Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: ByzCat3000 on March 12, 2019, 12:27:23 PM

Title: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 12, 2019, 12:27:23 PM
Was wondering what people's opinions are on the Eastern Rites, particularly in light of the current crisis of the Church.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 12, 2019, 01:13:53 PM
I go to an eastern rite parish.  The priest is soldily Catholic, but he is clueless about the crisis in the Church.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 01:17:00 PM
Was wondering what people's opinions are on the Eastern Rites, particularly in light of the current crisis of the Church.  

My opinion on the Eastern rites is the same as my opinion of other cultures.

1. I'm largely ignorant about them, and I prefer to only open my mouth when I'm an authority or an expert on something: when I know what I'm talking about.

2. Even in the cases where a Liturgy or culture is well and good from a Catholic standpoint, it's still "not for me". I'm an American born and raised Traditional (Roman) Catholic in the Midwest, USA. English is my first language. My culture and outlook in all things is 100% Western. I am a Roman Rite Catholic, for better or worse. I could just as easily change my skin color, ethnicity, heritage, or primary language as I could join up with an Eastern Rite church and feel even 5% "at home".

3. I believe that, all things being equal, God prefers us to stay where we're planted. Americans are all too rootless these days. If God meant for me to live and breathe in the Eastern Rite, he would have created me in an Eastern Rite family, and/or had me be born in a different country. It's simple, really.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 12, 2019, 01:22:29 PM
Well, Matthew, the Eastern Liturgy was a little strange to me the first time I attended, but once you get used to it a little you start to see its own beauty.

Many Ruthenian communities are very much Americanized, with no use of any language other than English.  In fact, the Ruthenians were never like that since they actually sprawl across multiple languages and cultures, so there's no built-in culture.

Even if your preference is for the Latin, Catholics may attend any approved Catholic Rite to fulfill their obligation.  So I think the question is, were there no Tridentine Masses available, would attending an available Eastern Rite Liturgy (with a group that hasn't been Novus Ordized like the Maronites) be --

1) obligatory
2) yellow light
3) red light
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 01:29:52 PM
Well, Matthew, the Eastern Liturgy was a little strange to me the first time I attended, but once you get used to it a little you start to see its own beauty.

Many Ruthenian communities are very much Americanized, with no use of any language other than English.  In fact, the Ruthenians were never like that since they actually sprawl across multiple languages and cultures, so there's no built-in culture.

Even if your preference is for the Latin, Catholics may attend any approved Catholic Rite to fulfill their obligation.  So I think the question is, were there no Tridentine Masses available, would attending an available Eastern Rite Liturgy (with a group that hasn't been Novus Ordized like the Maronites) be --

1) obligatory
2) yellow light
3) red light


I honestly don't know about your question at the end.

I'll say this: I don't know if you told me where you're from, but between other things you've said ("all my daughters' friends wear makeup", hostility experienced towards large families, and speaking of a variety of Eastern Rites being in your area, I'm thinking you're not in Texas, much less rural Texas)

Even in the 2nd largest city in Abraham Lincoln's home state, the Eastern Rites were a complete non-issue my whole life. If there were any, then no one I know was aware of them or even mentioned them -- pro, con or anything in-between.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 01:34:04 PM
I'm all for variety and appreciating the differences between peoples, nations, races, and cultures.

I would be the first to insist that all nations, cultures, etc. keep their identity (and of course their existence!) I'm completely against multiculturalism -- blending all the interesting colors together into a diarrhea-colored stew of humanity.

However, in my opinion those differences are good and enjoyable for anything friendship and down, as far as intimacy goes. That is: vacations, study, appreciation, buying their cultural products, making friends, acquaintances, co-workers and customers from among them, etc.

But for who you're going to yoke yourself to for life (marriage), I think it's best to stick with someone with the same upbringing and culture. A rich girl and a poor boy are going to have a LOT of trouble making it work. You're just from 2 different worlds, and as you go through life together, those different outlooks are going to cause disagreements not to say clashes and strife.

Anything beyond a western, specifically Irish or German outlook on discipline/money/religious practices/life/you name it, and I quickly leave my comfort zone. Which is fine for a change of pace -- a few hours or days, during a vacation, a TV show, being with a friend, etc. but I wouldn't want to "live there" full time. Foreign and different is the spice of life, but in the end, as Dorothy once said, "There's no place like home!"
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 01:43:58 PM
I'll admit, I think regular, white, English-speaking Americans joining an Eastern Rite (like Fr. Doran recently did) is kind of silly.

It reminds me of transgenderism. Instead of gender dysmorphia, you have liturgical dysmorphia. "I was always an Eastern Rite Catholic trapped in a Roman Rite body. But now that I've transitioned, I feel free!"

I realize it's not that bad, but it still reminds me of it. It still smacks of the same detachment from reality and common sense.

I mean, people change religions all the time. But if you're going from Catholic to something else, that's APOSTASY. God never wants that. When you go from something else up to Catholic, you're CONVERTING. God always wants that. Both of those things have a reason or objective goodness/badness to them. But changing Rites? Can anyone really ever say that God wants you to change to a Rite you weren't born into?

I'm only speaking my opinion and feelings here. I hardly ever do that. Most of my posts, you can take them to the bank as authoritative Church teaching on the matter.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 01:54:19 PM
So I think the question is, were there no Tridentine Masses available, would attending an available Eastern Rite Liturgy (with a group that hasn't been Novus Ordized like the Maronites) be --

Here's my question: WHICH group(s) haven't been Novus Ordo-ized?

See, as a Trad, I firmly believe the Crisis is NOT just about the Mass. That's why my family didn't move to a place with an Eastern Rite Mass as a "full solution" to the Crisis. My family didn't jump into the first Indult that came to town, for the same reason. It's not just about the Mass. For some ignorant non-Trads, it is. If they have a reverent, valid Mass, then they are 100% happy, 100% home free.

If the group in question fails to back up +Williamson, +Zendejas (etc.) and fails to stand with them in criticizing all the problems in Modernist Rome -- we're talking about the Catholic Faith here after all, so any heresies are Liturgy-neutral -- then what good is it if their Liturgy avoids most/all of the Modernist errors seen in the Novus Ordo Missae?

The Mass is only part of the Crisis.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 12, 2019, 01:55:31 PM
Here's my question: WHICH group(s) haven't been Novus Ordo-ized?

See, as a Trad, I firmly believe the Crisis is NOT just about the Mass. That's why my family didn't move to a place with an Eastern Rite Mass as a "full solution" to the Crisis.

If the group in question fails to back up +Williamson, +Zendejas (etc.) and fails to stand with them in criticizing all the problems in Modernist Rome -- we're talking about the Catholic Faith here after all, so any heresies are Liturgy-neutral -- then what good is it if their Liturgy avoids most/all of the Modernist errors seen in the Novus Ordo Missae?

The Mass is only part of the Crisis.

Well, I guess we need to define Novus Ordo-ized.  Most of the Eastern Rite chapels I've been to are no more liberal than what you might find in the 1940s and 1950s in the U.S.

Would a Catholic have been permitted to stay home from Sunday Mass in the 1950s if the priest at his church happened to be a Modernist (many, many were in the 1950s)?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 01:57:16 PM
Well, I guess we need to define Novus Ordo-ized.  Most of the Eastern Rite chapels I've been to are no more liberal than what you might find in the 1940s and 1950s in the U.S.
But is Modern Rome liberal?

If so, then were are all the Eastern Rite priests and bishops speaking out against the problems in the Church, beside +ABL, +De Castro Mayer, the 4 SSPX Bishops (back in the day), the 4 Resistance bishops, etc.?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 01:59:32 PM
Would a Catholic have been permitted to stay home from Sunday Mass in the 1950s if the priest at his church happened to be a Modernist (many, many were in the 1950s)?
Yes, because Modernism is dangerous to the Faith, just like it is today.
HOWEVER, that situation would almost never occur, because in that milieu (before Vatican II) there were a lot more than 1 Tridentine Mass option in each city! You had 1 Catholic church per neighborhood or per area, not per city or per state like today. So you would have to go to a different parish church, not stay home on Sunday.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 12, 2019, 02:31:56 PM
I'll admit, I think regular, white, English-speaking Americans joining an Eastern Rite (like Fr. Doran recently did) is kind of silly.

For context, just wondering, were you born Catholic?  'cause if you were born latin rite Catholic I can see how a post like this would make sense. For my own part I was raised Protestant, and want to convert.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 02:39:10 PM
For context, just wondering, were you born Catholic?  'cause if you were born latin rite Catholic I can see how a post like this would make sense. For my own part I was raised Protestant, and want to convert.
Yes I was born Catholic, and Trad Catholic at that. Grew up going to an independent chapel. And that is somewhat unusual, since I was born in the mid-70's.

