|
0 members (),
634
guests, and
105
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,518
Posts417,611
Members6,170
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
Of possible interest: I might be mistaken but I believe this is the first appearance of the text of Cum Data Fuerit online: English translation of Cum Data Fuerit [ archive.org] File description: "Cum Data Fuerit," English translation of the Decree of the Sacred Oriental Congregation in Rome, originally published in Latin on March 1, 1929 in reference to Eastern Catholics in the USA. The decree, which was approved by Pope Pius XI on February 9, 1929, established norms for the American Eastern Catholic Churches (at that time comprising what are now known as Ukrainian and Ruthenian Catholic Churches) in 43 articles. Article 12 was the most controversial, requiring that "priests of the Greek-Ruthenian Rite who wish to go to the United States of North America and stay there, must be celibates." This English translation of the Latin original was published in 1955 in "Temporary Diocesan Statutes of the Byzantine Rite Apostolic Exarchy of Philadelphia, PA., U.S.A.," Volume 1, pp. 11-24. Articles 38, 39 and 40 are omitted in this edition of Cum Data Fuerit due to a change in matrimonial law with the publication of Crebrae allatae in 1949.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 16
Global Moderator Member
|
|
Global Moderator Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 16 |
Think you're right, Dave. I don't recollect there being a translation of it in any of the other on-line documents of the era. Thanks very much.
Many years,
Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 610 |
Interesting, in light of the round-and-round discussion here about the use of the terms "Church" and "rite", that the document includes among the chief duties of bishops to see that "the rites and discipline peculiar to this Church be observed faithfully and in their entirety".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 421
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 421 |
So now ... as of now ... where do the Byzantine Catholic Ruthenians stand on celibacy for the priesthood.
Are they ordaining married men yet.
I do believe the Ukrainians are - the Melkites are starting to (or may have been doing so for some time but I just heard about it)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
According to the United States National Catholic Conference:
"An applicant for the priesthood must testify that he is not married or, if he is married, he has the approval of the Holy See. If an Eastern Catholic candidate is married, a certificate of marriage is required along with the written consent of his wife (CCEO, c. 769§1, 2°) and the approval of the Apostolic See…” (Program of Priestly Formation, 5th edition, 2006, paragraph 66)
As I understand, the Ruthenian Church has ordained one or two married men following this procedure and the Ukrainian Catholics have done several more.
The Melkites have ordained married men as well but have sent them back to the Middle East for ordination. By having them ordained in the Middle East they have avoided needing to get approval from Rome beforehand.
Last edited by DTBrown; 01/25/12 04:24 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953 |
So, since married priests are being assigned to American BCC parishes, has there ever been a rescission of Cum Data Fuerit or a modification specifically promulgated in a separate document rather than being tucked away in the big rule book like the citation indicates in the prior post by DT? Isn't that sort of like the Tax Code in terms of complexity?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
Cum Data Fuerit is no longer in force. The USCCB publication Program for Priestly Formation is online here [ old.usccb.org] and is an authoritative statement as to the current procedure for the ordination of married men to the priesthood in the US: "written consent from the wife" and "approval of the Apostolic See." This is also confirmed by some recent statements given to the press: On 20 February 2008, the regular meeting of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reaffirmed the validity of the norm of a binding obligation of celibacy for priests of Eastern Catholic Churches who exercise the ministry outside the canonical territory. The pope, however, has given the Congregation for the Eastern Churches the authority to give a dispensation from this norm, with the approval of the Episcopal Conference in question. (Text here, [adistaonline.it] translated from Italian.)And in a recent Catholic News Service story, the Secretary of the Eastern Congregation in Rome explained: Archbishop Cyril Vasil, secretary of the Congregation for Eastern Churches, told CNS [Catholic News Service] in Rome that the Vatican reconfirmed the general ban in 2008, “but in individual cases, in consultation with the national bishops’ conference, a dispensation can be given” allowing the ordination. (Text of the CNS article can be found here [scribd.com] on page 10.) As far as I know there are only three countries where the national bishops' conference in Western lands has agreed to the ordination of married men in the Eastern Catholic Churches: Australia, Canada and the US. In those lands dispensations can be obtained from the Eastern Congregation. IMHO, even though Cum Data Fuerit is no longer on the books, if national bishops' conferences can block the ordination of married men in Eastern Churches or if dispensations are required, the legacies of Cum Data Fuerit and Ea Semper are still with us.
