Cardinal Levada: no “celibacy issue” in reception of Anglicans into Catholic Church

Catholic/Anglican ping!

With all dure respect, this is beginning to sound like a soap opera...

I'd like to think that they would accept married guys already "in process", at least in some cases.

When I was coming up, once we were postulants we couldn't get married w/o our bishop's okey-dokey, so it wasn't like we treated the issue lightly, at least in my diocese. But, who knows, things are different from diocese to diocese and you'd have to wonder about guys who at this late date were going for Pepsicola ordination.

Many dioceses already have married (former Anglican) priests who have converted to Catholicism. I don’t really see that anything, other than an open invitation by the Pope, has changed.

Am I wrong here?

I'd like to think that they would accept married guys already "in process", at least in some cases.

I am not familiar with the current Anglican approach to divorced priests. It seems only right, from a Catholic perspective, that married seminarians and/or fully ordained priests, go through the normative process to ensure the marriage is solid. A divorced priest would present a scandalous situation in the Catholic Church. Does that make sense to you?

Apologies for not pinging you to my post #4.

The following was posted today by Rocco Palmo on his WITL blog.

On Anglican Deal, Vatican Busts "Celibacy" Chatter

We interrupt this weekend breather for a Halloween treat from the Holy See.

Over recent days, the Italian press ran with speculation (quickly picked up by Anglophone media) that the delay in the Apostolic Constitution which'll set up "personal ordinariates" for Tiber-swimming Anglicans owed itself to a "debate" regarding how the celibacy requirement would be handled for married converts who wished to enter formation for the Catholic priesthood.

This morning, in further evidence of a significant shift for its traditionally above-the-fray communications strategy, the Vatican Press Office released the following response to the now-widespread buzz, which included the relevant part of the still-hidden document, whose name likewise remains unknown. While several outlets ran with the story, the statement specifically (and, to be candid, astoundingly) called out one reporter -- the highly-regarded Andrea Tornielli of Il Giornale, who's racked up a reputation over the last several years as the most reliable of the Vatican's "court scribes."

Notably, the clarification was published solely in English.

Here it is in full; emphases original:

CLARIFICATION BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE HOLY SEE PRESS OFFICE, FR. FEDERICO LOMBARDI, S.I., ON SPECULATIONS ABOUT THE CELIBACY ISSUE IN THE ANNOUNCED APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION REGARDING PERSONAL ORDINARIATES FOR ANGLICAN ENTERING INTO FULL COMMUNION WITH THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

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.

I agree with your take on the divorced Anglican priests.

**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 **

Does this clarify for you?

**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.**

Wow! Not wasting any time here at all?

How many new priests for next year?

The media have one-track minds, and they think everyone else is as obsessed with untrammelled sexual activity as they are.

Boooo-ring.

Le-vah-da is da man!!

That certainly makes sense. Marriages would have to be seen to be valid, most certainly in the situation where there was a former Spouse (under civil law) still living.

The current pepsicola appraoch to divorced priests, like so much in that communion, is "Hey, whatever."

You are right as regards the current situation.

IF I understand what is now being contemplated, and that's a big if) the difference is that now instead of the former Anglican priest being folded into the diocese someway OR being part of an Anglican Rite parish, there would be these ordinariates, which would function like non geographical dioceses AND would not necessarily have bishops.

So I "regular" bishop who might not know what to do with a married priest would not have to worry about it. It would the the "Ordinary" who would place these men.

Le-vah-da is da man!!

As someone who remembers when Levada was Archbishop of San Francisco, I can assure you that he is NOT "da man." He is a church bureaucrat who has attained a high position because he does what he's told and does not rock the boat. If you see something positive coming from Levada, you can be sure that he is merely following orders from above (i.e., the Holy Father). Thus, if you want to give anyone credit, give it to Pope Benedict XVI.

Well, that’s not so bad. I mean not everyone is cut out to be an executive. If he’s pious and scholarly and efficient that’s not so bad. It’s just not diocesan material, maybe, especially in San Francisco where the job ought to come with combat awareness, a very thick skin, and a willingness to give as good as you get in streefighting.

No, it sounds like a developing news story.

You wrote:

“A divorced priest would present a scandalous situation in the Catholic Church.”

I remember reading about a former Episcopalian accepted into the Catholic priesthood under the Pastoral Provision. His wife divorced him AFTER he was ordained a Catholic priest. He didn’t want the divorce, but couldn’t stop it.

I didn’t see that as a scandal. There will be a number of worse cases that will come out of the woodwork when these Anglicans begin the process of applying for ordination.

It's just not diocesan material, maybe, especially in San Francisco where the job ought to come with combat awareness, a very thick skin, and a willingness to give as good as you get in streefighting.

