Question on Intermarriage Between Rites

[ParvaDei]

Hello to all and good morning.

I just had a theoretical question that came up in my head: I know that Eastern and Western Catholicism have two sets of praxes, theology, etc., etc. So, if there is a marriage between people of two different rites, how would they explain Catholic teachings to their children? (Of course, I'm sure most would be "the same conclusion through different means", but then when you get into the essence/energy distinction, the filioque clause, and married vs. celibate priests, wouldn't that get confusing -- if only for a little bit? )

And if you are in a marriage like that, how do you two deal with it? (For example, I know that the children get their "native Rite" (so to speak) from the father, so would you send children to the children's ministry for Eastern Catholics (or vice-versa) over the other?)

Thanks!

~ParvaDei

[acacia12]

Good question. As a returning Roman Catholic, I didn't even know about Eastern Rite Catholics. I'm still trying to get my head around all this
I always thought that being Catholic, we all believed in the same things and that their was no division or differences. Looking forward to reading the answers that reply to your question

[Vico]

Originally Posted by ParvaDei

Hello to all and good morning.

I just had a theoretical question that came up in my head: I know that Eastern and Western Catholicism have two sets of praxes, theology, etc., etc. So, if there is a marriage between people of two different rites, how would they explain Catholic teachings to their children? (Of course, I'm sure most would be "the same conclusion through different means", but then when you get into the essence/energy distinction, the filioque clause, and married vs. celibate priests, wouldn't that get confusing -- if only for a little bit? )

And if you are in a marriage like that, how do you two deal with it? (For example, I know that the children get their "native Rite" (so to speak) from the father, so would you send children to the children's ministry for Eastern Catholics (or vice-versa) over the other?)

Thanks!

~ParvaDei

There is canon law for that, the Latin Canon law (CIC) and the eastern canon law (CCEO).

CIC Can. 111 §1 Through the reception of baptism a child becomes a member of the Latin Church if the parents belong to that Church or, should one of them not belong to it, if they have both by common consent chosen that the child be baptized in the Latin Church: if that common consent is lacking, the child becomes a member of the ritual Church to which the father belongs.
§2 Any candidate for baptism who has completed the fourteenth year of age may freely choose to be baptized either in the Latin Church or in another autonomous ritual Church; in which case the person belongs to the Church which he or she has chosen.

CIC Can. 112 §1 After the reception of baptism, the following become members of another autonomous ritual Church:
1° those who have obtained permission from the Apostolic See;
2° a spouse who, on entering marriage or during its course, has declared that he or she is transferring to the autonomous ritual
Church of the other spouse; on the dissolution of the marriage, however, that person may freely return to the latin Church;
3° the children of those mentioned in nn. 1 and 2 who have not completed their fourteenth year, and likewise in a mixed marriage the children of a catholic party who has lawfully transferred to another ritual Church; on completion of their fourteenth year, however, they may return to the latin Church.
§2 The practice, however long standing, of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of an autonomous ritual Church, does not bring with it membership of that Church.

Canon 112 (NCCCL, Beal, Coriden, Green)
"... because ascription to a ritual church is definitive, it belongs to the status of persons."
"In effect, the canon distinguishes membership from liturgical practice. This means that change of ritual church membership occurs in one of the three ways provided for in paragraph one."

Breakout:
3° the children of those mentioned in nn. 1 [those who have obtained permission from the Apostolic See] and 2 [a spouse transferred during marriage] who have not completed their fourteenth year, and likewise in a mixed marriage the children of a catholic party who has lawfully transferred to another ritual Church; on completion of their fourteenth year, however, they may return to the latin Church.

CIC 1248.1
The obligation of assisting at Mass is satisfied wherever Mass is celebrated in a catholic rite either on a holyday itself or on the evening of the previous day.


CCEO Canon 12
1. The Christian faithful are bound by an obligation in their own patterns of activity always to maintain communion with the Church.
2. They are to fulfill with great diligence the duties which they owe to the universal Church and to their own Church sui iuris.

CCEO Canon 17
The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescriptions of their own Church sui iuris, and to follow their own form of spiritual life consonant with the teaching of the Church.

CCEO Canon 29
1. By virtue of baptism, a child who has not yet completed his fourteenth year of age is enrolled in the Church sui iuris of the Catholic father; or the Church sui iuris of the mother if only the mother is Catholic or if both parents by agreement freely request it, with due regard for particular law established by the Apostolic See.
2. If the child who has not yet completed his fourteenth year is:
(1) born of an unwed mother, he is enrolled in the Church sui iuris to which the mother belongs;
(2) born of unknown parents, he is to be enrolled in the Church sui iuris of those in whose care he has been legitimately committed are enrolled; if it is a case of an adoptive father and mother, 1 should be applied;
(3) born of non-baptized parents, the child is to be a member of the Church sui iuris of the one who is responsible for his education in the Catholic faith.

CCEO Canon 32
1. No one can validly transfer to another Church sui iuris without the consent of the Apostolic See.
2. In the case of Christian faithful of an eparchy of a certain Church sui iuris who petition to transfer to another Church sui iuris which has its own eparchy in the same territory, this consent of the Apostolic See is presumed, provided that the eparchial bishops of both eparchies consent to the transfer in writing.

