How do priests advance up the hiearchy

  • Thread starter Thread starter kestrel36
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kestrel36

Guest
Hello, Im not sure where to post this question so I am putting it here. Allow me to start by saying I have read about the church hierarchy but it actually seems somewhat confusing from the outside looking in. I am curious how priests progress up the hierarchy. I have noticed that I sometimes will read an article written by a priest who has been working for 35 years. Why do some priest move into higher positions such as bishops and the like while others with comparable experience do not? Thanks.
 
The short answer is, God picks them.

The long answer is, when a bishop dies or retires, a list of good candidates is prepared by somebody close to that situation, along with a list of what that place needs (Usually what they call a Papal Nuncio, essentially an ambassador. So The U.S. has a Papal Nuncio, as does Canada, etc.) That list is then sent to a commitee in the Vatican, who look at the needs of the place, and the backgrounds of the suggested people, and choose one person. That suggestion is then given to the Pope, who can either okay their pick, or choose any confirmed male catholic he thinks is a good choice (generally, he just okays the pick). That person is then notified, and will be ordained a Bishop.

Then for positions that are higher than bishop, they are chosen by the Pope, similarly, based on their merits and the needs of the position. A Bishop with a background in Canon Law is likely to be chosen for the judicial positions, while one with a background in theology will be chosen for a position which involves deciding doctrine.

The Pope is elected by the college of Cardinals (who were chosen by previous Popes). It essentially a majority vote. There is no (at least official) campaigning. People certainly don’t run for the office, although others may try and convince each other to vote a particular person. Again it could be anybody, but they usually elect a Cardinal (because they are experienced with how the whole system works)

The reason why some advance and others don’t can be attributed in part to shear luck. Maybe as a priest you were “lucky” and were assigned to a special position which got you name out there (rector/president of a Seminary, on a special advisory board, etc.) which got you recognized by the Nuncio. Maybe you were “unlucky” and just worked at parishes, while this is less likely to get you known around the country, this is where most bishops come from, Nuncio’s often ask Bishops if they have/know any good priests.

It is certainly nothing to feel bad about if you remain a priest your whole life, I once asked a Bishop what he missed most about being just a parish priest. His answer, “spending time with the people”. Being Bishop is a lot of paperwork and advising, and not a lot of personal time spent with the people. My Bishop is looking forward to his retirement later this year, so that he can return to Peru where he was a missionary for many years before becoming a Bishop.
 
SenorSalsa said:
The Pope is elected by the college of Cardinals (who were chosen by previous Popes). It essentially a majority vote. There is no (at least official) campaigning. People certainly don’t run for the office, although others may try and convince each other to vote a particular person. Again it could be anybody, but they usually elect a Cardinal (because they are experienced with how the whole system works)
Click to expand...
Correction. It’s a two-thirds-plus one vote that is needed to elect a pope.

Otherwise, this is a good explanation.
 
In every type of work there those who opt to move up the ladder and those who do not, including some who might wish to advance but for whatever reasons do not. Not all teachers become principals; not all police officers become supervisors, etc;
 
Thank you for the response. I have looked into this subject before but was never able to find anything about the actual process of moving into higher roles. Your explanation helped with that. Is there a link that anyone knows of that will explain the different roles. Wikipedia has a long explanation but it really doesnt give a concise explanation( ie. a flow chart etc.)
 
From my personal observations…

If a particular seminarian/young priest is thought to be particularly intelligent, disposed to leadership etc. they will be sent to Rome for further education. When they come back to the States (or wherever they’re from) they may be put into an non-parochial position, job in the offices of the diocese, at a university, etc. The eventually a lucky few will get crosiers. Some parish priests move ‘up the ladder’ but I don’t think that’s as common.
 
Just my opinion, but I don’t think it’s really accurate to talk about moving up the hierarchy as if it’s angling for a promotion just like in a regular job. Sure, it’s happened, but I don’t think it’s supposed to work that way.

Br. JR always talks about how a religious brother who is not a priest has “gone all the way” in his vocation to the religious life - that there’s nothing inferior to being a religious brother who is not ordained vs. one who is a priest.

