The Church Is All People of God

The Church is all the people of God – Episcopal Conferences and Pastoral Letters

Fr Clyde Muropa SJ

The recent pastoral letter by the Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops Conference (ZCBC), entitled The March is not Ended published in early August of 2020 attracted vitriol responses from the Zimbabwean government. The attack by the government on the person of the Archbishop of Harare, Robert Christopher Ndlovu, as president of the conference, is regrettable. Any attack on the bishops in general is still ill-advised, especially when the bishops are exercising their teaching authority. The first part of this article analyzes the “teaching authority” of bishops or episcopal conferences, and the second part addresses the role of

the papal nuncio as representative of the Apostolic See (the Church) or as ambassador of the Vatican City State or both. An episcopal conference or bishops conference “is a kind of assembly in which the bishops of some nation or region discharge their pastoral office in collaboration [the better] to promote the good which the Church offers to people, especially through forms and methods of apostolate carefully designated to meet contemporary conditions.” 1 The Church is the people of God. It is a hierarchical society headed by the bishops at the local level. 1. SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church, no. 38 The bishops exercise three functions; teaching, governing and sanctifying. By “teaching,” the bishops instruct the Christian faithful entrusted to their care. According to the law of the Church, the bishops as the authentic magisterium are the official and authoritative teachers and they teach in the name of the Church. Bishops exercise the magisterial function collegially as members of conference of bishops, particular councils and synods. The magisterial authority of bishops’ conferences is regulated by the 1998 letter issued motu proprio (on his own initiative) by Pope John Paul II, Apostolos sous. (1), in NORMAN P. TANNER, (ed.), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol. II, London, Sheed and Ward, 1990, 936.

“… at all times and in all places, the Church should have the true freedom to preach the faith, to proclaim its teaching about society, to carry out its task among men without hindrance, and to pass moral judgment even in the matters related to the political order, wherever the fundamental rights of man or the salvation of souls requires it” (Gaudium et spes, no. 76)

To exercise this teaching office, bishops seek the assistance of experts in various fields, be it in social sciences, theological or legal matters, civic or political matters. So, it is important to note that bishops do not simply make up “opinions.” The faithful are therefore bound to adhere to such authentic teaching with a submission of the whole person. This submission is not without intellect. The Jesuit theologian, Francis Sullivan pointed out that, “… the reasons that the faithful have for recognizing statements on which their bishops have reached consensus after broad consultation and serious deliberation, as guided by the Spirit [are] worthy of their trust and acceptance.” 2 The ministry of the divine word is to be exercised principally by issuing doctrinal or pastoral statements treating questions of faith and morals and various social questions in their context (c. 756 §2). These documents are authored either by individual bishops or by collegial groups such as particular councils and conferences of

2.FRANCIS A. SULLIVAN, “The Teaching Authority of Episcopal Conferences,” in The Theobishops. When they issue a pastoral letter, bishops make doctrinal statements, that is, “the transmission of the doctrine of the Church in a more incisive way in harmony with the particular character of a nation and circumstances of life of the Christian faithful.” 3 Generally, such statements have to do with human development, social, moral and political questions as applied to the bishops’ own nation or region. A pastoral letter is a concrete application of the teaching function of the bishops, in the name of the diocesan bishop (to his diocese) or an episcopal conference (to a national jurisdiction). The diocesan bishops enjoy the right to be prophetic voices. “It belongs to the Church always and everywhere to announce moral principles, even about the social order, and to render judgment concerning any human affairs insofar as the fundamental rights of the human person or the salvation of souls requires it” (c. 747 §2). It is prudent to note that the Church does not need the support of

logical Studies, 63 (2002), 493. 3.CONGREGATION FOR BISHOPS, Directory of the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops, issued 22 February 2004. the State to carry out its divine mission, and the Church must pursue this mission to the extent possible, even if the State opposes it or feels some discomfort about it. The Second Vatican Council taught that “… at all times and in all places, the Church should have the true freedom to preach the faith, to proclaim its teaching about society, to carry out its task among men without hindrance, and to pass moral judgment even in the matters related to the political order, wherever the fundamental rights of man or the salvation of souls requires it” (Gaudium et spes, no. 76). This second part addresses the erroneous attempt by the Zimbabwe government to summon the papal nuncio to ascertain whether the statements made by the bishops’ conference were sanctioned by the Vatican. It is important to understand the diplomatic relations between States and to understand the role of the nuncio as a political diplomat or as a representative of the Pope to local churches. It is common knowledge that the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church and is the political leader of the Vatican State.

The Vatican State is not the Church and the Church is not the Vatican State, even though the head of both is the same person. This is even made clear in the Vatican “diplomatic service”, which, at the appointment of the Pope (as head of the State), the nuncio is appointed to a country that has diplomatic relations with the Vatican as a political entity. Such an appointee presents his credentials to the hosting government and is an ambassador of the Vatican State. In countries that have no diplomatic relations with the Vatican State, the “nuncio” is appointed solely to represent the Roman Pontiff to the local church, and he is technically called a papal representative. In most cases, the same person is appointed for both offices, but each function is governed separately, according to law. The two major functions of the nuncio, according to Church law are, (1) “… representing the Roman Pontiff in a stable manner to particular churches (2) or also to the states and public authorities to which they are sent” (c. 363§1). The particular churches are the local dioceses. Canon 364 further points out that the responsibility of the pontifical legate (nuncio) to the particular churches is “to make stronger and more effective the bonds of unity which exist between the Apostolic See and particular churches…” thus the nuncio, in this capacity, serves the interests of the relations between the Roman Pontiff (the Church) and the local churches (dioceses and episcopal conference). Furthermore, the papal legate also has a special duty, that is, “… at the same time acts as a legate to States according to the norms of international law.” International law in this case refers to diplomatic relations, expressed in c. 364 §1, 1° “to promote and foster relations between the Apostolic See and the authorities of the state.” Public authorities include the United Nations

or such international bodies. The subsequent paragraphs pertain to the papal legate as representative of the Apostolic See drafting and signing concordats with hosting States. By “summoning” the nuncio as an ambassador to ascertain if the pastoral letter was sanctioned by the Vatican State, the government displayed diplomatic daftness. The Vatican State does not sanction the writing

of pastoral letters, let alone interfere in the affairs of local churches. So to expect the nuncio to answer whether the pastoral letter was the mind of the Roman Pontiff (as head of the Church) or the Vatican City (represented by the Secretariat of State) makes one wonder whether the government has withered intelligence. Otherwise, this was a diplomatic faux and an attempt to camouflage the numerous crises in Zimbabwe that were exposed by the pastoral letter.