Chrismation and first Holy Eucharist of Roman Catholic children by Eastern Catholic Priest?

[matthias]

Some background: I regularly attended a Ruthenian Catholic Church for years. At one point, I even registered as a parishioner there. In the past, I thought about formally changing enrollment to the Ruthenian Church jurisdiction “switching rites” but it didn’t seem necessary. Since then I have moved a 2.5 hours drive away from that Ruthenian parish and there is no other closer Eastern Catholic parish. It has been 7 years since I moved. I have visited the Ruthenian parish often but now that I am married and have children it is much harder to drive (5 hour round trip) with a 3 and 1 year old!

The question / situation: I have been struggling recently with the longing for my children to be Chrismated and receive Holy Communion. I have been careful to teach my son that the Eucharist is Jesus and people receive Jesus when they go up for communion and now my 3 year old is starting to ask why he can’t receive Jesus!!!?

I made the journey this weekend to visit the Ruthenian parish this weekend and the Priest told me that in the past they could only Chrismate and give Holy Communion to Roman Catholic babies with the permission of the Roman Bishop but Father said that this has changed and that now he can do this with no permission required. He said he thought there was some change to cannon law but he wasn’t sure where to point me so I could read more about this.

Do any of you on the Catholic Answers forums here know if what Father said is correct? Or specifically have any references to help me? I have some Roman Catholic priest friends (I used to be in seminary) who have told me this is not really allowed.

In the mean time I am beginning to look into switching rites again and possibly starting a mission parish in my town but in the mean time I really want my 3 year old who is asking to receive Jesus to be able to do so.

Thank you everyone.

 

[Casilda]

I believe that the jurisdiction of the father of the children it is what the children fall into. If you are Latin (Roman) Catholic your children would be, too. Were they baptized Latin (Roman)?

If you switch officially, your children under a certain age (14?) Would come under with you. After that they can choose to or not.

One may have a canonical change of Church more than once.

CIC Code of the Latin Church:
Can. 112 §1 After the reception of baptism, the following become members of another autonomous ritual Church:
1° those who have obtained permission from the Apostolic See;
2° a spouse who, on entering marriage or during its course, has declared that he or she is transferring to the autonomous ritual
Church of the other spouse; on the dissolution of the marriage, however, that person may freely return to the latin Church;
3° the children of those mentioned in nn. 1 and 2 who have not completed their fourteenth year, and likewise in a mixed marriage** the children of a catholic party who has lawfully transferred to another ritual Church; on completion of their fourteenth year, however, they may return to the latin Church. **

CCEO Code of the Eastern Catholic Churches
Canon 33 A wife is at liberty to transfer to the Church of the husband at the celebration of or during the marriage; when the marriage has ended, she can freely return to the original Church sui iuris.

I was under this last provision, my husband converted to Eastern Catholicism, he was Protestant (he initially tried with the Latin-Roman) and I was able to transfer as his spouse. I am free to return if we get divorced or he dies.

 

[matthias]

Casilda,

Thank you for your quick response but you haven’t really answered the question I asked (see above).

In short: Can the Ruthenian Catholic priest Chrismate and Commune my children (ages 1 and 3) without any special permission from my Roman Catholic Bishop. My wife, children, and I are all currently Roman Catholics. See above OP for more background and detail.

 

[FrDavid96]

Some background: I regularly attended a Ruthenian Catholic Church for years. At one point, I even registered as a parishioner there. In the past, I thought about formally changing enrollment to the Ruthenian Church jurisdiction “switching rites” but it didn’t seem necessary. Since then I have moved a 2.5 hours drive away from that Ruthenian parish and there is no other closer Eastern Catholic parish. It has been 7 years since I moved. I have visited the Ruthenian parish often but now that I am married and have children it is much harder to drive (5 hour round trip) with a 3 and 1 year old!

The question / situation: I have been struggling recently with the longing for my children to be Chrismated and receive Holy Communion. I have been careful to teach my son that the Eucharist is Jesus and people receive Jesus when they go up for communion and now my 3 year old is starting to ask why he can’t receive Jesus!!!?

I made the journey this weekend to visit the Ruthenian parish this weekend and the Priest told me that in the past they could only Chrismate and give Holy Communion to Roman Catholic babies with the permission of the Roman Bishop but Father said that this has changed and that now he can do this with no permission required. He said he thought there was some change to cannon law but he wasn’t sure where to point me so I could read more about this.

Do any of you on the Catholic Answers forums here know if what Father said is correct? Or specifically have any references to help me? I have some Roman Catholic priest friends (I used to be in seminary) who have told me this is not really allowed.

