"I'm not the Boss!"
I'm not a Canon lawyer but as far as I understand it, the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster is NOT the "leader of the Catholic Church in England and Wales". Many media outlets but particularly the BBC nearly always refer to him as such - see here, for example. Although he is the only Cardinal in England and Wales [un-retired cardinal - thank you too an anonymous pedant in the comments box], he is not the Primate (as the Cardinal Archbishop of Armagh is the Primate of all Ireland). Vincent Nichols is the Chairman of the Bishop's Conference but that is an elected post and he was elected to it long before he was made a cardinal. Westminster, as with other Archbishoprics, has several suffragan sees, which give the Archbishop certain limited duties and responsibilities under certain circumstances, usually when something has gone seriously amiss (Canon 435ff). Canon 436 §3 says: The metropolitan has no other power of governance in the suffragan dioceses. Even a Primate has no authority over the faithful outside his own diocese: (Can. 438) The titles of patriarch and primate entail no power of governance in the Latin Church apart from a prerogative of honour unless in some matters the contrary is clear from apostolic privilege or approved custom.
As I understand it, each bishop is the sole authority in his diocese with the next step up being the Pope as his only line manager (to use modern parlance). Again, as I understand it, we are not a "national church" in that way. I guess that the all pervading conception of the bishops' conference idea is responsible for this way of understanding things. Thus, when an individual bishop wants to speak out on what seems "out of step" with the rest of the bishops' conference, he might be reluctant to do so. Obviously, it makes sense for bishops to co-operate in individual countries so that there might be common practice. But this doesn't always follow - in the practice of the age of Confession, Confirmation and Holy Communion for example. Such differences don't seem to make us fall apart.
I do wonder that someone doesn't formally make the BBC aware of its mistake and ask that Aunty Beeb tries to get it right in the future. Perhaps some Monseigneurial mandarin in the Department of Administrative affairs at Eccleston Square could find time to do that. I know that this isn't the most important thing in the world but it does lead to a misconception being propagated. I've certainly heard of folk saying they will "write to the Cardinal" when they haven't had the answer they wanted from their bishop.
8 comments:
He is the only Cardinal Elector in England and Wales but not the only Cardinal - Cormac is also a Cardinal.
When I watched an interview with Fr Christopher Jamison, OSB and asked, over twitter, why he had refered to the Cardinal as the head of the Church in England and Wales as it was theologically incorrect, he replied that that's what they'd been told to say by the bishop's conference.
But agree, it's horribly Westphalian, this attempt to build ridiculous 'national' Churches...
It should be His Eminence who puts the Beeb straight.
Perhaps he might say what Cdl Winning used to say when called the head of the Church in Scotland, "The only head we have is Jesus Christ!"
I always thought some face-less wonder in Eccleston Square ruled the roost! It certainly seem slike it at times.
Father: I know we now have the CBCEW, but has Si Qua Est of 1911 in which the Archbishop of Westminster became the of the English and Welsh Hierarchy been formally rescinded? See here or page 553 here.
True, of course, Father. But things could be worse…
It’s not that long ago that Fr. Paddy McSlattery, the irremovable PP of St. Fintan’s in Ballybog, would have been perceived as the ‘Head’ of the local church - bishops, Popes and Our Lord Himself notwithstanding. He was sovereign in his parish, his word having the force of law and any dissenters would be consigned to perdition.
So perhaps some progress has been made - but I don’t consider Bishops’ Conferences to be ‘progress’…
Please be assured, Father, that the BBC is quite well aware that Cardinal Nichols is not the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales. Getting this wrong is a way of showing contempt for the Church, just as references to Lord David Steele and Baroness Catherine Ashton are a way of showing contempt for the honours system. Of course, the latter contempt does not survive ennoblement, does it, Lord John Birt. (Brace yourself, my friends, for Lord Evan Davies.) Can you imagine the backtracking when Jock Leftie et al. line up at the Pearly Gates?
Post a Comment