www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Aussie Sharing of Churches, Clergy

This article disturbs me. Catholics and Orthodox worship in the same physical building as Protestants, as well as "share clergy."

Naturally I'm aware that others are not of the same opinion as I am. Nonetheless, the article should be interesting to most everyone of all persuasions.

Logos Teen

Teen,

CWN reported this as well. The Catholics did not agree to intercommunion nor the sharing of ministers. The Catholic Church has recognized baptism by other Churches and most ecclesial groups with a few exceptions (JW, LDS, UPC, to name a few). IIRC, canon law allows for the sharing of Catholic buildings by non-Catholics with permission from the local Catholic Ordinary. This usually occurs in the Middle East between Melkite and Antiochian Orthodox. I think the same is true for use of non-Catholic buildings by Catholics (by permission of the local Ordinary). Of course, there must be compelling reasons for the Ordinary to grant permission (eg. lack of physical space for Catholics). To better foster ecumenical relationships is not one of them. As I said, this probably happens more often between Eastern Catholics and their Orthodox brethren.

I think the following paragraphs from the _Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism_ might be useful here.

-----
Sharing Other Resources for Spiritual Life and Activity

137. Catholic churches are consecrated or blessed buildings which have an important theological and liturgical significance for the Catholic community. They are therefore generally reserved for Catholic worship. However, if priests, ministers or communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church do not have a place or the liturgical objects necessary for celebrating worthily their religious ceremonies, the diocesan Bishop may allow them the use of a church or a Catholic building and also lend them what may be necessary for their services. Under similar circumstances, permission may be given to them for interment or for the celebration of services at Catholic cemeteries.

138. Because of developments in society, the rapid growth of population and urbanization, and for financial motives, where there is a good ecumenical relationship and understanding between the communities, the shared ownership or use of church premises over an extended period of time may become a matter of practical interest.

139. When authorization for such ownership or use is given by the diocesan Bishop, according to any norms which may be established by the Episcopal Conference or the Holy See, judicious consideration should be given to the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament, so that this question is resolved on the basis of a sound sacramental theology with the respect that is due, while also taking account of the sensitivities of those who will use the building, e.g., by constructing a separate room or chapel.

140. Before making plans for a shared building, the authorities of the communities concerned should first reach agreement as to how their various disciplines will be observed, particularly in regard to the sacraments. Furthermore, a written agreement should be made which will clearly and adequately take care of all questions which may arise concerning financial matters and the obligations arising from church and civil law.

141. In Catholic schools and institutions, every effort should be made to respect the faith and conscience of students or teachers who belong to other Churches or ecclesial Communities. In accordance with their own approved statutes, the authorities of these schools and institutions should take care that clergy of other Communities have every facility for giving spiritual and sacramental ministration to their own faithful who attend such schools or institutions. As far as circumstances allow, with the permission of the diocesan Bishop these facilities can be offered on the Catholic premises, including the church or chapel.

From http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...rinciples-and-norms-on-ecumenism_en.html

-----
From what I read, 140 seems to have been fulfilled. I would have to read the real text, and not the commentary-put-on-it by some media source which edits things, to know for sure.

As has already been mentioned, most of what has been approved, by the Catholics, are not new: recognition, for example, of the baptisms of other traditions. I suspect much has been made about nothing, but, I also suspect there are many involved who are planning to use this initiative to draw the churches together in OZ into one "church." I do not see it happening, and I do see, like Sergius Bulgakov, that we need to meet by Jacob's Well more often than we do. There will be good done with this, but it must be understood where the good is, and not confuse the situation and make it seem more has been done than has been done.

I work on an Air Force Base where a church is shared by Catholics and Protestants.

I think this practice is good. I would like to see more sharing of church buildings and facilities.

Christ is our peace.

Paul

So Paul, you are either at Kirkland or Holloman AFB. Well as a former insider let me tell you that this is not an acceptable situation for Catholics. They are the ones who have to sacrifice not having statues, not having the blessed sacrament reserved in the main church and a host of other things.
I definitely would not agree that it is a good thing.
Stephanos I

Stephano!,

I understand your concerns, but I'm not sure if the GIRM and Canon law support them (I'm always willing to learn).

