Rites of the Catholic Church

[zwergel88]

I feel awful saying this, but I have read alot of this thread, and I read the thing on EWTN, but I have to admitt, I still don't completely understand this. I know I'm a Roman Catholic, so I guess that's enough.

Therefore, I think that it is possible to explain this, however you must type very slowly.

[musturde]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 15 2005, 11:39 AM']no. 
lol if people could make their own rite, we'd have accumulated many more than 23 over our 2 millenia of existence.
[right][snapback]685657[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Well, how is a rite made then? Are you saying we can't make another rite currently or that you never could?

[Aloysius]

they were created by historical and cultural realities, many of them sad realities (schisms). I suppose theoretically another rite could organically form, I can't foresee the conditions that would cause it in the modern world. the only upcoming rites we could hope for is more eastern rites as the orthodox churches return in my opinion.

an Anglican rite seems to be growing, I don't know if there would ever be consideration to forming an entire sui juris church unless the unlikely event happened where the entire Anglican church returned. then I suppose the 'archbishop of canturbury' could be the patriarch of such a church

maybe some of the oldest protestant churches if they were ever to return would become their own rite, lutheran (though I bet they'd have to change their name! lol) or something... I don't know.

[White Knight]

I have no idea.

[Aloysius]

the main original point was not that people understand all the caveats we ended up discussing about sui juris churches, rites, and rituals, but that they understand that the term "Roman Catholic Church" does not refer to the entire Catholic Communion. There are many other churches all in union with the Pope that believe the same doctrine though holding to certain theological and ritualistic differences

it's the basic concept that the language-war word game that is used to attempt to connote the Catholic Church as something merely western, merely roman, merely european and nothing else at all is incorrect. there are different types of Catholic other than just "roman"

"Catholic Church" is a term forged in hostility, and the R is put there with the purpose of undermining our claim of universality.

anyway, that's it. ignore our little discussion on the intricacies of the system and what can be called a "rite" or "sui juris church"... the ultimate point is that there's alot more to the Catholic Church centered around the Roman Pontiff than the mere "roman" part of it.

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

There are 23 Sui Juris Catholic Churches, one of them is the 'Roman' Catholic or Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is composed of all 23 Sui Juris Churches, not just the Catholic Church.

[Apotheoun]

[i]I would put it this way:[/i]


There are 23 [i]sui juris[/i] Catholic Churches, one of them is the [i]Roman[/i] or [i]Latin[/i] Catholic Church, but there is also the [i]Ruthenian[/i] Catholic Church, the [i]Ukrainian[/i] Catholic Church, the [i]Melkite[/i] Catholic Church, and so on.

[rhetoricfemme]

I voted yes. I'd just chalk it up in a simple statement like, "There are different Rites of Catholicism, branches, if you like. At the moment I can't do them all justice and remember them all, so if you're interested, just Google it."

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='12 August 2005 - 10:14 PM' timestamp='1123899262' post='683675']
That's true. But you have to admit that there are people out there with an agenda who promote the idea.. I think the mandatory celibacy in the west is a great gift to the Church. It really bothers me when people devalue it or do comparisons with the practices of the east. The fact is, celibacy is ideal. The fathers, both east and west, are univocal in this regard.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the married clergy of the east has a beauty of its own, but I'm Roman Catholic and I'm not about to attack our traditions or compare east and west. Neither can be understood on the others terms.
[/quote]
I like this statement. It hadn't crossed my mind until now, but I agree with you.

[quote name='journeyman' date='13 August 2005 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1123967201' post='684288']
Do we understand all the varieties of Lutherans and/or Baptists?
[/quote]
Good point...

