Holy Day Obligation in the Eastern Rite

  • Thread starter Thread starter cleirigh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ad_Gentes said:
The Holy Days of Obligation as set by the USCCB and approved by the Apostolic See for Latin rite Catholics in the United States can be found here:

usccb.org/liturgy/q%26a/general/obligation.shtml

I had a similar question regarding different solemnities and feasts within the Latin and Eastern rites, which fall on the same day. More specifically, I was planning to attend Qurbono (Divine Liturgy) at a Maronite Catholic Church on January 1st, but was not sure if the Feast of the Circumcision of Our Lord would fulfill my obligation as a Latin rite Catholic to attend Mass on the Solemnity of Mary Mother of God. At the end, I decided to attend Mass at a Latin rite parish.
Click to expand...
You fulfill any obligation at any Catholic Eucharistic rite.

Can. 1248 §1 The obligation of assisting at Mass is satisfied wherever Mass is celebrated in a catholic rite either on a holyday itself or on the evening of the previous day.
 
ByzCath said:
You fulfill any obligation at any Catholic Eucharistic rite.

Can. 1248 §1 The obligation of assisting at Mass is satisfied wherever Mass is celebrated in a catholic rite either on a holyday itself or on the evening of the previous day.
Click to expand...
I take from this canon that it doesn’t matter if the Mass/Divine Liturgy is for the particular feast of the obligation. Is this correct?
 
i think that we need to be cautious about the word “obligation” because it can tend to direct one toward a legalism type of faith. There is always a tension between “law” and “love”. As Christians, we should do all things in love. While the law helps direct us toward love it is no subsitute. I think it is important to see holy days of obligation from the paradigm of love instead of law.
 
Dan-Man916 said:
i think that we need to be cautious about the word “obligation” because it can tend to direct one toward a legalism type of faith. There is always a tension between “law” and “love”. As Christians, we should do all things in love. While the law helps direct us toward love it is no subsitute. I think it is important to see holy days of obligation from the paradigm of love instead of law.
Click to expand...
This is ideal, but we are fighting the consequences of original sin. And we’re living in a secular world.

There are people close to me who are practicing Catholics but who need a little coaching at times (don’t we all). Sometimes the only way I can get them to go on Sunday and certain Holy Days is by remind them that it’s an obligation and so out of respect for the law they should at least go on these days.

The concept of obligation helps me too … when choosing to go for a non-obligatory Holy Day (e.g. Annunciation, or All Soul’s) I will have to factor in work, other things going on that day, etc. But if it’s an obligation, I will be absolutely sure to go, even if it means missing other important things. I will even tell my work I will have to come in late or leave early, something I could not be justified in doing if it wasn’t a Holy Day of Obligation.
 
A. CCEO - Code of Canons of Oriental Churches

Canon 880
  1. Only the supreme authority of the Church can establish, transfer or suppress feast days and days of penance which are common to all of the Eastern Churches, with due regard for 3.
  2. The authority of a Church sui iuris which is competent to establish particular law can constitute, transfer or suppress feast days and days of penance for that Church sui iuris, however having sought the opinions of the other Churches sui iuris and with due regard for can. 40, 1.
  3. Holy days of obligation common to all the Eastern Churches, beyond Sundays, are the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Dormition of the Holy Mary Mother of God and the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul except for the particular law of a Church sui iuris approved by the Apostolic See which suppresses a holy days of obligation or transfers them to a Sunday.
Canon 881
  1. The Christian faithful are bound by the obligation to participate on Sundays and feast days in the Divine Liturgy, or according to the prescriptions or legitimate customs of their own Church sui iuris, in the celebration of the divine praises.
  2. In order for the Christian faithful to fulfill this obligation more easily, the available time runs from the evening of the vigil until the end of the Sunday or feast day.
  3. The Christian faithful are strongly recommended to receive the Divine Eucharist on these days and indeed more frequently, even daily.
  4. The Christian faithful should abstain from those labors or business matters which impede the worship to be rendered to God, the joy which is proper to the Lord’s day, or to the proper relaxation of mind and body.
Canon 882
On the days of penance the Christian faithful are obliged to observe fast or abstinence in the manner established by the particular law of their Church sui iuris.

