Issue with roman priest about infant communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mgthesixth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mgthesixth

Guest
Ok so my family just moved back to Oklahoma where there are no Byzantine parishes near us only byzantine community that meets once a month. The rest of the time I attend a local Roman parish. My daughter has been baptized, chrismated and has received holy Communion in the Ruthenian church. The roman priest was shocked when I told him this and flatly refused to allow my daughter to receive our Lord (something about age of reason). Anyway I was just wondering if anyone had any suggestions. (Btw my daughter is 5 months)
 
Ok so my family just moved back to Oklahoma where there are no Byzantine parishes near us only byzantine community that meets once a month. The rest of the time I attend a local Roman parish. My daughter has been baptized, chrismated and has received holy Communion in the Ruthenian church. The roman priest was shocked when I told him this and flatly refused to allow my daughter to receive our Lord (something about age of reason). Anyway I was just wondering if anyone had any suggestions. (Btw my daughter is 5 months)
The priest is obviously (and unfortunately) wholly ignorant about Byzantine Catholicism and the canons that apply to Byzantine children in Roman parishes. I would speak to the local Roman bishop and ask him what to do about the situation. He should direct the priest to allow your child to receive Communion, as long as there is no danger of scandal (that’s the only legitimate reason for refusal, I believe). God bless, I hope and pray it works out for you.

EDIT: I just noticed that you list your religion as “Roman with byzantine leanings.” Is your daughter canonically Ruthenian, or do you both just attend Ruthenian parishes when possible, while still being technically members of the Latin Church? If the latter, then your child is not canonically allowed to receive Communion (or Chrismation, even though she already did) until the age of reason, since she would fall under the jurisdiction and laws of the Latin Church.
 
Ok so my family just moved back to Oklahoma where there are no Byzantine parishes near us only byzantine community that meets once a month. The rest of the time I attend a local Roman parish. My daughter has been baptized, chrismated and has received holy Communion in the Ruthenian church. The roman priest was shocked when I told him this and flatly refused to allow my daughter to receive our Lord (something about age of reason). Anyway I was just wondering if anyone had any suggestions. (Btw my daughter is 5 months)
You follow the tradition of the parish you are in.
 
That’s not what the canon law of the Catholic Church states.
Doesn’t matter. The Church is not America, stop waiving the canons as if it is the bill of rights. The rule of thumb is, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” You go inside a Roman Catholic Church, you follow Roman Catholic tradition.

When I was Eastern Catholic, that is what I did. If we go to an RC Mass, my kids don’t receive Communion. Simple as that.
 
Doesn’t matter. The Church is not America, stop waiving the canons as if it is the bill of rights. The rule of thumb is, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” You go inside a Roman Catholic Church, you follow Roman Catholic tradition.

When I was Eastern Catholic, that is what I did. If we go to an RC Mass, my kids don’t receive Communion. Simple as that.
This is merely your opinion and personal preference, and one you have no right or authority to impose on anyone else. The fact of the matter is that canon law permits any Catholic who is properly disposed to receive the Eucharist in any Catholic Church. An Eastern Catholic child who has been baptized, chrismated, and admitted to Holy Communion, but who has not yet reached the age of reason is at all time properly disposed to receive Holy Communion, and per canon law, has the right to receive Holy Communion in any Catholic Church.

When I go to Mass, I don’t ask to have my son receive Holy Communion, because I’d rather not take the chance that the priest I’d be dealing with is either ignorant of the matter, or simply chooses to ignore canon law. However, if I were in a situation where we permanently had to attend a Roman Catholic parish, I would insist that my son be communed. If the priest refused to follow the canons of his own Church, then I would contact my own Eastern Catholic bishop, who then would then resolve the matter by contacting the Roman Catholic bishop. This is not a matter of waving the canons as if they were the Bill of Rights. This is a matter of asserting a right acknowledged by the Church.
 
BTW, it’s not at all unusual for Eastern Catholic priests to commune Roman Catholic children who have been admitted to Holy Communion, but not yet chrismated/confirmed, even though it is Eastern Catholic tradition not to admit to Holy Communion those who have not yet been chrismated/confirmed.
 
Doesn’t matter. The Church is not America, stop waiving the canons as if it is the bill of rights. The rule of thumb is, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” You go inside a Roman Catholic Church, you follow Roman Catholic tradition.

When I was Eastern Catholic, that is what I did. If we go to an RC Mass, my kids don’t receive Communion. Simple as that.
Rome has said otherwise, ESPECIALLY for the ECC’s.
 
