How can I become Catholic and what are the steps?

[Zekariya]

Issanjose, yes, I am speaking from the Catholic view.

Hi Zekariya.

So breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin? So much for believing everything that Orthodoxy teaches, eh?

Schism has always been considered grave sin. However, there is a difference between breaking communion with Rome and never having been in communion with Rome. The first is a grave sin.

Catholics do not believe everything that the Orthodox teach (the authority of the Pope being one difference).

 

[lssanjose]

Issanjose, yes, I am speaking from the Catholic view.

Schism has always been considered grave sin. However, there is a difference between breaking communion with Rome and never having been in communion with Rome. The first is a grave sin.

Catholics do not believe everything that the Orthodox teach (the authority of the Pope being one difference).

With this in mind, how would we categorize the OP’s “sin.”? Like most kids, they go along with the parents, being obedient to them.

Then again, I can also bring up Jesus’s point of not coming to bring peace, but a sword…

 

[Zekariya]

With this in mind, how would we categorize the OP’s “sin.”? Like most kids, they go along with the parents, being obedient to them.

Then again, I can also bring up Jesus’s point of not coming to bring peace, but a sword…

I want to clarify… I am not saying that the OP committed a mortal sin. I doubt that he would intentionally leave what he believes is Christ’s Church, choosing to be schismatic. However, schism is grave matter and, if the other two qualifications existed, it would indeed be a mortal sin.

Mortal sin requires:

1. Its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter.
2. It must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense (no one is considered ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are inborn as part of human knowledge, but these principles can be misunderstood in a particular context).
3. It must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

 

[lssanjose]

I want to clarify… I am not saying that the OP committed a mortal sin. I doubt that he would intentionally leave what he believes is Christ’s Church, choosing to be schismatic. However, schism is grave matter and, if the other two qualifications existed, it would indeed be a mortal sin.

Mortal sin requires:

1. Its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter.
2. It must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense (no one is considered ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are inborn as part of human knowledge, but these principles can be misunderstood in a particular context).
3. It must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

Thanks, for the preface, brother. To clarify, I didn’t personally take your previous point in the manner, for which you were concerned.

 

[Zekariya]

Thanks, for the preface, brother. To clarify, I didn’t personally take your previous point in the manner, for which you were concerned.

No worries. I clarified because I realized that what I wrote could be taken the wrong way.

In Christ,
Zechariah

 

[Peter_J]

Schism has always been considered grave sin. However, there is a difference between breaking communion with Rome and never having been in communion with Rome. The first is a grave sin.

I have to run, unfortunately, but first I just want to assure you that I never thought you were saying that never having been in communion with Rome is a grave sin.

Issanjose, yes, I am speaking from the Catholic view.

…

Catholics do not believe everything that the Orthodox teach (the authority of the Pope being one difference).

OIC.

 

[Zekariya]

I have to run, unfortunately, but first I just want to assure you that I never thought you were saying that never having been in communion with Rome is a grave sin.

OIC.

That’s good. Have a blessed day, brother.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Zekariya,

A Catholic can partake of Communion in any Catholic parish, Western or Eastern. You are technically a Latin/Roman Catholic. Your Russian Orthodox Chrismation/Confirmation is accepted as valid by the Catholic Church. You could talk with your priest about changing from Western-Rite to Eastern-Rite. Here is an Eastern Catholic parish directory: byzcath.org/index.php/find-a-parish-mainmenu-111?catid=6

Can you please explain why he has to change jurisdictions? He is entering the Catholic Communion as a Russian Orthodox. Why wouldn’t he automatically be ascribed to the Russian Catholic Church?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[lssanjose]

Sorry it has taken so long with my reply:blush: Let me explain myself a little better. My parents were both raised catholic and they both were married by a catholic preist. I was baptised and recieved first holy communion. When i was 10 my parents left the catholic church and we all were baptiesd into the Russian Orthodox Church. When i said Rcc I meant roman catholic church but i would like to join the eastren catholic church. I think someone said the russian catholic church i have never heard of them?

You can look for any local Eastern Catholic church, in your area. I don’t think a canonical switch is necessary, unless you’re going to look into holy orders, within a particular church. For myself, I’ll be in the process of switching rites, as I’m “discerning” orders within the Rusyn Greek Catholic Church. I’ve already talked to the vocational director, and I’ve been given the directive to be at a Byzantine Catholic parish for five years, and in that time, submit my formal transfer.

