Improving the bishop-priest relationship

Catholic priests should be treated like close family by their Ordinary. What is not mentioned here is the important safeguards that Catholic Priests enjoy as Parish Priests. For example, the Bishop is required to seek approval of the Parish Priest before undertaking a visit. Christ is risen! Alleluia! Alleluia!

As long as bishops act as if their primary responsibility is to represent the mind of the Vatican and priests simply conceive of themselves as representing their bishop, the Church will not function in a healthy manner. What is needed is the far more difficult task of the bishop representing the people of his diocese to the national Church and the Vatican as well as representing them to his people. Parish priests must know their people well enough and take seriously the fact that the Spirit also speaks through them to represent them before the bishop as well as representing the bishop to their people. The fact that the people of a diocese have very little to say about who are their priests, not to mention who is their bishop, makes the responsbility of two way communication and representation very difficult to realize.

Bishops need to PAY consultants to tell them they should visit their priests in the hospital? Whatever happened to the corporal works of mercy?
Instead of organizing presidential boycotts and anti-condom crusades, they should be home taking care of business. But when will the Vatican INVESTIGATE bishops the way they are planning to rake the LCWR over the coals?

"Most priests view their bishop as supportive and understanding." This is not really the case with most priests from the Archdiocese of Boston, New York, Chicago and San Francisco, to name a few of the many dioceses that I personally have knowledge of. Yes, there are some good bishops, but to claim that most priests view their bishops as supportive and trusted by their priests is not backed up by facts. The morale of most priests is so low as a result of mistrust of their bishops that I question if it can ever be repaired without massive correction of the abuses of power and misuse of authority. Until popes, cardinals, bishops and priests have wives and families of their own, the clerical state will be unhealthy and unnatural. Very few bishops have courage to stand up and challenge this state of decay the Church faces. A few have tried and have been silenced. I believe the institutional Church as we know it must be rebuilt from the ground up. I think we are witnessing the end of a very corrupt power structure that no longer mirrors the Church Christ wants. The sooner, the better!

I think the number one disruptive force in a presbyterate is when priests openly go against their promises of respect and obedience. Whether they agree with the bishop or not, the fact that some priests would publicly denounce the bishop or use passive-aggressive tactics is simply a scandal.

The root of the problem is that bishops more often than not are outsiders appointed by a distant bureaucracy that in its appointment-making is more concerned with the hierarchical pecking order than the peculiarities and needs of the dioceses.

The clergy has to stop reading their own press releases.

Improve the bishop-priest relationship. You have to be kidding. What priest is going to tell a bishop anything unless he is an old priest and ready to retire or a young priest and is ready to pack his bags for Alaska. Bishops live in a world of their own. It reminds me of a joke. A Postal Inspector visits a Postmaster and says,I'm here to help you, and the Postmaster replies, I'm happy to see you. Both are liars. The area that needs improvement is between parishioners and bishops/priests. Pastors of a parish also have that bishop complex. My door is always open ( but my mind is alwAYS closed) This is my kingdom. How many bishop and priest , for that matter, ever discus with their parishoners, how much money is being budgeted for financial settlements, or how many sex abuse cases are they still dealing with.These subjects are never openly discussed.It's as if, if you don't talk about it it will go away and we don't have to get into this openness and accountability thing. I know, that's not what the subject was. But is it ewver?????

Why do priests have to swear to obey their bishops in the first place? Did Jesus EVER tell his disciples to swear to obey him? What about Peter's denial of him or Judas' turning him over to the authorities? No obediency there and Jesus seemed to handle it just fine. Swearing obedience just leads to corruption in power.

And I agree with John-Otto Liljenstolpe above who said priests need to let the bishops know what the people say so he can tell Rome what we think. Somehow in this article, it seems the laity has been left out of the loop again!

Bishops need to develop more sophisticated understanding about the political concept of "...consent of the governed." If they are not accepted as "governors" worthy of allegiance, they will not be successful.

St. Peter was married as were most of the apostles, both male and female, chosen by Jesus. When Chris Smith mentions the clergy should be given permission to be married, he is correct. He states what Jesus did: Jesus had married apostles/disciples: both male and female.

People who leave out the reality that marriage was fine according to Jesus , well, those people are not being in line with Jesus.

If the Church in Rome is getting this wrong, that is, insisting on celibacy, the Church should be corrected. Jesus did not choose an unmarried apostleship. Even his newest recruits like Samaritan woman and Junia, and Andronicus etc. were married. Married.

How can some still cling to 'celibacy only' idea when the NT clearly shows this is not how Jesus had the church, and in Paul's time too, most of the apostles too were married. Peter's son is Mark. That's not celibacy.

