From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: bishops's authority (was: Altar girls)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 19:17:54 GMT


   This discussion started over a bishop's alleged authority to allow
altar girls.

   Gordon Zaft wrote:

>       Wrong on both counts.  While it's true that there is a very broad
>range of things that a bishop can dispense if he wishes, if I'm not
>mistaken things concerning the nature of the liturgy (such as altar
>girls) are not his to dispense, but are reserved to the Holy See.  I think
>someone quote the relevant stuff earlier; I don't have it handy.

Ray Lang then made this assertion:

>Bishops have a proper authority that is their own by virtue of the fact
>that a bishop is a successor to the Apostles.  The authority of a bishop
>comes by virtue of apostolic succession and does not flow out from the Pope.
>He governs his flock by his own authority and not as a papal delegate.
>Furthermore, even if bishops in the West have not exercised their
>proper authority out of loyalty to the Pope, this in no way lessens
>that authority.
>
>Seems to me if a bishop wants to allow girls as altar servers, that's
>his perogative.

   Although this true according to Catholic belief, it is also
incomplete, and sounded to me like an implicit denial of papal
primacy, because he did not acknowledge that authority in certain
matters is reserved to the Pope.

   I then stepped into the discussion, although I realize now that
taken out of the context of this discussion, what I said was not
totally clear:

>   This may be the understanding of the Orthodox and Anglicans, but
>Catholic belief is that the Bishop of Rome has a primacy over all
>other bishops that is not merely honorary.
>
>   Furthermore, if what you say were true, then why does Canon Law
>specify a _latae sentenciae_ excommunication for any (bishop) who
>consecrates a bishop without the permission of the Pope?

  So naturally, Ray took what I said somewhat out of context, although
a lot of it is my fault for being unclear:

[...]
>>>proper authority out of loyalty to the Pope, this in no way lessens
>>>that authority.
>>
>>   This may be the understanding of the Orthodox and Anglicans [...]

   My important "but" clause was left out of this quote.  Actually,
the way I should have phrased it is this: "This [ much ] may be the
understanding of the Orthodox and Anglicans, but Catholic belief
[ also says ] that the Bishop of Rome has a primacy over all other
bishops that is not merely honorary."

   Ray then went on to give a quotation from _Lumen gentium_, with
which I agree:

>And also the clear teaching of the Roman Catholic Church:
>
[ _Lumen gentium_ quote deleted ]

   Anyway, Ray and I may have been on different wavelengths on this,
but I still reject the notion that liturgy is left to each individual
bishop.  Rather it is something that is reserved to the Pope's
authority.

   I would also like to give another quotation from Chapter 22 of
_Lumen gentium_, which confirms what I said about papal authority:

	[ ... ]

	   The college or body of bishops has for all that no
	authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's
	successor, as its head, whose primatial authority, let it be
	added, over all, whether pastors or faithful, remains in its
	integrity.  For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as
	Vicar of Christ, namely, and as pastor of the entire Church,
	has full, supreme and universal power over the whole Church, a
	power which he can always exercise unhindered.  The order of
	bishops is the successor the the college of the apostles in
	their role as teachers and pastors, and in it the apostolic
	college is perpetuated. Togther with their head, the Supreme
	Pontiff, and never apart from him, they have supreme and full
	authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be
	exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff.  The
	Lord made Peter alone the rock-foundation and the holder of
	the keys of the Church (cf. Mt. 16:18-19), and constituted him
	shepherd of his whole flock (cf. Jn. 21:15 ff.)...

   Finally, let's look at what Canon Law says about this.  I've
already noted that Canon 2 explains that liturgical norms are no
longer within the scope of the Code of Canon Law, and that THOSE NORMS
IN EFFECT AT THE TIME of the 1983 code ARE TO REMAIN IN EFFECT.

   For a description of authority with respect to _supervision of_ the
liturgy, see Canon 838.  It says that the bishops are in charge of the
liturgy in their respective dioceses, but that they must follow the
norms of the universal Church.  Furthermore, it says that approval is
reserved to the Holy See.   Canon 839.2 also says that practices must
be in accord with the rest of the Church.

   Since the Holy See has in fact spoken against the practice of
"altar girls," one cannot make a good case for them.  _Roma locuta,
causa finita_.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu