Married Priests

[Aramis]

I came across this letter regarding the situation of divorced, divorced and remarried, and widowed and remarried priests in the Romanian Orthodox Church. It is clear from the letter that this is/was a significant problem in the Romanian Orthodox church and that it is not considered to be acceptable, but that it has in fact happened on a frequent enough basis to cause concern.

roeanews.info/2010/03/15/bor-%E2%80%93-divorced-andor-remarried-priests/

Divorced is a major issue…

But economia has traditionally been applied when a priest is a recent widower with small children to allow him to take a new wife.

 

[babochka]

Well, the canons are clear that priests are to be deposed if they marry. If they continue, it would have to be out of ekonomia.

Yes, I know. That’s what I said in the first place.

 

[hieroglyph]

Not correct. Married men enrolled in the Anglican Ordinariate as laymen may be ordained priests. It’s worded such that other Romans can’t take advantage of the Ordinariate, but those who were Anglican laity and those born into the Ordinariate may be ordained. It goes through Rome for approval, and the specific requirements in formation have yet to be released, possibly yet to be developed, but Anglicanorum Coetibus does permit it.

What about an Anglican that converted Roman before the Coetibus? Is such a person allowed to join the Ordinariate and pursue the priesthood or not?

 

[guanophore]

I’m interested in which non-Protestant churches/denominations/ordinariates/rites allow it.
So far the list is

1. Eastern Orthodox
2. Eastern Rite Catholic Apparently this is within their territory or with Papal dispensation if the community is outside their territory.
3. Anglicans, Episcopal, and Lutherans joining under the Anglican ordinariate.

Any more?

The Roman Rite is now receiving more married priests than ever before. If they come over from a Protestant ministry which is confirmed (the Church affirms that they are called) then they can receive Holy Orders despite being married. This will be especially common in the Anglican communion as they return.

The rule is, though that they cannot be the pastor of a Roman Rite parish. They can serve in one, but the Church recognizes that they have two vocations, and wants them to prioritze their family so they don’t want them carrying the bulk of duties that the Pastor always does. The Church relies on the celibate priest to get up in the night to do last rites and to respond to crises.

 

[Aramis]

What about an Anglican that converted Roman before the Coetibus? Is such a person allowed to join the Ordinariate and pursue the priesthood or not?

I can’t be 100%, and mind, I lack training in canon law… but it appears that such a person might qualify if they relatively promptly joined the ordinariate.

 

[Vico]

Ref: Also no new Anglican Catholic priests may be married when ordained, although there have been many converting married priests accepted.

Not correct. Married men enrolled in the Anglican Ordinariate as laymen may be ordained priests. It’s worded such that other Romans can’t take advantage of the Ordinariate, but those who were Anglican laity and those born into the Ordinariate may be ordained. It goes through Rome for approval, and the specific requirements in formation have yet to be released, possibly yet to be developed, but Anglicanorum Coetibus does permit it.

There are exceptions to the norm as stated in Anglicanorum coetibus (Nov 4, 2009) for the Personal Ordinariates for those Anglican faithful:VI. § 1. Those who ministered as Anglican deacons, priests, or bishops, and who fulfil the requisites established by canon law[13] and are not impeded by irregularities or other impediments[14] 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[15] and in the Statement In June[16] 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.

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apc_20091104_anglicanorum-coetibus_en.html

 

[OLofMtCarmel]

The way it is expressed is:42. In virtue of the fundamental norm of the government of the Catholic Church, to which We alluded above, (82) while on the one hand, the law requiring a freely chosen and perpetual celibacy of those who are admitted to Holy Orders remains unchanged, on the other hand, a study may be allowed of the particular circumstances of married sacred ministers of Churches or other Christian communities separated from the Catholic communion, and of the possibility of admitting to priestly functions those who desire to adhere to the fullness of this communion and to continue to exercise the sacred ministry. The circumstances must be such, however, as not to prejudice the existing discipline regarding celibacy
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_24061967_sacerdotalis_en.html

No offense intended. But do you know the historical facts of what happened when the eastern Catholics originally occupied territory in the U.S.? They started trying to force the families of priests back to their countries of origin. That’s not only scandalous, but extremely sinful in my view. There is no excuse to break up a validly married couple with children like that. That’s what I was thinking about when I posted.

However, I do recognize that divorce among clergy exists and that is scandalous. But they are humans like the rest of us. We need to stop thinking of priests as untouchables, free of sin. That alone would help change the face of the earth. But who am I but a lowly worm. I accept, but I’m not blinded to the tragedies created with good intentions. That’s what created another schism. The existing eastern Catholics moved to the Orthodox. That’s why there is even more bitterness in America over Eastern Catholics that stayed and mostly towards Latin Rite Catholics. It just doesn’t seem right and that’s why it is scandalous to me. The Latin rite forcing validly married priests to send their families to the old country after they had already move here.

 

[Vico]

No offense intended. But do you know the historical facts of what happened when the eastern Catholics originally occupied territory in the U.S.? They started trying to force the families of priests back to their countries of origin. That’s not only scandalous, but extremely sinful in my view. There is no excuse to break up a validly married couple with children like that. That’s what I was thinking about when I posted.

However, I do recognize that divorce among clergy exists and that is scandalous. But they are humans like the rest of us. We need to stop thinking of priests as untouchables, free of sin. That alone would help change the face of the earth. But who am I but a lowly worm. I accept, but I’m not blinded to the tragedies created with good intentions. That’s what created another schism. The existing eastern Catholics moved to the Orthodox. That’s why there is even more bitterness in America over Eastern Catholics that stayed and mostly towards Latin Rite Catholics. It just doesn’t seem right and that’s why it is scandalous to me. The Latin rite forcing validly married priests to send their families to the old country after they had already move here.

I know the history. The Holy See said from the start that married priests we not approved to come to the USA with the intention to stay. (The same rule applies to Latin married priests.) Obedience would have avoided many tragedies.