PRESERVATION OF RITE AND JURISDICTION: DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE HIERARCHY AND THE FAITHFUL

Rev. Dr. Francis Eluvathingal
Introduction
In the present scenario of the Catholic Church, especially of the Indian Church, preservation of the rite and jurisdiction are topics that we need to discuss and study as they help us to understand the position of the church on these. The study is for uniting everyone under one umbrella in a better way keeping one’s own individuality and respecting the other, than to fight to get the rights done. In the last Synod of Bishop in Rome, His Beatitude Mar Varkey Cardinal Vithayathil, Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Church stated that more than hundred years have elapsed since Leo XIII’s plea on the like dignity of Western and Eastern Catholics. Issues on these topics do exist not because there is no teaching on these topics from the magisterium but because of various other reasons. Hence this is an attempt to look into the duties and responsibilities of the hierarchy and the faithful as far the preservation of the rite and jurisdiction are concerned.

I. Teachings of the Church
According to Orientalium Ecclesiarum 4, “Provision must be made therefore everywhere in the world to protect and advance all these individual churches. For this purpose, each should organize its own parishes and hierarchy, where the spiritual good of the faithful requires it. The hierarchies of the various individual churches who have jurisdiction in the same territory should meet at regular intervals for consultation, and thus foster unity of action. They should make united efforts to promote common activities…”.
The injunction was repeated in Christus Dominus, 23, 27 “Where there are faithful of a different rite, the diocesan bishop should provide for their spiritual needs either through priests or parishes of that rite or through an episcopal vicar endowed with the necessary faculties. Wherever it is fitting, the last named should also have episcopal rank. Otherwise the Ordinary himself may perform the office of an Ordinary of different rites”. Moreover “one or more episcopal vicars can be named by the bishop. These automatically enjoy the same authority which the common law grants the vicar general … for the faithful of a determined rite” (CD 27). The same document went on to say that if, on account of some special circumstances, none of these alternatives was practicable, a special hierarchy could be established for each different Rite, should the Apostolic See judge this to be opportune.
In the letter of John Paul II to the Bishops of India, he said “By virtue of my office as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church I wish to state the following: … the Latin Ordinaries of such dioceses are to provide as soon as possible for an adequate pastoral care of the faithful of these Eastern Rites, through the ministry of priests, or through an Episcopal vicar endowed with the necessary faculties. Where circumstances would so indicate, the Apostolic See will establish a proper hierarchy for such faithful. This will be done through the two Roman Congregations responsible for the affairs of the Eastern and Latin Rites, and after consultation with the Latin Bishops involved.”
John Paul II’s Ecclesia in Asia, nr. 27, the above-said concepts are being repeated. The document says, “… I call upon everyone to recognize the legitimate customs and the legitimate freedom of these Churches in disciplinary and liturgical matters, as stipulated by the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. Following the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, there is an urgent need to overcome the fears and misunderstandings which appear at times between the Catholic Eastern Churches and the Latin Church, and among those Churches themselves, especially with regard to the pastoral care of their people, also outside their own territories. As children of the one Church, reborn into the newness of life in Christ, believers are called to undertake all things in a spirit of common purpose, trust and unfailing charity. Conflicts must not be allowed to create division, but must instead be handled in a spirit of truth and respect, since no good can come except from love… It is clear that the Catholic Eastern Churches possess a great wealth of tradition and experience, which can greatly benefit the whole Church”.
Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, a recent document of the Holy See, also repeats the above-mentioned obligation regarding the Eastern Catholic migrants with special reference to the Latin Bishops (Nos. 52 - 55). Eastern Rite Catholic migrants, whose numbers are steadily increasing, deserve particular pastoral attention. In their regard we should first of all remember the juridical obligation of the faithful to observe their own rite everywhere insofar as possible, rite being understood as their liturgical, theological, spiritual and disciplinary heritage (cf. CCEO Can. 28, §1). Even a prolonged practice of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of another Church sui iuris does not mean that they become members of that Church (cf. CIC Can. 112, §2).

