BISHOP, episcopus , is a first-order prelate [1] who is responsible in particular for the spiritual guidance of a diocese, and who, conjointly with the other prelates, participates in the government of the universal Church.

Under the term bishops are also included the archbishops, the primates, the patriarchs, and the pope himself, who are all bishop s, and are distinguished by a particular title from plain bishops only because they are the first in the episcopal order, where there are several different levels with respect to the hierarchy of the Church, although with respect to order the bishops all have the same power, each in his own diocese.

The title of bishop  [2] comes from the Greek ἐπίσκοπος and signifies overseer or inspector . It is a term borrowed from the pagans; for that is what the Greeks called those they sent out to their provinces to see whether everything was in order.

The Latins also called episcopos those who were inspectors and controllers of bread and food: Cicero held this function: episcopus oræ campaniæ .

So the first Christians borrowed the term bishops from the civil government to designate spiritual governors, and called diocese the province governed by a bishop , just as they then called by that name the civilian government in each province.

The name bishop was given by Saint Peter to Jesus Christ; it was also applied sometimes to all priests in general, and even to laymen who were paterfamilias.

But this name has for a long time, following the Church’s practice, been reserved for first-order prelates who succeeded the apostles, who were the first bishops instituted by Jesus Christ.

They are also called ordinary, because their rights of jurisdiction and assigning of benefices belong to them by their authority and jure ordinario , in other words following common law.

Bishops are the vicars of Jesus Christ, successors of the apostles, and the princes of priests; they possess the fullness and perfection of the priesthood with which Jesus was invested by his father, so that when a bishop communicates some portion of his power to lower ministers, he still retains the supreme jurisdiction and the sovereign eminence in hierarchical functions.

They are the primary pastors of the Church established for the sanctification of men, being the successors of those to whom Jesus said: Go and preach to all the nations, teaching them to keep everything I have said to you. [3]

It is incumbent on each of them to order in his diocese the ministers of the altars, to entrust the care of souls to the pastors who are to work under their orders: that is why they must, following common law, have the institution of the benefices and the disposition of all the ecclesiastical dignities.

Each bishop exercises alone the spiritual jurisdiction over the flock which is placed in his hands, and all together govern the Church.

The dignity of a bishop is very respectable, since their institution is divine, their functions sacred, and their succession uninterrupted. The bishopric is the most ancient and eminent of all the benefices; it is the source of all the orders and of all other ecclesiastical functions.

Jesus said in speaking of their predecessors the apostles that whoever hears them hears him, and whoever spurns them spurns him.

They are the fathers and the first doctors of the Church, to whom all power has been given in heaven and on earth, to bind and unbind in everything that is in the spiritual domain.

The apostles, having preached the Gospel in the large cities, established bishops there to instruct and edify the faithful, to work toward increasing their number, to govern those early churches, and to establish other bishops in the neighboring cities when there were enough Christians to give them their own pastor. I left you in Crete , Saint Paul says to Titus, for you to govern the flock of Jesus Christ and to establish priests in the cities to which the faith spreads.  [4] By the term priests he means at that point bishop s, as the rest of the letter makes clear.

The number of bishops thus grew apace with the advances of the Christian religion → . During the early centuries of the Church it was the bishops of neighboring cities who established new ones in the cities where they thought it necessary, but for the last eight or nine hundred years there have been virtually no bishoprics established without the pope’s authority. Other interested parties must also be heard, and in France in particular the king’s authority must play a role. See what has been said previously on this subject at the word Bishopric.

The pope, as successor to Saint Peter, is the first among bishops ; his pre-eminence over them is of divine institution. The other bishops are all successors of the apostles, but the distinctions that have been established among them with relation to the titles of patriarchs, primates and metropolitans are a matter of ecclesiastical law.

Saint Paul in his first epistle to Timothy says that si quis episcopatum desiderat, bonum opus desiderat . [5] The bishoprics were then considered a very heavy duty. There were neither honors nor riches attached to this position; thus they were sought neither out of ambition nor of self-interest. Some from a spirit of humility hid themselves when they were sent for to become bishop s.

With regard to the qualities which St. Paul desires in a bishop : Oportet , he says, episcopum irreprehensibilem esse, unius uxoris virum, sobrium, castum, ornatum, prudentem, pudicum, hospitalem, doctorem, non vinolentum, non percussorem, sed modestum; non litigiosum, non cupidum, sed suæ domui benè præpositum, filios habentem subditos cum omni castitate . [6]

These terms, unius uxoris virum , meant that one could not have been married more than once, because bigamists were not ordained; others understand by it that the bishop must not have more than one church, which is considered as his bride.

