What is the meaning of this canon in the UGCC particular law?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tradycja
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tradycja

Guest
Participation of the Faithful in areas of Social Communication
Can. 77 (CCEO c. 653) Sacred ministers and also other faithful, who habitually, temporarily or occasionally make use of the instruments of social communication explaining that, which deals with Catholic doctrine or morals, are obligated to receive written permission from the eparchial bishop.

It is for the metropolitan or eparchial bishop to establish more detailed norms.

archeparchy.ca/documents/Particular_Law_Canons.pdf
 
Tradycja said:
Participation of the Faithful in areas of Social Communication
Can. 77 (CCEO c. 653) Sacred ministers and also other faithful, who habitually, temporarily or occasionally make use of the instruments of social communication explaining that, which deals with Catholic doctrine or morals, are obligated to receive written permission from the eparchial bishop.

It is for the metropolitan or eparchial bishop to establish more detailed norms.

archeparchy.ca/documents/Particular_Law_Canons.pdf
Click to expand...
It means we need permission to post stuff at CAF? :eek:
 
Yeah it’s Ukrainian Greek Catholic but I heard the other Eastern Catholic Churches have similar rules. Does this mean an individual member of the lay faithful could not have a blog?
 
Tradycja said:
Participation of the Faithful in areas of Social Communication
Can. 77 (CCEO c. 653) Sacred ministers and also other faithful, who habitually, temporarily or occasionally make use of the instruments of social communication explaining that, which deals with Catholic doctrine or morals, are obligated to receive written permission from the eparchial bishop.

It is for the metropolitan or eparchial bishop to establish more detailed norms.

archeparchy.ca/documents/Particular_Law_Canons.pdf
Click to expand...
Yeah, the Ukrainians are strict, but this refers to explaining dogma: “explaining that, which deals with Catholic doctrine or morals”.

The Byzantine Metropolitan Church sui iuris of Pittsburgh USA, did not add particular law for canon 653.

CCEO Canon 653
It is for the particular law to lay down more detailed norms about the use of radio, cinema, television and the like dealing with Catholic doctrine or morals.

Byz

byzcath.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=334
 
I can see the logic in this - with modern comunication, one wayward memeber could wind up leadig many down a wrong path. That more limite but more correct promilgation would be better.

Not that I agee with this, but I can see why.
 
Vico said:
The Byzantine Metropolitan Church sui iuris of Pittsburgh USA, did not add particular law for canon 653.

CCEO Canon 653
It is for the particular law to lay down more detailed norms about the use of radio, cinema, television and the like dealing with Catholic doctrine or morals.
Click to expand...
That said, I’d be shocked if Fr. Tom Loya did not seek and receive episcopal blessing for his radio ministry, Light of the East, beforehand.
 
Tradycja said:
Yeah it’s Ukrainian Greek Catholic but I heard the other Eastern Catholic Churches have similar rules. Does this mean an individual member of the lay faithful could not have a blog?
Click to expand...
I get the impression that it is referring to those who use means of communication while representing themselvse as official sources of Church teaching (such as parish websites, etc.). Blogs are admittedly based on personal opinions, so would not fall under that heading.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Also see CCEO:

Canon 652
  1. Eparchial bishops are to see that with the help of institutes of social communication the Christian faithful are taught to use the media critically and advantageously; they are to foster cooperation among such institutes, see to the formation of experts, and finally, promote good initiatives, praising and blessing in the first place good books, a policy that is more efficacious than the censure and condemnation of evil.
  2. For the safeguarding of the integrity of faith and morals, the eparchial bishop, the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church, the council of hierarchs, and the Apostolic See are competent to forbid the Christian faithful to use or to pass on to others means of social communication, to the extent that these are detrimental to that same integrity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top