Read on Twitter
A reminder, and a short #thread:
Per canon law, a diocesan Bishop *cannot even wear his vestments* outside the boundaries of his diocese, unless he has the permission of the local Ordinary where he is visiting.
(That's Canon 390, if you want to look it up)
1/
Per canon law, a diocesan Bishop *cannot even wear his vestments* outside the boundaries of his diocese, unless he has the permission of the local Ordinary where he is visiting.
(That's Canon 390, if you want to look it up)
1/
Why? Because the local Ordinary (that is, the Bishop of a given See) is the sole authority within that diocese.
That authority comes with distinct visual markers (the 'pontificalia') like the cappa magna (the big pointed hat), so the laity knows clearly who the Bishop is.
2/
That authority comes with distinct visual markers (the 'pontificalia') like the cappa magna (the big pointed hat), so the laity knows clearly who the Bishop is.
2/
That's because that one Bishop acts as the visible gathering point of that local Church. The local Church is made 'Catholic,' by definition, by its unity with its Bishop.
So the Church wants to avoid a situation where there appears to be more than one Bishop in a given See
3/
So the Church wants to avoid a situation where there appears to be more than one Bishop in a given See
3/
This is, in part, because the history of the Church includes periods where the teaching authority within some dioceses was in dispute - more than one person was visibly claiming to have episcopal authority in a location at the same time.
4/
4/
Such a situation is the very definition of a 'scandal' - it becomes a literal 'stumbling block' to the faith of the laity. Whose teaching and interpretation should they trust in such a case? When there are two visible claimants to the Diocese, it is unclear.
5/
5/
Hence the canonical rule that a visiting Bishop should seek permission to visibly portray the markers of authority.
It doesn't mean a visiting Bishop *can't* display pontificalia, but the requirement to seek permission of the Ordinary allows the authority to remain clear
6/
It doesn't mean a visiting Bishop *can't* display pontificalia, but the requirement to seek permission of the Ordinary allows the authority to remain clear
6/
Now I know we are talking about vestments and such here, but there is a wider point that often gets lost:
In most cases, a local Bishop has no authority to teach or interpret outside his given diocese.
I don't say this disrespectfully; I say this canonically.
7/
In most cases, a local Bishop has no authority to teach or interpret outside his given diocese.
I don't say this disrespectfully; I say this canonically.
7/
When the Pontiff speaks, in his role as Universal Bishop, that has universal authority.
When the Bishops speak with one voice, as part of the Ordinary Magisterium, that also has a global (but not always universal) authority.
8/
When the Bishops speak with one voice, as part of the Ordinary Magisterium, that also has a global (but not always universal) authority.
8/
But a lone Bishop offering an opinion on Twitter - while it may indeed be a statement of moral gravity, and deserving of our respectful attention - carries no actual binding authority outside the boundaries of his own diocese.
9/
9/
If a Bishop cannot wear a *hat* without permission outside his diocese, it is because he (more importantly) cannot *teach* without permission outside his diocese.
(This also goes for diocesan priests, who derive their authority from the local Ordinary)
10/
(This also goes for diocesan priests, who derive their authority from the local Ordinary)
10/
Why point this out?
Well, because the internet makes everything weird.
We laity can see a tweet from a priest or a Bishop from a different diocese, and understandably become confused as to whether the claim it contains is binding upon us.
It isn't.
11/
Well, because the internet makes everything weird.
We laity can see a tweet from a priest or a Bishop from a different diocese, and understandably become confused as to whether the claim it contains is binding upon us.
It isn't.
11/
Treat such claims with respect, certainly. Weigh them in your conscience, prayerfully.
But do not mistake such claims for absolute edicts that must be followed without question or discussion. *That is not the way teaching authority works in our Church.*
12/
But do not mistake such claims for absolute edicts that must be followed without question or discussion. *That is not the way teaching authority works in our Church.*
12/
Canon law has properly placed clear limitations on the authority of a Bishop (or priest) to bind the *local* faithful.
If you have a concern or question about a teaching, the canonical resource should be your *local* priest and your *local* Bishop -
not a random tweet.
13/
If you have a concern or question about a teaching, the canonical resource should be your *local* priest and your *local* Bishop -
not a random tweet.
13/
I wish more Catholic laypersons understood this, and I wish more priests and Bishops clearly practiced this - because the visible locality of a clear Ordinary is especially vital and necessary now, in a world where we can hear opinions from Catholics everywhere at once.
14/
14/
So, Catholic Twitter, work out your timelines with fear and trembling, and keep track of which one of the guys in the room should actually be wearing the hat, and which ones should be asking permission. It matters.
Caveat emptor.
15/15
Caveat emptor.
15/15
