I’m inclined to go with Deacon Ed on this because I attended a Roman Catholic High School run by Jesuits and once a year (for all four years that I was there) we went on a “trip” to a nearby (about two miles from the school) Orthodox Church for Mass. Nothing was ever said about not receiving. In fact, a majority of us INCLUDING the priests DID receive.
Comments?
Unusual, and technically illicit, but not something I find objectionable at all. Many of the Orthodox Apologists, however, find it problematic.
The wording of canon law, in the english translation, is pretty clear that it’s only licit when unable to approach a catholic minister.
Here’s the Roman law as posted at the vatican:
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.
§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.
§5. For the cases mentioned in §§2, 3, and 4, the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops is not to issue general norms except after consultation at least with the local competent authority of the interested non-Catholic Church or community.
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2T.HTM
Emphasis mine.
Now, Rome has two different canon laws, one set for the Roman Church, and one for the other 22…
Here’s the permission for EC’s to do so
Canon 670
1. For a just cause Catholics can attend the liturgical worship of other Christians and take part in the same, observing those things which, by reason of the degree of communion with the Catholic Church, are established by the eparchial bishop or by a superior authority. 2. If non-Catholic Christians lack a place in which divine worship can be celebrated with dignity, the eparchial bishop can grant the use of a Catholic building or cemetery or church according to the norm of particular law of his own Church sui iuris.
Canon 671
- Catholic ministers licitly administer the sacraments only to Catholic Christian faithful, who, likewise, licitly receive the sacraments only from Catholic ministers. 2. If necessity requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it and provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is permitted for Catholic Christian faithful, for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers, in whose Churches these sacraments are valid. 3. Likewise Catholic ministers licitly administer the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick to Christian faithful of Eastern Churches, who do not have full communion with the Catholic Church, if they ask for them on their own and are properly disposed. This holds also for the Christian faithful of other Churches, who according to the judgment of the Apostolic See, are in the same condition as the Eastern Churches as far as the sacraments are concerned. 4. If there is a danger of death or another matter of serious necessity in the judgment of the eparchial bishop, the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church or the council of hierarchs, Catholic ministers licitly administer the same sacraments also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach the ministers of their own ecclesial communities and who request them on their own, provided they manifest a faith consonant with that of the Catholic Church concerning these sacraments and are rightly disposed. 5. For the cases in 2, 3 and 4, norms of particular law are to be enacted only after consultation with at least the local competent authority of the non-Catholic Church or ecclesial community concerned.
intratext.com/IXT/ENG1199/_PIM.HTM
intratext.com/IXT/ENG1199/_PIN.HTM
Emphasis and underline mine
Pretty narrow definition. Now, exceptions are in fact in treaties for the Assyian Church of the East, the Syrian Orthodox, and the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Church.
Inter-communion between the ACROD and the Ruthenian Catholics is a well known de-facto thing…
… and I think these are wonderful, and a true sign of hope for reunification… but they are, unless specifically indulted, or in place by inter-church treaty, only for emergencies.
