what makes a "bishop" better than a "priest"?

[christianmomof3]

I read an article today about some Catholic bishops being ordained and the article said

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Catholics believe bishops are inspired descendants of Peter, one of Jesus' original 12 apostles.[/FONT][/FONT]

[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]which made me wonder about the whole heirarchical system of leadership in the RCC and some other groups. [/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Were these guys not inspired descendants of Peter when they were just priests? [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Is it the ordination process that makes them that?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]And if so, are just plain old priests not inspired decendants of Peter?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]And then what do they get to be next as they move up the ladder of holiness?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]And what are all the ranks and why are they necessary?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Who really decides all of that? The article said that "Rome" decided these guys got to move up to a higher position.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Who is "Rome"? [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Is it just the Pope?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Or all of the officials at the Vatican?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Or is there a bishop electing committee?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Do they have to be old to move up?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Do they get paid more when they are promoted?[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Do they have to take classes and pass tests or perhaps perform miracles or something?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Do they have different costumes or uniforms or whatever you call them for the different ranks?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Do the other groups who have heirarchical leadership do things the same way or differently? [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, sans-serif][/FONT]​

 

[Rhamiel]

In the Latin Rite, the Bishop picks who he wants to replace him, from among the priests in his diocees, then the Pope approves of this and the priest is promoted to Bishop and the old Bishop retires
i do not think they have to pass tests
there are differant clothes,
I do not think they get paid more, they might, but they have the resourses of the entire Diocees at their disposal, but that is only to be used for officail stuff

 

[stormcloud]

The bishops are successors to the apostles and receive their authority through that succession by the laying on of hands.

As for being "better" than a priest, I wouldn't use that term. The duty of the bishops is to serve the priests who's duty, in turn, is to serve the laity. As Jesus taught, the last shall be first and the first shall be last. This idea of servitude was demonstrated by Christ himself when he washed the feet of the apostles at the last supper.

 

[ReadingForOrders]

In the Latin Rite, the Bishop picks who he wants to replace him, from among the priests in his diocees, then the Pope approves of this and the priest is promoted to Bishop and the old Bishop retires
i do not think they have to pass tests
there are differant clothes,
I do not think they get paid more, they might, but they have the resourses of the entire Diocees at their disposal, but that is only to be used for officail stuff

Do you live in the U.S.?

I've lived in 4 different Dioceses I've seen the elevation of 9 Bishops. None of the retiring Bishops had ever met their successor before the successor was chosen and none of them came from the Diocese they were elevated to serve. Not one.

 

[ReadingForOrders]

This might help a little

 

[JJM]

These are a bunch of questions. First I'd like to say that Roman Catholics do not consider Bishops to be the inspired descendants of Peter, rather they are the "descendants" all the Apostles. The difference between a Priest and a Bishop is on some level a difference of Degree. All of the Apostolic Church's are composes of local churches in communion with each other. Based on differences in ecclesiology this communion plays itself out differently but it remains a feature. These local churches are often called dioceses at least in the West. Each local church is headed by a Bishop. He is the Pastor of that Church and is the representative of Christ for that Church, the successor of the Apostles for that community. Under neither each Bishop (usually) is a number of priests. These priests then act as representatives of the Bishop, as dioceses are often too big for the Bishop to minister to everyone in particular (they are composed of many smaller parishes which might be in common parlance more often referred to as a church. I am not Roman Catholic and my diocese (or at least the one I am currently residing in) spans more than one state and we actually have a parish in Italy.) Priests while they may be able to perform sacraments while not under a bishop have no authority in their own right it is only from the Bishop that they gain their authority to teach. Moreover, only Bishops can ordain other clergy.

Bishops often to have other vestments (that is one word your looking for but it is just an anglicized version of the Latin word for clothes), and also different clothes they can wear outside of services (I don't know if there is a term for those, they might be called habits (ie what you live in)). In the West the big difference as far as I know is that a Bishop has a miter, Crosier, ring, yamaka (though they are often referred to as skull caps in Christian circles), and large pectoral cross.

How Bishops are chosen is different for different areas and churches. In this case Rome likely means either the Pope himself, or a delegate within the Vatican acting with the Pope's approval.

