www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Eastern Code and Eastern Catholics

I believe the Eastern Code of Canons is still not online. PetrosPete's recent posting prompted me to find these and submit them for discussion here. I realize there are a variety of views on the subjects mentioned in these selected canons. As far as I know this has not been specifically discussed here on this Forum.

Canon 42

Just as, by the Lord's decision, Saint Peter and the other Apos-
tles constitute one college, so in a similar way the Roman Pon-
tiff, successor of Peter, and the bishops, successors of the
Apostles, are joined together.

Canon 43

The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office
(munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the
Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the
college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire
Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he
enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in
the Church which he can always freely exercise.

Canon 45

{1} The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office (munus), not only
has power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of
ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by
which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops
possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both streng-
thened and safeguarded. {2} The Roman Pontiff, in fulfilling the
office (munus) of the supreme pastor of the Church is always
united in communion with the other bishops and with the entire
Church; however, he has the right, according to the needs of the
Church, to determine the manner, either personal or collegial, of
exercising this function. {3} There is neither appeal nor re-
course against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff.

Canon 46

{1} In exercising his office (munus) the Roman Pontiff is as-
sisted by the bishops who aid him in various ways and among these
is the synod of bishops; moreover the cardinals, the Roman curia,
pontifical legates and other persons and various institutes as-
sist him according to the needs of the times; all these persons
and institutes carry out the task committed to them in his name
and by his authority for the good of all the Churches, according
to the norm of law established by the Roman Pontiff himself. {2}
The participation of patriarchs and other hierarchs who preside
over Churches sui iuris in the synod of bishops is regulated by
special norms established by the Roman Pontiff.

Canon 50

{1} The college of bishops exercises power over the entire
Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council. {2} The
college exercises the same power through the united action of the
bishops dispersed in the world, which action as such has been
initiated or has been freely accepted by the Roman Pontiff so
that a truly collegial act results. {3} It is for the Roman
Pontiff, in keeping with the needs of the Church, to select and
promote the ways by which the college of bishops is to exercise
collegially its function regarding the entire Church.

Canon 51

{1} It is for the Roman Pontiff alone to convoke an ecumenical
council, to preside over it personally or through others, to
transfer, suspend or dissolve it, and to confirm its decrees.
{2} It is for the same Roman Pontiff to determine matters to be
treated in a council and to establish the order to be followed in
the same council; to the questions proposed by the Roman Pontiff
the fathers of a council can add other questions, to be approved
by the same Roman Pontiff.

Canon 52

{1} It is the right and obligation of all and only the bishops
who are members of the college of bishops to participate in an
ecumenical council with a deliberative vote. {2} The supreme
authority of the Church can also call others who are not bishops
to an ecumenical council and determine what part they take in it.

Canon 54

{1} Decrees of an ecumenical council do not have obligatory
force unless they are approved by the Roman Pontiff together with
the fathers of the council and are confirmed by the Roman Pontiff
and promulgated at his order. {2} When the college of bishops
takes collegial action in another manner, initiated or freely
accepted by the Roman Pontiff, in order for its decrees to have
binding force, they need this same confirmation and promulgation.

Canon 595

{1} The Church, to whom Christ the Lord entrusted the deposit of
faith so that, assisted by the Holy Spirit, it might reverently
safeguard revealed truth, more closely examine it and faithfully
proclaim and expound it, has the innate duty and right to preach
the gospel to all nations, independent of any human power what-
ever. {2} To the Church belongs the right always and everywhere
to announce moral principles, including those pertaining to the
social order, and to make judgments on any human affairs to the
extent that they are required by the fundamental rights of the
human person or the salvation of souls.

Canon 596

The office of teaching in the name of the Church belongs only to
bishops; but that function is shared, according to the norm of
law, both by those who have been made collaborators of the
bishops by sacred orders and by those who, though not in sacred
orders, have received the mandate to teach.

