H
holdencaulfield
Guest
A good name would be the:
The One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church
The One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church
- Status
J
JugglingReferee
Guest
OP, I don’t think your post was answered very well.
One is Eastern Catholic from three methods:
- they are baptized by an eastern Catholic priest
- in my case, I was baptized into the UGCC 2 weeks after I was born
- (and perhaps) confirmed shortly thereafter
- in my case, I was confirmed 2 weeks after I was baptized
- do all ECCs do it this way?
- a person in received into the Catholic church through an Eastern Catholic RICA program
- a person transfers from the Roman Rite to an Eastern Rite by both bishops dispensing said transfer
Thoughts anyone?
A
a_pilgrim
Guest
Hi, JugglingReferee!
Item #1 (above) is not necessarily true. With regard to infant baptism, the Catholic Church (both East and West) follows a patrilineal sui iuris Church assignment - the infant becomes a member of its father’s sui iuris Church, regardless of the Church and rite in which the baptismal ceremony is performed. If the child of a Latin (Roman) Catholic father is baptized by an Eastern Catholic priest, that child is canonically a Latin Catholic, even if the baptism took place within an Eastern Catholic temple employing an Eastern Catholic ceremony.
Obviously, the converse is also true. Here’s a real-life example: My Byzantine Catholic sister and her Byzantine Catholic husband had a child while he was stationed in the military, far removed from any Byzantine Catholic church. Their son was baptized at a nearby Latin church by a Latin priest in a Latin ceremony - upon baptism, however, my nephew immediately became a canonical member of the Byzantine Catholic Church because that’s the sui iuris Church of his father.
J
JugglingReferee
Guest
Ok, that’s cool; thanks.
Let’s say that the father is not Catholic. Does the infant baptism revert to the mother’s rite, or the rite of the baptism?
Let’s say that the father is not Catholic. Does the infant baptism revert to the mother’s rite, or the rite of the baptism?
W
Warrior4Him
Guest
Thanks guys. This is starting to make sense to me now.
D
dessert
Guest
I read Archbishop Joseph M. Raya book The Eyes of the Gospel
does that qualify me? Just kidding, it is a marvelous book and he was a great man of God. That book just dances and prays one through Christ and the liturgy, and I’m not kidding about that.
does that qualify me? Just kidding, it is a marvelous book and he was a great man of God. That book just dances and prays one through Christ and the liturgy, and I’m not kidding about that.
H
Hesychios
Guest
Hi Al!
Long time…
I don’t know how they ever came up with this idea. The rule of patrilineal descent seems (to me) like perhaps an arbitrary attempt to be fair by apportioning an equal number of possible new family starts into each Sui Iuris church. And so it can be, if the two groups are approximately equal in size with similar birth rates.
But when the one particular church is a distinct minority in which most of the marriages are likely to be mixed, something interesting happens:
Half of every generation is technically “officially” lost to the minority church in every generation, essentially for good. (Of course, they can aways attend if they want, and transfer…)
So if one is a male in the Ruthenian/Chaldean/Ge’ez or other Sui Iuris church and marries a Latin the offspring will be canonically enrolled in the church of the father, but if each of these children enters a mixed marriage and half are females their children will be entered into the other church.
In each additional generation, half the children of the males can be expected to be enrolled into the other church. So, of one’s offspring it is possible to see a pattern like this:
1st : 50% (children, males and females after marriage)
2nd: 25%
3rd: 12.5% or one eighth of one’s great-grandchildren (only one out of every eight may be a Ruthenian/Chaldean/Ge’ez)
4th: 6.25% or one sixteenth of one’s great grandchildren.
This is assuming that all of the marriages will be mixed and is not really affected by the rate of reproduction across generations. It does not matter whether the rule is patrilineal or matrilineal.
Of course, if the two religious communities were equal in size, the ratio should not change at all because the possibility of finding a mate in ones own community is fifty-fifty. Also if there were any number of equally sized populations mixing freely the exchanges would be about equal. When there is an overwhelming preponderance of one community the other ones will likely shrink as a proportion of the total.
This alone will not explain the collapse of some populations, there have to be other factors, one being the possibility of migration out of core areas, another being a lack of evangelistic fervor. Naturally, if the population is indifferent to the tradition that can complicate the prospects of growth or maintenance.
As I understand it, converts from Protestantism are normally automatically ascribed to the Latin church, although they can ask to be accepted into another if they are aware of the possibility.
Your brother,
Michael
Long time…
An interesting (at least to me) statistical phenomenon. I had not really given any thought to before, although I imagine you would have figured this out long ago…
I don’t know how they ever came up with this idea. The rule of patrilineal descent seems (to me) like perhaps an arbitrary attempt to be fair by apportioning an equal number of possible new family starts into each Sui Iuris church. And so it can be, if the two groups are approximately equal in size with similar birth rates.
But when the one particular church is a distinct minority in which most of the marriages are likely to be mixed, something interesting happens:
Half of every generation is technically “officially” lost to the minority church in every generation, essentially for good. (Of course, they can aways attend if they want, and transfer…)
So if one is a male in the Ruthenian/Chaldean/Ge’ez or other Sui Iuris church and marries a Latin the offspring will be canonically enrolled in the church of the father, but if each of these children enters a mixed marriage and half are females their children will be entered into the other church.
In each additional generation, half the children of the males can be expected to be enrolled into the other church. So, of one’s offspring it is possible to see a pattern like this:
1st : 50% (children, males and females after marriage)
2nd: 25%
3rd: 12.5% or one eighth of one’s great-grandchildren (only one out of every eight may be a Ruthenian/Chaldean/Ge’ez)
4th: 6.25% or one sixteenth of one’s great grandchildren.