By the way, I know you're new here, but there's a large post linked at the top of the site, "Read an Interview with Matthew..." that's me. In that post I mention that part of my background. It takes a while to read all of it -- but one of these days, when you have time, you might want to peruse it if you're bored.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: forlorn on March 12, 2019, 02:58:47 PM
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with switching Rites or deciding to go to Eastern Rite masses when you convert, but I'd heed what Matthew and Ladislaus said and be sure to not just pick it for the sake of it being exotic or having more interesting "smells and bells". If you feel like the Eastern Rite is preferable for you, then go ahead. But don't pick it because you think it looks prettier. 
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Pax Vobis on March 12, 2019, 02:59:49 PM
Fr Hesse made the point that one should stick with the rite of Church that one grew up in.  Obviously, times are so that fulfillment of one's sunday obligation makes attending Eastern rites necessary but his/Matthew's points are similar in that a Western-born mindset would be attuned to the Latin rite, while a person born in the East would gravitate towards the Eastern rites, all things being equal.  I would think that some minor things in the West would be scandalous (at first) to an Eastern rite Catholic and vice versa.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 12, 2019, 03:16:08 PM
Fr. Hesse's advice might be sound.  But it only makes sense in the context of a person who grew up in Catholicism at all.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Boethius on March 12, 2019, 03:30:38 PM
Eastern liturgy is not the only issue when speaking on this topic. Addressing this a simply Eastern Rites is to look at this from an wholly Latin perspective, greatly distorting the matter. What is being discussed is eastern ritual CHURCHES, not merely different Rites. The Latin Church sui juris is unified in jurisdiction under the Papacy and has (today) very few rites, namely Roman, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, as well as some local usages. The Eastern Churches are 23 distinct Churches from the Latin Church which total collectively (all 24 Churches) comprise the communion that is the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. These 23 Eastern Churches have a wide variety of liturgical Rites. Some are Byzantine, like the Ruthenian, Ukrainian, and Melkite Churches. Some are Syriac, like the Chaldeans, Maronites, and Syro-Malabar Churches. And still others are Alexandrian in their liturgy, like the Coptic and Ethiopian Churches. Latin Catholics can freely attend the liturgies of the Eastern Catholic Churches, but formally joining them is an altogether different issue since that is moving from one Church to another Church. It is easier today to switch Churches, but once had to be done through a formal process at the level of the Roman curia.

I am wholly comfortable in the Byzantine Rite in its Slavic recension. In fact, I live much closer to both Ruthenian and Ukrainian parishes than to where I attend the Tridentine Mass. However, I am a Latin Catholic and will always call the Tridentine Mass home.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 04:07:53 PM
Eastern liturgy is not the only issue when speaking on this topic. Addressing this a simply Eastern Rites is to look at this from an wholly Latin perspective, greatly distorting the matter. What is being discussed is eastern ritual CHURCHES, not merely different Rites. The Latin Church sui juris is unified in jurisdiction under the Papacy and has (today) very few rites, namely Roman, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, as well as some local usages. The Eastern Churches are 23 distinct Churches from the Latin Church which total collectively (all 24 Churches) comprise the communion that is the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. 
Um...the Pope has universal jurisdiction -- over anyone calling themselves Catholic.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Pax Vobis on March 12, 2019, 05:39:38 PM
And technically we are all under jurisdiction of our local bishop so switching to an Eastern rite would have to be approved.  This assumes normal orthodox times...
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 12, 2019, 06:03:09 PM
I honestly don't know about your question at the end.

I'll say this: I don't know if you told me where you're from, but between other things you've said ("all my daughters' friends wear makeup", hostility experienced towards large families, and speaking of a variety of Eastern Rites being in your area, I'm thinking you're not in Texas, much less rural Texas)

Even in the 2nd largest city in Abraham Lincoln's home state, the Eastern Rites were a complete non-issue my whole life. If there were any, then no one I know was aware of them or even mentioned them -- pro, con or anything in-between.

Yep, there's a HUGE variety of such things up here in the Cleveland area.  Cleveland was THE Eastern European melting pot in the U.S. for about 30-40 years.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 12, 2019, 06:08:38 PM
Yes, because Modernism is dangerous to the Faith, just like it is today.

That doesn't sound right to me.  I'm sure that if you would have asked Pope Pius XII in the 1950s whether you could be dispensed from your obligation because you lived in some rural area where there was only one Catholic Church accessible to you and the priest had modernist tendencies, he would reject the request.  I think there's a significant difference between a Church with a completely intact official structure (intact Magisterium and hierarchy) and what we have today, a state of emergency that's systemic in the Church.  I know that I would feel as if I were committing a mortal sin by missing my obligation in 1950 because Angelo Roncalli was the priest at my parish (and the Vatican had listed him as being suspect of Modernism).
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 12, 2019, 06:10:38 PM
Fr Hesse made the point that one should stick with the rite of Church that one grew up in.  Obviously, times are so that fulfillment of one's sunday obligation makes attending Eastern rites necessary but his/Matthew's points are similar in that a Western-born mindset would be attuned to the Latin rite, while a person born in the East would gravitate towards the Eastern rites, all things being equal.  I would think that some minor things in the West would be scandalous (at first) to an Eastern rite Catholic and vice versa.

Well, maybe, but the Church would readily allow people to switch Rites, primarily from Roman to Eastern, before Vatican II.  There was reluctance in letting Easterns go Roman because of the risk that the Eastern Rites would eventually be swallowed up into the much more populous Roman Rite.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 12, 2019, 06:13:45 PM
And technically we are all under jurisdiction of our local bishop so switching to an Eastern rite would have to be approved.  This assumes normal orthodox times...

For formal switching, yes.  For just attending Mass there and even registering at the parish, no.  Formal switching entailed removing yourself from Roman jurisdiction and Roman Canon Law and subjecting yourself to Eastern Canon Law and jurisdiction.  But there's no requirement for approval to regularly (even exclusively) ATTEND an Eastern Rite Liturgy.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 12, 2019, 06:44:30 PM
It seems like a lot of you were born Latin Rite Catholic, which I assume would explain the whole "having to get approval to switch" thing.  But that wouldn't be relevant only for a person who had already converted.

What would be your thoughts on a Protestant *deciding* to convert to the Eastern Rite, as opposed to the Roman one?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 12, 2019, 07:18:11 PM
Fr Hesse made the point that one should stick with the rite of Church that one grew up in.  Obviously, times are so that fulfillment of one's sunday obligation makes attending Eastern rites necessary but his/Matthew's points are similar in that a Western-born mindset would be attuned to the Latin rite, while a person born in the East would gravitate towards the Eastern rites, all things being equal.  I would think that some minor things in the West would be scandalous (at first) to an Eastern rite Catholic and vice versa.
The parish I go to is almost totally made up of Roman Rite refugees who have fled the Novus Ordo.  There are only two elderly members of the parish left, the rest of the fairly good size parish are all from the Roman Rite, from all sorts of ethnic backgrounds that are not Eastern European.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2019, 08:55:35 PM
The parish I go to is almost totally made up of Roman Rite refugees who have fled the Novus Ordo.  There are only two elderly members of the parish left, the rest of the fairly good size parish are all from the Roman Rite, from all sorts of ethnic backgrounds that are not Eastern European.

Ok, I'll bite.
All you (2-3 members in this thread actually) Catholics who opt for the Eastern Rite the same way 99% of Trad-leaning Americans head for a Tridentine Latin Mass chapel (Roman Rite) --

There's just one problem.

You're a small minority. What are the chances there's a nice young lady at that ONE Eastern Rite chapel for your son, or a nice young man for your daughter to marry?

In the Trad world, at least we have the TLM to unite us. There are a lot of Trads nationwide, and even worldwide. We are all comfortable with the same Mass.

If you/your son/daughter DID meet a good spouse at a different Rite, which rite would you go to as a family and raise your children in?

This is alone a good reason to stick with Western ways and the Roman Rite.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Pax Vobis on March 12, 2019, 09:16:21 PM

Quote
For formal switching, yes.  For just attending Mass there and even registering at the parish, no.  Formal switching entailed removing yourself from Roman jurisdiction and Roman Canon Law and subjecting yourself to Eastern Canon Law and jurisdiction.  But there's no requirement for approval to regularly (even exclusively) ATTEND an Eastern Rite Liturgy.
I'm referring to normal times, i.e. pre-V2 days.  The days when you had to go to your parish church of your neighborhood and you weren't even allowed to go to the neighboring parish church 5 miles away, without permission.  The days when your parish priest had ultimate authority over all Catholics in his parish and Catholics weren't allowed to pick-and-choose which Church they could go to on Sundays.  The days when everyone knew and grew up with the same families for decades (assuming they didn't move houses).  We've lost all of this order, community and harmony since V2.

