Be that as it may, I think you are sugercoating what actually happened after the Council. There was a general pulling away from Roman authority, and the bishops were hesitant to fill in that gap, and so allowed all sorts of wrong things to happen. For instance, The Land o" lakes declaration in which the Catholic Colleges basically to declare their independence of the Church is one of them. If the episcopacy had been sure of its ground, the president of Notre Dame would have been forced to resign for leading this rebellion. The abandonment of their vocation by so many priests and the emptying of the seminaries stunned the Church. Ironically, the only thing that kept the Church in the USA from splitting was the confidence of the liberals that it would soon fall into their hands. The election and, even more, the charisma of John Paul II, was a blow to their ambitions.
We have to understand where the authority of the bishops begin and end. Take for example the Catholic colleges and the Lando o Lakes Declaration or Notre Dame. The bishops have no authority over Catholic colleges or universities that do not belong to the Catholic Church. Most Catholic colleges and universities are the property of religious congregations or non-profit corporations. They are Catholic; but they are not under the jurisdiction of the Church. Therefore, their cooperation with Church authority is really up to their leaders, not the bishops. The bishops want to see good things happen at all of our colleges and universities, but they don’t have the jurisdiction to interfere in the internal decisions of these institutions.
For example, Fr. Jenkins is a member of the Brothers of the Holy Cross. The Brothers are a Congregation of Pontifical Right. Only the Pope has the authority to demand his resignation. The bishops cannot do that. If they did, they would be in very serious trouble with the Holy Father for overstepping their authority. Bishops do not have authority over religiuos of Pontifical Right, only the Pope does.
A bishop has no jurisdiction over a priest who leaves the priesthood. He only has jurisdiction over those who remain, provided that the priest is a secular. If the priest is a religious, the bishop has no jurisdiction either. When a priest leaves without permission, he excommunicates himself. Once he does that, he is canonically outside of the authority and reach of the bishop. There is nothing that a bishop is allowed to do.
The “emptying seminaries” is not an area over which the bishops have authority. The bishop cannot order men to enter a seminary. His authority is limited to calling men to Holy Orders. He cannot demand that they remain or that they enter. The only ones who actually have the authority to demand that men enter the seminary are superiors of brothers communities, not bishops. In these communities, the brothers make a vow of obedience to the superior. But in the secular world, secular men do not make a vow of obedience to the bishop. Secular men make a promise of obedience to the bishop on the day that they are ordained to the diaconate, either transitional or permanent.
If the seminary belongs to the diocese, the bishop has jurisdiction over the discipline of the seminary and the formation given at the seminary, but not over the men who are students there. They are free to leave at any time until they are ordained deacons.
If it’s a house of formation, the bishop has no jurisdiction and is not even allowed oversight of it. The oversight belongs to the Superior General of the religious who study there. Bishops cannot overstep the authority of superiors of religious men or women.
We have to be careful not to blame bishops for areas that are not under their jurisdiction. Jursidiction was what go Archbishop Lefebvre excommunicated. No bishop can act contrary to canon law. That is a violation of jurisdiction. Some violations of jurisdiction are more serious than others. They can carry excommunication or at the very least a reprimand from the Holy Father.
For example, if the bishop had mandated that Fr. Jenkins resign, that bishop would have been in very serious trouble with the Pope. That role is reserved to two people: the Provincial Superior of the Holy Cross Brothers and the Pope. The bishops have to be very careful what they say and how they say it. They can suggest that Fr. Jenkins resign. They can’t even ask the Provincial Superior to transfer him. The Provincial Superior of the Brothers of the Holy Cross has the same authority as a bishop. He answers to the Pope, not to the bishops.
Remember, the bishops really have authority over the laity and over secular clergy. Religious are not part of any diocese. Catholic colleges and universities are usually not part of any diocese. Often, seminaries are not part of any diocese, they are regional. They are governed by a board of regents that represent many bishops.
A good example is the apostolic visitation of the sisters. The bishops’ hands are tied because the sisters belong to Pontifical institutes. They answer to the Holy Father. If he does not call them on the carpet, the bishop cannot do it. He can invite them to talk. He can ask them not to work for his diocese. But he cannot dismantle them or their institutions.
The relationship between a bishop and secular clergy is different. They belong to his diocese. They owe him obedience in all pastoral matters. The other group that the bishop has the authority to govern is the laity. He can govern institutions that are owned by the diocese. Those he can open and close, unless they were canonically erected. Then he cannot do that. But if they were erected by the diocese, the diocese can close them.
I hope this clarifies this point.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
