Debate: Priests holding a political office

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guillaumus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As some may notice I’m trying to pick up the discussion again and I would very much like a lively debate about it. Since it is not really forbidden, although frowned upon and one needs the permission of His Holiness.
 
As some may notice I’m trying to pick up the discussion again and I would very much like a lively debate about it. Since it is not really forbidden, although frowned upon and one needs the permission of His Holiness.
I am sorry that no one is really responding; I, for one, do not know that much upon the topic as from the Church’s perspective.
 
Something else, deacons. They are also ordained members of the clergy, yet they can be married and have children. Are they suitable to engage into politics? Or could a politician get ordained as a deacon and still be an active elected politician?
Permanent Deacons i know are expected to hold other jobs, because of their status. the Church cannot pay them as much as a secular job would, and since they have a family to raise, it is understood that they will hold on to a “daytime job”

while its not specified what it could be, i suppose being an elected official is not prohibited, as long as its not the type of elected position which would take one away from his duties in the Church.
 
by the way, i think it was in a similar topic but different thread, but i did mention that a province in the Philippines had a priest for governor for 3 years. but during this time he was on “indefinite leave”

during the run-up to the presidential elections, he considered running for president. but the Bishops Conference said he’d be defrocked if he did so, win or lose

he eventually didn’t run, ran for re-election to be governor, and lost. in his last press statement i read that he will ask to be reinstated

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Panlilio
 
Permanent Deacons i know are expected to hold other jobs, because of their status. the Church cannot pay them as much as a secular job would, and since they have a family to raise, it is understood that they will hold on to a “daytime job”

while its not specified what it could be, i suppose being an elected official is not prohibited, as long as its not the type of elected position which would take one away from his duties in the Church.
Politics, if one fully commits oneself to them, is very time-consuming. But making time every Sunday to assist a parish priest as a permanent deacon is very managable. But you can’t do very much more then that when active in politics.

And yes, it isn’t really prohibited, but one needs a special dispensation of the Pope.
 
by the way, i think it was in a similar topic but different thread, but i did mention that a province in the Philippines had a priest for governor for 3 years. but during this time he was on “indefinite leave”

during the run-up to the presidential elections, he considered running for president. but the Bishops Conference said he’d be defrocked if he did so, win or lose

he eventually didn’t run, ran for re-election to be governor, and lost. in his last press statement i read that he will ask to be reinstated

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Panlilio
About the same story as Fernando Lugo, although he was a bishop a became defrocked for ranning for president of Paraguay. He asked the Holy See to be removed from his position as priest, basically to ‘undo’ his ordination. The Holy See denied his claim, but he did ran for president and became defrocked. It is very sad that a bishop leaves his vocation behind him, but is their a difference between a priest or deacon to “pursue” a political “carreer”? Priests and deacons, especially deacons, have more ‘time’ to spare to society. But of course as priests, they already devote their lives to mankind. It’s very paradoxal moving between two worlds, the Church and State.
 
There are political implications to the gospel, and there is something to be said for the priests who worked for the poor in Latin America. I am thinking of heros such as Father Miguel D’Escoto. However, we do have a law and until that changes they should follow the canon or request a dispensation/leave.
 
This is not related to the OP, but just a silly question that is related to the answers to the OP. Why do lay people use the term “defrocked”? We don’t use that word. It does not exist in Canon Law nor in the constitutions or rules of religious communities.

Why not use the correct canonical term? I priest who runs for office can be dismissed from the clerical state. He’s not even dismissed from the priesthood. No one can do that, not even a pope. He’s dismissed from the clerical state. Just curious. 😃

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
This is not related to the OP, but just a silly question that is related to the answers to the OP. Why do lay people use the term “defrocked”? We don’t use that word. It does not exist in Canon Law nor in the constitutions or rules of religious communities.

Why not use the correct canonical term? I priest who runs for office can be dismissed from the clerical state. He’s not even dismissed from the priesthood. No one can do that, not even a pope. He’s dismissed from the clerical state. Just curious. 😃

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
I guess that it is just a colorful, colloquial word that “sticks” in one’s mind. It simplified and slightly dramatizes the situation.
 