There is a weekly Liturgy on Saturday evening in Tulsa.
archpitt.org/component/zoo/item/tulsaok

If none of you are Byzantine, you might want to discern if now is a good time to contact your old Byzantine priest and change ritual churches so that the law affords you the protections for the life you were already living. You’ll need to commit to maintaining a Byzantine identity without nearby support, which will probably include monthly travels to Tulsa or our parish in DFW depending on where you are in Oklahoma. It wouldn’t be easy especially with a baby and Lord willing more in the future, but if it is important to you then you can make it happen.

If your daughter is canonically Latin, the tribunal will probably say she may not receive the Eucharist according to the Roman canons. Even though they allow Confirmation for infants in danger of death, they still restrict the Eucharist to those Roman Catholics who’ve attained the use of reason and can distinguish the Eucharist from ordinary bread. At 5 months old, there will be no question that she does not meet this criteria imposed on Roman Catholics.

If your daughter is canonically Byzantine and you don’t have access to an Eastern Catholic parish then the Roman Catholic bishop has a responsibility to provide for her care, including with regular reception of the Eucharist. First call the Roman Catholic tribunal and if that doesn’t help then call her Byzantine bishop.

If your daughter is Byzantine, this pamphlet might help.
stsophiaukrainian.cc/resources/traveling/
You can download the PDF and use 2-sided printing and it will fit on standard 8.5" x 11" paper.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Ok so my family just moved back to Oklahoma where there are no Byzantine parishes near us only byzantine community that meets once a month. The rest of the time I attend a local Roman parish. My daughter has been baptized, chrismated and has received holy Communion in the Ruthenian church. The roman priest was shocked when I told him this and flatly refused to allow my daughter to receive our Lord (something about age of reason). Anyway I was just wondering if anyone had any suggestions. (Btw my daughter is 5 months)
The Roman priest is bound to celebrate the Mass according to the Latin form.
In canon law, “whatever applies to the whole, applies to every part-of the whole.”
Since the priest is bound to follow the Latin laws/rules for the whole of the Mass, he is also bound to follow the Latin form for every individual part of the Mass. The Latin code is clear that the priest cannot administer Communion to infants.

Can. 913 §1. The administration of the Most Holy Eucharist to children requires that they have sufficient knowledge and careful preparation so that they understand the mystery of Christ according to their capacity and are able to receive the body of Christ with faith and devotion.

What that means is that you do not have a “right” to insist that the priest administer Communion to your daughter.

While it is true that there is no canon law that says “when in Rome, do as the Romans do”–that does not mean that somehow there IS a law that says “when in Rome, you may do as the Byzantines do”

Every liturgical (or para-liturgical to use the Eastern vocab.) act must follow the ritual and the rules of that specific Church sui iuris which celebrates it.

Can. 846 §1. In celebrating the sacraments the liturgical books approved by competent authority are to be observed faithfully; accordingly, no one is to add, omit, or alter anything in them on one’s own authority.
§2. The minister is to celebrate the sacraments according to the minister’s own rite.

#2 is what’s important here. The Latin priest is bound to follow the ritual and laws of the Latin Rite Mass, and the laws that govern that Mass prohibit him from administering Communion to infants. If he visits an Eastern parish and joins in the Divine Liturgy, then he would be bound to observe the Eastern form—but that’s not the case here.

Again, whatever applies to the whole applies to every part. A Latin priest is bound to celebrate the entire Mass according to the Latin Rite usage–and that includes the rules for Communion.

An Eastern Catholic does not have a right to insist that the Latin priest at Mass administer Communion to an infant any more than there is a “right” to insist that the Trisagion be used as a form of the Kyrie in the Latin Mass just because one or more members of the congregation are Eastern Catholic.

Conclusion:

You do not have any “right” to insist that the Latin priest administer Communion to your infant daughter when you attend a Latin Rite Mass. There is no such right because you cannot compel the Latin priest to violate the laws that prohibit him from doing so.

Regardless of what you’ve already read that’s been posted here, you do not have any right to insist that the Latin Rite priest violate his own obligations under canon 846.2
You cannot impose this on him.

Pastoral response:

First, talk to the (Latin) priest and explain things to him. Don’t go waving some pamphlet in his face and insist that he “must” do what he already knows he cannot do.

The law prohibiting the Latin priest from administering Communion to infants is a disciplinary law of the Church (certainly not Divine Law). As such, the local bishop can dispense him from it. Personally, I don’t think this would need to be anything formal, just a simple verbal dispensation would suffice. I also personally think that such a dispensation would be readily given if the request is reasonably made.

Now the important thing for you to do is to put him into a position where he is willing to request that dispensation.

Waving pamphlets under his nose, threatening to report him to Rome, and above all insisting that you know more than he does about this because you “read something on the internet” or any other kind of confrontational behavior will not help the situation. In fact, it will only make matters worse because you will be essentially telling the Latin Rite priest that you think he’s been over-ruled by an internet forum. Believe me, this will make things worse. This strategy will bring you nothing but headaches.

