End of "First Communion" Celebrations in US Melkite Greek Catholic Church

[CDB1718]

I believe the quote says that Roman Catholics “think it is cute to dress up the young ones and have a party and gifts”. That is in no way the reason for Eucharist being celebrated at the age of 7, and yes it does make light of it. I haven’t read every post on the Eastern thread, but I don’t remember reading about people complaining about how the Eastern church celebrates Mass.

It doesn’t say Roman Catholics do that. It says some Eastern Catholic adults turn their backs on their own traditions in favor of a party and gifts.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

I believe the quote says that Roman Catholics “think it is cute to dress up the young ones and have a party and gifts”. That is in no way the reason for Eucharist being celebrated at the age of 7, and yes it does make light of it.

If you read the Bishop’s letter entirely, it is clear this was commentary on the sentiments expressed by some of his own Melkite flock and not a slight against Latin Catholic practice itself or Latin Catholics for that matter.

When you these comments in context, recognizing that these children have already received the Sacrament of Holy Eucharist as infants and have likely continued to receive the Holy Eucharist as young children before reaching the age of reason, the “need” to have a separate ceremony can clearly be seen more as a “want”, and that more so of the parents than the children. I do believe that expresses the bishop’s comments fairly, in summary.

 

[brumano]

But if we can “not contest too much” then neither can you.

It is not our place to question the bishop when he decides to follow tradition.

Not only that but following a tradition of a sui iuris Church is in no way making a comment on the practice (tradition) of another sui iuris Church when they differ. To be offended by the practice of tradition of another sui iuris Church when it differs from your own is to be overly sensitive and not at all appropriate. The bishop did not say that the Latin way is wrong, he only stated that the Latin way is wrong for Melkites (non-latins) which is within his authority to say.

Anyways it is an illogical to celebrate first communion at the age of reason for a child who has been receiving communion since their baptism.

Where is this contest taking place, in the Eastern Church, there is no contest about first Communion in the Roman West or the Roman East.

It’s not our place either, the question is about whether he is actually following true tradition not about the Bishop himself.

Distinctions and discriminations must be made about and among traditions whether they are Sacred, and if so they must have Scriptural basis or at least not be contrary to the thrust of the Scriptures, if they are Non Sacred are they mainly unobjectionable, or else where do they come from? If they are from evil, then of course they must be banned (MT.Ch.16, vss 21,22,&23.)
The Bishop in his letter agrees with objection #3, that the practice at issue was an established tradition of the Mother Church in the Middle East; but he sees this as a challenge to him, in his person. He is a Bishop and he has spoken; the practice itself is an acceptable tradition, and he has also made his will and his message very clear and unambivalent: the practice is to be stopped because it is Latinistic.You can say, nevertheless, he is the Bishop and it is his right and I don’t know, maybe that is the greater right, but there should not be any misgivings about why he is doing this; it is not in protection of a good tradition, it is in order to purge out a tradition that has a likeness to the First Holy Communion practiced by Roman Catholics.

What would be in every respect be much more logical?

 

[RyanBlack]

Where is this contest taking place, in the Eastern Church, there is no contest about first Communion in the Roman West or the Roman East.

It’s not our place either, the question is about whether he is actually following true tradition not about the Bishop himself.

Distinctions and discriminations must be made about and among traditions whether they are Sacred, and if so they must have Scriptural basis or at least not be contrary to the thrust of the Scriptures, if they are Non Sacred are they mainly unobjectionable, or else where do they come from? If they are from evil, then of course they must be banned (MT.Ch.16, vss 21,22,&23.)
The Bishop in his letter agrees with objection #3, that the practice at issue was an established tradition of the Mother Church in the Middle East; but he sees this as a challenge to him, in his person. He is a Bishop and he has spoken; the practice itself is an acceptable tradition, and he has also made his will and his message very clear and unambivalent: the practice is to be stopped because it is Latinistic.You can say, nevertheless, he is the Bishop and it is his right and I don’t know, maybe that is the greater right, but there should not be any misgivings about why he is doing this; it is not in protection of a good tradition, it is in order to purge out a tradition that has a likeness to the First Holy Communion practiced by Roman Catholics.
What would be in every respect be much more logical?

