Theappointment of bishops in theCatholic Church is a complicated process. Outgoingbishops, neighbouring bishops, the faithful, theapostolic nuncio, various members of theRoman Curia, and thepope all have a role in the selection. The exact process varies based upon a number of factors, including whether the bishop is from theLatin Church or one of theEastern Catholic Churches, the geographic location of the diocese, what office the candidate is being chosen to fill, and whether the candidate has previously been ordained to theepiscopate.
It is unclear when the notion of amonarchial bishop emerged, but it is clear that by 200 a single bishop in charge of a metropolitan area became a universal norm without much controversy. Initially, bishops were chosen by the local clergy with approval from nearby bishops. "A newly elected bishop was installed in office and given his authority ... by the bishops who supervised the election and performed the ordination."[1]
Examples of episcopal election in the early church include such notable figures asAmbrose of Milan. Episcopal election was so taken for granted that by the time of theCouncil of Nicaea (see below), it is mentioned as the normative method for selecting bishops, with approval of local metropolitans.
The bishops of the most importantsees sought acceptance from Rome.[citation needed] Some earlyChurch Fathers attest to the fact that the Church of Rome - in effect its diocese - was the central point of authority. They attest to the Church's reliance on Rome for advice, for mediation of disputes, and for guidance on doctrinal issues. They note, asIgnatius of Antioch (early 2nd century) does, that Rome "holds the presidency" among the other churches, and that, asIrenaeus (c. 2nd century) explains, "because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree" with Rome.[citation needed] They[clarification needed] are also clear on the fact that it isfull communion with Rome and thebishop of Rome that causes one to be in communion with the Catholic Church.[citation needed] This displays a recognition that, asCyprian of Carthage (3rd century) puts it, Rome is "the principal church, in which sacerdotal unity has its source."[2] Most of these references were to theentire Church of Rome as such, not necessarily to the bishop of Rome in his person, but after the role of the pope emerged, the church and its bishop became interpreted in a synonymous way.[citation needed]
By the time of theFirst Council of Nicaea in 325, themetropolitan bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome had a role of the greatest importance in the selection. Canon 6 of the council acknowledged and codified an ancient custom giving jurisdiction over large regions to the bishops of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch. Nicaea decreed that the consent of themetropolitan bishop was normally required:
Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also. Likewise in Antioch and the other provinces, let the Churches retain their privileges. And this is to be universally understood, that if any one be made bishop without the consent of the Metropolitan, the great Synod has declared that such a man ought not to be a bishop. If, however, two or three bishops shall from natural love of contradiction, oppose the common suffrage of the rest, it being reasonable and in accordance with the ecclesiastical law, then let the choice of the majority prevail.[3]
As part of the flourishing of culture and renewal under his reign, the EmperorCharlemagne commissioned one of the first major church-wide studies of the patristic era. This "golden age" orCarolingian Renaissance greatly influenced the identity of the Church. New texts were being discovered and disseminated at rapid pace in the late 700s and early 800s and patristic authorship became important for establishing a text's authority in Catholic theology. Unfortunately also at this time, a series of power struggles emerged between diocesan bishops and their metropolitans. As part of this struggle, a series of elaborate forgeries were produced, capitalizing on the cultural renaissance of the time and eagerness to discover new texts. ThePseudo-Isidorian Decretals asserted Roman papal power to depose and appoint bishops for the first time by deriving this power from forgeries of texts of the fathers of early church, interlaced with texts already known to be legitimate. Thesedecretals had an enormous influence concentrating power of the pope in the Middle Ages, and were not uncovered as forgeries until the 1500s or universally acknowledged to be forgeries until the 1800s.
