Different Technicalities

[dans0622]

Dan, would he not automatically belong to an Eastern Church? In which case the laws of the Latin Church would be irrelevant, right?

Hello,

I’ve seen a response from the Holy See which involved an infant baptized in an Orthodox Church but then adopted by Latin Catholic parents. They have the child “ascribed” to the Catholic Church and the Holy See said nothing is needed to have the ascription “changed” to the Latin Church: the child is already Latin because of canon 29 of the Eastern Code.

However, canon 29 doesn’t actually address that situation: it addresses *Catholic *baptism, and the legal consequences, not non-Catholic baptism. So, I’ve seen some canon lawyers, in effect, say that canon 35 of the CCEO is the one that applies.

According to my understanding, we have:
–a non-Catholic mother
–has a child initiated in an Orthodox Church
–with no involvement of the father
–but the child’s father now has legal custody
–and is fulfilling his obligation to raise the child in the Catholic Church
–he is a Latin Catholic

When the child becomes Catholic, would the child automatically be ascribed to the father’s Church? This would make sense to me: why would the law expect a Latin Catholic father to raise a child in a different Church? This is a principle behind canon 34 of the CCEO.

Even though it seemed to read into canon 29, I think I’ll accept the way the Holy See interpreted that canon and say that the child is “automatically” part of the Latin Church.

Dan

 

[LethalMouse]

TBH the way I looked at it is if peopel are raised “half jewish/catholic” despite the theological issues with such, that each of us doing our own thing with him being so similair would let him make his choices at age without negative impact of bickering parents. So idk what is up…I know most kids who get involved with religipn from a standpoint of parents argueing, they usually leave it all together when they get older.

 

[LethalMouse]

Hello,

I’ve seen a response from the Holy See which involved an infant baptized in an Orthodox Church but then adopted by Latin Catholic parents. They have the child “ascribed” to the Catholic Church and the Holy See said nothing is needed to have the ascription “changed” to the Latin Church: the child is already Latin because of canon 29 of the Eastern Code.

However, canon 29 doesn’t actually address that situation: it addresses *Catholic *baptism, and the legal consequences, not non-Catholic baptism. So, I’ve seen some canon lawyers, in effect, say that canon 35 of the CCEO is the one that applies.

According to my understanding, we have:
–a non-Catholic mother
–has a child initiated in an Orthodox Church
–with no involvement of the father
–but the child’s father now has legal custody
–and is fulfilling his obligation to raise the child in the Catholic Church
–he is a Latin Catholic

When the child becomes Catholic, would the child automatically be ascribed to the father’s Church? This would make sense to me: why would the law expect a Latin Catholic father to raise a child in a different Church? This is a principle behind canon 34 of the CCEO.

Even though it seemed to read into canon 29, I think I’ll accept the way the Holy See interpreted that canon and say that the child is “automatically” part of the Latin Church.

Dan

I would note that not only not invovled, but she denied my fatherhood on his baptism ie: his baptism cert has no father. She used tthus method on the birth cert as well to not use my last name.

 

[Usige]

So a child gets stuck for 18 years in the opposite church of his parent just cause?

Can we not convert rites? Like I can’t become eastern rite etc?

Especially with a non practicing parent involved?

I’ll admit that is where it gets murky for me since your ex is non-practicing and not in full communion (if I am following correct she is Orthodox of some vein).

Normally when someone from the Orthodox Churches comes into full communion with the Catholic Church they belong to the corresponding Eastern Catholic church. If they want to change rites then that is a separate process. The intent is that the Latin Catholic church should not be the catch all and default when coming into full communion. If a person wants to change rites then the age of 14 stick in my mind, but I believe that the parent of a minor can change their rite and those of there minor children at the same time.

Where it is murky for me is when neither parent is changing rites how the child changes rites before 14. Your’s is a bit less straightforward than a more typical “orthodox family” → “full communion in eastern catholic church” → “change rites to Latin church”. Not saying it isn’t possible, but really just trying to understand how the different laws apply. In other words is your child technically an Eastern Catholic that is attending Mass in the Latin rite? If so is he bound by Eastern or Western laws and disciplines? Obviously this is more theoretical than what is actually happening in real life, but more trying to work out how those things mesh.

