Limits of Eastern Catholicism for the Roman Catholic

[BrianLC]

I did once attend a lecture by a Latin Rite Dominican Priest who had been granted priestly faculties in the Easter Catholic Curch. he wore Eastern clerics. I don’t know how that works. if he had to recieve two ordinations or what. I assume he would need permission from both bishops. but he gave a very intriguing lecture on Iconography

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I did once attend a lecture by a Latin Rite Dominican Priest who had been granted priestly faculties in the Easter Catholic Curch. he wore Eastern clerics. I don’t know how that works. if he had to recieve two ordinations or what. I assume he would need permission from both bishops. but he gave a very intriguing lecture on Iconography

For a priest to become bi-ritual he needs the approval of his current bishop, an Eastern Catholic bishop who will give him faculties and then Rome must grant approval.

 

[Diak]

No where within the Code of Canon Law is such an exception made, the only statement within the Code is that one may fulfill their Obligation at any Catholic rite.

Byzcath’s citation of the Latin law actually corroborates what Ciero is saying and what his bishop has related to him. Every Catholic is free to choose which particular Church they may participate in regarding the “obligation” which most definitely includes specific feasts and traditions of any particular ritual Catholic Church. Absolutely no dispensation is required. The key concept is “freedom” in the faithful practice of one’s Catholic faith.

No one is slavishly bound to a specific particular practice of their Catholic faith by law when they wish to experience another. Ciero is quite correct, and his bishop is consistent with all of the other Latin bishops and canonists I have spoken to about this matter as well. No Catholic should feel a legalistic subservience to a faulty interpretation of the law which is inconsistent with Magisterial teaching (Orientale Lumen et. al.) and quite opposed to Eastern Christian concept of economia.

One should be able to experience the Holy Mysteries in the way they freely choose along with the associated spiritual practices and traditions. That is truly “catholic”.

 

[Diak]

Brian, the chancellor of my Ukrainian Greek Catholic Eparchy is a Dominican who retained his Ukrainian liturgical tradition but accepted Latin biritual faculties upon his ordination to the priesthood. He participates in his Dominican chapter in Chicago and resides with them, but his “day job” is entirely in the Ukrainian particular Church.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Byzcath’s citation of the Latin law actually corroborates what Ciero is saying and what his bishop has related to him. Every Catholic is free to choose which particular Church they may participate in regarding the “obligation” which most definitely includes specific feasts and traditions of any particular ritual Catholic Church. Absolutely no dispensation is required.

No one is slavishly bound to a specific particular practice of their Catholic faith by law when they wish to experience another. Ciero is quite correct, and his bishop is consistent with all of the other Latin bishops and canonists I have spoken to about this matter as well. No Catholic should feel a legalistic subservience to a nonexistent interpretation of the law which is quite opposed to Eastern Christian thinking.

One should be able to experience the Holy Mysteries in the way they freely choose along with the associated spiritual practices and traditions. That is truly “catholic”.

That’s not how I understand the Canons, but then I am not a Canon Lawyer and have yet to take any classes in Canon Law.

The Canons only explicitly state that one may fulfill their Obligation in any Catholic rite.

I was told though that as a Byzantine Catholic I must follow my holidays even though I am living in a Latin religious order house.

 

[Diak]

You are encouraged and free to do so, but as you know the primary “obligation” to one such as yourself in a religious community is fidelity of obedience to your rule and order. That should not conflict with an identity of a particular ritual Catholic Church.

In several cases of friends in similar circumstances (living in a Latin order while remaining Greek Catholic) that basically involved private prayer of the Horologion with the blessing of the superior, and attending Liturgy at a nearby Eastern Catholic parish for Sundays and feasts, but with all of the usual communal/chapter involvement for prayer. You are also free to completely become ritually Latin by formal change of particular ritual Church if you so desire and discern.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

You are encouraged and free to do so, but as you know the primary “obligation” to one such as yourself in a religious community is fidelity of obedience to your rule and order. That should not conflict with an identity of a particular ritual Catholic Church.

In several cases of friends in similar circumstances (living in a Latin order while remaining Greek Catholic) that basically involved private prayer of the Horologion with the blessing of the superior, and attending Liturgy at a nearby Eastern Catholic parish for Sundays and feasts, but with all of the usual communal/chapter involvement for prayer. You are also free to completely become ritually Latin by formal change of particular ritual Church if you so desire and discern.

