Showing posts with label Archbishop Cordileone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Archbishop Cordileone. Show all posts

Sunday, April 26, 2015

Coming and Going


Archbishop Cordileone celebrating
Mass in the usus antiquior 

Recently over a hundred prominent San Francisco area Catholics published an open letter to Pope Francis petitioning “Holy Father, please provide us with a leader true to our values and your namesake.  Please replace Archbishop Cordileone.”  The letter was signed by leading lay Catholics from the worlds of philanthropy, business, law, civil service, and education. 
Signers complained that the Archbishop is very much out of touch with his flock and is not providing the sort of leadership requisite to his office as he does not know “who the bedrock of the San Francisco Catholic community is.”  The signers also charge that the Archbishop is responsible for “an atmosphere of division and intolerance.”  The loss of confidence in Cordileone’s leadership is not related to a single issue but has been building ever since he was named to the See.  Nevertheless, San Francisco being, well, San Francisco, his attempts to impose a “morality clause” on diocesan employees, including teachers in the Catholic schools that requires not only their adherence to Catholic doctrine but conforming their lives to Catholic sexual ethics has met with considerable resistance.  Later the Archbishop supported local pastor, the Reverend Joseph Illo, in banning girls from serving at the altar during liturgical services at the Star of the Sea parish where Illo is pastor.  Father Illo also distributed a pamphlet to young students listing potential sins including masturbation, sexual acts, abortion, and sterilization.  The pamphlet, designed to help individuals examine their consciences prior to confessing their sins, was deemed by many parents not to be age appropriate to their children.  Illo, a priest of the Stockton Diocese, transferred to San Francisco in hopes of beginning “an Oratory.”  The Oratorians are communities of secular priests who live together in a scholarly and gentlemanly way and generally sponsor churches where there is a revival of the pre-Vatican II liturgy done with great splendor. 
Jesuit Father James Martin, on the editorial staff of America magazine, said that such petitions to remove bishops have not been uncommon over the past few decades but neither have they been effective.  What is interesting in this particular situation, however, is that this past week Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City MO, has “resigned” under pressure from the Vatican.  Bishop Finn had been found guilty of sheltering from legal proceedings a priest whom the Bishop knew to have been guilty of child pornography.  Strangely enough, under Missouri law, that is only a misdemeanor, but a Vatican investigation determined that Finn could no longer function effectively as the spiritual leader of Catholics in the 27 counties of western and north-western Missouri. The question will be does Cordileone have the confidence of his flock to lead.  Conservative Catholics have started a push-back campaign to support Archbishop Cordileone.
Like Finn, Cordileone has a misdemeanor in his background—Cordileone’s for a 2012 driving under the influence (of alcohol) charge.  Perhaps more interesting, both Finn and Cordileone are protégés of Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke who remains a Cardinal in good standing but certainly a prelate in bad odor in Pope Francis’ Rome.  In other words, Cordileone, like Finn, lacks a mediatrix of needed grace at a time most needed. 
Meanwhile, priests and people in the Southern Chile Diocese Osorno continue to protest the installation of Monsignor Juan Barros Madrid as local bishop.  Pope Francis appointed Barros despite the claims of three men that Barros had been present when they had been sexually molested by Barros’ friend Fernando Karadima in the 1980’s and 90’s. Barros denies knowledge of Karadima’s sexual abuse of the men. Although criminal charges against Karadima were dropped due to the statute of limitations, after investigation the Vatican stripped Karadima of his priestly status.  Barros had served as a chaplain to the Chilean military before being named bishop. 
So where will it all end.  It is anyone’s guess, of course, but I will be very surprised if any action is take against Archbishop Cordileone.  It would be a bad precedent to act on a public petition, especially one signed by only one hundred people and a somewhat self-selected group at that. On the other hand, the effort launched by conservative Catholics to support the Archbishop might in turn trigger a more popular response.  There is no doubt that if push were to come to shove, Cordileone would lack the support of the majority of Catholics in his Archdiocese.  This is not only due to his princely ways and dogmatic leadership.  Frankly, many American bishops could not win the support of the majority of their flocks.  People may not mount petitions or get out and demonstrate, but despite the great popularity of Pope Francis, and the loyalty that most give to their local parishes, Americans rarely get much positive energy about their bishops.  At the end of the day, American Catholics are (culturally) Protestants and have never understood the Catholic structure.  While the Popes, even the less popular ones like Pope Benedict, remain a strong symbol of our being Catholic, we really tend to congregationalism and somewhat resent a prelate who usually does not know us well interfering with our parishes and, even more perhaps, taking a percentage of our parish funds for his causes.  Given the size of American dioceses, a parish might only see a bishop once or twice in a year and then in a highly ritualized context.  As long as they are dignitaries they can’t function effectively as pastors.  The fact that so many appointed over the last thirty-some years were chosen not for their pastoral style but for their canon-law ability has not helped their estimation in the eyes of the rank and file.  In Cordileone’s case—as in Finn’s—their penchant for “rings and things and buttons and bows” has certainly not helped them establish the sort of genuine rapport that a few of their predecessors in the episcopal dignity—people like Bernard Topel or Tom Gumbleton or Ken Untener—were able to accomplish.  Archbishop Cordileone is particularly ill-suited for the Church of San Francisco yet I doubt that he will be removed.  On the other hand, as long as Francis is Pope, I don’t expect he will be upwardly mobile either.  But then, Francis is old and Cordileone is still young so que sera, sera.  