 

[LethalMouse]

I’ll admit that is where it gets murky for me since your ex is non-practicing and not in full communion (if I am following correct she is Orthodox of some vein).

Normally when someone from the Orthodox Churches comes into full communion with the Catholic Church they belong to the corresponding Eastern Catholic church. If they want to change rites then that is a separate process. The intent is that the Latin Catholic church should not be the catch all and default when coming into full communion. If a person wants to change rites then the age of 14 stick in my mind, but I believe that the parent of a minor can change their rite and those of there minor children at the same time.

Where it is murky for me is when neither parent is changing rites how the child changes rites before 14. Your’s is a bit less straightforward than a more typical “orthodox family” → “full communion in eastern catholic church” → “change rites to Latin church”. Not saying it isn’t possible, but really just trying to understand how the different laws apply. In other words is your child technically an Eastern Catholic that is attending Mass in the Latin rite? If so is he bound by Eastern or Western laws and disciplines? Obviously this is more theoretical than what is actually happening in real life, but more trying to work out how those things mesh.

I guess my priest should have said something if it was an issue unless he is just wrong that my son can be latin? Idk I didnt even expect to get this confused as my initial post was hypothetical ponderings and citing his example was meant as an example I didnt know had extra caveats lol

 

[Usige]

Hello,

I’ve seen a response from the Holy See which involved an infant baptized in an Orthodox Church but then adopted by Latin Catholic parents. They have the child “ascribed” to the Catholic Church and the Holy See said nothing is needed to have the ascription “changed” to the Latin Church: the child is already Latin because of canon 29 of the Eastern Code.

However, canon 29 doesn’t actually address that situation: it addresses *Catholic *baptism, and the legal consequences, not non-Catholic baptism. So, I’ve seen some canon lawyers, in effect, say that canon 35 of the CCEO is the one that applies.

According to my understanding, we have:
–a non-Catholic mother
–has a child initiated in an Orthodox Church
–with no involvement of the father
–but the child’s father now has legal custody
–and is fulfilling his obligation to raise the child in the Catholic Church
–he is a Latin Catholic

When the child becomes Catholic, would the child automatically be ascribed to the father’s Church? This would make sense to me: why would the law expect a Latin Catholic father to raise a child in a different Church? This is a principle behind canon 34 of the CCEO.

Even though it seemed to read into canon 29, I think I’ll accept the way the Holy See interpreted that canon and say that the child is “automatically” part of the Latin Church.

Dan

Thanks for the clarification and thoughts, Dan. I think many of us were coming from the standpoint that the child would be considered Eastern Catholic under canon 35. I would agree it doesn’t make sense for a Latin catholic to raise their child with Eastern practices, but I had never seen anything definitive that addressed this type of situation.

 

[Usige]

I guess my priest should have said something if it was an issue unless he is just wrong that my son can be latin? Idk I didnt even expect to get this confused as my initial post was hypothetical ponderings and citing his example was meant as an example I didnt know had extra caveats lol

Welcome to the twisted paths of CAF.

On the plus side you now know more about orthodox coming into full communion than 99.9% of Catholics.

 

[babochka]

Hello,

I’ve seen a response from the Holy See which involved an infant baptized in an Orthodox Church but then adopted by Latin Catholic parents. They have the child “ascribed” to the Catholic Church and the Holy See said nothing is needed to have the ascription “changed” to the Latin Church: the child is already Latin because of canon 29 of the Eastern Code.

However, canon 29 doesn’t actually address that situation: it addresses *Catholic *baptism, and the legal consequences, not non-Catholic baptism. So, I’ve seen some canon lawyers, in effect, say that canon 35 of the CCEO is the one that applies.

According to my understanding, we have:
–a non-Catholic mother
–has a child initiated in an Orthodox Church
–with no involvement of the father
–but the child’s father now has legal custody
–and is fulfilling his obligation to raise the child in the Catholic Church
–he is a Latin Catholic

When the child becomes Catholic, would the child automatically be ascribed to the father’s Church? This would make sense to me: why would the law expect a Latin Catholic father to raise a child in a different Church? This is a principle behind canon 34 of the CCEO.