Yes, we meet as a community for Morning Prayer/Mass and Evening Prayer during the week days, we are encouraged by our rule and constitutions to have at least an hour of private prayer a day. I attend a Byzantine parish on Sundays and when I am able.

I do not have a copy of the Horologion so I am limited in doing this privately. I have a copy of the Melkite Publican’s Prayer Book that I try to use as I can.

I have no plans to change particular Churches.

Having said that I must stress though that my obediences as a vowed religious are different than a lay persons.

 

[malphono]

Byzcath’s citation of the Latin law actually corroborates what Ciero is saying and what his bishop has related to him. Every Catholic is free to choose which particular Church they may participate in regarding the “obligation” which most definitely includes specific feasts and traditions of any particular ritual Catholic Church. Absolutely no dispensation is required. The key concept is “freedom” in the faithful practice of one’s Catholic faith.

Yes indeed. That agrees with my interpretation but more importantly, it is exactly how a respected canon lawyer friend of mine (JOCD) has explained the matter. His classmate (JCD) does likewise.

 

[Diak]

Having said that I must stress though that my obediences as a vowed religious are different than a lay persons.

To which we are in complete agreement. And your superiors are likewise bound by fidelity to the Magisterial obligations not to place any requirement or imediment on you as a religious that would interfere or negate your freely chosen excercise of the Catholic faith in your own particular ritual Church.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

I am now convinced that, if I should ever be somewhere in Eastern Europe (such as Greece, Armenia, Georgia, Russia, etc.) on Sunday or any other holy day, yet remain in communion with Rome, I will be able to attend an Eastern Catholic Church.** I plan on being Latin Rite forever (VIVA IL NOSTRO PAPA), **but these questions were really bugging me and I had to get them cleared up!

I presume you know that members of Eastern Catholic Churches are also subject to our dear Pope, the same as Latin rite Catholics. We are all one Church.

 

[Ad_Gentes]

I was told though that as a Byzantine Catholic I must follow my holidays even though I am living in a Latin religious order house.

According to Can. 1248 §1, “A person who assists at a Mass celebrated** anywhere** (emphasis added) in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.” (CIC)

Can. 883 §1 also states that “[t]he Christian faithful who are outside the territorial boundaries of their own Church sui iuris can adopt fully (emphasis added) for themselves the feast days and days of penance which are in force where they are staying.” (CCEO)

I’m not a a Canon lawyer either, but it seems to me that one can celebrate the feasts, holy days of obligation, and days of penance of the sui iuris Church where one attends, even in one is not canonically enrolled there.

Blessings and Merry Christmas!

 

[Aramis]

Canon 833 does not apply if you are in driving distance of a parish of one’s own church, nor if specific provision has been made by the national conference. In the US, the national conference has made explicit what is obligatory.

 

[ciero]

Yes, we meet as a community for Morning Prayer/Mass and Evening Prayer during the week days, we are encouraged by our rule and constitutions to have at least an hour of private prayer a day. I attend a Byzantine parish on Sundays and when I am able.

I do not have a copy of the Horologion so I am limited in doing this privately. I have a copy of the Melkite Publican’s Prayer Book that I try to use as I can.

I have no plans to change particular Churches.

Having said that I must stress though that my obediences as a vowed religious are different than a lay persons.

A vowed religious is a lay person, unless you have been ordained to the diaconate or priesthood.

 

[Ad_Gentes]

A vowed religious is a lay person, unless you have been ordained to the diaconate or priesthood.

Strictly speaking, you are correct. However, the Church does make a distiction between the religious (e.g. monks, nuns, brothers, sisters, etc.) and the lay faithful. In addition, vowed religious (e.g. those belonging to an institute or congregation) have additional obligations that those of the lay faithful (e.g. non-consecrated, non-vowed, etc.).

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

ciero:
A vowed religious is a lay person, unless you have been ordained to the diaconate or priesthood.

While being a lay person I have additional vows. I am under the Vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience. My Obedience vow is a vow to be obedient to my lawful superior, the rule and constitutions of my order, and the Church.