You are very wrong.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

Where is this contest taking place, in the Eastern Church, there is no contest about first Communion in the Roman West or the Roman East.

It’s not our place either, the question is about whether he is actually following true tradition not about the Bishop himself.

Distinctions and discriminations must be made about and among traditions whether they are Sacred, and if so they must have Scriptural basis or at least not be contrary to the thrust of the Scriptures, if they are Non Sacred are they mainly unobjectionable, or else where do they come from? If they are from evil, then of course they must be banned (MT.Ch.16, vss 21,22,&23.)
The Bishop in his letter agrees with objection #3, that the practice at issue was an established tradition of the Mother Church in the Middle East; but he sees this as a challenge to him, in his person. He is a Bishop and he has spoken; the practice itself is an acceptable tradition, and he has also made his will and his message very clear and unambivalent: the practice is to be stopped because it is Latinistic.You can say, nevertheless, he is the Bishop and it is his right and I don’t know, maybe that is the greater right, but there should not be any misgivings about why he is doing this; it is not in protection of a good tradition, it is in order to purge out a tradition that has a likeness to the First Holy Communion practiced by Roman Catholics.

What would be in every respect be much more logical?

Brumano,

Unless I am misunderstanding your posts, you are missing several key points to this whole argument.

First: There is no “Roman East” (I am understanding here that you mean Eastern Catholics). There are many Eastern Catholic particular Churches that are in communion with the See and Church of Rome, but they are NOT Roman Catholics, do NOT follow Roman Catholic theology, spirituality, discipline, practices, etc. Their Mother Church is NOT the Roman Church, but the various Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches from which they came when the (re)entered communion with Rome. They look to these Orthodox Churches, as well as to history, for the authentic liturgical expression of the Faith.

Secondly: First Communion is NOT an Apostolic tradition, and I see no evidence of it in the Scriptures. The original tradition, both East and West, was that all new initiates, both children and adults, would receive all three of what the West has come to call the “Sacraments of Initiation.” For various reasons and historical circumstances the Roman West abandoned this practice, and subsequently developed a theology around the new practice.

Third: Bishop Samra (a Catholic bishop of one of the Eastern Catholic Churches in communion with Rome) does not acknowledge that the practice of First/Solemn Communion is an “established tradition of the Mother Church in the Middle East.” Quite the contrary. He recognizes that the practice, nay abuse (yes, among Eastern Catholics this is really a form of liturgical abuse), of First/Solemn Communion is sometimes practiced in the Middle East, but that is not their authentic Eastern tradition. It is, rather, a very recent development that came about primarily so that Eastern Catholics could “prove” to Roman Catholics that we are Catholic too. It stems from the problem of Catholics equating Catholicism and Roman Catholicism.

Fourth: In many ways Bishop Samra is not only trying to be true to the authentic liturgical tradition of the Byzantine East, but he is also trying to be obedient to Rome. Rome has been consistently calling ALL Eastern Catholics and Eastern Catholic Churches to return to the authentic liturgical, spiritual, theological, and disciplinary traditions. Part of that return does indeed include abandoning the practice of First/Solemn Communion in favor of communicating children from the day of their baptism. If you have a problem with that, take it up with Rome, not with our dear Bishop.

Again, unless I am misunderstanding your posts, you seem to be making the same mistake that the majority of Roman Catholics make, that is to equate Catholicism and Catholic practice with Roman Catholicism and Roman practice. Before commenting on the legitimacy, or lack thereof, of Bishop Samra’s actions, you ought to take the time to educate yourself on authentic Eastern/Byzantine (Melkite) practices and traditions.

 

[Hesychios]

I believe the quote says that Roman Catholics “think it is cute to dress up the young ones and have a party and gifts”. That is in no way the reason for Eucharist being celebrated at the age of 7, and yes it does make light of it. I haven’t read every post on the Eastern thread, but I don’t remember reading about people complaining about how the Eastern church celebrates Mass.

Wow.

