OUR LADY OF FATIMA  CATHOLIC CHURCH

I Stand Corrected (or Partially)

December 7, 2006

A few columns ago I asked a question: "By what 'rite' do you do these things ?". I was referencing the recent "inter-ritual" ordinations of deacons and priests by the SSPX prelate, Bishop Richard Williamson. I received the following e-mail a few days ago which said in part:

In your recent column (which I always look forward to reading), you said: "When was the last time I heard of ordinations for one rite being held using the liturgical rites and traditions of another community ? I can't think of one in my years of studies. "

 

As a matter of fact, while rare, it's not unheard of. To give one example, Blessed Hieromartyr Theodore Romzha, Byzantine Bishop of Uzhorod, was adminstrator for the Latin Catholics in the area, and ordained priests for the Latin rite. This is documented in the book YE SHALL BE MY WITNESSES by Fr. Athanasius Pekar, OSBM, about the Ruthenian Church under Communism. The reverse happened frequently in the USA when the Eastern Churches didn't have their own bishops.

Some few here are still under the administration of the local Latin bishop, e.g., the Syro-Malankar from India; why this should be when the parallel rite and church, the Syrian Catholic, have a bishop here puzzles me. It would seem more logical to me to have them under the Syrian Catholic, or even the Syro-Malabar bishop (who is likewise from India, though of another liturgical tradition).

The case of SSPX bishops spreading schism and confusion is another issue, but this is not germane to my point here: interritual ordination has taken place in the past.

The author is an Orthodox Bishop and he should no doubt be more knowledgeable than I about such things. Then I remembered these two pictures of Archbishop Fulton Sheen (a Latin Rite bishop) in Eastern Rite Eucharistic garb:

Sheen in the middle	Sheen on the right

The problem, though, as originally stated, was whether a bishop of one rite could ordain a candidate from another rite. Researching both the Latin Code of Canon Law (1983) and the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (1990) the answer is yes, but only with the permission of the Apostolic See (i.e. the Pope). 

Can. 1015 §2. If not impeded by a just cause, the proper bishop is to ordain his own subjects personally; without an apostolic indult, however, he cannot ordain licitly a subject of an Eastern rite. CIC 1983

Can. 748 §2. An eparchial bishop cannot ordain a candidate subject to him who is enrolled in another Church sui iuris without the permission of the Apostolic See; if, however, it is a case of a candidate who is enrolled in a patriarchal Church and has a domicile or quasi-domicile within the territorial boundaries of the same Church, the patriarch can also grant this permission. CCEO 1990

We can be assured no such permission was granted. In addition, there must be no possibility of moral recourse to a bishop of one's own rite (as the e-mailer above pointed out) which likewise was not the case here. Thus I conclude with the good bishop above, the action can only be seen as clearly schismatic, or in the words of the legitimate bishop affronted by Williamson's actions:

Archbishop Ihor Vozniak of Lviv said that the ordination of priests to serve in Ukraine was a "criminal" act, since Bishop Williamson ignored the authority of the Roman and Byzantine Catholic bishops of the region. Archbishop Vozniak, who heads the Byzantine Church in Lviv, stressed that none of the priests ordained by Williamson would have permission to serve Ukrainian Catholic parishes. [Full Story Here]

Thus again: "By what 'rite' do you do these things ?"

+TF

Copyright© Our Lady of Fatima Spring Hill, 10401 Spring Hill Drive, Spring Hill, Florida, 34608, USA