In those days, yes, you'd have to get permission to attend the Eastern church on sundays, unless that was your parish church.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 12, 2019, 10:55:43 PM
Ok, I'll bite.
All you (2-3 members in this thread actually) Catholics who opt for the Eastern Rite the same way 99% of Trad-leaning Americans head for a Tridentine Latin Mass chapel (Roman Rite) --

There's just one problem.

You're a small minority. What are the chances there's a nice young lady at that ONE Eastern Rite chapel for your son, or a nice young man for your daughter to marry?

In the Trad world, at least we have the TLM to unite us. There are a lot of Trads nationwide, and even worldwide. We are all comfortable with the same Mass.

If you/your son/daughter DID meet a good spouse at a different Rite, which rite would you go to as a family and raise your children in?

This is alone a good reason to stick with Western ways and the Roman Rite.
It’s a valid point.  But, let’s face it, things aren’t going well in the traditional chapel scene either. There are so many divisions now that your son or daughter may only be limited to future spouses from whatever group or sub-group you affiliate with.  If you are a resistance family, a hard core SSPX loyalist family may not let your kids near their kids, the same could be said about families who are CMRI, FSSP, SSPV, etc.  

It’s getting tougher to help your kids find good and compatible spouses no matter where you plant your roots during this crisis.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 13, 2019, 01:26:20 AM

1st you would remain Roman when converting, unless your parents are eastern catholic or orthodox.

2nd you do not change churches unless you are actually living an eastern catholic life, which means more than just attending the liturgy. Unless you did that you're not going to even be able to be considered for changing ritual churches. This is near impossible as Matthew said. To attend liturgy is one thing, to find authentic tradition in another rite is hard, then living that tradition is damn near impossible for most.
on the calendar level for another church you're going to have different seasons from what you expect,  you're gonna have to redo the your whole life which is not feasible for most people
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Nishant Xavier on March 13, 2019, 03:43:39 AM
I have been every now and then to Syrian Catholic and other Eastern Catholic rites. I have no intention of switching rite of course, but they are ok to assist at because many of them are mostly unchanged. I don't live in the west of the world, though I am a Roman Rite Traditional Catholic. I think the Eastern Catholic rites that have existed for a long time are all good and holy, just like our TLM. The Liturgy of St. James, both its text and the video (can find only Orthodox, but I think Catholic is same) http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0717.htm is a reverent liturgy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX23jIhacC0 I personally dislike for myself the idea of us Latin-rite Catholics turning away from our difficulties, rather than working to restore Tradition in the Latin Church, along with the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome. But if someone, weighing all the circuмstances, wants to choose that as the best for him and his family, I think that's legitimate.

Some texts from that Liturgy, from New Advent: "The Priest.

I O Sovereign Lord our God, contemn me not, defiled with a multitude of sins: for, behold, I have come to this Your divine and heavenly mystery, not as being worthy; but looking only to Your goodness, I direct my voice to You: God be merciful to me, a sinner; I have sinned against Heaven, and before You, and am unworthy to come into the presence of this Your holy and spiritual table, upon which Your only-begotten Son, and our Lord Jesus Christ, is mystically set forth as a sacrifice for me, a sinner, and stained with every spot. Wherefore I present to You this supplication and thanksgiving, that Your Spirit the Comforter may be sent down upon me, strengthening and fitting me for this service; and count me worthy to make known without condemnation the word, delivered from You by me to the people, in Christ Jesus our Lord, with whom You are blessed, together with Your all-holy, and good, and quickening, and consubstantial Spirit, now and ever, and to all eternity. Amen.

Prayer of the standing beside the altar.

II Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, the triune light of the Godhead, which is unity subsisting in trinity, divided, yet indivisible: for the Trinity is the one God Almighty, whose glory the heavens declare, and the earth His dominion, and the sea His might, and every sentient and intellectual creature at all times proclaims His majesty: for all glory becomes Him, and honour and might, greatness and magnificence, now and ever, and to all eternity. Amen.

Prayer of the incense at the beginning.

III Sovereign Lord Jesus Christ, O Word of God, who freely offered Yourself a blameless sacrifice upon the cross to God even the Father, the coal of double nature, that touched the lips of the prophet with the tongs, and took away his sins, touch also the hearts of us sinners, and purify us from every stain, and present us holy beside Your holy altar, that we may offer You a sacrifice of praise: and accept from us, Your unprofitable servants, this incense as an odour of a sweet smell, and make fragrant the evil odour of our soul and body, and purify us with the sanctifying power of Your all-holy Spirit: for You alone are holy, who sanctifies, and are communicated to the faithful; and glory becomes You, with Your eternal Father, and Your all-holy, and good, and quickening Spirit, now and ever, and to all eternity. Amen." ... (see the link for more; basically, it's an entirely orthodox Catholic traditional Liturgy).
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: poche on March 13, 2019, 04:21:53 AM
Ok, I'll bite.
All you (2-3 members in this thread actually) Catholics who opt for the Eastern Rite the same way 99% of Trad-leaning Americans head for a Tridentine Latin Mass chapel (Roman Rite) --

There's just one problem.

You're a small minority. What are the chances there's a nice young lady at that ONE Eastern Rite chapel for your son, or a nice young man for your daughter to marry?

In the Trad world, at least we have the TLM to unite us. There are a lot of Trads nationwide, and even worldwide. We are all comfortable with the same Mass.

If you/your son/daughter DID meet a good spouse at a different Rite, which rite would you go to as a family and raise your children in?

This is alone a good reason to stick with Western ways and the Roman Rite.
The 1917 Code of Canon Law stipulated that the rite of the husband would be the rite of the children. The 1983 code leaves that decision up to the couple themselves.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Stubborn on March 13, 2019, 06:31:18 AM
My opinion on the Eastern rites is the same as my opinion of other cultures.

1. I'm largely ignorant about them, and I prefer to only open my mouth when I'm an authority or an expert on something: when I know what I'm talking about.
I'm with Matthew, only having gone to a Byzantine service in desperation once or twice in the 1970s. I didn't understand it then, and since then, thankfully having had no reason to pursue it further, am still happily ignorant of the Eastern Rite as a whole.

Not sure if I missed it, or if the Easterners were/are so untouched by crisis that there aren't any eastern rite priests who have ever spoke out or speak out on the crisis as the trad priests have done throughout the years, but are they so far separated from us that the crisis missed them and their liturgy so completely that they have no need to, or no one to condemn the crisis, or what has and is happening to the Church, the pope, the hierarchy etc, at all?

I know that today the TLM is in many places still celebrated in basements, hotels, and other makeshift locations - but I never heard of going to an Eastern Rite service anywhere other than one of their official diocesan(?) churches.

 
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 13, 2019, 07:54:17 AM
I'm referring to normal times, i.e. pre-V2 days.  The days when you had to go to your parish church of your neighborhood and you weren't even allowed to go to the neighboring parish church 5 miles away, without permission.  The days when your parish priest had ultimate authority over all Catholics in his parish and Catholics weren't allowed to pick-and-choose which Church they could go to on Sundays.  The days when everyone knew and grew up with the same families for decades (assuming they didn't move houses).  We've lost all of this order, community and harmony since V2.

In those days, yes, you'd have to get permission to attend the Eastern church on sundays, unless that was your parish church.  

Nonsense.  You never had to get permission to assist at Mass at any Catholic church.  To formally enroll in the parish and become a registered parishioner, yes.  To attend Mass there, go to Confession there, most certainly not.  Now, if you wanted to get married or have your children baptized, then you would have been required to stay in your parish.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ihsv on March 13, 2019, 08:10:11 AM
A Latin Rite Catholic who attends an Eastern Rite church, even if he enrolls in the parish, goes every Sunday, etc., is still bound by the laws of his own Latin diocese/rite (days of abstinence, rules of fasting, Holy Days, etc.), and is not bound by the Eastern Rite rules (e.g., The Great Fast, etc).  He can voluntarily choose to follow them, but he must follow the laws in force in his own diocese.  If he goes through the process of changing rites, which entails getting released by his own bishop and accepted by the Eastern Rite one, then he would be bound by the Eastern Rite rules.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 13, 2019, 08:43:04 AM
A Latin Rite Catholic who attends an Eastern Rite church, even if he enrolls in the parish, goes every Sunday, etc., is still bound by the laws of his own Latin diocese/rite (days of abstinence, rules of fasting, Holy Days, etc.), and is not bound by the Eastern Rite rules (e.g., The Great Fast, etc).  He can voluntarily choose to follow them, but he must follow the laws in force in his own diocese.  If he goes through the process of changing rites, which entails getting released by his own bishop and accepted by the Eastern Rite one, then he would be bound by the Eastern Rite rules.

