The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
That latin friend, Deacon Eric, Pastor Freed, Sebastian, Deepu
5,836 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 73 guests, and 33 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Byzantine Nebraska
Byzantine Nebraska
by orthodoxsinner2, December 11
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,153
Posts414,831
Members5,836
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 127
V
Member
OP Offline
Member
V
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 127
My father was a Byzantine Catholic and my mother was a RC. I was baptized in a Rc church, which I attend now, but I have been told by many priests and religious that canonically I am a Byzantine Catholic. I am asking this because I have had inner desires to turn East in my Christian journey. I considred orthodoxy for a period of time, and naturally the Ukrainian bishop I spoke to told me I was actually Byzantine, but I thought for a moment he said that just to get me to convert since he left the Catholic Church himself. Anyone shed some light on this for me? I realize that a RC can go to a Byzantine church. I am inquiring as to my canonical identity. Also, I was baptized in 1957. I was also told I am under the old canon law before the modifications in 1983. Don't know what to believe.

V

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,441
Likes: 1
J
Job Offline
Cantor
Member
Offline
Cantor
Member
J
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,441
Likes: 1
Although, definitely not an expert on this...I think he was correct...if I remember correctly, for "preservation of the rite" if one parent is Eastern Catholic the children technically are Eastern...

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208
My understanding is that "back in the day" children born to Byzantine Catholic fathers were automatically ascribed to the father's ritual Church at Baptism, even if the Baptism took place in an RC parish.
I'm curious just what "brand" of Byzantine Catholic you apparently are: Ruthenian? Ukrainian? Melkite?

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 127
V
Member
OP Offline
Member
V
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 127
I would be Ukrainian.

V

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,881
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,881
From the information you have provided you are Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

God bless!

cool

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Global Moderator
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Volodymyr,

You are indeed a Ukrainian Greek (or Byzantine) Catholic. It does not matter what year you were born and what someone else described as the practice 'back in the day' is, in fact, still the practice. The determining consideration is the Catholic Church to which one's father belonged by baptism.

The Church to which one's mother belongs is only a consideration if the father was not a Catholic or if the parents formally agreed that the child would be ascribed to her Church (and that would have to have been recorded at the time of baptism). That you were baptized in a Latin church and raised in it, absent those factors, does not change the canonical ascription which you inherited from your father.

Many years,

Neil


"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,206
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,206
Originally Posted by volodymyr
Also, I was baptized in 1957. I was also told I am under the old canon law before the modifications in 1983. Don't know what to believe.
V

CCEO Canon 29 [intratext.com] CCEO was first published in 1990

CIC Can. 111 §1 [vatican.va].
Quote
Through the reception of baptism, the child of parents who belong to the Latin Church is enrolled in it, or, if one or the other does not belong to it, both parents have chosen by mutual agreement to have the offspring baptized in the Latin Church. If there is no mutual agreement, however, the child is enrolled in the ritual Church to which the father belongs.CIC C 111 the wording is rather different and at first glace appears to favor the Latin Church.


See the commentary [tinyurl.com] for that CIC Can. 111 §1 page 151

Quote
... if they do not agree [that the child be enrolled in the Latin Church], then the child follows the father's rite, according to long standing tradition.

I would check with the tribunal in your Diocese since the Baptism predates these codes, tho the "according to long standing tradition" in the commentary indicates this was the practices before it was codified in the 1983 revision if nothing was in the old CIC.

We recently had a seminarian who was ordained to the priesthood last June and celebrated his first Divine Liturgy with us. He was raised in the Latin Church and realized he was actually Ukrainian Catholic in adult life. He is a member of the OP/Dominicans and had to get permission to be in that community as an EC. He surely was born and baptized prior to 1983 so either the old CIC must have had the same stipulation, or the "long standing tradition" been accepted practice. I believe it was only his father who was Ukrainian Catholic and his mother Latin Church.

Last edited by likethethief; 10/31/10 07:42 AM.
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,881
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,881
We have had a similar senario to the Dominican at the Seminary in Melbourne (Australia) a few years ago and as the old code was in place he had to be considered as UGCC as his father was. He changed to the Latin Rite and continued his studies for the Archdiocese.

