If a priest is sentenced to prison for abusing a child, murder, rape, or any other serious crime, do they remain a priest while in prison or are they essentially kicked out of the priesthood?
And if they were found innocent after serving 10 years in prison, can they still be/become a priest again?
How would the clergy have an influence on having him released from a secular prison?
I think you're underestimating the power that religion has. Throw in some political corruption, some money and/or religious government officials with some pull and there you go... in the eyes of the public the Priest would be a reformed member of society... or even, perhaps it was the church that was influencing his parole?
Perhaps he's thrown into a third world prison where nothing is done by the books?
Money.
Religion.
Power.
Same shit, different stink...
If a crime has been established and if he is convicted then he may go to jail.
As for his priestly functions none can be taken away. When a priest is ordained the presiding bishop says to him, in the company of witnesses,
Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.
Once priestly powers have been conferred they cannot be revoked. However, he can and would be forbidden to perform any public rites, especially the sacraments, with the interesting exception of the sacrament of Reconciliation. This ban would be in force while he is in jail. After his release the priest may elect to go to monastery where he will be permitted to offer Mass, hear Confession, administer the sacrament of Anointing of Sick (Extreme Unction), and Baptize, He will not preside over marriages. If he is/was a bishop the pope would probably remove him as a bishop and thus he would not Confirm baptized persons or Ordain priests.
Excommunication requires very specific offenses and even then the person is given multiple opportunities to remain within the Mystical Body of Christ. There are sins which automatically make an excommunicate, but even these can be "set aside" upon "reconciliation".
The mixing of civil jurisdiction, in this case crime and punishment, with ecclesiastical jurisdiction and sanctions doesn't apply in today's western society. That said, even if no crime is proven or conviction made the priest's bishop may, due to the scenario you suggest, "suspend" his public functions and confine him to private worship. However, you'd have to set the background for this rule so that the reader knows what's happening and why. It probably would be better presented in dialogue than in narrative.
BTW if a baptized person receives a sacrament from a priest who's functions have been suspended the sacrament is valid for that person, as long as the recipient is unaware of the priest's suspension. The validity of a sacrament rests with the recipient not the priest.
Hope this helps.
C
If a crime has been established and if he is convicted then he may go to jail.
As for his priestly functions none can be taken away. When a priest is ordained the presiding bishop says to him, in the company of witnesses,
Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.
Once priestly powers have been conferred they cannot be revoked. However, he can and would be forbidden to perform any public rites, especially the sacraments, with the interesting exception of the sacrament of Reconciliation. This ban would be in force while he is in jail. After his release the priest may elect to go to monastery where he will be permitted to offer Mass, hear Confession, administer the sacrament of Anointing of Sick (Extreme Unction), and Baptize, He will not preside over marriages. If he is/was a bishop the pope would probably remove him as a bishop and thus he would not Confirm baptized persons or Ordain priests.
Excommunication requires very specific offenses and even then the person is given multiple opportunities to remain within the Mystical Body of Christ. There are sins which automatically make an excommunicate, but even these can be "set aside" upon "reconciliation".
The mixing of civil jurisdiction, in this case crime and punishment, with ecclesiastical jurisdiction and sanctions doesn't apply in today's western society. That said, even if no crime is proven or conviction made the priest's bishop may, due to the scenario you suggest, "suspend" his public functions and confine him to private worship. However, you'd have to set the background for this rule so that the reader knows what's happening and why. It probably would be better presented in dialogue than in narrative.
BTW if a baptized person receives a sacrament from a priest who's functions have been suspended the sacrament is valid for that person, as long as the recipient is unaware of the priest's suspension. The validity of a sacrament rests with the recipient not the priest.
Hope this helps.
C
Well, for my story I was thinking he's a Catholic priest who is abandoned by the church (his superiors anyway, who believe exorcism to be a primitive and barbaric practice) when an exorcism goes wrong and he's thrown in prison. Whether he's actually guilty or not is a mystery... but either way, the church wanted to make an example of him.
20 years later the church (yea, those guys that left him to rot in prison) come crawling back to him because he seems to be only one equipped to handle a situation that has emerged. So with their power they have him released from prison.... you get the picture.
I know that I can just have the church reinstate him in my story, but I was curious to see how it would be handled in the real world.
Thoughts?
Or in Spain or Poland. In France or the UK on the other hand, any attempt would probably cause a minor scandal with lots of bad press for the church.If he were placed in an Italian prison, the Church would have a lot more influence on his parole.