Just wondering, I see that some Latin rite people change to the Byzantine rite but do any Byzantine rite people change to the Latin rite (other than the lack of a Byzantine church in their area)?

And why?

Loretta, SFO

Dear Loretta:

The answer to your question is that movement from the Eastern to the Western church is more common than from West to East. I can think of several reasons for this:

1) it's easier. Although, there may be a BC church "within reach," there will probably be 5-10 Roman Catholic churches that are closer. They also have multiple Masses each Sunday, schools, well organized social programs, and nearly universal familiarity. Nearly everyone has heard of a Roman Catholic, almost no one has heard of an Eastern Catholic, including most Roman Catholics. There also is no intimidating chant, less strict fasting requirements, easily available texts, virtually no foreign language use, and so on.

2) marriage. BC women who marry RC men, by canon law, become Roman Catholic and so do their children. Conversely, BC men who marry RC women are often "pulled" into the RC church by their wives who are more religiously committed.

3) Dissatisfaction with clergy and hierarchy. At this time, they are unhappy with the Easternizations that are creaping in and replacing what they perceive to be the "Catholic stuff." Sixty to eighty years ago, our people became Orthodox because of the Latinizations that were replacing the authentic Eastern stuff.

4) We live in a Western society. Western society is based on Western philosophy, Western theology, Western mores, and so on. The theology has been affected significantly by the rise of scholasticism, the scientific method, and the Protestant reformation. Parts are broken into smaller, easier to understand, sub-components. This is all contrary to Eastern theology (contrary, not in content but rather in approach.)

5) Over-identification of the Eastern Churches with their mother nationalities. Subsequent generations born in this country are likely to see themselves as American (or Canadian)as opposed to Ruthenian, Ukrainian, Lebanese, etc. Many actually reject their ethnic roots as being backward, embarrassing, anti-intellectual, and anti-American.

6) Natural human tendency to want to be part of something "big."

7) Greater identification with the Pope than with their local Bishop as the "leader of the flock."

8) Post-Vatican II changes within the Western church which has placed greater emphasis on the laity. There are more perceived opportunities for "meaningful" positions available, like youth minister, social concerns chairperson, Eucharistic minister, lay pastoral associate, etc.

9) Good old-fashioned prosyletism. Roman Catholic priests are often ignorant of canon laws governing Eastern Christians and freely encourage Eastern Catholics to join their flocks.

10) Although officially discarded, there are still many who feel that only the Roman Church represents the fullness of Catholicity. The Eastern churches are ugly stepchildren that contain the truth albeit in an imperfect way. There are Roman and Eastern Catholics that buy this one.

11) Simple preference for the Roman way. I describe the Roman Mass as prose and the Eastern liturgies as poetry. There are some that don't like poetry with their religion.

That's my list. I'm sure others will come up with yet more reasons.

Fr. Dcn John

WRONG! They MAY become RCs, just like their
husbands MAY become BCs (CIC, can. 112).



Their children MAY also become BCs if both parents
want this.

Sincerely,

Reader Peter

I think that the vast majority of cases are in the category "1" described by rev. dn. John. At least in most of the country, there are so many more RC parishes, usually one is closer to home, always one has more "convenient" liturgical schedules (the one closest to my home has 13 Masses to choose from compared to one for the Eastern parishes -- whether Catholic or Orthodox), and then there is the school issue, where parish membership can be important in some places.

I think that category 2 can also result in moving towards the Latin Church because of category 8 issues. In my experience, there are many RC women -- particularly RC women who are active in ministries in their RC parishes -- who aren't interested in/willing to belong to an Eastern parish where they perceive themselves to be limited to serving in the choir or teaching religious education. In my experience, this is a big issue for women, and I have seen it result in moves by BC men to the Latin Church.

I think that the categories 2,4,5 and 6 also account for most of the Orthodox who shift over to the RCC -- particularly 2 (Catholics generally don't like to get married outside the Catholic Church and if the Orthodox party is less religious, then they usually will go Catholic) and 4 (it's an ongoing challenge to our own theologians to restate our Orthodox faith in ways that are meaningful for Orthodox living in the West). Some of the category 6 people may end up in less ethnic Orthodox parishes, whereas others (Eastern Catholic and Orthodox alike) may end up in mainline Protestant churches (the ultimate way to "fit in" to our current North American mindset).

I think that category 11 is related to category 4 -- the tendency to "cut to the chase" is something that has tremendous appeal for many harried conetmporary North Americans. I think that the overall length of liturgies is related to this as well -- our liturgies are always longer -- usually by at least 45 minutes if not more.

I haven't seen much of 9 -- at least not around here. 10 is definitely alive and well, unfortunately.

