Celibacy and Anglican orders: Trick? Or Treat?
The Vatican today released a statement aimed at refuting an Italian press report that the Apostolic Constitution on the Anglican ordinariate was delayed because of debates over the celibacy conditions. In the course of clarifying the Vatican released the text of the clauses relating to celibacy and Anglican priests, current and future. The text appears–to me–to confirm reports of recent days that dispensation from celibacy will be very limited, primarily for currently married Anglican priests (and bishops, who would be demoted to the lower clergy) and perhaps for married seminarians. But others interpret this the exact opposite, saying it allows for married Anglicans to come in beyond the “grandfather” clause. How do dotCommoners read this statement?
There has been widespread speculation, based on supposedly knowledgeable remarks by an Italian correspondent Andrea Tornielli, that the delay in publication of the Apostolic Constitution regarding Personal Ordinariates for Anglicans entering into full communion with the Catholic Church, announced on October 20, 2009, by Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is due to more than “technical” reasons. According to this speculation, there is a serious substantial issue at the basis of the delay, namely, disagreement about whether celibacy will be the norm for the future clergy of the Provision.
Cardinal Levada offered the following comments on this speculation: “Had I been asked I would happily have clarified any doubt about my remarks at the press conference. There is no substance to such speculation. No one at the Vatican has mentioned any such issue to me. The delay is purely technical in the sense of ensuring consistency in canonical language and references. The translation issues are secondary; the decision not to delay publication in order to wait for the ‘official’ Latin text to be published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis was made some time ago.
The drafts prepared by the working group, and submitted for study and approval through the usual process followed by the Congregation, have all included the following statement, currently Article VI of the Constitution:
§1 Those who ministered as Anglican deacons, priests, or bishops, and who fulfill the requisites established by canon law and are not impeded by irregularities or other impediments may be accepted by the Ordinary as candidates for Holy Orders in the Catholic Church. In the case of married ministers, the norms established in the Encyclical Letter of Pope Paul VI Sacerdotalis coelibatus, n. 42 and in the Statement “In June” are to be observed. Unmarried ministers must submit to the norm of clerical celibacy of CIC can. 277, §1.
§2. The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See.
This article is to be understood as consistent with the current practice of the Church, in which married former Anglican ministers may be admitted to priestly ministry in the Catholic Church on a case by case basis. With regard to future seminarians, it was considered purely speculative whether there might be some cases in which a dispensation from the celibacy rule might be petitioned. For this reason, objective criteria about any such possibilities (e.g. married seminarians already in preparation) are to be developed jointly by the Personal Ordinariate and the Episcopal Conference, and submitted for approval of the Holy See.”
Cardinal Levada said he anticipates the technical work on the Constitution and Norms will be completed by the end of the first week of November.
At the CNS blog, John Thavis writes:
In announcing the plan, Vatican officials made it clear that Anglican priests who are married may be ordained Catholic priests, but that married Anglican bishops would not be allowed to function as Catholic bishops. They also indicated that married Anglican seminarians would be allowed to be ordained.
The Vatican clarification confirmed that married former Anglican ministers would be admitted to priestly ministry, on a case by case basis. It said the question of married seminarians would have to be worked out jointly by the personal ordinariate and the local bishops’ conference, and would be submitted for approval of the Vatican.
Is this a change from current practice under the Pastoral Provision?
David,
I don’t detect any change from the current legislation — as I stated in another thread a few days ago.
“Had I been asked I would happily have clarified any doubt about my remarks at the press conference,” said Cardinal Levada.
I’m sorry to disagree with the cardinal — and to repeat this — but when it was pointed out to him during the press conference that he and Archbishop Di Noia had been very vague in answering journalists’ questions, he said, “If we have been vague, then so be it.”
Was it ever likely that Benedict would countenance an arrangement under which there would be no limit to new married seminarians accepted even for this subsection of the Latin Rite? Given his often expressed views, I think not. Nonetheless there was something awkward about the way information was given out.
