Last couple of days, I thought I heard several church officials use the terms archbishop and cardinal, as well as archbishop and bishop, interchangeably. I also thought I heard someone refer to the Pope as bishop.
How many bishops are there worldwide? Does a cardinal exercise much influence over archbishops and bishops?
All cardinals are bishops, but only a few bishops are cardinals. The Pope appoints all bishops and cardinals.
They’re all administrators of various sorts. But cardinals are the highest ranking ones. They are usually in charge of a very large archdiocese or hold an important administrative position in the Vatican.
The major difference between a bishop and an archbishop is the size of the diocese they oversee. Large ones (such as New York and Los Angeles) are called Archdioceses. The top guy is by definition, an archbishop. He will have associate bishops who will look after other parts of the administration of the archdiocese. These guys are just bishops.
Smaller dioceses, for example, in Southern California, are run by a bishop.
The most important archbishops heading up by the largest archdioceses eventually become cardinals. L.A., NY, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington for example. But it’s not automatic.
Someone will have a clearer definition sooner.
Every Cardinal and Archbishop is a Bishop.
A Bishop’s job is to be the ecclesiastical authority and chief pastor for a diocese. There are a couple of things that only he can do: confirm and ordain, and a number of things left to his proper discretion, ranging from approving interfaith marriages in Catholicism to consecrating chrism.
Historically, the dioceses over which bishops preside are grouped together into provinces, AKA archdioceses, each with an archbishop. The archbishop has some authority over the bishops in his province. (There are two slightly contradictory uses of the term archdiocese: it can be synonymous with province, meaning the half dozen dioceses over which an archbishop has authority; or it can mean the diocese of which the archbishop is the bishop – since he is an archbishop, it’s an archdiocese. Anglicans always use it the first way, as Catholicism historically did; contemporary Catholic usage tends to mean the second way.) [Aside: Eastern Rite Catholics and Eastern Orthodox have Metropolitans which are exactly the same thing as Archbishops; it’s merely a different term used in churches of the Eastern tradition.]
A Cardinal is a Bishop, nearly always an Archbishop, who has been named as one of the “Princes of the Church” in Catholicism. He gets an honorary title relative to one of the churches in Rome, the right to wear the red hat and clerical garb, and a certain amount of authority relative to the church as a worldwide whole, most especially the right to vote for a new Pope.
They’re all doing the job of a bishop, but some have additional duties and an additional honorific in token of that.
There are a couple of odd and confusing details to how Catholicism does things, though:
There’s a longstanding tradition that ties a bishop to a city over which he has episcopal authority, so the rule is one bishop per city. However, this runs up against the fact that some dioceses really need two or more bishops. So if a suffragan bishop is named to assist the Bishop of, say, Kansas City, his job and his office are there in Kansas City, but to preserve the one bishop/one city distinction, he is named Titular Bishop of Ancient-City-in-the-Moslem-World-that-used-to-be-a-see-city. The incumbent Bishop of Ogdensburg, NY, used to be the suffragan of the Bishop of Buffalo, and was at that time Titular Bishop of Hippo Regius, in succession to St. Augustine.
Then there’s the Archbishop ad personam, which simply means that somebody “deserves” to be elevated to Archbishop in the Pope’s estimation, but there’s no Archdiocese open that needs him. So he remains bishop of one diocese, but is officially designated as archbishop, by way of promotion.
The Pope is, among other things, Bishop of Rome; he’s head of that (arch-)diocese, though 99% of the work of episcopating over that diocese is delegated to other bishops. (Before his health failed, John Paul used to, every so often, go out and hear confessions, celebrate Mass, and/or do confirmations in Rome, giving real meaning to that tradition, another of the things for which he was beloved by Catholics.)
It’s not customary but not improper to refer to an Archbishop or a Cardinal as Bishop X; he remains a bishop, just one with additional dignities.
A Cardinal in and of himself, by the way, has no authority over Bishops or Archbishops except the ones in his own archdiocese. But he may have a churchwide job that gives him some authority over all Catholics, as in being one of the people whom the Pope depends on to review and approve annulments, the ordination of converted clergy, etc.
Final oddball point. The term Patriarch may come up. There were originally five Patriarchs, in Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Rome, and Ephesus. The one at Ephesus was early transferred to Constantinople. One of the Pope’s other titles is Patriarch of the West. However, the number of Patriarchates grew over the years: several of the national churches of Orthodoxy have Patriarchs, including notably the Russian Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow. And as Eastern Rites were created or returned to Catholicism, Patriarchs were recognized, so that Alexandria, for example, has three Patriarchs, one for the Coptic Orthodox, one for the Eastern Orthodox, and one for the Eastern Rite Catholics. In addition there are a very few Archbishops who have that dignity in the Western Church: Venice and I think Milan have Patriarchs, and there may be another one.
One more point: Sacramentally, there are three levels of clergy in the RCC: Deacons, priests, and bishops. A layman receives the Sacrament of Holy Orders to become a deacon, a deacon receives a different form of the same sacrament to become a priest, and a priest receives the sacrament again to become a bishop. No sacrament is needed, however, to make an Archbishop, Cardinal, or Pope (assuming that the person was already a bishop, as is almost always the case). Looked at another way, any sacrament the Pope can perform, any bishop can perform. This is why the Pope is sometimes referred to as a bishop, but almost never referred to as an archbishop or cardinal: The category of “bishop” has more significance.
The way my college professor described all this is that there are only three ranks in the Catholic church–deacons, priest, and bishop–and everything else–archbishop, cardnal, pope–is a job, that overlays that. Just like in the military, you have to have a certain level of rank to be eligible for certain jobs, but the job is independent of the rank. And theoretically, if you really want to give someone a job that they haven’t the rank for, you can accelerate their rank pretty quick (as happened in the seventh/eighth centuries when the selected member of whatever Roman family came out on top in the papal succession squabbles were ordained as priests and then bishops and then installed as Popes in a three day whirlwind).