Canon 883
  1. The Christian faithful who are outside the territorial boundaries of their own Church sui iuris can adopt fully for themselves the feast days and days of penance which are in force where they are staying.
  2. In families in which the parents are enrolled in different Churches sui iuris, it is permitted to observe the norms of one or the other Church, in regard to feast days and days of penance.
B. Particular Law for the Byzantine-Ruthenian Church in the USA, 1999

Canon 198 and 294:
The (eparchial bishop - canon 198 / pastor - canon 294) is to celebrate the Divine Liturgy for the people on all Sundays and the days of precept. The days of precept are:

January 6 - Theophany of our Lord
Ascension of our Lord
June 29 - Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul
August 15 - Dormition of the Mother of God
December 25 - Nativity of our Lord

C. Particular law for the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (2006 translation, Canada).

Can. 114 (CCEO cc. 880 §3, 881 §4) Besides Sundays, the faithful are obliged to observe the following Holy Days:
  1. The Nativity of Christ;
  2. The Theophany of our Lord;
  3. The Ascension of our Lord;
  4. The Annunciation of the Holy Mother of God;
  5. The Dormition of the Holy Mother of God;
  6. The Feast of the holy apostles Sts. Peter and Paul;
On these days, the faithful are obligated to take full part in the Divine Liturgy, to hear the homily, and not to engage in strenuous physical labour.

The synod of bishops encourages all the faithful to take part in the Divine Services during the traditional holy days on the Church calendar.
 
Christ is Baptized!
Vico said:
Canon 880 3. Holy days of obligation common to all the Eastern Churches, beyond Sundays, are the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Dormition of the Holy Mary Mother of God and the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul except for the particular law of a Church sui iuris approved by the Apostolic See which suppresses a holy days of obligation or transfers them to a Sunday.
Click to expand...
It’s “interesting” that the CCEO refers to Theophany of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as the Epiphany. I understand it is the epiphany/manifestation of our Lord, and I have seen even some Orthodox churches refer to the feast day as the Epiphany and Blessing of the Waters but in my limited experience those do seem to be the exception to the norm of Theophany as it’s called in the canons of the two churches sui iuris you include.
 
I think that Vico’s post makes a strong argument for what I had believed, with a little room for exceptions that I did not know about. It would look like the exceptions are if you live beyond the boundaries of your particular Churc sui iurius, or are married to somebody who is a member of a different church sui iurius than you. So I would still seem to believe this means that an unmarried individual or a married couple where both partners are Latin Rite who live somewhere where there are active Catholic parishes of the Latin Rite are expected to keep the holy and penitential days of the Latin Rite regardless of where they attend weekly or are registered to. I would think that if there were exceptions for those who are discerning a change of Churches that it would be mentioned here.

I respect your answer, ByzCath, to simply confer with a canon lawyer/priest/Bishop. I see wisdom in trusting in their authority and guidance in these matters as opposed to answering a question where I might be less than 100%. I think that is a good and holy approach. So I am not saying I definitively know the resolution of this matter, but I feel more confirmed in my original belief after reading the canon law shown there. I feel that you were presenting a belief or possibility based on what one canon lawyer may have told one individual at some point but without any evidence etc. Individual priests or canon lawyers can make mistakes. I am curious what they could find that was not shown in the canon law itself. Still, I admit that asking a person to consider confiding in someone especially qualified on such matters would be a prudent idea, and perhaps I will use it if it is ever to come up. But I would still present to that person this evidence and my opinion if they were going to make a decision before ample opportunity to take the matter up with said experts, or to take the canon law to the expert to see if they can explain the further exemptions and clarify the matter.
 
exarctly said:
I think that Vico’s post makes a strong argument for what I had believed, with a little room for exceptions that I did not know about. It would look like the exceptions are if you live beyond the boundaries of your particular Churc sui iurius, or are married to somebody who is a member of a different church sui iurius than you. So I would still seem to believe this means that an unmarried individual or a married couple where both partners are Latin Rite who live somewhere where there are active Catholic parishes of the Latin Rite are expected to keep the holy and penitential days of the Latin Rite regardless of where they attend weekly or are registered to. I would think that if there were exceptions for those who are discerning a change of Churches that it would be mentioned here.

I respect your answer, ByzCath, to simply confer with a canon lawyer/priest/Bishop. I see wisdom in trusting in their authority and guidance in these matters as opposed to answering a question where I might be less than 100%. I think that is a good and holy approach. So I am not saying I definitively know the resolution of this matter, but I feel more confirmed in my original belief after reading the canon law shown there. I feel that you were presenting a belief or possibility based on what one canon lawyer may have told one individual at some point but without any evidence etc. Individual priests or canon lawyers can make mistakes. I am curious what they could find that was not shown in the canon law itself. Still, I admit that asking a person to consider confiding in someone especially qualified on such matters would be a prudent idea, and perhaps I will use it if it is ever to come up. But I would still present to that person this evidence and my opinion if they were going to make a decision before ample opportunity to take the matter up with said experts, or to take the canon law to the expert to see if they can explain the further exemptions and clarify the matter.
Click to expand...
I think this is a good approach but the best would be to contact your pastor and/or bishop. They are the authority and also have the power to grant dispensations to these canons.

