www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Orthodox to Catholic: questions

Actually, we don't see totally different ritual traditions celebrated within a different Church sui iuris - not in that example at least. Kidane Meheret - the Ethiopian parish in DC is juris alienos (subject to the law of another), a condition that has application only to canonical jurisdiction, not liturgical praxis. And such occurs whenever pastoral entities exist outside the historical bounds of their primatial hierarchs, unless the Church has a canonical jurisdiction in that area of the diaspora. (As regards liturgical praxis and spirituality, the 'stand-alone' parish in the diaspora remains subject to its primatial hierarch, assuming there is one - otherwise to the Congregation).


In any such instance, the Ethiopian Orthodox ought to be ascribed to the Ethiopian Catholic Church, unless he chose to be ascribed to another Church sui iuris. (Frankly, the Ethiopian/Eritrean presence in NA is significantly larger than that of their Coptic Catholic brethren - a consequence of the unrest and economic hardships that have plagued their countries.)

Both the Codes place obligations on hierarchs who have within their jurisdiction faithful of another Church sui iuris



As a side note, the Eritreans within the Ethiopian Catholic Church have 1 parish in Canada and 5 missions there, each served once a month.

In the US, they share 1 parish and 2 active missions with the Ethiopians (the parish is principally Ethiopian but both missions are significantly more Eritrean than Ethiopian in membership). The Eritreans also have about 18 other mission communities, of which about a third are regularly served.

The Ethiopians have 2 missions which are not shared, but both are served only irregularly.

These are links to the Ethiopian and Eritrean parishes and missions in North America. Data is complete as to US and Canada (or as complete as can be, given that there is no other centralized listing for either group of which I'm aware).

To return for a moment to the comment about "totally different ritual traditions being celebrated within" a different Church sui iuris, I can think of only a single true instance of this:

The Metropolitan Arch-Eparchy of Kottayam of the Knanaites, a metropolia (without suffragn jurisdictions) within the Syro-Malabar Church sui iuris has within it an Episcopal Vicariate for Malankara Knanaites. The fifteen parishes of the Vicariate canonically serve the Knanaite Usage of the Malankara Rescension of the Antiochene Rite (although the Metropolia is of the Chaldean Rite).

The other theoretical instance would be the historical ascription of the three Italo-Grieco-Albanian jurisdictions in Italy to the Western Patriarchate - for what that thought is worth.

The other instances which come to mind are:

• the Melkite involvement with several Russian parishes in the US and Australia;
• the Romanian involvement with another Russian parish in the US;
• the Melkite involvement with Italo-Greeks in Australia;
• the Ruthenian pastoral responsibility for Croats, Hungarians, and Slovaks in the US;
• the Ruthenian erection of an Italo-Greek parish in the US;
• the Ukrainian pastoral responsibility for Hungarians in Canada

(and I think I missed one, but the circumstances are identical in any instance)

These indeed represent "cross-overs" but don't meet the standard of "totally different ritual traditions" - given that all the Churches involved serve according to the Byzantine Rite. The instances of those formally committed to the pastoral care of the Ruthenians and Ukrainians could, however, be cited to "ascribe (a) 'convert' (from - for instance - Hungarian Orthodoxy) to (an) Eastern Catholic church that shares a closer liturgical relationship" with his Church of origin - which has no formal canonical presence in this country.

Many years,

Neil

It is interesting that one would be 'lumped' into one rite or the other - of necessity, I mean.

If one is Catholic, one is Catholic. Is there some practical reason for assigning rite? There can't be any theological or doctrinal reason.

For Orthodox who would become Catholic, I don't see at all why one would be consigned automatically to Eastern Rite Catholicism. Why not just attend the nearest Church.

I'm speaking practically, not the obvious - we want to worship the way we always have.

Does my post make sense?

Father John,

Your post does make sense and is exactly correct. As I noted earlier in the thread the canon law is for good housekeeping in the Church. The practical reasons for assigning rite are mainly 1) providing a ultimate responsibility for pastoral care of the individual and 2) encouraging that individual to be faithful to his own patrimony.

Most Orthodox who become Catholic do simply join the Church they desire. Technically become Byzantine even if they are received by a Roman Catholic priest. The RC priest could do the paperwork for him to be canonically enrolled in the Latin Church but most don't bother.

John

Neil considers


Strictly speaking, this is not an anomaly, because these groups and the Carpatho-Russians who are the backbone of the Pittsburgh Metropolia are assumed to share a common liturgical tradition, which Rome has termed "Ruthenian".

Speaking of liturgical traditions, "the Ge'ez Rite" is an expression which means nothing at all, unless one is referring to a divine service (of whatever liturgical tradition, including the RC Mass) offered in the Ge'ez language.

One could correctly note that the Eritrean Catholics use the same liturgical tradition as that of the Ethiopian Catholic Church (and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church), which is closely related to - but not identical to - the Coptic liturgical tradition.

Fr. Serge

Father, Bless,

I most certainly agree with you and that was my point - that this is among those "cross-overs" that really are not, except in the narrowest construction.


Again, we are in complete agreement, although the usage is so pervasive - especially among the Ethiopians and Eritreans themselves - that it's difficult to eradicate. My presumption is that it has come into use to differentiate the (Oriental) Ethiopian Catholic Church from the the comparatively small (Latin) Ethiopian Catholic Church, as we use Byzantine or Greek-Catholic in distinguishing ourselves from our Latin brethren in countries where there are parallel hierarchical structures and reference to each includes the country name.

Offhand, the Ethiopians may be the only Oriental Church sui iuris with the problem - the remainder either have a unique name or (in the case of the Armenians) are virtually the sole Catholic presence. It's much more commonly an issue for those of us of the Byzantine Churches.

Many years,

Neil