Considering Eastern Catholicism

[roraha]

Hello everyone! This is my first time posting. I was born and raised Roman. The last few years that I was Roman I attended EC churches both Ruthenian and Melkite. I seriously considered switching rites. However, I ended up moving to another part of the country where there were no EC parishes. I was able to find a lovely OCA parish which I joined in 2005 and have been Orthodox ever since. I cannot lie the Orthodox Church has been very good to me.the I have no complaints. However, sometimes I feel like I should become EC now that I live within driving distance from a couple of EC parishes (moved again). There is a certain degree of confusion and internal conflict. If I am understanding correctly what has been written in this thread if i wanted to rejoin the Catholic Communion I would need to do a Profession of Faith and confession? I would be enrolled in an EC since I have been a practicing Orthodox Christian for more than 6 years. I am not clear what EC Church I would be enrolled in as I am currently a member of an Antiochian Parish. Would I be Melkite or UGCC? Any advise or (name removed by moderator)ut? Thank you.

 

[Vico]

Hello everyone! This is my first time posting. I was born and raised Roman. The last few years that I was Roman I attended EC churches both Ruthenian and Melkite. I seriously considered switching rites. However, I ended up moving to another part of the country where there were no EC parishes. I was able to find a lovely OCA parish which I joined in 2005 and have been Orthodox ever since. I cannot lie the Orthodox Church has been very good to me.the I have no complaints. However, sometimes I feel like I should become EC now that I live within driving distance from a couple of EC parishes (moved again). There is a certain degree of confusion and internal conflict. If I am understanding correctly what has been written in this thread if i wanted to rejoin the Catholic Communion I would need to do a Profession of Faith and confession? I would be enrolled in an EC since I have been a practicing Orthodox Christian for more than 6 years. I am not clear what EC Church I would be enrolled in as I am currently a member of an Antiochian Parish. Would I be Melkite or UGCC? Any advise or (name removed by moderator)ut? Thank you.

It would be best to attend one of the eastern Catholic parishes regularly for a few years and then request transfer to the Church sui iuris with the recommendation of the pastor there, since you are enrolled in the Latin Church by your baptism.

 

[Frank_J]

Hello roraha,
Why do you want to leave the Orthodox faith? If I were you I would step back and think twice about this move of yours. Look into it if you must, but don’t make a move until you have assurance that you would be able to become EC first. Talk too and EC Priest first and have him submit your transfer before you find yourself trapped in the RC Church once again. You could be setting yourself up for one big fall.

Pres. Ronald Regan statement was (trust but verify). Remember that Pres. Ronald Regan was dealing with communists. Here you have the same problem here with similar opponent that you must deal with. The Latin Church will try not to cut you some slack, remember you dealing with the Latin Church. I left the Latin Church because of the events that took place in my life. Investigate first and see how it would take place. Don’t jump into the fire first. PLEASE but PLEASE !!! don’t jump……….

Look at it at this angle, what happen that if they say no to your transfer after you have been attending the EC Church and the only hold out is the Latin Bishop???

Hey just some sound advice…

 

[5Loaves]

The Latin Church will try not to cut you some slack, remember you dealing with the Latin Church.

Look at it at this angle, what happen that if they say no to your transfer after you have been attending the EC Church and the only hold out is the Latin Bishop???

I’m unclear what slack you are referring to that the Latin Church wouldn’t cut. What do you have in mind?

In my EC parish until very recently most of the parishioners, those in the choir, and those “in the pews” (although we have no pews ) were Latin Catholics. Lately we’ve had a number of youngish ECs become involved in the parish so there’s a bit of a shift in the percent with these additions but the other Latins are still there with this as their parish. Being Latin Catholics has limited them in no way. For example, ConstantineTG is an example here of a Latin Catholic whose young child was baptized, christmated and receives Holy Eucharist in an ECC.

When I made the decision to make a formal change from the Latin Church to the Russian Greek/Byzantine Catholic Church sui iuris my Latin bishop immediately upon receiving word of my request wrote his letter releasing me. I had no problem whatsoever with any resistance about the change. There are occasional stories of someone who has ended up having a problem with the request, but even in that case they are not restricted from living as an Eastern Catholic, being active in the EC parish of their choice, exclusive of any involvement with the Latin Church, unless they choice some involvement. I’ve heard plenty of stories of people who had as little difficulty as I did with making the change.

