Dr. Edward Peters: There really is no "functional laicization"

Caveat lector: there really is no "functional laicization"

The Diocese of Phoenix is dealing with an unfortunate situation brought on by one Msgr. Dale Fushek. … But a comment by diocesan spokesman Jim Dwyer concerning an associate of Flushek, one Fr. Mark Dippre, who abandoned ministry and married civilly a few years ago, caught my eye:

"Dippre has never been formally laicized, Dwyer said, but the diocese considers him 'functionally laicized' because he has not been in ministry and has had no ties to the diocese for several years."

I think that kind of description is going to confuse people.

Describing AWOL priests as "functionally laicized" or as "permanently inactive" or as "resigned from ministry", and so on, might seem more palatable to the public, but it masks a serious problem: none of those categories exist canonically; easy resort to such labels, in my opinion, just puts off dealing with the problems.

Read more at: http://www.canonlaw.info/2008/01/caveat-lector-there-really-is-no.html