Even though it seemed to read into canon 29, I think I’ll accept the way the Holy See interpreted that canon and say that the child is “automatically” part of the Latin Church.

Dan

I know of a case in which a child was baptized Anglican, with and Anglican father and Eastern Catholic mother. The child was raised Latin Catholic. As an adult, her spirituality is firmly Latin, but she wondered whether she would be considered Eastern Catholic, since her only Catholic parent is Eastern. She consulted a canon lawyer with the Byzantine Catholic Eparchy and a Latin canon lawyer. The Byzantine Catholic canon lawyer told her she is Byzantine because her only Catholic parent is Byzantine; the Latin canon lawyer told her she is Latin because the Anglicans (and all Protestants) are considered to be Western Rite). I guess maybe it always isn’t completely clear. That’s why we have canon lawyers and tribunals, I guess.

 

[babochka]

Thanks for the clarification and thoughts, Dan. I think many of us were coming from the standpoint that the child would be considered Eastern Catholic under canon 35. I would agree it doesn’t make sense for a Latin catholic to raise their child with Eastern practices, but I had never seen anything definitive that addressed this type of situation.

I don’t know… Eastern Catholics raise their children with Latin practices all the time.

 

[LethalMouse]

I don’t know… Eastern Catholics raise their children with Latin practices all the time.

Then wouldn’t his being Eastern Catholic be in name only basically? And since Catholic is Catholic I sort of wouldn’t care if he was in a sense other than I aint driving to find a EC church when I have a perfectly apostolic and valid sacramental RC church wayyyyy closer… lol. Seems like much semantics in this case rather than anything truly important.

 

[babochka]

I guess my priest should have said something if it was an issue unless he is just wrong that my son can be latin? Idk I didnt even expect to get this confused as my initial post was hypothetical ponderings and citing his example was meant as an example I didnt know had extra caveats lol

Don’t worry about it. Some of us like to discuss technicalities to death! I mean, you post with a title about “technicalities” and it might make somebody’s day.

But as far as your confusion about local variations in the rules. Each bishop has considerable flexibility to do what he deems best for his people, and this might change from bishop to bishop. Local customs that do not contradict the faith are important. The Church is universal, but that doesn’t mean that every rule must be applied universally. It means that the Church encompasses all and is for all. For this reason, it can include a variety of customs, practices and even theological perspectives.

 

[babochka]

Then wouldn’t his being Eastern Catholic be in name only basically? And since Catholic is Catholic I sort of wouldn’t care if he was in a sense other than I aint driving to find a EC church when I have a perfectly apostolic and valid sacramental RC church wayyyyy closer… lol. Seems like much semantics in this case rather than anything truly important.

Really, it doesn’t matter except for ordination and marriage. There is even a provision in canon law for a mixed family to choose one tradition to practice, so that you don’t get all hung up on which feast days must be celebrated, etc. Basically, you would raise your son Latin Rite with the customs and obligations of a Latin Rite Catholic. Regardless of whether he is Latin Rite or belongs to an Eastern Church, though, I think it would be a good idea for him to have occasional exposure to the traditions of the Church of his baptism.

My personal opinion is that he should be able to receive Communion and I don’t believe there is any canon law to prevent him, but I also think it is important to defer to your priest. (That doesn’t preclude having a conversation with him, though.) This issue will come up again when his peers receive Confirmation. You want him to have the benefit of the religious education, but he will not be preparing for Confirmation, just as he is not now preparing for his first Communion.

 

[LethalMouse]

Another example is the meat friday thing, if one belonged to a no meat diocese and practiced as the ones who can, would they be truly sinning?

[28] Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

So, NO!

Obeying the chosen PRACTICES of one;s Bishop, who is well within HIS Authority and has from both God’s and the Churches perspective ; total responsibility for the care of the Souls of His Flock.

Religious FAITH & Moral beliefs are God’s and to be obeyed by BOTH, but practices are the domain of the Bishops.