Later, state authorities demanded their consent for the election of bishops. Inmedieval times, rulers demanded not only their consent to an election made by others but the right to choose the bishops directly. TheInvestiture Controversy changed that to some extent, but later concessions meant that many kings and other secular authorities exercised a right of appointment or at least of veto until the second half of the 20th century.
 |
| Papal primacy,supremacy andinfallibility |
|---|
Catholic episcopal councils compared to popes |
Existing dogma compared to popes |
Objections and controversy
|
For many years, the monarchs of the European states weighed in on the appointment of bishops.[4]: 144
In the early 19th century, state involvement in episcopal appointment was still so normal that, in spite of the opposition of the Church in Ireland to the proposedroyal veto of the appointment of bishops, the Holy See was prepared to grant it to theBritish king. As late as the 20th century,Franz Joseph I ofAustria-Hungary attempted to exercise the power ofjus exclusivae to veto the election ofMariano Rampolla as pope during the1903 papal conclave. The attempted veto was rejected by the conclave, but over the course of several ballots, Rampolla, who had been the leading candidate, lost support until the conclave elected Cardinal Giuseppe Sarto, who then becamePope Pius X. In his Constitution "Commissum Nobis" (1904), Pius X declared that the Apostolic See had never approved the civil veto, though previous legislation had not succeeded in preventing it, and he forbade any attempt to exercise it.[5]
It was in 1871 that a radical shift in law and practice began to take place. In that year theLaw of Guarantees gave the pope the right to choose the bishops of theKingdom of Italy, all 237 of them, appointments that through theunification of Italy had fallen into the hands of KingVictor Emmanuel II of Italy. Although the pope denounced the law, he nevertheless profited by it to appoint, within the first seven months that followed, 102 new Italian bishops.[6][7][8] Before the unification of Italy the various rulers made the appointments, with the pope doing so only for thePapal States. The1905 French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State had a similar effect for appointing bishops in the territories ruled by France. In the early 20th century, papal appointment of Catholic bishops was an almost universal practice except where, in virtue of theSpanishPatronato real and thePortuguesePadroado, the appointment of Catholic bishops remained in the hands of the civil authorities.
Thus the1917 Code of Canon Law was able to finally affirm that, in theLatin Church, the decision rests with thepope. In the course of the 20th century, remaining privileges enjoyed by secular authorities gradually diminished, especially since theSecond Vatican Council (1962–1965). A decree of the Second Vatican Council states, "Since the apostolic office of bishops was instituted by Christ the Lord and pursues a spiritual and supernatural purpose ... the right of nominating and appointing bishops belongs properly, peculiarly, and per se exclusively to the competent ecclesiastical authority."[4]: 145 The Council stated its wish that in the future, "no more rights or privileges of election, nomination, presentation, or designation for the office of bishop be granted to civil authorities."[4]: 144 This principle was incorporated into the1983 Code of Canon Law.[4]: 144
Canon 377 provides some flexibility by stating that the pope appoint bishops or "confirms those legitimately elected".[4]: 144 For example, this provides latitude for the bishops elected in most German dioceses, those elected in some parts of Austria and Switzerland, and accommodates the president of France's right to designate bishops forStrasbourg andMetz.[4]: 144
ArchbishopMarcel Lefebvre threatened to consecrate his own bishops in order to continue thetraditionalist movement.[4]: 145 Academic Paul P. Mariani writes that this likely impacted the decision to make the 1983 Code of Canon Law so detailed regarding appointing bishops.[4]: 145 In 1988,Pope John Paul II declared that Lefebvre had beenautomatically excommunicated forconsecrating four bishops that year without permission and despite John Paul II's express prohibition.[9]
Canon 401 §1 of the1983 Code of Canon Law states that archdiocesan/diocesan bishops (including cardinals) are requested to submit their resignation to the pope on reaching the age of 75 years. Some do so earlier with a view to having the resignation take effect immediately on reaching 75. Bishops should also offer their resignation if ill-health or other grave problems render them unsuited for fulfilling their office.[10] The letter of resignation goes first to theapostolic nuncio orapostolic delegate, the pope's representative in the country or region. He forwards it to whichever department of theHoly See has particular responsibility for the selection of bishops for the country in question: theDicastery for Evangelization in the case of mission countries, theDicastery for the Eastern Churches in the case of evenLatin bishops in certain Middle Eastern countries and Greece, theSecretariat of State if the country's government has been given the right to present objections of "a general political nature" (not of a party-political kind) or is involved in some other way, but generally theDicastery for Bishops. The congregation presents the bishop's offer of resignation to the pope, who has a range of options from rejecting the offer of resignation to accepting it with immediate effect. In the case of diocesan bishops who have reached 75 years of age, the usual decision is to accept the resignation but with effect only from the date of publication of the appointment of a successor, a decision known as acceptancenunc pro tunc (now for then).
