Posted on 10/29/2009 10:34:26 AM PDT by NYer
The delay in publishing the apostolic constitution, which will allow large numbers of Anglicans to be received into the Catholic Church, is due not so much to translation problems as the more weighty issue of priestly celibacy.
According to two reliably informed Italian newspapers, Il Giornale and Il Foglio, canon lawyers are continuing to define what has been a particularly unclear aspect of the new provision: whether married Anglicans could train as seminarians.
Andrea Tornielli of Il Giornale reports that over the last few days, the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts has been working to clarify this point. He writes that “everything suggests” seminarians in these future Anglo-Catholic communities “will have to be celibate like all their colleagues in the Latin Catholic Church.”
Both papers also report the Holy Father would have preferred the publication of the apostolic constitution to have taken place at the same time as last week’s press conference, mainly to avoid any repeat of the mishandling of his decision to lift the excommunications on four bishops from the Society of St. Pius X earlier this year.
But as Cardinal William Levada had already informed the bishops of England and Wales and the Archbishop of Canterbury of the provision, and the date for their joint press conference in London had already been disclosed, it would have been impossible to keep the matter under wraps, Tornielli writes. The Vatican therefore decided to go ahead with the press conference, even though the precise canonical details of the constitution hadn’t yet been worked out.
Ping!
What I am wondering about is what exactly they mean by celibacy being required?
Does that indicate that all married pastors in the Anglican tradition will not be accepted into the body of the church?
That doesn't seem to make sense since we no that other pastors from the Anglican tradition have been granted a dispensation to be married when they decide to switch faiths, why then are they harping on celibacy now, is due to the fact that this would be such a large chunk of the Anglican faith that it would make it difficult to justify celibacy for the rest of their priests?
Married Catholic Priests: Why are Some Catholic Priests Married?.
My understanding is the the rules for married Anglican clergy will remain the same. This is about whether married Anglicans will be able to enter Catholic seminaries.
Could they go to Eastern-rite seminaries? There, they could have the experience and support of other married clergy. If not, I would still consider modeling their instruction alongside celibate clergy in the same way that has worked for Eastern-rite seminaries for some time.
That makes more sense, thanks.
I ‘d still like to see how they plan on handling a large world wide influx of Priests that are married, should make for some interesting theological discussions within the Catholic church.
I assume that is what’s being worked out.
Currently-married Anglican priests will generally be ordained as Catholic priests, every other requirement being met.
The question is whether any married men not currently ordained in the Anglican communion - like unordained but married seminarians - will be permitted to be ordained after reception into the Catholic Church.
I hope that makes it a little clearer.
sitetest
LOL. Wagglebee beat me to it with a much shorter post.
I do believe that married Anglicans may still not become Bishops. I am looking forward to see if they are required to subscribe to all beliefs and doctrines and Catholic dogma in the Catechism including use of the official Douay version of the Catholic Bible and the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. I cannot see how any such exemptions would be granted without tearing asunder Catholic teaching.
I don't think this is a major issue, traditional Anglicans have not had the major issues with these issues the way other Protestants have.
The fact still remains that nobody is forcing any Anglicans to join the Church, but if they want to there are guidelines that they must adhere to.
Doesn't this fly in the face of the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome whose clergy (bishops excluded) have the option to marry prior to receiving Holy Orders? or are the Anglicans being treated as "Latins" rather than as a separate (autonomous) Rite?
The personal ordinariates will be structures within the Latin Church.
I wonder whether one day they might become a separate sui juris Church, but that day isn't this day.
sitetest
My understanding is slightly different and comes from both a Western and Eastern Catholic experience, so I hope to address both questions. I believe this is intended to allow those priests already married to continue to serve; however, future seminarians would be required to adopt the celibate rule. This is the tradition in the west.