I’m thinking it’s often the same way for Holy Orders outside of the religious life. There are permanent deacons who are fulfilling their vocation as such, many priests fulfilling their vocation, and a relative few men who are fulfilling their vocations as bishops. I’m pretty sure our pastor wouldn’t ever have the slightest interest in being a bishop - he is very fulfilled being a priest and pastor.

Br. JR, feel free to correct me if I have misunderstood you in any way.
 
Is it sinful for a Priest to want to move up the ranks as it were?

I would think it is not, as long as:

A) The Priest recognizes that, no matter how qualified or whatnot they think they are (i.e. Doctorates in Sacred Theology or Canon Law or something), it is up to the Church to make the decision of who rises up
B) The Priest does not do anything sinful, including neglecting their current responsibilities, in their desire to move up
 
nsper7 said:
Is it sinful for a Priest to want to move up the ranks as it were?

I would think it is not, as long as:

A) The Priest recognizes that, no matter how qualified or whatnot they think they are (i.e. Doctorates in Sacred Theology or Canon Law or something), it is up to the Church to make the decision of who rises up
B) The Priest does not do anything sinful, including neglecting their current responsibilities, in their desire to move up
Click to expand...
If he is doing it out of pride, for a want of personal power and renown, then yes it would be sinful.

However, I once heard of a case of some bishop (whose name I cannot remember and which I cannot find online) who as a priest would pray that he would become a bishop, because he wanted the fullness of the priesthood, so that he could better and more closely serve God. Whoever the bishop was, he has since either become a saint or his cause is being examined.

So, if wanting to advance is out of a want to serve God in a more complete way or to serve the Church in a bigger way, out of love for God and his people, then no it would not be sinful
 
If he is doing it out of pride, for a want of personal power and renown, then yes it would be sinful.
Click to expand...
Is it sinful to desire honor? My understanding is that pride is the disordered desire for honor. If someone recognizes that, desires notwithstanding, it is the Church that grants the honor of the episcopate, then is it a disordered desire?

For example, let us say there is a Priest that desires to be a Bishop so he feels that several ways to better his chances are:
  1. Try to get transferred to a position that will get him noticed by the current Bishop and Papal Nuncio
  2. Go for advanced theological degrees
  3. Try to get his writings published
It would seem to me that as long as, for issue 1, the Priest realizes it is his lawful superior who makes the final decision where the Priest goes; for issue 2, his lawful superior can refuse to allow him to get said degrees; for issue 3, as long as he is not plagiarizing or purposely writing heretical/heterodox views
 
nsper7 said:
Is it sinful to desire honor? My understanding is that pride is the disordered desire for honor. If someone recognizes that, desires notwithstanding, it is the Church that grants the honor of the episcopate, then is it a disordered desire?
Click to expand...
I’m having trouble thinking of a way of desiring honor without it being prideful.

The difference is does the person want the position (rector, bishop, cardinal) for the honor that will come to him, because certainly we honor those people.

Or does he want the position for the good that he can do for God from that position. And he accepts that this will likely bring him honor as a side effect.

In other words, does he desire a position that will , as a side effect, bring him honor (not sinful) or does he desire a position that brings honor, so that he can be honored. (sinful)
 
SenorSalsa said:
I’m having trouble thinking of a way of desiring honor without it being prideful.

The difference is does the person want the position (rector, bishop, cardinal) for the honor that will come to him, because certainly we honor those people.

Or does he want the position for the good that he can do for God from that position. And he accepts that this will likely bring him honor as a side effect.

In other words, does he desire a position that will , as a side effect, bring him honor (not sinful) or does he desire a position that brings honor, so that he can be honored. (sinful)
Click to expand...
I think this is a great distinction. I agree, it’s not sinful for a priest to want to “move up the ranks.” But I think that any priest who is chosen to be a bishop should be truly humbled by the great honor and responsibility bestowed on him. I also think we need to be careful, still, to not think of it as a corporation, where you’re supposed to want to move up and to angle for promotions or you’re not ambitious enough or some such. There are many older, holy, humble priests who never wanted to be bishop and that’s fine, too. Or if they wanted to be one and were never chosen, it doesn’t mean they weren’t good enough.
 