 

[Vico]

…

This is not a ritual Church transfer situation. Since the parent’s or guardian’s Catholic ritual Church establishes an infants enrollment at the time of baptism.

According to canon law those first baptized Latin Catholic (per Church of Catholic parent or guardian) remains that unless meeting one of the conditions in CIC canon 112 to transfer, for Latin Catholics.

CIC Can. 111 §1 Through the reception of baptism a child becomes a member of the Latin Church if the parents belong to that Church or, should one of them not belong to it, if they have both by common consent chosen that the child be baptized in the Latin Church: if that common consent is lacking, the child becomes a member of the ritual Church to which the father belongs.
§2 Any candidate for baptism who has completed the fourteenth year of age may freely choose to be baptized either in the Latin Church or in another autonomous ritual Church; in which case the person belongs to the Church which he or she has chosen.

CIC 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.

Canon 112 (NCCCL, Beal, Coriden, Green)
“… because ascription to a ritual church is definitive, it belongs to the status of persons.”
“In effect, the canon distinguishes membership from liturgical practice. This means that change of ritual church membership occurs in one of the three ways provided for in paragraph one.”

For eastern Catholics:

CCEO Canon 29

1. By virtue of baptism, a child who has not yet completed his fourteenth year of age is enrolled in the Church sui iuris of the Catholic father; or the Church sui iuris of the mother if only the mother is Catholic or if both parents by agreement freely request it, with due regard for particular law established by the Apostolic See.
2. If the child who has not yet completed his fourteenth year is:
   (1) born of an unwed mother, he is enrolled in the Church sui iuris to which the mother belongs;
   (2) born of unknown parents, he is to be enrolled in the Church sui iuris of those in whose care he has been legitimately committed are enrolled; if it is a case of an adoptive father and mother, 1 should be applied;
   (3) born of non-baptized parents, the child is to be a member of the Church sui iuris of the one who is responsible for his education in the Catholic faith.

CCEO 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.

CCEO 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.

Transfer correspondences from Comparative Sacramental Discipline in the CCEO and CIC, Canon Law Society of America, pp. 255-258):

Eastern:
Orthodox Church of America → Ruthenian or Ukrainian or Russian Catholic
American Carpatho-Rusyn Orthodox → Ruthenian or Slovak Catholic
Serbian Orthodox → Krizevci Catholic
Macedonian Orthodox → Macedonian Catholic
Greek Speaking Eastern Orthodox → Hellenic Greek Catholic
Arabic Speaking Eastern Orthodox → Melkite Greek Catholic
Romanian Orthodox → Romanian Catholic
Russian Orthodox → Russian Catholic
Belarussian Orthodox → Belarussian Catholic
Ukrainian Orthodox → Ukrainian Catholic
Bulgarian Orthodox → Bulganian Catholic
Hungarian Orthodox → Hungarian Catholic
Albanian Orthodox → Albanian Catholic

Oriental:
Armenian Orthodox–> Armenian Catholic
Coptic Orthodox → Coptic Catholic
Ethiopian Orthodox → Ethiopian Catholic
Syrian Orthodox → Syrian Catholic
Indian Orthodox → Syro-Malankara Catholic
Mar Thoma Syrian → Syro-Malankara Catholic
Orthodox Syrian (Jacobite) → Syro-Malankara Catholic
Malabar Independent Syrian Church (Thozhiyoor) → Syro-Malankara Catholic
Church of South India, St. Thomas → Syro-Malankara Catholic

Assyrian:
Assyrian Orthodox → Chaldean Catholic
Syrian Malabarese → Syro-Malabar Catholic
Syro-Chaldean → Syro-Malabar Catholic

Latin:
Church of South India, not St. Thomas → Latin Catholic
Anglican, Lutheran, Reformed, Anabaptist, and their derivatives. → Latin Catholic

 

[Peter_J]

Hi Zekariya.

So breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin? So much for believing everything that Orthodoxy teaches, eh?

Schism has always been considered grave sin. However, there is a difference between breaking communion with Rome and never having been in communion with Rome. The first is a grave sin.

Catholics do not believe everything that the Orthodox teach (the authority of the Pope being one difference).

