what could I do?

[Monica4316]

I posted a while ago here about my Canon Law situation, and about how I worshipped with non Catholics because I was doubting the Papacy, and am concerned there’s a canonical penalty for that. (based on Canon 1365 in Latin Canon Law). Since then, I spoke to a Latin rite priest and was told that although common worship is indeed communicatio in sacris, I don’t have a penalty because I didn’t know it existed. I also saw the Canon this is based on. However, apparently I’m supposed to follow Eastern Canon Law… and I thought maybe they’re the same, cause I found the same canon there (that participation in communicatio in sacris results in a penalty) - but there is no more detail given. I wanted to find out if the Eastern interpretation is the same. I emailed the Eastern Catholic (Ukrainian) chancery, and they said I could ask them the question, and I did, but they haven’t gotten back to me yet.

The problem is, - I’m worried that according to Eastern (though not Latin) canon law there is a penalty… and I don’t know how to go to Confession because what if my Confession would be invalid. I really need the chancery to reply so I could go to Confession. But if they don’t reply for a while, I’m not sure what to do.

What would you do in this situation? should I just go to Confession anyways?

Also, does anyone know, - according to Eastern Canon Law, heresy results in an excommunication, but it says that the person must be first warned by a “legitimate authority”. I’m just curious, - does this refer to a priest, or a bishop? would a lay person be “legitimate authority”?

thank you

 

[ConstantineTG]

My Bishop and I discussed this last Saturday (not about you but same related case) and he said that apostatizing the faith is an excommunicable offense. But first you have to convert out of the Catholic faith (actually be received in a non-Catholic Chruch) and you need to face a tribunal before you are excommunicated.

So no, you are NOT excommunicated.

 

[ciero]

I posted a while ago here about my Canon Law situation, and about how I worshipped with non Catholics because I was doubting the Papacy, and am concerned there’s a canonical penalty for that. (based on Canon 1365 in Latin Canon Law). Since then, I spoke to a Latin rite priest and was told that although common worship is indeed communicatio in sacris, I don’t have a penalty because I didn’t know it existed. I also saw the Canon this is based on. However, apparently I’m supposed to follow Eastern Canon Law… and I thought maybe they’re the same, cause I found the same canon there (that participation in communicatio in sacris results in a penalty) - but there is no more detail given. I wanted to find out if the Eastern interpretation is the same. I emailed the Eastern Catholic (Ukrainian) chancery, and they said I could ask them the question, and I did, but they haven’t gotten back to me yet.

The problem is, - I’m worried that according to Eastern (though not Latin) canon law there is a penalty… and I don’t know how to go to Confession because what if my Confession would be invalid. I really need the chancery to reply so I could go to Confession. But if they don’t reply for a while, I’m not sure what to do.

What would you do in this situation? should I just go to Confession anyways?

Also, does anyone know, - according to Eastern Canon Law, heresy results in an excommunication, but it says that the person must be first warned by a “legitimate authority”. I’m just curious, - does this refer to a priest, or a bishop? would a lay person be “legitimate authority”?

thank you

I suggest you see a spiritual director about your scruples. Forget about the rest, but deal with the scruples.

 

[jam070406]

I posted a while ago here about my Canon Law situation, and about how I worshipped with non Catholics because I was doubting the Papacy, and am concerned there’s a canonical penalty for that. (based on Canon 1365 in Latin Canon Law). Since then, I spoke to a Latin rite priest and was told that although common worship is indeed communicatio in sacris, I don’t have a penalty because I didn’t know it existed. I also saw the Canon this is based on. However, apparently I’m supposed to follow Eastern Canon Law… and I thought maybe they’re the same, cause I found the same canon there (that participation in communicatio in sacris results in a penalty) - but there is no more detail given. I wanted to find out if the Eastern interpretation is the same. I emailed the Eastern Catholic (Ukrainian) chancery, and they said I could ask them the question, and I did, but they haven’t gotten back to me yet.

The problem is, - I’m worried that according to Eastern (though not Latin) canon law there is a penalty… and I don’t know how to go to Confession because what if my Confession would be invalid. I really need the chancery to reply so I could go to Confession. But if they don’t reply for a while, I’m not sure what to do.