I read that, in 1953, Pius XII offered to make Archbishop Montini(later Pope Paul VI) a cardinal, but that the latter declined the offer. Yet, Montini accepted the cardinalate from John XXIII in 1958. I wonder what caused his change of heart. Anyway, I feel that it is probably better to be a great theologian/philosopher than to become a bishop(though, obviously, one can be both; e.g. we have had 2 Popes who are Doctors of the the Church). Any competent priest can be ordained a bishop; not everyone can be a remarkable intellectual or a saint(whether recognized or not).
 
The Vatican Diplomatic Corps exists and, from what I have read, it is very selective and one needs to go through many years of schooling in preparation(not to mention probably being away from your family for so long).
 
tonio5555 said:
From my personal observations…

If a particular seminarian/young priest is thought to be particularly intelligent, disposed to leadership etc. they will be sent to Rome for further education. When they come back to the States (or wherever they’re from) they may be put into an non-parochial position, job in the offices of the diocese, at a university, etc. The eventually a lucky few will get crosiers. Some parish priests move ‘up the ladder’ but I don’t think that’s as common.
Click to expand...
Is not it slightly different for religious priests(other than most likely spending years in a monastery or priory before final vows or the like)?
 
However, it is wrong for one to become a priest solely because of a desire to “move up the ranks.”
 
PacoG said:
Correction. It’s a two-thirds-plus one vote that is needed to elect a pope.

Otherwise, this is a good explanation.
Click to expand...
the majority rule would still apply if a cetain amount of days (forgot how much) has passed and no Pope has been chosen
 
Ralph de Bricissart, the priest in The Thornbirds, rose rapidly in the Church (to the cardinalate) after inheriting 13 million pounds(as valued in the late 1929s- so this would be a rather enormous fortune today) from his friend Mary Carson. However, I do not know if that would actually “work” in real life, at least nowadays(remember, though, that aristocratic connections used to be an asset for priests, as evidenced by all of the Medici in high position). I was mentioning all of this to offer flavor to our discussion, not give anyone any ideas.
 
I didnt realize this question would turn into a debate. I would still be interested in a website that has a fairly straight forward description of the church hierarchy. Like I said wikipedia has an explanation that isnt very clear for someone not brought with a catholic background. Part of my confusion is that there seem to be commities that priests belong to which then in turn give them some other rank or designation. Thanks.
 
kestrel36 said:
I didnt realize this question would turn into a debate. I would still be interested in a website that has a fairly straight forward description of the church hierarchy. Like I said wikipedia has an explanation that isnt very clear for someone not brought with a catholic background. Part of my confusion is that there seem to be commities that priests belong to which then in turn give them some other rank or designation. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Not sure of a site, but basically the hierarchy is:
  1. Bishops
  2. Priests
  3. Deacons
    That’s it, Holy-Orders-wise. These are the only “levels” of ordination.
An archbishop is a higher ranked bishop - typically the bishop of a larger or more important city. A cardinal is a type of honor, the “princes” of the Church - they are higher in precedence than a regular bishop, and tend to hold important positions in the Vatican or be archbishop of a really important place. Cardinals are almost always bishops, but cardinal is not a part of Holy Orders in itself - you’re not ordained cardinal. Cardinals get to vote for the next Pope (until they turn 80).

The Pope is the Bishop of Rome and holds highest precedence and has authority over everybody else, and appoints cardinals and bishops (at least in the Roman Rite). But again, he’s not ordained Pope.

Some other titles are various types of honorifics like rector (usually over a Cathedral), Vicar General (second in command to a bishop), monsignor, etc. An abbot is the head of an important monastery, with high precedence, but this is a religious order position, not part of Holy Orders. Some titles mean a lot and some don’t mean much, but there are only those three levels of ordination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top