It is a tradition of the Church that since the Ascension of Our Lord the apostles lived in celibacy; nevertheless, married men were often raised to the bishopric and to the priesthood: they, as well as the deacons, were henceforth obligated to live in continence, and to see their wives now only as their sisters. The discipline of the Latin church never varied on this matter. Wives of bishops are mentioned in some ancient writings, episcopae , because of the dignity of their husbands.

But gradually, in the Latin church, bishops were no longer chosen who were currently married, and such is still the present discipline of the Latin church: a man who has been married twice is not admitted to the bishopric any more than to the priesthood.

But in the schismatic churches, such as the Greek church, bishops and priests are married.

In ecclesiastical history several examples can be found of prelates who were elected from among the laity, such as Saint Nicholas and Saint Ambrose; but these elections were approved only when the humility of those who were chosen as pastors was so universally recognized that there was no cause for fear that they would take pride in their dignity; and soon they were chosen only from among clerics.

Following the Council of Trent, bishops must be born in legitimate marriage, and must be commendable in conduct and learning. This council would also have them be thirty years old, but in France it was enough, following the concordat, to be going on twenty-seven. We find some examples of bishops who were named while still very young. Count Héribert, the uncle of Hugues Capet, had his son who was only five named archbishop of Reims, and this was confirmed by Pope John X. These singular examples must not be given too much importance.

The concordat would also have had a man promoted to a bishopric be a doctor or bachelor in theology or in civil or canon law; it exempts those who are relatives of the king or of some high rank. Mendicant monks, who by the rule of their order cannot acquire degrees, are also exempted. The Ordinance of Blois [7] and that of 1606 have confirmed the concordat’s specification with relation to the degrees that bishops must have. The concordat does not explain whether these degrees must be taken in a university in the kingdom, but it has so been interpreted, in conformity with the practice in the kingdom.

It is not absolutely necessary for the bishop to have obtained his degrees in all the forms; it is enough to have obtained degrees of concession, in other words the kind that are granted with dispensation of length of study and some ordinary exercises; but the titles of privilege granted by letters from the pope and his legates would not suffice in France.

The Ordinance of Blois, article 1 , states that the king will not name anyone to a prelature until it has been vacant one month; that before the deliverance of the letters of appointment, the names of the persons will be sent to the diocesan bishop in the place where they have been studying for the last five years; together with the chapters of the vacant churches and monasteries, which will inform respectively on the life, conduct, and learning, and make reports on it all which they will send to His Majesty.

Article 2 states that before the letters of appointment are sent, the named archbishops and bishops will be examined on their learning of the Bible by an archbishop or a bishop whom His Majesty will put in charge; two doctors of theology will be called, who will send their certificates on the capacity or insufficiency of said nominees. Article 1 of the edict of 1606 is consistent with this.

But these rules were never executed, and are not exactly enough observed. For several years it was tolerated for the papal nuncios, who have no jurisdiction in France, to receive the profession of faith of the man named to be bishop , and to inform themselves about his life, conduct, and capacity, and about the state of the benefices, which is contrary to the law of the ordinaries [8] and was forbidden by an edict of regulation issued by the parlement of Paris on 12 December 1639.

The practice of the other churches is not everywhere the same as in France: some follow session XXII of the Council of Trent, according to which, for want of degrees, it suffices that the bishop have a certificate given by a university which attests that he is capable of teaching others, and if he is a regular, that he have the attestation of his superiors.

The canons would have the man elected bishop be at least a subdeacon. The Council of Trent would have the bishop be a priest for six months before his promotion; but the concordat, which enumerates the qualities that must be possessed by those named by the king, does not require that they be priests or subdeacons, and the decree of Blois supposes that a simple cleric can be appointed bishop without being in holy orders. Indeed, article 8 of that decree states that within three months of their installations bishops are required to have themselves promoted to holy orders; and that if in three months they have not attended to this duty they be deprived of their church without further declaration, following the holy decrees.

As for the appointment of bishops in the first centuries of the Church, they were elected by the clergy and the people. They were to install only those whom the clergy elected and the people desired; but the metropolitan and the bishop of the province were supposed to instruct the people so they would not be motivated to ask for persons unworthy or incapable of fulfilling such an eminent position.

