T
twf
Guest
The bishops, of course.
The Church is not a democracy and never can be.
The Church is not a democracy and never can be.
It's time to end the "imperial episcopate." What do you think?
- Status
K
Kathleen18
Guest
Why would you want to be a jerk? That’s awful!
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
isn’t that what Pope Francis preaches and does.
He is very much into Pastoral Care, and says the Church is a field hospital for the sick and much rather sees it as bruised, wounded and struggling. because that is real. Rather then sterile and stately
He is very much into Pastoral Care, and says the Church is a field hospital for the sick and much rather sees it as bruised, wounded and struggling. because that is real. Rather then sterile and stately
D
dochawk
Guest
As many issues as I have with his stewardship, I have run into the (now) former RC bishop here in the mens room with everyone else at Catholic education conferences . . .
hawk
hawk
G
Gorgias
Guest
Who administers, then? Surely you aren’t of the opinion that there isn’t significant work (and plenty of it!) in the administration of a diocese, do you?
The author makes his point about ‘finery’ – but he does so in the context of disliking cassocks and their accoutrement (but, he manages to do so without throwing cassocks under the bus, surprisingly). Here, at least, in the U.S., bishops wear clerics and black suits. If this hasn’t prevented the scandal, what does he think he’ll accomplish by throwing out “colored sashes, buttons, piping, and capes”?
He also betrays a lack of sensitivity to administrative issues. Does he really think that creating a sufficient number of new dioceses (in order to eliminate all auxiliary bishops) would be a good solution? Especially since it would create a greater number of local bureaucracies?!? No… he may not like auxiliaries, but that’s not the solution.
T
twf
Guest
Technically your example is prior to the Liturgy… not part of the Liturgy itself.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
I get what he’s trying to do, but I think some of his suggested changes are unnecessary and/or problematic.
Getting rid of the word “bishop”? Well, it comes from the Greek episcopos, which is literally in the Bible. Losing that distinction would be confusing to most Catholics.
Having bishops stick to the black clerical garb? Most bishops do wear regular priestly attire on a day-to-day basis. They generally only wear the different garments in more formal settings. I don’t know, maybe it’s a temptation for some bishops to think they are super-special because their cassock has some magenta trim to it. I don’t think that’s that big of an issue.
Having the bishop stay at the cathedral? While I can see the wisdom of the bishop being more present to the cathedral parish, tying the bishop down to the see city is a terrible idea. How is the bishop going to get the sense of what his priests are doing if he doesn’t go meet them on their home turf? That’s only providing less accountability for the priests.
Getting rid of auxiliary bishops? I appreciate the point that the whole concept of auxiliaries is a bit peculiar. Bishops can only be “overseers” (the literal meaning of the original Greek word) of an actual territory. And each territory only has one overseer. So having a bishop who oversees a territory that no longer exists so he can basically be an assistant to another bishop seems like a bit of “creative bookkeeping.”
However, I don’t really see this as a huge contributor to “imperialism.” In a sense, I want to see bishops that get their feet wet before thrusting them in a much larger role. There’s less of a learning curve that way.
Having more, smaller dioceses? This is probably the point I can kind of agree with. The Catholic population of the world has nearly quadrupled in the past 100 years. In the U.S., the number of Catholics has gone from 10 million in 1900 to nearly 70 million today. The number of arch/diocesan bishops has more than doubled in that time (in the U.S.), but hasn’t increased at nearly the pace of the general population. With the Church’s emphasis on subsidiarity, that would make sense.
Of course, the downside is then that poor Pope Francis would have a lot more bishops that he would have to keep track of.
Getting rid of the word “bishop”? Well, it comes from the Greek episcopos, which is literally in the Bible. Losing that distinction would be confusing to most Catholics.
Having bishops stick to the black clerical garb? Most bishops do wear regular priestly attire on a day-to-day basis. They generally only wear the different garments in more formal settings. I don’t know, maybe it’s a temptation for some bishops to think they are super-special because their cassock has some magenta trim to it. I don’t think that’s that big of an issue.
