Comments on: Anglicans, Welcome Home!

By: HomeschoolNfpDad

HomeschoolNfpDad — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:29:59 +0000

The discipline of priestly celibacy dates all the way back to apostolic times. Don’t let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise! Even deacons were expected to be celibate in the early centuries of the Church. This expectation extended to married men who were ordained. There is a reason why the Church retains the tradition wherein a man’s wife must assent to his being ordained to the permanent diaconate. Not because celibacy is necessarily required*, but because it used to be. In the early Church, a married man ordained to the priesthood was expected to be celibate in his marriage after ordination. It is perhaps likely that some individuals were exempted from the discipline, but priestly celibacy is the norm for the Catholic Church (and not just the Western rite) and it always has been the norm, even for married priests. It remains a disciplinary norm (and not a dogmatic or doctrinal norm), but it is a norm nonetheless.

Whether or not this ancient norm will be applied to incoming Anglican priests under the new rules is entirely up to the Pope. But even if exemptions are granted, they will be exemptions and nothing more. But such exemptions to the order of discipline are entirely the prerogative of the Vicar of Christ.

I don’t care if the entrance of the Traditional Anglicans into the ancient Church ruffles some feathers and requires certain exemptions to certain disciplines. I’m glad they’re coming home. To be frank, it’s about time.

Next up (and may God grant it speedily): the Society of Saint Pius X.

* There is a defensible argument that canon law extends the requirement of celibacy to permanent deacons and then mitigates against the requirement (see http://www.canonlaw.info/a_deacons.htm and http://www.canonlaw.info/a_deacons2.htm).

By: Arkanabar Ilarsadin

Arkanabar Ilarsadin — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:05:40 +0000

Kathryn,
much remains to be seen, but I have no doubt that full and informed assent to all Catholic doctrine will be required. Hopefully they will live it better than cradle Catholics like myself so often do.

Bear in mind that the practical effect of the Personal Ordinariates will be to marginalize “progressive” *CATHOLIC* bishops, and reduce the amount that they are able to hamper the process. My guess is that the Anglicans who want to convert are probably also those most likely to fully assent to Catholic doctrine.

I expect the heaviest stumbling block will be marriage discipline.

By: Kathryn

Kathryn — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:46:33 +0000

DWC is correct: The Eastern Rite Churches (Byzantine rite, for example) do sometimes draw from the “married men crowd” to be priests (as oppose to allowing a man who is already a priest to become married…the marriage vows must come before the vows to the priesthood. You cannot take priestly vows, then get married.) Not all Eastern priests are married–I think in the US most of them are not–but it does happen. I think the Eastern Churches only draw their Bishops from the non-married priest group.

It is my understanding that the Western Church, in order to stop abuses of power (nepotism) decided to stop ordaining married men, and only ordain those who had already accepted celibacy.

Unfortunately, in my experience (I am a convert) that RCIA programs vary a great deal. Ours is a liberal area, and my fellow students never asked questions regarding abortion or contraception. Even if they had, the issue would have been swept under the rug. Just look at Tony and Cherie Blair–still promoting both contraception and abortion, and as far as the Vatican is concerned, they are good Catholics.

By: DWC

DWC — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:13:11 +0000

For me, married priests is not a concern (that exists today, and could be a blessing). No difference than many of the eastern rite groups. I suspect there will be strict guidelines regarding their eucharistic theology. As I understand it, some Anglicans align well with our belief .. while others stray off into consubstantiation and worse. Of course, those groups “joining” us would most likely be aligned. It will be interesting to see what ripple this has.

By: isidore

isidore — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:59:51 +0000

Celibacy, that’s what. Anglican priests will not be forced to give up their marriages, so why will our faithful and celibate priests not become Anglican priests, marry, and then “return home?” What about our Roman Catholic priests who were not faithful to their vows of celibacy, married, and were forced out of active ministry -– will they be welcomed back home? What about our Roman Catholic priests who ARE faithful to their vows of celibacy — what is their status? Will my parish need to build a rectory for our new (former Anglican) priest, his wife and their children? These are some of the questions that will need to be answered as we welcome home our separated brothers.

By: PrairieHawk

PrairieHawk — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:17:16 +0000

My experience as an RCIA catechist working with new Catholics is that these are the most faith-filled, sober people who ask the toughest questions and demand the very best of what I have to give. Having thousands more like them can only be a great help to our Church. God bless them!

By: Kathryn

Kathryn — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:06:56 +0000

Personally, I’d love to see these people “come home” as it were, and if the Episcopal church in our town were to make the switch, I would love to go there. I grew up in a lapse Episcopal family that once attended that church and then I could “go home”. I have no problem with a “married priesthood.”

My fear though is that they will not entirely cross the Tiber–they will continue to contracept, if not abort. (And I do wonder about the divorce rate amoung the married Anglican clergy.) What cousel will they give to the penitent who is struggling with family size, difficult pregnanies, and sterilizations? Will they support TOTB, NFP, and/or the Natural Law with regards to contraception?

We do not need more Anglicans like Tony Blair entering the Church.