Should Orthodox be re-confirmed?

[JohnVIII]

I understand that the Catholic Church teaches that confirmation (or chrismation as the Orthodox call it) should not be repeated, but only done once. I also understand that the Catholic Church recognizes that the sacraments in the Orthodox Church are valid. Therefore, is it wrong for a baptized and confirmed Orthodox Christian to be re-confirmed in order to become a Roman Catholic?

 

[AJV]

I understand that the Catholic Church teaches that confirmation (or chrismation as the Orthodox call it) should not be repeated, but only done once. I also understand that the Catholic Church recognizes that the sacraments in the Orthodox Church are valid. Therefore, is it wrong for a baptized and confirmed Orthodox Christian to be re-confirmed in order to become a Roman Catholic?

Yes.

As an aside, nowadays it seems “Roman Catholic” is often used to indicate Catholic faithful belonging to the Latin rite. If this is what you mentioned, someone converting from Eastern Orthodoxy should ideally join the corresponding Eastern Catholic Church (CCEO 35).

 

[JReducation]

I understand that the Catholic Church teaches that confirmation (or chrismation as the Orthodox call it) should not be repeated, but only done once. I also understand that the Catholic Church recognizes that the sacraments in the Orthodox Church are valid. Therefore, is it wrong for a baptized and confirmed Orthodox Christian to be re-confirmed in order to become a Roman Catholic?

If there is evidence that the person was confirmed, it would be wrong to confirm again. The second confirmation is not only invalid, it is a violation of Canon Law. You only repeat the rituals, if you cannot find proof that they ever took place.

To become a Catholic all that an Orthodox person has to do is make a profession of faith and be received into the Catholic Church through the rite of reception.

JR

 

[puzzleannie]

I understand that the Catholic Church teaches that confirmation (or chrismation as the Orthodox call it) should not be repeated, but only done once. I also understand that the Catholic Church recognizes that the sacraments in the Orthodox Church are valid. Therefore, is it wrong for a baptized and confirmed Orthodox Christian to be re-confirmed in order to become a Roman Catholic?

yes it is, the pastor should never condone it. All that is required is a profession of faith. The procedure is similar to change in ritual between an Eastern Rite and Latin Rite for a Catholic. Should such an individual come to a parish asking about joining the Catholic Church he should be immediately referred to the pastor, who should consult the particular law of the diocese for the specific procedure. There should be little if any delay, beyond that which is entailed in waiting for paperwork etc.

 

[JohnVIII]

If there is evidence that the person was confirmed, it would be wrong to confirm again. The second confirmation is not only invalid, it is a violation of Canon Law. You only repeat the rituals, if you cannot find proof that they ever took place.

To become a Catholic all that an Orthodox person has to do is make a profession of faith and be received into the Catholic Church through the rite of reception.

JR

There was a time several years ago, because of the influence of my wife - my wife is Roman Catholic - that I desired to join the Roman Catholic Church. I thought it be a real easy thing to do, because I am Orthodox already, nevertheless I was told I had to go through the RCIA program. I actually ended up going through the program three times, the first two times at the same parish, and the last time at another parish in another city. Everyone in both parishes said that being Orthodox was not good enough, and that to only make a profession of faith was also not good enough. At the end of the third time in the second perish I joined the Roman Catholic Church and I was told I had to be re-confirmed, as my Orthodox confirmation was not valid. I was re-confirmed and I still hold the confirmation papers that prove this happened. (And, yes I also have the papers that prove I was confirmed in the Orthodox Church as well). Later on I returned to the Orthodox Church, and at one point I was told that if I wanted to return to the Roman Catholic Church again I would have to go through the RCIA program all over again.

I have heard time and time again, both before as well as after this, that as an Orthodox Christian all I would have to do is make a profession of faith, but I found that in actual practice this is not true! I am left now with the feeling that the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t really think of the Orthodox as being any closer to them than anyone of any of the Protestant churches.

Any comments?

 

[cameron_lansing]

Perhaps just a couple points for clarity.

“…someone converting from Eastern Orthodoxy should ideally join the corresponding Eastern Catholic Church (CCEO 35).”

Canon 35 of the CCEO is a binding norm that admits to exception only by permission of the Apostolic See. Otherwise, the person is *always *enrolled in the corresponding Eastern Catholic Church. This would be true even if a Latin Catholic priest or bishop presides over the reception of the Eastern Christian into the Catholic Church.