Canon 597

{1} The Roman Pontiff, in virtue of his office, possesses in-
fallible teaching authority if, as supreme pastor and teacher of
all the Christian faithful who is to confirm his fellow believers
in the faith, he proclaims with a definitive act that a doctrine
of faith or morals is to be held. {2} The college of bishops
also possesses infallible teaching authority if the bishops,
gathered in an ecumenical council, exercise their teaching auth-
ority, and, as teachers and judges of faith and morals for the
universal Church, declare that a doctrine of faith or morals must
be definitively held; they also exercise it scattered throughout
the world but united in a bond of communion among themselves and
with the successor of Peter when together with that same Roman
Pontiff in their capacity as authentic teachers of faith and
morals they agree on an opinion to be held as definitive. {3}
No doctrine is understood to be infallibly defined unless it is
clearly established as such.

Canon 598

{1} All that is contained in the written word of God or in tradition,
that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church and
also proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magiste-
rium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium,
must be believed with divine and catholic faith; it is manifested
by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the lea-
dership of the sacred magisterium; therefore, all are bound to
avoid any doctrines whatever which are contrary to these truths.

{2} Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Canon 599

A religious obsequium of intellect and will, even if not the as-
sent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching on faith or morals
which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate when
they exercise the authentic magisterium even if they do not in-
tend to proclaim it with a definitive act; therefore the Chris-
tian faithful are to take care to avoid whatever is not in har-
mony with that teaching.

Canon 600

Although they do not enjoy infallible teaching authority, the
bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the
college, whether as individuals or gathered in synods or in par-
ticular councils, are authentic teachers and instructors of the
faith for the faithful entrusted to their care; the faithful must
adhere to the authentic teaching of their own bishops with a re-
ligious obsequium of soul.

Canon 1436

{1} Whoever denies a truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or who calls into doubt, or who totally repudiates the Christian faith, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, it to be punished as a heretic or an apostate with a major excommunication; a cleric moreover can be punished with other penalties, not excluding deposition.

{2} In addition to these cases, whoever obstinately rejects a teaching that the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, have set forth to be held definitively, or who affirms what they have condemned as erroneous, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished with an appropriate penalty.

[This message has been edited by DTBrown (edited 10-27-2000).]

the Roman Pontiff

Very Eastern expression, that. Har har.

<a href="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus�</a>

>>>Very Eastern expression, that. Har har.<<<

The 1995 Symposium on the CCEO, held in Balamand, Lebanon, had some very interesting (and on the whole, unflattering) things to say about the Code, its style and contents, and the manner in which it was promulgated. The consensus of that learned gathering was that the new CCEO was better than the Multu Proprios that it replaced, but can only be considered an interim measure because of its inconsistency with the Eastern canonical Tradition.

I would here agree with Stuart that the current Code can only be viewed as an interim document. Nonetheless, does it not represent the official position on these subjects (i.e., the role of the Bishop of Rome, ecumenical councils, defined dogmas)? When we say "The Church teaches..." is this not what the Church officially teaches?

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

[This message has been edited by DTBrown (edited 10-27-2000).]

>>>Nonetheless, does it not represent the official position on these subjects (i.e., the role of the
Bishop of Rome, ecumenical councils, defined dogmas)? When we say "The Church teaches..." is
this not what the Church officially teaches?<<<

To the extent that each particular Church receives the Code and chooses to follow it, it does. However, the behavior of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church (in the area of marriage regulations, for instance) makes plain that they, at least, feel free to accept, reject or modify specific canons according to their own particular circumstances--with the permission and approval of Rome, if possible; without, if necessary.

Anyone know the current status of the dispute that Stuart alludes to between the Melkite Church and Rome (re: the requirement that the Catholic partner in a mixed marriage make known their intent to raise their children as Catholics)?

Nonetheless, we know what the official position of the Church is. Some may agree...some may not. The canon re: which faith a Catholic will raise their children in if married to an Orthodox is not on the same level as the role of the Bishop of Rome or defined dogma or what constitutes an ecumenical council, is it?