That is not to say I am encouraging OP in leaving Holy Orthodoxy. That decision is between OP and God.

 

[Frank_J]

Hello roraha,

Why do you want to leave the Orthodox faith? If I were you I would step back and think twice about this move of yours. Look into it if you must, but don’t make a move until you have assurance that you would be able to become EC first. Talk too and EC Priest first and have him submit your transfer before you find yourself trapped in the RC Church once again. You could be setting yourself up for one big fall.

Pres. Ronald Regan statement was (trust but verify). Remember that Pres. Ronald Regan was dealing with communists. Here you have the same problem here with similar opponent that you must deal with. The Latin Church will try not to cut you some slack, remember you dealing with the Latin Church. I left the Latin Church because of the events that took place in my life. Investigate first and see how it would take place. Don’t jump into the fire first. PLEASE but PLEASE !!! don’t jump……….

Look at it at this angle, what happen that if they say no to your transfer after you have been attending the EC Church and the only hold out is the Latin Bishop???

Hey just some sound advice…

 

[Frank_J]

I stand by my statement

 

[Diak]

Hello everyone! This is my first time posting. I was born and raised Roman. The last few years that I was Roman I attended EC churches both Ruthenian and Melkite. I seriously considered switching rites. However, I ended up moving to another part of the country where there were no EC parishes. I was able to find a lovely OCA parish which I joined in 2005 and have been Orthodox ever since. I cannot lie the Orthodox Church has been very good to me.the I have no complaints. However, sometimes I feel like I should become EC now that I live within driving distance from a couple of EC parishes (moved again). There is a certain degree of confusion and internal conflict. If I am understanding correctly what has been written in this thread if i wanted to rejoin the Catholic Communion I would need to do a Profession of Faith and confession? I would be enrolled in an EC since I have been a practicing Orthodox Christian for more than 6 years. I am not clear what EC Church I would be enrolled in as I am currently a member of an Antiochian Parish. Would I be Melkite or UGCC? Any advise or (name removed by moderator)ut? Thank you.

If you were formally received as Orthodox, and worshipped in an Orthodox parish as a communicant, you are obviously no longer Roman and thus no longer subject to Roman law. You can be received by any Eastern Catholic church you choose. You would, of course, need to participate in the EC parish and work with the pastor. In the UGCC we receive Orthodox by sacramental Confession, profession of faith and Holy Communion. No rebaptizing, no re-chrismating. It is really that simple. If you are Antiochian the closest parallel EC particular Church is Melkite. But if distance is a factor, you can join any EC parish.

 

[Frank_J]

Hello Diak,

 

[Vico]

One cannot change the fact of enrollment through baptism in the Catholic parents Church (e.g., the Latin Church), even through heresy, schism, or apostacy occurred later. The membership from baptism and is perpetual so one does loose membership in their Catholic Church sui iuris by becoming Orthodox, Protestant, or Muslim. Even within the Catholic Churches sui iuris one does not change ascription without the approval of the Apostolic See:

Can. 1 The canons of this Code concern only 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.
§2 The practice, however long standing, of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of an autonomous ritual Church, does not bring with it membership of that Church.

 

[ConstantineTG]

For example, ConstantineTG is an example here of a Latin Catholic whose young child was baptized, christmated and receives Holy Eucharist in an ECC.

My child was baptized and confirmed by a Roman Catholic priest
He was admitted to communion in our Ukrainian parish just this past Easter. Although we are all canonically Latin. My next child will be baptized, chrismated and given first Communion in the Ukrainian-Byzantine Rite. My bishop is already helping me out with the details

 

[Diak]

One cannot change the fact of enrollment through baptism in the Catholic parents Church (e.g., the Latin Church), even through heresy, schism, or apostacy occurred later. The membership from baptism and is perpetual so one does loose membership in their Catholic Church sui iuris by becoming Orthodox, Protestant, or Muslim. Even within the Catholic Churches sui iuris one does not change ascription without the approval of the Apostolic See:

Your citing of Canon 112 absolutely does not address those who have left communion with the Catholic Church, and the caveats you stated do not appear in the canon nor are necessarily implied. The Roman Church does not “own” anyone simply by virtue of baptism when they have left the Latin Church and Catholic communion of their own free will. The meaning of* “autonomous ritual Churches” *in this context is defined and understood solely within the Catholic communion.