In the mean time I am beginning to look into switching rites again and possibly starting a mission parish in my town but in the mean time I really want my 3 year old who is asking to receive Jesus to be able to do so.

Thank you everyone.

There is some kind of misunderstanding here.

No, he cannot just Chrismate or give First Communion to Roman Catholic children. He cannot do this because those people are not under his jurisdiction. As a Roman pastor I cannot (actually “should not” because the canon is not overly strict) give First Communion to Romans from the neighboring Roman parish without permission.

Yes, there were some changes made by Pope Francis in recent years that make it easier for people to change ritual churches. Your pastor should consult those before attempting anything.

An Eastern priest always validly Chrismates/Confirms (assuming the person is baptized and not yet Chrismated, naturally); and this validity does not depend on jurisdiction. However, in order to be licit (in accord with the law) there are other requirements, and these are not to be ignored.

A 3 year old Roman Catholic is not eligible under the law to receive either Confirmation or First Communion. It doesn’t matter who the priest might be. If the person is not eligible, then the priest may not do it. A Roman Catholic (regardless of age) is still bound by the Latin Code of Canon Law. We absolutely cannot say “if that child were Eastern, the Eastern law would apply, so we could do it.”

If you change to the Ruthenian Church, then that will obviously change things. But without that change, the child is clearly not eligible.

 

[Hospodi_pomilui]

There is some kind of misunderstanding here.

No, he cannot just Chrismate or give First Communion to Roman Catholic children. He cannot do this because those people are not under his jurisdiction. As a Roman pastor I cannot (actually “should not” because the canon is not overly strict) give First Communion to Romans from the neighboring Roman parish without permission.

Yes, there were some changes made by Pope Francis in recent years that make it easier for people to change ritual churches. Your pastor should consult those before attempting anything.

An Eastern priest always validly Chrismates/Confirms (assuming the person is baptized and not yet Chrismated, naturally); and this validity does not depend on jurisdiction. However, in order to be licit (in accord with the law) there are other requirements, and these are not to be ignored.

A 3 year old Roman Catholic is not eligible under the law to receive either Confirmation or First Communion. It doesn’t matter who the priest might be. If the person is not eligible, then the priest may not do it. A Roman Catholic (regardless of age) is still bound by the Latin Code of Canon Law. We absolutely cannot say “if that child were Eastern, the Eastern law would apply, so we could do it.”

If you change to the Ruthenian Church, then that will obviously change things. But without that change, the child is clearly not eligible.

BEGIN_RANT

Beyond the possible problem with jurisdiction, simply ending the Latin historical development (tradition) of withholding Confirmation and the Eucharist based the age of reason would put an end to this silliness - at least from an Eastern view. Of course this easier said than done because this would also end the custom of girls in white dresses and boys in white suits and the party and the gifts, and the completely inaccurate understanding of Confirmation that I have encountered in some Latin teens who think that they are confirming their faith.

END_RANT

The thinking that a child is not “eligible” is absurd. If they have been baptized, then they are eligible. Beyond the question of jurisdiction, there is absolutely no good reason to continue withholding the sacraments of initiation. None.

If you don’t feel comfortable with the Ruthenian priests answer, then the best thing to do is to contact either (or both) the Ruthenian and Roman bishops. I would start with the Ruthenian bishop because they might have a better understanding of what you need to do since they probably deal with this situation more often. Also, though I am very much in favor of infant Chrismation and Communion, you should follow what your local Latin bishop allows even if that means going through the transfer process first. At this time, he is your bishop, and you should do all things with him.

 

[FrDavid96]

BEGIN_RANT

Beyond the possible problem with jurisdiction, simply ending the Latin historical development (tradition) of withholding Confirmation and the Eucharist based the age of reason would put an end to this silliness - at least from an Eastern view. Of course this easier said than done because this would also end the custom of girls in white dresses and boys in white suits and the party and the gifts, and the completely inaccurate understanding of Confirmation that I have encountered in some Latin teens who think that they are confirming their faith.

END_RANT

The thinking that a child is not “eligible” is absurd. If they have been baptized, then they are eligible. Beyond the question of jurisdiction, there is absolutely no good reason to continue withholding the sacraments of initiation. None.

If you don’t feel comfortable with the Ruthenian priests answer, then the best thing to do is to contact either (or both) the Ruthenian and Roman bishops. I would start with the Ruthenian bishop because they might have a better understanding of what you need to do since they probably deal with this situation more often. Also, though I am very much in favor of infant Chrismation and Communion, you should follow what your local Latin bishop allows even if that means going through the transfer process first. At this time, he is your bishop, and you should do all things with him.

