M
MarkThompson
Guest
Not to mention his order excommunicating the SSPX. He is definitely a force to be reckoned with!
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
Mark has made a very good case for the Conferences of Bishops around the world and in different states. It’s very important to remember that up to Vatican II, bishops ruled their dioceses like Lords over a fiefdom. They had nothing to do with each other or with major religious superiors. In effect, you had parallel universes.
This was a result of a time when there was no way for people to communicate instantly and transportation was a major endeavor. Sometimes you could not travel for months due to inclement weather. As a result, the cohesiveness and the fraternal bond between bishops was lost as the world got bigger and distances became greater.
By the time that Vatican II comes around, things changed. Mass communication is in and high speed travel has arrived on the scene. The means are available to bring these leaders together as a body of brothers. That was the greatest wish of the Council and the popes. The conferences provide the opportunity for that cohesiveness through mutual cooperation.
To make it happen, the Church assigns certain tasks to the conferences such as approving the liturgical books for its region, including the breviary. The conference decides the minimum amount of education required for secular priests in its region. This allows bishops to add to the formation program, as they see fit. Translations are assigned to the conferences. When a document comes from the Vatican, it is translated at the conference, not at the diocesan level. This ensures that everyone is reading the same thing. This also includes translations of the scriptures. For example, when the word virgin was taken out of the one verse in Isaiah, it does not have to be approved by Rome. The conference has the authority to approve it. The decisions of the conferences are part of the Ordinary Magisterium, but they are not up for grabs. The Church expects us to assent out of fidelity, even though they may not require an assent of faith. In other words, we obey because authority has spoken.
When the USCCB approves of a translation for use in the USA, it is with the blessing of the Catholic Biblical Associaton of America. The Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship intervenes only if something is wrong. This rarely happens, not that something is rarely wrong. What rarely happens is their intervention. The popes discourage the prefects of the different congregations from interfering unless they are called upon for help or the matter is so out of control that they need help. This is the principle of subsidiarity. This is another reason for the existence of conference. By working together, the local Churches can pull their resources to solve their own problems. The Vatican cannot possibly know about and resolve every problem. They don’t really want to be swarmed. I have no idea how many dioceses and parishes there are around the world, but imagine the kind of staff that the Vatican would need to answer to every question that arises around the world. Bishops conferences can do much of this.
The conferences do not have juridical power. This means that other than what is assigned to them and whatever they agree upon among themselves, each diocese is governed by its bishop, not by the conference. When a bishop invokes the conference, it’s because what he is invoking is a joint decision in which he has participated and to which he has agreed. They may disagree on implementation. That happens. The conference cannot tell the bishop how to implement the rule.
There was also a need to bring the bishops to the table with large organizations of lay leaders and with the religious superiors. Many religious who serve in a diocese are exempt from the authority of the bishop. There are areas of Catholic life that only the bishop controls and no one is exempt in those areas. Other areas are not under his control. If the bishops and religious are to work together, they and the major superiors have to talk to each other. Otherwise, the left hand won’t know what the right hand wants, never mind what it’s doing.
Superiors cover bigger geographical areas than dioceses. One religious community may be present in many dioceses. While they try to work one-on-one with the local bishop, it’s nice to have some constants in place so that you don’t have to reinvent the wheel every time you move your religious and so that the bishop does not have to draw up a set of policies and procedures every time he welcomes a community into his diocese. Aside from the canons that govern the relationship between religious and bishops, there are agreements made by the associatons of major superiors and the Conference of Bishops. In the USA there are four bodies: Women Religious (LCWR), Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM), National Association of Religious Brothers (NARB) and Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR).
As we can see, the conferences exist to bring people together in fraternity to support the life of the Church for the common good and they take some work off the shoulders of the Roman Curia.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
This was a result of a time when there was no way for people to communicate instantly and transportation was a major endeavor. Sometimes you could not travel for months due to inclement weather. As a result, the cohesiveness and the fraternal bond between bishops was lost as the world got bigger and distances became greater.
By the time that Vatican II comes around, things changed. Mass communication is in and high speed travel has arrived on the scene. The means are available to bring these leaders together as a body of brothers. That was the greatest wish of the Council and the popes. The conferences provide the opportunity for that cohesiveness through mutual cooperation.
