Smaller Eastern Churches "sui iuris"

[twf]

On the Synod thread I noted that only 13 of the Eastern Catholic Churches are guaranteed representation at the Synod of the Catholic Church ex-officio: those Churches whose head is of metropolitan rank or higher. That means that 8 or 9 Churches sui iuris within the Catholic communion only have a guaranteed voice in the Church’s universal governance at ecumenical councils when literally every single bishop participates. These same churches also have all of their bishops appointed directly by Rome and lack any sort of synod or council of hierarchs of their own. My question is…what *really * makes these smaller Churches sui iuris? It seems, at least on the surface, that their status is little different than the Anglican Ordinariates which, while part of the Latin Church and dependent on Rome for the provision of an Ordinary, have their own rules concerning liturgy, parish life, etc.
This deeply bothers me. How can we claim to be a communion of Churches of equal dignity? If these Churches are so small that it wouldn’t be practical for them to have their own metropolitan / synod, couldn’t they at least be “autonomous” churches dependent upon a larger Church of their same tradition? This seems much deeper than the issue of the Patriarchal or Major Archepiscopal Churches having limits in their autonomy outside of the “traditional territories”.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I imagine part of it at least has to do with canon law. These smaller Eastern Churches would still be under the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (controversial though that is) and not under the Code of Canon Law.

 

[Vico]

I imagine part of it at least has to do with canon law. These smaller Eastern Churches would still be under the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (controversial though that is) and not under the Code of Canon Law.

It is difficult to understand what you mean. Both the CCEO and CIC are canon law.

 

[Vico]

On the Synod thread I noted that only 13 of the Eastern Catholic Churches are guaranteed representation at the Synod of the Catholic Church ex-officio: those Churches whose head is of metropolitan rank or higher. That means that 8 or 9 Churches sui iuris within the Catholic communion only have a guaranteed voice in the Church’s universal governance at ecumenical councils when literally every single bishop participates. These same churches also have all of their bishops appointed directly by Rome and lack any sort of synod or council of hierarchs of their own. My question is…what *really * makes these smaller Churches sui iuris? It seems, at least on the surface, that their status is little different than the Anglican Ordinariates which, while part of the Latin Church and dependent on Rome for the provision of an Ordinary, have their own rules concerning liturgy, parish life, etc.
This deeply bothers me. How can we claim to be a communion of Churches of equal dignity? If these Churches are so small that it wouldn’t be practical for them to have their own metropolitan / synod, couldn’t they at least be “autonomous” churches dependent upon a larger Church of their same tradition? This seems much deeper than the issue of the Patriarchal or Major Archepiscopal Churches having limits in their autonomy outside of the “traditional territories”.

Those without their own church ordinary are cared for by the Latin Church and are heard by the Congregation for Oriental Churches.

Eastern Catholic Churches Without Their Own Hierarchy​

21 Russian - Fr. Sergius Golovanov Apostolic Visitator of the Greek Catholics of Asian Russia
22 Belarusian - Archimandrite Sergiusz Gajek Apostolic Visitator for Greek Catholics in Belarus *

• member of the Congregation for Oriental Churches.

Ordinariates for the Faithful of Various Eastern Catholic Churches Without Their Own Hierarchy​

Argentina - Archbishop of Buenos Aries
Austria - Archbishop of Vienna
Brazil - Archbishop of Rio de Janeiro
France - Archbishop of Paris
Greece - apostolic administrator
Poland - Archbishop of Warsaw
Armenians in Eastern Europe - titular Armenian bishop
Armenians in Romania - apostolic administrator

 

[Peter_J]

The small GC Churches are a lot like the Western-Rite Orthodox. So the way I see it, if the latter are not considered problematic, the former shouldn’t be either.

 

[twf]

The small GC Churches are a lot like the Western-Rite Orthodox. So the way I see it, if the latter are not considered problematic, the former shouldn’t be either.

Isn’t this basically admitting that their status, on paper, as sister Churches “sui iuris” is just legal fiction? The Orthodox don’t claim the Western-Rite Orthodox constitute a “Latin Orthodox Church” - they are simply parishes within the Antiochian (and maybe other?) Churches.
At least the Anglican Ordinariates, though very small and part of the Latin Church, have their own Ordinaries - an honor that some of these Churches “sui iuris” can’t even claim.

 

[Peter_J]

The fact that some GC Chuches and WRO are similar doesn’t mean they need to be exactly the same. I can’t see any problem with the fact that the former have Sui Iuris status and the latter don’t (although I’m open to hearing arguments to that effect).

 

[Vico]

Isn’t this basically admitting that their status, on paper, as sister Churches “sui iuris” is just legal fiction? …

Self governing churches: Sui iuris means “of one’s own right”. For the smaller churches sui iuris (without their own hierarchy) the governing hierarch acts with authority delegated to him from the Holy See.

CCEO TITLE 2 - Churches Sui Iuris and Rites - Canon 27
A group of Christian faithful united by a hierarchy according to the norm of law which the supreme authority of the Church expressly or tacitly recognizes as sui iuris is called in this Code a Church sui iuris.

CCEO Canon 175
These Churches immediately depend on the Apostolic See; however, the hierarch exercises the rights and obligations mentioned in can. 159, nn. 3-8, as a delegate of the Apostolic See.

 

[Peter_J]

…

Another instructive case to consider is the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church; officially it is one Sui Iuris church, but it is very much like two: one in the USA and one in Ukraine.

 

[Vico]

Another instructive case to consider is the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church; officially it is one Sui Iuris church, but it is very much like two: one in the USA and one in Ukraine.

There is normally more than one jurisdiction in a Church *sui iuris *based upon the number of ordinaries. Some law is established per Church sui iuris.

 

[Peter_J]

True, I just wanted to keep it brief.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

It is difficult to understand what you mean. Both the CCEO and CIC are canon law.

Sorry for the late response. I’m afraid I don’t understand your difficulty. Of course they are both canon law. It’s even in both of their titles. My point was that different parts of canon law apply differently to these Churches.

 

[Vico]

Sorry for the late response. I’m afraid I don’t understand your difficulty. Of course they are both canon law. It’s even in both of their titles. My point was that different parts of canon law apply differently to these Churches.

I understand, thank you. In studying those codes I discovered that some canons in the eastern code apply to the Latin Church, and some canons in the Latin Church also apply to the eastern churches, so they are used in conjunction.