We do need to know. After all, on All Souls Day we can gain an indulgence by fulfilling certain conditions, one of which is praying for the Pope’s intentions.
What are they?
Does the clause “admission of married men on a case to case basis” not mean that these new churches will be able to ordain married men as priests, with special papal permission? Paul VI asked for this at the 1971 synod and the bishops turned down his request. It looks like the thin edge of the wedge — spelling the beginning of the end for universal clerical celibacy in Roman Catholicism.
Remember GW Bush before the Iraq war chortling smugly to journalists, “I’m the one who gets to decide.”
The Vatican is delighted with a new papal power — the power to dispense future priests from the obligation of celibacy. The new power is being acquired by stealth. (Unless I am misreading this.)
“The Vatican is delighted with a new papal power — the power to dispense future priests from the obligation of celibacy. The new power is being acquired by stealth. (Unless I am misreading this.)”
There is nothing new about this power. Only the exercise would be new. I still think that it is unlikely that Benedict would exercise it beyond the numbers of married men who are already in Anglican seminaries. If he does, there will be loud protests all over about unfairness and they will be justified.
Robert Mickens: thanks for pointing out this Orwellian bending of the truth on the part of Cardinal Levada.
Fr. O’Leary,
If this is the beginning of the slide down the slippery slope to married Catholic priests, I wonder how fast the slide will accelerate. How bad is the priest shortage in the Orient? (Assuming there is one.) If your bishops are short of priests that will leave only the African bishops to oppose the change.
I can’t help but hope that the change will be like the fall of Communism — fast. I was told by a writer who was in Czchoslovakia when that happened that all the Communist leaders had privately formed the opinion that Communism had failed, but — like many of Catholic bishops now — they were afraid to say so publicly. When Gorbachev started to express some criticisms and make some changes the others found the courage to say what they really thought, and the changes accelerated as more and more spoke out. We’ll see.
Wait…and pray.
In due course all will be revealed, no doubt.
And we’ll adapt and work through it and incorporate whatever is decided into our understanding of the faith as something much more important than our petty day-to-day concerns. That’s what V2 was all about, after all.
And what is true will continue and in time, flourish.
And god wil be in His heaven and all’s right with the world.
Or, see the latest on said topic by a priest from the non-acedeme trenches, Msgr, Byrne at Archangel’s latest blog.
“… there will be loud protests all over about unfairness and they will be justified” — and this is relevant to the Vatican’s idea of the clerical state because …. ??????
“Orwellian bending of the truth on the part of Cardinal Levada.” Tsk, tsk: You are surprised at this duplicity on the part of a Vatican official because …. ??????
A modest proposal, in the spirit of Jonathan Swift: the magisterium have been very vocal of late about the decline of the dignity of marriage. They also want to be certain that no gay men are in the priesthood, warning darkly of the dangers such men pose to the people of God. (To which, when the decree came out a few years ago, all but a very few of the presbyters. gay and straight, nodded sagely and agreed–”yes, indeed, we must keep Them out. They are disordered and dangerous.”) The rectories are largley big empty houses–ample for a priest and his (doubtless) large family. After all, as the chidless Mother Teresa said “How can there be too many children? That’s like saying there are too many flowers.” The best way to call for social awareness of fundamental truths like the goodness of marriage and family is to lead by example. I suggest, then, that the magisterium not only allow priests to be married, but REQUIRE them to be so. Those who divorce would be automatically laicized, of course. Since orders requires marriage, and since an annulled marriage is thought never to have been a real marriage from the start, clearly such a man would have been ordained under false pretenses, whether he knew it at the time or not. Widowers would be given a decent interval (say, 5 years,) within which to remarry. And those who declare a sense of vocation to priesthood but not to marriage? Sorry–it cannot be so. All who are to be ordained are called to marriage, too.
And the document will begin with the words “As the Church has always taught…”