This is assuming that all of the marriages will be mixed and is not really affected by the rate of reproduction across generations. It does not matter whether the rule is patrilineal or matrilineal.
Of course, if the two religious communities were equal in size, the ratio should not change at all because the possibility of finding a mate in ones own community is fifty-fifty. Also if there were any number of equally sized populations mixing freely the exchanges would be about equal. When there is an overwhelming preponderance of one community the other ones will likely shrink as a proportion of the total.
This alone will not explain the collapse of some populations, there have to be other factors, one being the possibility of migration out of core areas, another being a lack of evangelistic fervor. Naturally, if the population is indifferent to the tradition that can complicate the prospects of growth or maintenance.
As I understand it, converts from Protestantism are normally automatically ascribed to the Latin church, although they can ask to be accepted into another if they are aware of the possibility.
Your brother,
Michael
D
dessert
Guest
I would say the rite of the baptism. Because if the father is not Catholic but the mother is then he is supposed to have agreed to raise the child Catholic.
L
LookingEast
Guest
From what I’ve read, it’s not the rite of the priest baptizing, but the church of the mother that the child would follow in this case. Children always follow the Catholic parents even if they are baptized in a church of a different rite.
D
dessert
Guest
Yes I think you have it right and the child would be baptized in the mother’s rite anyways more than likely and if the mother changes rites the child would be accepted as having a valid baptism . And the child would just continue in the rite as she/he continues with receiving all the sacraments in due time.
F
Formosus
Guest
I beleive the Oriental Canon law says its the Father’s sui irus church, not the mother’s (unless the mother is the only spouse that is Catholic).
L
LookingEast
Guest
I believe that’s true for both the eastern and western churches.
I was responding to the situation given where only the mother was Catholic.
G
GregoryPalamas
Guest
I’ll admit that I haven’t read every post but from a glance at most of them I don’t see an answer to the original question.
We are Orthodox in Communion with Rome. Our only reason for existence is to help bring the East and West together. Should we fail we will cease to exist as the Colorado River ceases to exist in the Arizona dessert. If we succeed we will be Orthodox in Communion with Rome but not as a separate entity. If this is not our purpose, our reson d’etre, I don’t know what is.
CDL
We are Orthodox in Communion with Rome. Our only reason for existence is to help bring the East and West together. Should we fail we will cease to exist as the Colorado River ceases to exist in the Arizona dessert. If we succeed we will be Orthodox in Communion with Rome but not as a separate entity. If this is not our purpose, our reson d’etre, I don’t know what is.
CDL
I
invocation
Guest
now, i am a latin rite catholic who has been attending a melkite parish for well over a year now. if i understand this correctly, barring me going through a lot of paperwork that i can’t see myself gathering the energy to actually do (laziness is one of the things i confess most regularly )…i am sort of a permanent visitor?
so, 1. i am curious if i understand my status correctly and
2. is this an implicit judgment on the part of the church that i really belong in a latin rite parish?
in the peace of christ
F
Formosus
Guest
I think I have to disagree. When the Orthodox return, they will be Eastern Catholics as well. The Catholic Church is the orthodox Church and the role of Eastern Catholics is to live out that expression of the Faith that we have inherited from the Apostles the same as western Catholics are. Sure we have the extra purpose of being an example to our separated eastern brethern to show them that being Catholic does not mean abandoning their theology, spirituality, liturgical ritual , etc. but that is not the primary purpose, at least in my view. In essence, I think delegating the eastern churches down to mere bridges between East and West is almost degrading to them, making them less important in that we are just bridges, not as important as the things we are briding together… I don’t know. Maybe I am looking at that the wrong way. I agree that Eastern churches need to be shining examples of Apostolic , authentic , Eastern faith that is in Union with Rome, but to make that our sole purpose I think makes Eastern churches almost a novelty item that do not stand alone.
W
Warrior4Him
Guest
How can you be sure of that?
F
Formosus
Guest
Because that is what the canon law says.
W
Warrior4Him
Guest
I understand what you are saying about that but there is no way of knowing if the parents will comply. Religion is a topic that stirs up strong feelings in many and it could be a difficult compromise to agree on.
H
Hesychios
Guest
It really has nothing to do with the compliance of the parents. The canons are pretty clear. If there is any question the pastor can contact the bishop’s office for further insight.
Regardless of the Sui Iuris status of the priest, the faithful are ascribed to a particular church by the rules. It’s really about the canons first, over the personal preference of the parents and the priest, I am pretty sure.
If they prefer to change this ascription that is a separate matter, and involves the agreement of the two bishops, again according to the rules. I see no reason why any bishop would oppose a transfer unless the people requesting a change are notorious ne’er-do-wells or otherwise not in good standing. But there is a formal procedure for it.
C
catherineajt
Guest
Do you have a source for this? My family converted (was chrismated, and our youngest baptized) to the Orthodox faith (having formerly been Latin Catholics). Now we are returning to the Catholic Church, so when we “formally” join, will we be considered Eastern Catholics, since we are returning through the Byzantine Church? Or do we ‘revert’ to the Roman Catholic Church, since my husband, myself, and our two oldest were baptized in that church? And what of our youngest, who was baptized in the Eastern Orthodox Church?
I know, the answer will be “ask your priest” but we are trying to take things slowly, simply attending Liturgy and not pushing our way in, and letting our priest set the pace, as it were.
- Status