“The procedure is similar to change in ritual between an Eastern Rite and Latin Rite for a Catholic.”

Ritual here should be understood in its broadest sense, namely the spiritual patrimony of the respective Churches, which are equal in dignity.

A transfer of enrollment between the Latin Catholic Church and one of the Eastern Catholic Churches proceeds quite differently. Although there are several ways in which this may happen, no profession of faith is ever involved because the party is already in full communion with the Catholic Church.

 

[1ke]

I am left now with the feeling that the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t really think of the Orthodox as being any closer to them than anyone of any of the Protestant churches.

Any comments?

My comment is that this is not a reflection of how the Catholic Church views the Orthodox Church. This is a reflection of how poorly catechized those in charge of the RCIA programs in your area-- and the priests too apparently-- are.

I hope you will reconsider the Catholic Church. And, when you do-- contact the diocese. Contact the Chancery Office who will be more knowledgeable and tell them of what the parishes are trying to do. You can also ask to talk to the Judicial Vicar, or someone in his office. The JV is a canon lawyer.

You should talk to a canon lawyer about your canonical status. When you went through RCIA and were “confirmed” you also made a profession of faith. While that confirmation was invalid because you are already validly confirmed, your profession of faith probably brought you into the Catholic Church.

 

[cameron_lansing]

Any comments?

Sure, it was wrong if you were a confirmed Eastern Orthodox and the second confirmation was inefficacious.

True, there are cases in which a community presenting itself as Orthodox in the West might not actually be so and lack true apostolic succession and sacraments, but those are the only cases that I could envision, and you have not given reason to look in that direction. Off hand, as well, I cannot think of an Eastern Orthodox Church that does not confer Holy Mhyrr at the time of baptism.

See CCEO canon 897: “A member of the Christian faithful of an Eastern non-Catholic Church is to be received into the Catholic Church with only the profession of the Catholic faith, after doctrinal and spiritual preparation according to each one’s condition.”

 

[malphono]

…I am left now with the feeling that the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t really think of the Orthodox as being any closer to them than anyone of any of the Protestant churches.

Officially, of course, that’s not the case, but the problem as I see it is often ignorance, at least on the parish level.

In the “old days” a parish priest who was unsure of what to do in a situation like this would have queried the local ordinary, (or the VG, or the Judicial Vicar directly since that’s where the query would likely have gone anyway). Seems to me it’s better to ask than put what might well be (and in this case certainly was) an unnecessary burden on the petitioner.

Also, in the “old days” if there was any question about the validity of a person’s Orthodox Chrismation, it might have been redone by the Latin priest but only on a conditional basis. (Same as would be the case with a questionable Baptism.) But even the conditional form would not have been used without having presented the situation to the local ordinary, as above.

Believe it or not, the same sort of ignorance is not unknown even among the Eastern and Oriental CCs.

 

[puzzleannie]

There was a time several years ago, because of the influence of my wife - my wife is Roman Catholic - that I desired to join the Roman Catholic Church. I thought it be a real easy thing to do, because I am Orthodox already, nevertheless I was told I had to go through the RCIA program. I actually ended up going through the program three times, the first two times at the same parish, and the last time at another parish in another city. Everyone in both parishes said that being Orthodox was not good enough, and that to only make a profession of faith was also not good enough. At the end of the third time in the second perish I joined the Roman Catholic Church and I was told I had to be re-confirmed, as my Orthodox confirmation was not valid. I was re-confirmed and I still hold the confirmation papers that prove this happened. (And, yes I also have the papers that prove I was confirmed in the Orthodox Church as well). Later on I returned to the Orthodox Church, and at one point I was told that if I wanted to return to the Roman Catholic Church again I would have to go through the RCIA program all over again.

I have heard time and time again, both before as well as after this, that as an Orthodox Christian all I would have to do is make a profession of faith, but I found that in actual practice this is not true! I am left now with the feeling that the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t really think of the Orthodox as being any closer to them than anyone of any of the Protestant churches.

Any comments?

the person directing RCIA in this parish was wrong from start to finish. the standard direction in every diocese is to submit the case of an member of an Orthodox Church directly to the chancery for instructions on how to proceed, and it does NOT include RCIA and confirmation. You did nothing wrong, your second confirmation simply has no effect, you have nothing for which to reproach yourself. Do not concern yourself. Spend the time simply working on being a good Catholic and on your marriage and family duties. Welcome to your second home! Hope the reunification of the Churches takes place in my lifetime, what rejoicing there will be in heaven on that day.

