest. If they are reinstated they do not need to be ordained again, as with a severed finger can be reattached to the body and be used again (in certain circumstances).

What do Eastern Catholics say about this comment? Is it true, according to ConstantineTG, that a DL can be validly celebrated by an Eastern Catholic priest without the antimension?

There is no teaching otherwise that without the antimens, there is no valid Liturgy or valid Eucharist. It is still followed as a matter of practice, not a matter of necessity. In fact in our own parish we have a very old antimens which isn’t even signed by a bishop of our Eparchy past or present (although technically at the time the antimens was signed I believe our churches belonged to another Eparchy as we are a young Eparchy).

 

[Aramis]

What is the canonical penalty for a Latin priest who celebrates a Liturgy of another Church sui juris without the requisite biritual faculties granted by the Eparch?

Are you asking about celebrating it as principal celebrant or as concelebrant?

As concelebrant, all he needs to is do so in his Roman-Rite vestments to be completely in the clear.

As a principal celebrant, “a just penalty” … probably nothing more than a talking to the first time.

 

[malphono]

What is the canonical penalty for a Latin priest who celebrates a Liturgy of another Church sui juris without the requisite biritual faculties granted by the Eparch?

For the sake of argument, lets assume the priest had more than sufficient knowledge of the pertinent canons to rule out omission of diligence and that under the circumstances we can conclude that there was no emergency situation.

This is the kind of question that dubia are made of, so I did the next best thing and posed the question to a very well respected JOCD, even though I thought I knew the answer. Turns out I was right:

Whether it was done in public or privately, any such Mass is valid but totally illicit, as it is directly contrary to the provisions of the CCEO:

Canon 674 - §2. The minister should celebrate the sacraments according to the liturgical prescriptions of his own Church sui iuris, unless the law establishes otherwise or he himself has obtained a special faculty from the Apostolic See.

as well as the provisions of the CIC:

Can. 846 §2. The minister is to celebrate the sacraments according to the minister’s own rite.

There are, however, no penal canons for this offense, so any “penance” that might be imposed by the priest’s bishop/Ordinary would be at the discretion of the bishop/Ordinary, and would likely be light, at least for a first offense. I would imagine something on the order of “I’m not telling you again … don’t do this anymore.” A repeat offender might incur a light disciplinary action, but nothing severe or long-term.

 

[Vico]

What is the canonical penalty for a Latin priest who celebrates a Liturgy of another Church sui juris without the requisite biritual faculties granted by the Eparch?

1. Celebration:
   CIC Can. 846 §1. In celebrating the sacraments the liturgical books approved by competent authority are to be observed faithfully; accordingly, no one is to add, omit, or alter anything in them on one’s own authority.
   §2. The minister is to celebrate the sacraments according to the minister’s own rite.
2. Penalty
   CIC Can. 1384 In addition to the cases mentioned in ⇒ cann. 1378-1383, a person who illegitimately performs a priestly function or another sacred ministry can be punished with a just penalty.

Redemptionis Sacramentum 174. Furthermore, those actions that are brought about which are contrary to the other matters treated elsewhere in this Instruction or in the norms established by law are not to be considered of little account, but are to be numbered among the other abuses to be carefully avoided and corrected.

1. The things set forth in this Instruction obviously do not encompass all the violations against the Church and its discipline that are defined in the canons, in the liturgical laws and in other norms of the Church for the sake of the teaching of the Magisterium or sound tradition. Where something wrong has been committed, it is to be corrected according to the norm of law.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

 

[5Loaves]

What do Eastern Catholics say about this comment? Is it true, according to ConstantineTG, that a DL can be validly celebrated by an Eastern Catholic priest without the antimension?

Blessings,
Marduk

I can’t imagine DL celebrated in any normal circumstance without an antimension for Eastern Orthodox, or Eastern Catholic. I don’t know about Oriental Orthodox and Oriental Catholic rubrics. Among other things it represents the permission of the bishop for the priest to celebrate. Folded, unfolded, where it’s placed, are of course all spelled out. What would prompt such an innovation as to not use one under any normal circumstance? We do know of the stories of our heroic priests in the Gulags who celebrated flat on their backs using their chests as a Holy table which may well have not included any antimension. The last thing I’d have been thinking about in that Gulag would have been “Is this Eucharist valid?” Christ I know took care of that for them Himself.