Laymen long preserved the right to attend the elections, and even to cast their vote; but because of the confusion usually caused by the multitude of electors and the fear lest the people lack the necessary discernment for the qualities that a bishop must possess, only the clergy were ultimately admitted to elections. A formal decree was made of it in the eighth general council held in Constantinople in 869, and it was followed in the Western as well as the Eastern church. At the same time, it was forbidden to receive as bishops those who were named only by the emperors or kings. This change did not prevent their being obliged to ask for the consent and approval of sovereigns before consecrating those who were chosen. This rule was followed even with respect to popes, who were long obliged to obtain the consent of Charlemagne’s successors.

As for the bishoprics of France, they were at the disposal of our kings of the first dynasty, without participation by the people or the clergy; it is certain at least that since Clovis and until 590 no bishop was installed except by order or consent of the king; they still held an election, but it was only for form.

In the seventh century our kings similarly disposed of bishoprics. The monk Marculphe, who lived in that century, reports the formula of an order or precept by which the king declared to the metropolitan that, having learned of the death of a certain bishop , he had decided, with the agreement of the bishops and grandees, to give him a certain person as his successor. He also reports the formula of a request by the citizens of the episcopal city in which they asked the king to give them as bishop a certain man whose merit was known to them, which shows that the choice, or at least the consent, of the people was expected.

Louis the Pious restored free elections to the churches; but with respect to bishoprics it appears that this prince appointed them, as Charlemagne had done; that Charles the Bald did likewise; and it was only under his successors that the right of the episcopal cities to elect bishops was re-established for a while. The cathedral chapters, having become powerful, assumed the power to elect bishop s, but it still required the king’s approval.

From 1076 and until 1150 the popes had excommunicated huge numbers of persons and caused millions of men to perish in the wars they provoked in order to deprive sovereigns of the investiture of bishoprics and give the election to the chapters.

It appears that it was about the same time that the bishops began to call themselves bishops by the grace of God or by the mercy of God, divina miseratione . It was a bishop of Coutances who was the first to add, in 1347 or 1348, at the head of his pastoral and other letters, these words: and by the grace of the holy apostolic see , to recognize that he had been confirmed by the pope.

To return to appointments to bishoprics, pope Pius II and five of his successors fought for a half-century to get them away from the chapters and give them to the king. Such was the state of things in France before the concordat made between Leo X and François I.

By this treaty, elections for prelatures were abrogated and the right to appoint them was transferred entirely to the king, on whose nomination the pope must grant bulls, provided the person nominated possesses the requisite qualities.

The king must make an appointment within six months of the vacancy; if the person does not have the qualities required by the concordat, and the pope refuses the bulls, the king must appoint someone else within three months, counting from the day the refusal of the bulls was made in the consistory, and the man who solicited them has been notified. If within these three months the king did not name a competent person, the pope, by the terms of the concordat, could make provision, subject nevertheless to notification of the king, and obtaining his consent; but there is no example of the pope’s ever having invoked this power.

He whom the king has appointed bishop must within nine months, counting from his letters of appointment, obtain bulls or justify the measures he has taken to obtain them; otherwise he completely relinquishes the right he had acquired by virtue of his letters.

If the pope refused bulls without reason to the man who was appointed by the king, he could have himself consecrated by the metropolitan, according to the former practice, or petition the parlement , where he would obtain a decree by virtue of which the appointee would enjoy the revenue and confer the benefices dependent on his bishopric.

The new bishop can, before his installation, do everything that stems from spiritual jurisdiction: he has the distribution of benefices and the emolument of the seal; but he can do none of the things quæ sunt ordinis , like giving orders, laying on of hands, or performing holy anointment.

The councils would have the bishop be installed or consecrated, which is the same thing, three months after his institution; if he defers three months more, he should be deprived of his bishopric. The Ordinance of Blois also would have the bishops installed in the time specified in the canonical constitutions.

At one time all the bishops of the province assembled in the vacant church to attend the election and install the person who had been elected. When they were divided on this subject, the majority of the suffrages was followed. There were provinces in which the metropolitan could consecrate those who were elected only with the consent of the primate. When they could not all assemble, it sufficed that there be three of them to consecrate the electee, with the consent of the metropolitan who had the right to confirm the election. This regulation of the Council of Nicaea, renewed by several later councils, was observed for several centuries. It is still the practice to have the new bishop consecrated by three other bishops , but it is not necessary for the metropolitan of the electee to perform the consecration. This ceremony is performed by the bishops to whom the bulls are addressed by the pope.

