www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology should I petition to change rite?

Dear Bel and StuartK!

As a Latin Catholic who intends to stay that way, I really do appreciate your commitment to the Oriental Catholic Churches and their traditions. One of the things that I really love about the Catholic Church is that it does not comprise only the Latin Church, but also the Oriental Catholic Churches. I know there are plenty of difficulties and misunderstandings, but to me at least the Oriental Catholic Churches are important and make a big difference. Of course it's still not perfect, because we are not in full communion with the Orthodox Churches. But to me it's important that the Catholic Church is not just the Western, Latin Church, but a communion of Churches, both Eastern and Western!

Yes, this is true if you just want to change ritual Church, but don't have any connection to that Church by marriage. But from my understanding of the relevant canon (Code of Canon Law can. 112 § 1 n. 2) I think if you are getting married or are married to a member of a different ritual Church you don't need to explain why you want to transfer, and you don't need permission from anyone. You just have to say that you're doing so. But please correct me if I'm wrong.

That is what I meant by "implicit" change--it happens automatically, no paperwork, but is also immediately revokable upon the death of the spouse or dissolution of the marriage.

I see. Then I think we agree, or very nearly so. It's just not quite how I would use the word "implicit," because it seems you do have to make a formal declaration to transfer to your spouse's ritual Church; it doesn't happen automatically. Still, I guess I'm splitting hairs here

My children aren't really old enough to have an opinion. Well, that's not entirely true. Their opinion would be based on the fact that the Byzantine Church has yummy treats every Sunday, versus once a month donuts at our other parish. My oldest is only 6. [/quote]

Hi babochka,

I assume that your questions would have been answered. I'm not much of a documents person when it comes to answering this question, but this decision really only matters if i) you or one in the family would like to be a priest or ii) someone in your family is getting married and would like to clear all canonical difficulty. Since none of these apply to you (just yet at least ), do consider being happy where you are. You do have the liberty of changing rite and that's a given, but if you're Catholic, you're Catholic.

However, since you did say that you feel more Eastern than not, make the change, although there's nothing canonically wrong with being a closet "Eastern". . Most importantly, its about the family that you experience at your parish community.

I too would like to thank everyone for thier input. I was told I was Catholic and welcomed in any Catholic church and that the reason I was raised Eastern was because of my Fathers rite. I had no intent of searching for an Eastern Rite church and it is through my studies and spiritual experiences that the Lord is calling me to learn and study my roots. I don't think I have formally changed rites. I married my Latin rite Husband in the Eastern rite Church because of my Father. I wanted to feel he was a part of my wedding even though we lost him when I was 9. I had friends from the dance group in that church and they were all at my wedding. I see it as part of my past. The past I am now being called to research in the present. Why? I have no idea. What I have learned about Eastern spirituality is that I should just accept the mystery and spiritual experience with out question. My Latin experiences has me searching for a reason as to why I am called to research. I am trying to put all of that aside and just learn. I have often wondered am I Eastern OR Latin Rite at this point? Based on what I read I never formally changed but my husband and children have me in the Latin Rite. I didn't think I was interested in even studying the Eastern Rite and now that is where I am. My pastor says you belong here now so you follow our traditions. So through marriage I am following my husbands rite and raising my children. I can return to the Eastern Rite at any time since I never formally changed but will always be welcome in any one of the Catholic Churches. I want my children to know the Eastern Rite and I think ALL Catholics should know about the Eastern Rite. This is not the case. Maybe I will be teaching that in the LR? I am a catechist for 3rd grade currently but studying along side future deacons in the LR.

I know it was mentioned that it is odd to discuss such matters on line. What happens when you have no one to ask? My husband has only experienced our Wedding in the ER. He has no interest in either church but attends for the sake of our children. He asked me why I am researching the Eastern Church. I told him I am writting a paper. I am but it is more than just the paper. I am following. The Holy Spirit is my guide and I am sharing with all of you here. I can't wait to visit to see what I remember. I will attend the Divine Liturgy this weekend for the first time in 20 years. Then again the following week at another ERC. I will be meeting with and speaking with both priests. I can only say we will see where that leads. I am sure it will be more studying. It is great to know that there are a few here that are very knowledgable in the ERCC. I am grateful that you are sharing and answering questions. There are questions I guess I need to ask in person.

"the Eastern Code of Canon Law"

1. A metropolitan Church sui iuris is presided over by a metropolitan of a determined see who is appointed by the Roman
Pontiff and assisted by a council of hierarchs according to the
norm of law.


This is not the 1st milleniums law of the Church.
This is the Pseudo-Isodorian False Decretals influence on Gratian. The Eastern Code of Canon Law is latinized. "sui iuris" is a latin not greek term. I would be weary of them.

Xristoforos, my Melkite brother,

The CCEO is indeed latinized. But, the CCEO is part of the framework within which we have to function. In some instances, its provisions serve our needs - in others, not as well, or not at all.