As for myself, I attend daily Mass and weekly (when possible) Divine Liturgy so I cover all the Holy Days for both the Latin and Byzantine Churches though I may be at a different rite for them, as we fill any “obligation” when we attend in any Catholic rite.
 
ByzCath said:
As for myself, I attend daily Mass and weekly (when possible) Divine Liturgy so I cover all the Holy Days for both the Latin and Byzantine Churches though I may be at a different rite for them, as we fill any “obligation” when we attend in any Catholic rite.
Click to expand...
Being baptized in the Latin Church, but a member of a Byzantine Catholic Church, I assist at Divine Liturgy on all the days of precept for the Byzantine, and additionally attend Mass on these three: Jan 1, Nov 1, and Dec 8. The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church also makes the Annunciation, March 25, a day of precept, unlike the Latin and Byzantine churches.

Jan 1 is equivalent to Eastern “The Synaxis of the Most Holy Theotokos,” of Dec 26, Nov 1 to Sunday eight weeks after Pascha, the “Sunday of All Saints,” and Dec 8 to “The Conception of St. Anne” on Dec 8 (or Dec 9 for some Ukrainians).

The canons are distinct between Latin Church and Eastern Catholic Churches.
Code of Canon Law 1983
Can. 1 The canons of this Code regard only the Latin Church.

CCEO Canon 1
The canons of this Code affect all and solely the Eastern Catholic Churches, unless, with regard to relations with the Latin Church, it is expressly stated otherwise.
The universal set of feast days for the Latin Church are given in CCL 1983 are actually ten in number, but several are often moved to Sunday:
Can. 1246 §1. Sunday, on which by apostolic tradition the paschal mystery is celebrated, must be observed in the universal Church as the primordial holy day of obligation. The following days must also be observed: the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Body and Blood of Christ, Holy Mary the Mother of God, her Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, Saint Joseph, Saint Peter and Saint Paul the Apostles, and All Saints.
 
Jan 1 is equivalent to Eastern “The Synaxis of the Most Holy Theotokos,”
Click to expand...
At least in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church this is the day of the commemoration of the Circumcision of the Savior as well as the great feast day of St. Basil the Great of Caeseria in Cappadocia. It is not one of the 12 Great Feasts on the UGCC calendar.
 
If I am ever asked about this I will tell the person to consult their pastor, spiritual director, a Canon Lawyer, and/or their bishop. That is enough. As I am none of those I would not provide any answer as any answer that I did provide would be pure opinion and speculation that I am untrained to give.
Click to expand...
Excellent advice. While I have not received absolutely any different opinions whatsoever amongst any of the nearly dozen diocesan and archdiocesan canon lawyers I have consulted all the way to the canon lawyer for the Pro-Nuncio about this issue indicated in my answers posted above in Post #12 of this thread, I would not presume to pontificate any subjective personal opinion as definitive, but rather based on precedental experience having assisted probably over 20 families in formally changing particular Churches and having consulted the canonists frequently.
 
Diak said:
Vico;6159737:
Jan 1 is equivalent to Eastern “The Synaxis of the Most Holy Theotokos,”
Click to expand...
At least in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church this is the day of the commemoration of the Circumcision of the Savior as well as the great feast day of St. Basil the Great of Caeseria in Cappadocia. It is not one of the 12 Great Feasts on the UGCC calendar.
Click to expand...
I thought what Vico meant was we celebrate the Synaxis of the Most Holy Theotokos, on Dec 26, equivalent to the Latin Jan 1 Mary, Mother of God feast day, not that Jan 1 is not the Circumcision of the Savior as well as the feast day of St. Basil the Great in the ECCs. Maybe you meant the Synaxis of the Most Holy Theotokos isn’t as elevated a feast for us as the Jan 1 Solemnity of Holy Mary, Mother of God is for the Latin Church.
 
Diak said:
At least in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church this is the day of the commemoration of the Circumcision of the Savior as well as the great feast day of St. Basil the Great of Caeseria in Cappadocia. It is not one of the 12 Great Feasts on the UGCC calendar.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, for Eastern Catholics, January 1 may become a great feast if the patron saint of your parish is Saint Basil the Great!

I believe that the highest fixed feast day of the year is Theophany in the Byzantine Catholic Church.

The Eastern Churches preserve the tradition of January 1 as the “Feast of the Circumcison of the Lord” which was also true of the Latin Church until 1960. Since 1969, January 1 is called “Solemnity of Mary, the Mother of God” in the Latin Church, so it corresponds nowadays to the Eastern “the Synaxis of the Most Holy Theotokos” yet on a different day.
 