[quote name='p0lar_bear' date='15 August 2005 - 08:42 AM' timestamp='1124109737' post='685448']
Actually, there are 21 Eastern Catholic Churches that follow 5 traditions

Alexandrian Tradition:
Coptic Catholic Church
Ethiopian Catholic Church

Antiochene Tradition:
Syro-Malankara Catholic Church
Maronite Catholic Church
Syrian Catholic Church

Armenian Tradition:
Armenian Catholic Church

Byzantine Tradition:
Albanian Church
Belarussian (Byelorussian, White Russian) Church
Bulgarian Catholic Church
Eparchy of Krizevci
Greek Catholic Church
Hungarian Catholic Church
Italo-Albanian Catholic Church
Melkite Greek Catholic Church
Romanian Greek Catholic Church
Russian Church
Ruthenian Catholic Church
Slovak Catholic Church
Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church

Chaldean (East Syrian) Tradition:
Chaldean Catholic Church
Syro-Malabar Catholic Church


The Ambrosian, Gallican, and Mozarabic rites are/were part of the Latin Church, not the Eastern Churches. The Celtic rite I think was derived from an Eastern rite, but it was still part of the Western Church
[/quote]
Boy Howdy!

[Apotheoun]

There are 22 Eastern Catholic Churches, but for some reason the Macedonian Catholic Church was left off the above list of Churches within the Byzantine Tradition.

[Skinzo]

Apo is right. "Rites" is a misleading term really. The Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches says this to define a rite:
"A group of Christian faithful linked in accordance with the law by a hierarchy and expressly or tacitly recognized by the supreme authority of the Church as autonomous is in this Code called an autonomous Church" (canon 27)
And:
"1. A rite is the liturgical, theological, spiritual and disciplinary patrimony, culture and circumstances of history of a distinct people, by which its own manner of living the faith [b]is manifested in each autonomous [sui iuris] Church[/b]. 2. The rites treated in this code, unless otherwise stated, are those which arise from the Alexandrian, Antiochene, Armenian, Chaldean and Constantinopolitan traditions" (canon 28)[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches#cite_note-10"][/url]

The American bishops offered some clarity on this subject: "We have been accustomed to speaking of the Latin (Roman or Western) Rite or the Eastern Rites to designate these different Churches. However, the Church's contemporary legislation as contained in the [i]Code of Canon Law[/i] and the [i]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches[/i] makes it clear that we ought to speak, not of rites, but of Churches. Canon 112 of the Code of Canon Law uses the phrase 'autonomous ritual Churches' to designate the various Churches."
From "Eastern Catholics in the United States of America", 1999, p.4.

S.

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

[quote name='zwergel88' date='18 August 2005 - 10:16 PM' timestamp='1124424984' post='689994']
I feel awful saying this, but I have read alot of this thread, and I read the thing on EWTN, but I have to admitt, I still don't completely understand this. I know I'm a Roman Catholic.
[/quote]

Yes, you are Roman; but not all Catholics are Romans. However we are all Catholic in full communion with the Holy See. It may help to visit one or more of the Sui Juris Churches. If you google it you will find Maronite, Ruthenian, Ukranian and other Byzantine Catholic Churches in most major metropolitan(no pun intended) areas.

Edited May 31, 2010 by IgnatiusOfAntioch

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='IgnatiusOfAntioch' date='30 May 2010 - 09:16 PM' timestamp='1275272191' post='2120978']
Yes, you are Roman; but not all Catholics are Romans. However we are all Catholic in full communion with the Holy See.
[/quote]

The First Vatican Council uses the adjective "Roman" to describe the Universal Church. It, therefore, seems appropriate that all Catholics be called "Roman Catholics" since all Catholics are members of the Universal Church. If a Catholic wants to designate himself as a member of the Latin church (as opposed to the Eastern churches), he should state that he is a "Latin Catholic".

[Winchester]

I reckoned I'd bump this since I started in on someone about it.

Again.

[Paddington]

[quote name='Resurrexi' timestamp='1275272416' post='2120982']
The First Vatican Council uses the adjective "Roman" to describe the Universal Church. It, therefore, seems appropriate that all Catholics be called "Roman Catholics" since all Catholics are members of the Universal Church.[/quote]

Who could argue?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Paddington' timestamp='1288878926' post='2184703']
Who could argue?
[/quote]
I could.

1. It angers people.
2. There are senses of the word, and people who use Roman Catholic tend to slide right into criticizing celibacy, which is a discipline of our rite. They don't know what they're talking about.
5. Shut up, Rexi.