Issue with roman priest about infant communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mgthesixth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
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. 🙂
It doesn’t change the fact that at a Roman Mass, the code that applies is the Latin code of 1983. It’s rather simple (yet, so is the solution).
 
It doesn’t change the fact that at a Roman Mass, the code that applies is the Latin code of 1983. It’s rather simple (yet, so is the solution).
True, but it also doesn’t change the fact that a person admitted to communion in one Church may, according to Rome’s own laws (both CIC and CCEO) freely receive in another. Similarly rather simple. 🙂
 
It doesn’t change the fact that at a Roman Mass, the code that applies is the Latin code of 1983. It’s rather simple (yet, so is the solution).
This is the problem with trying to extrapolate sacramental discipline in Canon Law into rubrical expression.

Canon 913 refers to the disposition of the subject of the law, not the minister.
Can. 913 §1 For holy communion to be administered to children, it is required that they have sufficient knowledge and be accurately prepared, so that according to their capacity they understand what the mystery of Christ means, and are able to receive the Body of the Lord with faith and devotion.
There is a distinction between sacramental discipline (legal) and liturgical action (rubrical).

The sacramental discipline of the Roman Church prohibits infants (subject to the CIC) from receiving. It has no force over those who are not subject to it (Eastern Catholics). Rubrics however govern the action itself. I am proficient enough with the Latin tradition to know there is no rubric that concerns itself with the age of the communicant. Eastern discipline requires communion under both kinds but an Eastern Catholic at a Latin Rite Mass has no right to demand the chalice because that is a rubrical matter.

Now unless we want to get into a feud over Eastern priests denying communion to non-chrismated Latin children we should try not to create any artificial barriers to communion in an already fragile situation. 🤷
 
The CCEO states

Canon 710 - With respect to the participation of infants in the Divine Eucharist after baptism and chrismation with holy myron, the prescriptions of the liturgical books of each Church sui iuris are to be observed with the suitable due precautions.

Would this not indicate that when in a Roman Rite parish that the law governing participation in the Eucharist for all people present would be the CIC?
 
The CCEO states

Canon 710 - With respect to the participation of infants in the Divine Eucharist after baptism and chrismation with holy myron, the prescriptions of the liturgical books of each Church sui iuris are to be observed with the suitable due precautions.

Would this not indicate that when in a Roman Rite parish that the law governing participation in the Eucharist for all people present would be the CIC?
Edit: please see my reply below. The liturgical books in question are those for Christian Initiation, not the Eucharistic Liturgy.
 
The CCEO states

Canon 710 - With respect to the participation of infants in the Divine Eucharist after baptism and chrismation with holy myron, the prescriptions of the liturgical books of each Church sui iuris are to be observed with the suitable due precautions.

Would this not indicate that when in a Roman Rite parish that the law governing participation in the Eucharist for all people present would be the CIC?
I don’t think that is what CCEO Canon 710 is saying. The CIC is not a liturgical book.
 
I don’t think that is what CCEO Canon 710 is saying. The CIC is not a liturgical book.
I don’t have my code on me but I believe that canon actually means to say that each Eastern Church sui iurus is to determine the age that children receive communion.

Edit: Yes. The liturgical books mentioned refer to the liturgical books for the Mysteries of Initiation: Baptism, Chrismation, and Eucharist., it says that these books should contain instruction on whether infants are communed together with Baptism and the anointing with Myron.
 
Well, you can always force the issue and get grief, which is not the Christian way. Or just get with the program and be at peace.

Humility is the hallmark of a true Christian, not one who begs for their “rights”.
 
By the way to all the canon lawyers on this thread, the “Religion” of the OP states that he is “Roman”. So if you are canonically Roman, what right do you have to have your below-7 y/o kids commune at a Roman parish even though they receive in a Byzantine parish?
 
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.
My wife and daughter are both Ruthenian, I hope to change rites in the near future.
 
Well, you can always force the issue and get grief, which is not the Christian way. Or just get with the program and be at peace.

Humility is the hallmark of a true Christian, not one who begs for their “rights”.
I suppose my original post sounded like I was demanding the priest but I simply explained and asked if he would considered, it just astounded our pastor. This conversation happened a couple of months ago of which we simply respected our pastors decision.
 
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.
The Code of Canon Law quoted here conflicts with the Code of Canon Law quoted in the post above your post. How confusing. Why would the Catholic Church have written exact opposite Laws regarding something so sacred as the reception of Holy Communion of full members of the Catholic Church while in a Roman parish?

In this situation is it recommended by Eastern Priest who Chrismated the baby for her parents to take her to an Orthodox Church so the baby won’t be deprived of the Living-giving Mysteries while living in an area where the Catholic Church either can’t or refuses to commune their fully Catholic baby?

Isn’t it acceptable under Code of Canon Law to attend and participate in an Orthodox Church where it’s either physically or morally impossible to attend a Catholic Church?
 
Well, you can always force the issue and get grief, which is not the Christian way. Or just get with the program and be at peace.
Humility is the hallmark of a true Christian, not one who begs for their “rights”.
I agree with your comment on humility. But, there is another important point: there shouldn’t be any need, whatsoever, for force, and certainly not for begging. Even if it is true that a dispensation is required, and I think that the opponents of that view have the stronger argument, it is very hard to understand this advice:
Now the important thing for you to do is to* put him into a position where he is willing* to request that dispensation.
Why would there be any suggestion of any need for this effort? Why would we not expect, by education and formation, that the priest is not only disposed, but pre-disposed, to request the dispensation. It should be* that *simple.
 