CCEO Canon 33
A wife is at liberty to transfer to the Church of the husband at the celebration of or during the marriage; when the marriage has ended, she can freely return to the original Church sui iuris.

CCEO Canon 40.3
Other Christian faithful are also to foster an understanding and appreciation of their own rite, and are held to observe it everywhere unless something is excused by the law.

CCEO Canon 403
1. With due regard for the right and obligation to preserve everywhere their own rite, lay persons have the right to participate actively in the liturgical celebrations of any Church sui iuris whatsoever, according to the norms of the liturgical books.

CCEO Canon 881
1. The Christian faithful are bound by the obligation to participate on Sundays and feast days in the Divine Liturgy, or according to the prescriptions or legitimate customs of their own Church sui iuris, in the celebration of the divine praises.

CCEO Canon 883
1. The Christian faithful who are outside the territorial boundaries of their own Church sui iuris can adopt fully for themselves the feast days and days of penance which are in force where they are staying.
2. In families in which the parents are enrolled in different Churches sui iuris, it is permitted to observe the norms of one or the other Church, in regard to feast days and days of penance.

[Andre1000]

Originally Posted by ParvaDei

Hello to all and good morning.

I just had a theoretical question that came up in my head: I know that Eastern and Western Catholicism have two sets of praxes, theology, etc., etc. So, if there is a marriage between people of two different rites, how would they explain Catholic teachings to their children? (Of course, I'm sure most would be "the same conclusion through different means", but then when you get into the essence/energy distinction, the filioque clause, and married vs. celibate priests, wouldn't that get confusing -- if only for a little bit? )

And if you are in a marriage like that, how do you two deal with it? (For example, I know that the children get their "native Rite" (so to speak) from the father, so would you send children to the children's ministry for Eastern Catholics (or vice-versa) over the other?)

Thanks!

~ParvaDei

Eastern Catholics also believe in the filioque. The teaching and the faith is absolutely the same, only how to express the faith is differed. This is just like a Marriage where the parents speak differed languages.

[WingsOfEagles]

The couple would find a parish belonging to one of the rites and attend it. The parent from the other rite can do this and commit no sin. I think it is much easier than marrying a Protestant or something like that.

[smad0142]

CCEO Canon 883
1. The Christian faithful who are outside the territorial boundaries of their own Church sui iuris can adopt fully for themselves the feast days and days of penance which are in force where they are staying.
2. In families in which the parents are enrolled in different Churches sui iuris, it is permitted to observe the norms of one or the other Church, in regard to feast days and days of penance.

They can simply pick a Rite to make it easier and then explain as they grow older.

[Diak]

Eastern Catholics also believe in the filioque.

It is actually ommitted in many Eastern Catholic parishes. Article I of the Union of Brest which re-established communion between Rome and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church states: "...we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son." This is essentially a reiteration of the Cappadocian Fathers and especially St. Basil the Great.

[lssanjose]

Originally Posted by Diak

It is actually ommitted in many Eastern Catholic parishes. Article I of the Union of Brest which re-established communion between Rome and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church states: "...we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son." This is essentially a reiteration of the Cappadocian Fathers and especially St. Basil the Great.

Thanks, for this, Diak.

Slava Isusu Christu, Slava Na' Viki,

Les

[Vico]

The entire item 1 from the Union of Brest:

1.—Since there is a quarrel between the Romans and Greeks about the procession of the Holy Spirit, which greatly impede unity really for no other reason than that we do not wish to understand one another—we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TREATBR.HTM

[ParvaDei]

Originally Posted by Diak

It is actually ommitted in many Eastern Catholic parishes. Article I of the Union of Brest which re-established communion between Rome and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church states: "...we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son." This is essentially a reiteration of the Cappadocian Fathers and especially St. Basil the Great.

That's what I thought. So, if that's the case, how can two people of different rites teach the Faith to their children if they disagree on key points like this that separate the Latins and the Easterns? (Again, I know that most of the time, it will be reaching the same conclusion via different paths, but then there's stuff like this where one can get into arguments about filioque vs. no filioque, and the child just gets confused in the end. I mean, do they just put it off until later in life or what -- you know, the practical aspects of this? )

Also, to the guy who posted the canon law: I can see where you're coming from, but again, I'm just wondering how do parents and children work this out in real life. Even as a Latin myself, I don't have all the canons straight out in my head, and my Latin Rite parents know literally nothing about them -- they just try to live a good Catholic life to the best of their ability, trying not to concern themselves with stuff they don't have time for. (I wish not to offend anyone; it's just the case in my family.) I'm not sure about the Easterns, though. . .

***

Or maybe I haven't been paying attention to this thread for a while(?) . . . I had a two-day delay due to personal things that I wanted to take care of. Either way, if the question was already answered, I apologize for adding more fluff to the thread -- carry on!