There is a crucifix behind the altar at the KAFB chapel. It is covered by a curtain during Protestant services. Maybe statues/paintings could also be set in a similar manner. I beleive, as at the St. Francis Cathedral in Santa Fe, that the Blessed Sacrament may be reserved in a separate chapel. I admit the I prefer it be in the sanctuary, however I beleive that the GIRM allows for it.

Even with the current compromises I still think bringing Christians of diverse churches into one building is partially answering Christ's prayer to be one.

I like the practice of sharing a church with Protestants as long as liturgical norms are followed.

God bless you,

Paul

I was stationed most of my tour of duty at McChord AFB in Tacoma, WA. We had 2 chapels there; one for Catholics, one for Protestants. I guess we were blessed. I did attend Orthodox Liturgy at the Catholic chapel at Lackland, AFB, in San Antonio, TX, once. I guess they had only 1 choice.

The Newman club at the U of W, in Seattle, had only 1 chapel to be used by all the faiths on campus. I remember going in after an Orthodox Liturgy, and one of the students remarking "It smells like a Catholic Church in here" !!!!!

I remember years ago, reading the Catholic directory for some parishes in the Seattle area where they were obliged to use a grange hall or the city hall or the auditorium of some school because they didn't have enough people to build a church of their own. I don't remember if they shared a church with non-Catholics or not.

A dear friend of mine was married in the Chapel at Andrews AFB outside of Washington,DC a number of years ago.

When we walked into the Chapel to see the statues and crucifix as I knew she was Protestant.

As we were sitting there, I watched in utter amazement as the statue suddenly began to rotate and flat panneling appeared. This also happened with the Crucifix and a plain wooden cross appeared on the wall.

I don't remember what happened to the Altar, if it lowered into the floor or what.

I found out later that the Chapel was used by all the denominations Catholic and Protestant.

If I'm not mistaken, they also held Jewish services there as well...

mark

Dear Logos Teen:

I understand your concerns.

However, I would also take note of the resurgence of the Catholic Church in Australia from a banned religious group since the 18th century to becoming, by end of 2001(26% vs. 22%), the largest in the continent finally bypassing the Anglican Church of Australia (29% vs. 20% by end of 2003 estimate) of the total population. (Consider that the mission status of the Catholic Church in Australia was lifted only recently in 1976!)

Not only that. A recent survey commissioned by the Australian Anglican Church showed that around 50% of those attending weekly services are Catholics, the other 50% spread among the other religious denominations, including Anglicans and other Protestants.

http://www.anglican.org.au/docs/2004-047ACAStatistics.pdf

Hopefully, joining the ecumenical movement in Australia will redound to the benefit of the Catholic Church.

Amado

For all we hear of those disatisfied Catholics leaving the church for other faith expressions, the fact is that Protestant groups are dying off.
I think for the first time in the history of the United States the Protestants are in the minority.
Yep you got it, the largest denomination is Catholic, and the second largest denomination is (no not the Baptist lol) its non praticing Catholics.
This year alone 80 Protestant ministers have enter into Catholic Communion.

Stephanos I
(a former dare I say the word - Protestant)
"Blessed are you Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven." Matt 16:18

so long as actual cannon laws are not being broken (and I cannot see that they are) I do not see that there would be a problem with such an arrangement. Actually, it seems to me that it would be a great idea. I mean, imagine the power and effect it could have on a protestant to go into a church and see a crucifix....to see that their Lord and Savior died in such a way...I mean, they have heard about it, but to see a crucifix is something different. Truly Christ would be happy that we can agree on some things, that His church can be friends with each other again. Perhaps it will foster a better understanding between different typs of Christians.

It is one thing to read about Orthodox Christianity, it is another to meet the people that practise it. This could be the only exposure that anyone might have to the East, and it could have a great impact on them.