I pray that this helps you,
Patrick

You said “NO” but it seems that the context of my question might have been misunderstood since your answer includes “Obeying one’s bishop” whereas I was talking of sort of Disobeying the local bishop in favor of another diocese practices and as to the gravity of such offense. I mean I kind of doubt one is going to hell for it… but how it would be seen as sinful? To say pray an extra rosary like you did before and then go eat that burger…but your new diocese say no burgers.

 

[LethalMouse]

Really, it doesn’t matter except for ordination and marriage. There is even a provision in canon law for a mixed family to choose one tradition to practice, so that you don’t get all hung up on which feast days must be celebrated, etc. Basically, you would raise your son Latin Rite with the customs and obligations of a Latin Rite Catholic. Regardless of whether he is Latin Rite or belongs to an Eastern Church, though, I think it would be a good idea for him to have occasional exposure to the traditions of the Church of his baptism.

My personal opinion is that he should be able to receive Communion and I don’t believe there is any canon law to prevent him, but I also think it is important to defer to your priest. (That doesn’t preclude having a conversation with him, though.) This issue will come up again when his peers receive Confirmation. You want him to have the benefit of the religious education, but he will not be preparing for Confirmation, just as he is not now preparing for his first Communion.

Oh, they do the confirmation too, I forgot that one…

Umm so it was Orthodox, so he is recognized confirmed and doesn’t really need to do anything in the RC? So does an adult convert between the two with a previous confirmation just basically show up and good to go? sounds sweet lol.

And he is making communion with his peers, the only ones he knows are going to first communion with him… well their first, his second or maybe 20th idk… she did take him to church for a short time but so young he doesn’t remember it.

Aww I missed all his real first sacraments… I didn’t know about the communion thing until I enrolled him in CCD…and just fully processed the confirmation thing…

I wonder would they have him go through the motions for the confirmation like they are doing with first communion? Or would that be an issue since it would be like trying to do a second baptism? I am extra confused lol…and extra sad I may never see my son’s confirmation now

 

[babochka]

Oh, they do the confirmation too, I forgot that one…

Umm so it was Orthodox, so he is recognized confirmed and doesn’t really need to do anything in the RC?

He’ll need confession at some point.

So does an adult convert between the two with a previous confirmation just basically show up and good to go? sounds sweet lol.

An Orthodox Christian who wishes to become Catholic would make a profession of faith. He would recite the Nicene Creed and add 'I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God."

He could also receive Catholic sacraments prior to a formal profession of faith.

This is part of what confuses me about your son’s situation. If he were an adult, he could just show up and receive Communion. As a child, why does this change? Has your priest mentioned a formal process for reception into the Catholic Church as a child? How is his reception recorded in parish records?

I wonder would they have him go through the motions for the confirmation like they are doing with first communion? Or would that be an issue since it would be like trying to do a second baptism? I am extra confused lol…and extra sad I may never see my son’s confirmation now

They most definitely should not have him go through the motions for Confirmation, as it simulates a sacrament that has already occurred. This wouldn’t be unheard of (it happened to me), but this is not supposed to be done. Your son will still need catechesis, and having him go to class with his peers might be the best way to achieve that.

 

[LethalMouse]

He’ll need confession at some point.

An Orthodox Christian who wishes to become Catholic would make a profession of faith. He would recite the Nicene Creed and add 'I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God."

He could also receive Catholic sacraments prior to a formal profession of faith.

They most definitely should not have him go through the motions for Confirmation, as it simulates a sacrament that has already occurred. This wouldn’t be unheard of (it happened to me), but this is not supposed to be done. Your son will still need catechesis, and having him go to class with his peers might be the best way to achieve that.

For sure, I srill intend that either way. Plus, well… at least right now… he absolutely loves going lol. Which surprised me because she temporarily had him in her version and he said he hated it. He had such a anger toward church I was expecting the process to be miserable. But he came out the first day unable to wait to go back. I can only thank God and assume he has an awesome instructor lol.

He is 50/50 on mass… but 7 yr olds and sitting still, he’d love a 25-30 min mass though lol. Plus I think when he actually starts getting communion.