What would you do in this situation? should I just go to Confession anyways?

Also, does anyone know, - according to Eastern Canon Law, heresy results in an excommunication, but it says that the person must be first warned by a “legitimate authority”. I’m just curious, - does this refer to a priest, or a bishop? would a lay person be “legitimate authority”?

thank you

Monica, I agree with Ciero.
I will pray for you!

 

[Monica4316]

My Bishop and I discussed this last Saturday (not about you but same related case) and he said that apostatizing the faith is an excommunicable offense. But first you have to convert out of the Catholic faith (actually be received in a non-Catholic Chruch) and you need to face a tribunal before you are excommunicated.

So no, you are NOT excommunicated.

so if I am understanding correctly, apostasy is if I had actually joined a non Catholic church? but if I went there to worship, with doubts in Catholicism, in order to pray about whether God wants me there or not, and was READY to convert, but did not… that is a sin but no excommunication?

however the canon that really bothers me is the one about communicatio in sacris… because it doesn’t refer to excommunication or apostasy or schism, but a penalty due to common worshp with non Catholics. I got the Latin point of view on this, and was told you have to know about the specific penalty at the time, to receive it. But I can’t seem to find out what the Eastern view is, - because I’m Eastern so I guess I need to follow Eastern canon law. I thought they are similar on this but recently it appears that maybe not.

I suggest you see a spiritual director about your scruples. Forget about the rest, but deal with the scruples.

I do have a spiritual director for the scruples but I don’t know if this is scruples or not. Because it’s not in my mind… .it’s in Canon Law. lol. Scruples can’t really be fixed with knowledge, but this can, - if the chancery were to reply and tell me I don’t have a penalty, then I can let this go more easily.

Monica, I agree with Ciero.
I will pray for you!

thank you

 

[Wesley7]

Do what you feel is necessary.

I make confession in my prayer corner. So, . . .

 

[Diakonia]

I can assure you that we Eastern Catholics have no problem worshipping with our Orthodox brothers and sisters - whom we consider (know) to be Catholics, albeit not in communion with us. You prayed there to ask God which path He wanted you to take - you can pray anywhere and asking God to assist you in discerning anything is not, can not be, a sin.

You say you were READY to convert - the unsaid conclusion to that sentence is ‘if I understood that God wanted me to do so.’ As you did not do, presumably because you did not discern it to be God’s will for you, you never sinned.

I don’t know how to go to Confession because what if my Confession would be invalid.

Why would your confession be invalid? You are, again, creating a scenario calculated to make your worst fears be reality. If there is a sin here, it is in failing to believe/have faith in God’s mercy and forgiveness - if there is even anything to forgive.

I do have a spiritual director for the scruples but I don’t know if this is scruples or not. Because it’s not in my mind… .it’s in Canon Law

It does involve scruples. You are utilizing an imperfect understanding of Canon Law as a medium against which to measure your actions - doing so is, indeed, a manifestation of scrupulosity. Canon Law is not ‘fact’ but the imperfect (non-dogmatic) attempt of Church leaders to provide a framework within which to function. It is not a rulebook by which the average layperson is intended to life out their spiritual life or those temporal aspects of it upon which spirituality is or ought to be interlaid.

Consider that, until the current times and the ready availability of such textual material on media such as the internet, the average Catholic - Latin or Eastern - was blissfully unaware of most provisions of Canon Law. The number of laypersons who ever saw, let alone read, the 1917 Canons (predeccessor text to the current edition) was miniscule in relation to the body of Catholic faithful. And, in some ways, that was most assuredly for the best - because it avoided the modern day practice of privately applying the Canons to one’s life and using those interpretations to either scare oneself silly or to identify loopholes that excuse one’s actions. In earlier times, the average layperson relied on a Catechism - a document written in style that answered the layperson’s questions about matters of doctrine, praxis, sprituality, etc, in ways that did not leave the individual out there trying to play the role of canon lawyer.