What is absurd is that you think you can take your own personal opinion and say that the Catholic Church is wrong for doing it the Church’s way instead of your way.

Whether you like it or not, a 3 year old Roman Catholic person is not eligible to be Confirmed nor to receive First Communion (except danger of death). That is not your decision to make.

 

[Hospodi_pomilui]

What is absurd is that you think you can take your own personal opinion and say that the Catholic Church is wrong for doing it the Church’s way instead of your way.

Whether you like it or not, a 3 year old Roman Catholic person is not eligible to be Confirmed nor to receive First Communion (except danger of death). That is not your decision to make.

Fr. David,
Please try to read what I wrote, specifically what I recommended at the end. Do I think that the Latin Churches practice of denying Chrismation and the Eucharist needs reforming? Yes, I do. Am I allowed to have that opinion? Yes. Just as the custom changed in the Latin Church during the last thousand years away from the universal practice of the apostolic churches, it can change back, and I hope it will.

Did I say that it was my decision to make? Nope.

Did I recommend that the original poster do whatever he wanted. Nope.

In fact, I suggested the exact opposite.

If he does not feel comfortable with what the priest told him, then he needs to contact the authorities that can actually give him an authoritative answer, the bishops. This is exactly what I would do if I was unsure of something like this. Why did I recommend that he do that? Read what I wrote again and think about the Eastern Father I was paraphrasing and the Eastern understanding of the bishop.

 

[babochka]

Do any of you on the Catholic Answers forums here know if what Father said is correct? Or specifically have any references to help me? I have some Roman Catholic priest friends (I used to be in seminary) who have told me this is not really allowed.

I know the appropriate canons and I don’t know about possible exceptions to them, nor any arrangements that might have been made between bishops. What I do know is that my bishop has given priests in his eparchy guidelines for what to do in these situations and that the guidelines given by the bishop do, in some cases, allow for the Baptism, Chrismation, and Holy Communion of the children of Latin Rite families. It happens with some frequency in my parish. Specific canons notwithstanding, I can only assume that my bishop knows what he is doing and that my priest is obedient to his bishop in this matter. If your priest is following the guidance given by his bishop and is willing to baptize your child, then I see no problem with it.

 

[Vico]

Some background: I regularly attended a Ruthenian Catholic Church for years. At one point, I even registered as a parishioner there. In the past, I thought about formally changing enrollment to the Ruthenian Church jurisdiction “switching rites” but it didn’t seem necessary. Since then I have moved a 2.5 hours drive away from that Ruthenian parish and there is no other closer Eastern Catholic parish. It has been 7 years since I moved. I have visited the Ruthenian parish often but now that I am married and have children it is much harder to drive (5 hour round trip) with a 3 and 1 year old!

The question / situation: I have been struggling recently with the longing for my children to be Chrismated and receive Holy Communion. I have been careful to teach my son that the Eucharist is Jesus and people receive Jesus when they go up for communion and now my 3 year old is starting to ask why he can’t receive Jesus!!!?

I made the journey this weekend to visit the Ruthenian parish this weekend and the Priest told me that in the past they could only Chrismate and give Holy Communion to Roman Catholic babies with the permission of the Roman Bishop but Father said that this has changed and that now he can do this with no permission required. He said he thought there was some change to cannon law but he wasn’t sure where to point me so I could read more about this.

Do any of you on the Catholic Answers forums here know if what Father said is correct? Or specifically have any references to help me? I have some Roman Catholic priest friends (I used to be in seminary) who have told me this is not really allowed.

In the mean time I am beginning to look into switching rites again and possibly starting a mission parish in my town but in the mean time I really want my 3 year old who is asking to receive Jesus to be able to do so.

Thank you everyone.

The sacramental disciplines of each Church sui iuris are to be preserved. In the ancient Catholic church Christian initiation was all at once by the Bishop. Different practices developed in the eastern Catholic and Latin Catholic church traditions. The Latin Church is to provide catechesis for Confirmation in advance whereas the eastern is post Chrysmation. In both the oil is the link to the Bishop (Latin priests may be allowed to confirm for the bishop like the eastern norm).

 

[Solomonson]

Have your children already been baptized? Have you considered taking them to Mexico for baptism/first communion/confirmation? I know that’s fairly common among “traditionalists” around here.

I know our former Ruthenian priest used to baptize/give communion/confirm infant from “out of town” until the Eastern ordinary put a stop to it.