Correct.  That's why I distinguished between just Mass attendance and switching over canonically.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Pax Vobis on March 13, 2019, 09:45:09 AM
Quote
Nonsense.  You never had to get permission to assist at Mass at any Catholic church.  To formally enroll in the parish and become a registered parishioner, yes.  To attend Mass there, go to Confession there, most certainly not.  Now, if you wanted to get married or have your children baptized, then you would have been required to stay in your parish.
Yes, I see what you're saying but I'm thinking of a person, in the 1950s, who owned a house.  Wouldn't they, according to Church law, have to belong to a parish and register there?  I say yes (based on what i've read) because when you live in a diocese, you are under the authority of that Bishop, and further under the authority of a parish priest.

For example, the diocese also might have Domincans or another order which the Bishop allows (or an Eastern Church) but that doesn't mean that a catholic can attend those masses regularly.  During the week, yes (assuming the Bishop allowed them to say public mass.  Many times, the Bishop allowed orders like Dominicans to provide confessions and to preach but not offer public masses except during the week.).  But on sundays?  I think the pre-V2 rules required one to attend their parish because your parish priest was your spiritual father.  Maybe it was different for different dioceses?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 13, 2019, 12:07:40 PM
Actually the old my catholic faith series stated that all Catholics should attend one eastern liturgy annually fot two reasons one to learn about other Catholics and two to donate at that mass to support them since they are so small. this is of course if one existed nearby
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 13, 2019, 12:54:56 PM
Yes, I see what you're saying but I'm thinking of a person, in the 1950s, who owned a house.  Wouldn't they, according to Church law, have to belong to a parish and register there?  I say yes (based on what i've read) because when you live in a diocese, you are under the authority of that Bishop, and further under the authority of a parish priest.

For example, the diocese also might have Domincans or another order which the Bishop allows (or an Eastern Church) but that doesn't mean that a catholic can attend those masses regularly.  During the week, yes (assuming the Bishop allowed them to say public mass.  Many times, the Bishop allowed orders like Dominicans to provide confessions and to preach but not offer public masses except during the week.).  But on sundays?  I think the pre-V2 rules required one to attend their parish because your parish priest was your spiritual father.  Maybe it was different for different dioceses?

Well, I'm sure they were SUPPOSED to register at their parish.  I doubt everyone did, and I don't think there were canonical penalties for not doing so.  Now, if you weren't somehow active in the parish, you'd probably undergo some questioning if you requested some of the Sacraments that require certificates and/or preparation ... Baptism, Confirmation, Matrimony, etc.  But even then I'm sure if you had the priest call the Eastern Rite priest and vouch for the fact that you attend regularly, they would likely not deny you even those Sacraments.

But perhaps someone who was around and old enough to remember those days could chime in on this matter.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 13, 2019, 02:29:15 PM
What's particularly important about celebrating a liturgy in a makeshift location?

To be clear, I'm not asking why it happens.  As far as the Latin Rite goes, I get that and why some people have serious concerns about the validity of Novus Ordo priests and stuff like that.  But why is it inherently a bad thing that a liturgy isn't being celebrated in a makeshift location?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 13, 2019, 03:00:10 PM
nothing i think stubborn is referring to the fact that there's no eastern equivalent to the resistance or SSPX.

the reason for that's a completely different ecclesiastical theology. In the eastern canons bishops can't shove you out of the church because you publicly disagree with him and how he runs the eparchy or diocese. Our penalties can not be ipso facto, some ecclesiastical court or meeting of heirarchs must pass an actual sentence so it's rarely done. That's why you could talk about +Williamson's latest comments and basically no one will say anything against it.(this and discussions about Fr Gruner take place all the time with more positive feedback even from more liberal Eastern churches since  this type of dussent is seen as healthy). this is my experience anyway. YMMV(your local eastern churcj mileage may vary)
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 13, 2019, 03:02:31 PM
nothing i think stubborn is referring to the fact that there's no eastern equivalent to the resistance or SSPX.

the reason for that's a completely different ecclesiastical theology. In the eastern canons bishops can't shove you out of the church because you publicly disagree with him and how he runs the eparchy or diocese. Our penalties can not be ipso facto, some ecclesiastical court or meeting of heirarchs must pass an actual sentence so it's rarely done. That's why you could talk about +Williamson's latest comments and basically no one will say anything against it.(this and discussions about Fr Gruner take place all the time with more positive feedback even from more liberal Eastern churches since  this type of dussent is seen as healthy). this is my experience anyway. YMMV(your local eastern churcj mileage may vary)
So what would happen if someone tried to do that same thing in a Latin Rite church?

Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Markus on March 13, 2019, 03:19:55 PM
Is there an obligation to attend an eastern rite mass if no Roman rite mass is available? I'm not sure. I believe Fr. Hesse says, in one of his talks, that among the rights of Catholics is the right to hear Mass in their own rite. If their rite is not available, they are not bound to attend Mass at another rite, even if it is convenient.

Has anyone else heard this claim before?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 13, 2019, 03:41:25 PM
byzcat you'd be shown the door.

markus, this is somewhat true, in eastern law you would be encouraged to attend in order
your rite
if not available
another similar eastern rite
the orthodox equivalent
if none of the the above 
western liturgy
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Stubborn on March 14, 2019, 05:17:21 AM
What's particularly important about celebrating a liturgy in a makeshift location?

To be clear, I'm not asking why it happens.  As far as the Latin Rite goes, I get that and why some people have serious concerns about the validity of Novus Ordo priests and stuff like that.  But why is it inherently a bad thing that a liturgy isn't being celebrated in a makeshift location?
The thing I was questioning is that when the revolution of V2 hit and in many places, still today, the *only* places the Mass was celebrated was in halls, basements and other makeshift locations for the Latin Rite. IOW, the true Mass was forced entirely underground.

Faithful priests who refused to say the new "mass" and go along with the new conciliar religion were evicted, kicked out of their rectories by their own bishops, who in turn celebrated the true Mass in these makeshift locations. Some of these priests like Fr. John O'Connor, Frs. Altenbach, Gomer De Paul, Wathen, Sanborn and a slew of many others, would preach to the masses via radio, TV, recordings and the mail, of the heresies and errors that were happening - but not a peep from the Eastern priests? even to this day?

It's just something I never really understood how the whole crisis seems to have missed the Easterners entirely, while effecting every other human being on earth.

 
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Pax Vobis on March 14, 2019, 10:46:44 AM
Quote
It's just something I never really understood how the whole crisis seems to have missed the Easterners entirely, while effecting every other human being on earth.
Modernism did affect the eastern rites, but not in the same scope (and not with the same media attention) because each eastern rite is smaller than the Latin rite.  I read an article about how there is a "ultra conservative" wing of the Ukrainian rite which did not accept "updates" which happened to the rite in the mid 70s.  They stuck with Tradition, just like Trads in the latin rite.  The modernists/joos did not leave any catholic rite untouched, eastern or western.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 14, 2019, 11:35:39 AM
actually the eastern rites had been heavily latinized in mostly a bad way by Jesuits. The changes gave them an opportunity to return to some of their traditional expressions which were unjustly suppressed by the Jesuits. The ultra conservative wing are not traditional the changes were legitimate and the priest was excommunicated, not automatic but by trial. actually the whole thing was a mess.

Stubborn the modernist thing lives in every parish, the liturgy however is not the problem so most people who just attend a liturgy don't experience it much outside of Maronite churches who have a Chaldean or local Roman crap diocese. in the south and west you're unlikely to see female altar servers (which in itself is a misnomer is since anyone male or female is allowed in the bema which is the area in front of the altar since it is a choir area. most females seen even in these liturgies don't enter the altar area. its the equivalent of having females carrying things and entering the choir and staying there in a Latin liturgy. obviously this is a modernist thing but as Ladislas pointed out not liturgy invalidation). modernism is there if you stick around long enough, it is not as widespread since no one monkeyed around with the liturgy or theology
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 14, 2019, 02:34:45 PM
It really comes down to,what gets you out the door to get to Mass.  For me, it is that I want my kids, my wife and me to be present at Calvary continued and to receive a valid Holy Communion.  The other aspects of mass are all secondary to me:  community of likeminded Catholics, the sermon, gong to mass in the Rite of my ancestors, etc.  