While I applaud the fact that education and literacy are now such that laypersons can be better informed in matters theological of all sorts, it has had the unfortunate effect of producing ranks of pseudo-theologians, pseudo-liturgists, and pseudo-canonists - the vast majority of whom are frightfully unprepared to take up those roles. Witness almost any thread on this site in the Liturgy, Apologetics, Spirituality, and other fora - each replete with a host of individual interpretations to posted queries - diverse, divergent, and in many cases absolutely wrong, yet almost every one of which will be seized upon and believed by some reader.

We are, in effect, developing into a Church where commonality of belief is a thing of the past - it is cafeteria Catholicism at its worst, despite that many of those practicing it would be the first to decry ‘cafeteria Catholicism’ as abhorrent and ranking right up there with the worst heresies of all time.

You need to take a few minutes and read carefully some of the myriad posts that you’ve made here and at other fora and allow yourself to acknowledge how many of them are variations on a theme - arising from self-interpretation and application to yourself of Canons that were not, are not, intended as day-to-day guidelines by which Catholics live their lives. And, you need to accompany that by a realization that everyone cannot be wrong all the time, thus - question asked, question answered, move on - do not revisit the matter with new variations on a theme, to see if a different answer will result.

The totality of the discussion - by the time it ends, which it almost never would, except that respondents grow weary of repeating themselves - most resembles an undergrad course in logic or metaphysics, wherein multiple scenarios are urged on the students to have them understand the variant outcomes which result from each. ‘What if …’ in the effort to test one’s actions against Canon Law can become a self-fulfilling course of destructiveness, compounding the unworthiness of each of us as human beings, until we cannot accept that we will ever achieve even an iota of the goodness that God asks of us - and that cannot be true if we are to believe that God wants us to succeed as spiritual beings.

 

[The_Idiot]

Monica

You have asked the same type of question many times here .

Each time you have been answered very patiently by many people and each time you have answered them thanking them for their help and then saying words to the effect of

"Thank you BUT I have read … "

No matter what anyone says you prefer to go by what you have read .

I seem to remember that comments are made about protestants who make their own interpretation of the Bible and we comment that we rely on Mother Church for our interpretation . Are you unable to rely on her for her interpretation of what concerns you - do you know better than all these priests who are doing their best to help you ?

My advice - get rid of your books , go to your Spiritual Director and tell him what you are doing - running from priest to priest , looking for an opinion which matches your own . Then tell him you will listen to no-one but him and talk to him and with him. Listen to him and follow his advice . Till you can do this you will not be at ease

 

[Monica4316]

I am not self interpreting anything… I don’t know what the Church’s interpretation is, since I can’t seem to find out - like I said I’ve emailed the chancery but they have not replied yet. (I mean the Eastern church. I have found out the Latin church’s interpretation from my priest).

When people tell me not to worry, because Eastern Catholics worship with the Orthodox, - but in canon law it says that communicatio in sacris is not allowed. I asked my priest and he said that communicatio in sacris is common worship. Soo… how can I simply dismiss that? I can’t just go by what the majority does, I’m sorry… I am looking for Church’s answer. Again I was told by my spiritual director that common worship is indeed communicatio in sacris: not just sharing in Communion. He also said that in the Latin canon law, the person doens’t get the penalty if they didn’t know a canonical penalty exists. However, I can’t seem to find out if it’s the same for the Eastern church. I wouldn’t say this is “scruples”, I’m trying to find out the truth.

I know that lots of people say that it’s okay to worship without receiving the Sacraments, for no grave reason, - but I have to trust what my priest said and he is very orthodox. Not to mention that another priest in the same parish also said that communicatio in sacris could be common worship. This is the traditional understanding… common worship is only allowed for special circumstances. This isn’t my own interpretation

 

[The_Idiot]

You seem to be ‘playing off’ the Eastern Churches remember they are **fully **Catholic ] against the Roman Latin Church ] and once more you are not satisfied with one answer - you want to get the answer from both churches and there is no way it will be expressed in identical terminology.

Monica - you say you are undergoing Direction with a Latin Priest - does he know how you are doubting what he says ?

