Possession and vacancy of sees upon appointment

  • Thread starter Thread starter Elizium23
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Elizium23 said:
I have a followup to this and a related question.

According to this article from Whispers in the Loggia, a Bishop-elect is permitted to use the titles “Your Excellency” and “The Most Reverend” from the moment of announcement of his appointment. Does this also apply to Cardinal-designates? Can they be called “Your Eminence” before the consistory happens?
Click to expand...
Normally that would occur only when the bishop-elect (I hate that term, since no one elected him) is already a bishop. Many ordinaries are previously auxiliary bishops or bishops of other dioceses before being appointed ordinaries. If he is only a priest–including a monignor–he will have to be ordained to the episcopate before he can be called Your Excellency or titled The Most Rev. _______.
 
Chatter163 said:
Normally that would occur only when the bishop-elect (I hate that term, since no one elected him) is already a bishop. Many ordinaries are previously auxiliary bishops or bishops of other dioceses before being appointed ordinaries. If he is only a priest–including a monignor–he will have to be ordained to the episcopate before he can be called Your Excellency or titled The Most Rev. _______.
Click to expand...
Actually, if you read the article, you will see that this is not true. He can immediately use those titles, and is also immediately entitled to all the vestments of a bishop, except for mitre, crozier and ring. If you’d like to argue about the reliability of information there, have at it - this is one of the most respected blogs in the Catholic blogosphere.
 
As you can see in this blog article, His Excellency +Strickland of the Tyler diocese already owns a pectoral cross and amaranth zucchetto. And in fact he claims to wear the cross already. I would say that Whispers in the Loggia is correct.

I know it’s really confusing. I am doing this research for Wikipedia, because there are lots of editors who routinely violate the policy that says “Wikipedia is not a crystal ball” and insert future information about Catholic bishops and cardinals that should not be included until the installation or consistory. I am assiduously collecting secondary sources regarding these procedures and trying to impress the importance of following the correct rules on the editors there, but it is an uphill climb.
 
Elizium23 said:
Actually, if you read the article, you will see that this is not true. He can immediately use those titles, and is also immediately entitled to all the vestments of a bishop, except for mitre, crozier and ring. If you’d like to argue about the reliability of information there, have at it - this is one of the most respected blogs in the Catholic blogosphere.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure exactly what that means, but there are no Vatican documents referred to in the column–just what someone observed some anonymous bishop doing in Rome.
 
Chatter163 said:
I’m not sure exactly what that means, but there are no Vatican documents referred to in the column–just what someone observed some anonymous bishop doing in Rome.
Click to expand...
As I said in my last post, His Excellency Strickland already wears his pectoral cross and amaranth zucchetto; this is corroboration that Whispers in the Loggia is correct.

I don’t know what documents could be referenced. This kind of trivia isn’t in Canon Law. Perhaps it is somewhere in an apostolic constitution post-Vatican II or something. But it appears to be fact, and in the absence of reliable sources to refute it, I’m going to run with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top