FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Collegiality......can someone help me understand??
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
It seems to me that the Bishops in this country are using the term "collegiality" to ignore the Pope. It's obvious that he wants us to kneel for Holy Communion, to "allow generous usage of the Tridentine Mass", to obey the Church on matters such as ABC., to fight hard to end abortion, etc., etc. Still, kneeling to receive the Eucharist, receiving on the tongue, generous usage of the Mass of 1962 just aren't happening. The excuse that is often used is the "collegiality" of the Bishops??

Collegiality is defined as:: the cooperative relationship of colleagues; specifically : the participation of bishops in the government of the Roman Catholic Church in collaboration with the pope.  ???

Like everything else associated with the Spirit of Vatican II, what collegiality means is what the liberals want it to mean, right here, right now.

Also, a democracy is naturally resistant to changes of direction, especially if such changes require us to do hard things.  The USCCB is a democracy.

This is what "collegiality" was designed to do.  No one should be surprised or disappointed.

We should be angry, and fight and pray for an end to such nonsense.  C'est tout.
AFAIK, the original point was to emphasize the responsibility of the bishops over the local Church i.e. the Pope shouldn't have to write an encyclical or make investigations every time there's a local issue. The supervision of local bishops and synods should be sufficient for addressing the majority of concerns. There's nothing wrong with this idea, as far as I can tell, since that's standard practice in the eastern Churches (and was in the West pre-Reformation). But like most things since Vatican II, it's been falsely used to undermine the status of the Pope and to promote the idea that the Church should be governed by majority consent.
(05-11-2012, 02:05 PM)Marchy Wrote: [ -> ]AFAIK, the original point was to emphasize the responsibility of the bishops over the local Church i.e. the Pope shouldn't have to write an encyclical or make investigations every time there's a local issue. The supervision of local bishops and synods should be sufficient for addressing the majority of concerns. There's nothing wrong with this idea, as far as I can tell, since that's standard practice in the eastern Churches (and was in the West pre-Reformation). But like most things since Vatican II, it's been falsely used to undermine the status of the Pope and to promote the idea that the Church should be governed by majority consent.

And therein lies the heart of the problem >:( And I contend it was no accident that so much of this anti-catholic nonsense has blossomed after Vatican II,  that's because its seeds were cleverly planted in the ambiguous wording of so many of its documents.
(05-11-2012, 02:05 PM)Marchy Wrote: [ -> ]AFAIK, the original point was to emphasize the responsibility of the bishops over the local Church i.e. the Pope shouldn't have to write an encyclical or make investigations every time there's a local issue. The supervision of local bishops and synods should be sufficient for addressing the majority of concerns. There's nothing wrong with this idea, as far as I can tell, since that's standard practice in the eastern Churches (and was in the West pre-Reformation). But like most things since Vatican II, it's been falsely used to undermine the status of the Pope and to promote the idea that the Church should be governed by majority consent.

So, one more abuse. Collegiality is defined as:: the cooperative relationship of colleagues; specifically : the participation of bishops in the government of the Roman Catholic Church in collaboration with the pope.  Basically, collegiality means nothing unless decisions are made the bishops [u]in COLLABORATION (& agreement) with the Pope.[/u]

"Collegiality (chapter III) (Lumen Gentium)
The third chapter of the document, which spoke of the bishops as a "college"[2] that, within the Church, succeeds[3] to the place of the "college" or "stable group" of the apostles[4] and is "the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church, provided we understand this body together with its head, the Roman Pontiff".[5]
Conservative bishops in the Council were fearful that the idea of the College of Bishops would be interpreted as a new conciliarism, a fifteenth-century idea that an ecumenical council was the supreme authority under Christ in the Catholic Church. Of the members of the Council, 322, a minority, but a substantial minority, voted against any mention whatever in the document of a "college" of bishops),[6] and were now proposing 47 amendments to chapter III.[7][8]

I have seen Catholics do exactly what the Conservative Bishops were afraid of. I've seen them argue forever that Vatican II was "infallible".