As for the question of entering eastern seminaries, that would entail applying to Rome for a canonical change of rite. For the most part, and I can only speak on behalf of the Maronite (Eastern) Catholic Church, the policy is to accept married men into seminary but only after a scrupulous examination of the married couple and their children. In the Maronite Church, married priests are not assigned to the diaspora and only serve in Lebanon. My Maronite pastor's grandfather was a married priest but he chose the celibate life. He is also bi-ritual, Maronite and Latin Rite. The Maronite Church respects the traditions of the west in assigning priests. There are other Eastern Catholic Churches that have married priests, even in the west. In all instances, though, the decision to serve as a priest must be made after marriage. Also, married priests may never be elevated to bishop.
You wrote:
“I am looking forward to see if they are required to subscribe to all beliefs and doctrines and Catholic dogma in the Catechism...”
TAC members already do. They all signed the Catechism to attest to that fact.
“...including use of the official Douay version of the Catholic Bible...”
What? The Church doesn’t use it as an official translation anymore. The NAB and RSV are essentially official editions.
“...and the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary.”
TAC already believe in it. It’s also in the Anglican Breviary for more than 50 years already so it can’t be a problem for those who take Anglican tradition seriously.
“I cannot see how any such exemptions would be granted without tearing asunder Catholic teaching.”
No such “exemptions” are necessary, nor will they be granted. I doubt many people would even ask for them.
Thanks for the response.
One of my interests is how annulment will be dealt with. How many TAC clergy are on there second marriage? The RC Church has been liberal in granting annulments to the laity, but 1 Timothy 3 will need to be addressed for clergy.
Oddly enough, instead of the laity, it may be a boon to the Anglican clergy that may now take advantage of the wide Roman annulment guidelines.
I thought Bp. Iker’s statement about second marriage laity was really strange and still do, but it got me to thinking about the Anglican clergy. That is: 1. RC laity wedding all done right, divorce and remarriage, big problem. 2. Anglican clergy: Anglican wedding all done right, divorce and remarriage, no problem. It wasn’t a RC wedding, so annulment is just a letter away.
In short, to NYer as well, the delay has a lot more on its plate than celibacy.
Not really. The Mozarabic Rite is a liturgical family permitted in (parts of?) Spain. It may be used by Spanish Latin Rite Catholics who are part of the ordinary hierarchy of the Church. The Mozarabic Rite is a little more analogous to the Anglican Use parishes, which are under the direct jurisdiction of the ordinary of the local territorial diocese.
Anglican Use parishes are just regular Latin Rite parishes that have permission to use an Anglicanized Catholic liturgy, and the priests are former priests of the Anglican Communion, but now priests incardinated in the local territorial diocese who answer to the ordinary of the local territorial diocese.
What the Apostolic Constitution offers is a separate hierarchy apart from, but within the Latin Church. The personal ordinariates will permit the erection of Roman Catholic parishes that are not under the immediate jurisdiction of the ordinary of the local territorial diocese. Rather, these parishes will be under the immediate jurisdiction of the ordinary (can be either a priest or a bishop) of the personal ordinariate. The priests will be incardinated in the personal ordinariate, and will be subject to the ordinary of the ordinariate, not to the bishop of the local territorial diocese.
They will have their own Anglican Catholic liturgy, of course, and will likely more heavily depend on Anglican music.
These ordinariates will also be able establish their own seminaries. They will be able to develop a Catholic theology and formation that incorporate uniquely Anglican attributes (Don't ask me what those might be - I'm told that they exist, but I just don't know enough to tell you what they are.).
Thus, there will be a separate hierarchical structure.
Nonetheless, it will be wholly within the Latin Church.
These structures have been compared to military ordinariates, which function in many ways as non-geographical dioceses.
They are a good distance from the Pastoral Provision that provided for the establishment of Anglican Use parishes within Roman Catholic territorial dioceses, but they aren't quite as far as the sui juris Churches.
I hope that made it a little clearer, and not muddier.
sitetest
What are ordinariates and what is an ordinary? And how can anything be entrusted to a priest without it being entrusted to a bishop under whom a priest operates? Do Catholic priests work independent of bishops? In Eastern Churches, a priest without a bishop has no authority. Pleas clarify.
But, overall, from what you are saying it seems like the Anglican Rite will be a separate body under special provisions that are neither here nor there with respect to anything else in the Latin Church. Is that close?
