To paraphrase Nancy Mitford: The episcopacy in the Sede Vacante is like a gelding: it may prance and jump, but in fact it is impotent.
Rubbish! As far as we're concerned at Pistrina, we need quite a few more of these episcopi vagantes. Indeed, we argue that all priests should receive the episcopacy as soon as they can scrape together enough cash to buy the basic starter kit of miter, pectoral cross, ring, and, perhaps, a cassock with piping.
Shocked? O.K., we'll explain:
If every priest were made a bishop, then the Hermit-Kingdom monopolies controlled by these traddie mediocrities would soon come to an end. No more withholding holy oils, confirmations, ordinations; no more putting on airs and parvenu uppityness; no more deadly ecclesiastical adventurism and vain empire building. Soft-conscienced prelates would perforce have to concentrate on serving exclusively the people whose toil and sweat make it possible for them to live comfortably and play (often hilariously) the great man on their home turf.
As to objections about the great dignity of the episcopacy or the laying on of hands too wantonly, the Readers remind everyone that we're in the Sede Vacante. Let's remember that these see-less bishops possess only the bare-bones minimum: they can sanctify but not rule or teach. Moreover, they enjoy only material apostolic succession. In the utter absence of authority, there are no means to sift the chaff from the wheat to assure that only worthy men receive episcopal orders.
As the situation stands, any ambitious priest who covets a miter can get one, provided he find a willing consecrator. (And their number is legion.) In other words, self-selection constitutes "election," not the studied scrutiny of the institutional Church. Good character, piety, zeal for souls, solid learning in theology are no longer the real criteria -- they're just unsupported and sometimes tacked-on claims, which often are belied by our knowledge of these men's sorry record of accomplishment. How else, then, could we have gotten the likes of so many of the wandering bishops who now plague traditional Catholicism in the U.S.?
Traditional Catholic self-identity is best severed from the episcopacy so that the clergy can focus on the cure of souls. It's hard to focus on the faithful when self-aggrandizing petty prelates ration the sacraments in order to guarantee their corner on the market. What's funny is that these characters don't even have the span of control of a big-box discount store assistant manager. Let's face it: in the Sede Vacante, bishops really have a but very limited role to play, essentially to bless holy oils (and perhaps sacred vessels) and to ordain. They're not really needed for confirmation and the many other functions that a priest has the power to perform.
Therefore it's no big deal to multiply these orders. The cachet is gone. If everyone has the same standing, then traditional bishops may be less inclined to strive for self-promotion (particularly if the laity won't be impressed). Then we may see an end to some of these ecclesiastical kleptocracies and personal cheerleading societies. Maybe, just maybe, the salvation of souls may once again become the first law of the clergy. Maybe, just maybe, the traditional movement can be brought back to life.
Then this fits in very nicely with Fr. Ramolla's long range plans.
ReplyDeleteOr with Janet Gaye's plans for her beloved Bernie...
ReplyDeleteSadly, it seems pretty clear that the majority of Traddieland will be as much of a non-factor in the resurrection of Holy Church as Merkozy, BO, or any of the other sociopaths in charge of the modern mega-states will be in the renewal of society at large. It will happen, but God's ways are not our ways. As tired as we are of the endless sh*t sandwiches, God must be well past ready to consign a great many 'powerful' men to the outer darkness. Godspeed to you and yours in 2012 and beyond.
ReplyDeleteI think that there might be something to this. If every priest were made a Bishop...
ReplyDeleteWhat I am worried about Toth, something bugging me, maybe you can write a few words about it, is the validity of orders of the Lefebvre. If Lionart was a Mason, which Lefebvre had enough information to make a pubic admission, and seeing what became of the SSPX, and of the Masons within V2, whose mission ended in subverting the Church, then can intention of Lionart invalidate. I don't want to be donatist. But, as of now, I am unconvinced. If a man has a latent intention to subvert the Church, perhaps it could be very well through not having the intention to confer the sacrament, and in this case, that could well be suspect given the fact that Paul VI changed the form of Orders. That was the masonic intention all along?
I know it is conjectural, but it seems like Lionart could at least be held suspect.
If anyone goes around ordaining and consecrating willie nillie, I hope it is Bp. Slupski.