If you present this to him in a non-confrontational way, he may just see fit to contact the bishop (or the vicar general, or even the local dean if the bishop has delegated his deans to grant this kind of dispensation–some have) first request, and then receive a dispensation from his obligation under canon 913 (no Communion to infants). Remember, it’s a dispensation from the priest’s obligation—not a dispensation for your daughter.

If you go about this the right way, you just might find that the end-result is exactly what you were hoping to achieve.

If you go about it the wrong way, meaning that you try to tell the priest that he has been over-ruled by an internet forum, you will only make things worse.

I wish you the best.
 
That is so complicated that I want only add this, I don’t think there is a priest who with intention do what he is not supposed to. A priest is a servant of God, as we all are, but with the right to give us Sacraments. So let us do what the priest say we can or can not. And don’t forget that The Sacrament of Communion is The Most Holy of them all, and shoud be recognized as such.
 
The priest is still obligated under Latin Canon Law to not administer communion to infants. He would have to receive dispensation in order to administer communion to your child.

A similar situation would be if a Latin child goes to a Byzantine Divine Liturgy. That Latin child would be prohibited from receiving because even though a Byzantine priest can administer to infants, Latins are prohibited from receiving under the age of reason.

I wish you all the best.
 
For being “one holy, catholic and apostolic church,” we forum members claiming “rights” or “autonomy”, and legalism (from both camps) seem awful hard on each other in this discussion.
 
The priest is still obligated under Latin Canon Law to not administer communion to infants. He would have to receive dispensation in order to administer communion to your child.

A similar situation would be if a Latin child goes to a Byzantine Divine Liturgy. That Latin child would be prohibited from receiving because even though a Byzantine priest can administer to infants, Latins are prohibited from receiving under the age of reason.

I wish you all the best.
Did you not read the very informative pamphlet that CDB1718 posted above? It’s simply not true. No Catholic priest has to receive “dispensation” to administer ANY sacrament to ANY Catholic of ANY rite who is permitted by Canon law to receive that sacrament.

Once again, please read CDB1718’s post above as it is very informative and educational. 👍
 
The priest is still obligated under Latin Canon Law to not administer communion to infants. He would have to receive dispensation in order to administer communion to your child.

A similar situation would be if a Latin child goes to a Byzantine Divine Liturgy. That Latin child would be prohibited from receiving because even though a Byzantine priest can administer to infants, Latins are prohibited from receiving under the age of reason.
A better analogy would be a BC priest refusing to commune an RC child who had received first communion but was not yet confirmed. Consider that. :eek:

Of course the BCC would prepare and administer the gifts according to his own rite. That is a matter wholly distinct from deciding who is prepared. For the sake of comity, we are obligated to respect the criteria of other sui juris churches in assessing whether or not a person of that church is properly disposed to receive. I agree with the previous posts that recommend prompt consultation with your Bishop.
 
Did you not read the very informative pamphlet that CDB1718 posted above? It’s simply not true. No Catholic priest has to receive “dispensation” to administer ANY sacrament to ANY Catholic of ANY rite who is permitted by Canon law to receive that sacrament.

Once again, please read CDB1718’s post above as it is very informative and educational. 👍
Since the Latin Code does indeed say that infants are prohibited by law from receiving the Eucharist, your post simply makes no sense.
 
Since the Latin Code does indeed say that infants are prohibited by law from receiving the Eucharist, your post simply makes no sense.
With all due respect, Father David, (and we’ve both been on this forum and interacted long enough for you to know I mean that), it seems to me that the situation is a bit more complicated and that theistgal is correct. Perhaps all of this would have been clearer if the child involved were a toddler rather than an infant, but it seems to me the principles are the same.

What I mean (and I understand Canon Law (both the CIC and CCEO) better than one might think off-hand), is that the child has been formally and officially admitted to communion according to the precepts of a Church in communion with Rome. To deny the child communion is rather like saying “we’re bigger so our more restrictive law on admission to communion trumps yours” even though, officially at least, the Church considers both to be equal. One has, I think, to keep in mind that it is equally a principle of Canon Law that the faithful of one Church are always permitted to receive communion in another.

