Catholic Answers Forums

Catholic Answers Forums (http://forums.catholic.com/index.php)
-   Liturgy and Sacraments (http://forums.catholic.com/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop? (http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=299810)

jofa Jan 7, '09 9:17 pm

Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
I can't get it straight:
1.)In the heirarchy of the Church, highest to lowest, does it go Cardinal, Archbishop,then Bishop?
2.)If so, does one have to be a Bishop to then become a Archbishop, and Archbishop to be a Cardinal, etc.
3.) And why so many different levels?
4.) And who appoints them? Is it by vote?

Thank you, thank you, thank you! (I'm ashamed to say I was a Catholic Theology major in college but apparently failed to absorb several basic facts about our faith! :blush: )

Fludgecow101 Jan 7, '09 9:22 pm

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
well, for your first two questions, from what i know, it goes something like deacon, preist, monsignor, bishop, cardinal, pope. the archbishop is the bishop of an archdiocese

benedictgal Jan 7, '09 9:27 pm

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jofa (Post 4640800)
I can't get it straight:
1.)In the heirarchy of the Church, highest to lowest, does it go Cardinal, Archbishop,then Bishop?
2.)If so, does one have to be a Bishop to then become a Archbishop, and Archbishop to be a Cardinal, etc.
3.) And why so many different levels?
4.) And who appoints them? Is it by vote?

Thank you, thank you, thank you! (I'm ashamed to say I was a Catholic Theology major in college but apparently failed to absorb several basic facts about our faith! :blush: )

The appointments to bishop, archbishop and cardinal are made by the Holy Father. The bishop is in charge of a diocese while the archbishop is in charge of an archdiocese, called a Metropolitan See. Newly appointed Archbishops receive the pallium (the white woolen "garment" with five crosses that is worn like a necklace, for lack of a better word) directly from the Holy Father on the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul.

Now, not all archbishops are Metropolitans. There are some priests who receive this special designation when they assume high ranking curial posts. I do not believe, for example that now John Cardinal Foley was a metropolitan see when he was ordained an archbishop by Pope John Paul II. In fact, now Stanislaw Cardinal Dwivecz, the former secretary to Pope John Paul II (and now the Metropolitan of Krakow) was ordained an archbishop, an honor that the late Holy Father bestowed on him. Archbishop John Harvey, an American prelate, is the prefect of the Papal Household. I am not sure if he held a post as either an ordinary or a metropolitan. The former papal MC, Archbishop Pietro Marini, did not have a Metropolitan See. He was given the honor of being Archbishop by Pope John Paul II.

Cardinals are appointed directly by the Holy Father. A majority of them (the ones who are Latin-Rite and below the age of 80) are the Papal electors. They also form the Roman clergy, as they are the ones who elect the Pope. There are cardinals from the Eastern Rite and cardinals who, as in the case of the late Avery Cardinal Dulles, who are created cardinals by virtue of a special achievement (wish the Holy Father would have done that for Fr. Richard John Neuhaus).

The newly created cardinals receive their red berrettas (hats) and special rings at the next consistory. While I am only speculating, I would think that the former Metropolitan of St. Louis, Archbishop Raymond Burke, would be in line for this.

Among the cardinals they have their own ranks of Cardinal Deacon, Cardinal Priest and Cardinal Bishop. The Cardinal Priests are assigned a parish in Rome. The Cardinal Bishops are assigned titular sees. Before he became Pope, the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was a Cardinal Bishop, as is Francis Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

I hope this helps.

JimG Jan 7, '09 10:18 pm

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Keep in mind that there are only three "levels" of Holy Orders: Deacon, Priest, and Bishop. The other titles are jurisdictional (or sometimes honorary, as in the case of Monsignor.)

Every bishop is equally a successor to the Apostles. An archbishop has no higher level of Holy Orders, just a larger geographic jurisdiction. A Cardinal has no higher level of Holy Orders than a bishop, just a higher level job at the Vatican.

Andreas Hofer Jan 7, '09 11:04 pm

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
When "ranking" hierarchs, it is best to simply leave cardinals aside as their own parallel track in the hierarchy. Here's my run-down.

