Non-bishop ordinary with an auxiliary bishop?

[chevalier]

Administrations, prelatures, vicariates and similar entities can sometimes have a non-bishop ordinary, and sometiems they can have an auxiliary bishop. Now, has there ever been a non-bishop ordinary with his own auxiliary bishop?

(It does seem that the auxiliary necessarily has to be a bishop. A non-bishop would probably have to be a non-succeeding coadjutor or something of the sort.)

„Lite” version: Do normal dioceses get a non-bishop administrator appointed to them despite having a serving and non-impeded auxiliary bishop or especially multiple such bishops?

 

[InThePew]

Administrations, prelatures, vicariates and similar entities can sometimes have a non-bishop ordinary, and sometimes they can have an auxiliary bishop. Now, has there ever been a non-bishop ordinary with his own auxiliary bishop?

(It does seem that the auxiliary necessarily has to be a bishop. A non-bishop would probably have to be a non-succeeding coadjutor or something of the sort.)

„Lite” version: Do normal dioceses get a non-bishop administrator appointed to them despite having a serving and non-impeded auxiliary bishop or especially multiple such bishops?

Okay starting slowly here: first of all the terms ordinary applies to a multitude of offices (supreiors general, abbots, territorial prelates, etc) while the titles Auxiliary or Coadjutor only apply to bishops and not other ordinaries. They also usually only arise in relation to dioceses although the Personal Prelature of Opus Dei has auxiliaries as does the Military Ordinariate of the US. On the other hand, structures like Administrations, Vicariates and Missions Sui Iuris are incapable of being a diocese usually because they’re too small (for example, the Prefecture Apostolic of the Marshall island has four parishes and five priests) or because local considerations don’t allow it. So given this, a non-bishop ordinary couldn’t have an auxiliary (in any other case I think the practical problems would mean that the “auxiliary” in all but name wouldn’t be consecrated a bishop until their ordinary had retired). A coadjutor always succeeds upon vacancy of the diocese (although this of course requires them to still be around and active when the vacancy arises…).

As for non-bishop administrators, yes this is possible (canon 409) although it would be unusual. When a vacancy arises, the College of Consultors are required to elect an administrator and, in the interim, the (senior) auxiliary bishop governs the diocese so you’d expect that the college would elect the auxiliary but there’s no requirement for them to do so.

 

[chevalier]

Yeah, I know about non-bishop administrators in dioceses that actually have a serving auxiliary bishop. Rare but can happen. The admin is, of course, still in charge, but can’t cross certain limits connected to episcopacy. Perhaps it’s more frequent to have a non-bishop administrator in a diocese that doesn’t have an auxiliary bishop but has a bishop emeritus (typically older than 75), but I’m guessing here (don’t have any stats etc.).

Also in religious congregations, for obvious reasons, there can sometimes be some situations in which a priest can be the boss of someone below him who for some reasons is an ordained bishop (e.g. previous abbot who got ordained as a bishop, someone who used to be a normal diocesan bishop before a life-changing event etc.). Probably less frequent now than in the middle ages or early modern period, although SSPX used to have a non-bishop superior general with as many as four bishops under him.

Any chaplain at the (name removed by moderator) would be under the grandmaster, who basically can’t be a chaplain (priest or higher, though I guess he could be a permanent deacon). Some bishops are honorary chaplains there, dunno but perhaps some are normal members. Obviously the GM wouldn’t interfere with clerical things and probably wouldn’t try to exercise spiritual authority.

A more obvious case would be vicars general, who are usually priests, where auxiliary bishops are usually only episcopal vicars, so the vicar general is theoretically the superior.

But I’m mostly wondering about situations like vicariates apostolic, territorial prelatures etc., where they can have auxiliary bishops but their ordinary doesn’t necessarily have to be a normal bishop himself.

… Or do only explicit dioceses have auxiliary bishops?

(When I mentioned coadjutors, I mostly meant religious ones, like coadjutor abbots and grandmasters, in a diocese a coadjutor has to be a bishop as far as I know.)

Hypothetical situation: The post-Anglican ordinariates are headed by married monsignors. Can such an ordinariate receive an auxiliary bishop despite not having a normal bishop in charge? So for example could someone become an auxiliary bishop of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham?