Overall, I think it's important to remember the comment of Bishop Kallistos Ware that in the coming century the Orthodox are going to be limited to those who truly want to be Orthodox -- because it definitely is not the path of least resistance, so to speak. Much the same could be said of Byzantine Catholicism, I think.

Brendan

Initially I didn't add to this thread because I thought the question referred to canonical transfers and I really don't know the answer. Among former Latins who change, canonical transfers aren't uncommon; I don't how many Byzantines do this or if it's actually harder for a Byzantine than a Latin to move officially to a new Church. I suspect few bother with the paperwork and a lot of Roman pastors don't really care about the canonical niceties of different Catholic Churches: to at least some, "Catholic is Catholic' means "Catholic equals Roman' or even "Catholic equals Irish'! So "of course the Ukrainians who just moved here will join the parish here, St Patrick's'.

Archbishop Vsevolod in Chicago (Ukrainian Orthodox under Constantinople) has written that highfalutin theological arguments aren't necessary to make Byzantine Christians in America switch — "mere social pressure will do'. (From We Are All Brothers.) And Fr Dn John (Petrus) has described these pressures very well. Brendan is right that the ultimate way to fit in among Americans is to turn mainline Protestant... or, I'll add, totally secular.

2) marriage. BC women who marry RC men, by canon law, become Roman Catholic and so do their children.

This once was true in Catholic canon law and, as Peter has pointed out, no longer is the case. An example of one of the good aspects of the modern emphasis on women's rights. (And there are good aspects — working toward fair play and equal pay.) Now, hooray, hooray, the man can choose to pass over to his new wife's Church!

and then there is the school issue, where parish membership can be important in some places

Longtime (pre-crash) forum member Stuart once wrote that the Eastern Catholic bishops themselves (I think specifically the Melkites) complained to the American RC bishops about this de facto poaching: "join the RC parish and get the members' discount for the school'. In at least some places this has been corrected so any Catholic family living in the parish, regardless of which Church they belong to, can use the parochial school and get the discount.

The issue of Roman formation vs. Byzantine/Orthodox formation at these schools is a whole other thread-worthy topic. Stuart once complained that as a catechist at his church he had to unteach his RC-schooled students, then reteach them Byzantine stuff... then again there are Orthodox priests who send their children to Catholic schools.

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Serge ]

Serge --

"then again there are Orthodox priests who send their children to Catholic schools"

Right. The family that lived next door to ours as a child was Greek Orthodox and send their children to the RC school across the street. By the parents' request, the kids were exempt from taking "religion" classes at the RC school (they'd spend the time in the school library).

Brendan

Dear Brendan and Serge,

You think that's something?

I have a friend who is OCA and head of a Catholic religion department!

I guess when they recite the Creed, he coughs when they come to the Filioque and thinks of Alexandria when they mention the Pope . . .

He probably has to fight giggling out loud whenever they have a "longer Liturgy" on a special occasion ...

The good thing is that he can wear more expensive shoes to those things, as there is no fear they will wear out soon.

Alex

2) marriage. BC women who marry RC men, by canon law, become Roman Catholic and so do their children.

This once was true in Catholic canon law and, as Peter has pointed out, no longer is the case. An example of one of the good aspects of the modern emphasis on women's rights. (And there are good aspects — working toward fair play and equal pay.) Now, hooray, hooray, the man can choose to pass over to his new wife's Church!


Could you please explain this further?

Does this help?

Can. 112 §1 After the reception of baptism, the following become members of another autonomous ritual Church:

1° those who have obtained permission from the Apostolic See;

2° a spouse who, on entering marriage or during its course, has declared that he or she is transferring to the autonomous ritual

Church of the other spouse; on the dissolution of the marriage, however, that person may freely return to the latin Church;

3° the children of those mentioned in nn. 1 and 2 who have not completed their fourteenth year, and likewise in a mixed marriage the children of a catholic party who has lawfully transferred to another ritual Church; on completion of their fourteenth year, however, they may return to the latin Church.

§2 The practice, however long standing, of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of an autonomous ritual Church, does not bring with it membership of that Church.


David

Dear brothers and sisters of this thread:

In regard to the canonical question (I am not a canon lawyer, nor do I like to play one): I was referring to canon 33 (CCEO) "A wife is at liberty to transfer to the Church of the husband at the celebration of or during the marriage; when the marriage has ended, she can freely return to the original Church sui iuris." This is the passive mechanism that occurs simply by the act of marriage. She becomes a member of her husband's church even if the marriage takes place in her church. This applies not only for an East meets West couple but also for a couple who come from two different Eastern churches. The other mechanisms for changing one's church require an active declaration. Perhaps someone better versed in Canon Law can elucidate or correct this further.

John

P.S. (Now something that his been bugging me for a long time),

David,

How do you make those cool curly things to represent the paragraphs in the Code of Canons?