Right. For a long time, we've needed a real archbishop to come into San Francisco and shake things up and put an end to all of the un-Catholic nonsense that takes place in this archdiocese. We've needed someone to stand up to the liberals, the gays, the media and the local "Catholic" politicians (i.e., Pelosi, Newsom et al.). Levada was not that person and neither was his successor.

I thought there'd be some "incoming". I was actually being somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I too, remember when Levada was Archbishop of San Francisco. I think we were all shocked when the Pope called him to the CDF.

Then again, Matthew was a tax collector, Mary Magdalen was a prostitute and Peter denied Jesus three times.

I'm hoping Levada does good and want to see him succeed! Hence the cheerleading.....

The media have one-track minds, and they think everyone else is as obsessed with untrammelled sexual activity as they are

Again, every day there is a different story. That's all I meant.

Soap operas are developing stories too, Vlad. :)

I didn’t see that as a scandal.

And your opinion represents the Magisterium?

THe downside of subsidiarity: If the higher ups won’t do it, then it’s up to us grunts. Let’s go kick some liberal butt! (Easy for me to say from 3k miles away.)

True. But they’re written out ahead of time. This is developing organically and effects so many people. That’s why so many of us find its new developments interesting.

You wrote:

“And your opinion represents the Magisterium?”

Well, the universal Church didn’t suffer much with that last divorced priest. I have a friend, who was divorced, and his bishop wants to ordain him - even though he’s remarried. It’s already been approved by Rome. And no, I do not know all the circumstances of his first marriage, but the bishop seems to see no scandal there. I ain’t losing sleep over this. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n31_v31/ai_17005915/

How can a decision be made before the canonical legalities have been worked out? And if all the legalities have been worked out, why all the speculations and drama?

You wrote:

“How can a decision be made before the canonical legalities have been worked out?”

It is the soap operas that are written out ahead of time. You apparently misunderstood what I was saying.

“And if all the legalities have been worked out, why all the speculations and drama?”

Again, you apparently misunderstood what I was saying.

Again, you apparently misunderstood what I was saying

My apologies.

Wouldn’t it only be an “official” scandal if he “remarried”? If your wife leaves you, it’s going to cause a stir, but it doesn’t rise, IMHO, to the level of scandal.

No problem!

Wouldn’t it only be an “official” scandal if he “remarried”?

Official scandal? Lol! A priest confects the Eucharist. He changes the matter of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. His hands were consecrated at the time of his ordination. Think about that, rather than measuring it against the contemporary trends of society.

Don't yell at me. I'll cry!

I know all that. If somebody;s wife ups and leaves him, well, it might bear looking into, but it MIGHT be nothing to do with him, qua him. Even if one exercises great judgment at the time of marriage, people change and not everyone thinks what we think about matrimony - especially if they're Episcopalians.

I mean, I certainly that priest is out of the marriage market, and I always said in the old days if I were in charge the priest would be relieved of pastoral responsibility for some time, and the causes would have to be examined.

IS it your thought a priest ought to have an unimpeachable in any respect whatsoever marriage? Bot all of that is under his control, but it IS a great argument for celibacy.

An interesting thing in my diocese: we have a priest who was married, then divorced and annulled, and then became a priest (a late vocation). I had no idea that was allowed and had never heard of it before.

In my former diocese, the bishop (who was the #3 ranking bishop in the church in terms of date of consecration) divorced his wife of three decades, annulled his own marriage, then remarried a divorced woman on Palm Sunday and honeymooned out of the US on Easter Sunday. So much for his “headship” of the diocese and for his flock and for the teraching of Holy Scripture. I left the Episcopal Church shortly thereafter.

, annulled his own marriage,

It's great being Bishop!

And Senator and Mrs. Elizabeth Taylor were married by the then Bishop of the Pepsicola Diocese of Virginia. I believe that was marriage number Seven for Ms. Violet Eyes to Die For.

Sacrament, schmacrament!

The River Tiber is deep and cold
The Green Gather Hymnal chills the soul.
But Sacraments burn with sacred fire,
Giving us each our heart's desire.
Alleluia.
(To the Tune of "Michael Row the Boat Ashore.)

I’m familiar with Father William Shields. However, he’s not the only divorced Catholic priest. Also, there are divorced men who were ordained priests after getting annulments. Just like widowers can be ordained priests, the church under certain conditions allows men who are divorced to be ordained if the marriage was annulled. However, he can not be ordained if the annulment was granted due to his immaturity.

I forgot to mention the bishop also had five children. What does the annulment make them?

I'm pretty sure the Episcopal canons specifically state that the status of children of an annulled marriage is not in any way affected by the annulment. It's been a while in the world since the civil status of a marriage was determined by the sacramental status thereof.

It's the same among us RCs. An annulment does not make the children bastards. It does make the parents fornicators, though clearly not usually with, uh, malice aforethought.