Limits on the Authority of Bishops?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sealabeag
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sealabeag

Guest
I was just talking with a friend and we were sort of disagreeing about whether it was just/valid for Bishops to cancel Masses and public worship and command their priests to do so, etc.

Regardless of what my take on the whole situation is, I would love some clear answers on this from anyone versed in Canon Law. (Opinions are fine but less helpful to my understanding.)

My questions:
  1. What are the limits on the authority of Bishops with regards the celebration of the Sacraments and the cancelling or limiting thereof? Is it absolute?
  2. Can a Bishop validly command his priests not to hold public Masses? Obviously I’m speaking now in terms of the Covid situation, not in a case where a priest was being disciplined for some kind of bad behaviour, which would be different. The obvious argument in terms of Covid is about public health - but what does canon law have to say here?
  3. If a priest’s Bishop forbids public worship, and a priest disobeys that order and celebrates public masses clandestinely, is that a sin for the priest and those who attend that Mass if a. that order is just and valid and b. that order is unjust and invalid, respectively.
Plus anything else that may be relevant here that I didn’t think to ask! Thanks.
 
sealabeag said:
I would love some clear answers on this from anyone versed in Canon Law.
…
Click to expand...
Oh, man. You need a dissertation to answer these questions and I seriously hope some smart, brave soul writes such a dissertation in the coming years.

Generally and basically, bishops are limited by the Code of Canon Law and other universal legislation (such as in the rubrics of the Mass/Sacraments, etc.). So, no, bishops do not have absolute authority. Priests in the parish have obligations that are imposed by the universal law and bishops must respect those obligations and allow them to be fulfilled.

Concerning the cancellation of Mass (“public Mass”), I would say that a diocesan bishop can do that. Canon law doesn’t say anything about this, directly.

As for a priest who does not follow that directive, canon law does not and would not (at least in “modern days”) speak of this in terms of sin. If the bishop decided to threaten penalties for the violation of his edict, then perhaps the priest/people would be guilty of a crime. That’s an escalation that is pretty hard for me to fathom.

Dan
 
I doubt anyone here is qualified to answer these question. You’re asking because we are expecting a lockdown.

The last lockdown was put in place to prevent the hospitals of being over ran, not to lower the total number of cases over all.

Did it work? maybe maybe not, depends on who you ask. Will another one work? maybe maybe not, depends on who you ask. I do know there are less people that will get it during this lockdown as they already had it and developed enough antibodies to not get it again.

I dont plan on going to mass until there is a vaccine and yes I plan on being in line on day one.

If your bishop cancels mass it might be best you follow the advice
 
Last edited:
😂 Your name is literally “acanonlawyer”, so that’s a good start! Thanks for your response, very clear.

And I understand it is a complex area and tough to answer.

Ok, good to know that there are pre-existing rules laid out in canon law regarding bishop’s authority! I did not know that about priest duties/universal law.

Yes, I was actually hesitant to use the word “sin” but I couldn’t think of the correct term so went with that!

Okay, so in terms the specific example of Bishops banning public worship/Mass at this time is, whilst being, it would seem, within their authority, do you think would be right or wrong for a priest to disobey such an order?

These questions really come down to the whole issue of current lockdown restrictions and the fact that the laity cannot receive the sacraments, and whether disobeying the Bishops rules on these things is a case of disobedience or not. I’ve heard people use phrases like “holy disobedience” and say that obedience to God comes before obedience to men, and I don’t know what the correct stance is.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, I’ll check it out! I actually find canon law fascinating (I guess I’m a bit of a stickler for rules), whilst also finding it difficult to wrap my little intellect around it all. 😋
Oh, just fyi I think you spelled “canon” wrong in your link so it doesn’t work, but I just googled it. 🙂
 
Last edited:
In no way do I claim knowledge here. But in my opinion. The Bishops has the authority to do what you stated but lacked wisdom in doing so. So in short, could they have done it? Yes. Should they have? Nope.
 
redcatholic said:
In no way do I claim knowledge here. But in my opinion. The Bishops has the authority to do what you stated but lacked wisdom in doing so. So in short, could they have done it? Yes. Should they have? Nope.
Click to expand...
The bishop of a diocese, besides facilitating availability of sacraments also has a general responsibility as Shepherd.

If it would be uncharitable for some people who unknowingly may have a virus that would endanger others, the shepherd may weigh the risks and cancel Masses. People keep referring to sacraments but forget bishops have received a sacrament, too.

If a given bishop cancels Masses out of spite, or similar reason, that seems to go against canon law. But because of Covid, with considerable public health warnings to back up that decision, it certainly would be in the realm of his sacramental, shepherd authority.
 
