Immediately subject to Rome

[Spirithound]

I was wandering around Catholic-Hierarchy some time ago, and I found something that eludes me. The link leads to page for the Archdiocese of Winnipeg. It says that this diocese is “Immediately subject to the Holy See”. In other pages of archdioceses, that line usually says “Metropolitan See”.

Can anyone elaborate what it means to be “immediately subject to the Holy See”, and what is different about other archdioceses? (Or maybe what’s different about Winnipeg…)
Thanks!

 

[twf]

The Archdiocese of Winnipeg is not a metropolitan see. There are no suffragan dioceses attached to the archdiocese; thus, Winnipeg is an ecclesiastically isolated diocese belonging to no province.

 

[PacoG]

All you had to do was follow the link to the Archdiocese’s webpage. Evidently, the archbishop of Winnipeg isn’t a metropolitan. But he isn’t subject to the Metropolitan for Manitoba, the archbishop of St. Boniface:

Although the creation of the Archdiocese of Winnipeg left St. Boniface as the Metropolitan See for Manitoba, the Archdiocese of Winnipeg was not made subject to St. Boniface. Instead, Winnipeg became the only archdiocese in Canada immediately subject to the Holy See. archwinnipeg.ca/history_part3.php

Like has been discussed in the pallium thread, not all archbishops are metropolitans. Winnipeg is one such archdiocese.

Note the difference between what the Rome did in Manitoba and what it did when it divided Texas and California into two archdioceses. California has two Metropolitan Sees in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Texas has two in San Antonio and Houston-Galveston. Furthermore, in each state, the Holy See made one archbishop into an unofficial primate by giving one archbishop the cardinals’ red hat (Los Angeles in California and Galveston-Houston in Texas).

(That leads to a more interesting question…what does protocol require when the Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops and the California Bishop’s Conference meet? Do the the cardinals (DiNardo in Texas and Mahoney in California) dress for Mass when the meeting is in the non-red hat province (San Antonio or San Francisco)? Do they dress for Mass? Are they the principal celebrants or con-celebrants? Or do they just dress in choral vestments and let the hosting non-cardinal metropolitan (Gomez or Niederauer) preside? Does anyone know?)

 

[Spirithound]

Clarification is hereby requested
Saint-Boniface, according to Catholic-Hierarchy is an archdiocese and also a metropolitan see, but does not have any suffragan dioceses either. How then do they differ? Aren’t all archdioceses immediately subject to Rome? How does this affect the relationship between the Archdioceses of Winnipeg and Quebec, Canada’s primatial see? Is Winnipeg outside of the Primate of Canada’s purview?

 

[PacoG]

I think the Metropolitan Archdiocese of Washington DC also had no suffragans until the 1970s when it was given the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Wow, as I was looking at Catholic Hierarchy webpage, Canada has a lot of archdioceses. I remember reading criticism of Rome when it elevated Houston-Galveston to archepiscopal status that Rome was creating way too many dioceses and archdioceses in the United States. The writers said that original reasoning was to try to have one province per state. Rome, the writer said, broke the rule by erecting two provinces in Texas and California. Quebec has five. Ontario has three.

Texas and California have faster growing Catholic populations than Ontario and Quebec have. Dallas may have its wish to be raised to arch-episcopal status one day.

 

[LumenGent]

Immediately subject to Rome, means that the Diocese is immediately subject to the Authority of Rome in all affairs, it is not subject to a Metropolitan See. Winnipeg is an Archepiscopal See not a Metroploitan See. If you look at the Archdiocese of Montreal, you will see that it has 4 suffragan Diocese attached to it. Therefore the Archbishop of Montreal is a the head of a province.

 

[Spirithound]

Immediately subject to Rome, means that the Diocese is immediately subject to the Authority of Rome in all affairs, it is not subject to a Metropolitan See. Winnipeg is an Archepiscopal See not a Metroploitan See. If you look at the Archdiocese of Montreal, you will see that it has 4 suffragan Diocese attached to it. Therefore the Archbishop of Montreal is a the head of a province.

Ok, but I see the difference between a Metropolitan See and an Archdiocese, but look again at the Archdiocese of Montreal, and you will not see “Immediately subject to the Holy See” on that page. Designation as a Metropolitan See says something is subject to that Archdiocese, not whether it is subject to a higher authority.

 

[LumenGent]

Ok, but I see the difference between a Metropolitan See and an Archdiocese, but look again at the Archdiocese of Montreal, and you will not see “Immediately subject to the Holy See” on that page. Designation as a Metropolitan See says something is subject to that Archdiocese, not whether it is subject to a higher authority

First of all, every Metroplolitan See headed by an Archbishop is a Metroplolitan Archdiocese, but not every Archbishop is a Metrolpolitan since not all Archbishoprics are Metrolpolitan Sees. The Archdiocese of Montreal isn’t subject to the Holy See in as much as it is a Metrolpolitan See aka Ecclesiastical Province. It is not suffrangan to another See.

There are also Archepiscopal Sees that are either immediately subject to the Holy See or are subject to the Metropolitan Archdiocese (Ecclesiastical province) to which they belong.

 

[Spirithound]

First of all, every Metroplolitan See headed by an Archbishop is a Metroplolitan Archdiocese, but not every Archbishop is a Metrolpolitan since not all Archbishoprics are Metrolpolitan Sees. The Archdiocese of Montreal isn’t subject to the Holy See in as much as it is a Metrolpolitan See aka Ecclesiastical Province. It is not suffrangan to another See.

There are also Archepiscopal Sees that are either immediately subject to the Holy See or are subject to the Metropolitan Archdiocese (Ecclesiastical province) to which they belong.

Who is the Archdiocese of Montreal subject to?

 

[LumenGent]

It is subject to Rome as all diocese are, It isn’t subject to any other Province. The suffragan diocese in a province go through the Metropolitan then to Rome if needed.

Keep in mind that a Metropolitan Archbishop has very limited authority over the suffragan diocese in his province, He basically serves as the first court of appeal regarding canonical matters of provincial diocesan tribunals, but ultimately Rome has the greatest authority.

There are also diocese attached to the province but not subject to the Metropolitan Archbishop, they are immediately subject to Rome.