So long as the faith is not comprimised I can only see that good would come of this. If only here in America the Protestants and Catholics could get along a little....if even to just do good together in their community, to show that while we have our differences we are all Christians and we want to do good for Christ!

In His Name,
Stephen

I've wondered about this sort of phenomenon and read about it in some parts of the world.

I think it's probably a good idea when one thinks of the great expense of buildings and maintenance, etc.

Where I seem to run aground, though, is the idea of sharing sacred vessels used in the Eucharist. I understand that once a vessel is blessed for use in the Eucharist it is not to be used for any other purpose. But if we lend it to another group not in communion, we seem to do just that. If we have an ecclesial community that does not have orders that we recognize and, therefore, a eucharist that we do not recognize, how can we share sacred vessels, e.g., chalices, patens, ciboria, etc.? For Catholics, since we do not recognize any Anglican or Protestant Orders, lending sacred vessels seems to be allowing their use for a purpose other than that for which they have been set aside by being blessed.

In Christ,

BOB

Exactly Bob,
and try they will, even use some of that "bread stuff" there which Catholics keep in the "box".Use of sacred vessels and vesments was another thing.
I had to ask a presbyterian minister, who decided to go to the Mass with us, to remove the stole he put on for the celebration and also explain to him that he was not able to receive the Eucharist which he tried to do.
I immediately put them straight. Saying, "over my dead body."
Technically they are not even suppose to use a consecrated Altar. In the military we were not even allow to have saints relic in the Altar.

Might sound like a "nice" idea but I for one do not find it nice in the least when they so easily profane holy things.
I remember going into a chapel that was used infrequently by Protestants, there was a communion cup half filled with wine, mold of all sorts growing in it.

It just doesnt work period. An I am well aware of Canon Law allowing it, I just prefer not to do it.
Stephanos I

Stephanos I:

Rev Father bless.

I have the same problem with vestments, too, because it seems to be the same story. If I were to vest and carry out the sacred vessels to perform some ceremony, there would be a firestorm. So why, if I am fully initiated into Christ, is it such a big deal if one who is only partially initiated does the same thing? (This has not earned me a lot of "politically correct points" but being a prophet never does.)

My last spiritual director wrote me a long note this past week--he's been away for almost three years. He told me that he always welcomed the intellectual challenge that I presented and missed that part of working with people. I told him once that I believed that it was part of our Baptismal committment to challenge what seemed to go against what we had been taught, especially when it was or seemed to be an innovation with no rationale beyond "because I (bishop, pastor, authority figure) said so." Not that that should be done with anger or in a nasty way, but the quiet question in private should be the first step. It drives my present pastor nuts.

My last spiritual director told me that sometimes I was the only touchstone to reality he had, with my persistant questioning and the knowledge and reasons behind my objections. He told me that he had to do what he was told even when it cut across his previous training. He told me that I was lucky that I was not in Orders and could question and challenge both publicly and privately.

Maybe that's why the Lord didn't let me answer the call to the priesthood. He knew I'd probably be suspended more than I'd be functioning.

BOB

As for military bases having separate chapels, this must be something new. I was in the Air Force in the 60s, and there was one chapel for use by all, more than one chapel on very large bases, but never a Catholic chapel or a Protestant chapel. From a certain length of time after a Mass, Protestant service, or Jewish synagogue-type service until a certain length of time before the next one the chaplain's assistant had to set up the "neutral" situation.

Furthermore, in 1966 or 67 a ruling came out that the chapel had to alternate services whether the people wanted it or not on Sunday morning: at Wheelus AFB in Libya they had had Cath-Prot-Prot-Cath, which suited everybody; but they had to change to Cath-Prot-Cath-Prot.

Both Protestants and Catholics had literature in the rack in the narthex.

The base could not officially have Prot. services other than "general Protestant" unless there was a demand for a service of a particular denomination, such as Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, and a chaplain of that denomination who was willing to provide a denominational service.

At least the Catholics had their own liturgies; whereas all the Protestants were lumped together.

Porter (actual name)