C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Anything with the CCEO is not relevant to us.
Is the Eastern Code of Canon Law authentically Eastern? Does it apply to Eastern Catholics?
- Status
J
JGMendes4049
Guest
Isn’t the CCEO the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches?
B
Bookcat
Guest
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
It’s the Canons of the Vatican.
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
Who do you mean by “us”?
B
Bookcat
Guest
Correct they are the Code of Canons of the Eastern Catholic Churches. Valid for the Eastern Catholic Churches.
Just like the Code of Canon Law (CIC) is the Code for us in the Latin Church.
M
malphono
Guest
Very good question.
Personally, I find the CCEO to be mainly a bad Roman joke (despite the decree of promulgation and its reference to all those true Easterners and Orientals who wrote it – yeah, right
). Nonetheless, and my personal thoughts notwithstanding, it is the “law of the land” so-to-speak. It’s interesting, though, that as much as I dislike it, (not to mention bristle at what it represents), it does have its practical uses. For example, it gives a frame of reference for the myriad and sundry ways that Rome can interfere with matters that really are none of its concern. 
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
Indeed, yet our bishops accepted it, and it is our law (together with the norms of particular law for each sui juris Church).Very good question.
Personally, I find the CCEO to be mainly a bad Roman joke (despite the decree of promulgation and its reference to all those true Easterners and Orientals who wrote it – yeah, right
Practical realities aside (as you so comically yet accurately and effectively describe), and like it or not, we as Eastern & Oriental Catholics cannot honestly and rightfully say the CCEO does not apply to us.
I suppose if one wanted to take that approach, they have truly rejected their own Church.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Very good question.
Personally, I find the CCEO to be mainly a bad Roman joke (despite the decree of promulgation and its reference to all those true Easterners and Orientals who wrote it – yeah, right
Well, I would have to say that on the plus side, the CCEO does have a lot of open ended canons which give each particular Church freedom to decide how certain canons are applied to them. For example, the CIC says that a Roman Catholic can fulfill their Sunday Obligation by attending a Catholic Mass (or Liturgy) of any Rite. That is missing in the CCEO, and it just says it is up to each sui juris to determine how their faithful can meet their “obligation”. Which means that if a sui juris would say attending an Orthodox service meets the obligation of her faithful, then it is so.
But I agree with malphono 100%. The CCEO feels more like a law of the land provided by a colonial power on her colony. If we are indeed true sui juris Churches, ie self governing, then we should be true to the very meaning of the word. And that starts by making canons (governing) by ourselves.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Bl Pope John Paul II noted regarding the Eastern Code of Canons – in Apostolic Constitution Sacri Canones – that it was worked on by experts chosen from all the Churches and was indeed sent to all the Bishops of the Eastern Catholic Churches …
Indeed he noted that the Code was composed by those of the Eastern Churches themselves.
and in Orientale Lumen he notes:
“In recent times, on October 18, 1990, I promulgated the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches,(52) in order to safeguard and to promote the specific features of the Eastern heritage.” --Blessed Pope John Paul II
Indeed he noted that the Code was composed by those of the Eastern Churches themselves.
and in Orientale Lumen he notes:
“In recent times, on October 18, 1990, I promulgated the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches,(52) in order to safeguard and to promote the specific features of the Eastern heritage.” --Blessed Pope John Paul II
C
Cyrillic
Guest
First post here, so hello 
This doesn’t look like something composed by Easterners to me. I mean, even the name of the Eastern Canon rule book, Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium, is Latin.
Canon 43 of the CCEO: “Canon 43 - The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office (munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise.”
This doesn’t look like something composed by Easterners to me. I mean, even the name of the Eastern Canon rule book, Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium, is Latin.
M
malphono
Guest
Oh, I’m quite well aware of what was written and by whom. Hence my earlier [post=9776752]parenthetical remark[/post].
M
malphono
Guest
Well, let’s look at it this way. If by “Eastern” (or “Oriental”) one means a person who is a member of one or another of the Churches sui juris (and no, I’m not a fan of that term), the answer would be yes, many such did work on this piece of legislation, as they were instructed to do. Now, OTOH, if one means a person who was not trained as a canon lawyer in Rome, the answer would be a resounding NO. To my knowledge, (and I do personally know people who were involved with the project) no such person was involved at any stage.