 

[Monica4316]

You seem to be ‘playing off’ the Eastern Churches remember they are **fully **Catholic ] against the Roman Latin Church ] and once more you are not satisfied with one answer - you want to get the answer from both churches and there is no way it will be expressed in identical terminology.

Monica - you say you are undergoing Direction with a Latin Priest - does he know how you are doubting what he says ?

You are not understanding what I meant… sorry if I was unclear. I am NOT doubting what my priest said. Neither am I “playing off” Eastern churches or comparing them to the Latin understanding.

I am Eastern Catholic and am supposed to follow Eastern canon law. I was told the interpretation based on Latin canon law. I believe this interpretation and am not doubting it. But I think the Eastern interpretation MIGHT differ. So I am trying to find out what the Eastern interpretation is, because I am Eastern Catholic. I emailed the chancery and am waiting for a reply. That is all

 

[Cavaradossi]

Pope Benedict XVI recited the creed with Patriarch Bartholomew during a prayer service; I guess he’s excommunicated too.

 

[puzzleannie]

I What would you do in this situation? should I just go to Confession anyways?

if you have a question about possible matter for confession that depends on a segment of canon law, see a priest. If it is about the canon law for the Eastern rites (they have their own) see you Eastern rite priest.

It sounds like you are making up something out of nothing, but not knowing the situation, it seems like only a priest can advise you.

don’t make an assumption based on what you read in canon law unless you are expert enough to know what it is really saying, and your interpretation does not sound correct.

 

[The_Idiot]

But you see - all this checking is because of your confusion over East and West

You are receiving Spiritual Direction from a Western priest and he has given you his opinion BUT you are now insisting you are Eastern and are waiting for an answer from your Eparch’s Chancery .

You CANNOT mix East and West - it doesn’t work and as you have found it leads to confusion .

Diakonia said

I can assure you that we Eastern Catholics have no problem worshipping with our Orthodox brothers and sisters - whom we consider (know) to be Catholics, albeit not in communion with us. You prayed there to ask God which path He wanted you to take - you can pray anywhere and asking God to assist you in discerning anything is not, can not be, a sin.

5Loaves states that she attends some services in the Latin Church , some in her Byzantine Church and some in her Local Orthodox Church - if this is communicatio in sacris then it strikes me that a large number of Eastern Catholics have got problems .

 

[Monica4316]

Pope Benedict XVI recited the creed with Patriarch Bartholomew during a prayer service; I guess he’s excommunicated too.

I am referring to worship in non Catholic services. Not praying with a non Catholic.

if you have a question about possible matter for confession that depends on a segment of canon law, see a priest. If it is about the canon law for the Eastern rites (they have their own) see you Eastern rite priest.

It’s about canon law specifically in the Eastern rites… I would gladly just talk to a Latin rite priest in Confession. And I’ve been told what the Latin understanding is. But since I’m Eastern, I was told I need to follow the Eastern understanding. I don’t know what that is. I don’t have an Eastern parish, - it’s not that easy for me to find an Eastern priest to speak in Confession with. I actually phoned an Eastern Catholic priest but he was not entirely sure about my canon law question. That’s why I emailed the chancery cause I’m sure they’d know.

It sounds like you are making up something out of nothing, but not knowing the situation, it seems like only a priest can advise you.

it says in canon law there is a penalty for communicatio in sacris… I have participated in communication in sacris… the only thing that was preventing me getting a penalty according to the Latin canon law was that I didn’t know about the penalty at the time. I was told by my priest that common worship IS communicatio in sacris. (not just receiving Communion). Soo… I am trying to find out if in the East, there would be a penalty or not… because in the Eastern canon law, I can’t find the same condition: that the person needed to have known about the penalty at the time. I wouldn’t say that is making something out of nothing.

don’t make an assumption based on what you read in canon law unless you are expert enough to know what it is really saying, and your interpretation does not sound correct.

I’m not saying I know the interpretation. I have said time and time again that I DON’T know, but that I can’t seem to find out. So I don’t know what to do, since I can’t seem to find the interpretation anywhere.

But you see - all this checking is because of your confusion over East and West

You are receiving Spiritual Direction from a Western priest and he has given you his opinion BUT you are now insisting you are Eastern and are waiting for an answer from your Eparch’s Chancery .