Having the bishop stay at the cathedral? While I can see the wisdom of the bishop being more present to the cathedral parish, tying the bishop down to the see city is a terrible idea. How is the bishop going to get the sense of what his priests are doing if he doesn’t go meet them on their home turf? That’s only providing less accountability for the priests.
Getting rid of auxiliary bishops? I appreciate the point that the whole concept of auxiliaries is a bit peculiar. Bishops can only be “overseers” (the literal meaning of the original Greek word) of an actual territory. And each territory only has one overseer. So having a bishop who oversees a territory that no longer exists so he can basically be an assistant to another bishop seems like a bit of “creative bookkeeping.”
However, I don’t really see this as a huge contributor to “imperialism.” In a sense, I want to see bishops that get their feet wet before thrusting them in a much larger role. There’s less of a learning curve that way.
Having more, smaller dioceses? This is probably the point I can kind of agree with. The Catholic population of the world has nearly quadrupled in the past 100 years. In the U.S., the number of Catholics has gone from 10 million in 1900 to nearly 70 million today. The number of arch/diocesan bishops has more than doubled in that time (in the U.S.), but hasn’t increased at nearly the pace of the general population. With the Church’s emphasis on subsidiarity, that would make sense.
Of course, the downside is then that poor Pope Francis would have a lot more bishops that he would have to keep track of.
Last edited:
B
BartholomewB
Guest
Does he say that? I must look again. I thought he was arguing for the abolition of auxiliary bishops, leaving just the one diocesan bishop in each diocese.
D
DaveBj
Guest
I remember reading long, long ago that auxiliary bishops are also titular bishops of sees that no longer exist, or of sees that they cannot physically occupy because of political or other conditions. Is that correct?
D
D
T
twf
Guest
I think if the number dioceses was greatly increased, the metropolitans would have to take on more of their ancient role as local primates. It’s more ceremonial than practical at this point in Church history.
S
semper_catholicus
Guest
The essence of the priesthood is to offer sacrifice. That’s what the focus ought to be. When the cleric looses sight of that, it’s fallen apart.
G
goout
Guest
Yes, and “washing the feet” of his flock. Christ demonstrated the priesthood.
Perhaps dioceses should have lay administrators and just remove the episcopate from that in deference to the vocation.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Early days as in the 300s onward.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
The issue wasn’t liturgical.
Of course our liturgies should be beautiful. But vestments are different from clerical dress for the sake of finery, in the sense of exalting the status of a cleric.
Of course our liturgies should be beautiful. But vestments are different from clerical dress for the sake of finery, in the sense of exalting the status of a cleric.
Last edited:
S
semper_catholicus
Guest
Yes, that’s part of sacrifice.
A
AlbMagno
Guest
There are several dioceses (mine included) in which the majority of the administrators (save the bishops and the auxiliary bishops themselves) are already lay people. That’s how far we can go, as the episcopate is based on Apostolic succession, a clerical role (the apostles being the first clerics) not a lay one.
However, I agree with simplifying/humbling the symbols, protocols, titles and dressings of the bishops.
However, I agree with simplifying/humbling the symbols, protocols, titles and dressings of the bishops.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
What reason? Because you didn’t like one article? Heck if I stopped reading things the minute they said something I didn’t agree with, I probably wouldn’t even read the Sunday comics.
Have read First Things for years. Some articles are obtuse, some arcane, some somewhat inflammatory, and many, many, very on point with Catholic teaching and tradition.
As to this article, you may be one who “adores” bishops, loves the titles and the pomp and circumstance. That is your prerogative. Enjoy it.
G
godisgood77
Guest
I couldn’t agree more that our episcopate needs to move to servant leadership. Get rid of all of the accoutrement… elaborate vestments, expensive vessels, staffs, relics, etc…
Pope Francis is a great example of this… Cardinal Burke’s focus on vestments is a good example of one of the things I would like changed in the Church
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
The Kingdom is like a fertile field. Yet, the master of the field has born a heavy burden. His servants shall have certain favor, and industry and grace in bringing forth the harvest for the master. For the works of their hands are due a just reward.
- Status