These are vows that a non-vowed lay person are not bound to. I am bound to them under penalty of sin. There are things that I must do that you as a lay person can chose to do or not do with out sinning, if I am bound to them then if I chose not to do them then I sin.

There is a big difference.

I think the Church lost a lot when it changed its focus on religious life and started to include them explicitly in the laity class.

Again, while vowed religious are laity, they are very different.

 

[ciero]

To which we are in complete agreement. And your superiors are likewise bound by fidelity to the Magisterial obligations not to place any requirement or imediment on you as a religious that would interfere or negate your freely chosen excercise of the Catholic faith in your own particular ritual Church.

I’m not so sure about this, if someone joins a religious order outside their own ritual church.

 

[Aramis]

I’m not so sure about this, if someone joins a religious order outside their own ritual church.

No, the order, via the lawful superior, is expected to not cause violations of other, extant vows and/or obligations. That said, they can require one to fulfill those obligations in a different rite.

For example, as a Byzantine, the good brother JR is expected to fulfill his Jan 6 Theophany obligation by attending a divine worship service. His superior needs to see to it he can, under pain of sin, as a superior… but neither he nor his superior are restricted to fulfilling that in the Byzantine Rite. Likewise, his order can add for him, by rule, custom, or instruction from his superior, an obligation for the Jan 1 feast’s liturgy, even tho’, as a byzantine, he’s not obligated; he can be obligated as a Carmelite.

Several orders require daily divine worship attendance. Those orders have to make it possible for their members to do so in a practical fashion, or dispense the obligation when not practical.

One of the interesting things about leadership in the Church is that it comes with responsibility for all the souls entrusted to one’s care, under pain of sin. If you don’t enable them to fulfill their obligations, you also suffer thesin. Hence the saying “The Road to hell is paved with Bishop’s souls.”

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

No, the order, via the lawful superior, is expected to not cause violations of other, extant vows and/or obligations. That said, they can require one to fulfill those obligations in a different rite.

For example, as a Byzantine, the good brother JR is expected to fulfill his Jan 6 Theophany obligation by attending a divine worship service. His superior needs to see to it he can, under pain of sin, as a superior… but neither he nor his superior are restricted to fulfilling that in the Byzantine Rite. Likewise, his order can add for him, by rule, custom, or instruction from his superior, an obligation for the Jan 1 feast’s liturgy, even tho’, as a byzantine, he’s not obligated; he can be obligated as a Carmelite.

Several orders require daily divine worship attendance. Those orders have to make it possible for their members to do so in a practical fashion, or dispense the obligation when not practical.

One of the interesting things about leadership in the Church is that it comes with responsibility for all the souls entrusted to one’s care, under pain of sin. If you don’t enable them to fulfill their obligations, you also suffer thesin. Hence the saying “The Road to hell is paved with Bishop’s souls.”

Got it all right. I can fulfill obligations through my attendance at daily Mass in the priory.

But you got it wrong where you stated it is Br JR, its not, it is me Br David.

Canon Law actually allows for this. As my order has no Eastern Foundations that I am working towards there was an added requirement that they get approval from the Congregation for Oriental Churches for my entry into the Novitiate. Otherwise my Novitiate would have been invalid.

The point that I was trying to make is that as a Byzantine Catholic I am still bound to the Holydays of my Church, one of which Aramis states, Theophany on January 6th, yes I can fill it by attendance at a daily Mass or I can try and make it to my parish, St Melany in Tucson. A Latin who chooses to celebrate in a Byzantine Parish would still be bound to January 1st. My being a vowed Carmelite adds other obligations to me according to our rule and constitutions.

 

[Cobbfmly]

I did once attend a lecture by a Latin Rite Dominican Priest who had been granted priestly faculties in the Easter Catholic Curch. he wore Eastern clerics. I don’t know how that works. if he had to recieve two ordinations or what. I assume he would need permission from both bishops. but he gave a very intriguing lecture on Iconography

Our previous pastor was granted priestly faculties in an Eastern Catholic Church (I don’t know which rite) so that one of the Eastern Catholic parishes could continue to have sacraments while awaiting the arrival of a new priest from their rite.

As gifts for his service to the parish he received a gold plated gospel cover, a censer with bells and a hand held cross, which he used for the closing blessing. During his 11 yrs at our parish, I came to really appreciate their use at our parish.