I will add that I have, at my own expense and on my own time, taken 4 national level courses intended to form RCIA directors and catechists, and this issue has never even been raised. However every diocese has particular law that governs canon law in this case, and it is mentioned in the Ritual book and the national statutes. Accept my apologies for poor catechesis of my comadres.

 

[a_priori]

I understand that the Catholic Church teaches that confirmation (or chrismation as the Orthodox call it) should not be repeated, but only done once. I also understand that the Catholic Church recognizes that the sacraments in the Orthodox Church are valid. Therefore, is it wrong for a baptized and confirmed Orthodox Christian to be re-confirmed in order to become a Roman Catholic?

My wife and I were Antiochian for 4 years then Greek for 8 years. We were required to go through RCIA in order to convert to Catholicism.

No biggie. Met some cool people and got into some cool discussions. It was just hanging out with Christian friends, albeit a little more formal. We didn’t see it as an obstacle (or an insult) but rather another opportunity to talk about God.

 

[JohnVIII]

Thank you for all your comments, they have been most helpful to me! In certain contexts I still refer to myself as Catholic, because of the commonly held belief that “once a Catholic always a Catholic”; however as an Orthodox Christian I have mostly held to the most traditional customs, and as such, conversion to the Roman Catholic Church was a very hard thing for me to do. That is the reason I went thru the RCIA program three times! The one thing that kept me from joining the Roman Catholic Church until this issue was resolved for me was the matter of the filioque. So, the manner of the filioque was resolved for me and I joined Roman Catholic Church. But then later, the matter of the filioque became once again unresolved for me, so I returned the Orthodox Church.

To be fair, and for the sake of comparison, I was confirmed in the Orthodox Church four times. The Orthodox Church does not teach that confirmation must be done only once - one of the minor differences between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church.

 

[puzzleannie]

I think it would help in this discussion to differentiate between “RCIA-the rites and all intitiation sacraments” vs. “RCIA as shorthand for parish program of adult sacramental preparation and catechesis”.

Going through “the class” is probably beneficial for anyone seeking to revert to childhood faith, or who is already a well-catechized adult leading a solid Christian life in another denomination. Those well educated adults first of all have a great deal to offer other participants. Secondly it has been my almost universal experience in 20 years of working with RCIA in some capacity that the best educated practitioners in their own faith are precisely those that have the most complex questions, issues and doubts and who benefit most for extended study and discussion in those areas.

 

[a_priori]

The one thing that kept me from joining the Roman Catholic Church until this issue was resolved for me was the matter of the filioque. So, the manner of the filioque was resolved for me and I joined Roman Catholic Church. But then later, the matter of the filioque became once again unresolved for me, so I returned the Orthodox Church.

My apologies for drifting momentarily off-topic, but I had to think this through as well. There are few subjects that get people sideways faster around these parts than the Filioque. But most, to be fair, are well-intentioned.

I’m speaking only for myself and your mileage may vary. But my conclusion was that human language words are, in any case, incapable of describing the relationship between the Persons of the Godhead. Words like “proceeds” and “from” necessarily presuppose time and space. God exists outside of time and space. Either version of the Creed suffers the shortcomings of language and therefore both give us the Truth we need but not the mechanical specificity we assume.

Wittgenstein felt that words themselves break down and lose their relevance over time. If we use the words of Plato they are slightly different in nuance than when he wrote them. This is unavoidable. It seems to me that words, like scientific instruments, must be recalibrated to assure us of exacting precision. We can’t recalibrate words so we have to interpret things in a larger context.

The gradient became so great for us between Orthodoxy and Catholicism that the Filioque became less of an issue. We have many good friends in Orthodoxy and many rightly feel at home there but we’ve never looked back.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I understand that the Catholic Church teaches that confirmation (or chrismation as the Orthodox call it) should not be repeated, but only done once. I also understand that the Catholic Church recognizes that the sacraments in the Orthodox Church are valid. Therefore, is it wrong for a baptized and confirmed Orthodox Christian to be re-confirmed in order to become a Roman Catholic?

It’s not wrong, it’s FORBIDEN.

 

[JohnVIII]

It’s not wrong, it’s FORBIDEN.

And yet it my case it was required. I asked the RC priest (actually I asked two priests at two different parishes) if I can enter the Roman Catholic Church by confession of faith alone, as it was my understanding through the grapevine (that is, the internet mostly) that the Roman Catholic Church fully recognized the sacraments of the Orthodox Church. I told them that I have the documents that prove I received confirmation in the Orthodox Church. And yet I was still told I had to complete the RCIA program and be received by the sacrament of confirmation.

