What does defrocking of a priest, bishop, or, in this case, a Cardinal mean? Most Rev Joseph Osei-Bonsu provides the answers.
My Lord, this weekend (16-17 February 2019), the news outlets have been taken up by the announcement that the Pope has defrocked Cardinal McCarrick of the U.S. What does defrocking of a priest, bishop, or, in this case, a Cardinal mean? What conditions warrant a defrocking and what are the implications of that for a) the person defrocked and b) for the faithful? Question by Hippolyt:
Answer:
Cardinal Theodore Edgar McCarrick
Cardinal Theodore Edgar McCarrick served as archbishop of Washington from 2001 to 2006. He was removed by the Vatican from public ministry in June 2018 because of credible sexual misconduct allegations. Under intense pressure, McCarrick submitted his resignation from the College of Cardinals in July 2018, which was accepted by Pope Francis. The Pope ordered McCarrick to a life of “prayer and penance” until a canonical trial could be held and he moved to a monastery in Kansas.
In a short release on 16 February, 2019, the Vatican said that a canonical process had found McCarrick, 88, guilty of two charges: soliciting sex during Confession (the Sacrament of Reconciliation) and committing “sins” with minors and adults “with the aggravating factor of the abuse of power”. The Vatican had, therefore, stripped him of the rights of the priesthood. McCarrick, the Vatican said, was notified on Friday, 15 February 2019, of the decision. The decision was affirmed by Pope Francis, meaning that the ex-cardinal has no further recourse.
Dismissal from the Clerical State
The decision against McCarrick, which has been described in the press as “defrocking”, is known formally as a “dismissal from the clerical state”. The sentence is considered by the Catholic Church to be the most severe form of canonical punishment for a cleric. What is meant by “dismissal from the clerical state” and what are the reasons for such a dismissal?
The Catholic Church teaches that once a man is ordained a priest, he is a priest for ever (cf. Psalm 110.4). The fact that one nevertheless occasionally encounters an “ex-priest” would therefore appear to be a contradiction. However, we should note that there is a delicate distinction that must be made between the metaphysical fact that a man is always a priest once he has been ordained, and the canonical status of a priest who has been dismissed from the clerical state.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that the sacrament of Holy Orders confers an “indelible spiritual character” on the man who receives it (CCC 1582). Like the sacrament of Baptism, it can never be erased – a baptized Christian can cease to practise his faith, and even publicly deny Christ, but he can never undo his baptism. Priestly ordination works in exactly the same way. Similarly, Canon 290 of the Code of Canon Law states bluntly that once a man validly receives sacred ordination, the sacrament never becomes invalid. This is because once a priest, always a priest. A cleric can never become a layman again. At the same time, however, it is possible for a priest to be released from the duties and responsibilities that are connected to the clerical state (CCC 1583). Practically speaking, this would mean that such a priest will no longer function outwardly as a priest. He will no longer engage in ministry within his diocese or religious institute, no longer celebrate Mass or confer the sacraments. He will no longer be called “Father”. If he is a bishop or archbishop, he will not be addressed as “My Lord” or “Your Grace’. In the case of a cardinal like Ex-Cardinal McCarrick, he will no longer be addressed as “Your Eminence”. If the person is a pope, he will no longer be addressed as “Your Holiness” or “His Holiness”. Indeed, all such clerics will be addressed as “Mr.”. He will no longer wear clerical clothing (hence “defrocking”), and will no longer be supported financially by the Church. To the world he would appear to be a layman, working at an ordinary job and living the normal life of the laity. Canon law refers to this change as the “loss of the clerical state” (cf. cc. 290-293). Common parlance calls it “laicization”.
Why would a priest lose the clerical state? In the Catholic Church, a deacon, priest, bishop, archbishop or cardinal may be dismissed from the clerical state as a penalty for certain grave offences, or by a papal decree granted for grave reasons. Dismissal from the clerical state can be imposed upon the cleric as the most serious penalty for a cleric who has committed an ecclesiastical crime. In the case of McCarrick, he was dismissed, as we have seen, for soliciting sex during Confession and committing “sins” with minors and adults “with the aggravating factor of the abuse of power”. Ordinarily, dismissal from the clerical state takes place because a priest voluntarily requests it. For any number of reasons, he may conclude that he cannot continue living the life of a priest. This may be because of a serious criminal conviction, heresy, or similar matter. A Catholic cleric may also voluntarily request to be dismissed from the clerical state for a grave personal reason. Voluntary requests are by far the most common means of removal from the clerical state, and the most common reason is to marry: Latin Church clergy must as a rule be unmarried. A priest may also seek to be released from the clerical state voluntarily because he disagrees with major policies or doctrines of the church and wishes to dissociate himself from those policies.
When this occurs and a priest is released from the clerical state, he is still technically a priest, but, as canon 292 notes, he may no longer exercise the power of orders. But in theory, if such a priest were to celebrate Mass, it would be a valid Mass, since he never loses the ability to celebrate the Eucharist. It would, however, be illicit. According to Canon 976, any priest, even one who lacks the faculty to hear confessions, can validly and licitly hear the confession of anyone who is in danger of death. Thus, even a priest who had lost the clerical state, who certainly has lost his confessional faculties, can hear the confession of someone who is dying. In fact, canon 986.2 goes even farther: in an urgent situation, every priest is obliged to hear the confession of a Catholic in danger of death. If, for example, a priest who had lost the clerical state were driving home and came across a car accident, and found there a Catholic victim who at least appeared to be near death, that priest would actually be required under canon law to hear his confession and grant him absolution. This will also apply to McCarrick. This is totally in keeping with the theological concept that an ordained priest always remains a priest.
Can a priest who has been released from the clerical state get married? Can McCarrick get married? At the age of 88, it is most unlikely that he will contemplate marrying! However, as a rule, Catholic clergy are required to be celibate (c. 277.1). One might presume that once a priest has been reduced to the lay state, his obligation to remain celibate ceases. But this is not the case. Canon 291 addresses this issue specifically, and notes that the loss of the clerical state does not carry with it an automatic dispensation from the requirement to stay celibate. In fact, such a dispensation would have to be requested separately, and can only be granted by the Pope himself. Once this is granted, such a priest can marry in the Church. However, he and the future wife will have to receive instruction in preparation for the marriage. Banns will have to be published as is normally done, and in this way the people of God will know that a priest who has been released from the clerical state is getting married.