When one leaves one state, crosses the state line, and drives into another, the speed limits of the state just left no longer apply. Free will is never trumped, and when the subject leaves the Church through their own free will, the Church does not and cannot exercise “jurisdiction” with regard to law when there is no willful subject. In this case the person has become Orthodox by virtue of formal reception into the Orthodox Church. They are no longer Latin. Their sacramental reality is Orthodox, not Latin.

If Magisterial teaching is to be believed (and hopefully it is) the hierarchal and sacramental validity of the Orthodox Churches are most definitely respected. And thus they would be received back into the Catholic Church as an Orthodox coming into Catholic communion, since they had of their own free will chosen to leave the Latin Church for the Orthodox Church. And thus, assuming again of their own free will they chose (as the Church suggests) to continue worshipping in an Eastern autonomous ritual Church, they would be received into that Church as having come from whatever Orthodox church. To suggest the person has been a “crypto-Latin” the entire time or that all of the sacraments they received in the Orthodox Church “really don’t count, they were always Latin”, is ludicrous and bereft of respect for the efficacy of the sacramental life of the Orthodox.

What is done in a case like this is very simple, namely that when the person is received into the particular Eastern Catholic church, a notation is made to the baptismal registry of the orignal Latin parish church of baptism that (1) so and so received x,y,z sacraments in whatever Orthodox church (since those sacraments are absolutely valid), and (2) the person was received into Sts. Whatever Eastern Catholic Church.

Again, to tell someone that they can’t really be received into a Catholic church until some papers are shared between bishops who really don’t care themselves to be bothered with this is ridiculous. No one should be made to feel like an illegitimate stepchild for wanting to continue to practice their Catholic faith in the same way they have most recently been practicing as Orthodox.

 

[Diak]

When I made the decision to make a formal change from the Latin Church to the Russian Greek/Byzantine Catholic Church sui iuris my Latin bishop immediately upon receiving word of my request wrote his letter releasing me. I had no problem whatsoever with any resistance about the change. There are occasional stories of someone who has ended up having a problem with the request, but even in that case they are not restricted from living as an Eastern Catholic, being active in the EC parish of their choice, exclusive of any involvement with the Latin Church, unless they choice some involvement. I’ve heard plenty of stories of people who had as little difficulty as I did with making the change.

That is not to say I am encouraging OP in leaving Holy Orthodoxy. That decision is between OP and God.

Our local Latin Archbishop generally runs about two to three weeks on his letter of release for practicing Latins wishing to become UGCC, and about the same response time for our UGCC bishop (unless he is in Ukraine, Brazil, etc. for a Synod).

The Russian Greek Catholic situation is unique even amongst Eastern Catholics since the Russian Greek Catholic Church has no hierarchy and no clergy in the US; all of the clergy in the US are under the omophorion of Melkite, Latin, or in one case Romanian hierarchs. The release is essentially from one Latin bishop to another (or the same if the Russian Greek Catholic parish being transferred into is within his diocese).

You are also somewhat fortunate in that not all Latin bishops even understand the RGCC situation; one fellow I tried to help finally gave up and went to another Eastern Catholic Church when after a year the chancery still couldn’t figure out what he wanted. When he decided to go to an EC church with a hierarchy, it was done in about a month. Sad.

 

[Diak]

To clarify my earlier post with regard to Canon 112 only being understood in context of Catholic communion, and apologizing for my verbosity, what is usually misunderstood about Canon 112 is its relation in the Latin Code to Canon 96 which specifically addresses and releases in the case of someone who leaves the Catholic communion.

Can. 96 By baptism one is incorporated into the Church of Christ and is constituted a person in it with the duties and rights which are proper to Christians in keeping with their condition,** insofar as they are in ecclesiastical communion **and unless a legitimately issued sanction stands in the way.

It goes without saying that there is not full ecclesiastical communion at this time between the Orthodox and Catholic churches.

 

[Vico]

To clarify my earlier post with regard to Canon 112 only being understood in context of Catholic communion, and apologizing for my verbosity, what is usually misunderstood about Canon 112 is its relation in the Latin Code to Canon 96 which specifically addresses and releases in the case of someone who leaves the Catholic communion.
It goes without saying that there is not full ecclesiastical communion at this time between the Orthodox and Catholic churches.