I guess that it is just a colorful, colloquial word that “sticks” in one’s mind. It simplified and slightly dramatizes the situation.
OOOOOOK

It has always struck me as comedic, because the term only exists in English. The event is far from dramatic. When a priest is disimssed he receives a letter from the Holy See informing him of the fact and giving him 15 days to appeal in a court. If he does not appeal, the dismissal sticks. Unless the dismissal is signed by the Holy Father or the Prefect for the Sacred Congregation of the Faith, then there is no appeal. If he’s a member of an order, he remains a member of the order, but not in the clerical state. It is them up to the Superior General of the order to proceed with a dismissal from vows. But that’s another process that takes a bit.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
OOOOOOK

It has always struck me as comedic, because the term only exists in English. The event is far from dramatic. When a priest is disimssed he receives a letter from the Holy See informing him of the fact and giving him 15 days to appeal in a court. If he does not appeal, the dismissal sticks. Unless the dismissal is signed by the Holy Father or the Prefect for the Sacred Congregation of the Faith, then there is no appeal. If he’s a member of an order, he remains a member of the order, but not in the clerical state. It is them up to the Superior General of the order to proceed with a dismissal from vows. But that’s another process that takes a bit.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
The process, while sad, still sounds rather intriguing. But I thought that one can only be released from solemn vows by the Pope. Oh well.
 
The process, while sad, still sounds rather intriguing. But I thought that one can only be released from solemn vows by the Pope. Oh well.
Your thinking is correct. Only a pope can realeas a religious who belongs to an order with solemn vows. However, the process of dismissal must be executed by the Superior General. The Superior General must take the request for dismissal to the General Council. If the council approves, then the request for dismissal is presented to the Holy Father. If the Council does not approve, the Superior General has to proceed using other means to reach the Holy Father. Those means are described in the Modus Procdendi of the Religius institute.

The process is different for religious who are in simple vows. These are either members of religious orders who are in temporary vows or perpetually professed members of religious congregations.

Whether you belong to an order or to a congregation, the canons of 1983 insist that the process of dismissal can only be initiated by the Superior General and never by the pope. Pope John Paul II deliberately put this into the canons to separate the religious life from the priesthood, because the pope is generally a secular priest, not a consecrated religious. We have not had a consecrated religious as pope in more than 100 years. Every pope of the 20th century was a secular priest. So far the two of the 21st century are also seculars.

To keep the clerical state separate from the consecrated state, Pope John Paul applied the principle of subsidiarity to dismissals.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Your thinking is correct. Only a pope can realeas a religious who belongs to an order with solemn vows. However, the process of dismissal must be executed by the Superior General. The Superior General must take the request for dismissal to the General Council. If the council approves, then the request for dismissal is presented to the Holy Father. If the Council does not approve, the Superior General has to proceed using other means to reach the Holy Father. Those means are described in the Modus Procdendi of the Religius institute.

The process is different for religious who are in simple vows. These are either members of religious orders who are in temporary vows or perpetually professed members of religious congregations.

Whether you belong to an order or to a congregation, the canons of 1983 insist that the process of dismissal can only be initiated by the Superior General and never by the pope. Pope John Paul II deliberately put this into the canons to separate the religious life from the priesthood, because the pope is generally a secular priest, not a consecrated religious. We have not had a consecrated religious as pope in more than 100 years. Every pope of the 20th century was a secular priest. So far the two of the 21st century are also seculars.

To keep the clerical state separate from the consecrated state, Pope John Paul applied the principle of subsidiarity to dismissals.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
I see. Thank you for explaining that, Brother.
 
About the same story as Fernando Lugo, although he was a bishop a became defrocked for ranning for president of Paraguay. He asked the Holy See to be removed from his position as priest, basically to ‘undo’ his ordination. The Holy See denied his claim, but he did ran for president and became defrocked. It is very sad that a bishop leaves his vocation behind him, but is their a difference between a priest or deacon to “pursue” a political “carreer”? Priests and deacons, especially deacons, have more ‘time’ to spare to society. But of course as priests, they already devote their lives to mankind. It’s very paradoxal moving between two worlds, the Church and State.
Are you serving God or a political goal?
you can’t serve both. One will suffer.

bluelake
 
Are you serving God or a political goal?
you can’t serve both. One will suffer.

bluelake
I’m not so sure about that. Think of great political leaders who were also saintly Catholics: Thomas More, Elizabeth of Hungary, Louis King of France, just to name a few. They exercised their public office in accord with the teachings of the Church. Many of their constituents were unhapppy. More lost his head over this. Elizabeth was thrown into the street. Louis did die in power.

What they all managed to do was to protect their people from at least one or several moral and spiritual falls. They were unable to protect them from every moral fall, but at least a few. I look at it this way. If you can save me a few bumps, even if you can’t save me from all of them, five bumps are not as bad as 12.

