Posted on 02/04/2007 6:27:27 AM PST by NYer
Some readers intimated that I had perhaps read too much into Canons 209-210 by suggesting that it implied supporting one's local parish (see Jan. 16). Although the expression "particular church" usually means "diocese" in canonical terms, most Catholics support their local church through their parish.
Likewise, according to Canon 107, Catholics, unlike most Protestants, generally acquire their pastor through place of residence (technically domicile or quasi-domicile) as canon law presumes laws to be territorial. Even when, as frequently happens in the United States, a Catholic registers and worships in a parish different from his or her territorial parish, this latter parish remains the proper channel and authority for any permissions and dispensations required by canon law.
The widespread custom in the United States of people registering at a parish other than their territorial parish is rather the exception than the norm. This is perhaps due to the ease of mobility in that country and also because the concept of parish territoriality is somewhat weaker as historically many national parishes were established to cater to successive waves of immigrants.
Catholic worship around the world has historically revolved around territorial parishes forming a worshipping community. I would sustain that consequently Catholics should generally assist and support their local parish, supposing that the faithful's right to authentic Catholic worship is provided for in that parish.
This is not a strict legal obligation, however, and the code is sufficiently flexible to allow for differences in religious sensibilities in practice and worship.
For example, Canon 112 on changing from one Catholic rite to another is illustrative. Canon 112 sets strict conditions for a Latin-rite Catholic to switch rites to an Eastern Catholic Church. In most cases this requires permission from the Apostolic See.
Canon 112.2 states that not even prolonged practice and reception of the sacraments in another ritual Church entails enrollment in that Church. In effect the canon distinguishes membership from liturgical practice. Any Catholic is allowed, even habitually, to receive most sacraments in a ritual Church different from his or her ritual Church, without formally becoming a member of the Church.
For instance, if, for solid spiritual reasons, an adult baptized and confirmed in the Roman rite begins to practice in a Maronite parish, he or she may receive the Eucharist, the sacrament of reconciliation, and anointing of the sick without any need to formally switch rites. If a man in this situation wished to enter holy orders, or if a couple of Latin-rite Catholics wish to marry according to the Maronite rite, then permission would normally be needed to formally switch rites.
If this flexibility is practiced among various Catholic rites, even more so it may be observed among diverse parishes of the same rite.
Thank you, Fr. McNamara, for your response to my email :-)
Very informative.
I don't even know what parish we're in, territorially. We attend the nearest church, give or take a half-mile, but for all I know, parishes could be as gerrymandered as congressional districts.
Different "religious sensibilities" puts it very politely. Many Catholics are attending Mass outside their geographical parishes because the liturgy may be close to inauthentic or because having the priest facing the congregation results in a distasteful and distracting focus on the personality of the priest. Mass is worship, the commemoration of the sacrifice at Calvary, not a clerical performance.
Also, St. Thomas is in Smyrna, and we live in Atlanta (post office) and work downtown, so as far as political boundaries go we're more oriented towards Holy Spirit.
. . . better music too!
I haven't been to my local parish in I don't know how long. It's been decades. Okay, well at least a couple. Won't be going back.
My parish is described as a commuter parish. Easily 1/3 of the families are out of state.
I drive past 3 or 4 Catholic churches on the way to the one I attend...
It's a very well kept secret -- I had to go onto the archdiocesan website, get into the back numbers of the Georgia Bulletin, and find the articles about the two parishes' founding back in the 60s or 70s in order to find out the boundaries!
I don't think it really matters in the South - the individual parish churches just aren't very territorial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.