The primary consideration outweighs the secondary, so that is why I go to the eastern rites.  So long as the priest is not teaching heresy, which I have never encountered at any eastern rite Church, the primary consideration for me is to keep getting to Mass and receiving Holy Communion so long as God permits me to do so.  

I don’t care if the priest understands the crisis in the Church or preaches on it, (which you won’t hear in the eastern rites, since they are clueless on this point) so long as he doesn’t teach heresy against the Faith, which I haven’t seen.  I keep my focus squarely on the primary consideration.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: forlorn on March 14, 2019, 02:41:27 PM
byzcat you'd be shown the door.

markus, this is somewhat true, in eastern law you would be encouraged to attend in order
your rite
if not available
another similar eastern rite
the orthodox equivalent
if none of the the above
western liturgy
Uh what? You'd be encouraged to go to a schismatic Mass before a Latin Mass? 
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 14, 2019, 04:18:26 PM
yes. our obligation is fulfilled by the office so you would be encouraged to attend either the Sunday office or liturgy of the orthodox equivalent. until the eastern code was promulgated, liturgy would not have been encouraged, either Roman or Orthodox
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: poche on March 16, 2019, 12:16:42 AM
Well, I'm sure they were SUPPOSED to register at their parish.  I doubt everyone did, and I don't think there were canonical penalties for not doing so.  Now, if you weren't somehow active in the parish, you'd probably undergo some questioning if you requested some of the Sacraments that require certificates and/or preparation ... Baptism, Confirmation, Matrimony, etc.  But even then I'm sure if you had the priest call the Eastern Rite priest and vouch for the fact that you attend regularly, they would likely not deny you even those Sacraments.

But perhaps someone who was around and old enough to remember those days could chime in on this matter.
Prior to the 1983 Code of Canon Law a great emphasis was made on going only to the parish within whose boundries you lived. If you were not registered in the parish (and this is true even today in many parishes) your children might not get baptized, you could have problems getting married in the Church, and there could be problems being buried from that church.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: forlorn on March 16, 2019, 10:09:18 AM
Prior to the 1983 Code of Canon Law a great emphasis was made on going only to the parish within whose boundries you lived. If you were not registered in the parish (and this is true even today in many parishes) your children might not get baptized, you could have problems getting married in the Church, and there could be problems being buried from that church.  
Well I wasn't around back then, but from what I gather from people I know and based on pragmatism, I don't think they'd be huge sticklers about having to go to the church you technically lived in. The Mass that's most convenient for you to go to could vary for a number of different reasons, maybe the closest church isn't technically in the same parish you go to, maybe you visit family on Sundays so you go to their local Mass instead, etc. 

Of course you'd be registered in a parish and that's where your kids would get their Sacraments, etc. but that wasn't always the same parish you were technically living in. Sometimes if you were living in the countryside, you and your next door neighbour 2 minutes down the road might send your kids off to schools in different villages, and your kids would get their Sacraments through their schools in their respective villages(so different parishes) even if your homes were technically in the same parish. As long as they got their Communion and Confirmation in the same place, what would it matter? I know of a number of cases of that sort of thing prior to 1983 without any issues, and I was in a situation sort of similar to that(went to a school and got all my Sacraments in a neighbouring parish), albeit after 1983.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 16, 2019, 04:39:20 PM
Quote
yes. our obligation is fulfilled by the office so you would be encouraged to attend either the Sunday office or liturgy of the orthodox equivalent. until the eastern code was promulgated, liturgy would not have been encouraged, either Roman or Orthodox
what is being down voted here, me or the eastern canons? 
I don't understand the mentality of disapproval of the person pointing out church law. If you have another interpretation of the law point it out, if you're not liking the law because of its difference between the Roman canons and the Eastern I can't help you. Pius X and previous Popes put allowances in place for communicating with heretics on case by case basis for Jesuits and others working in the Middle East long before the 1917  code. The 1917 code is not a panacea either it's the best we have in the Latin Church.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: forlorn on March 16, 2019, 06:29:58 PM
what is being down voted here, me or the eastern canons?
I don't understand the mentality of disapproval of the person pointing out church law. If you have another interpretation of the law point it out, if you're not liking the law because of its difference between the Roman canons and the Eastern I can't help you. Pius X and previous Popes put allowances in place for communicating with heretics on case by case basis for Jesuits and others working in the Middle East long before the 1917  code. The 1917 code is not a panacea either it's the best we have in the Latin Church.
It's just shocking that schismatic "masses" are preferred to Catholic masses of a different rite. 
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ladislaus on March 16, 2019, 07:59:57 PM
It really comes down to,what gets you out the door to get to Mass.  For me, it is that I want my kids, my wife and me to be present at Calvary continued and to receive a valid Holy Communion.  The other aspects of mass are all secondary to me:  community of likeminded Catholics, the sermon, gong to mass in the Rite of my ancestors, etc.  

The primary consideration outweighs the secondary, so that is why I go to the eastern rites.  So long as the priest is not teaching heresy, which I have never encountered at any eastern rite Church, the primary consideration for me is to keep getting to Mass and receiving Holy Communion so long as God permits me to do so.  

I don’t care if the priest understands the crisis in the Church or preaches on it, (which you won’t hear in the eastern rites, since they are clueless on this point) so long as he doesn’t teach heresy against the Faith, which I haven’t seen.  I keep my focus squarely on the primary consideration.  

I'm the same way.  I have a very high threshold for red-lighting a valid Mass or Liturgy and feeling that I can skip my obligation.  I too have never heard heresy taught by an Eastern Rite priest.  Liberalism to one extent or another, yes, but nothing more than you might find at any even Latin Rite pre-Vatican II parish.  In a Ukrainian Rite church a few months ago, I heard a stronger defense of EENS than I had ever heard at any SSPX-aligned chapel.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 16, 2019, 08:56:55 PM
What did the priest say that you wouldn't hear at the SSPX?  Just curious.  

And how would you distinguish liberalism from heresy?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Stanley N on March 16, 2019, 10:11:22 PM
I don’t care if the priest understands the crisis in the Church or preaches on it, (which you won’t hear in the eastern rites, since they are clueless on this point)
I'm not so sure they are clueless.

I grew up in a Ukrainian Catholic church which also had a lot of Roman Rite refugees, which is how I got to know about the problems in the Roman rite. The Roman refugees eventually arranged to have priests visit and say the Latin Mass at a rented place. For reasons I forget, one Sunday they had a priest (SSPX) but the rented place wasn't available, and the Ukrainian parish let them use the church. The parish leader at the time was later ordained; he certainly understood something of the problems in the Church. I couldn't imagine any N.O. parish letting the SSPX use their church at that time. I am fairly sure the eparchy also had to know about this.

Most of the Ukrainians in the parish had been to a N.O. at some point. It was obvious to most of us that the N.O. was focused on the congregation rather than God.

At another point in my life I was friends with a granddaughter of a Ruthenian Catholic priest, and her family thought much the same - the N.O. was man-centered.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 16, 2019, 11:16:22 PM
Quote
It's just shocking that schismatic "masses" are preferred to Catholic masses of a different rite. 
You have to understand that most of the rules about schism as understood now have much more to do with Protestant trouble the west has had. Remember that most councils held were attended by the Orthodox. 99.9% of real difference between Catholics and Specifically most Oriental Orthodox and the majority of Eastern Orthodox is ancient politics. the rest is the role of the papacy. For the rest of the orthodox the devision is them misrepresenting Catholic belief.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: poche on March 17, 2019, 12:24:49 AM
Well I wasn't around back then, but from what I gather from people I know and based on pragmatism, I don't think they'd be huge sticklers about having to go to the church you technically lived in. The Mass that's most convenient for you to go to could vary for a number of different reasons, maybe the closest church isn't technically in the same parish you go to, maybe you visit family on Sundays so you go to their local Mass instead, etc.

Of course you'd be registered in a parish and that's where your kids would get their Sacraments, etc. but that wasn't always the same parish you were technically living in. Sometimes if you were living in the countryside, you and your next door neighbour 2 minutes down the road might send your kids off to schools in different villages, and your kids would get their Sacraments through their schools in their respective villages(so different parishes) even if your homes were technically in the same parish. As long as they got their Communion and Confirmation in the same place, what would it matter? I know of a number of cases of that sort of thing prior to 1983 without any issues, and I was in a situation sort of similar to that(went to a school and got all my Sacraments in a neighbouring parish), albeit after 1983.
Prior to the Code of 1983 if you did not live within the parish boundry then they would not allow your children to receive instruction if your home did not fall within the territory of the parish itself. You could live next door to the church and if your house was not in the physical territory of that parish you were unwelcome in that church. I frequently heard stories of the priest standing at the doors of the church and if he saw someone who he knew lived outside the jurisdiction of his parish he would turn them away.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 17, 2019, 07:29:50 AM
I'm not so sure they are clueless.