I think it has been clarified for you already, but I would like to suggest we think about what it might be like if the Latin rite church suddenly started communing infants once again.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRNibujiRIgR4gF5eWo_ZAYkRnhOoPyPndgwI_LKdtBY6Uw5Ary

A lot of Roman Catholic families would resist this on more than one level, and one big reason for the disappointment would be the loss of the family tradition of a First Holy Communion event, the family gathering, celebration and even gifts.

What the good bishop is saying is that this is not a good reason to continue to violate tradition. He is right, of course. It is a Melkite problem and he is dealing with it.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

you seem to be making the same mistake that the majority of Roman Catholics make, that is to equate Catholicism and Catholic practice with Roman Catholicism and Roman practice.

I will echo Phillip’s comments and add that this is no different in my particular Eastern Catholic Church (Ruthenian). We have the same issues and our bishops are dealing with them the same way. In our case, the Rites of Christian Initiation were fully reinstituted in 1997. While there was adjustment to be had on the part of the laity, with catechesis and time, this restored practice is now once again the accepted norm.

And Phillip rightly points out that this has an element of obedience to Rome, as well. In 1996, the Congregation for the Oriental Churches issued Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, a follow-up to the promulgation of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. It is clear from this document that Rome expects the Eastern Churches to restores their traditions and liturgical practices without delay.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

Perhaps the best way to clear up this misunderstanding is simply to state: Roman Catholic practice is not normative for the entire Catholic Church. Let’s see what comes from saying that.

 

[5Loaves]

the practice itself is an acceptable tradition,

This is what happens when because their parents’ generation, or maybe even as far back as grandparents’ generation, began doing it something is now called “tradition” when it was not so before that. These are innovations not tradition. The Church beginning with Pope Pius XII and continuing with the Second Vatican Council and Popes since then has called for Eastern Catholic Churches to abandon these latinizations and return to their authentic praxis.

 

[brumano]

You are very wrong.

If it were just that you are right and I am wrong that’s really of no consequence, the sad part is that the Melkite Catholics who were practicing this Latin Innovation are now to be made to look wrong, and whether spoken or unspoken they will be made to feel bad, those are the people you are saying are very wrong, not me I would never accept the Eucharist without knowing who it is.

 

[Cavaradossi]

If it were just that you are right and I am wrong that’s really of no consequence, the sad part is that the Melkite Catholics who were practicing this Latin Innovation are now to be made to look wrong, and whether spoken or unspoken they will be made to feel bad, those are the people you are saying are very wrong, not me I would never accept the Eucharist without knowing who it is.

So are you bothered by the ancient practice of communing infants?

 

[RyanBlack]

If it were just that you are right and I am wrong that’s really of no consequence, the sad part is that the Melkite Catholics who were practicing this Latin Innovation are now to be made to look wrong, and whether spoken or unspoken they will be made to feel bad, those are the people you are saying are very wrong, not me I would never accept the Eucharist without knowing who it is.

I’m sorry for them that they might be made to feel bad, but that’s not a sufficient reason for Bishop Nicholas not to restore what is his Church’s ancient, authentic, legitimate tradition.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

I’m sorry for them that they might be made to feel bad, but that’s not a sufficient reason for Bishop Nicholas not to restore what is his Church’s ancient, authentic, legitimate tradition.

In fact, it was done both because it is right and in obedience to Rome.

Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, 1996

What people unfamiliar with the real dynamics of the situation fail to realize is that there have been a number of “allowances” made pastorally to try to help people “adjust” to the restored traditions, and thus this transition has been a partial one as complicated by such. This has only further confused matters.

While not a member of his flock, I had the pleasure of meeting and conversing on occasion with Sayedna (Bishop) Nicholas before being enthroned as Bishop of the Melkite Eparchy of Newton. He is a kind and caring man. I am not worthy to loose his sandals. I make that statement having been humbled by his presence. I therefore find it hard to read criticism of those who (i) do not fully understand Eastern Catholicism or the condition of the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome, (ii) do not have any real familiarity with the traditions of these Eastern Churches of equal dignity to Rome, and (iii) have zero appreciation of the situation that this Bishop is trying to manage on the ground.

If there are any Melkite contributors to the Forum and specific thread, your comments would be most welcome.

