Is canon law intended for the laity?

[ConstantineTG]

It goes back to question, what is the place of canon code among laity, east AND west? My Orthodox friend explained very briefly, and straight to the point: Canon law is for the ideal; it’s more for bishops, and clergy as a guidebook. Canon law describes the ascetic ideal. It’s not a rulebook by which the laity uses to live their spirituality.

I think this is the original contention Brother Constantine had with the repeated postings of canon law. My friend did say the catechism has its place among the laity, but not Canon Law.

Again, it goes back to the need of a spiritual father, or confessor to make the ultimate call if one is really receiving worthily, or not. We, as laity, have a responsibility to live our lives out as little Christs (Christian - Christianos); to be an example to others; build the mystical body of Christ; not be administrators or politicians pertaining to matters of canon law.

Canon Law is meant for the clergy. It was never meant to be the guiding force for the laity. The faith was never meant to turn us into lawyers. Canons are issued at councils by bishops for bishops. Then it is up to bishops to apply the law in their own Churches. Usually it is very straight forward to apply the law, but then sometimes after a great amount of time passed by, following the law to the letter has no longer any meaning. So it is up to the bishop to interpret the spirit of the law and apply that accordingly to the faithful in his Church. It isn’t mean to be a resource for the laity to post on online forums to win debates.

 

[George_G]

Canon Law is meant for the clergy. It was never meant to be the guiding force for the laity. The faith was never meant to turn us into lawyers. Canons are issued at councils by bishops for bishops. Then it is up to bishops to apply the law in their own Churches. Usually it is very straight forward to apply the law, but then sometimes after a great amount of time passed by, following the law to the letter has no longer any meaning. So it is up to the bishop to interpret the spirit of the law and apply that accordingly to the faithful in his Church. It isn’t mean to be a resource for the laity to post on online forums to win debates.

While I’m not going to defend how canon law is often used in online discussions, such as this one, I don’t think it can be said that canons are only for bishops. That’s like saying that civil law is only for judges and police officers. Obviously that’s not the case; the law is for everyone. Judges and police officers have their own roles to play with regard to the law, but so do citizens. In the same way, bishops might have a relationship to canon law that’s different than that of the laity, but the law is there for everyone.

I think problems come in when people confuse the law for the faith, or when people completely separate the law from the faith.

 

[lssanjose]

While I’m not going to defend how canon law is often used in online discussions, such as this one, I don’t think it can be said that canons are only for bishops. That’s like saying that civil law is only for judges and police officers. Obviously that’s not the case; the law is for everyone. Judges and police officers have their own roles to play with regard to the law, but so do citizens. In the same way, bishops might have a relationship to canon law that’s different than that of the laity, but the law is there for everyone.

I think problems come in when people confuse the law for the faith, or when people completely separate the law from the faith.

Then it still comes down to: what place does canon law have among laity? With your mention in place, where do you think the laity can use canon law? I can see, personally, how it’ll guide someone to remain a member of a particular church. It won’t necessarily be their spiritual puppet master. I think the rudder idea regarding canon law is on point.

 

[Peter_J]

While I’m not going to defend how canon law is often used in online discussions, such as this one, I don’t think it can be said that canons are only for bishops.

I don’t want to try to speak on Constantine’s behalf, but I think the sentence after might be of helping in understanding that one:

                 Originally Posted by **ConstantineTG**                     [forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9775309#post9775309)                 
             Canon Law is meant for the clergy.   It was never meant to be the guiding force for the laity.  The faith was  never meant to turn us into lawyers.  **Canons are issued at councils by  bishops for bishops.  Then it is up to bishops to apply the law in their  own Churches.**

 

[Aramis]

We hear at CAF often quote Canon law when engaged in debates because when on the internet, it is easy to look up stuff. That is just the nature of the internet and CAF.

Of course in real life, no one goes about quoting canons. We are all trying to live lives that are pleasing to God in the best way we know how.

Not quite true. I’ve been known to quote the canons in support of various discussions outside of internet debates. Several other members at my home parish likewise. Then again, for years, we had a canon lawyer as pastor. Some of his best homilies compared the canons of the CCEO, the Early Church Fathers, and the Ruthenian Particular Law to the Gospel message, showing us WHY we have the rules we do.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Not quite true. I’ve been known to quote the canons in support of various discussions outside of internet debates. Several other members at my home parish likewise. Then again, for years, we had a canon lawyer as pastor. Some of his best homilies compared the canons of the CCEO, the Early Church Fathers, and the Ruthenian Particular Law to the Gospel message, showing us WHY we have the rules we do.

That’s an interesting testimonial. Perhaps because of the training of your pastor, this became a subject of frequent homiletic, but as a cradle who has been a parishioner in the Passaic and Parma Eparchies, I have rarely heard reference to canon law in sermons or discussions among faithful, except as an occasional subject of adult catechesis.

I would be interested in your former pastor’s views on the norms of Particular Law for the Ruthenian Church, as it is still rumored that they were not fully approved as +Metropolitan Judson and his council submitted and desired.

 

[lssanjose]

I think part of the issue, at least as it pertains to Orthodoxy’s potential reunion with Rome (from my limited understanding) is the idea of doctrinal development. There’s a plus, and minus to this mentality. But, there were points in time, taking the filioque as an example, where predecessors have downright claimed it as heresy, having no place in the creed. However, over time it was slowly codified into the creed. Then successive popes, particularly when it came to papal supremacy/infallibility, a statement was made about arguing against decrees by the Roman pontiff, as points of excommunication. The tone has cooled down, particularly with the most recent popes (JPII, and Benedict XVI).