I agree that a non-confrontational approach would be the best. 🙂 But even here, I would venture to say that a “dispensation” from the bishop/ordinary would not be needed. I’m not saying that a Latin priest might not object and/or voice some concerns, but it’s really simply a matter of understanding that the child has been admitted to communion. Once admitted, the right to receive cannot be taken away except by excommunication.
A similar situation would be if a Latin child goes to a Byzantine Divine Liturgy. That Latin child would be prohibited from receiving because even though a Byzantine priest can administer to infants, Latins are prohibited from receiving under the age of reason.
The situations are not similar at all. In the first, the child has been admitted to communion, but in the second that is not the case.
Did you not read the very informative pamphlet that CDB1718 posted above? It’s simply not true. No Catholic priest has to receive “dispensation” to administer ANY sacrament to ANY Catholic of ANY rite who is permitted by Canon law to receive that sacrament.
👍 🙂
 
With all due respect, Father David, (and we’ve both been on this forum and interacted long enough for you to know I mean that), it seems to me that the situation is a bit more complicated and that theistgal is correct. Perhaps all of this would have been clearer if the child involved were a toddler rather than an infant, but it seems to me the principles are the same.

What I mean (and I understand Canon Law (both the CIC and CCEO) better than one might think off-hand), is that the child has been formally and officially admitted to communion according to the precepts of a Church in communion with Rome. To deny the child communion is rather like saying “we’re bigger so our more restrictive law on admission to communion trumps yours” even though, officially at least, the Church considers both to be equal. One has, I think, to keep in mind that it is equally a principle of Canon Law that the faithful of one Church are always permitted to receive communion in another.

I agree that a non-confrontational approach would be the best. 🙂 But even here, I would venture to say that a “dispensation” from the bishop/ordinary would not be needed. I’m not saying that a Latin priest might not object and/or voice some concerns, but it’s really simply a matter of understanding that the child has been admitted to communion. Once admitted, the right to receive cannot be taken away except by excommunication.

The situations are not similar at all. In the first, the child has been admitted to communion, but in the second that is not the case.

👍 🙂
Not quite. It’s actually a very basic principle (and for that matter, law) that the laws which apply are the laws of that specific Church sui iuris which is celebrating the service (whatever it might be).

Most of the time what constitutes being “eligible for Communion” is the same across the Churches. Since in this case, there are 2 differing laws, there must necessarily be a choice of “which law prevails?”

The answer is that the law that applies to the Mass prevails. If the situation is a Latin Rite Mass, the Latin Code (and other norms) apply. If the situation is one of the various Eastern usages, then the Eastern Code (and norms) apply.

To put it another way, there is no “right to mix rites” (I like that 😃 )

Since the Latin code prohibits the Latin priest from administering Communion, he cannot do so. There is no “right” for infants to receive Communion in the Latin Rite because the Latin code specifically prohibits this from being done. That’s the critical point. The Latin priest is bound by the Latin code, unless he’s dispensed.

The important point here (the really important one) is that there is a solution that will most likely result in the OP getting the intended result.
 
Most of the time what constitutes being “eligible for Communion” is the same across the Churches. Since in this case, there are 2 differing laws, there must necessarily be a choice of “which law prevails?”

The answer is that the law that applies to the Mass prevails. If the situation is a Latin Rite Mass, the Latin Code (and other norms) apply. If the situation is one of the various Eastern usages, then the Eastern Code (and norms) apply.
Or is it the law to which the individual communicant is subject? Your perspective requires GC priests, unless formally dispensed, to refuse communion to Latins who have not yet been confirmed. No? I think that we - and that means the priests involved - should be striving to be proactive in finding ways to accommodate, rather than excommunicating, one another. It is an important sign.
 
Not quite. It’s actually a very basic principle (and for that matter, law) that the laws which apply are the laws of that specific Church sui iuris which is celebrating the service (whatever it might be).

Most of the time what constitutes being “eligible for Communion” is the same across the Churches. Since in this case, there are 2 differing laws, there must necessarily be a choice of “which law prevails?”

The answer is that the law that applies to the Mass prevails. If the situation is a Latin Rite Mass, the Latin Code (and other norms) apply. If the situation is one of the various Eastern usages, then the Eastern Code (and norms) apply.

To put it another way, there is no “right to mix rites” (I like that 😃 )

Since the Latin code prohibits the Latin priest from administering Communion, he cannot do so. There is no “right” for infants to receive Communion in the Latin Rite because the Latin code specifically prohibits this from being done. That’s the critical point. The Latin priest is bound by the Latin code, unless he’s dispensed.

The important point here (the really important one) is that there is a solution that will most likely result in the OP getting the intended result.
Indeed the CIC prohibits it, but it’s also the case that in the Latin Church, children are not admitted to communion until the so-called “age of reason” (usually between 6-8 years of age). IOW, the CIC here is concerned with intra-Latin practice.

In the case at hand, I cannot see how the priest would be in violation of Canon Law to administer communion to a duly-communicated Byzantine child. The child was baptized, Chrismated (confirmed), and admitted to the Eucharist.

Considering that key difference, I continue to hold that a formal “dispensation” is unnecessary and even extraneous. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top