Non-Latin Rites and Papal Succession

[Diakonia]

The CCEO refers to those six as eastern traditions. The rites in that code arise from the traditions.

That being, possibly, the most poorly constructed sentence in the CCEO.

 

[dochawk]

I *Universi Dominici Gregis *is directed to the Cardinal electors, but makes no mention of ***whom ***they can elect. It’s said that Giovanni Battista Montini (the future Paul VI) received several votes in 1958, before he was made a Cardinal.

Also, note that he was not Roman Catholic, but Ambrosian, until becoming Pope.

hawk

 

[Hesychios]

Also, note that he was not Roman Catholic, but Ambrosian, until becoming Pope.

hawk

I hate to have to mention this, but the church does not recognize an “Ambrosian” church in any form. Milan is a Roman Catholic Archdiocese, the old liturgy is allowed in a few places but that does not mean there is anything like an Ambrosian Catholic. Priests who use that liturgy (very few indeed) are Roman Catholic priests and the bishop is a Roman Catholic bishop. The same is true of the Mozarabic Liturgy of Spain. What remains is a very Latinized version of the liturgy anyway, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Archbishop Montini hardly ever used it himself.

It is true that originally long ago the Metropolitan of Milan was not appointed by the bishops of Rome, and the Metropolitan Synod had it’s own liturgy and it’s own calendar of Saints, but it has been completely absorbed and does not exist as a church Sui Iuris, it is just another Archdiocese in Italy.

 

[malphono]

I hate to have to mention this, but the church does not recognize an “Ambrosian” church in any form. Milan is a Roman Catholic Archdiocese, the old liturgy is allowed in a few places but that does not mean there is anything like an Ambrosian Catholic. Priests who use that liturgy (very few indeed) are Roman Catholic priests and the bishop is a Roman Catholic bishop. The same is true of the Mozarabic Liturgy of Spain. What remains is a very Latinized version of the liturgy anyway, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Archbishop Montini hardly ever used it himself.

It is true that originally long ago the Metropolitan of Milan was not appointed by the bishops of Rome, and the Metropolitan Synod had it’s own liturgy and it’s own calendar of Saints, but it has been completely absorbed and does not exist as a church Sui Iuris, it is just another Archdiocese in Italy.

Just a point of clarification. It is, of course, true that there is no “Ambrosian Church sui juris” as such, and there never really was, but there most certainly IS an Ambrosian Rite. It currently exists in two forms, the traditional pre-conciliar form (being the Usus Antiquior), and the post-conciliar form (the local equivalent of the Novus Ordo but it is not the same as the Roman Rite Novus Ordo). Each maintains its own proper calendar and lectionary that are distinct from the Roman (and are distinct within themselves, just as are the Roman Usus Antiquor and Novus Ordo calendars and lectionaries). The Ambrosian Rite is used within the Archdiocese of Milan and in certain other nearby places that were part of the ancient ecclesiastical Province of Milan. The Roman Rite (both in its Usus Antiquior and the Novus Ordo) is also used in Milan, but mainly by religious houses that are part of the Roman Rite. Diocesan clergy of the “Ambrosian territory” may be bi-ritual, but are in the first place Ambrosian, and as such are permitted to serve it personally anywhere they travel.

As Archbishop of Milan, Montini adopted the Ambrosian Rite and indeed served it regularly, as did his predecessors. Indeed, Montini developed quite a love for it, and became a great defender of the Ambrosian Rite. When, his immediate successor tried to suppress the Ambrosian Rite in favor of the Roman Rite Novus Ordo, Montini (as Paul VI) intervened to ensure its continued survival. In short, the Ambrosian Rite is served daily within its territories.

While it is also true that the Archbishop of Milan was elected locally rather appointed by Rome, one must bear in mind that that was the case for all Primates and Metropolitans (actually even bishops) in the West, at least through the First Millennium. The election was confirmed by Rome and the pallium given in recognition of same. Becket, for example, was elected Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of England by the local Synod. Metropolitans were similarly recognized directly by the Primate and indirectly by Rome.

The Mozarabic Rite Mass underwent a restoration (completed, I believe, in the mid-'90s) to strip out most latinizations that had crept in over the centuries. It is still served in parts of the Archdiocese of Toledo. The Abbey of Santo Domingo de Silos petitioned for, and was granted, its use. Elsewhere in Spain, it may be used, with permission, on an ad-hoc basis.

 

[Hesychios]

Just a point of clarification. It is, of course, true that there is no “Ambrosian Church sui juris” as such, …

And thus, no such thing as an Ambrosian Catholic.

It is a misnomer. These are Latin Catholics, and one does not inherit a special membership in an Ambrosian church through the patrilineal, and one does not become ‘Ambrosian’ through marriage. Bishops around the world are under no obligation to attempt to accomodate the ‘special needs’ of the faithful from Milan.

… and there never really was, but there most certainly IS an Ambrosian Rite.

I do believe that a strong argument can be made that the original Metropolitan See and Synod was a church Sui Iuris, as probably all Metropolitan Sees were.

However, the term is an anachronism. It (the term Sui Iuris) is only important today because Rome allows some particular churches derived from “the East” to have sets of canon law different from the Latin church’s law. But for all practical purposes, the churches of North Africa, Hispania, Gaul and northern Italy were equivalent in the early centuries.

It currently exists in two forms, the traditional pre-conciliar form (being the Usus Antiquior), and the post-conciliar form (the local equivalent of the Novus Ordo but it is not the same as the Roman Rite Novus Ordo). …

It seems that the original ‘antique’ rite, using the 1954 updates, was used in only one parish until recently and now is celebrated in two parishes by indult (apparently since the Motu Propio), but not the cathedral.

 

[Vico]

That being, possibly, the most poorly constructed sentence in the CCEO.

Melius est in lingua originali. - Yoda

**Can. 28 **-
§1. Ritus est patrimonium liturgicum, theologicum, spirituale et disciplinare cultura ac rerum adiunctis historiae populorum distinctum, quod modo fidei vivendae uniuscuiusque Ecclesiae sui iuris proprio exprimitur.
§ 2. Ritus, de quibus in Codice agitur, sunt, nisi aliud constat, illi, qui oriuntur ex traditionibus Alexandrina, Antiochena, Armena, Chaldaea et Constantinopolitana.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

1. Do the various Rites in the Catholic Church, other than the Latin Rite, have Cardinals, or some other equivalent who votes on who the new Pope will be when the Pope dies?

No, the Pope is elected by an electoral college which is composed solely of cardinals under the age of 80. There may be Patriarchs and Major Archbishops among their number. However, the Eastern Catholic Churches do not get a vote per se.

1. Is a Catholic from a non-Latin Rite eligible to become Pope?

Yes, the office is not restricted to Latin Catholics. Nor is it restricted to cardinals.