For example let’s suppose an Anglican bishop converts, who is widowed or has never been married, is comfortably under 75 years of age, attached to the Anglican heritage and wanting to join that community rather than integrating into the mainstream as a normal Latin Rite bishop, and let’s suppose his consecrator was an Old Catholic or Orthodox or some other probably valid bishop, so this would qualify for a sub conditione reordination rather than normal ordination, and there’d be every incentive to have his a bishop. Sort of like Msgr Graham Leonard, except unmarried and younger. Obviously, in real life he would probably be a humble person (like the monsignors who gave up being bishops).

 

[Joe_Kelley]

At one time our bishop had an archbishop as one of his auxiliaries.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Administrations, prelatures, vicariates and similar entities can sometimes have a non-bishop ordinary, and sometiems they can have an auxiliary bishop. Now, has there ever been a non-bishop ordinary with his own auxiliary bishop?

(It does seem that the auxiliary necessarily has to be a bishop. A non-bishop would probably have to be a non-succeeding coadjutor or something of the sort.)

„Lite” version: Do normal dioceses get a non-bishop administrator appointed to them despite having a serving and non-impeded auxiliary bishop or especially multiple such bishops?

From 2005-2007 our diocese had both an Administrator and an Auxiliary Bishop during a vacancy. The auxiliary was elderly and in fact died in 2006–he played a minimal role in the administration of the diocese

 

[chevalier]

At one time our bishop had an archbishop as one of his auxiliaries.

Oh, yeah, that. There are also suffragan cardinals under non-cardinal metropolitans.

 

[InThePew]

Also in religious congregations, for obvious reasons, there can sometimes be some situations in which a priest can be the boss of someone below him who for some reasons is an ordained bishop

Members of religious Orders who become bishops are exempt from the governance of their order (although the remain a part of it).

Any chaplain at the (name removed by moderator) would be under the grandmaster, who basically can’t be a chaplain (priest or higher, though I guess he could be a permanent deacon). Some bishops are honorary chaplains there, dunno but perhaps some are normal members. Obviously the GM wouldn’t interfere with clerical things and probably wouldn’t try to exercise spiritual authority.

Except the (name removed by moderator) is not a diocese / prelature / ordinariate / etc and neither is it a religious order so priests can’t be incardinated into it and so remain under the authority of their ordinary.

A more obvious case would be vicars general, who are usually priests, where auxiliary bishops are usually only episcopal vicars, so the vicar general is theoretically the superior.

If there is an auxiliary bishop in a diocese then they would usually be appointed Vicar General and even if episcopal vicars would be dependent on the authority of the Diocesan bishop alone (can. 406)

But I’m mostly wondering about situations like vicariates apostolic, territorial prelatures etc., where they can have auxiliary bishops but their ordinary doesn’t necessarily have to be a normal bishop himself.

These wouldn’t have an auxiliary bishop, particularly not if their ordinary wasn’t a bishop himself, although personal ordinariate (such as a Military Ordinariate) or Personal Prelature could. A coadjutor in a diocese is always a bishop and I don’t there is such a thing as any other kind of coadjutor since these are only mentioned in relation to bishops in the code of canon law. Granted there were once coadjutor abbots but I think most abbeys no longer elect their abbots for life and so the need for coadjutors has passed.

Hypothetical situation: The post-Anglican ordinariates are headed by married monsignors. Can such an ordinariate receive an auxiliary bishop despite not having a normal bishop in charge? So for example could someone become an auxiliary bishop of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham?

This had occurred to me but I left it in the too hard basket! A head of an anglican ordinariate can be a bishop provided they’re not married (and obviously fulfill the usual criteria). Currently none are but, at the same time, there are also none large enough to warrant an auxiliary although in theory a coadjutor bishop could be appointed. I think, in reality however, this probably wouldn’t happen. Instead, the existing ordinary would retire first before his successor took office. Upon taking office, the new ordinary could / would be ordained a bishop and, as a priest, his predecessor would be subordinate to him in much the same way as he would be to a non-bishop ordinary, or that an emeritus bishop is.

 

[chevalier]

Members of religious Orders who become bishops are exempt from the governance of their order (although the remain a part of it).

Yeah, but that’s not the same as a bishop retiring to a monastery, going there to live, getting elected abbot for a term etc.

Except the (name removed by moderator) is not a diocese / prelature / ordinariate / etc and neither is it a religious order so priests can’t be incardinated into it and so remain under the authority of their ordinary.