The metropolitans are installed, like the other bishops , by those to whom the bulls are addressed.

Here are the principal ceremonies observed in the Latin Church for the consecration of a bishop . This consecration must take place on a Sunday in the home church of the electee, or at least in the province, so far as can conveniently be done. The presiding bishop must be assisted by at least two other bishop s; he must fast the day before, and the electee also. The presiding bishop being seated before the altar, the eldest of the assisting bishops presents the electee to him, saying: The Catholic Church asks that you elevate this priest to the function of bishop . The presiding bishop does not ask whether he is worthy, as they did at the time of elections, but only whether there is an apostolic mandate, in other words the principal bull that answers for the merit of the elect, and he has it read. Then the electee takes an oath of fidelity to the holy see, using a formula of which an example exists from the time of Gregory VII. Several clauses have since been added, among others that of going to Rome to give an account of his conduct every four years, or at least to send a deputy, which is not observed in France.

Then the presiding bishop begins to examine the electee on his faith and conduct, in other words on his intentions for the future, for it is assumed that the past is vouched for. Once this examination is over, the presiding bishop begins the mass. After the epistle and the gradual he returns to his seat, and the electee being seated before him, instructs him concerning his obligations, saying: a bishop must judge, interpret, consecrate, ordain, offer, baptize, and confirm . Then, the electee having prostrated himself, and the bishops kneeling, they recite the litanies, and the presiding bishop takes the book of the gospels, which he places open wide on the neck and shoulders of the electee. This ceremony was easier at a time when books were scrolls, volumina ; for the gospel thus unrolled fell to each side like a stole. Next the presiding bishop lays his two hands on the head of the electee, with the attendant bishop s, saying: Receive the Holy Spirit . This laying on of hands is specified in Scripture ( I Timothy 4:14 ), and in the apostolic constitutions ( bk. VIII, chap. iv ) mention is made of the laying on of the book to make the point of the obligation to bear the yoke of the Lord and to preach the Gospel. The presiding bishop then says a preface in which he prays God to give the electee all the virtues, the mysterious symbols of which were the ornaments of the high priest of the old law; and while they chant the anthem of the Holy Spirit he anoints his head with the holy chrism; then he completes the prayer he has begun, asking for an abundance of grace and virtue for him, which is indicated by this anointment. They chant Psalm 132, which speaks of the anointment of Aaron, and the presiding bishop anoints the hands of the electee with the holy chrism. Next he blesses the pastoral baton, which he gives him as a sign of his jurisdiction. He also blesses the ring, and puts it on his finger as a token of his faith, exhorting him to keep the Church without stain as the bride of God. Then he removes the book of the gospels from his shoulders, and puts it in his hands, saying: Take the gospel, and go preach to the people who are entrusted to you, for God is powerful enough to increase his grace to you .

Here the mass continues: they read the gospel, and formerly the new bishop preached to inaugurate his function; at the offering, he offers bread and wine, following the old practice; then he joins the presiding bishop and completes the mass with him, where he communes, standing, under the two species. The mass over, the presiding bishop blesses the miter and gloves, designating their mysterious meanings; then he enthrones the consecrated in his seat. Next the Te Deum is sung, and meanwhile the attendant bishops accompany the consecrated around the church to present him to the people. Finally, he gives the solemn benediction. ( Pontificale romanum de consecration episcopum ; Fleury, Institution au Droit ecclésiastique, vol. I, part I, ch. xi, p. 110 and ff .) [9]

Formerly the bishop was to go visit his metropolitan two months after his installation to receive from him the instructions and advice he deemed appropriate to give him.

The bishop being installed must take an oath of fidelity to the king in person; until this oath the jurisdiction remains open. See Oath of fidelity.

We find some passages in the ancient authors that could make us think that from the first centuries of the Church the bishops bore some external sign of their dignity; the apostle Saint John, and Saint James, first bishop of Jerusalem, bore a golden plate on their heads, which was no doubt imitated from the pontiffs of the old law, who wore on their foreheads a golden band on which the name of God was written. [10]

The episcopal ornaments are the miter, the staff, the pectoral cross, the ring, and the sandals. The bishop may have the cross carried in front of him in his diocese, but he cannot have it carried in another bishop ’s diocese, because the raised cross is a sign of jurisdiction.