Did their constituency like their choices, not always. Did they care whether their constituency like it? Not a all. The important thing was to do what was best for their consituency. These individuals understood that their role in government was to protect their people from moral evils, over and above all things, and from social and economic evils second. They understood that the power of government comes from God and has to comply with what God has revealed, not what man wants. Like these most famous political leaders and saints,there have been many others.

We also have other public servants who have become great saints, among them is St. Giuseppi Moscati. As Dr. Moscati, he was a public health official. He is also guilty of violating half of the medical laws in Italy in order to comply with the moral teachings of the Church and the spiritual teachings of Francis of Assisi to whom he had great devotion. In the end, he did a lot of spiritual good for his medical students and colleagues. He helped them convert to become better and truer Catholics. He also helped save thousands of lives. His methods were later adopted by the health department in his region… These were the same people who were angry at him for not complying with the duties of his office as the law required.

I’ll finally throw in my own experience. I’m not a political figure. I did work for a state university as a professor of medicine. I absolutely refused to teach certain medical procedures that are immoral. My worse critics were Catholic. They argued that I was being paid with state funds and therefore should follow the state mandated curriculum. I argued that the state knew I was Catholic, end of story.

It was interesting, my greatest supporters were Jews and Muslims, not Catholics. They shared my conviction. The state is never above the truth, not matter how much it pays. Citizens know what they want, but not always what is good for them. What is good for them is written in the Truth revealed through faith.

While my Jewish and Muslim friends disagreed with me on the truths revealed by faith, they supported me in placing faith above state funds. When the Board of Trustees challenge me, it was the Jews and the Muslims who argued in my favor saying that the Bodard nor the State had the right to obscure the truth or demand that any professor teach sin. One very intelligent Muslim phyisican argued that the students had the right to be taught according to moral truth, not according to the whims of the people whose only concern was “democracy”. He proceeded to quote Pope John Paul II. “Democracy is a system that is meant to protect the rights of man. It may never be confused. To violate morality in order to preserve democracy is a grave moral evil.” (Evangelium Vitae). I was thrilled to see a Muslim well-versed on the Gospel of Life.

My point is that one can be a good public servant and a good and faithful Catholic. However, we who are religious have been asked to leave that to lay Catholics. But lay Catholics have the moral duty to exercise public life like other lay saints in similar situations. Never let anyone preach to you the great lie that democracy is a higher good than revealed Truth. Democracy must open the door so that truth can be taught and it must protect its citizens from falsehoods. Otherwise, democracy is worthless.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
I’ll finally throw in my own experience. I’m not a political figure. I did work for a state university as a professor of medicine. I absolutely refused to teach certain medical procedures that are immoral. My worse critics were Catholic. They argued that I was being paid with state funds and therefore should follow the state mandated curriculum. I argued that the state knew I was Catholic, end of story.
I did not know that you had had medical training, Br. J.R. Even with the ethical issues, it must have been fascinating to teach that subject (I previously wanted to become doctor and love the life- sciences). Was that before you became a Capuchin?
 
I did not know that you had had medical training, Br. J.R. Even with the ethical issues, it must have been fascinating to teach that subject (I previously wanted to become doctor and love the life- sciences). Was that before you became a Capuchin?
Afterward. After getting my STD in Mystical and Ascetical Theology I was sent to school to get a PhD in Neuroscience., my area is in-utero neuro-development. That knowledged helped propel me to move from teaching to work for the life of the unborn and eventually the foundation of the Brothers of Life.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Afterward. After getting my STD in Mystical and Ascetical Theology I was sent to school to get a PhD in Neuroscience., my area is in-utero neuro-development. That knowledged helped propel me to move from teaching to work for the life of the unborn and eventually the foundation of the Brothers of Life.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
That is quite interesting. I love learning in general, and it certainly has its uses.
 
Never let anyone preach to you the great lie that democracy is a higher good than revealed Truth. Democracy must open the door so that truth can be taught and it must protect its citizens from falsehoods. Otherwise, democracy is worthless.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Excellent post, Brother JR. All of it, but especially the quoted part above, and even most especially the parts bolded above.🙂
 
It does not matter what any of us think about this subject. Any Priest that runs for a public office is subject to being lacisized. That is the rule of the church, and I personally think it is a good one.

Priests are not supposed to be involved in running the world. They are ordained to tend to the souls of the faithful;. If they wish to become political figures, leave the Priesthood, and run as a lay person.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top