Last edited by DTBrown; 01/25/12 08:36 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953 |
Cum Data Fuerit is no longer in force. The USCCB publication Program for Priestly Formation is online here [ old.usccb.org] and is an authoritative statement as to the current procedure for the ordination of married men to the priesthood in the US: "written consent from the wife" and "approval of the Apostolic See." This is also confirmed by some recent statements given to the press: On 20 February 2008, the regular meeting of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reaffirmed the validity of the norm of a binding obligation of celibacy for priests of Eastern Catholic Churches who exercise the ministry outside the canonical territory. The pope, however, has given the Congregation for the Eastern Churches the authority to give a dispensation from this norm, with the approval of the Episcopal Conference in question. (Text here, [adistaonline.it] translated from Italian.)And in a recent Catholic News Service story, the Secretary of the Eastern Congregation in Rome explained: Archbishop Cyril Vasil, secretary of the Congregation for Eastern Churches, told CNS [Catholic News Service] in Rome that the Vatican reconfirmed the general ban in 2008, “but in individual cases, in consultation with the national bishops’ conference, a dispensation can be given” allowing the ordination. (Text of the CNS article can be found here [scribd.com] on page 10.) As far as I know there are only three countries where the national bishops' conference in Western lands has agreed to the ordination of married men in the Eastern Catholic Churches: Australia, Canada and the US. In those lands dispensations can be obtained from the Eastern Congregation. IMHO, even though Cum Data Fuerit is no longer on the books, if national bishops' conferences can block the ordination of married men in Eastern Churches or if dispensations are required, the legacies of Cum Data Fuerit and Ea Semper are still with us. Indeed, we Orthodox would ask, how then do you reconcile your status as Eastern Catholic members of a Sui Juris Church (meaning: "having full legal rights or capacity") in communion with the Holy See if your Church and her rules (i.e. her 'juris') are subordinate to a majority vore of a 'national conference of bishops' which to any traditional Eastern ecclesiological (including post-Unions) is an anomaly as they are currently constituted by the Church of Rome? Isn't my question just a modern formulation of the same one asked by my grandfathers at the first KOVO convention in Pittsburgh in the mid 1930's when Rome was respectfully petitioned by a sizeable numnber of the American Ruthenian Greek Catholic clergy and faithful to reconsider Cum Data Fuerit? I am glad that we are closer today and that the bitterness of the past is being put behind us in America, but the question ultimately remains unresolved in my opinion.
Last edited by DMD; 01/25/12 09:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
One answer I have heard to this question is a desire to work within the system to reform and change it.
I think that may be one reason the Melkite Church does not seek dispensations from the Eastern Congregation for the ordination of married men in this country but sends them back to the Middle East for ordination. It might not be the perfect solution but I admire them for doing so. It's kind of like a respectful civil disobedience.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953 |
One answer I have heard to this question is a desire to work within the system to reform and change it.
I think that may be one reason the Melkite Church does not seek dispensations from the Eastern Congregation for the ordination of married men in this country but sends them back to the Middle East for ordination. It might not be the perfect solution but I admire them for doing so. It's kind of like a respectful civil disobedience. After the experience with the Russianizing forces within Orthodoxy following St. Alexis and Archbishop Ireland, it was only with a sense of 'respectful civil disobedience' that the movement which led to ACROD began its efforts to overcome Cum Data and the accompanying threat of Latinization. It was the lack of a 'respectful' response which caused the second wave of schism within the Greek Catholic Church. I think we all should be grateful that today's Rome is less inclined to act with a heavy hand than was the case in the past.
Last edited by DMD; 01/25/12 10:16 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
Times certainly are different. In this situation, the Melkite Church is perfectly within its canonical rights to ordain married men in the Middle East and send them here.