It is only archbishops who commonly have the right to wear the pallium; nevertheless, some bishops have this right by special concession from the pope. See Pallium.

Some bishops have still other singular signs of honor: for example, according to some authors, the bishop of Cahors has the privilege in certain ceremonies of saying mass, on the altar, with the naked sword, helmet, and gauntlets which are relative to the qualities he assumes as baron and count. Several German bishops who are sovereign princes do likewise.

In France there are six bishops or archbishops who are ecclesiastical peers: to wit, three dukes and three counts ( See Peers); most of the other bishops also possess seigniories attached to their bishopric. That is why they have been admitted to the king’s councils; and in the parlements respect for their ministry has caused the first rank in their assemblies to be yielded to them, which under the first dynasty belonged to the nobility.

It is not thought, however, that it is because of their seigniories that they are given the title of monsignor , which they are accustomed to giving to one another; it seems rather that it comes from the term senior which, in the early church, was the common title of all bishops and all priests: they were thus called seniores or senieurs because the eldest among the faithful were ordinarily chosen to govern the others; they were also qualified as most holy , most pious , and most venerable ; presently they are given the title most reverend .

With respect to the current practice of designating each bishop by the name of the city which is the seat of his church, like M. de Paris, M. de Troyes, instead of Monsieur the archbishop of Paris, Monsieur the bishop of Troyes: this is not a new practice. Indeed Calvin in his book entitled la maniere de réformer l'Eglise [ The Manner of Reforming the Church ], [11] said already in 1548, although in mockery, Monsieur d’Avranches in speaking of Robert Cénalis. [12]

It was formerly the custom to prostrate oneself before them and kiss their feet. This is no longer practiced except with respect to the pope; but what has remained of this custom is that when the bishop walks while clad in his episcopal ornaments, he distributes blessings with his hand which those present receive on their knees.

New bishop s, after their installation, ordinarily make a solemn entrance into the episcopal city and into their church; several of them had the right to be borne in pomp by four of the principal barons or vassals of their bishopric, called in some instances casati majores or homines episcopi ; in some dioceses these vassals owe the bishop a gouttière  [13] or taper of a certain weight.

For example, the lords of Corbeil, of Montlhéry, la Ferté-Alais, and of Montjay owed a taper to the church of Paris, and were obliged to carry the bishop , as well as the lords of Torcy, Tournon, Lusarche, and Conflans Sainte Honorine; it is also said in some ancient contracts that the lord of Bretigny was one of those who were to carry the bishop on his entry.

The bishops of Orléans have always maintained the right to make their solemn entry, and they have in addition the privilege on that occasion of releasing criminals. This privilege, which they owe to the piety of our kings, had formerly been extended considerably. Criminals came then from all over to turn themselves in to the prisons of Orléans to obtain their pardon, which was restrained by an edict in November 1753 which we will discuss later at the word Grace.

Some bishops enjoy in their church a right of joyous accession, like the one which the king possesses upon his accession to the throne. Mr. Louet gives an example of the bishop of Poitiers, who was confirmed in this right by an act of the parlement in 1531.

We also find that in 1350 the bishop of Clermont had suspended his diocese for failure to pay duties he claimed for his joyous accession; King John sent by letters patent to his bailiff in Auvergne to summon the prelate to lift the suspension, no one being allowed, he said in those letters, to suspend any land of his domain.

The canons forbid the bishops to remain long outside their diocese, and do not allow them to make their ordinary residence outside the episcopal city: that is why Philip the Tall ordered in 1319 that there should henceforth be no prelates in the parlement , the prince feeling a scruple at preventing them from attending to their spiritual government.

In the primitive church the bishops ordered nothing important without consulting the clergy of their diocese, presbyterium , and sometimes even the people. It was a simple matter then to assemble the priests of the diocese, since they were almost always in the episcopal city.

When priests had been established in the countryside, which happened around the year 400, the clergy of the diocese was no longer assembled except in important cases, as is done today for the diocesan synods; but the bishops continued to seek the opinion of all the ecclesiastics who made their residence in the episcopal city; this appears to be established by several councils of the sixth and seventh centuries that would have the bishop seek the opinion of all the abbots, priests, and other clerics.