Your fellow Eastern Catholics pray for our Melkite brothers and sisters, that they become a stronger congregation and witness to the Lord, in their own way and manner. May God grant Sayedna Nicholas and his flock many blessed and spiritually fruitful years!

 

[RyanBlack]

In fact, it was done both because it is right and in obedience to Rome.

Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, 1996

What people unfamiliar with the real dynamics of the situation fail to realize is that there have been a number of “allowances” made pastorally to try to help people “adjust” to the restored traditions, and thus this transition has been a partial one complicated by such. This has only further confused matters.

While not a member of his flock, I had the pleasure of meeting and conversing on occasion with Sayedna (Bishop) Nicholas before being enthroned as Bishop of the Melkite Eparchy of Newton. He is a kind and caring man. I am not worthy to loose his sandals. I make that statement having been humbled by his presence. I find it hard to read criticism of those who (i) do not fully understand Eastern Catholicism or the condition of the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome, (ii) do not have any real familiarity with the traditions of these Eastern Churches of equal dignity to Rome, and (iii) have zero appreciation of the situation that this Bishop is trying to manage on the ground.

If there are any Melkite contributors to the Forum and specific thread, your comments would be most welcome.

Your fellow Eastern Catholics pray for our Melkite brothers and sisters, that they become a stronger congregation and witness to the Lord, in their own way and manner. May God Sayedna Nicholas and his flock many blessed and spiritually fruitful years!

I too have met Bishop Nicholas (several times), and have served with him at the altar at least once (maybe twice). I think he is a very kind and gracious man, and I fully support him in restoring traditional practices vis-a-vis the sacraments of initiation. When I heard that he was made Bishop of Newton, it made me a bit envious of Melkites in America and caused me to wish my Ruthenian parish could transfer to the Eparchy of Newton.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

I too have met Bishop Nicholas (several times), and have served with him at the altar at least once (maybe twice). I think he is a very kind and gracious man, and I fully support him in restoring traditional practices vis-a-vis the sacraments of initiation. When I heard that he was made Bishop of Newton, it made me a bit envious of Melkites in America and caused me to wish my Ruthenian parish could transfer to the Eparchy of Newton.

I know exactly how you feel - they are most fortunate to have him as their Shepherd!

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

I know exactly how you feel - they are most fortunate to have him as their Shepherd!

We are indeed very fortunate to have him as our shepherd. I prayed and prayed that he would be our next Eparch when I found out Archbishop Cyril was being transferred. Thank God for answered prayers.

 

[brumano]

And we should note that the Vatican itself, via the Congregation for the Eastern Churches and in its Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches once again emphasized in 1996, over five years after the promulgation of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (CCEO), its expectation that the Eastern Churches fully restore their liturgical traditions.

In order to highlight in summary, the following are the first two stated objectives of the Instruction:

This is not from a single bishop, but rather from a Congregation of the Roman Curia acting on behalf and with the guidance and direction of the Holy Father.

Pope John XXIII convened Vatican II for the express purpose of reviewing all aspects of Roman Catholicism from liturgical practices to moral issues to the role of the Church in society, and it’s relationship with the seperated churches, he is known as the initiator of the ecuemenical reforms and outreach that have as the highest priority the restoration of Unity of all Catholics as it has to do with the Eastern Orthodox Churches. The Sacred Doctrines and Traditions of the Roman Catholic Church were not changed; at all.
The encouragement and the prescriptions to the Eastern Orthodox Churches to restore, each to their own, liturgical practices even in cases where vestiges of Roman Catholic Tradition would be supplanted was meant in the spirit of charity and in being respectful of the dignity of the Church Fathers, past and present of those Churches. It was not meant as an license or a mandate to uproot and expunge anything and everything even if it is good simply because it is a Latin tradition.

Carefully read the highlights,

 

[coco2]

If you read the Bishop’s letter entirely, it is clear this was commentary on the sentiments expressed by some of his own Melkite flock and not a slight against Latin Catholic practice itself or Latin Catholics for that matter.

When you these comments in context, recognizing that these children have already received the Sacrament of Holy Eucharist as infants and have likely continued to receive the Holy Eucharist as young children before reaching the age of reason, the “need” to have a separate ceremony can clearly be seen more as a “want”, and that more so of the parents than the children. I do believe that expresses the bishop’s comments fairly, in summary.