I think they do often get paid more, actually. The job is more demanding, they deserve it.

Can. 378 §1 3° within the western Roman Catholic Church says that he must be 35 or older, but this is merely a practical rule, it does not mean someone could not be ordained who was younger. A series of laws concerning the role of the Bishop in the western Roman Catholic Church can be found at Code of Canon Law - IntraText just hit the next button to scroll through.

For a more in depth analysis of the issue from the Roman Catholic perspective see Lumen Gentium Chapter III and also compare Presbyterorum Ordinis to Christus Dominus.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

A various points in Holy Scripture, there are greek terms refering respectively to a "episkopos," "presbuteros," and "diakonos;" translated directly from the ancient Koine Greek dialect into English they are: "Bishop," "priest," and "deacon." [In descending order].

 

[Old Catholic Man]

A various points in Holy Scripture, there are greek terms refering respectively to a "episkopos," "presbuteros," and "diakonos;" translated directly from the ancient Koine Greek dialect into English they are: "Bishop," "priest," and "deacon." [In descending order].

Episkopos and Presbuteros were used interchangeably in the New Testament. Most Roman Catholic Theologians believe that the two words did not take on a separate meanings until around 120 A.D. While I agree that in the three fold ministry it is not clear in Scripture.

From Catholic dot com (can't post links for some reason)

The term for bishop, episcopos ("overseer"), was also fluid in meaning. Sometimes it designated the overseer of an individual congregation (the priest), sometimes the person who was the overseer of all the congregations in a city or area (the bishop or evangelist), and sometimes simply the highest-ranking clergyman in the local church—who could be an apostle, if one were staying there at the time.

Although the terms "bishop," "priest," and "deacon" were somewhat fluid in the apostolic age, by the beginning of the second century they had achieved the fixed form in which they are used today to designate the three offices whose functions are clearly distinct in the New Testament.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

If one is under the count of fifty postings, then one is temporarily prohibited from posting website links, until one has reached the fifty post-mark. Such is one of the fora's regulations.

 

[Old Catholic Man]

If one is under the count of fifty postings, then one is temporarily prohibited from posting website links, until one has reached the fifty post-mark. Such is one of the fora's regulations.

Thank you!

T

 

[christianmomof3]

Episkopos and Presbuteros were used interchangeably in the New Testament. Most Roman Catholic Theologians believe that the two words did not take on a separate meanings until around 120 A.D. While I agree that in the three fold ministry it is not clear in Scripture.

From Catholic dot com (can't post links for some reason)

The term for bishop, episcopos ("overseer"), was also fluid in meaning. Sometimes it designated the overseer of an individual congregation (the priest), sometimes the person who was the overseer of all the congregations in a city or area (the bishop or evangelist), and sometimes simply the highest-ranking clergyman in the local church—who could be an apostle, if one were staying there at the time.

Although the terms "bishop," "priest," and "deacon" were somewhat fluid in the apostolic age, by the beginning of the second century they had achieved the fixed form in which they are used today to designate the three offices whose functions are clearly distinct in the New Testament.

Thank you for sharing that. It confirms what I was taught which was that bishops and priests were not separate "offices" or "positions" in the early church and that those separate distinctions and heirarchy were not developed until later. Therefore, when Paul was using those terms, he was not referring to the heirarchical system that now exists in the RCC and many other Christian religious groups nor was he referring to them as different "offices".

 

[Old Catholic Man]

Thank you for sharing that. It confirms what I was taught which was that bishops and priests were not separate "offices" or "positions" in the early church and that those separate distinctions and heirarchy were not developed until later. Therefore, when Paul was using those terms, he was not referring to the heirarchical system that now exists in the RCC and many other Christian religious groups nor was he referring to them as different "offices".

That isn't entirely true. Around the year 120 is pretty early in a Church over 2000 years old. Besides if it was clearly delineated by that time it was forming for decades before that. It is entirely possible that Paul was referring to the three fold ministry, the point isn't that he wasn't, the point is that he may not have been, and that only based upon Scripture. Holy Tradition testifies that the three fold ministry was clear even to the Apostles.

T