Well, you can always force the issue and get grief, which is not the Christian way. Or just get with the program and be at peace.

Humility is the hallmark of a true Christian, not one who begs for their “rights”.
Rights are meaningless if we cannot insist they be honored.

Let me ask you about a hypothetical. What if an Eastern Catholic parent of an adult child (baptized, chrismated, and admitted to Holy Communion–been receiving Holy Communion since infancy), according to Eastern Catholic tradition) with a severe developmental disability must permanently live in an area where the closest Eastern Catholic parish is several hundred miles away. The priest refuses to commune this child of the Lord because he has determined that he does not understand that meaning of the Eucharist. This child of the Lord, who was licitly admitted to Holy Communion under the law of his particular Church, should permanently be denied Holy Communion because of the ignorance of a priest from a different particular Church? His parents, instead of “begging for their rights,” should permanently allow this injustice to continue? I don’t think so. As I stated, rights are meaningless if we cannot insist they be honored.
 
T
In this situation is it recommended by Eastern Priest who Chrismated the baby for her parents to take her to an Orthodox Church so the baby won’t be deprived of the Living-giving Mysteries while living in an area where the Catholic Church either can’t or refuses to commune their fully Catholic baby?
:confused::confused::confused:
Surely you are aware of the fact that Greek Catholics are not, without a very rare display of sacramental economy, allowed to receive communion in Orthodox churches.
 
The Code of Canon Law quoted here conflicts with the Code of Canon Law quoted in the post above your post. How confusing. Why would the Catholic Church have written exact opposite Laws regarding something so sacred as the reception of Holy Communion of full members of the Catholic Church while in a Roman parish?

In this situation is it recommended by Eastern Priest who Chrismated the baby for her parents to take her to an Orthodox Church so the baby won’t be deprived of the Living-giving Mysteries while living in an area where the Catholic Church either can’t or refuses to commune their fully Catholic baby?

Isn’t it acceptable under Code of Canon Law to attend and participate in an Orthodox Church where it’s either physically or morally impossible to attend a Catholic Church?
The priest suggested that we could attend an Orthodox Church nearby so that we can have her receive the sacraments, I suppose that if we do that would that mean I would have to go to a roman liturgy like on Saturday night and take my family to the Orthodox Liturgy on Sunday? (Not that I would mind)
 
The priest suggested that we could attend an Orthodox Church nearby so that we can have her receive the sacraments, I suppose that if we do that would that mean I would have to go to a roman liturgy like on Saturday night and take my family to the Orthodox Liturgy on Sunday? (Not that I would mind)
The Orthodox priest will almost certainly not admit any Catholic to Holy Communion–something the Catholic priest who suggested this should have known.
 
The priest suggested that we could attend an Orthodox Church nearby so that we can have her receive the sacraments, I suppose that if we do that would that mean I would have to go to a roman liturgy like on Saturday night and take my family to the Orthodox Liturgy on Sunday? (Not that I would mind)
If I were the parent in this situation, I would follow the priest’s advice for the sake of my child’s ability to receive the Life-giving Mysteries. What could possible be more important?

If that means you have to attend another Church on Saturday, I don’t pretend to understand all those Catholic rules. Especially since their Laws directly conflict with one another as previous posters have posted the conflicting Laws.
 
Go to the priest’s tribunal. It takes one phone call and they’ll tell the priest he’s wrong. The Roman canons that restrict Roman Catholics from receiving until after the age of reason do not bind your daughter. The Roman canons that restrict the priest to practicing his own rite’s liturgical rubrics do not address who is properly prepared to receive and do not restrict the priest from communing Byzantines who are properly prepared according to their own canons.

You should be humble and polite when you’re discussing this misunderstanding, but you should make your sacramental needs known and should expect the church to provide access to the life-giving sacraments. This is just a misunderstanding on the priest’s part. He’s confusing liturgical rubrics with canon law and doesn’t know which applies to whom. The tribunal will explain it all to him. The conversation will probably be unexpectedly brief. “She is a canonical Byzantine through her Byzantine mom? Yeah, tell him he has to commune her.”

At that point, the priest might want some help or assurances from you. He might need to do some parish catechesis. Might want to see you maintaining a Byzantine life as appropriate to your life so you aren’t living like Latins in every other area except this. He might ask you to try to attend the same Mass on a regular basis to reduce surprise and increase catechesis of the affected congregants. These are areas in which you should be willing to work with him after the tribunal tells him your daughter who is a fully initiated Catholic in a state of grace is to be communed when presented.

This will be handled so swiftly that you can start addressing the bigger issue of how you plan to maintain the rest of the Byzantine life. I suggest joining either the Tulsa parish or St. Sophia in The Colony, TX as a part-time parishioner so you are included in parish mailings and support opportunities. You can choose a spiritual director who is Byzantine and will need to plan to meet in person at least twice a year. You can pray morning and evening prayers as a family at home. These issues will prove to be much more difficult to figure out and maintain.
 
By the 5th or 6th post the only useful information coming out of this thread is a flagrant display of lacking humility and charity!:mad:

Why don’t we look for common ground in the Gospel of our Lord rather than argument for the sake of argument?

Peace and all goof!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top