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 SMOM 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).