But I’m supposed to follow Eastern canon law which is different from Latin canon law. I was told about Latin canon law. I am canonically an Eastern Catholic, I just don’t have a parish. (cause Russian Catholic parishes are very few in North America).

You CANNOT mix East and West - it doesn’t work and as you have found it leads to confusion .

I am not mixing anything… I am Eastern Catholic who doesn’t have a parish and so I attend a Latin rite parish and was told about Latin canon law BUT - I am canonically bound to Eastern canon law. I can’t follow Latin canon law just because I want to.

Diakonia said

5Loaves states that she attends some services in the Latin Church , some in her Byzantine Church and some in her Local Orthodox Church - if this is communio in sacris then it strikes me that a large number of Eastern Catholics have got problems .

again I am not concerned about the majority. The majority could be wrong… I’m not saying you’re wrong but I’m saying I’m looking for the official Church teaching, in Eastern canon law. People here are saying that I just want to follow my interpretation, but it’s actually the opposite, I am trying to find out the official teaching. I have found out what it is in the West. But I am supposed to follow Eastern canon law. i can’t find the Eastern interpretation anywhere. So my question was simply, what could I do. The problem is not Eastern/Western Catholicism… .it’s that as a Catholic, I worshipped in a non Catholic service, because I doubted the Catholic Church.

 

[DL82]

I’m sure you will dismiss this as the opinion of a Latin Catholic, but in order for grave sin to be committed, there must be grave matter, full knowledge and complete consent.

It sounds to me as though there was no knowledge that what you were doing was a sin, or at least no knowledge that it would/might incur a canonical penalty.

I would also doubt that you entirely consented, or at least freely consented, to any sin, because you did not, in the end, convert, even though you entertained those doubts for a period of time.

Arguably, it is virtually impossible for anyone to commit the sins of apostacy or communicatio in sacris - in order to do so, you would need to wilfully leave the true faith for what you knew was a false faith, deliberately and knowingly so. Someone who becomes convinced that another church is the true church, and follows their conscience, does not do this. Only someone who (for example) converted in order to win political favour or to please a spouse, while still knowing that the Catholic Church is the true Church, would be committing this sin.

Firstly, you did not convert, so no apostacy was committed. Secondly, you attended another church’s worship because you felt the need to explore this in good conscience, so there was no consent to sin. Finally, you were, by your own admission, unaware that common worship can constitute an excommunicable sin (which I am not entirely sure is correct at any rate). Please, please, please, accept the peace your spiritual director is offering to you. If you cannot accept his advice because of the different canons of your Eastern Church, then maybe you need to find an Eastern spiritual director, or arrange a canonical transfer, so that you can be of one mind and find peace.

 

[Monica4316]

I’m sure you will dismiss this as the opinion of a Latin Catholic, but in order for grave sin to be committed, there must be grave matter, full knowledge and complete consent.

My views are actually much more Latin than they are Eastern… the reason I’m inquiring about this is simply because I am technically Eastern Catholic - but I mostly practice as a Latin… I agree with what you said about mortal sin. I actually did know that what I was doing is against Church teaching, and a sin. I was really afraid at the time, I went to the Orthodox church to discern if I should be Orthodox, and I didn’t care very much about Church laws anymore. I wasn’t fully aware that there’s a canonical penalty though. I mean, when I decided that I believe in Catholicism, I thought Confession would be enough. My Latin rite priest said it’s significant that I didn’t know about the penalty. I later found that same statement in Latin canon law. However, it’s not present in Eastern canon law and this is why I am checking.

As for consent, that is a good point, but am having difficulty figuring out if I did consent. I mean, - schism and apostasy would require someone to leave their faith… and actually convert out of it. But in my understanding, based on what I was told by my priest, communicatio in sacris is simply common worship. It need not mean becoming Orthodox or Protestant. There’s a separate canon for communicatio in sacris (in both Eastern and Latin canon laws) and for heresy/schism/apostasy. (Canon 1365 in Latin canon law).