Bishop: All bishops possess the same level of Holy Orders, be they bishop, archbishop, or cardinal. Those who are titled bishops might either be the ordinary (man-in-charge) or a diocese or the auxiliary of a diocese. (AFAIK it is not normal to ordain men as "simple" bishops outside of those two cases). They possess the fulness of the priesthood, and their authority is confined to their own diocesan territory.

Archbishop: Archbishops are bishops who hold special dignity within the Church. There are three main classes of archbishops. The first is metropolitans. Metropolitans are archbishops who are ordinaries of the head see within an ecclesiastical province. For instance, Indianapolis is the metropolitan see of Indiana, and Abp. Buechlein is thus the head bishop of Indiana. In modern times metropolitan archbishops have little concrete authority outside of their own territories, whereas they used to have more sway. Under the current CIC, metropolitans duties and privileges in their subordinate dioceses are:

Can. 436 1. In the suffragan dioceses, a metropolitan is competent:
1/ to exercise vigilance so that the faith and ecclesiastical discipline are observed carefully and to inform the Roman Pontiff of abuses, if there are any;
2/ to conduct a canonical visitation for a cause previously approved by the Apostolic See if a suffragan has neglected it;
3/ to designate a diocesan administrator according to the norm of cann. 421, 2, and 425, 3.
2. Where circumstances demand it, the Apostolic See can endow a metropolitan with special functions and power to be determined in particular law.
3. The metropolitan has no other power of governance in the suffragan dioceses. He can perform sacred functions, however, as if he were a bishop in his own diocese in all churches, but he is first to inform the diocesan bishop if the church is the cathedral.

A second class of archbishops are those who head "important" or large dioceses that have no suffragan (subordinate) dioceses attached to them. In the United States, the archdioceses of Washington, D.C. and for the Military Services are two prime examples. These archbishops claim precedence of honor over other bishops, but have no responsibilities or privileges outside their territory as do metropolitans.

A third class of archbishops are curial officials, in particular the heads of dicasteries and apostolic nuncios. Once again, these claim precedence of honor, and they furthermore are not ordinaries of a dioceses. I believe they are ordained to the episcopate and given the honor of archbishop because their duties will require them to "give orders" to other bishops in the world, and thus it was felt that propriety demanded they actually be "superior" to those bishops in some respect.

You can see, then, that because not all archbishops have dioceses and not all of those actually have authority over other bishops, even here its not fully correct to simplify things into a "ranking" of bishop, archbishop, pope. If one is confining oneself to honor and precedence, this would be accurate, but if one is trying to map the hierarchy of jurisdictional power, it would run bishop, metropolitan (archbishop), pope, with archbishop type 2 ranking with bishops and type 3 sort of floating to the side (they exercise papal authority over bishops and archbishops but none in their own right).

Cardinals, now, further complicate things. According to modern law, all cardinals will be bishops (and, in practice, archbishops) with a few exceptional priests. But in theory, cardinals need not even be deacons. It used to be considered normal for laymen to be named cardinals - including one of the most famous cardinals of the sixteenth century, Cdl. Pole, who was cousin to Henry VIII and sometime papal legate to Trent (he did, eventually, receive holy orders but for many years he was a cardinal while not yet even a deacon). The cardinalate is an honorary designation that makes one a member of the pope's "senate," his group of counselors, and a papal elector. It also carries precedence of honor over all other non-cardinals (except, perhaps, patriarchs of Eastern churches, though I can't remember for sure), along with certain privileges of exercising what orders one has anywhere in the world.

Cardinals are typically named for three reasons. The first is that they are the metropolitans of significant archdioceses. Certain archdioceses, like New York, Westminster, Paris, Milan, etc., are considered "automatic" cardinal's positions, although such fortunes do shift as ecclesiastical demography does as well. The second is that they are high-ranking and/or long-serving curial officials. Here the prefectures of the CDF, CDW, and Apostolic Signatura are the sorts of things that bring an "automatic" red hat. The third group are distinguished theologians, typically only in their advanced years and thus after not just a distinguished but also long service in that capacity. Although these men, typically not bishops, are required to be ordained bishops upon their ascendancy to the cardinalate, the law provides that the pope might allow them to remain in the presbyterate if they so request - the best known example is the recently deceased Cdl. Dulles. These priest-cardinals show perfectly why it can be confusing to try to rank cardinals with bishops and archbishops, because Cdl. Dulles held precedence over the bishops of the world but never exercised authority over anyone.

