www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship The Other Sacramental Mysteries Marriage Rite

If an Eastern Catholic woman chooses to change to the Latin Church at the time of her marriage to a Latin Catholic man may their wedding be presided over by a Latin deacon as allowed in the Latin Church?
If the change is not requested would that marriage be both invalid and illicit?

If an Eastern Catholic or Eastern Orthodox is married in a Latin Church it must be by a priest and never by a deacon. This is by virtue of the woman's Baptism. Marriage of any Eastern Catholic or Eastern Orthodox by a deacon is always invalid (and never considered illicit).

Thank you... and:

I.e. if she made that choice of the automatic change of Church would she be Latin during the wedding, and therefore able to be married with the deacon presiding, or be Latin only after the wedding and therefore the deacon could not preside?

I cannot give a definite answer, but solely using logic, I would say that they would have to be married by a Priest, because it would only be after the marriage would the transfer of Church would take effect.

In my understanding, the marriage would be invalid by virtue of her baptism, unless she formally sought to transfer to the Latin Church and it was granted before her marriage. She is still Eastern at the time of marriage, which requires a priest. Only after marriage by a priest can she take advantage of the automatic transfer of ritual Church. Any attempt by well-meaning Latin clergy or canon lawyers to gloss over the issue will not result in an ‘illicit’ marriage that can be made ‘licit’, but will result in an invalid marriage. Also there is no automatic change of ritual Church at the time of marriage if the marriage itself is invalid.

So far it sounds like we all have the same take on this. Thank you.

As noted already, unless she has sought and received permission to transfer her canonical enrollment to the Latin Church, and formally transferred, prior to the marriage, the EC woman can only transfer by virtue of the marriage - either upon being married or during the marriage.

The transfer cannot be predicated as occurring simultaneously with the marriage and thus giving licity to it. Until the marriage is blessed, the woman is subject to the CCEO and, thus, the minister of the marriage into she is entering must be a priest.



Many years,

Neil

Please excuse my Orthodox mindset, but I always find this subject to be confusing at best.

A few questions:

1. If John and Mary are both of the Roman Rite, John is a parishioner of St. Brigid's and Mary is a parishioner of St. Stan's and both churches are side by side - which parish do they attend? Can they chose or is there some hard fast 'rule'.

2. John is Melkite Greek Catholic, Mary is Ukrainian Greek Catholic - St. John's Melkite Church and St. Mary's UGCC are next door - to which one do they have to belong?

3.Given the 'sui juris' status of the Eastern Churches and their stated equal dignity with that of the Roman Church, why can they not freely choose where to attend and what rite in which to raise their children? (Granted, the priest who 'loses' the couple won't be happy, but on the other hand, he will take some comfort in that they remained Orthodox.)

It is my experience within Orthodoxy here in the states, that if John is from the Greek Orthodox parish and Mary is from the Carpatho-Russian one and both churches are next door, they can choose where to belong without any fuss. The pastor of the parish they choose would be entitled to production of proof from the other church that the joining spouse was an Orthodox Christian.

(Of course John still has to work at the Greek Festival and Mary has to teach him how to make pirohi. wink! )

Any Catholic of any ritual Church can attend and join any Catholic parish. It only becomes a complex matter of canon law when ‘permanent’ sacraments are involved – Baptism, Marriage, Holy Orders. The purpose of all this is simply to provide good order in the Church. It is (or should be) the same for the Orthodox – regardless of where you actually attend, your records for should be at only one location. Your Baptismal record at the church where you were baptized should have notations about Marriage and Orders.

This case is complicated by the fact that the Latin Catholic Church allows Deacons to officiate a marriage due to their theology, which is not allowed by Eastern theology or tradition. The complexity is a result of the difference in theology between two different Catholic Churches – a difference that cannot be ignored by simply attending or joining another parish.

The situation between two different Catholic Churches that have the same the same theological patrimony such as Byzantine Melkite Catholic and Byzantine Ukrainian Catholic should be about the same as the situation between Byzantine Serbian Orthodox and Byzantine Russian Orthodox.

That would, or at least did, vary.

I grew up in the San Francisco Arch-Diocese. Crossing a parish boundary to attend Mass on Sunday was not something to do trivially; you were supposed to go to your parish. For these diocese, the couple would attend whichever they lived within.

I was startled by the flexibility when I went to Iowas State, where there were two parishes. The one across the street from the university catered to the student population, while the other to the general. Since we had young children, we went to the general pop. church, due to the school (and later found out that some years, the subsidy from the other school was more than the parish subsidy; it varied).

And then to Pennsylvania, which was built with ethnic churches. Huh?

The Irish built the first church. When the Lituanians came they built one block away (not quite next door, but with a could arm, you could toss a rock from one to the other).

The Poles built about three blocks away, and the Ruthenian church is tucked behind that.

[quote
(Of course John still has to work at the Greek Festival and Mary has to teach him how to make pirohi. wink! )
[/quote]
But will she?

The Polish church had a reat food festival, but the old ladies drove the men and young ladies crazy by refusing to let the young ladies help make the piroshiki (?) (pirogi?)

These are ancient family secrets, after all . . .

As Catholics they can be parishioners or visitors at any Latin Church, celebrating either the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite or the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, or be parishioners or visitors at any Eastern Catholic or Oriental Catholic parish, or they can go to a Monastery community or other religious community, but those are not parishes so they don't have parishioners.

Since V2 the Latins don't have any hard fasting.


As Catholics they can be parishioners or visitors any Eastern Catholic or Oriental Catholic parish, or be parishioners or visitors at any Latin Church, celebrating either the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite or the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, or they can go to a liturgy or other services at a Monastery community or other religious community, but those are not parishes so they don't have parishioners.
I like to go to Mass at the Dominican Priory some weekdays.

And from what I can tell you have to be Russian to have the hard fast. I was at the screening last night of Mysteries of the Jesus Prayer [mysteriesofthejesusprayer.com] and ran into a young Antiochian friend of a friend. When they sent us to the wine bar before the screening, I laughed and said "It's Wednesday..." to which he laughed and told me the Antiochian's have no fasting during the entire Pascal season now. And I was reminded that we can have wine on Wed. too in Pascha, except I wanted to stay awake for the film and discussion.


Of course everyone goes to the Greek Festival [oaklandgreekfestival.com] ... tomorrow!!! OPA!!! The smart ones go to the Russian Festival, too, and the Armenian... and the Antiochian...

Thank you for your answers. I did not realize that Deacons in the Roman Rite can perform marriages.

As to the parish record books, you are correct in that there would be notations made by the pastor should a member transfer to another Orthodox community or wed etc...

As to hard fasting, the big secret among most Orthodox is that it is much discussed, perhaps followed by monastics and some within the parish-type setting, but little followed otherwise out in the world. ....Oil, no oil, shellfish, no shellfish, bones,fresh water fish, salt water fish,wine, no wine, no bones etc...

I remember a cleric telling a story about a dinner invitation he had during as fast period from several of his fellow clergy who were Greek Orthodox. They served a wonderful dinner which included lobster and octopus and squid along with vegetables. Somewhat bemused by the scene, he was noticed by one of the other priests who said not to worry, they only ate like that during a fast.

Same goes for the 'fasting' desserts one will find at the table following a Sunday of Orthodoxy service. We former Greek Catholics were taught not to have dessert during Lent and it always came as a surprise on that occasion over the years as the Greek yayas and Slavic babas, as the case might have been, proudly extolled how they prepared the delicacies according to the fasting 'rules.' oh well, such is life....