I assume then if parents choose to follow the rite of mother then the making of a choice needs to be added to the register as a very clearly worded note, to ensure that there is no question of what the Church is a person belongs to.

cool

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Global Moderator
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Originally Posted by likethethief
Originally Posted by volodymyr
Also, I was baptized in 1957. I was also told I am under the old canon law before the modifications in 1983. Don't know what to believe.
V

CCEO Canon 29 [intratext.com] CCEO was first published in 1990

CIC Can. 111 §1 [vatican.va].
Quote
Through the reception of baptism, the child of parents who belong to the Latin Church is enrolled in it, or, if one or the other does not belong to it, both parents have chosen by mutual agreement to have the offspring baptized in the Latin Church. If there is no mutual agreement, however, the child is enrolled in the ritual Church to which the father belongs.

CIC C 111 the wording is rather different and at first glance appears to favor the Latin Church.


Folks, we need to stop confusing the issue - this is a topic that has been discussed and explained here innumerable times.

Note the opening line of Canon 111 - Through the reception of baptism, the child of parents who belong to the Latin Church is enrolled in it.

That line of the Canon does not govern the canonical status of a child whose both parents are not of the Latin Church. Canon 29 of the CCEO governs.

Quote
1. By virtue of baptism, a child who has not yet completed his fourteenth year of age is enrolled in the Church sui iuris of the Catholic father; or the Church sui iuris of the mother if only the mother is Catholic or if both parents by agreement freely request it.


Further, as to the cited commentary on C 111, CIC, it asserts that the ascription to the father's ritual Church is because of long-standing tradition. No, it is because the very Canon on which it comments states that to be the case.

That the baptism predates the Code is of no consequence. The Codes as they were promulgated explicitly abbrogated all prior Codes. The gentleman is a Ukrainian Greek-Catholic by virtue of his father having been such, unless it is recorded in the sacramental registry that his parents mutually agreed that he was to be ascribed to the Latin Church.

Whenever one parent is of a non-Latin Church, folks need to get in the habit of looking to the CCEO and working back from that, thereby reducing confusion and avoiding the risk of disseminating misinformation.

Many years,

Neil


"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,206
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,206
Originally Posted by Irish Melkite
That line of the Canon does not govern the canonical status of a child whose both parents are not of the Latin Church. Canon 29 of the CCEO governs.

I thought OP said his dad is EC and mom RC.

Quote
...folks need to get in the habit of looking to the CCEO and working back from that, thereby reducing confusion and avoiding the risk of disseminating misinformation.

I agree, Neil. I thought that Canon 29 of the CCEO was so clear about it I didn't quote, just linked to it. [intratext.com] I only included the CIC because sometimes people ask if there is something parallel there. Sorry it that may contribute to confusion.

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Global Moderator
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Originally Posted by likethethief
Originally Posted by Irish Melkite
That line of the Canon does not govern the canonical status of a child whose both parents are not of the Latin Church. Canon 29 of the CCEO governs.

I thought OP said his dad is EC and mom RC.

Mary Louise,

He did and that's why the opening line of C.29 of the CIC isn't relevant - because it only applies if both parents are of the Latin Church. It has no standing if both are not Latin.

If they are not both Latin - but they agree to have the child baptized in the Latin Church (which requires more than the physical act of baptism - it requires also an intent that the child be enrolled to the Latin Church), then the second phrase of the sentence comes into play and does have relevancy.

Many years,

Neil


"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,206
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,206
Originally Posted by Irish Melkite
Originally Posted by likethethief
Originally Posted by Irish Melkite
That line of the Canon does not govern the canonical status of a child whose both parents are not of the Latin Church. Canon 29 of the CCEO governs.

I thought OP said his dad is EC and mom RC.

Mary Louise,

He did and that's why the opening line of C.29 of the CIC isn't relevant - because it only applies if both parents are of the Latin Church. It has no standing if both are not Latin.

If they are not both Latin - but they agree to have the child baptized in the Latin Church (which requires more than the physical act of baptism - it requires also an intent that the child be enrolled to the Latin Church), then the second phrase of the sentence comes into play and does have relevancy.

Many years,

Neil

I think this means thee and me are on the same page, I just quoted the entire canon rather than dropping the 1st phrase, which does not pertain to this situation. Just the way I was taught to read them, as a whole canon... smile I thought you were saying that the CIC C29 did not pertain at all to his situation. My misunderstanding of your point.


Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5