PacoG Jan 7, '09 11:17 pm

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Andreas Hofer (Post 4641061)
Archbishop: Archbishops are bishops who hold special dignity within the Church. There are three main classes of archbishops. *** A second class of archbishops are those who head "important" or large dioceses that have no suffragan (subordinate) dioceses attached to them. In the United States, the archdioceses of Washington, D.C. and for the Military Services are two prime examples. These archbishops claim precedence of honor over other bishops, but have no responsibilities or privileges outside their territory as do metropolitans.***

Incredible post. One correction, however: the Archdiocese of Washington has a suffragan--the Diocese of St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands. It used to not have a suffragan until 1977 when St. Thomas was raised from a Territorial Prelature to a diocese.

Andreas Hofer Jan 7, '09 11:52 pm

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PacoG (Post 4641081)
Incredible post. One correction, however: the Archdiocese of Washington has a suffragan--the Diocese of St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands. It used to not have a suffragan until 1977 when St. Thomas was raised from a Territorial Prelature to a diocese.

Thanks for the correction (and the compliment<img>).

Frosty Jan 8, '09 12:19 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
To complicate the picture somewhat, there is also the office of "Primate". Primates are Archbishops [usually also Cardinals] of an episcopal see which have precedence over the Bishops of neighbouring ecclesiastical provinces. For example a "national" church whether in historic, cultural or political terms. Primates are usually found in older Catholic countries. At one time they had a lot of power but now the title is mainly honorific. It is normally vested in the oldest Archdiocese in the country.
Some examples of countries that have primates are:
Argentina---Buenos Aires---Cardinal Bergolio
Mexico---Mexico City---Cardinal Rivera Carrera
France---Lyons----Cardinal Barbarin
Ireland----Armagh---Cardinal Brady
Canada---Quebec City----Cardinal Ouellet
Poland---Warsaw---Cardinal Glemp
Italy---Rome ---Pope Benedict XVI
There are other countries as well, but I don't remember which ones. I believe that most of the Latin American countries have Primates.

PacoG Jan 8, '09 6:05 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosty (Post 4641152)
To complicate the picture somewhat, there is also the office of "Primate". Primates are Archbishops [usually also Cardinals] of an episcopal see which have precedence over the Bishops of neighbouring ecclesiastical provinces. For example a "national" church whether in historic, cultural or political terms. Primates are usually found in older Catholic countries. At one time they had a lot of power but now the title is mainly honorific. It is normally vested in the oldest Archdiocese in the country.

I remember reading that early on, the American hierarchy requested that the Archbishop of Baltimore be declared the primitial see of the United States. Pope Pius IX denied the request but, instead, gave Baltimore "primacy of precedence." Baltimore has the best place in processions and presides over any national plenary councils (if the U.S. were to ever have one again). However, the U.S. doesn't have a primate.

I wonder why Rome denied the request. I wonder if they would if asked now.

Dicerning Jan 8, '09 6:33 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by benedictgal (Post 4640837)
The appointments to bishop, archbishop and cardinal are made by the Holy Father. The bishop is in charge of a diocese while the archbishop is in charge of an archdiocese, called a Metropolitan See. Newly appointed Archbishops receive the pallium (the white woolen "garment" with five crosses that is worn like a necklace, for lack of a better word) directly from the Holy Father on the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul.

Now, not all archbishops are Metropolitans. There are some priests who receive this special designation when they assume high ranking curial posts. I do not believe, for example that now John Cardinal Foley was a metropolitan see when he was ordained an archbishop by Pope John Paul II. In fact, now Stanislaw Cardinal Dwivecz, the former secretary to Pope John Paul II (and now the Metropolitan of Krakow) was ordained an archbishop, an honor that the late Holy Father bestowed on him. Archbishop John Harvey, an American prelate, is the prefect of the Papal Household. I am not sure if he held a post as either an ordinary or a metropolitan. The former papal MC, Archbishop Pietro Marini, did not have a Metropolitan See. He was given the honor of being Archbishop by Pope John Paul II.