If the resignation is accepted with immediate effect, theepiscopal see becomes vacant on publication of the pope's decision. Vacancy of a see may also occur because of a bishop's transfer to another see or position, or because of his death. In the case of anunc pro tunc acceptance, the see does not become vacant immediately, but the process that leads to the appointment of a successor begins without delay.
One important element in selecting a bishop is the list of priests, of both thediocesan and thereligious clergy, that the bishops of the ecclesiastical province or the wholeepiscopal conference judge to be suitable generically (without reference to any particular see) for appointment as bishops. They are required to draw up this list at least once every three years, so that it is always recent.[11]
When it comes to a concrete appointment for a particular see, the papal representative (apostolic nuncio or delegate) asks either the outgoing bishop, or in case of asede vacante, thevicar general ordiocesan administrator, to draw up a report on its situation and the needs. That person will be the bishop who has presented his resignation or, if the see is vacant, the diocesan administrator orapostolic administrator. The papal representative is also obliged to consult themetropolitan archbishop and the other bishops of the province, the president of the bishops conference, and at least some members of thecollege of consultors and thecathedral chapter. He may also consult others, whether clergy, diocesan or religious, and "lay persons of outstanding wisdom".[12][13]
Canon law insists on enabling those consulted to provide information and express their views confidentially, requiring that they be consulted "individually and in secret".[14] Accordingly, when theIrish Times of 12 April 2007 published the text of the letter with which ArchbishopGiuseppe Lazzarotto,Apostolic Nuncio to Ireland, consulted certain priests on the choice of their next bishop, he said, "All aspects relating to the process of episcopal appointments should be dealt with in the strictest confidentiality. I trust that you will understand that I cannot depart from this practice."
The nuncio then decides on a short list, orterna, of three candidates for further investigation and seeks precise information on each of them. Since if it were widely known that a priest who was not the one who was finally chosen for the post had been under consideration, people might think he had been excluded because of some fault found in him, the nuncio will ask those consulted about individual candidates to observe the strictest confidentiality on the fact of the consultation. He will then send to the Holy See a list of the (usually) three candidates that seem to be the most appropriate for consideration, together with all the information that has been gathered on them and accompanying the information with the conclusions that he himself draws from the evidence.[15]
The qualities that a candidate must have are listed in canon 378 §1. As well as being at least 35 years old and a priest for at least 5 years, he should be "outstanding in strong faith, good morals, piety, zeal for souls, wisdom, prudence and human virtues", and should possess the other qualities needed for fulfilling the office in question; and he should be well versed in sacred Scripture, theology and canon law and, preferably, hold a doctorate in one of these fields. Moreover, according to ancient tradition bishops are always to be celibate and exceptions are not granted (this is not generally an issue as Roman Catholics priests are required to be celibate but it happens inpersonal ordinariates for former Anglicans: should a married priest be appointed an ordinary of an ordinariate he isn't consecrated bishop and rules the ordinariate as a priest).
The Dicasteries of theRoman Curia responsible for the appointment (one of the four indicated above) studies the documentation provided by the nuncio, taking into consideration his opinion, but not necessarily accepting it. It might even reject all the candidates he has proposed and ask him to prepare another list, or it might ask him to provide more information on one or more of the individuals who have already been presented. When the congregation decides on which person should be appointed, the list and the related conclusions are presented to the pope, asking him to make the appointment.[16] If he agrees, the papal act is communicated to the nuncio for him to obtain the consent of the individual to his appointment and to choose a date for its publication. The newly appointed bishop is obliged to get episcopal consecration within three months of the arrival of thepapal bull of his appointment, which is usually prepared at least a month after the publication. If the consecration takes place within the diocese, he takes charge immediately. If it occurs elsewhere, a separate act is required, after the consecration, for taking possession of his new post.[17] Bringing the process to a conclusion requires much time, usually taking at least nine months, and it may on occasion take up to two years.