You’ll have to excuse me for crossing threads a little bit here. When I referred to the Melkite Initiative and Melkites “believing everything that Orthodoxy teaches”, I’m piggy-backing on a conversation from (I think) the “In the Eastern Catholic Church, Can One Receive Communion with a Serious Sin on One’s Soul?” thread. But anyhow, your statement that breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin (which obviously only applies if one switches side in one direction but not the other direction) is a good illustration of how far apart we really are.

 

[Peter_J]

P.S. I hoped you don’t feel too ignored here, ThatOrthodoxGuy. Oftentimes, a specific question someone asks can lead to a lot of more general discussion, as you can see in this thread.

 

[Marybeloved]

You’ll have to excuse me for crossing threads a little bit here. When I referred to the Melkite Initiative and Melkites “believing everything that Orthodoxy teaches”, I’m piggy-backing on a conversation from (I think) the “In the Eastern Catholic Church, Can One Receive Communion with a Serious Sin on One’s Soul?” thread. But anyhow, your statement that breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin (which obviously only applies if one switches side in one direction but not the other direction) is a good illustration of how far apart we really are.

Just to understand you, Peter J: Are you saying that breaking communion with Rome does not necessarily mean guilt or culpability in mortal sin in the person breaking that communion (and in this case certainly not- the OP was just a kid, it was his parents who actually broke communion) or that even objectively speaking, breaking communion with Rome is not grave?

 

[mardukm]

But anyhow, your statement that breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin (which obviously only applies if one switches side in one direction but not the other direction) is a good illustration of how far apart we really are.

HUH?!!! You mean Orthodox do not consider it a grave sin for Orthodox to leave the Orthodox Church?

Again, I really don’t get these “far apart” comments. Can you please explain how the denial of a portion of our Faith placing you outside of the Church is “far apart” from the Orthodox perspective? Do you mean to say schism is not a serious sin in the Orthodox Church?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Zekariya]

HUH?!!! You mean Orthodox do not consider it a grave sin for Orthodox to leave the Orthodox Church?

Again, I really don’t get these “far apart” comments. Can you please explain how the denial of a portion of our Faith placing you outside of the Church is “far apart” from the Orthodox perspective? Do you mean to say schism is not a serious sin in the Orthodox Church?

Blessings,
Marduk

Schism is a grave sin in the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches. Schism is a grave sin in the Catholic Church. Certain factors may abolish all culpability, however, schism itself is a grave sin.

A toddler is not culpable in participating in sexual acts. However, those sexual acts are still grave sin.

 

[Peter_J]

Originally Posted by Peter J

No, I’m not saying that. See the comment I highlighted above.

 

[Peter_J]

HUH?!!! You mean Orthodox do not consider it a grave sin for Orthodox to leave the Orthodox Church?

Again, I really don’t get these “far apart” comments. Can you please explain how the denial of a portion of our Faith placing you outside of the Church is “far apart” from the Orthodox perspective? Do you mean to say schism is not a serious sin in the Orthodox Church?

Blessings,
Marduk

Mardukm, please stop with the baiting. It is very tiresome.

 

[mardukm]

Mardukm, please stop with the baiting. It is very tiresome.

It was a straight question, brother. If you can’t explain yourself, you shouldn’t be saying such things.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Peter_J]

It was a straight question, brother. If you can’t explain yourself, you shouldn’t be saying such things.

Hi Mardukm. My name is Peter (or Peter J if you want to go with screen names) and you’re welcome to question what I said – which, just to remind you and anyone else reading this, was “your [Zekariya’s] statement that breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin (which obviously only applies if one switches side in one direction but not the other direction) is a good illustration of how far apart we really are.”

I would like request, however, that you desist from the way you have been speaking to me, for example:

HUH?!!! You mean Orthodox do not consider it a grave sin for Orthodox to leave the Orthodox Church?

 

[Peter_J]

But anyhow, your statement that breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin (which obviously only applies if one switches side in one direction but not the other direction) is a good illustration of how far apart we really are.

P.S. A suggestion for anyone who takes issue with what I’ve said here: don’t feel like you need to take my word for it, but do try making Zekariya’s statement (that breaking communion with Rome is a grave sin) to an Orthodox friend, and see whether he/she agrees.