An ordinariate is an ecclesial structure that is governed by an ordinary. An ordinary is the chief hierarch of an ordinariate. The bishop of a diocese is the ordinary of the diocese. Any auxiliary bishops that he may have to assist him are not ordinaries of the diocese. However, here the term is used a little more narrowly. I haven’t seen a formal definition, but I’ll provisionally define it as being an ecclesial structure that is governed by an ordinary, but is not a territorial diocese, territorial abbey, or other structure.
The example that folks have given is that of military ordinariates. There is a military ordinariate in the Catholic Church for the United States Armed Forces. The ordinary of this ordinariate is usually an archbishop. All the priests who serve as chaplains within the US military are incardinated in this ordinariate, and report to the archbishop of the ordinariate. Thus, if you’re in the military, and you’re Catholic, you belong to the military ordinariate, and you follow the specific law for the military ordinariate, your priest would ordinarily be a military chaplain, and his bishop would be the archbishop of the military ordinariate.
A structure like the military ordinariate is established to meet the needs of a specific Catholic community that isn’t territorial in nature. Thus, the ordinariate can make its own legislation concerning church disciplines such as the Eucharistic fast, Lenten fasts, observance of Holy Days, Sunday Mass assistance, etc. As an example, the miilitary ordinariate might exempt soldiers in battle from the Eucharistic fast, because the demands of their circumstances make it impossible to safely keep the fast.
By having all members of the armed services belong to the ordinariate, military chaplains can apply to one bishop for guidance, direction and law, rather than having to engage each individual ordinary [bishop] of each individual diocese through which they might travel.
Other ordinaries include abbots of territorial abbeys. These are abbeys where surrounding territory is attached to the abbey, and the parishes, priests and Catholic laity in that territory are subject to the authority of the abbot. These are dramatically reduced in number in the Catholic Church from previous centuries, but there still are some around. The abbot of a territorial abbey isn’t a bishop, nonetheless, he has the jurisdiction within his abbey of a bishop, or rather, of an ordinary.
The new personal ordinariates, thus, will include those priests, parishes and laity of the Anglican tradition who attach themselves to these ordinariates.
The ordinaries of these structures can be bishops or priests. There will be some canonical and theological differences between bishop-ordinaries and priest-ordinaries.
The following is my understanding of things, and we’ll have to see the details of the Apostolic Constitution to see how correct is my understanding.
As you know, a bishop is a successor to the apostles, and teaches and acts of his own authority, equal to any other bishop in the world, save that he must not teach heresy or intentionally harm the Church. His ministry and authority derive directly from Christ, and are not delegated to him from another.
But a priest-ordinary, although he would have full authority in his ordinariate to govern, to teach, to sanctify, his authority would be a delegated one from another. I imagine this delegation will come from the pope himself, or perhaps in conjunction with a local territorial diocesan bishop.
I also imagine that priest-ordinaries will be unable to ordain other priests or consecrate bishops. They will likely have delegated to them the faculties to perform the sacrament of Confirmation (which is a faculty that is inherent to bishops) and to forgive sins that are usually reserved to bishops.
It may seem odd, or even wrong that the ordinariy of a diocese-like structure might not be a bishop. But at least in the Catholic Church, this happens regularly under certain circumstances. When the bishop-ordinary of a diocese dies or must resign suddenly, the Church may not provide immediately for his permanent replacement. Nonetheless, the work of the diocese must continue, and the Church may appoint a priest who is not a bishop as an apostolic administrator of the diocese. This person governs the diocese until a bishop may be appointed as the new ordinary of the diocese. In the interim, the apostolic administrator functions as the ordinary, although if this person is not a bishop, his authority is delegated rather than intrinsic.
Hope that helps a little.
sitetest
“But, overall, from what you are saying it seems like the Anglican Rite will be a separate body under special provisions that are neither here nor there with respect to anything else in the Latin Church. Is that close?”
Sort of, I guess, maybe. We’ll have to wait for the Apostolic Constitution to actually be released to get more precise answers.
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.