"Latins" can receive communion and participate in Easter Catholic Churches, right?

[Micael]

I very inrtrigued. Unitil recently, I was certain any Catholic(of any rite) can take part and Divine Liturgy/Mass at any Catholic Church they desired.

However I was just infomed that this is not the case. I was told this is allowed only if there is no Latin Rite(I am of the Western/Latin rite) Church near-by.

I think this applies to only to Eastern Orthodox church, but not Eastern** Catholic **Churches…now I’m not sure.

What is correct, cause I have a strong desire to visit a local Eastern church. Not because I am not happy with my Latin rite, but because I want to celebrate the true universality/Catholicity of the Church at large.

Thank you.

Micael

PS: Additionally can someone provide the official church document that spells this out clearly, cause I can’t find it anywhere in the CCC.

 

[Matt_Collins]

As part of my daughter’s confirmation preparation, her confirmation class visited an Eastern Rite church in communion with Rome, and they were admitted to Holy Communion. The priest knew the class was coming, so they instructed the visitors how to do so. It is very different than in the Latin rite.

My pastor is pretty orthodox, so I don’t think he would have allowed this if it weren’t “kosher”, so to speak…

But I’m not sure…

 

[wynd]

CCC 2180:

The precept of the Church specifies the law of the Lord more precisely: “On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass.” “The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.”

 

[Micael]

As part of my daughter’s confirmation preparation, her confirmation class visited an Eastern Rite church in communion with Rome, and they were admitted to Holy Communion. The priest knew the class was coming, so they instructed the visitors how to do so. It is very different than in the Latin rite.

My pastor is pretty orthodox, so I don’t think he would have allowed this if it weren’t “kosher”, so to speak…

But I’m not sure…

Actually, taking about “orthodox”, are you aware that Eastern Catholicism is older than the Latin rite. Peter, our first Pope , was the bishop of Antioch before he left and became the 1st bishop of Rome.

In essence, Peter was the 1st Bishop of Antiock in the East(asigning another when he leftt westward), and the 1st Bishop of Rome where he died.

So it is not a mater of orthodoxy or being “kosher” per se (in this case Eastern being more "kosher). But simply whether it is allowed. Remember it works both ways, would they be allowed to participate in the Latin/Western equivalent under the same circumstances?

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

1.) What wynd quoted out of the CCC.

2.) I think you are confusing two things:

 - Eastern Rite churches, which are in communion with Rome. You are free to attend any of these you wish, and to receive the Eucharist.
- Orthodox churches, which are not in communion with Rome, but have a valid priesthood and valid Eucharist. You should only attend these for Sundays IF there is no other Catholic (of any type united with Rome) parish nearby, not receiving the Eucharist (We let the Orthodox receive, but they do not let us and they don't want their people receiving from us).

The two look somewhat to almost exactly alike.

 

[Micael]

CCC 2180:

The precept of the Church specifies the law of the Lord more precisely: “On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass.” “The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.”

Thank you so much!

and may God bless you.

Micael

 

[wynd]

Orthodox churches, which are not in communion with Rome, but have a valid priesthood and valid Eucharist. You should only attend these for Sundays IF there is no other Catholic (of any type united with Rome) parish nearby, not receiving the Eucharist (We let the Orthodox receive, but they do not let us and they don’t want their people receiving from us).

Just to clarify: If there is no Catholic church around, there is no obligation to attend any church at all. (Though I would definitely recommend visiting an Orthodox church )

 

[kleary]

1.) What wynd quoted out of the CCC.

2.) I think you are confusing two things:

• Eastern Rite churches, which are in communion with Rome. You are free to attend any of these you wish, and to receive the Eucharist.
• Orthodox churches, which are not in communion with Rome, but have a valid priesthood and valid Eucharist. You should only attend these for Sundays IF there is no other Catholic (of any type united with Rome) parish nearby, not receiving the Eucharist (We let the Orthodox receive, but they do not let us and they don’t want their people receiving from us).

The two look somewhat to almost exactly alike.

And “nearby” does not mean within a short distance. An example of this was during the time of the Soviet Union, Catholics there were allowed to attend the Russian Orthodox Churches because there were no Catholic Churches there during that time “behind the Iron Curtain”. Also, if that is the case you are not required to attend Mass anyway.

Ken

 

[Micael]

I want to thank everyone. The responses were excellent.

In summary.

Any Catholic of any of the 22 worldwide rites , Latin being the largest, can attend/receive communion freely in any “Catholic” Service (Mass/Divine Liturgy) here, throughout the world and at any time.

Catholics should attend an Orthodox Church if there is no Catholic Church within a reasonablle distance. This is so, because, though one might have the excuse of simply not attending . It is better to attend a vaild though separated sister Church service than nothing at all, expecially if staying over an extended period…than to not attend or recieve the Holy Eucharist at all. Keeping in mind that they are still separated brethren, and though they maintain a valid priesthood and Eucharist some of what they profess many not me in line with the fullness of the truth found in union with the Primacy of Peter.

PS: Matt the Catholic Church gives all its rites and churches equal standing Latin, Byzantine, Coptic or other no more than any other. See CCC 1200-1203.

1203 Specifically states:

"The liturgical traditions or rites presently in use in the Church are the Latin (principally the Roman rite, but also the rites of certain local churches, such as the Ambrosian rite, or those of certain religious orders) and the Byzantine, Alexandrian or Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Maronite and Chaldean rites. In “faithful obedience to tradition, the sacred Council declares that Holy Mother Church holds all lawfully recognized rites** to be of equal right and dignity**, and that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way.”

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Actually, taking about “orthodox”, are you aware that Eastern Catholicism is older than the Latin rite. Peter, our first Pope , was the bishop of Antioch before he left and became the 1st bishop of Rome.

In essence, Peter was the 1st Bishop of Antiock in the East(asigning another when he leftt westward), and the 1st Bishop of Rome where he died.

So it is not a mater of orthodoxy or being “kosher” per se (in this case Eastern being more "kosher). But simply whether it is allowed. Remember it works both ways, would they be allowed to participate in the Latin/Western equivalent under the same circumstances?

Yes, we’re all Catholics.

 

[twf]

You as a Catholic may be permitted to receive the Eucharist from an Eastern Orthodox minister if a Catholic minister is not available, but the Orthodox themselves WOULD NEVER want to commune to you. So out of respect for the Orthodox, I would never present myself for Holy Communion under any circumstances.

Of course we may freely receive the Blessed Sacrament from any church of the Catholic Communion, whether it’s Latin, Byzantine, Coptic, etc.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

Just to clarify: If there is no Catholic church around, there is no obligation to attend any church at all. (Though I would definitely recommend visiting an Orthodox church )

Exactly. It’s an “only if you want to” deal.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Yes, Catholic churches being in “communion” with each other speaks to more than simple shared authority structures - sharing of the Eucharist among churches (and individuals, for that matter) is really the test of full communion.