[Vico]

Originally Posted by ParvaDei

That's what I thought. So, if that's the case, how can two people of different rites teach the Faith to their children if they disagree on key points like this that separate the Latins and the Easterns? (Again, I know that most of the time, it will be reaching the same conclusion via different paths, but then there's stuff like this where one can get into arguments about filioque vs. no filioque, and the child just gets confused in the end. I mean, do they just put it off until later in life or what -- you know, the practical aspects of this? )

Also, to the guy who posted the canon law: I can see where you're coming from, but again, I'm just wondering how do parents and children work this out in real life. Even as a Latin myself, I don't have all the canons straight out in my head, and my Latin Rite parents know literally nothing about them -- they just try to live a good Catholic life to the best of their ability, trying not to concern themselves with stuff they don't have time for. (I wish not to offend anyone; it's just the case in my family.) I'm not sure about the Easterns, though. . .

***

Or maybe I haven't been paying attention to this thread for a while(?) . . . I had a two-day delay due to personal things that I wanted to take care of. Either way, if the question was already answered, I apologize for adding more fluff to the thread -- carry on!

Do you mean how to inter-ecclesial families organize? I think it depends upon the territory, the ages of the people, available transportation, and the parishes available in the area. Studying the faith takes time, classes and reading, and living the faith. But the faith is the same, whereas the liturgies and theologies are different. It does not take very much to understand the differences.

For laity and clergy:
Inter-Ecclesial Relations Between Eastern and Latin Catholics


https://clsa.site-ym.com/store/view_....asp?id=315681

[Diak]

Surely the Latin parent will accept Paragraph 248 of the Cathechism:

248 At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father's character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he "who proceeds from the Father", it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son.77 The Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque). It says this, "legitimately and with good reason",78 for the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as "the principle without principle",79 is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, he is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds.80 This legitimate complementarity, provided it does not become rigid, does not affect the identity of faith in the reality of the same mystery confessed.

[Peter J]

Originally Posted by ParvaDei

Hello to all and good morning.

I just had a theoretical question that came up in my head: I know that Eastern and Western Catholicism have two sets of praxes, theology, etc., etc. So, if there is a marriage between people of two different rites, how would they explain Catholic teachings to their children? (Of course, I'm sure most would be "the same conclusion through different means", but then when you get into the essence/energy distinction, the filioque clause, and married vs. celibate priests, wouldn't that get confusing -- if only for a little bit? )

And if you are in a marriage like that, how do you two deal with it?

Hi ParvaDei. I take it from your question that you think it would be a problem, but personally I can't see that it would be. Consider: if the differences don't make being in full communion with each other a problem, then the difference surely wouldn't make marriage and raising children a problem, right?

[ParvaDei]

Originally Posted by Peter J

Hi ParvaDei. I take it from your question that you think it would be a problem, but personally I can't see that it would be. Consider: if the differences don't make being in full communion with each other a problem, then the difference surely wouldn't make marriage and raising children a problem, right?

I don't mean it would be a problem in the sense of having a good marriage and family life in general. Instead, what I see as a potential problem is when it comes to teaching the kid(s) how the Faith should be lived, because Latins and Easterns approach theology differently and thus have different liturgical/devotional practices and attitudes.

That's what I'm confused about, because would the parents have to teach their kids that as long as the Rites are Catholic and under the Pope, it's all just opinion (if it's not a dogma, obviously), and it doesn't matter which way you go? (Indeed, while hopefully this would be talked about prior to marriage, there could be reluctance on the part of Latins to support married priests since it's not what they're used to and on the part of Easterns to some sort of Latin practice that may not fit with their theological understanding, which again could lead to questions for kids in terms of consistency.)

Thus, I'm just wondering how would people in a mixed-Rite marriage teach their kids their sides of the Faith without seeming to contradict themselves in some aspects without further explanation later on when they can understand the theology better.

That's all. But then again, I could be wrong, so please charitably correct me if I am mistaken -- I'm not infallible.

[Vico]

Originally Posted by ParvaDei

I don't mean it would be a problem in the sense of having a good marriage and family life in general. Instead, what I see as a potential problem is when it comes to teaching the kid(s) how the Faith should be lived, because Latins and Easterns approach theology differently and thus have different liturgical/devotional practices and attitudes.

That's what I'm confused about, because would the parents have to teach their kids that as long as the Rites are Catholic and under the Pope, it's all just opinion (if it's not a dogma, obviously), and it doesn't matter which way you go? (Indeed, while hopefully this would be talked about prior to marriage, there could be reluctance on the part of Latins to support married priests since it's not what they're used to and on the part of Easterns to some sort of Latin practice that may not fit with their theological understanding, which again could lead to questions for kids in terms of consistency.)

Thus, I'm just wondering how would people in a mixed-Rite marriage teach their kids their sides of the Faith without seeming to contradict themselves in some aspects without further explanation later on when they can understand the theology better.

That's all. But then again, I could be wrong, so please charitably correct me if I am mistaken -- I'm not infallible.

Conforming to the liturgical practice and sacramental discipline is required of the clergy (and maybe the religious by their rule). The faithful can follow private devotions and have a theology as they like (not in opposition to Catholicism), while they support both the Universal and their canonical Church sui iuris.