In article <frknk3$98b$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>The heirarchy is deacon, priest, bishop, archbishop, cardinal, then
>pope, right?
In theory, not quite. "Cardinal" is a modifier to the first three.
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03333b.htm>
is the Catholic
Encyclopedia's article, but that's about 100 years old and the rules
have apparently changed, and the article is really heavy slogging.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_(Catholicism)>
is in accord
with what I've seen elsewhere (so far as I remember).
The College of Cardinals was, centuries ago, the cathedral chapter of
the Bishop of Rome, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province,
&c &c. That is, the seven bishops of his suburbicarian sees, priests
of the important (cardinal) churches of Rome, and certain deaconates.
As with any other bishophric, the clergy of the bishopric elected the
new Bishop of Rome (who got lots more lovely take-home titles, like
Patriarch of the West (dropped recently for no good reason I can
see)). Wikipedia says
Each cardinal takes on a "title" to a certain church in Rome or
one of the suburbicarian sees. The only exception is for
patriarchs of Eastern Catholic Churches. The Dean of the College
of Cardinals always adds the title Bishop of Ostia to the title of
the suburbicarian see that he already holds. Not only Eastern
patriarchs, but also Western bishops and archbishops retain the
governance of the particular Church that is in their charge at the
time of their appointment to the cardinalate.
... the six Cardinal Bishops of the suburbicarian sees (who had
been relieved of direct responsibilities for those sees by Pope
John XXIII [in 1962]). ...
A cardinal priest has no functional relationship to the parish's
operations, though his name and coat of arms are still posted in
the church. Pope Paul VI abolished all administrative rights
cardinals had with regard to their titular churches.
Until 1918 it was possible to become a Cardinal without entering
Holy Orders, but only the order of Cardinal Deacons was open to
those who were not priests. For example, in the 16th century,
Reginald Pole was a cardinal for 18 years before he was ordained a
priest. After 1918 it was established that all cardinals, even the
Cardinal Deacons, had to be priests, and since 1962 all cardinals
have been bishops with rare exceptions where permission was
granted to decline episcopal consecration because of advanced
age. Today, Canon 351 specifically requires that a cardinal be at
least in the order of priesthood at his appointment, and those who
are not already bishops must receive episcopal consecration, save
by dispensation from the Pope. Most of these dispensations have
involved eminent theologians who are priests, such as was granted
in 2001 to Avery Dulles.
So there are few Cardinal Priests and no Cardinal Deacons? Not so.
A bishop is still a priest, after all. Those of the Order of Cardinal
Priests are given the title of a parish church in Rome; I haven't the
time to re-scan to see what titles those of the Order of Cardinal
Deacons get. Except for the Eastern Patriarchs, bishops join as
Cardinal Priests, and only get one of the few suburbicarian titles
with a lot of papal favor.
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