Ok, thank you for clarifying that.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Pope John XXIII convened Vatican II for the express purpose of reviewing all aspects of Roman Catholicism from liturgical practices to moral issues to the role of the Church in society, and it’s relationship with the seperated churches, he is known as the initiator of the ecuemenical reforms and outreach that have as the highest priority the restoration of Unity of all Catholics as it has to do with the Eastern Orthodox Churches. The Sacred Doctrines and Traditions of the Roman Catholic Church were not changed; at all.
The encouragement and the prescriptions to the Eastern Orthodox Churches to restore, each to their own, liturgical practices even in cases where vestiges of Roman Catholic Tradition would be supplanted was meant in the spirit of charity and in being respectful of the dignity of the Church Fathers, past and present of those Churches. It was not meant as an license or a mandate to uproot and expunge anything and everything even if it is good simply because it is a Latin tradition.

Carefully read the highlights,

We are not talking about the Roman Catholic Church or the Eastern Orthodox Churches

We are talking specifically about the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, one of the 23 sui juris Churches of equal dignity to the Roman Catholic Church within the Catholic Communion.

And the document referenced in my cited post speaks to the 22 Eastern / Oriental Catholic Churches in the Catholic Communion

Frankly, it is extremely challenging to understand your points, and respectfully, it does seem that your lack of familarity with the Eastern Churches (Eastern Catholic Churches, specifically) leaves us somewhat handicapped here as to how to both interpret and address your points.

I can assure you, as a “cradle” Eastern Catholic with a mom raised in the Roman Catholic Church, most of my extended family in the Roman Catholic Church, a godfather who is a reader and Eucharistic Minister in the Roman Catholic Church, and being a frequent and active witness and participant in the Roman Catholic Mass, I do well understand the Roman Catholic Church.

For the sake of beating a dead issue, we’ll once again state this subject has nothing to do with suppressing Roman Catholic practices simply because they are Roman Catholic, nor does it say anything about the dignity of the Roman Catholic Church and its distinct traditions.

If you’d like to make a point, and you cite something that I or other knowledgeable Eastern Catholic contributors have offered honestly and factually, then I pray and ask that you kind be specific about that to which you object or beg to differ. The cite in you last post, together with your commentary, IMO misrepresents that which I offered honestly, factually and fairly.

Further, the final statement, with no reference as to what you intend us to read, is rather directly stated and thus borderline ad hominem. Nothing that has been offered here to explain this matter from the inside out was directed to anyone else in this manner.

All that said, it does appear from your last post in its entirety that you are somehow confusing Eastern Orthodox Churches with Eastern Catholic Churches …

 

[mardukm]

Pope John XXIII convened Vatican II for the express purpose of reviewing all aspects of Roman Catholicism from liturgical practices to moral issues to the role of the Church in society, and it’s relationship with the seperated churches, he is known as the initiator of the ecuemenical reforms and outreach that have as the highest priority the restoration of Unity of all Catholics as it has to do with the Eastern Orthodox Churches. The Sacred Doctrines and Traditions of the Roman Catholic Church were not changed; at all.
The encouragement and the prescriptions to the Eastern Orthodox Churches to restore, each to their own, liturgical practices even in cases where vestiges of Roman Catholic Tradition would be supplanted was meant in the spirit of charity and in being respectful of the dignity of the Church Fathers, past and present of those Churches. It was not meant as an license or a mandate to uproot and expunge anything and everything even if it is good simply because it is a Latin tradition.

Carefully read the highlights,

This is a rather insulting post! To think that recovery of our Traditions is not our RIGHT, and is rather some kind of doleful permission is just Latin hubris. If our bishop wants to remove everything Latin, that is his RIGHT, if he wants to retain some, that is his RIGHT also.

You misunderstand the whole situation. The Latinizations were not normal to begin with. They should not be there. Your assessment of the matter is the polar opposite of the intention of the Instruction. The local bishop (who has the RIGHT) will have the best handle on the situation on the process (both the extent and speed) of de-Latinization - whether or not some will be retained or all will be removed, and at the appropriate time and place.

Blessings,
Marduk