“My mission does not belong to me, I hold it from the pope, like any bishop. It was entrusted to me by him, it is taken away from me by him. I therefore sent a letter of resignation to the Holy See, by mail, on Dec. 31.”
This is not the ecclesiology of Vatican II. A bishop does not receive his authority from the Pope as if he we merely th…
“My mission does not belong to me, I hold it from the pope, like any bishop. It was entrusted to me by him, it is taken away from me by him. I therefore sent a letter of resignation to the Holy See, by mail, on Dec. 31.”
This is not the ecclesiology of Vatican II. A bishop does not receive his authority from the Pope as if he we merely the local branch manager for a large corporation. A bishop is a successor to the apostles in his own right. Yes, Peter holds a place of primacy among the apostles, but a bishop's mission and authority are not merely derived from that of the Pope.
EDIT: I should clarify. Bishop Rey's mission does come in part from the Pope... he was called to the episcopacy by the Holy Father and receives his jurisdiction from the Supreme Pontiff as well, which was taught by the First Vatican Council. And yet as the Second Vatican Council reminds us, the office to which he has been called is established by Christ--not invented by the Pope. The Bishop is not the mere delegate of the Pope (like an apostolic nuncio), but a successor to the apostles whose office it is to guard Sacred Tradition and to faithfully hand on the Doctrine of the Faith. So even if jurisdiction and the concrete call letter comes through the Supreme Pontiff, the content of the mission comes solely from Christ and cannot be altered. What is so disturbing today is that the bishops who seem to take this mission most seriously are the very ones who are often removed from their See. Even if this is done validly, that does not necessarily make it just.
A tall order when we don't actually believe what we say we believe. For all the beauty of Lumen gentium, when the rubber hits the road, the attitude of Rome remains that of Pius IX: "I, I am tradition! I, I am the Church!" The temptation to adopt the attitude of Pius XII, towering with arms outstretched above the faith of Saint Peter's Square, is a powerful one.
"This power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate, to which all, of whatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound by their duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world."
"If anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church... let him be anathema." - Pastor Aeternus (Vatican I)
A bishop does not receive his sacred power from the Pope - obviously - but canonical mission and episcopal office (i.e. responsibility for diocese etc.) do come from the Pope. Do you claim that the documents of Vatican II contradict this...?
I just posted an edit and then saw your comment. You are right. The Pope has the authority to "give and to take away" when it comes to a bishop's canonical mission and responsibility for a diocese. At the same time, the content of the mission comes from Christ and cannot be altered by the Holy Father and his office should only be taken away where there is serious cause (i.e. when the bishop is failing in the mission given by Christ).
Lumen Gentium 27: 'Bishops govern the particular churches entrusted to them as the vicars and ambassadors of Christ ... This power, which they personally exercise in Christ's name, is proper, ordinary, and immediate, although its exercise is ultimately regulated by the supreme authority of the Church'
“My mission does not belong to me, I hold it from the pope, like any bishop. It was entrusted to me by him, it is taken away from me by him. I therefore sent a letter of resignation to the Holy See, by mail, on Dec. 31.”
This is not the ecclesiology of Vatican II. A bishop does not receive his authority from the Pope as if he we merely the local branch manager for a large corporation. A bishop is a successor to the apostles in his own right. Yes, Peter holds a place of primacy among the apostles, but a bishop's mission and authority are not merely derived from that of the Pope.
EDIT: I should clarify. Bishop Rey's mission does come in part from the Pope... he was called to the episcopacy by the Holy Father and receives his jurisdiction from the Supreme Pontiff as well, which was taught by the First Vatican Council. And yet as the Second Vatican Council reminds us, the office to which he has been called is established by Christ--not invented by the Pope. The Bishop is not the mere delegate of the Pope (like an apostolic nuncio), but a successor to the apostles whose office it is to guard Sacred Tradition and to faithfully hand on the Doctrine of the Faith. So even if jurisdiction and the concrete call letter comes through the Supreme Pontiff, the content of the mission comes solely from Christ and cannot be altered. What is so disturbing today is that the bishops who seem to take this mission most seriously are the very ones who are often removed from their See. Even if this is done validly, that does not necessarily make it just.
Yeah, that's the kind of ecclesiology we're trying to convince the Orthodox that we DON'T actually adhere to haha
A tall order when we don't actually believe what we say we believe. For all the beauty of Lumen gentium, when the rubber hits the road, the attitude of Rome remains that of Pius IX: "I, I am tradition! I, I am the Church!" The temptation to adopt the attitude of Pius XII, towering with arms outstretched above the faith of Saint Peter's Square, is a powerful one.
"This power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate, to which all, of whatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound by their duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world."
"If anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church... let him be anathema." - Pastor Aeternus (Vatican I)
A bishop does not receive his sacred power from the Pope - obviously - but canonical mission and episcopal office (i.e. responsibility for diocese etc.) do come from the Pope. Do you claim that the documents of Vatican II contradict this...?
I just posted an edit and then saw your comment. You are right. The Pope has the authority to "give and to take away" when it comes to a bishop's canonical mission and responsibility for a diocese. At the same time, the content of the mission comes from Christ and cannot be altered by the Holy Father and his office should only be taken away where there is serious cause (i.e. when the bishop is failing in the mission given by Christ).
God bless all of you for not going down a collegiality rathole! 💪 🙏
I completely agree.
Lumen Gentium 27: 'Bishops govern the particular churches entrusted to them as the vicars and ambassadors of Christ ... This power, which they personally exercise in Christ's name, is proper, ordinary, and immediate, although its exercise is ultimately regulated by the supreme authority of the Church'
Amen, Father, amen.