Listening to the laity and having the laity truly involved, I agree, is what should be happening too, as another poster points out. Jesus sure was alert to the people, the laity. Jesus listened, asked of , talked to, granted the requests of the people, the laity.

Plenty of reforms needed in the Church for it to be authentic to Jesus, God and Holy Spirit. Great reflections made by many here! Jesus and God told us to use our minds too and our discernment and our integrity. Married clergy and laity to fully participate, not be ignored and dismissed by bishops, cardinals, archbishops, priests, popes. Because some clergy and some parishioners choose to ignore what Jesus said and did, the RC church is not like the church of Jesus at all and that drives Catholics away. What a difference it would be if the RC church become more authentic to the teachings and traditions of the NT, God and Jesus, Holy Spirit. Married clergy and both male, female clergy because Jesus chose married women and married men as his apostles. That's the truth of the NT.

After the way bishops have behaved over the past six years, showing themselves for the most part to be venal and self-serving bureaucrats beholden more to lawyers, insurance companies and the media than to their "flock," any priest would have to be out of his mind to trust any of them. They would throw any priest under the bus without the slightest hesitation to preserve those dunce caps on their heads and t keep that big stick in their hands. In general, they are mediocre climbers whose ambition has been stoked via the Roman old boys network and has produced little more than passive dependent dress-up dolls than anything remotely resembling Gospel leadership.

Having worked with a number of priests (and also having seen a number of bishops close up in action), I believe that a number of folks who posted under this topic are pretty well on target (John-Otto Liljenstolpe,Sylvester,Tomasso Tucson,crackedearthenvessel, and Joe Magaratz).

I believe that there needs to be an actual prep time to get ready to assume a new position for both priests and bishops. When a pastoral associate has been on different parishes for awhile and seems to be able to assume pastoral duties fairly well (even in a excellent fashion), he is eventually appointed pastor. Absolutely, he has learned much by being around other experienced priests--the pastors he has worked with (and under). But he needs, perhaps, prep sessions---preparing him to go to that parish where he will be assigned. He needs to know about the finances---yes, of course. But there is so much more. Public speaking skills (which should have been taught in the seminary), how to be a good pastor---'bed-side manners for pastors', and the complexion of the SPECIFIC parish of which he's going to be pastor. It is not, "If you've seen one parish, you've seen them all"----common mistake of many in-coming pastors---experienced or not.

It is the same with bishops. Where is there a "Bishops' Training Program"? It doesn't exist. And to say, 'Well, we never had them and we don't need them' is simply ridiculous! We need them now more than ever. Leadership roles are growing more and more complex each and every year. A training retreat is crucial---time to pray---time to reflect---time to up-date pastoral skills---speaking skills---listening skillls---understanding the problems, needs, of this particular diocese---working closely with pastors and priests---and the people---is essential.

I truly believe that 'grace builds on nature' and the nature needs to be receptive to God's grace, and willing to grow and learn. Once one believes that "I know it all, have seen it all, I know better, I have the authority" hardness of heart, cloudy vision, and ultimate failure of ministry is in store.

The great Spanish painter, Goya, (who was certainly no saint), did manage to gain much wisdom in his long, convuluted life. His last painting was a self-portrait. He painted himself as the old man that he was---walking toward the distance and toward a beautiful light. At the bottom of the painting, he wrote, "I continue to learn, to grow". It is a wonderful reminder that learning and growth are absolutely essential in life, and more so in ministry.

Bishops cover up, conceal, and hide from the people of God the fact they have allowed priests who sexually abused and raped children to continue their ministry by removing them from one parish and assigning them to another in a cycle that in which the same behavior just continues. The cowardly anonymous posters in this thread think people who question and observe the lack of trust between priest and bishop should therefore be excommunicated? Give us all a break. Oh, please! Grow up. The church Christ wants does not require his followers to be celibate. None of the original apostles
were. St. Peter, the first symbolic bishop of Rome had a wife as did many other apostles. The first thousand years of the Catholic Church's history, its' popes, bishops and priests had wives and a healthier human sexuality because many of them also had children and families. The ignorance of Catholic church history by these anonymous posters is just too much. The hierarchical system of the Church is in a final state of decay. It is no longer possible to observe this dysfunctional system of top down power and call it anything but corrupt and unworthy to be Christ's representative shepherds here on this good Earth. The Imperial Roman model is hardly what Christ envisioned as his Church. Women should also be represented in every ministry including that of bishop of Rome. The dirty little secrets of the bishops are no longer secret. We know.