You mean they don’t have a structure that could incardinate clerics as chaplains or something?

If there is an auxiliary bishop in a diocese then they would usually be appointed Vicar General and even if episcopal vicars would be dependent on the authority of the Diocesan bishop alone (can. 406)

Okay, you’re right. ‘Dependent only on his authority,’ applies to all auxiliary bishops, even when appointed only episcopal vicar when a simple priest is serving as vicar general at the same time. So a vicar general is not the superior of episcopal vicars who are auxiliary bishops unless the vicar general is either a coadjutor or the special auxiliary bishop from can. 403 § 2.

These wouldn’t have an auxiliary bishop, particularly not if their ordinary wasn’t a bishop himself, although personal ordinariate (such as a Military Ordinariate) or Personal Prelature could.

Yeah. Personal prelatures are typically held by a bishop, but I’m not sure if all of them always are. As for military ordinariates, I suppose they could be simply ‘ordinariates’ without being dioceses.

It probably doesn’t take a proper diocese to merit an auxiliary bishop becaue vicariates apostolic are not dioceses, strictly speaking but can have auxiliaries.

A coadjutor in a diocese is always a bishop and I don’t there is such a thing as any other kind of coadjutor since these are only mentioned in relation to bishops in the code of canon law. Granted there were once coadjutor abbots but I think most abbeys no longer elect their abbots for life and so the need for coadjutors has passed.

Yeah, I think monastic coadjutors were meant for succession at least as much as assistance in governance, so perhaps their time has passed.

A head of an anglican ordinariate can be a bishop provided they’re not married (and obviously fulfill the usual criteria).

Yeah! In which case the ordinariate could probably be explicitly made into a diocese (a ‘Diocese of Holy Patron’ rather than ‘Diocese of This City’ but a ‘diocese’ and not a ‘vicariate’).

Currently none are but, at the same time, there are also none large enough to warrant an auxiliary although in theory a coadjutor bishop could be appointed.

Well, I’m looking at can. 403 § 1 right now, and I see ‘diocese’. It can probably be stretched to include approximate equivalents, but I’m not quite sure about the possibility of, let’s say, Msgr Newton receiving a coadjutor bishop.

Instead, the existing ordinary would retire first before his successor took office.

True perhaps, but what if the Pope doesn’t want to retire the then-current ordinary (60 years of age, let’s say) but an unmarried Anglican bishop suddenly converts, especially one with an Old Catholic consecrator?

They probably have some unmarried priests who were Anglican priests before (and prefer to appoint former Anglican married bishops as non-bishop Catholic ordinaries over taking an unmarried former Anglican simple priest and ordaining him as a Catholic bishop, from which he’s not barred), but they have nobody unmarried who was a bishop on the Anglican side. That could change things.

Upon taking office, the new ordinary could / would be ordained a bishop and, as a priest, his predecessor would be subordinate to him in much the same way as he would be to a non-bishop ordinary, or that an emeritus bishop is.

I think some religious congregations may have former abbots who were ordained to the episcopacy as abbots but have subsequently retired and are now abbots emeriti. I suppose such an abbot emeritus would be subject to the new abbot if he chose to stick with the order as opposed to making use of the canons providing for an exemption from the order’s governance on account of the emeritus’s episcopacy.

But let’s taken the Australian Ordinariate. Msgr Entwistle was born in 1940, so he’s probably going to submit his resignation next year and receive no more than 3 years extension. Let’s build a hypothetical. Suppose a widowed Anglican bishop converts in the meantime, also close to retirement age, and receives a sub conditione episcopal ordination. But after his retirement the only replacement is a simple priest. So it looks like the bishop emeritus will — in this hypothetical — have a simple priest for his permanent ordinary (not even temporary administrator). Right?

So we’d have a bishop subject to the jurisdiction of a non-bishop ordinary.

Then, there are some episcopi vagantes renciled with the Pope and working as simple priests, so they might as well be curates under a parish pastor, but theirs would be a special case where they aren’t treated like normal bishops temporarily filling a parish billet. The only recognition they’d get would be annointment on the other side of their hands during extreme unction if I’m getting things right (judging by Talleyrand’s case; he was a laicized bishop).

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Members of religious Orders who become bishops are exempt from the governance of their order (although the remain a part of it).