Subsequently the clergy of the cathedral lived in common with the bishop and formed a sort of monastery or seminary whose bishop was always the superior; the chapter was regarded as the ordinary and necessary counsel of the bishop ; such was still the order observed in the time of Alexander III. But since then the canons have gradually lost the right to be the bishop ’s necessary counsel, except perhaps for what relates to the service of the cathedral church; for matters concerning the government of the diocese, the bishop seeks the opinion of whomever he chooses.

The jurisdiction that belongs to bishops by divine right consists only in the power of teaching, forgiving sins, administering the sacraments to the faithful, and punishing by purely spiritual penalties those who violate the laws of the Church.

Following Roman laws, the bishops had no jurisdiction over contestations, even among clerics, but the emperors established the bishops as the necessary arbiters of causes between clerics and laity; this path of arbitrage was gradually converted into jurisdiction. Secular princes, out of consideration for the bishop s, greatly increased the rights of their jurisdiction by assigning a tribunal of contestation to them to give more authority to their decisions over cases; they also granted them by special grace inquiry into personal suits, both civil and criminal, brought against clerics.

With respect to cases between laics over temporal matters, Constantine the Great decreed that when one party wanted to submit to the opinion of a bishop , the other party would be obliged to defer to him; and the bishop ’s judgments would be unalterable, which made the bishops into sovereign judges. This law was inserted into the Codex Theodosianus ( book XVI, title x , De episcopalis audientia ). Justinian did not include it in his code, but the credit of the bishops under the first two dynasties of our kings, the share they had in the election of Pepin, and the great consideration which Charlemagne had for them, led our kings to renew the privilege granted to bishops by Constantine; it was made law and is found in the capitularies ( vol. I, book VI, chap. ccclxvi ).

The ignorance of the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth, centuries allowed bishops to increase their contentious jurisdiction greatly; they had become the ordinary judges of pupils, minors, widows, foreigners, prisoners, and other such persons; they judged the execution of all contracts in which one was required to swear a religious oath, the execution of testaments, and ultimately almost all manner of business.

But as people became more enlightened, things reverted to order; the contentious jurisdiction of bishops was reduced, with respect to laics, to purely spiritual matters, and with respect to clerics to personal matters.

Bishops have various officers to exercise their contentious jurisdiction: to wit, an official, a vice-gerent, a promoter, a vice-promoter, and other necessary officers. Until the twelfth century, bishops themselves exercised their jurisdiction without officials; now they normally delegate that duty to their official, which does not prevent some of them from going once, at their ascension, to hold the audience of officiality. There are numerous examples, and among others in Paris that of M. de Bellefonds the archbishop, who was installed on 2 June 1746 in the officiality, and there judged two causes with the concurrence of the dean and chapter of Notre Dame. See Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, Official, Vice-gerent, Promoter.

The council and decrees impose on bishops the obligation to visit their diocese in person, and to have their archdeacons visit the places where they cannot go in person. See Visit.

The bishop performs by himself or through his grand-vicars all the acts that are of voluntary and gracious jurisdiction,  [14] such as dimissories, [15] according benefices, joining benefices, approving confessors, vicars, preachers, schoolmasters; permission for foreign priests to celebrate, permission to beg alms in the diocese; blessing churches, chapels, cemeteries, and their reconciliation; visiting the parish churches and other holy places, visiting things that are contained therein and required for the divine service; visiting persons and monasteries of nuns; dispensations regarding the ordination of clergy, dispensations of vows, irregularities, marriage bans, finally anything concerning censures and absolutions. See Voluntary jurisdiction.

There are certain functions which the bishops must perform themselves, such as giving confirmation and orders, blessing the holy chrism and holy oils, consecrating bishop s, etc.

When a bishop finds himself unable to fulfill the duties of the bishopric because of his infirmities or for some other reason, he is given a coadjutor with future succession . The coadjutor must work with him on the government of the diocese. The pope, in according bulls to the coadjutor on the nomination of the king, makes the coadjutor bishop in partibus infedilium [in the lands of the unbelievers], so that he may be anointed and to confer orders. See Coadjutor.