As to 'sui iuris', I can't worry that it isn't Greek (Should the term be rendered in Greek? Or in OC Slavonic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge'ez, etc, depending on the Church to which it is applied?). I am more concerned that the term is not accurate in all respects, as there are instances in which our Churches are not allowed to function as 'sui iuris' entities - but rather as 'sui alienos' - a prime example being the restrictions on patriarchal authority in the diaspora.

As it is, 'sui iuris' is the term in common usage and, at least, expresses the status to which we aspire and for which we pray. If you are old enough to remember the state of the Church which we share from four decades past, you will appreciate that we have come a long way, As Rome was not built in a day, neither was Antioch, Byzantium, Alexandria, Jerusalem, nor any other of the hierarchical sees. It will take time; it won't happen in my lifetime, regretably, but I can pray that it will in the lifetime of my children or grandchildren.

Meantime, this is off topic - let's stick with the thread. If you want to create a new thread specific to whether 'sui iuris' is an accurate descriptor, feel free to do so. Meanwhile, tell my old friend, Father Joe, that Neil, from the Cathedral, says 'hello'.

Many years,

Neil

I'm going to strongly suggest that the tone of posts to this thread take on a significantly more charitable and less pedantic tone. The original poster asked a question, she did not ask to be lectured at!

Many years,

Neil

In regard to the references made here that a change of canonical enrollment is a 'one time' decision, that is not the case - at least insofar as there being any provision in Canon Law, East or West, to that effect (note that there was a time when such was the case, but it hasn't been true for a couple decades now).

As a practical matter, although a request to revert to the Church in which one originated might be declined or might be looked at with more skepticism than the original request for change, there is no reason why the change cannot be accomodated if the two hierarchs involved are agreeable to allowing it. In practice, it is a rarely made request.

Bel,

Contrary to the statement made earlier in the thread, it is NOT which is why the Eastern Canons say that she 'is at liberty' to do so and the Latin Canons say that such a change occurs for 'a spouse who, ..., has declared' - limiting the happening to those who so declare.

As to the timing of a wife declaring her intent to adopt the Ritual Church of her husband, it is not a formal act that occurs during the Mystery of Crowning. It requires only that you advise the priest of your intent, which he should record in the sacramental register. He can also transmit that information to the Latin parish in which you were baptized, for it to be recorded there, although it is not absolutely required that such be done.

You are also correct in your comments about marriages being performed in the parish church of either party - with no requirement that either change their canonical enrollment to do so.

The marriage can be performed in the parish church of either of the parties, without regard for which of them is of which Ritual Church, with one caveat!

A marriage in a Latin church, in which one of the parties is an Eastern Catholic must be performed by a priest. In the Latin Church, the couple are the ministers of the Sacrament and the cleric its witness. In the Eastern Church, that is not the case and an Eastern Catholic may not validly or licitly enter into marriage in a ceremony at which a deacon presides - despite that the Latin Church permits its deacons to do so.

Many years,

Neil

bel and Cmoore, you may also want to read the "Beating a Dead Horse" thread in Faith and Worship. Neil can figure out the link and post it here, I am sure.

Like Neil and Anhelyna I am also a proponent of being fully a member of the particular Church one attends regularly and wants to raise one's family.

Try this

Beating a dead horse

I spoke to my pastor yesterday and he said many people are dual rites. Interesting. I told him it was not supposed to be that way. At first I thought the beating the dead horse title was offense until I read the thread. I understood what was said. I had no intention to go East but the Holy Spirit is sending me that direction. I didn't say it was to join. I have no idea. I am just studying so the research before I enter the door and so far it is very helpful. I have a feeling it is the begining of a new depth of understanding. My main questions these days is "What am I" I spoke to a Carmalite priest yesterday. I asked him if they were from the East and he said "Yes" he seemed surprised that I was asking that question since they do follow Latin Liturgy. I now want to ask him why they don't practice Eastern Divine Liturgy. He did tell me they were in the desert. I will stop there since it isn't part of this thread. He did tell me I should join their order and the next words were and become a Nun. I was laughing all night. He did say "Sometimes we search for an answer and it is right behind us" I have been reflecting on those words.

I think that there is absolutely no problem with changing rites (or transferring from one ritual Church sui iuris to another), and a person should not be afraid to do so if he or she has a good reason. The Catholic Church has made a great effort to create a comprehensive body of canon law to regulate the life of the Church. This means that the Church thinks that good order is important. The Church is not an anarchy, but a hierarchical society where everyone should know his or her correct place. The fact that both the Code of Canon Law (of the Latin Church) and the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches contain clear rules about changing rites shows that the Catholic Church takes each ritual Church seriously. The existence of these canons also shows that the Church actually wants people to be able to change rites in certain circumstances. Therefore, if someone has a good reason for changing rites, that person should not be afraid to use the process which the Church has provided for that very purpose. In other words, the rules for changing rites are there to be used, not ignored.

Of course, there is that pesky canon that says converts must be enrolled into the particular ritual Church that most closely parallels their previous Church or ecclesial community, which automatically presumes all Protestants are merely lapsed Roman Catholics. Which canon we scrupulously ignore, because there is no salvation in the (canon) law.