The Vaticanisti comments on a proposal by Bishop Donal Wuerl of Pittsburgh that individual bishops should not talk publicly about Catholic politicians who dissent from non-negotiable Church teachings until they get permission from the USCCB.
In his article, Wuerl asks the following, “if it is decided by a bishop that there are sufficient grounds to refuse Communion to a person, given the interrelatedness of the dioceses in this country, should such a decision be finalized only in concert with the conference of bishops whose purpose is to provide some level of pastoral collaboration and coordination?”
I agree with Vaticanisti when he responds, “No!”
A bishop is not subsidiary to a national episcopal body. He is sovereign in his own diocese and must make decisions as pastor of his own flock, independent of what other bishops decide. He can’t simply defer his judgment to the collective. After all, how quickly can a bureaucracy respond to immediate need? Look at how quickly the USCCB has responded to the challenge of a pro-abortion Catholic US presidential candidate. They’re still dithering about a policy nearly a year after the election. This isn’t rocket science.
What it boils down to is that some bishops are upset that Archbishop Chaput, Bishop Burke, Bishop Sheridan and others put them in an awkward position of having to uphold the Church’s teaching while allowing them to hobnob with their Democrat buddies. It puts such a dint in the social calendar.