Bishops , like other subjects of the king, are subject to secular jurisdiction in civil matters; as for criminal matters, a bishop can be judged for common crime only by the provincial council composed of twelve bishop s, which must be presided over by the metropolitan. But for the privileged case, bishops are, like other ecclesiastics, subject to royal jurisdiction; and if it happens that a bishop causes some turmoil in the state by his actions, words, or writings, the parlement , and even the lower royal judges, can halt the turmoil and prevent its repercussions either by seizing temporal possessions or by fines, decrees, and other means of law according to the circumstances.

The transfer of a bishop from one see to another was practiced for the first time in the third century in the person of Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem; it was then forbidden at the council of Alexandria in 340 and at the council of Sardica in 347. Stephen VII had the body of Formosus, his predecessor, exhumed and judged under pretext that he had been transferred from the bishopric of Porto to that of Rome, for which he assumed there had not yet been any example. This action was condemned by the council held in Rome in the year 901; Sergius III undertook to justify it.

Councils have always disapproved transfers done for reasons of ambition, cupidity, or inconstancy; but they have allowed them when they were done for the good of the Church. It used to be that a bishop could only be transferred from one see to another by order of a provincial council, but in present practice a papal dispensation suffices with the king’s consent.

A bishop , according to the canons, becomes irregular in certain cases; for example, if he has ordered a trial by hot iron or something similar, if he has authorized a condemnation to death, or if he attended its execution. [16]

In Germany, most of the bishoprics are elective. It is the cathedral or metropolitan chapters, ordinarily made up of nobles, who have the right to elect one among themselves by plurality of votes, or else to postulate him; [17] this election or postulation confers on the person so designated the dignity of prince of the empire, territorial superiority, and the right to sit and vote in the diet of the empire; and he who has been elected or postulated receives for the states subject to him the investiture of the emperor, and enjoys the same rights as a prince of the empire, independently of the confirmation of the pope which he needs as bishop .

The Treaty of Westphalia brought a great change in German bishoprics; many of them were secularized in favor of several Protestant princes. It is by virtue of this treaty that the house of Brandenburg possesses the archbishoprics of Magdeburg, Halberstadt, Minden, etc.; the house of Holstein those of Lübeck, etc. The bishopric of Osnabrück is alternately held by a Roman Catholic and by a prince of the house of Brunswick Luneburg, which is Protestant.

1. I.e., cardinals, archbishops, and bishops.

2. Évêque . Despite appearances, évêque and bishop have the same basic etymology.

3. Matthew 28:19 is one version of this charge.

4. Titus 1:5.

5. I Timothy 3:1–2: “If anyone is eager for the office of bishop , he desires a good work” (Confraternity version).

6. I Timothy 3:1–2: “A bishop then must be blameless, married but once, reserved, prudent, of good conduct, hospitable, a teacher” (Confraternity version).

7. Promulgated in 1579 by Henry III.

8. Le droit des ordinaires , canon laws concerning the jurisdictions of the prelates in particular cases.

9. Claude Fleury (1640–1723), Institution au droit ecclésiastique , 2 vol., 1687. A later edition of volume 1 (1771), edited by Boucher d’Argis, is available here.

10. See Exodus 28:36–38.

11. Jean Calvin (1509–1564), La vraie façon de réformer l’Église chrétienne was inserted in another work entitled L’Interim, c’est-à-dire provision faite sur les différends de la ← religion en quelques villes et pays d’Allemagne , published in Geneva in 1549.

12. Cénalis or Ceneau was indeed bishop of Avranches (1533–1560), which is still but a tiny city.

13. “In Orléans they call gouttières a certain piece of white wax in the form of a bier, which the [...] four barons of the bishopric of Orléans must present every year to the Holy Cross church of Orléans,” ( Dictionnaire de Trévoux ).

14. Juridiction gracieuse : “In the Roman chancellery, they call provisions of benefices in gracious form, in forma gratiosa , when they are granted on an attestation of life and conduct on the bishop ’s or superior’s part by virtue of which he takes possession without examination and without asking for the visa of the usual judge” ( Dictionnaire de Trévoux ).

15. Dimissoriae litterae: “Letter which a prelate gives to his diocesan in order to receive the tonsure or some other ecclesiastical order validly from another prelate” ( Dictionnaire de Trévoux ).

16. Here ends the article signed by Boucher d’Argis; the last two paragraphs are by Holbach, who often handles questions of Germanic practice for the Encyclopédie .

17. Postuler : “in beneficial matters, [...] to name a person who cannot be canonically elected for some deficiency” ( Dictionnaire de Trévoux ).