Posted on 06/02/2008 11:02:49 AM PDT by Aretaphila
As reported in the Santa Fe New Mexican, Archbishop Michael Sheehan ordained three priests at the Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi here in Santa Fe yesterday, and one of the three was Jeffrey Whorton, a married father of five.
(Excerpt) Read more at moraliablog.com ...
I thought this was going to be about some bishop breaking the rules.
I'm not Roman Catholic, but I have a problem with this. If this Archbishop isn't going to follow the rules from the Pope, he should shift to a denomination where he will follow the rules. He is setting a bad example (even though I agree with his view that women can and should serve God through ministry).
Father Whorton’s ordination does not mean that the Catholic Church has abandoned the celibacy requirement for priests — at least not for all priests. In 1980, Pope John Paul II established a special dispensation called a Pastoral Provision under which Episcopalian priests, who are permitted by their church to marry, could be ordained as Catholic priests while remaining married. Father Whorton is one of this small group of former Episcopal priests who have sought communion with the Catholic Church.
I find the Pope's decision odd, but in light of that decision, I'm okay with the Archbishop's actions.
I understand that people who are married before the priesthood can remain married, or perhaps this applies only with former Anglican/Episopalian priests.
Long time ago, there were plenty of married RCC priests.
I’m just glad he’s married to a woman...
This guy was an Episcopalian convert. Anglicans - like Orthodox - get special arrangements, because they were married before they even began thinking about the Catholic priesthood. The celibacy of the clergy in the Western Church is a disciplinary thing, based on Jesus’ words about those who have surrendered everything, who have become eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven, and has been incorporated into Church law.
The second generation is not allowed to marry (if his sons want to be priests, they will have to be celibate). This is a provisional situation.
If the candidate has never taken the vow of celibacy, then he not breaking the vow. Hence, the ability for married men to become RC priests.
The creaping incrimentalism of married priest. ;~)
Should she pass on (or otherwise leave), he won't be entitled to another wife. He'll be subject to the same rule as other priests.
“Theoretically, the priest shortage (to say nothing of the paedophilia problem) could be taken care of in short order if any devout Catholic man could have a wife and a Roman collar too.”
I find two faults with your logic. First, there are plenty of pedophiles who are not Catholic priests, many of whom are married. In fact, most of the abuses by Cahtolic priests were by homosexuals in the priesthood who preyed on young post-pubescent males between 12-18 years of age. This is a typical homosexual pattern.
Second, if a man is a devout Catholic (or for that matter, a devout Christian), the last thing he ought to do is prey upon children, married or not.
It’s the latter. I’m a married Catholic and therefore could not become a R.C. priest (although I’ve been informed that widowers can become priests even if they have children). Only married priests from a non-R.C. denomination can make the switch while married.
My pastor is a married Episcopal convert. Brought his associate and 3/4 of his parish with him into the Catholic Church.
It’s not new, but it seems to be happening more as men leave the Episcopal church over “gay clergy” and join the Catholic church.
The Catholic Church changes it’s rules to suit it’s needs on a regular basis. This dispensation for Anglican priest has been ongoing for quite a number of years. Having different regulations for different classes of people is the hallmark of this Church... after all, you can’t remarry in a Catholic Church if you were previously divorced unless your name in Ted Kennedy, etc. Unless you pay to go through their “annulment” procedure for the purpose of extracting funds from you to make the first marriage go away in the eyes of the church. Not much more than a sham!
Rome does. This man was ordained - not received as a priest. It was not a conditional ordination either, so it is an admission on his part that he was never really ordained a priest in the Church of God. That's why very few Anglican priests take this route. It is very difficult for most men to make that "admission." IMHO, it is a tremendous act of humility on his part, and it is a tremendously charitable pastoral provision on the part of Rome.
These men who come from Protestant denominations are nearly always ordained unconditionally... their previous ordinations are in fact considered invalid. There may be a small few who can demonstrate valid orders though Orthodox or Old Catholic bishops, but they are very few and far between, and would probably be ordained conditionally.
If that's the case, it seems that the role of these men should not be as ordained priests, but as lay ministers, like Scott Hahn, for example.
Lay ministers are not 'ordained' in any sense. However, those who had been Protestant pastors, including Dr. Hahn, could seek ordination under the pastoral provision. (I doubt that Dr. Hahn ever would.)
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.