V
Vico
Guest
You make a good point about rejection of Church. The issue is government, as the Holy See (Supreme Pontiff with Roman Curia, including the Congregation for the Oriental Churches) approves all laws for the entire Church. Sui iuris refers to own laws. Indeed, no ritual Church is completely independent and that is intentional. The mission to evangelize all nations, which requires diplomacy and coordination, is controlled through the Catholic dicastries.
The dicasteries that retain their competence with respect to the Oriental Churches (all 22) are:
1 the Congregation for the Oriental Churches
2 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
3 the Congregation for the Causes of Saints,
4 the Apostolic Penitentiary,
5 the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura,
6 the Tribunal of the Roman Rota, and
7 the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
That the law for all the ritual Churches (and for the Curia - in Pastor Bonus) has been made easily available helps to protect the traditions showing the rights and obligations of the clergy and of the faithful, and the sacramental discipline. (Liturgy is not covered in the canon law.)
M
malphono
Guest
When one thinks about it, that seems to present a real dichotomy, doesn’t it?
In any case, of course it is intentional. How many absolute monarchs ever ceded any real authority to satraps?
V
Vico
Guest
Reminds me of Justinian I, the Macedonian, Emperor of the Roman Empire (reign 527-565 A.D.), composing* Corpus Juris Civilis*. And Justinian I did replace some satraps with Dukes.When one thinks about it, that seems to present a real dichotomy, doesn’t it?
In any case, of course it is intentional. How many absolute monarchs ever ceded any real authority to satraps?
T
tdgesq
Guest
Here are some people who apparently didn’t find it to be “a bad Roman joke”:Very good question.
Personally, I find the CCEO to be mainly a bad Roman joke (despite the decree of promulgation and its reference to all those true Easterners and Orientals who wrote it – yeah, right
When the Second Vatican Council finally ended in 1965, all the patriarchs of
the Eastern Catholic Churches were named to the commission. At the
beginning of the last year of the Commission for the Redaction of the
^Eastern Code of Canon Law" the college of members consisted of the six
heads of the Eastern Churches and the prefect of the Congregation for the
Eastern Churches. Apostolic Constitution Sacri Canones John Paul II 1990
Then again, perhaps this can be easily dismissed by a “yeah right” comment and a
emoticon. On the the other hand, if your bishops accept the CCEO then I wonder what the fuss is all about.
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
In fairness, this issue and related matters and responses must be considered and understood in the context of relations between Rome and the Eastern / Oriental Churches in general and over time.Here are some people who apparently didn’t find it to be “a bad Roman joke”:
Then again, perhaps this can be easily dismissed by a “yeah right” comment and a
If you want to talk specifics on this particular subject, and you do feel that the CCEO is fairly portrayed as a work of the Eastern / Oriental Churches themselves, perhaps you could explain and validate as Eastern desires:
- the stark similarities between the CIC and the CCEO;
- the codification of an ecclesiastical class of Church (Major Archiepiscopate) that has no historical foundation in the Apostolic Church; and,
- the inability of the Eastern Churches to issue norms of particular law without interference from Rome in matters of discipline (e.g. the right to ordain married men to the priesthood).
M
malphono
Guest
Please don’t try to tell me that the Patriarchs themselves actually worked even 5 minutes in the thing, else I’ll tell you that I have a bridge for sale (cheap!). But even if they did (which they didn’t but never mind that), the result would have been the same.Here are some people who apparently didn’t find it to be “a bad Roman joke”:
When the Second Vatican Council finally ended in 1965, all the patriarchs of
the Eastern Catholic Churches were named to the commission. At the
beginning of the last year of the Commission for the Redaction of the
^Eastern Code of Canon Law" the college of members consisted of the six
heads of the Eastern Churches and the prefect of the Congregation for the
Eastern Churches. Apostolic Constitution Sacri Canones John Paul II 1990
Then again, perhaps this can be easily dismissed by a “yeah right” comment and a
Yeah, sure, the Syonds and bishops accept it, but really, how much choice did/do they have in the matter? Anyway, there’s no “fuss” being made. It is what it is, and I said it’s the law-of-the-land. But in the end, I still hold to the use of the original emoticon.
C
Cyrillic
Guest
I find it remarkable that the Latins maintain that the CCOE is Eastern while the Eastern Catholics maintain that it is not. Hilarious! 
- Status