Last edited:
One thing that you both should be clear the Bishops never “suspended” masses. They are still be ofered except there are no parishioners allowed into the church.
You can watch the mass offered every morning by the Pope in the Vatican.
Hardly any one in there but it is still celebrated.
Also to keep in mind; It is not the first time that this has happened.
And finally YES the Bishops have this authority they are the guardians of the flock.

Peace!
 
I don’t think a single bishop has canceled out of spite. That would be worthy of hellfire. I do think that some have canceled and it’s going to do more harm than good. Not saying too much here but our bishop while initially canceling has privately stated that he would not do so again. All I’m saying is in my opinion it has been an unwise decision that is a mistake. Not that it’s evil or ill willed.
 
redcatholic said:
I don’t think a single bishop has canceled out of spite. That would be worthy of hellfire. I do think that some have canceled and it’s going to do more harm than good. Not saying too much here but our bishop while initially canceling has privately stated that he would not do so again. All I’m saying is in my opinion it has been an unwise decision that is a mistake. Not that it’s evil or ill willed.
Click to expand...
I’m making the point that there can be extreme cases where you should not obey justly constituted authority, but the great majority of time you should. In today’s “entitlement” climate most are far more likely to disobey too readily than to obey too readily.

Remember there are often larger issues going on outside the public eye, other factors we don’t know about but the bishop might.
 
redcatholic said:
Should they have? Nope.
Click to expand...
Monday morning quarterbacking is such a wonderful game to play.

Sometimes I get the feeling that people think that the US is the only jurisdiction to have Covid-19. Likewise, they seem to forget that Italy, early on was so inundated with people needing advanced medical treatment that they had people laying in the hallways, dying.

A bishop not only has responsibilities for the sacraments; he also has responsibilities for his flock. At the beginning, and well into the pandemic, doctors and scientists were scrambling to figure out a whole host of issues concerning the virus.

If someone is infected and does not have contact with those who are not infected, they will not transmit. If they are infected, it was not entirely clear as to how the virus was transmitted (as in, it was more than just by sneezes - it also transmitted by simple breath vapor), and what safety precautions would be adequate. Just look back at the issue of masks; “No use”, “Maybe useful”; “Useful” as time developed. And as time went on, we saw more and more evidence of “super spreaders”.

As more information became available from epidemiologists, there came a trade-off between lockdown and limited gathering (which the epidemiologists by and large supported, with a combination of safe distance and masks).

Archbishop Corleone had an issue separate from the general populace/state rule, and went about it in a manner other than just defying the city moratorium. In some areas, there has been a common sense approach; in other areas, a lack of common sense - in both directions. And the largest problem is not the bishop, not the priests; it is the people who refuse to treat this disease with the necessary precautions.

I have not heard of any cases arising from attending Mass; but certainly there have been cases which have exposed people who then may attend Mass. And the theory of six degrees of separation is a constant issue that many, if not most people do not know or cannot comprehend in real time.

In short, bishops of the world have been faces with this issue, and Rome has not made a peep about it.

And any priest violating a bishop’s order on the matter likely would find that there are a multitude of ways to be keel-hauled, non of which would give him any satisfaction from Rome.
 
There’s monday morning quarterbacking and then there’s learning from mistakes to gain wisdom. When the quarterback has a bad game Monday morning quarterbacking is warranted. QBs learn or get replaced, coaches fix it or get fired.
 
There are some limits on celebration of the Eucharist, a Bishop couldn’t say instead of consecrating hosts we will be consecrating pizza pies.
 
Last edited:
sealabeag said:
Okay, so in terms the specific example of Bishops banning public worship/Mass at this time is, whilst being, it would seem, within their authority, do you think would be right or wrong for a priest to disobey such an order?
Click to expand...
I’ll give that a good, old “that depends.”

I know of priests who practically continued to offer “public Mass” even when there were supposed to be none (just continued the old schedule but had no publicity about it). I can understand their decision. I know of people who went to such Masses. I can understand their decision, too.

At the same time, I know of priests/people who followed the directives to the letter. I can understand their decision as well.

Dan
 
I’ve no need to convince anyone of anything. It’s my opinion that bishops have made mistakes in the handling of the situation. And no matter what anyone thinks about the wisdom of this or that, to say they have not made mistakes or to say we can’t call out what we think those are is odd to me. Like I said, my bishop Recognizes a mistake and would change the way it happened if he could. Some bishops are speaking out against a vaccine, others are doing the opposite. Any way you slice it this can and should be managed better by some.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top