To make it happen, the Church assigns certain tasks to the conferences such as approving the liturgical books for its region, including the breviary. The conference decides the minimum amount of education required for secular priests in its region. This allows bishops to add to the formation program, as they see fit. Translations are assigned to the conferences. When a document comes from the Vatican, it is translated at the conference, not at the diocesan level. This ensures that everyone is reading the same thing. This also includes translations of the scriptures. For example, when the word virgin was taken out of the one verse in Isaiah, it does not have to be approved by Rome. The conference has the authority to approve it. The decisions of the conferences are part of the Ordinary Magisterium, but they are not up for grabs. The Church expects us to assent out of fidelity, even though they may not require an assent of faith. In other words, we obey because authority has spoken.
When the USCCB approves of a translation for use in the USA, it is with the blessing of the Catholic Biblical Associaton of America. The Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship intervenes only if something is wrong. This rarely happens, not that something is rarely wrong. What rarely happens is their intervention. The popes discourage the prefects of the different congregations from interfering unless they are called upon for help or the matter is so out of control that they need help. This is the principle of subsidiarity. This is another reason for the existence of conference. By working together, the local Churches can pull their resources to solve their own problems. The Vatican cannot possibly know about and resolve every problem. They don’t really want to be swarmed. I have no idea how many dioceses and parishes there are around the world, but imagine the kind of staff that the Vatican would need to answer to every question that arises around the world. Bishops conferences can do much of this.
The conferences do not have juridical power. This means that other than what is assigned to them and whatever they agree upon among themselves, each diocese is governed by its bishop, not by the conference. When a bishop invokes the conference, it’s because what he is invoking is a joint decision in which he has participated and to which he has agreed. They may disagree on implementation. That happens. The conference cannot tell the bishop how to implement the rule.
There was also a need to bring the bishops to the table with large organizations of lay leaders and with the religious superiors. Many religious who serve in a diocese are exempt from the authority of the bishop. There are areas of Catholic life that only the bishop controls and no one is exempt in those areas. Other areas are not under his control. If the bishops and religious are to work together, they and the major superiors have to talk to each other. Otherwise, the left hand won’t know what the right hand wants, never mind what it’s doing.
Superiors cover bigger geographical areas than dioceses. One religious community may be present in many dioceses. While they try to work one-on-one with the local bishop, it’s nice to have some constants in place so that you don’t have to reinvent the wheel every time you move your religious and so that the bishop does not have to draw up a set of policies and procedures every time he welcomes a community into his diocese. Aside from the canons that govern the relationship between religious and bishops, there are agreements made by the associatons of major superiors and the Conference of Bishops. In the USA there are four bodies: Women Religious (LCWR), Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM), National Association of Religious Brothers (NARB) and Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR).
As we can see, the conferences exist to bring people together in fraternity to support the life of the Church for the common good and they take some work off the shoulders of the Roman Curia.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
A
ajpirc
Guest
Isn’t this how it should be? The Pope gives them some land and the responsibility to shepherd the flock of that land. He is given total authority and makes all of the laws of that land, but corresponding with the laws of the Pope.
With a Bishops’ Conference, it is more of a republican democracy where the dioceses are represented by the bishop thereof in the conference and they make the rules for all of the dioceses. The only thing you’re missing from that is people voting for their bishop and the conference making mandatory laws throughout the Catholic dioceses of the nation.
A
ajpirc
Guest
Bishop Bruskewitz has also been the bishop of Lincoln since 1992. To me that says a lot.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
It shouldn’t.
The length of time someone is the Ordinary of a diocese does not ensure his orthodoxy.
A
ajpirc
Guest
I’m says to me that God is pleased with what he is doing. In the Old Testament, it was believed that when people lived a long life, God was pleased with them. Why do you think Abraham and Noah live to like 900?
J
JReducation
Guest
They’re to retain total control of their dioceses. However, they were isolated from each other. It was not of the Church’s choosing. As I said, we did not have mass media and transportation. Two bishops in one state of the USA might as well be on two planets. That was not the vision of the Apostles. It is not the vision of the Church today.
Bishops make rules for the dioceses. That has not changed. At least, they’re not alone. They have fraternal support and consultation.
Remember, the conference does not run the dioceses. It is not a republican model. The conference has certain powers given to it by the Holy See and by Canon Law, for the good of the people in an given region. As has been said, the conference makes decisions about such things as the translation of the missal and the general instructions. Those things are centralized, because it’s important for the Church to have them centralized.