Cum Data Fuerit expressly forbade the importation of married priests from Eastern Europe, so that wasn't an option for the Greek Catholic Church in the 1930s.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953 |
But doesn't that return us back to my initial questions?
The truth is that within the sphere of reality, in which we all live, there really isn't an answer which will be satisfactory to all of us. We all have to decide for ourselves how far we may compromise on some issues in the face of greater truths. As I alluded to earlier, we should be grateful that things are not as they were back in 'the day.'
Where the future will lead us remains to be seen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24 |
Indeed, we Orthodox would ask, how then do you reconcile your status as Eastern Catholic members of a Sui Juris Church (meaning: "having full legal rights or capacity") in communion with the Holy See if your Church and her rules (i.e. her 'juris') are subordinate to a majority vore of a 'national conference of bishops' which to any traditional Eastern ecclesiological (including post-Unions) is an anomaly as they are currently constituted by the Church of Rome? It is an injustice we accomodate because I think our bishops (all Eastern Catholic Bishops) are unsure how to resume a married priesthood knowing most parishes can't afford to pay a living wage. I think some bishops feel it is just easier to continue with a celibate priesthood. Beyond that however, the Orthodox Bishops involved in the inter-Church dialogues need to protest how unacceptable this situation is and encourage/demand Rome restore our full autonomy. Allow our patriarchs unrestricted jurisdiction over their faithfull anywhere, allow Synnods to elect our bishops, and stop interfering with our married priesthood.
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
Beyond that however, the Orthodox Bishops involved in the inter-Church dialogues need to protest how unacceptable this situation is and encourage/demand Rome restore our full autonomy. Allow our patriarchs unrestricted jurisdiction over their faithfull anywhere, allow Synnods to elect our bishops, and stop interfering with our married priesthood. Perhaps like this quote by Kyr Vsevolod, of blessed memory, of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA: "As I have stressed, there is no need to require the Greco-Catholic Church of Kiev to break communion with Rome. But once this Church has restored communion with the Great Church of Constantinople, there will be no need or reason for Rome to attempt to retain the artificial organizational dependence of this Local Church on the Vatican. It will become the joy and the obligation of the Ecumenical Throne to require the dissolution of these juridical impositions which our Greco-Catholic brothers and sisters also find unacceptable: the attempt to impose clerical celibacy, the appointment of hierarchs without canonical election, the claim that the ordinary disciplinary decisions of Synods must have the confirmation of the Pope, the bestowal of the cardinalate on the chief hierarch. Rome assures us, the Orthodox, that she has no intention of imposing such restrictions upon us; let Rome prove it by ceasing to impose such restrictions on these our brothers."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 73
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 73 |
Indeed, we Orthodox would ask, how then do you reconcile your status as Eastern Catholic members of a Sui Juris Church (meaning: "having full legal rights or capacity") in communion with the Holy See if your Church and her rules (i.e. her 'juris') are subordinate to a majority vore of a 'national conference of bishops' which to any traditional Eastern ecclesiological (including post-Unions) is an anomaly as they are currently constituted by the Church of Rome? It is an injustice we accomodate because I think our bishops (all Eastern Catholic Bishops) are unsure how to resume a married priesthood knowing most parishes can't afford to pay a living wage. I think some bishops feel it is just easier to continue with a celibate priesthood. Beyond that however, the Orthodox Bishops involved in the inter-Church dialogues need to protest how unacceptable this situation is and encourage/demand Rome restore our full autonomy. Allow our patriarchs unrestricted jurisdiction over their faithfull anywhere, allow Synnods to elect our bishops, and stop interfering with our married priesthood. I have to agree. I think that if the Orthodox, actually want to see drastic changes in the way the ECCs are treated by Rome and if they really want to see Rome demonstrate that the ECCs are Churches in their own right, and that they should have all the rights that any EOC has, then the EO Bishops really must demand it of Rome, because Rome is more apt to listen to them than to the EC bishops. The EO bishops are in a much better place to make demands of Rome than the EC bishops. If the EO bishops could see the ECCs as allies and rally behind the ECCs and demand change on the part of Rome, I think we'd see a restoration of the Eastern Traditions, and a return to Orthodox ecclesiology much more quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