II. Canonical Legislations
The Codes, Codex Iuris Canonici (CIC) of 1983, and Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium (CCEO) of 1990 have clear directives for the hierarchy and faithful in relation to the preservation of rite and jurisdiction.
1. Rights and Obligations of the Faithful
a) Do the Christian faithful have a right to worship in their rite/Church? Both the codes say “The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescriptions of their own Sui Iuris Church…” (CCEO-C.17; CIC-C. 214).
b) Both the codes are clear too about the membership of the faithful in a Sui Iuris Church. One gets membership to a church through baptism and the church of ascription depends upon the church of the parents in the case of the children below 14. (CIC – CC. 111, 112 CCEO – CC. 29, 31, 38 to 147).
c) Regarding the preservation and promotion of rites also the faithful certain obligations. CCEO c. 39 says so: “ The rites of the Eastern Churches are to be preserved and promoted conscientiously as the heritage of the whole Church of Christ, a heritage in which shines forth the tradition coming down from the Apostles through the Fathers, and which in its variety affirms the divine unity of the Catholic faith“. There are also other canons which explain about the preservation and promotion of rites (CCEO – C. 40-41).
2. Rights and Obligations of the Local Ordinary/Hierarch
The diocesan bishop, in the exercise of his mandate, must foster pastoral care for all the faithful entrusted to him, including those who find themselves in special situations. The local Ordinaries/Hierarchs, no matter of whatever Church, if they have faithful belonging to a different sui iuris Church under them have to provided adequately for living their faith according to their respective ecclesial traditions (CCEO – CC . 41, 193, 207, 246; CIC – CC. 383, 399, 476, 518).
CIC Canon 383 § 2 says, “If he has faithful of a different rite within his diocese, he is to provide for their spiritual needs either by means of priests or parishes of that rite or by means of an episcopal vicar.” This canon is based on Christus Dominus (CD, No. 23 paragraph 3).
CIC goes further and recommend the establishment of a separate diocese in the same territory if needed: “There can be erected within the same territory of particular Churches which are distinct by reason of the rite of the faithful or some similar reason when such is deemed advantageous in the judgment of the Supreme Authority of the Church after it had listened to the conferences of Bishops concerned” (C. 372 §2). For the correct governance of the diocese C. 476 says that the diocesan bishop can also appoint one or several episcopal vicars, over the faithful of a determined rite. When it is necessary to establish parishes, the diocesan bishop can establish personal parishes based upon rite (C. 518).
Whenever this is done, these parishes will juridically form an integral part of the Latin diocese, and the parish priests of the aforementioned rite will be members of the diocesan presbyterate of the Latin bishop. It should, however, be noted that although in the hypothesis foreseen in the above mentioned canons these faithful are living within the jurisdiction of the Latin bishop, it is opportune that before instituting personal parishes for them or designating a presbyter as assistant or parish priest or indeed episcopal vicar, the Latin bishop should take up contact both with the Congregation for the Oriental Churches and with the respective hierarchy, in particular with the Patriarch.
It should be recalled here that the CCEO (Can. 193, §3) lays down that when eparchs “constitute this kind of presbyter or parish priest or syncelli for the pastoral care of the Christians faithful of the patriarchal Churches”, they should “take up contact with the relevant Patriarchs and, if they agree, should then act on their own authority, informing the Apostolic See about this as soon as possible; if, however, for any reason the Patriarchs do not agree, then the matter must be referred to the Apostolic See. Although there is no explicit regulation corresponding to this in the CIC, it should nevertheless by analogy apply to Latin diocesan bishops too.”
At issue is a norm which makes provision for the interference of an external authority (that of the patriarch or major archbishop) in the government of a diocese- an event explainable by the fact that the faithful of a Patriarchal or Major Archiepiscopal Church continue to belong to their own ritual Churches.
As regards the provisions for the coordination of different rites in one and the same territory, cf. CCEO Can. 202, 207 and 322.
3. The Rights and Duties of the Patriarch and Major Archbishop
To understand the powers of the Major Archbishop, the concept of proper territory is very important: According to canon 78 § 2 this power of Major Archbishop is exercised fully within the territorial boundaries of the major archiepiscopal Church; in order for it to be exercised validly outside of these boundaries, it is required that this be expressly established either by common law or by particular law approved by the Roman Pontiff. Canon 146 § 1 provides for the ius commune of which canon 78 § 2 speaks. There we read, the territory of the Church over which the patriarch presides extends itself over those regions in which the rite proper to the same Church is observed and the patriarch has legitimately acquired the right of establishing provinces, eparchies as well as exarchies.
Notwithstanding the geographical delimitation of the territory in which the patriarch or major archbishop exercises his power, the Code recognizes the ius et obligatio of each to seek appropriate information about the faithful residing outside the above-mentioned territory.
The visitor could be chosen from the bishops of the Major Archiepiscopal Curia or, alternatively, the Synod of Bishop of that Church should appoint a bishop who will reside in curia with a task of maintaining the bonds between the faithful who are in diaspora.
4. The Duties of the Apostolic See
The Congregation for the Oriental Churches is the organ of the Holy See deputed to carry out this particular task. Additionally, the Congregation usually sends prelates, with the title of Delegate, to visit, sustain, and encourage the said faithful and to facilitate their dialogue with their ordinaries.
a. Apostolic Visitors
Pastor Bonus has stated that the Congregation for the Oriental Churches is competent to even to establish stable visitors. This sometimes means Visitors of the Congregation or on the other occasions an Apostolic Visitor – one with a pontifical nomination and supplied with, in particular cases, determinate faculties.
We should gratefully acknowledge the efforts of the Holy See for providing pastoral care for the Syro-Malabar emigrants in different parts of the world by appointing Apostolic Visitors – Late Cardinal Antony Padiyara, Bp. Gregory Karotemprel, CMI, Bp. Joseph Pallikaparampil and recently Bp. Gratian Mundadan, CMI. It was with the report of Apostolic visitor the process of the establishment of Eparchy of Kalyan was initiated. The present visitor is to study the situation of the Orientals living outside the proper territories in India.
b. Territory:
The historical understanding of ‘one territory one bishop’ does not exist anymore clearly seen from the teachings of the Vatican II and the canonical legislations. Although the traditional territorial arrangement remains normative for parishes and dioceses, the territory no longer is considered a constitutive element but only a determining element of the community of the faithful. As per CCEO c. 146 - § 2, if any doubt concerning the territorial boundaries of the patriarchal Church arises, or if it is a question of the modification of its boundaries, it is for the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church to investigate the matter. After hearing the superior administrative authority of each Church sui iuris concerned, and after discussing the matter in the synod, it is up to the same synod to present a suitably documented petition for the resolution of the doubt or for the modification of the boundaries to the Roman Pontiff. It is only for the Roman Pontiff to resolve the doubt authentically or to decree the modification of the boundaries.