 

[Angel_Gabriel]

We were in a similar situation 4 years ago. We had been attending a small UGCC mission for a few years. At that point in time we were only meeting about 2 times a month and in the very beginning it was only once a month. We were interested in officially doing the canonical transfer but felt we needed to wait a bit longer so that we could go through another liturgical year/cycle. At any rate all we did was have the priest contact the Latin Bishop and ask his permission to chrismate and commune our kids. The oldest at the time was of the age to make his first communion and we wanted him to receive it during Divine Liturgy since we were really devoted to it. Our priest said he would like to do it but would like for him to be chrismated first since that was the more traditional practice. So that’s when he talked to the Latin Bishop. The Bishop had no problems with it and gave his permission. So all 3 kids were chrismated and communed (ages 8, 5 and 2).
The next year we had our new baby baptized, chrismated and communed in the byzantine rite. This time we didn’t even bother asking since the bishop had already given his approval the year before. A few months after he was baptized we officially transferred to the UGCC.

 

[Solomonson]

Yes, it was the right thing to do. This priest was bi-ritual and mostly identified with being a “traditional” Roman Catholic Priest. It was a “traditional network” of sorts that yielded the out-of-town children to be baptized.

 

[FrDavid96]

What some posters here either fail or refuse to understand is this:

The discipline and canons of the Latin Rite apply to the members of the Latin Rite.

The disciplines and canons of the Eastern Churches apply to the members of the Eastern Churches.

The two cannot be mixed-and-matched according to personal whims.

The question posed by the OP has to do with a Latin Rite person receiving Confirmation and First Communion. Since the person is a Latin person, then the canons and discipline and jurisdiction of the Latin Church apply. According to the Code of Canon Law of the Latin Church (CIC), a 3 year old person is not eligible to receive these Sacraments. It is that simple.

The Eastern Code and Eastern praxis have nothing to do with this topic.

If the OP chooses to transfer to an Eastern Church, then, and only then, would the Eastern practice, tradition, and Code (CCOE) apply.

 

[babochka]

What some posters here either fail or refuse to understand is this:

The discipline and canons of the Latin Rite apply to the members of the Latin Rite.

The disciplines and canons of the Eastern Churches apply to the members of the Eastern Churches.

The two cannot be mixed-and-matched according to personal whims.

The question posed by the OP has to do with a Latin Rite person receiving Confirmation and First Communion. Since the person is a Latin person, then the canons and discipline and jurisdiction of the Latin Church apply. According to the Code of Canon Law of the Latin Church (CIC), a 3 year old person is not eligible to receive these Sacraments. It is that simple.

The Eastern Code and Eastern praxis have nothing to do with this topic.

If the OP chooses to transfer to an Eastern Church, then, and only then, would the Eastern practice, tradition, and Code (CCOE) apply.

So the explicit permission of the bishop(s) in these situations is irrelevant and priests should refuse to give the sacraments to these children, even when their bishops have given them guidelines under which they may do so?

 

[Don_Ruggero]

So the explicit permission of the bishop(s) in these situations is irrelevant and priests should refuse to give the sacraments to these children, even when their bishops have given them guidelines under which they may do so?

Those priests should be following the directives of their bishop and of his curial officials.

 

[Hospodi_pomilui]

What some posters here either fail or refuse to understand is this:

The discipline and canons of the Latin Rite apply to the members of the Latin Rite.

The disciplines and canons of the Eastern Churches apply to the members of the Eastern Churches.

The two cannot be mixed-and-matched according to personal whims.

The question posed by the OP has to do with a Latin Rite person receiving Confirmation and First Communion. Since the person is a Latin person, then the canons and discipline and jurisdiction of the Latin Church apply. According to the Code of Canon Law of the Latin Church (CIC), a 3 year old person is not eligible to receive these Sacraments. It is that simple.

The Eastern Code and Eastern praxis have nothing to do with this topic.

If the OP chooses to transfer to an Eastern Church, then, and only then, would the Eastern practice, tradition, and Code (CCOE) apply.

Fr. David,
With all due respect, none of the posters here have refused or failed to understand the nature of disciplines and canons and their application. The other posters have explained what they know, what they have heard of happening, and what has happened to them in relation to the original posters query. There is no refusal or failure to understand. No one has mentioned the Eastern Code or praxis either so I’m not sure why that is being brought up. No one is talking about mixing disciplines either. (In my case I am simply of the opinion that the Latin Church should return to the original discipline in these matters which does not involve mixing disciplines, but returning to a prior practice.)