Diak,

I am curious if any of those that you consulted with were Latin Rite canon experts, since it would be there jurisdiction to answer whether or not a Latin Rite Catholic would be exempt from following the norms of their Church. Also, while I do respect you and those you asked, you still have not cited any reason as to why they say this. It is still possible that they are incorrect or assume that they know or passed on information they believed to be true.
For instance, we know that non-Catholics are not allowed to receive the Eucharist. Yet, there are rare instances when something can be done. also, there are rare instances where we would be allowed to receive Communion from an Orthodox Church were they willing to offer it in grave circumstances with no catholic Church available. But these exceptions are stated clearly in the canon law. So, I would think that any instance where a Latin Rite Catholic is free to ignore the precepts of his or her Church and follow that of another would also have to be clearly stipulated in canon law or with approval of a Bishop.
It seems kind of like a protestant concept to me that if a person thinks they like another Church better that they can simply start going there and are by their own choice under a new set of guidelines without any formal acknowledgment. It does not seem like the way things normally work in the Catholic world.
 
exarctly said:
…
It seems kind of like a protestant concept to me that if a person thinks they like another Church better that they can simply start going there and are by their own choice under a new set of guidelines without any formal acknowledgment. It does not seem like the way things normally work in the Catholic world.
Click to expand...
exarctly, the following canons confirm your statement. So it means one cannot adopt a different set of holy days of obligation and penitential days (fasting) of another ritual church informally.

Code of Canon Law 1983 for Latin Catholics:

Can. 1 The canons of this Code regard only the Latin Church.

Can. 112 §1. After the reception of baptism, the following are enrolled in another ritual Church sui iuris:
1/ a person who has obtained permission from the Apostolic See;
2/ a spouse who, at the time of or during marriage, has declared that he or she is transferring to the ritual Church sui iuris of the other spouse; when the marriage has ended, however, the person can freely return to the Latin Church;
3/ before the completion of the fourteenth year of age, the children of those mentioned in nn. 1 and 2 as well as, in a mixed marriage, the children of the Catholic party who has legitimately transferred to another ritual Church; on completion of their fourteenth year, however, they can return to the Latin Church.
§2. The practice, however prolonged, of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of another ritual Church sui iuris does not entail enrollment in that Church.

And for Eastern Catholics:

Canon 1
The canons of this Code affect all and solely the Eastern Catholic Churches, unless, with regard to relations with the Latin Church, it is expressly stated otherwise.
Canon 32
  1. No one can validly transfer to another Church sui iuris without the consent of the Apostolic See.
  2. In the case of Christian faithful of an eparchy of a certain Church sui iuris who petition to transfer to another Church sui iuris which has its own eparchy in the same territory, this consent of the Apostolic See is presumed, provided that the eparchial bishops of both eparchies consent to the transfer in writing.
    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.
    Canon 34
    If the parents, or the Catholic spouse in the case of a mixed marriage, transfer to another Church sui iuris, children under fourteen years old by the law itself are enrolled in the same Church; if in a marriage of Catholics only one parent transfers to another Church sui iuris, the children transfer only if both parents consent. Upon completion of the fourteenth year of age, the children can return to the original Church sui iuris.
    Canon 38
    Christian faithful of Eastern Churches even if committed to the care of a hierarch or pastor of another Church sui iuris, nevertheless remain enrolled in their own Church.
 
Vico said:
exarctly, the following canons confirm your statement. So it means one cannot adopt a different set of holy days of obligation and penitential days (fasting) of another ritual church informally.
Click to expand...
But someone working with their pastor (that is a pastor of a different Church sui juris) where they are enrolled with the idea of canonically changing is not doing so informally.

I also believe that Diak is a deacon in the UGCC.
 
ByzCath said:
But someone working with their pastor (that is a pastor of a different Church sui juris) where they are enrolled with the idea of canonically changing is not doing so informally.

I also believe that Diak is a deacon in the UGCC.
Click to expand...
Oh, by formally I meant with final approval of the Apostolic See to change ritual church. One is bound to follow the rules of their ritual church, but is free to follow anothers ritual church conventions in addition.
 
Vico said:
Oh, by formally I meant with final approval of the Apostolic See to change ritual church. One is bound to follow the rules of their ritual church, but is free to follow anothers ritual church conventions in addition.
Click to expand...
In your opinion.

We must remember we are not Canon Lawyers nor are we, in any way, the competent authority to judge such things.

As I said, I will leave it to the person in question and their pastor, spiritual director, bishop, and/or canon lawyer as they are the experts.
 
ByzCath said:
In your opinion.

We must remember we are not Canon Lawyers nor are we, in any way, the competent authority to judge such things.

As I said, I will leave it to the person in question and their pastor, spiritual director, bishop, and/or canon lawyer as they are the experts.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, as that is what is said in the Latin Church Canons:

Can. 209 §2. With great diligence they are to fulfill the duties which they owe to the universal Church and the particular church to which they belong according to the prescripts of the law.
Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top