I grew up in a Ukrainian Catholic church which also had a lot of Roman Rite refugees, which is how I got to know about the problems in the Roman rite. The Roman refugees eventually arranged to have priests visit and say the Latin Mass at a rented place. For reasons I forget, one Sunday they had a priest (SSPX) but the rented place wasn't available, and the Ukrainian parish let them use the church. The parish leader at the time was later ordained; he certainly understood something of the problems in the Church. I couldn't imagine any N.O. parish letting the SSPX use their church at that time. I am fairly sure the eparchy also had to know about this.

Most of the Ukrainians in the parish had been to a N.O. at some point. It was obvious to most of us that the N.O. was focused on the congregation rather than God.

At another point in my life I was friends with a granddaughter of a Ruthenian Catholic priest, and her family thought much the same - the N.O. was man-centered.
I am only relating from my experience, so I agree with you that some easterners might be better informed about what’s really going on in the Church, it’s just that I haven’t seen it.  It might be that many are in the know but do not talk about it publicly.  I was told recently that there are about 3,500 Ukrainian rite priests, so with that many, I have met only a small fraction of them.  This is not even counting the thousands of others priests in other different eastern churches.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 17, 2019, 07:31:45 AM
yes. our obligation is fulfilled by the office so you would be encouraged to attend either the Sunday office or liturgy of the orthodox equivalent. until the eastern code was promulgated, liturgy would not have been encouraged, either Roman or Orthodox
I don't understand this.  Where does the Catholic Church teach that an Eastern Rite Catholic should go to an Orthodox service at all.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 17, 2019, 07:37:51 AM
I'm the same way.  I have a very high threshold for red-lighting a valid Mass or Liturgy and feeling that I can skip my obligation.  I too have never heard heresy taught by an Eastern Rite priest.  Liberalism to one extent or another, yes, but nothing more than you might find at any even Latin Rite pre-Vatican II parish.  In a Ukrainian Rite church a few months ago, I heard a stronger defense of EENS than I had ever heard at any SSPX-aligned chapel.
I agree, I wouldn’t red light a mass unless I absolutely have to.  The threshold for me is very high for me before cutting myself off from a valid Mass using the Catholic rite said by a priest who is definitely validly ordained.  Unless the priest is spouting heresy or some other important reason, I would still go.
You’re blessed to have such a good priest who still openly professes the truth about EENS.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 17, 2019, 07:54:11 AM
I don't understand this.  Where does the Catholic Church teach that an Eastern Rite Catholic should go to an Orthodox service at all.
The Catholic Church doesn’t teach this.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Ric on March 17, 2019, 07:55:12 AM
Who is this priest who defends EENS?  The only one I know is a priest of the UGCC who is no longer with the Chicago Eparchy.  I haven't heard from him for a few years.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 17, 2019, 07:58:28 AM
The Catholic Church doesn’t teach this.
Isn't this what "Confederate Catholic" is saying though?  Or am I completely misunderstanding him?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 17, 2019, 08:32:00 AM
You can not apply Roman canon law and its interpretation to eastern catholic churches which have their own law. Eastern canons don't ever state 'obligation' we simply do not have them in the same way. for example I would be excommunicated if I missed the three masses in a row, i would be excommunicated if i fast on Saturday.
we see God in a 'different' way theologically i am supposed to be at church three times a day and am expected to pray at home what is missed, if i can not get to church any service i am supposed to do in church can be done in an orthodox church. 
communion with the orthodox is what is not done unless there is an agreement between the hierarchy of both churches which does happen.
the right to attend orthodox churches was originally in the 83 Latin code but was expressly surpressed since there is no tradition of this ever being done in the west.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 17, 2019, 09:03:12 AM
You can not apply Roman canon law and its interpretation to eastern catholic churches which have their own law. Eastern canons don't ever state 'obligation' we simply do not have them in the same way. for example I would be excommunicated if I missed the three masses in a row, i would be excommunicated if i fast on Saturday.
we see God in a 'different' way theologically i am supposed to be at church three times a day and am expected to pray at home what is missed, if i can not get to church any service i am supposed to do in church can be done in an orthodox church.
communion with the orthodox is what is not done unless there is an agreement between the hierarchy of both churches which does happen.
the right to attend orthodox churches was originally in the 83 Latin code but was expressly surpressed since there is no tradition of this ever being done in the west.
So can you provide the support in the "eastern law" that allows for Eastern Rite Catholics to attend Orthodox services?  

Added:  Even the "western law" (aka JPII heretical law), Orthodox services/sacraments are allowed in very limited/dire circuмstances.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 17, 2019, 09:08:33 AM
You can not apply Roman canon law and its interpretation to eastern catholic churches which have their own law. Eastern canons don't ever state 'obligation' we simply do not have them in the same way. for example I would be excommunicated if I missed the three masses in a row, i would be excommunicated if i fast on Saturday.
we see God in a 'different' way theologically i am supposed to be at church three times a day and am expected to pray at home what is missed, if i can not get to church any service i am supposed to do in church can be done in an orthodox church.
communion with the orthodox is what is not done unless there is an agreement between the hierarchy of both churches which does happen.
the right to attend orthodox churches was originally in the 83 Latin code but was expressly surpressed since there is no tradition of this ever being done in the west.
This is V2 theology infecting the East. You will not find any eastern Catholic sources supporting this view until after V2.  This ecuмenical junk theology needs to be rejected by Catholics of both east and west.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 17, 2019, 11:35:24 AM
there can be no response to someone who is determined to find errors of VII in a code of law going back to Emperor Justinian.

You do understand that in Russian Orthodox liturgies who are the most uberdox even they don't commemorate any patriarch.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 17, 2019, 11:57:02 AM
there can be no response to someone who is determined to find errors of VII in a code of law going back to Emperor Justinian.

You do understand that in Russian Orthodox liturgies who are the most uberdox even they don't commemorate any patriarch.
Then prove it and quote from eastern Catholic law, Pre-V2, that allowed Catholics to attend schismatic liturgies.  I can save you the time if you like, there was no such animal.  

This article gives a history on the subject and the decisions of the Holy Office which affected all Catholics east and west.  http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2006_AC_Allan.html (http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2006_AC_Allan.html)

I also have pre-V2 eastern Canon Law, it does not say what you are asserting.

I stand by my assertion that this is V2 junk theology and it has infected eastern Catholics, in the same way that it has infected Latin Catholics.  It is poison and must be rejected.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 17, 2019, 01:36:30 PM
Quote
As to the first category, the Holy Office addressed the question about whether Catholics can receive sacraments from non-Catholics. It said that Catholics may do so provided the following conditions are in place.25 The first is that there must be grave and urgent cause.26 Second, it must be administered by a validly ordained non-Catholic priest who administers the sacrament by a Catholic rite without any mixing of the condemned rite (ritus damnati).27 Third, by the communicatio in divinis, there must be no external professing (protestatio) of false dogma. Fourth, it must not cause scandal. While this pertains to the reception of sacraments for a grave and urgent cause, for those occasions which are outside of those conditions, it is forbidden. 
  So then not actually forbidden
I would love to read your copy of a code before 90 since no uniform code existed
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 17, 2019, 02:06:35 PM
Also sacraments are given in almost every eastern rite inside the liturgy
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 19, 2019, 04:27:59 PM
 So then not actually forbidden
I would love to read your copy of a code before 90 since no uniform code existed
I never said a “Code” of Canon Law, but as you should know Pope Pius XII has approved many laws for the eastern rites.  He and those under him were working towards an eastern Code.  

I have a good book on it by Fr. Popishil, but cannot find it right now.  

Anyway, all this is besides the point.  Where is your proof that the eastern rite Catholic Churches allowed its people to attend Orthodox churches prior to V2.  That is the crux of the matter, and it needs to be addressed by you, not me, as you have asserted this, and have yet to prove your assertion.  

I have said on here and still say that this is not true, that the eastern Catholics, as did Roman Catholics never allowed this practice, and it is a V2 novelty in both Latin and Eastern Churches.

Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 21, 2019, 12:40:48 PM
Quote
 I never said a “Code” of Canon Law, but as you should know Pope Pius XII has approved many laws for the eastern rites. 
Quote
 I also have pre-V2 eastern Canon Law, it does not say what you are asserting. 
??
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 21, 2019, 11:28:37 PM
You can not apply Roman canon law and its interpretation to eastern catholic churches which have their own law. Eastern canons don't ever state 'obligation' we simply do not have them in the same way. for example I would be excommunicated if I missed the three masses in a row, i would be excommunicated if i fast on Saturday.
we see God in a 'different' way theologically i am supposed to be at church three times a day and am expected to pray at home what is missed, if i can not get to church any service i am supposed to do in church can be done in an orthodox church.
communion with the orthodox is what is not done unless there is an agreement between the hierarchy of both churches which does happen.
the right to attend orthodox churches was originally in the 83 Latin code but was expressly surpressed since there is no tradition of this ever being done in the west.
“Where is your proof that the eastern rite Catholic Churches allowed its people to attend Orthodox churches prior to V2.  That is the crux of the matter, and it needs to be addressed by you, not me, as you have asserted this, and have yet to prove your assertion. “

??

Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 22, 2019, 02:36:08 PM
1- I quoted the very article you cited which stated that there were conditions already in place for going to receive sacraments in need

2- You are asking me to quote from canon law which did not exist

3- Canons which do exist are not interpreted by laypersons

4- In the east we cite church fathers, St. Athanasius required his clergy to commune semi arians
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 22, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
1- I quoted the very article you cited which stated that there were conditions already in place for going to receive sacraments in need

2- You are asking me to quote from canon law which did not exist

3- Canons which do exist are not interpreted by laypersons

4- In the east we cite church fathers, St. Athanasius required his clergy to commune semi arians
1.  You were not talking about receiving sacraments in need, I.e. confession in danger of death, you were asserting that eastern Catholics were permitted to actively participate in the worship of schismatics prior to Vatican II.  The author of the linked article states in his conclusion:

To summarize, we may recall that the Holy Office said that it is not so much a matter of whether schismatic worship contains anything objectionable to the Faith; rather, the problem is the very participation in worship with schismatics.  By participating in schismatic and heretical worship, one is giving exterior signs of segregation and disapproval. Any participation in liturgical actions would constitute a sign of unity with those who are not in union with the Church.  By coming together with them in unity of prayer, in unity of cult, in unity of veneration and worship, Catholics would offer worship with perverse schismatic and heretical ministers.  In effect, the Holy Office said that it is by the very coming together with them and joining one's prayer and worship to theirs that one is participating in worship of those who reject the Catholic Church.  To participate with those who reject the Faith was therefore forbidden, since there is a danger of perversion and loss of the Catholic faith.  There is the very danger of participating in a heretical or schismatic rite, since the participation manifests a sign of disunity from the Church.  Participation in heretical or schismatic worship is an occasion of scandal and by participating in their worship, one confirms schismatics and heretics in their errors.  The Holy Office therefore observed that the Council of Carthage forbade praying and singing with heretics and that participation in schismatic and heretic worship is "universally prohibited by natural and divine law...[about which] no one has the power to dispense...[and with respect to this participation] nothing excuses." http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2006_AC_Allan.html (http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2006_AC_Allan.html)

2.  The eastern Catholics did have law within their respective rites, it just was not codified into a code of canon law.  Pope Pius XII did promulgate law that bound the eastern churches in the 1950’s.  You could cite any proof you like that supports your claim,  if the eastern bishops allowed Catholics to go to schismatic churches to actively participate in schismatic rites, there is absolutely no record of this whatsoever that I am aware of.  Since you made the assertion, I asked you to provide proof, which could include statements of eastern bishops, eastern theologians, testimonial evidence, etc.  you did not provide any proof to support your assertion.

3.  We are only talking about Pre-V2 practices, so there is no need to interpret canons that were promulgated post V2.

4.  St Athanasius did not authorize worship with a schismatic sect, which is what we are discussing.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Nishant Xavier on March 23, 2019, 12:14:04 AM
If only the Pope and the Bishops would consecrate Russia, the Eastern schism would end, and the Greek, Russian, Syrian separated churches would retract their errors, return to communion with Rome, and become Catholic again. That's what we should pray for. The promised Triumph of the Immaculate Heart and the conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith along with the end of the Photian schism. Till then, there will be no peace in the world or in the Church. God has shown the Hierarchs what is the way to Heaven's Peace. It is up to them now to choose that path, and our duty is to pray and sacrifice for it. Eastern Catholic is a legitimate option. Lapsing into the Eastern Heterodox schism and heresy is not. That is false ecuмenism. It is they who left the Church and they who have to return. 

Orthodox have fallen into error on mainly two or three points, but they have not retracted it for centuries, even after the Second Council of Lyons and the Ecuмenical Council of Florence were called to correct them; they at first signed the decrees, then later relapsed. Mainly on Filioque and Purgatory; then, on the Immaculate Conception and also in consequence on original sin. Their own Liturgies teach them the Mother of God, Whom they call Theotokos, is absolutely sinless. But they interpret the Liturgy wrongly. They say it refers only to Her Personal Sinlessness. And others say differently. Then their Liturgy teaches them to pray for the departed to be purified from sins. But they don't want to believe in purgatory and historically raised some false objections to it. The Eastern Liturgies are all good. Orthodox have fallen into some errors as a result of their long separation from Rome, the Mother Church. Our Lady has a plan for their return.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: ByzCat3000 on March 23, 2019, 02:01:11 AM
To be clear, this thread was about Eastern Catholic, not Eastern Orthodox.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 23, 2019, 04:41:34 PM
The holy office is clear that in danger of death one can receive sacraments from the orthodox. since sacraments are always received in eastern churches within the the liturgy it logically follows that you would have to attend the liturgy to get the sacraments. this is sufficient to show that attendance at orthodox liturgy actually could happen pre VII.
you should be careful who you call schismatic especially as a Traditional Catholic. There are whole groups in church history who were labeled schismatic who said that new definitions being circulated were not traditional. Whole swathes of western Christendom declared Leo the Great a heretic for his definition..

In Eastern Europe and Egypt almost no Eastern Catholic attended Orthodox services in the rest of the eastern world however attendance of Catholic and Orthodox ( mostly Oriental Antiochian) at each others liturgy took place frequently. The Holy Office was dealing with the Greeks primarily and with eastern catholics in western and non patriarchal areas. This answer has no bearing on an easterner in his own territory
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 23, 2019, 04:44:44 PM
my original answer stands, you can not invent your own canon law my rite takes precedence over another rite for my attendance is the rule
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 23, 2019, 04:54:27 PM
Quote
To be clear, this thread was about Eastern Catholic, not Eastern Orthodox. 
Byzcat, to most people Eastern Catholics are just Latin Catholics with funny vestments. To try to explain legitimate differences in law and theology usually ends with them calling the eastern catholic either a heretic or orthodox so this is the usual progression
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Stanley N on March 23, 2019, 09:44:40 PM
Orthodox have fallen into some errors as a result of their long separation from Rome, the Mother Church ...
Why are you talking about the Orthodox? Your post doesn't seem to make any sense in this thread.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 24, 2019, 06:40:36 AM
my original answer stands, you can not invent your own canon law my rite takes precedence over another rite for my attendance is the rule
Can you re-post your answer in a clearer fashion?  Your posts are not clear, and I'm not sure whether it's a language thing.

Where does the Catholic Church before Vatican II state that Catholics (Western OR Eastern) can attend schismatic Orthodox liturgies or sacraments outside of the danger of death?

Per the Catholic Encyclopedia on the Eastern Churches:

Each Catholic (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm) body has been formed from one of the schismatical (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13529a.htm) ones; their organizations are comparatively late, dating in most cases from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Moreover, although all these Eastern-Rite Catholics (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm) of course agrees in the same Catholic (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm) Faith (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05752c.htm) we profess, they are not organized as one body. Each branch keeps the rites (with in some cases modifications made at Rome (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13164a.htm) for dogmatic reasons) of the corresponding schismatical (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13529a.htm) body, and has an organization modelled on the same plan. In faith (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05752c.htm) a Catholic (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm) Armenian (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01736b.htm), for instance, is joined to Catholic (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm) Chaldees and Copts (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01300b.htm), and has no more to do with the schismatical (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13529a.htm) Armenians (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01736b.htm) than with Nestorians (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10755a.htm) or Abyssinians (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01075e.htm). Nor does he forget this fact.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 24, 2019, 07:07:13 AM
Byzcat, to most people Eastern Catholics are just Latin Catholics with funny vestments. To try to explain legitimate differences in law and theology usually ends with them calling the eastern catholic either a heretic or orthodox so this is the usual progression
This comment leads me to believe that you are now going on the offensive because you do not have the proof for what you are suggesting in this thread.  No one here is calling Eastern Catholics schismatic.
 