No one is arguing about what the law says, but the reality is that exceptions are allowed by the Latin church and as a result infants and 3 years who are still legally Latin Catholics are allowed to receive Chrismation and the Eucharist without having transferred to an Eastern Church first. Latin bishops can and do allow this to occur. Perhaps speaking with your bishop about the pastoral nature of these decisions would be helpful in understanding why this is allowed.

 

[FrDavid96]

Fr. David,
With all due respect, none of the posters here have refused or failed to understand the nature of disciplines and canons and their application. The other posters have explained what they know, what they have heard of happening, and what has happened to them in relation to the original posters query. There is no refusal or failure to understand. No one has mentioned the Eastern Code

Yes. That is exactly the problem. People answer “this is what I think” or “this is what I once saw.” Anecdotes. Examples that might or might not be in harmony with the codes of canon law.

The fact that “no one has mentioned the Eastern Code” hardly supports their positions.

It does the exact opposite.

or praxis either so I’m not sure why that is being brought up.

Of course they have. That’s the topic of the thread.

No one is talking about mixing disciplines either.

Again, that is the entire topic of the thread: mixing disciplines. That’s what happens when a Latin Catholic seeks to be Chrismated/Communed in an Eastern Church.

(In my case I am simply of the opinion that the Latin Church should return to the original discipline in these matters which does not involve mixing disciplines, but returning to a prior practice.)

No one is arguing about what the law says, but the reality is that exceptions are allowed by the Latin church and as a result infants and 3 years who are still legally Latin Catholics are allowed to receive Chrismation and the Eucharist without having transferred to an Eastern Church first. Latin bishops can and do allow this to occur. Perhaps speaking with your bishop about the pastoral nature of these decisions would be helpful in understanding why this is allowed.

 

[Herculees]

Unfortunately I don’t know the answer. I think the best thing to do is to call the diocese/eparchy office closest to you and ask them. I will keep you and your
family in prayer, especially your decision of whether to transfer rites or not. I
am a Latin Rite Catholic and in the process of requesting a transfer to the Maronite Rite.

 

[FrDavid96]

The problem is that people think that the codes of Canon Law–in this case, both codes, don’t matter or are unimportant.

People think that this sort of thing is a matter of finding some priest who will do what they want, or some anecdotal example that might or might not even apply. Indeed, given the complexity of this, and the many changes to the laws over the years, anecdotal examples are the least helpful sort of responses to a question like this.

If a Catholic of one Rite, or Church sui iuris, wants to change to another, there are provisions in the laws to accommodate this. Pope Francis recently relaxed the relevant canons to make it rather easy to do this. As an aside, just a few decades ago, it was nearly impossible for a Catholic to switch.

With regard to the OPs specific question: what is being asked is not permitted under the law. The 2 Eastern and Western disciplines cannot be mixed-and-matched according to personal whims. (Here, I’m not talking about visiting and praying which, as we all know, is not an issue.)

This is what really amazes me:

The OP asked a question about “what does canon law say?” Re-read the OP. That’s exactly what was asked.

He said he thought there was some change to cannon law but he wasn’t sure where to point me so I could read more about this.

That’s what the OP wanted to know: was there a recent change to canon law? The answer is “no.” There was no such change. There were other changes made.

Somehow, some people seem to think that an answer that actually explains what canon law does say, is not the way to answer the question.

If anyone can explain how that makes logical sense, I’d like to know.

 

[Hospodi_pomilui]

Yes. That is exactly the problem. People answer “this is what I think” or “this is what I once saw.” Anecdotes. Examples that might or might not be in harmony with the codes of canon law.

The fact that “no one has mentioned the Eastern Code” hardly supports their positions.

It does the exact opposite.

Of course they have. That’s the topic of the thread.

Again, that is the entire topic of the thread: mixing disciplines. That’s what happens when a Latin Catholic seeks to be Chrismated/Communed in an Eastern Church.

Fr. David,
I am realizing that it is not worth continuing to post on this thread. I’m annoyed, and I’m guessing you are experiencing a similar feelings. This could continue until hell froze over, and there will be no agreement because we seem to be simply talking past one another. Continued discord on these matters is unhealthy - especially during Lent. I apologize for anything I have written to offend you or anyone else.

In reference to the original query, and as I wrote in my initial post, the poster needs to contact the bishops for an authoritative answer and then do what his bishop says. I hope that anyone would agree that it is a reasonable course of action and a better approach than making decisions based on forum discussions.

Glory be to Jesus Christ!