Please excuse my ignorance and simplicity, but:

1. Why does the Byzantine rite have only "one" Divine Litury on Sunday? Are there also daily services?

2. Why are the Byzantine laity uninvolved in church activities? Is there no community involvement or service?

3. Are the reasons for the movement from Eastern to Western also true in Europe/East?

Obviously what I need is a primer on Byzantine/Orthodox. I would appreciate any recommendations.

Loretta

Excuse me for a minute Loretta, I need to make another point about the Canon Laws. There is an obvious "wrinkle" between the CIC Can. 112 and the CCEO Can. 33. My understanding is that this happened as a conciliation to the Eastern churches in recognition of their more difficult situations. The bi-directionality (i.e. both partners of a marriage) that exists in the Latin church does allow a Latin man to choose to follow his wife into the Eastern church. He is not required to do so. An Eastern male, however, is anchored to his Church. He must obtain permission from the Apostolic See to change.

Now, in answer to your questions:

1a) We have only one liturgy on Sunday because we gather together fully as one parish community unified in the Eucharistic celebration.

1b) The practice of liturgies during the week varies. Some Eastern Churches have some liturgies during the week. Strictly speaking, however, the divine liturgy is typically reserved for Sunday as a celebration of little Easter. Typically, the prayer services during the week are the Liturgy of the Hours (the Divine Office). During Lent we practice the Liturgy of the Pre-Sanctified which is a combination vesper service with the sharing of "pre-sanctified" Eucharist.

2) The laity are very involved in Eastern churches. We tend to have a much looser organizational structure. The parish members assemble themselves as is needed to accomplish the task at hand. the leader of all tasks is the pastor. The laity assist the pastor, the pastor leads the parish.

3) The situation in the old country may be even more complicated than in this country. Historically, the Latin church had one huge advantage over the Eastern churches. There was much greater opportunity for academic training and pursuit. Often, recognition as an Easterner vs. Westerner in the motherland has as much to say about one's cultural/ethnic identity as it does about one's religious fervor.

As for a primer on the Byzantine tradition, may I recommend the Light for Life series. There are two threads that are fairly current regarding these three volumes. They are available from God with Us Publications via Byzantine Seminary Press.

John

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Petrus ]

Loretta --

1. The Byzantine tradition never really developed the practice of *daily* liturgies, outside of some monasteries. As a result, generally the only liturgies during the weekdays are: feast day liturgies and lenten liturgies (like the Presanctified Gifts served on Wednesdays during Lent, the Akathist service often served on Fridays during Lent and the plethora of services during Holy Week).

2. Eastern Churches are *much* smaller than Latin parishes. There is a good bit of involvement, but it's much less *organized* than in the Latin Church and much more informal. It's sort of a microcosm of what I would call the "personality" differences between the Latin and Eastern Churches. An Orthodox priest once said to me, looking around at the disarray at a recent church luncheon: "well, one thing's for sure -- if it's well organized, then you know it isn't Orthodox".

3. To my knowledge, this is really a phenomenon among Orthodox in the West. In the Orthodox world itself, for the most part there are very few Catholics and the Orthodox churches there are very well established in the national culture. There are small numbers of Orthodox who have become Catholic throughout the Orthodox world, but the movement is not significant -- largely due to the cultural issues, in my opinion. Unlike an Orthodox living in the West who wants to be more integrated into Western society, an Orthodox living in, say, Bucharest, Belgrade or Athens would not become Catholic to become more "Western" (except perhaps in a few isolated cases), because being Orthodox and being Greek, Serb or (at least Southern) Romanian is equivalent to being Orthodox in the local culture.

Brendan

As to the question of being less organized, it is not a characteristic of the east vis a vis the west, but of the particular North American situation. We have smaller parishes and therefore less formal organizations. In our larger parishes, we actually tend to be more organized than the Latins, some parishes have an active Board of Trustees, many have GCU Lodges, Social Halls with Saturday School programs, cultural programs, etc. Admittedly, as our numbers decrease in North America, these structures become less and less common.



The U.S. Ruthenian situation is a totally aberration from the situation of eastern Catholics everywhere else in the world. Hence one can become easily misguided when folks universalize aspects they have been exposed to here as they explore or even affiliate with Eastern Catholicism.

Basically, the Church presumes persons of different ritual churches are also members of distinct social groups. Therefore, the issue of transfer of ritual church is politically loaded. It has the potential the changes national boundaries, cause wars, change the direction of secular history. Obviously, the Church seeks (though often with poor success) not to be used as a tool in ethnic conflicts. This is why she is so reserved as to change of rite.

Americans, of course, think the world revolves around them, but in this case, they are an exception to which no theory has been developed.

K.