Minor clarification.
Although the bishop is the ordinary minister of confirmation…the bishop can delegate that duty to a priest in certain situations
(I’m not sure if a bishop is considered a “ordinary minister of ordination”, meaning that in special circumstances, with papal approval…someone other than a bishop could do the ordination. In reality of course…the number of ordinations pales in comparison to the number of confirmations in a diocese, so I can’t imagine a scenario where a bishop wouldn’t be doing the ordinations)
Just a side note.
There are a few (very few) Cardinals who are not specifically bishops (i.e., they don’t have pastoral duties) but are the head of their orders. I have heard the terms Cardinal Bishop (for a pastoral position) and Cardinal Abbot (for a non-pastor) but I’m pretty sure those are anachronisms.
No clue about Cardinal Abbots – presumably the Abbot who is head of the Benedictines or the Carmelites or whoever, and who has been red-hatted – but Cardinal Bishops are still very much a part of the Vatican hierarchy.
Briefly, the terms “Cardinal Deacon,” “Cardinal Priest,” and “Cardinal Bishop” may be misleading, but do have meaning. All Cardinals are, of course bishops, and probably Archbishops. But the three subdivisions of the Cardinalate do have significance.
The seven Cardinal Bishops are the heads of the seven “suburban sees” – the historical bishoprics based in what were seven communities then a short distance from Rome, now part of the metropolitan area. Needless to say, these are not large dioceses nor are they particularly strenuous to be the bishop of. So they are often the places of honor for a wise Cardinal who needs to step down from a major metropolitan see somewhere in the world but not retire fully. They are considered the Pope’s suffragan bishops.
The Cardinal Deacons are the men who are the heads of the Vatican Congregations, i.e., the major departments of the Vatican as the “home office” for Catholicism. There are six of them, IIRC. The theory here is that, just as deacons perform specific ministries under a bishop out in the dioceses worldwide, the Cardinal Deacons are the Pope’s assistants in managing the ministries entrusted to him, such as the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith. The Cardinal Deacons, though consecrated bishops, do not act as bishops of a given place; their responsibility is to the worldwide church.
The rest of the Cardinals are Cardinal Priests. Although their full-time work is to be Archbishop of New York, Sao Paulo, Manila, Toledo, Warsaw, or whatever, they each are assigned an honorary title as a priest in one of the historic churches in Rome. Each makes a point to visit and celebrate Mass at their titular church while in Rome on official business.
Hence every Cardinal is simultaneously a part of the hierarchy of the Diocese of Rome and a responsible leader of the worldwide Catholic Church.
How many religious orders are there in the Catholic Church? I can’t find a list in the Wikipedia.
Also – what about monsignors? What are they?
Another question: I’ve heard there’s something called a “papal nobility,” persons whom the pope, as a sovereign prince, has ennobled with the title of count or whatever. Is that still done? Can papal nobles pass their titles along to their heirs? Do they have some role in the Church government, or is it purely honorary, like a knighthood in the UK?
I’ve noticed that Pope John Paul II traditionally wore white robes, but occasionally green. Does the green have symbolic importance?
I have also seen cardinals wearing both red and black robes. Any explanations?
All I know about Monsignors is that when Bishop Dingman of Des Moinse, IA was bishop (he confirmed me, a really funny and great man, he once was kidnapped by a gunman and talked him out of it, he refused to live in the mansion of the diocese and was involved in peace issues in C.America and US family farms) he didn’t allow any monsignors to be “made.” After he retired, or died I don’t recall, they began again. So, I assume bishops must have say-so over appointing the title Msgr even if not final decision on it: maybe they can only recommend to the Vatican? The Msgr’s I’ve run into were usually administrators (or had been) of large projects and had more advanced education than your usual priest. I guess it’s a you’ll-not-likely-be-bishop consolation prive for older high up admin priests or good job award for slightly younger ones (I’ve never met a young Msgr).
The Anglican Church of Canada uses the term Metropolitans as well, as the name of the administrative office held by the archbishop who heads up the ecclesiasticla provinces, of which there are four: Canada (i.e. - southern Quebec and the Atlantic); Ontario; Rupert’s Land (prairie provinces, NWT, Nunavut, Northern Quebec) and B.C. (B.C. and Yukon).
See this map that an old friend of mine put together.
Anyone have an answer?
There are four standard colors that priests wear during the mass.
Green is worn during “ordinary time”
Purple is worn during Lent and Advent, it represents penance.
Gold or White is worn during Christmas, Easter, Feast Days, and Holy Days.
Red is worn special Feast Days and Holy Days throughout the year but I don’t know which ones or why.
Papal nobles can pass their titles down to their children. However, Pope Paul VI removed their privileges, and new titles aren’t commonly given anymore.
In 2000, Bricker posted a highly detailed answer to a question about Ranks of priests in Catholic church.
White is the pope’s non-liturgical color, and I guess if you saw him in green it was in liturgical dress during ordinary time.
The cardinals wear red as non-liturgical color. If you see any black vestments it would be for a funeral, and even that’s quite rare. White is now the color of choice for funeral vestments, according to my pastor.
The best answer is “a lot”. Here is a list on Wikipedia of many of them, but it’s not complete.
Monsignor is pretty much just an honorary title at the priest level - there aren’t any additional duties or authority vested with it. The ones I’ve known have generally been older priests who’d served for a long time, and had received the designation as a sort of thank you. I believe the designation is done on a diocesan level.
Thanks for the link…it seems to have cleared up my earlier question about who can be a minister of ordination.