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

what the church teaches? please read the entire sentence. this extraction from the text is what confuses and confounds. there are many teachings, all are not of equal weight or authority. some are the "best" available for now, others from the chair of peter are dogmatic in authority. sometimes it seems that some in the vatican want people to regard all that comes from there as if it all were dogma.it is not. also, all texts are not only to be read in their entirety, but in the context of the constitutions of vatican ii and Scripture. each line or canon is never ever to be understood as standing alone. the over-riding commandment is to save souls. simplistic readings or reading to get some point across is play, not understanding.

A failure to truly accept the concept of communion of churches and fraternity among bishops leads some to invent disputes where none exist. Within the Latin Church, where in theroy the bishops are much more closely bound to the Pope as their Patriarch and Latin law as particular totheir church, bishops in various circumstances with the full knowledge of the Holy See make pastoral applications of the marriage provision as best fits the times, societies, and personal situation they exist in. Certainly where political or cultural reasons make it impossible, this provision is considered inoperative by the legitimate canonical authority.

So even more so in a situation where it is deemed inoperative by the legitimate Patriarchal authority. No orders have come from the evil Rome to Antioch against her practice. I am not even aware of any fraternal consultation or dialogue over this, though I would find it unobjectionable if suggested.

Those who see a boggyman in every fraternal interaction between churches in communion, simply don't beleive in God's grace over those with the episcopal charism is effective.
K
.

Thanks, Kurt, for these thoughts.

I know there are varying views here among the participants regarding the role of the Bishop of Rome, defined dogmas and what constitutes an ecumenical council. Some propose that the current Orthodox position on these subjects is also what Byzantine Catholics believe as if what separates Catholic and Orthodox does not apply to Byzantine Catholics. If that were the case then the Eastern Code of Canons would have no application to Eastern Catholics.

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Of course it was, but "multu proprios" were
actually "Litterae Apostolicae Motu Propio
Datae" (shortly - in singular - "motu
proprio"). There were at least three such
documents, as I recall: "Crebrae allatae
sunt", "Postquam apostolicis litteris" and
"Cleri sanctitati".
Just a humble correction...
Let us fight
against every Latinization - but the Latin
language itself is not guilty of anything.

Sincerely,
Peter



[This message has been edited by Piotr Siwicki (edited 10-28-2000).]

There was a fourth motu proprio, "Sollicitudinem Nostram". A good commentary on the CCEO is Archimandrite Victor Pospishil's, _Eastern Catholic Church Law_,Revised Edition, St. Maron Publications, New York, New York, 1996. It is an easy read. It provides a history of Eastern Church Law, as well as the events leading to the promulgation of the CCEO.

???Anyone know the current status of the dispute that Stuart alludes to between the Melkite Church and Rome ???

Is there any truth to the rumour that the Melkite church and Antiocian Orthodox church are talking??

JoeS

>>>Is there any truth to the rumour that the Melkite church and Antiocian Orthodox church are talking??<<<

Yes. Where have you been for the last five years?

Yes, just this month the Catholic Patriarchs met in Lebanon and were joined at the close of their session by the Eastern Orthodox. Such meets seems to have become a regular part of these gatherings of Catholic prelates. The Holy See has praised the Eastern Catholic bishops for their leadership in developing these meetings and Constantinople has voiced no objection to them publicly.

It seems to me that one of the causes of the real productivness of these meetings is that the Church in the Middle East has serious pastoral, social and educational issues. This authentic work of the Church keeps them focused on their common endeavor rather than inventing issues to part company on.

K.


K.

I have this book at home (poorly translated into Ukrainian). However, I wrote my comments at work and at that moment recalled only two TITLES of such "motu proprio" documents. I knew they had been four, so I wrote "at least three" as I couldn't recall the fourth title.
BTW, the history of Eastern codification is described in the CCEC itself (see preface).

Sincerely,
Peter