Canon 96 does not state that those baptised in the Catholic Church are ever released from obligations, rather it refers to those Christians baptised in a non-Catholic church. New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law states in the commentary on this canon, p. 141:

By definition full communion excludes the catechumen (c. 206) and those baptised in the separated and reformed churches (c. 11).
Can. 206 §1 Catechumens are linked with the Church in a special way since, moved by the Holy Spirit, they are expressing an explicit desire to be incorporated in the Church. By this very desire, as well as by the life of faith, hope and charity which they lead, they are joined to the Church which already cherishes them as its own.
§2 The Church has a special care for catechumens. While it invites them to lead an evangelical life, and introduces them to the celebration of the sacred rites, it already accords them various prerogatives which are proper to christians.

Can. 11 Merely ecclesiastical laws bind those who were baptised in the catholic Church or received into it, and who have a sufficient use of reason and, unless the law expressly provides otherwise, who have completed their seventh year of age.

 

[roraha]

I would like to thank you all for your comments, both pro and con. I do not know if I will ever rejoin the Catholic Communion. I will let the Holy Spirit do the leading on that one. I do not feel the Orthodox Church to be deficient in any way. I think that for me a big part of my inquiry is that my family is still very much practicing Catholics. And it has been difficult not being able to worship together like we once did.I will be visiting a UGCC parish in the coming month and see how it goes.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Hello everyone! This is my first time posting. I was born and raised Roman. The last few years that I was Roman I attended EC churches both Ruthenian and Melkite. I seriously considered switching rites. However, I ended up moving to another part of the country where there were no EC parishes. I was able to find a lovely OCA parish which I joined in 2005 and have been Orthodox ever since. I cannot lie the Orthodox Church has been very good to me.the I have no complaints. However, sometimes I feel like I should become EC now that I live within driving distance from a couple of EC parishes (moved again). There is a certain degree of confusion and internal conflict. If I am understanding correctly what has been written in this thread if i wanted to rejoin the Catholic Communion I would need to do a Profession of Faith and confession? I would be enrolled in an EC since I have been a practicing Orthodox Christian for more than 6 years. I am not clear what EC Church I would be enrolled in as I am currently a member of an Antiochian Parish. Would I be Melkite or UGCC? Any advise or (name removed by moderator)ut? Thank you.

Canonically, you are a Latin (a.k.a. Roman) Catholic. If you revert to Catholicism you would have to revert to the Latin Church. You would require permission from the Apostolic See to transfer to one of the Eastern Catholic churches. That’s my understanding of Canon Law, anyway. The best way to find out is to contact those who will be involved in making the decision, i.e. your diocese.

 

[Diak]

Canon 96 does not state that those baptised in the Catholic Church are ever released from obligations, rather it refers to those Christians baptised in a non-Catholic church.

In Canon 96 ** “insofar as they are in ecclesiastical communion” is absolutely clear. An exception is explictly given to someone who has willingly left ecclesiastical communion by all conventions of canonical interpretation.

By definition full communion excludes the catechumen (c. 206) and those baptised in the separated and reformed churches (c. 11).

This does not contradict Canon 96 which clearly provides for someone has willfully left ecclesiastical communion to be excepted. No one is held against their free will to belong to a Church they wish to leave nor to the legislation of that Church. While we hope to eventually be in full ecclesial and Eucharistic communion with the Orthodox, the fact remains that we are still ecclesiastically separated. The renunciation of the anathemas of 1054 is a start, but we are most certainly not yet in* full ecclesiastical communion.* Canon 11 is never interpreted as binding or contradicting someone who has left ecclesiastical communion consistent with Canon 96.

Can. 206 §1 Catechumens are linked with the Church in a special way since, moved by the Holy Spirit, they are expressing an explicit desire to be incorporated in the Church. By this very desire, as well as by the life of faith, hope and charity which they lead, they are joined to the Church which already cherishes them as its own.
§2 The Church has a special care for catechumens. While it invites them to lead an evangelical life, and introduces them to the celebration of the sacred rites, it already accords them various prerogatives which are proper to christians.

I’m not sure what the obsession is with the catechumenate, but it is irrelelvant for someone who has left ecclesiastical communion consistent with Canon 96.

Can. 11 Merely ecclesiastical laws bind those who were baptised in the catholic Church or received into it, and who have a sufficient use of reason and, unless the law expressly provides otherwise, who have completed their seventh year of age.