Cardinals are appointed directly by the Holy Father. A majority of them (the ones who are Latin-Rite and below the age of 80) are the Papal electors. They also form the Roman clergy, as they are the ones who elect the Pope. There are cardinals from the Eastern Rite and cardinals who, as in the case of the late Avery Cardinal Dulles, who are created cardinals by virtue of a special achievement (wish the Holy Father would have done that for Fr. Richard John Neuhaus).

The newly created cardinals receive their red berrettas (hats) and special rings at the next consistory. While I am only speculating, I would think that the former Metropolitan of St. Louis, Archbishop Raymond Burke, would be in line for this.

Among the cardinals they have their own ranks of Cardinal Deacon, Cardinal Priest and Cardinal Bishop. The Cardinal Priests are assigned a parish in Rome. The Cardinal Bishops are assigned titular sees. Before he became Pope, the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was a Cardinal Bishop, as is Francis Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

I hope this helps.


another interesting thing is that I believe Avery Cardinal Dulles was never elevated to Bishop. I believe remained a priest while being made cardinal

Dicerning Jan 8, '09 6:39 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by benedictgal (Post 4640837)
.................While I am only speculating, I would think that the former Metropolitan of St. Louis, Archbishop Raymond Burke, would be in line for this.


I hope this helps.

If this is done I will post a video of me and my 240 pounds doing a backflip of Joy on GodTube.

That would be an interesting video...

rickh925 Jan 8, '09 6:59 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
I remember reading a diocesan newspaper clip in a small parish in Gatlinburg, TN announcing the title of Monsignor for then-Fr. Thoni. It went on to say that this was a papal honor and that Monsignor Thoni received. Can the pope honor a priest active in a diocese with the title of Monsignor?

As a side note, if you are ever in Gatlinburg, TN, visit St. Mary's Catholic Church. Msgr. Thoni is probably in his 80s and going strong. I can't imagine that the parish has more than 40 registered families but they make a huge impact on the poor in the area.

Rick

cerad Jan 8, '09 7:07 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
So what about the women? I know there are nuns. Are there ArchNuns and such?

Spirithound Jan 8, '09 7:57 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Andreas Hofer (Post 4641061)
Those who are titled bishops might either be the ordinary (man-in-charge) of a diocese or the auxiliary of a diocese. (AFAIK it is not normal to ordain men as "simple" bishops outside of those two cases). They possess the fullness of the priesthood, and their authority is confined to their own diocesan territory.

A bishop is actually always the head of a diocese. In the cases of auxiliary bishops, however, they're officially given dioceses which no longer exist. Interestingly enough, I've never heard of any of the auxiliary bishops of Rome ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosty (Post 4641152)
Primates are Archbishops [usually also Cardinals] of an episcopal see which have precedence over the Bishops of neighbouring ecclesiastical provinces. At one time they had a lot of power but now the title is mainly honorific. It is normally vested in the oldest Archdiocese in the country.
Some examples of countries that have primates are:
Canada---Quebec City----Cardinal Ouellet

I think it really is mostly honorific. The actual power of the Primate has been replaced in a way by the national conferences of Bishops, of which I'm not sure if Cardinal Ouellet has ever been president. But he's still noted as Primate of Canada on the CCCB website.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PacoG (Post 4641537)
I remember reading that early on, the American hierarchy requested that the Archbishop of Baltimore be declared the primitial see of the United States. Pope Pius IX denied the request but, instead, gave Baltimore "primacy of precedence."

I wonder why Rome denied the request. I wonder if they would if asked now.

:shrug: Perhaps reluctance to invest such authority in such a young country ;) ;) ;)
Anyways, probably not now, since it is only honorific.

Spirithound Jan 8, '09 8:06 am

Re: Cardinal? Bishop? Archbishop?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rickh925 (Post 4641706)
I remember reading a diocesan newspaper clip in a small parish in Gatlinburg, TN announcing the title of Monsignor for then-Fr. Thoni. It went on to say that this was a papal honor and that Monsignor Thoni received. Can the pope honor a priest active in a diocese with the title of Monsignor?

Yep, that's what it means. It's generally on the recommendation of the Bishop, but the title comes on the authority of the Pope.
A monsignor is an honorary member of the papal household, which means...well...


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 9:48 pm.


Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.