The procedure described above is the normal one for the appointment of a diocesan bishop. In the case of anauxiliary bishop, the diocesan bishop chooses the three priests to be presented for the appointment, but the nuncio still has the duty of gathering information and opinions on the candidates, and the congregation can either select one of them or ask for a different list of candidates to be presented.[18]
In some countries, the diocesanchapter or some other body decides on the three names to send, through the nuncio, to the Holy See. With the names, the nuncio sends the information he has gathered on the candidates. If none of the three candidates is acceptable to the Holy See, the chapter is asked for another list. However, the Holy See can reject the list in its entirety and appoint someone not proposed by the chapter.[19] In other cases the cathedral chapter chooses the bishop from among a list of three presented to them by the Holy See.[20]
The chapter participates in the election of bishops of 13 of the 27 German dioceses (Aachen,Cologne,Essen,Freiburg,Fulda,Hildesheim,Limburg,Mainz,Münster,Osnabrück,Paderborn,Rottenburg-Stuttgart,Trier), 3 Swiss dioceses (Basel,Chur,Sankt Gallen), and 1 Austrian (Salzburg).[21]
For thepersonal ordinariates established under theapostolic constitutionAnglicanorum Coetibus,[22] out of respect for the synodal tradition of Anglicanism, the ordinary will be appointed by the Roman pontiff from aterna of names presented by the governing council (CN Art. 4 § 1)[23]
In the past, privileges regarding the appointment of bishops were granted to kings and other civil authorities. In accordance with the decision of theSecond Vatican Council,[24] the 1983 Code of Canon Law lays down that "for the future, no rights or privileges of election, appointment, presentation or designation of Bishops are conceded to civil authorities."[25] In about a dozen countries, the civil government still has the right of consultation or even of presentation.[26]
There are 23Eastern Catholic Churches totalling about 20 million people that are in communion with theHoly See but their liturgy and other practices are different. Apatriarchal Eastern Catholic church itself elects its bishops who are to serve within its own territory, but other bishops are appointed by the pope.[27] Before the election of a bishop, the patriarchal synod considers the names proposed by its members and draws up a list of those it considers to be valid candidates for episcopacy; this is communicated to the pope and any name for which he refuses his assent is removed from the list.[28] When the synod then comes to elect a bishop, no further procedure is required if the person chosen is on the list; but if he is not on the list, the assent of the pope is needed before asking the newly elected to accept his election.[29] The same arrangement holds for a Church headed by amajor archbishop.[30] In the official bulletins and news media of the Holy See, these appointments are published as decisions of the Eastern Church in question, not of the pope. The procedure for appointing bishops of other Eastern Churches and those bishops of patriarchal and major archiepiscopal Churches who are to serve outside the territory of the Church in question is similar to that for Latin bishops, and the appointments are published as acts of the pope.
A recurring issue in thebilateral relationship between the Holy See and the People's Republic of China is the procedure for appointing bishops inmainland China.[31]: 180 Since the 1950s, theChinese government's position is that bishops in China should be elected by Chinese Catholics through theChinese Catholic Patriotic Association (CCPA).[31]: 180 The patriotic church's position is that this practice is consistent with the election of bishops in the early history of the church.[4]: 144 The Vatican's position is that the appointment of bishops is the prerogative of the Pope.[31]: 180 The Vatican describes the ordination of the Chinese bishops asvalid but illicit.[31]: 184
In 2018, the Chinese government and the Holy See reached a provisional agreement on the appointment of bishops.[31]: 180 The provisional agreement, under which the CCPA recommends bishops and the Vatican may veto the recommendations, was renewed in 2022 and 2024.[32][33]