Anyways… I do hope that somehow I can speak to someone at the chancery so that they could tell me what the case is for me.

Finally, you were, by your own admission, unaware that common worship can constitute an excommunicable sin (which I am not entirely sure is correct at any rate).

It’s not under excommunication, but under a “just penalty” whatever that is.

Please, please, please, accept the peace your spiritual director is offering to you.

I really wish I could I trust my spiritual director and I know that he told me the truth. But then I realized Eastern canon law is different in some points. And that’s when I got worried. My priest told me about Latin canon law, I imagine, cause he’s Latin and that’s what he studied.

If you cannot accept his advice because of the different canons of your Eastern Church, then maybe you need to find an Eastern spiritual director, or arrange a canonical transfer, so that you can be of one mind and find peace.

I tried to get a transfer before, but everyone told me there is no need right now. I phoned an Eastern priest but he wasn’t sure about my question I guess because it’s so specific and requires an indepth study of canon law.

I do hope I’ll find out

 

[DL82]

My views are actually much more Latin than they are Eastern… the reason I’m inquiring about this is simply because I am technically Eastern Catholic - but I mostly practice as a Latin… …

I tried to get a transfer before, but everyone told me there is no need right now. I phoned an Eastern priest but he wasn’t sure about my question I guess because it’s so specific and requires an indepth study of canon law.

I remember seeing a similar discussion elsewhere on this board, where someone was told, by a bishop no less, that if you practice as a Latin, that’s what you are for all legal purposes. Someone who regularly attends a Latin parish is bound by the fasts, holy days of obligation, and other requirements of that parish, regardless of the rite they were born into. Someone who regularly attends an Eastern parish is bound by their fasts, holy days of obligation, etc. Otherwise, you would have Eastern Catholics at Latin parishes still fasting after Easter Sunday had been celebrated, Latin Catholics at Eastern parishes unable to find a Divine Liturgy to fulfil a mid-week Holy Day of Obligation that’s celebrated on a different date in the East, and all kinds of other nonsense. Canonical transfers are only necessary if you want to become a priest in a particular diocese of a particular rite, or some other very specific situations. I think this is one of the meanings of lex orandi, lex credendi - the rule of prayer is the rule of our faith. If your priest thinks that you are ok, and the Eastern priest thinks a canonical transfer is unnecessary, then take that as a sign that all is well.

All is well. As Bl John Paul II was so fond of telling people, do not be afraid.

 

[Hesychios]

Monica, I agree with Ciero.
I will pray for you!

I agree with both of you.

Prayers and best wishes all around.

 

[Monica4316]

I remember seeing a similar discussion elsewhere on this board, where someone was told, by a bishop no less, that if you practice as a Latin, that’s what you are for all legal purposes.

A priest I know asked the Bishop for me, back when I was confused about what rite I am, and the Bishop said that I am Eastern Catholic. Then two Latin rite priests told me that I’m Eastern Catholic. An Eastern Catholic priest told me the same thing. This was over several years as I mentioned the matter during spiritual direction

Someone who regularly attends a Latin parish is bound by the fasts, holy days of obligation, and other requirements of that parish, regardless of the rite they were born into. Someone who regularly attends an Eastern parish is bound by their fasts, holy days of obligation, etc. Otherwise, you would have Eastern Catholics at Latin parishes still fasting after Easter Sunday had been celebrated, Latin Catholics at Eastern parishes unable to find a Divine Liturgy to fulfil a mid-week Holy Day of Obligation that’s celebrated on a different date in the East, and all kinds of other nonsense. Canonical transfers are only necessary if you want to become a priest in a particular diocese of a particular rite, or some other very specific situations. I think this is one of the meanings of lex orandi, lex credendi - the rule of prayer is the rule of our faith. If your priest thinks that you are ok, and the Eastern priest thinks a canonical transfer is unnecessary, then take that as a sign that all is well.

All is well. As Bl John Paul II was so fond of telling people, do not be afraid.

that makes sense,but I was told that I am indeed Eastern Catholic and should follow Eastern fasts and calendar and Canon Law. I don’t have much knowledge on this. However this is what I was told by priests.