Conclusion
It is a sad fact that in spite of the clear teachings of the Church and the provisions in both the codes of canon law regarding the pastoral care of the faithful of another sui Iuris Church, their implementation has been very inadequate owing to the less welcoming attitude of the Latin Hierarchy. It happens that some bishops find difficulty in meeting with their faithful who belong to a different Ritual Church, being fearful that, in satisfying the requests, which they make the bishops may harm the overall unity of their dioceses. They even object to the regrouping of the present Syro-Malabar eparchies out side the territorium proprium under a Syro-Malabar metropolitan.
Cardinal Ignace Moussa I. Daoud, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches said that Syro- Malabar, Syro-Malankara and Latin “rites are not opposed to each other; nor do they diminish each other in the slightest degree. One is not superior to the other; nor is any less noble than the other in any way. Instead, they make the one Catholic faith of Christ shine out beautifully in its various cultural and historical manifestations, as they emerged, by the will of God, from the many different experiences of our ancestors… The Holy See paid the same attention to other urgent matters regarding the Syro-Malabar Church and approached these with the same firm intention to reach a positive outcome respecting all the legitimate aspirations, needs and rights of the parties concerned. But the complexity of the issues had not allowed the Holy See to take any further steps for the time being.”
“As new pastoral circumstances have made necessary the above changes in one of the Particular Churches of your land, there are other pastoral necessities on a national level, which affect the adequate care of the faithful of all the sui iuris Churches in India. I know that over the past decades you have made great efforts and have been through much anguish in the matter of the extension of oriental jurisdiction beyond the territorium proprium. But now, at the beginning of a new millennium, I am asking myself and I am asking you, my dear Brother Bishops, whether the time has finally come for a resolution in this matter also. Indeed, I would be most delighted to know that one day concrete proposal will be considered by this conference, which would allow the possible creation of oriental pastoral structures covering all parts of India presently outside of beyond established oriental jurisdictions.”
To conclude, a five faced action plan should be implemented. The sooner that happens, the better will be the pastoral care.
1. The Holy See should take immediate actions for just pastoral solutions.
2. It should be emphasized that providing for the pastoral care of the Syro-Malabarians involves a certain amount of change of attitude and just implementation of Theology of Canon Law of the Churches from the part of the hierarchy of the Latin Church.
3. The pastors and leaders of the Church are to be convinced about the teachings of the church. They have to do everything possible for the faithful execution of the teachings of the Church even if they are not convinced of the same.
4. The last Global Meet of the Syro-Malabarians has re-strengthened our Syro-Malabar Bishop’s Synod to go ahead with much more commitment for this cause. The timely steps that are to taken from the part of the Synod, should be taken effectively.
5. From the part of the Syro-Malabar faithful, a sincere effort should be there for the preservation of the rite and for a united and immediate action in the light of the magisterium.
Canonical and other provisions do not lack in this matter; but what is needed is goodwill to put them into practice.

The Church is not a private property. It is of Christ. He is the head. He sent out not one apostle but twelve. In this Church of Christ, he will be hurt when love, peace, harmony, truth, fellowship, sharing are lost and when injustice is practiced. Hence immediate and united action is required. Pray hard and work hard. It is God who gives fruits.


This is a paper presented by the author in “All India Syro-Malabar Migrants’ Meet” at Kerala House, New Delhi on 28th October 2006.