I don’t mind the education, nor did I have a problem with being confirmed all over again (although I might add that the sacrament of confirmation performed in the Orthodox Church is far more ritualistically beautiful than I found it to be in the Roman Catholic Church) the only thing that really bothers me about this is that the position the Roman Catholic Church holds with regard to the Orthodox and their sacraments seems to be very inconsistent from place to place - but that’s okay, no big deal!

 

[JReducation]

The preferred process is to refer the Eastern Christian to the corresponding Eastern Catholic Church, if it is at all possible and have that Church receive the individual into full communion with the Church.

Then, if the person wishes to transfer into the Roman Church there is no need for a profession of faith, because he or she is already in full comminion with the Church, if he’s coming from an Eastern Catholic Church.

The individual being received into the Church may be required to attend religious education classes (RCIA) or other, but not required to receive the Sacraments of Initiation again. He already received them in the Orthodox Church.

Let’s not be so hard on the parish priests and the Directors of Religious Education. This part of Canon Law is not taught in the seminary or in theology programs. The only part of Canon Law taught in the seminary andin theology programs is the part that deals with the Latin Church and the focus is on marriage law. Unless a person is majoring in it, the degree program does not require an exhaustive study of Canon Law. It is usually a six month course or at most a year, if you belong to a religious order. You can’t cover a lot of territory in that amount of time. Priests, religious and DRE’s usually have degrees in theology, not Canon Law. Canon Law is a specialty field that stands independently among other fields that are independent.

The people at the parish should have checked this out with the Chancery. The Canonists there would have advised them correctly. That’s why they are there.

I’m sorry for the inconvenience that this may have caused the poster above. The Catholic Church does teach that there is much that the Orthodox and Catholics share and one of them is a communion in sacris (sacraments).

JR

 

[AJV]

To be fair, and for the sake of comparison, I was confirmed in the Orthodox Church four times. The Orthodox Church does not teach that confirmation must be done only once - one of the minor differences between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church.

If you do not mind, what were these 4 times and in which jurisdictions? I’m asking because it is possible, as Deacon Lansing noted above, that if you showed them a certificate from one of the splinter groups, they may be been confused (though still, investigation and if absolutely necessary, conditional confirmation would have probably been better)

 

[JohnVIII]

If you do not mind, what were these 4 times and in which jurisdictions? I’m asking because it is possible, as Deacon Lansing noted above, that if you showed them a certificate from one of the splinter groups, they may be been confused (though still, investigation and if absolutely necessary, conditional confirmation would have probably been better)

The Roman Catholic priests had no desire to see any certificate, so I never provided it to them.

My first chrismation was in the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia. The others were performed by a priest under the Old Calendar Church of Greece under his eminence Archbishop Chrysostom of Athens. The canonical status of the Old Calendar Church of Greece is questionable; however the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia was a part of Russian Orthodox Church that was granted a temporary autonomous status in accordance with ukaz #362 from Patriarch Tikhon of Russia. None of the 15 canonical Orthodox jurisdictions will question the validity of the sacraments of the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia, as it is a part of the Russian Orthodox Church.

What the Roman Catholic priests also told me was that the only “Orthodox Church” that they recognize sacraments are the ones that are in full communion with Rome. What they referred to of coarse were the Eastern Catholics.

 

[JReducation]

The Roman Catholic priests had no desire to see any certificate, so I never provided it to them.

My first chrismation was in the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia.

To the best of my knowledge the Russian Orthodox have full apostolic succession. Why did the Greek put you through the ritual again?

The others were performed by a priest under the Old Calendar Church of Greece under his eminence Archbishop Chrysostom of Athens. The canonical status of the Old Calendar Church of Greece is questionable;

Is their apostolic succession questionable?

What the Roman Catholic priests also told me was that the only “Orthodox Church” that they recognize sacraments are the ones that are in full communion with Rome. What they referred to of coarse were the Eastern Catholics.

That’s not correct. There is no Orthodox Church that is in full communion with Rome, unless they are referring to communion in sacraments. In which case there are Orthodox Churches that have the fullness of the priesthood. Therefore they have valid sacraments.

If you want to be Catholic, you may want to approach the local chancery. They have canonists who can direct you correctly.

Fraternally,

JR