The law does expressly provide otherwise, namely in Canon 96, and that is very clearly stated. I see nothing compelling in what you’ve stated to change any of the normal conventions of interpretation of the relation between Canons 96 and 112, but rather to confirm the norms of interpretation. When a Catholic wilfully leaves the Church of their own free will to become Orthodox, they have left ecclesiastical communion and Canon 96 most definitely applies. Law is only applicable when there is a person to be a subject of the law. The law clearly does not bind one who wishes to be no longer bound by leaving ecclesiastical communion.**

 

[Diak]

Canonically, you are a Latin (a.k.a. Roman) Catholic. If you revert to Catholicism you would have to revert to the Latin Church. You would require permission from the Apostolic See to transfer to one of the Eastern Catholic churches. That’s my understanding of Canon Law, anyway. The best way to find out is to contact those who will be involved in making the decision, i.e. your diocese.

You are not Latin if you revert to Catholicism as per Canon 96, nor do you “have to” do anything. You do not need to obtain permission from the Apostolic See to transfer anywhere, since by Canon 96 you left ecclesiastical communion and are now Orthodox, not Latin Catholic. I have described what is usually done in these circumstances when you enter an Eastern church from the Orthodox. It is very simple. You go to the parallel Eastern Church you wish, and let the priest handle everything else (he will make the necessary notations and send the letters). It is very simple, and these inferred additional “canonical” complications are unncessary.

Unlike some others on this Forum who speak of these things I have actually done this in a number of cases for Orthodox wishing to join my particular Church. Not once has there been a dispute from the Latin diocese or a contradiction to the interpretation of the relation of Canon 96 to 112 in the case of an Orthodox originally baptized Latin wishing to return to the Catholic Church through my own particular ritual Church (UGCC). The Church should be welcoming and foster such a case rather than burden with additional “obligations”. That is clearly what is best for the soul, which is the highest law. Feel free to contact me off-list if you need more specific information or assistance.

 

[ciero]

You are not Latin if you revert to Catholicism as per Canon 96, nor do you “have to” do anything. You do not need to obtain permission from the Apostolic See to transfer anywhere, since by Canon 96 you left ecclesiastical communion and are now Orthodox, not Latin Catholic. I have described what is usually done in these circumstances when you enter an Eastern church from the Orthodox. It is very simple. You go to the parallel Eastern Church you wish, and let the priest handle everything else (he will make the necessary notations and send the letters). It is very simple, and these inferred additional “canonical” complications are unncessary.

Unlike some others on this Forum who speak of these things I have actually done this in a number of cases for Orthodox wishing to join my particular Church. Not once has there been a dispute from the Latin diocese or a contradiction to the interpretation of the relation of Canon 96 to 112 in the case of an Orthodox originally baptized Latin wishing to return to the Catholic Church through my own particular ritual Church (UGCC). The Church should be welcoming and foster such a case rather than burden with additional “obligations”. That is clearly what is best for the soul, which is the highest law. Feel free to contact me off-list if you need more specific information or assistance.

Thanks Diak for a voice of reason. I too have helped a number of folks who were RC then Orthodox then wanted to become Eastern Catholic. None were required to have the permission of Rome, and none of the cases were disputed by the Roman diocese.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

You are not Latin if you revert to Catholicism as per Canon 96, nor do you “have to” do anything. You do not need to obtain permission from the Apostolic See to transfer anywhere, since by Canon 96 you left ecclesiastical communion and are now Orthodox, not Latin Catholic. I have described what is usually done in these circumstances when you enter an Eastern church from the Orthodox. It is very simple. You go to the parallel Eastern Church you wish, and let the priest handle everything else (he will make the necessary notations and send the letters). It is very simple, and these inferred additional “canonical” complications are unncessary.

Unlike some others on this Forum who speak of these things I have actually done this in a number of cases for Orthodox wishing to join my particular Church. Not once has there been a dispute from the Latin diocese or a contradiction to the interpretation of the relation of Canon 96 to 112 in the case of an Orthodox originally baptized Latin wishing to return to the Catholic Church through my own particular ritual Church (UGCC). The Church should be welcoming and foster such a case rather than burden with additional “obligations”. That is clearly what is best for the soul, which is the highest law. Feel free to contact me off-list if you need more specific information or assistance.

Even if one stops practising the Latin Catholic faith it does not matter whether they become Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, or other you remain canonically a Latin Catholic. The Church also considers you bound by its laws; whether someone observes them is another matter. Can you please show where the Church says you can freely leave, become Orthodox, and then come back to Catholicism in a different church.