This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1hf22
From CNS: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1403071.htm
The Ents of Rome are finally moving on this, which is good.
The comments at the end, which I think are from a while ago but I missed, are interesting in a more general sense:
Bishop Arrieta had said the current Code of Canon Law, promulgated in 1983, was written with such an emphasis on the role of the individual bishop in his local diocese that each bishop bore the full weight of deciding when and how to intervene and what sort of sanction or punishment to impose on the guilty.
The law ended up being too vague, and church sanctions were being applied so haphazardly, that the church appeared to be divided, he said.
Subsidiarity only applies at the lowest level possible, if the common good can be served without going higher up.
The Ents of Rome are finally moving on this, which is good.
The comments at the end, which I think are from a while ago but I missed, are interesting in a more general sense:
Bishop Arrieta had said the current Code of Canon Law, promulgated in 1983, was written with such an emphasis on the role of the individual bishop in his local diocese that each bishop bore the full weight of deciding when and how to intervene and what sort of sanction or punishment to impose on the guilty.
The law ended up being too vague, and church sanctions were being applied so haphazardly, that the church appeared to be divided, he said.
Subsidiarity only applies at the lowest level possible, if the common good can be served without going higher up.
2John5918
Subsidiarity only applies at the lowest level possible, if the common good can be served without going higher up.
My understanding of subsidiarity is slightly different. I would say that it applies at the appropriate level rather than the lowest level. Now in practice that has often meant an emphasis on the lowest level in the face of the centralising tendencies of higher authorities, but I don't think "lowest level" is the definition of subsidiarity.
My understanding of subsidiarity is slightly different. I would say that it applies at the appropriate level rather than the lowest level. Now in practice that has often meant an emphasis on the lowest level in the face of the centralising tendencies of higher authorities, but I don't think "lowest level" is the definition of subsidiarity.
3hf22
>2 John5918:
I would have thought lowest appropriate level? With serving the common good being the measure of appropriate? There certainly seemed to be a bias to decentralising in the Social Doctrine Compendium.
But this is your area - I am guided by your knowledge on this one.
I would have thought lowest appropriate level? With serving the common good being the measure of appropriate? There certainly seemed to be a bias to decentralising in the Social Doctrine Compendium.
But this is your area - I am guided by your knowledge on this one.
4John5918
>3 hf22: I wouldn't object to lowest appropriate level, which is not the same as lowest level.
Join to post