The formation of diocesan priests is also dictated by the conference. That too is important that you centralize it so that you can share resources. There are many dioceses that do not have enough men to warrant their own seminary. You have some dioceses that are tiny. Think of places like Wyoming or Utah. The number of seminarians is very small. If you have to combine formation programs, you need an agreement on what the formation program should look like.
Those things do not make for a republican system of government. Those are infrastructures that help the bishops do their jobs. They don’t take away their authority.
Eighteen years is not an unusually long time. There are some bishops who are in place longer, because they are installed at a younger age. Bishop Chaput has been in Denver for 14 years. Cardinal Hickey was in Washington for 20 years. My impression is that as bishops get older, they get less transfers than younger bishops.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
They didn’t live 900 of our years. The biblical numbers and calendars are very different from our own; but that has nothing to do with the bishop’s tenure in a diocese. Bishop B. became a bishop older. As I said, I have noticed that older bishops move around less than younger bishops. That would make sense. Why rattle someone’s life after a certain age unless there is an absolute need to move him?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
A
ajpirc
Guest
Ok, that seems like a long time to me. I haven’t even been alive for 18 years.
J
JReducation
Guest
THAAAAAAAAAAAAAT would make a difference.Ok, that seems like a long time to me. I haven’t even been alive for 18 years.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
Then the 32 years that my Bishop has been the Ordinary of my diocese must seem like an eternity to you!!Ok, that seems like a long time to me. I haven’t even been alive for 18 years.
And he will have served 33 years before he is required to submit his resignation,
nearly 3/4’s of my life!
A
ajpirc
Guest
That’s two times my age. I’ll have to wait another 16 years until I turn 32, hopefully I’ll be ordained by then.Then the 32 years that my Bishop has been the Ordinary of my diocese must seem like an eternity to you!!
And he will have served 33 years before he is required to submit his resignation,
nearly 3/4’s of my life!
I gotta feeling this is going to be a long life.
M
MarkThompson
Guest
I think you’re still missing the concept completely here, because you’re thinking about it only in terms of rules, decisions, and authority. The real answers to your questions are:
- In cases where actual “decisions” and “mandatory laws” have to be made, the Vatican has decided that bishops should not be absolute dictators of their dioceses. Rather, the Vatican sees that some decisions are best made for the whole Church at the Roman level (e.g., the rules set our in Summorum Pontificum), and others are best made for regions at the national level (e.g., approving translations), because the Church and the members of the faithful benefit from uniformity. This way people can move around within their nation without being confronted with big changes all the time.
- Most things the conferences do are simply not questions of rules, decisions, and authority. The conference acts like a “league of bishops,” allowing them to combine their resources and, usually, get better results than if they were off trying to do everything themselves.
And in the second situation, one must similarly ask: if we didn’t have the conferences, wouldn’t the bishops just create them on their own again anyway? They want to work together, share their resources, and speak as a national authority. After all, long, long before the permanent national conferences existed in this country, our bishops were already getting together in things like the Plenary Councils of Baltimore. These weren’t dogmatic councils or anything, but look at some of the kinds of resolutions they were approving:
“The Roman Ritual and the Baltimore ‘Ceremonial’ are to be followed. Pastors should keep registers of baptisms, confirmations, marriages, and funerals. All of these, except the last, should be written in Latin.”
Ah, a uniform rule to insure consistency from one place to the next. We’ve seen some of those in this discussion.
“A commission is appointed to prepare a catechism for general use.”
You’ve heard of the Baltimore Catechism, right? This is where it came from. It is simply a teaching tool, so any diocese that wants to can develop and issue its own catechism. Now, why did the bishops all come together and decide that it would be better to have a single catechism developed and approved at the national level?
J
JReducation
Guest
Bold is mine.
That’s an excellent example.
Another is the use of the Roman collar. The Roman collar was the dress of the Church of Scottland. It later became the dress of Anglicans. The same Council of Baltimore that decreed the publication of the Baltimore Catechism also voted and agreed that diocesan Catholic priests could not wear a cassock off church property, but had to wear the black suit and collar worn by the Anglicans. Thus the clerical shirt was introduced into the Catholic Church. Over the years, many conferences of bishops around the world have approved it for their region. It was done at the level of conference to make it uniform throughout the country.
But these things have nothing to do with governance of dioceses. These are external to the diocese and the authority of the bishop. If a bishop decides that the Baltimore Catechism is banned in his diocese or the Roman collar is banned, no one can overrule him. These are agreements, not laws. However, as Christians, when we agree to something, we make a commitment to it and we stick to it until the circumstances change.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status