So again, provide proof that the Catholic Church (Eastern or otherwise) allowed Catholics to attend schismatic sacraments/liturgies for reasons other than in danger of death.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 24, 2019, 07:32:51 AM
To be clear, this thread was about Eastern Catholic, not Eastern Orthodox.
Yes, it was....until Confederate Catholic posted that an Eastern Catholic can/should attend an Orthodox schismatic liturgy over a Latin Catholic one.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 24, 2019, 08:19:27 AM
let's be clear.
1- I said that according to existing law one must attend ones rite or its equivalent (which interpretation is part of the code which has been worked on constantly since 1870, that interpretation always included orthodox) before another rite.

2- Eastern codes are not uniform most are written by the patriarch himself and are not disseminated to the public. For example even though we have a canon of scripture, most rites who were at the same council have different lists

3- In general if someone say Dioscorus Pope of Alexandria was excommunicated the Synod would list their excommunication. It may or may not list his followers as cut off as well  it would be on this basis that the faithful would be told they could or could not attend a liturgy.
There would not be anything in writing. I do know for a fact that Rome gave written permission for Maronites and Jesuits to participate with schematics Jacobites and saw the docuмent Pius X gave the Jesuits.
I also never said that I think the faithful should attend any liturgy on a regular basis if they are not being communed
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 24, 2019, 08:28:46 AM
We did not have protestants so except for the Greeks who are actual schematic the others are mostly not
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 24, 2019, 09:35:25 AM
let's be clear.
1- I said that according to existing law one must attend ones rite or its equivalent (which interpretation is part of the code which has been worked on constantly since 1870, that interpretation always included orthodox) before another rite.

2- Eastern codes are not uniform most are written by the patriarch himself and are not disseminated to the public. For example even though we have a canon of scripture, most rites who were at the same council have different lists

3- In general if someone say Dioscorus Pope of Alexandria was excommunicated the Synod would list their excommunication. It may or may not list his followers as cut off as well it would be on this basis that the faithful would be told they could or could not attend a liturgy.
There would not be anything in writing. I do know for a fact that Rome gave written permission for Maronites and Jesuits to participate with schematics Jacobites and saw the docuмent Pius X gave the Jesuits.
I also never said that I think the faithful should attend any liturgy on a regular basis if they are not being communed
So no proof for your schismatic assertion.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 24, 2019, 09:55:05 AM
You fail to understand how eastern canon law works, this is your problem.

1- in the east canon law is not something obligatory like in the Latin Church.
Canon law is something applied by a priest in the way a Dr. applies medicine, not all canons are actually followed. They're only applied by a priest when he is dealing one on one with a layperson, the priest may tell one that they can go to a Greek Orthodox liturgy and tell someone else not to. We simply do not look at a list of laws and self apply. We are not the Dr's of ourselves.

Canons are looked at by bishops and priests as a rudder to steer by not as some rule or regulation, they're ignored frequently.

Two Churches take canons according to the letter, Rome and the Russian (Greek) Orthodox, largely because Latins tend to legalism and the Russians need the canons to (in their mind) justify their schism.

Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 24, 2019, 11:00:19 AM
Quote
you should be careful who you call schismatic especially as a Traditional Catholic. There are whole groups in church history who were labeled schismatic who said that new definitions being circulated were not traditional. Whole swathes of western Christendom declared Leo the Great a heretic for his definition..

I am very careful about labelling others as schismatic.  In this case, though, isn’t it obvious?  An organized religious group that openly and publicly rejects the authority of the pope, is clearly a schismatic group.  

If there was any doubt, I would refrain from using the term.  The orthodox groups all reject the authority of the pope, which makes each of them schismatic.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Bellato on March 24, 2019, 11:05:46 AM
You fail to understand how eastern canon law works, this is your problem.

1- in the east canon law is not something obligatory like in the Latin Church.
Canon law is something applied by a priest in the way a Dr. applies medicine, not all canons are actually followed. They're only applied by a priest when he is dealing one on one with a layperson, the priest may tell one that they can go to a Greek Orthodox liturgy and tell someone else not to. We simply do not look at a list of laws and self apply. We are not the Dr's of ourselves.

Canons are looked at by bishops and priests as a rudder to steer by not as some rule or regulation, they're ignored frequently.

Two Churches take canons according to the letter, Rome and the Russian (Greek) Orthodox, largely because Latins tend to legalism and the Russians need the canons to (in their mind) justify their schism.
The point you are missing is that the obligation is on you to prove your own assertion.  Despite numerous posts on this, you have not shown that any proof that eastern Catholics were permitted to go to schismatic liturgies prior to V2.  

The reception of sacraments privately for the dying is not the same as actively participating in a schismatic liturgy which is being done publicly,and if a catholic attends, he scandalously gives approval to a liturgy that is outside of the Church.  
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 24, 2019, 11:56:16 AM
no all orthodox do not reject the authority of the pope, this is an error, what they reject if they do is the idea that the Pope is somehow able to singlehandedly tell the church to overturn tradition.

I am not here to get you to understand eastern law since the concept of our law apparently has to be explained to an eastern catholic by a sedevacantist who is according to canonical norms excommunicated by his own church for violating canons. the irony is very funny
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 24, 2019, 12:07:26 PM
the fact that the holy office consistently issued decrees indicates that people were attending said liturgies otherwise there would be no need.
Franciscan and Jesuit clerics had to report to the Orthodox bishops in the holy land, hope that doesn't make your head explode.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: 2Vermont on March 24, 2019, 05:29:29 PM
The point you are missing is that the obligation is on you to prove your own assertion.  Despite numerous posts on this, you have not shown that any proof that eastern Catholics were permitted to go to schismatic liturgies prior to V2.  

The reception of sacraments privately for the dying is not the same as actively participating in a schismatic liturgy which is being done publicly,and if a catholic attends, he scandalously gives approval to a liturgy that is outside of the Church.  
You and I are wasting our time and energy.  Until CC can come up with proof of his schismatic assertions, I will ignore him.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on March 24, 2019, 08:58:23 PM
you are extremely dense. How can I produce a canon from pre 1990? 
no canons exist in the east for me to show you and the current code was worked on for over 120 years and is not authoritative if particular churches have their own laws. No one on the face of the earth can prove a negative, 
I can prove someone is Hitler's shoeshine boy.
I can not prove he's virtuous.
I also can never prove that Latin canons using Latin terminology exist where none exist.
The very passage you quote from the encyclopedia is in error.
Armenia was never part of the Roman Empire and only sent delegations to the first three councils. 
They never separated from Rome and to this day have never to my knowledge denied the the claims of Rome and to this day commune Roman Catholics.
In what way are they or when did they separate themselves from Rome?
Is it hard to exercise your canon law degree?
When were you ordained and put in charge of declaring who is schematic?
Is this something women do in traditional circles?
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Stanley N on March 24, 2019, 09:43:12 PM
There was a docuмent "ad totam ecclesiam" issued in 1967 by the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity that is probably relevant.

Quote
47. A Catholic who occasionally, for reasons set out below (cf n. 50), attends the holy liturgy (Mass) on a Sunday or Holiday of obligation in an Orthodox Church is not then bound to assist at Mass in a Catholic Church.
https://books.google.com/books?id=hQJzBgAAQBAJ&pg=PT811&lpg=PT811#v=onepage&q&f=false

In my Ukrainian church this was considered scandalous.

This docuмent was revised in 1993 and this part was omitted.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: reconquest on March 24, 2019, 10:14:33 PM
Mods change my name to Hitler's shoeshine boy.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on April 09, 2019, 03:42:56 PM
found this still looking
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: Your Friend Colin on April 09, 2019, 05:56:02 PM
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with switching Rites or deciding to go to Eastern Rite masses when you convert, but I'd heed what Matthew and Ladislaus said and be sure to not just pick it for the sake of it being exotic or having more interesting "smells and bells". If you feel like the Eastern Rite is preferable for you, then go ahead. But don't pick it because you think it looks prettier.
My friend Carlos went to a terrible seminary in Washington D.C. and the professors spewing heresy caused him to lose his Faith. He later switched to the Byzantine Rite. At the time, he had no idea that he couldn't just switch back to the Roman Rite. Although, depending where you are, the Byzantine priests are most likely fully Conciliarized. Like Matthew said, this crisis is much more than a fight for the Mass.
Title: Re: Eastern Rites
Post by: confederate catholic on April 09, 2019, 10:08:21 PM
you can switch back it is not unheard of just difficult.
the reasons for the difficulty is you had to have strong enough reasons for the switch in the first place. Byzantines in general usually  allow the change too easily.