…

e.g. Pope Francis is a Jesuit.

 

[InThePew]

Yeah, but that’s not the same as a bishop retiring to a monastery, going there to live, getting elected abbot for a term etc.

While a bishop could retire to a monastery the likelihood of them being elected abbot is basically non-existent since, besides the issue surrounding the status as a bishop, they’d also be too old.

You mean they don’t have a structure that could incardinate clerics as chaplains or something?

No, clerics can’t be incardinated to the (name removed by moderator).

Personal prelatures are typically held by a bishop, but I’m not sure if all of them always are. As for military ordinariates, I suppose they could be simply ‘ordinariates’ without being dioceses.

Effectively, the only difference between an ordinariate and a diocese is that the latter has defined geographical dioceses unlike say a personal ordinariate which applies to particular people and thus cut across diocesan boundaries…

It probably doesn’t take a proper diocese to merit an auxiliary bishop becaue vicariates apostolic are not dioceses, strictly speaking but can have auxiliaries.

No, vicariates apostolic wouldn’t have an auxilliary because they’re usually too small to justify it but, regardless, the leader isn’t bishop of that territory (often they are in fact bishops, albeit titular) but rather he governs in the name of the Pope. Thus, the vicariate couldn’t have an auxiliary bishop but they can have a “pro-vicar” who governs in the absence of a vicar.

In which case the ordinariate could probably be explicitly made into a diocese (a ‘Diocese of Holy Patron’ rather than ‘Diocese of This City’ but a ‘diocese’ and not a ‘vicariate’).

No, it would remain an ordinariate because it governance (for want of a better word) is over people and not a geographical area.

what if the Pope doesn’t want to retire the then-current ordinary (60 years of age, let’s say) but an unmarried Anglican bishop suddenly converts, especially one with an Old Catholic consecrator?

They probably have some unmarried priests who were Anglican priests before (and prefer to appoint former Anglican married bishops as non-bishop Catholic ordinaries over taking an unmarried former Anglican simple priest and ordaining him as a Catholic bishop, from which he’s not barred), but they have nobody unmarried who was a bishop on the Anglican side. That could change things.

Well the first point I’d make is that it doesn’t matter who ordained him - the orders of anyone ordained in the anglican / episcopalian Church are considered invalid (Apostolicae Curae - Leo XIII). At a guess I’d say that the preference would be to appoint as ordinaries those who were formerly bishops in the Anglican Church but that’s not a hard and fast rule. were a new and unmarried bishop to come over, he would be ordained a priest unless and until there was a need for a new ordinary at which point he may well be appointed to that position and ordained a bishop.

I think some religious congregations may have former abbots who were ordained to the episcopacy as abbots but have subsequently retired and are now abbots emeriti. I suppose such an abbot emeritus would be subject to the new abbot if he chose to stick with the order as opposed to making use of the canons providing for an exemption from the order’s governance on account of the emeritus’s episcopacy.

I believe most monastic orders now only elect their abbots for a fixed term (sometime renewable) and, at the end of their term, they’re expected to return to being an ordinary monk (albeit one whose guidance and counsel is likely to be sought by their successor). Over time, it would be possible to have more than one former abbot around.

Msgr Entwistle was born in 1940, so he’s probably going to submit his resignation next year and receive no more than 3 years extension. Let’s build a hypothetical. Suppose a widowed Anglican bishop converts in the meantime, also close to retirement age, and receives a sub conditione episcopal ordination. But after his retirement the only replacement is a simple priest. So it looks like the bishop emeritus will — in this hypothetical — have a simple priest for his permanent ordinary (not even temporary administrator). Right?

So we’d have a bishop subject to the jurisdiction of a non-bishop ordinary.

Assuming the “simple priest” is married, then yes although a man who’s close to retirement age probably wouldn’t be appointed in the first place - former bishop or not. It’s hard for some dioceses to find a bishop as is without having to repeat the exercise over again only a few years later! Nonetheless, the bishop would only be subject in the way an emeritus bishop (or a retired bishop living outside of his diocese) is. In some ways, it not all that unusual - I can think of a parish which currently houses a retired cardinal who is, in theory at least, subject to the authority of the parish priest.

As for episcopi vagantes, they remain bishops (in name at least) but their powers can be limited by the Holy See.