Non-Catholics receiving the Eurcharist

[DeepeningFaith]

ProVobis:

My understanding is that any valid Catholic rite can fulfill our obligation. Orthodox DL is considered a valid Catholic rite.

I do not believe so.

Canon Law:

Can. 1248 §1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere 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.

It says Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church does not consider the Orthodox Church to be the Catholic Church, they consider it the Orthodox Church, often referred to as an Eastern Church.

See the first couple of posts here.

 

[DeepeningFaith]

going to DL in a Catholic Eastern Church would fulfill your obligation. going to an Orthodox DL normally won’t fulfill your obligation. the clause is that unless you cannot go to a Catholic sui juris church, then an Orthodox DL/Mass would fulfill your obligation

Right! Sorry, I had misread your post before I posted mine. Do you have a citation for this? I can’t find it.

Pax!

 

[choy]

Right! Sorry, I had misread your post before I posted mine. Do you have a citation for this? I can’t find it.

Pax!

apparently my information is outdated:

This is taken from the New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, page 1145:

“The former Ecumenical Directory of 1967 granted a privilege permitting Catholics to fulfill their Sunday and holy day obligation at the divine liturgy of a separated Eastern church. This privilege was suppressed in the 1993 Directory for the Application of the Principles and Norms on Ecumenism”

got that here → forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3781121&postcount=13

 

[choy]

but to add, you may have your confessions heard from an Orthodox priest if there is danger of death. since their priesthood is valid, this would fall in the same category as laicized priests. they don’t have the faculites but since they are priests (once a priest, always a priest) they are allowed to hear confessions in emergency situations

 

[ProVobis]

I do not believe so.

The Orthodox Church has Apostolic Succession. Also the Orthodox liturgy goes back to the pre-Great Schism Catholic Church and therefore should retain its catholic rite status unless the Vatican has since ruled otherwise. I’ll see if I can find an external link for this.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m not a fan of him but Jimmy Akins has an interesting link on the Sunday obligation and the Orthodox Church:

jimmyakin.org/2005/03/orthodox_liturg.html

Of special note:

The reader then writes:

Are there any other circumstances where it would be all right to fulfill your Sunday obligation in that manner?

No, it doesn’t work quite like that. If you really can’t reasonably get to a Catholic Mass then your Sunday obligation is simply in abeyance. You don’t have to go. You could go to an Eastern non-Catholic liturgy but it would not be in fulfillment of your Sunday obligation because on that Sunday you are simply not obligated.

For such circumstances the Code of Canon Law does have a recommendation (not an obligation) to make:

Can. 1248 §2. If participation in the eucharistic celebration becomes impossible because of the absence of a sacred minister or for another grave cause, it is strongly recommended that the faithful take part in a liturgy of the word if such a liturgy is celebrated in a parish church or other sacred place according to the prescripts of the diocesan bishop or that they devote themselves to prayer for a suitable time alone, as a family, or, as the occasion permits, in groups of families.

 

[choy]

I’m not a fan of him but Jimmy Akins has an interesting link on the Sunday obligation and the Orthodox Church:

jimmyakin.org/2005/03/orthodox_liturg.html

sounds about right, i made the same conclusions after reading those same things he quoted.

 

[choy]

found something in Canon Law but its not about fulfilling the Sunday Obligation. but rather if there is a need for it, like if there is a danger of death, we may receive sacaraments from non-Catholic Churches whom we recognize the sacraments to be valid. so this would be the Orthodox and other schismatic Catholic Churches.

Can. 844 §1. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone, without prejudice to the prescripts of §§2, 3, and 4 of this canon, and ⇒ can. 861, §2.

§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.

§3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.

 

[Godloves13]

thks all for responding, since the thread has taken a different life of its own, I shall opt out here. but thank u all the same.

blessings

 

[dconklin]

I live in the South. I recall one of priest saying this after a Funeral Mass: “I wonder how many First Communions we had today?” Since our area is rather Protestant in make-up, our priests usually give instructions to the congregation, but there are always people that do not want to be left out.