The Lead

It appears that the news of the new Apostolic Constitution is not ready for prime time. Richard Owen reports in the Times of London that the publication of an Apostolic Constitution outlining a process for welcoming Anglicans into the Roman Catholic Church is delayed because of controversy in the Vatican over the specifics, in particular priestly celibacy.

Those who saw this announcement as the sign of a liberalizing trend in Rome will apparently be disappointed.

Owen says:

When asked last week about admission into the Catholic Church of married Anglican priests under the new rules, Cardinal William Levada, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, replied that requests would be judged "on a case by case basis".
It was left unclear however whether Anglican seminarians who were either married or who wished to get married before being ordained would also be admitted to the Catholic Church. The final text of the Apostolic Constitution is likely to "eliminate this ambiguity" by making clear that all trainee priests will be required to be celibate if they wish to go over to Rome, Mr Tornielli said....

The Pope is understood to have wanted the announcement to be made only when the text was finalised, in order to avoid a public relations disaster like that which followed his rehabilitation in January of Richard Williamson, an excommunicated arch-conservative bishop, before he became aware that Bishop Williamson was a Holocaust denier.

So what happened? If these details were not worked out, why was the announcement made when it was? Because as more people who were not in on the decision were briefed in--The Archbishop of Canterbury, and all the Catholic bishops of England and Wales, to name a few--there was fear that the news would leak.

Instead of leaking the story prematurely, it was announced before all the details were worked out.

Since, technically speaking, the requirement of priestly celibacy is on the level of regulation not dogma, there is some fear that to create an exception for former-Anglicans, who would not have their own church-within-a-church but live within the Roman Rite, would create havoc and confusion for other clergy and seminarians who would be required to maintain both their liturgies and priestly celibacy.

The idea that each married priest who wants to convert will be reviewed "case-by-case" and that future generations of Anglican-style clergy may have to adhere to the celibacy rule raises two questions: (1) why bother and (2) was all the drama-over-not-very-much worth the damage to ecumenical relations this document caused?

Read the rest here.

Comments (6)

It would have been so much better to have hashed this out first in the Vatican before springing it half-blown on the world. That would have avoided a great deal of needless confusion and speculation. It's amazing that the authorities had not even written the Constitution when they announced it. They led some pople to believe they could retain Anglicanism while embracing Roman Catholicism. Even the Vatican is finding this is easier said then done. Let's hope this does not have the makings of another fiasco.

(Editor's note: Thanks, Alabamian. We need your full name next time.)

Posted by Alabamian | October 30, 2009 1:16 PM

Day by day this thing seems to becoming more and more a non-story. Anglican priests who are already married and are willing to submit to Roman re-ordination can keep their wives. But that's always been the case -- there's nothing new about that. I think this has applied to Lutheran pastors in the past also, not only in North America but also in Germany. A married bishop could keep his wife, but he could only be re-ordained as a priest, not as a bishop. My suspicion is that for would-be Tiber-swimmers who are not yet married, it's already too late.

An interesting hypothetical case would be a priest who was ordained as an RC, swam the Thames, then married while among us, but now wants to swim back. Rome would recognize his ordination but would not admit the validity of his marriage (Holy Orders is an impediment to a valid marriage in Roman canon law). He'd have to choose between his collar and his wife.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave....

Posted by Bill Moorhead | October 30, 2009 1:46 PM

I put this on twitter a few days back: I'm skeptical that this morning's news from the Vatican is a big deal, but mine is a minority opinion: http://bit.ly/VmyQs #ecafe
9:51 AM Oct 20th from web

And in an email exchange with a reporter I suggested it might turn out to be one of the most over-hyped religion stories of all time.

Feeling pretty good about that right now.

Posted by Jim Naughton | October 30, 2009 2:16 PM

On the other hand, the Pope has now seen what a tangled mess it will be, and gotten a preliminary read on the reception of the idea. So we will see how the Constitution finally comes out.

Posted by Michael Russell | October 30, 2009 2:31 PM

More,

http://www.ucanews.com/2009/10/30/celibacy-issue-hinders-publication-of-anglican-document/

QUOTE
It now appears that Pope Benedict XVI was also not happy with this possibility, according to an Oct. 29 report in the Italian daily, “Il Giornale.”

Under the headline “Married priests: The Pope does not like the agreement with the Anglicans,” the paper revealed that the text of the apostolic constitution was examined by the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. As a result, it seems that seminarians of the new “personal ordinariates” will have to accept celibacy, just as Latin-rite seminarians must if they wish to become Roman Catholic priests.

UCA News has learned that discussions for the new papal provision for Anglicans to join the Catholic Church had been going on for at least 18 months before the press briefing.
UNQUOTE

Posted by John B. Chilton | October 30, 2009 10:36 PM

Bill, once a Roman priest has swum the Thames, they can only swim back laicized, so they might as well keep the wife. They are no longer welcome among the ranks of the ordained.

Posted by David Allen |dah • veed| | October 31, 2009 3:28 AM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

CATEGORIES

Organizations