Thursday, March 19, 2015

In the Spirit of Matthew 25:40


Sal Cordileone, on his way to  
take a solemn pontifical shower?

Pope Francis recently installed several banks of showers just off St. Peter’s Square where the homeless of Rome could get cleaned up for the day.  Borrowing an idea from his boss, Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco also installed several banks of showers outside his cathedral.  The Cordileone showers are designed to go off every thirty to sixty minutes throughout the night drenching the homeless who seek shelter from the night, sleeping beneath the doorways of Saint Mary’s Cathedral in San Francisco.  For God’s Sake, Sal, these are the least of Christ’s brothers and sisters, not pigeons to be shooed away.  I had previously thought of this protégé of Grand Poobah of the Knights of Malta to be simply another Burke Buffoon but this shows him to be a mean-spirited prick and he should be fired for this.  

Thursday, March 5, 2015

The Heart of A Shepherd and the Heart of a Lion

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone
Cordileone translates as "heart of
a lion." Lions have been known
to eat sheep.

I had the opportunity not too long ago to visit friends who have recently moved to Dallas Texas and bought a lovely home in a rather posh suburb.  Not that the house was overdone, but it was a bit like staying with J.R. and Sue Ellen Ewing.  While the cook prepared dinner, we settled into Andy’s “Den”—a book lined room with Persian rugs, walnut paneling, and a brass chandelier that looked like it had been stolen from Hampton Court.  Andy pressed a button and the bookshelves slid back to reveal a fully-stocked wet bar.  “It’s called a ‘Baptist Bar’,” Andy told me, “because when the Pastor or one of the church deacons would come to dinner, it would be hidden by the ‘books.’  They aren’t real books, you see” he said pointing at the shelves,” just blocks of wood pointed to look like old books.  What would a Southern Baptist do with books anyway?  Down here, books are for burning.” 
A ‘Baptist Bar;’ I loved it.  I was relating this story at lunch when one of my colleagues—a priest—mentioned that he had once done a wedding between one of his then parishioners, a Catholic,  and the daughter of a Mormon Bishop.  “The Catholic family had to pay for the band and for the booze,” Father said.  “But the groom’s father—an immigrant from Italy—said that he couldn’t invite his friends and relatives to a ‘wedding’ where there was no dancing and nothing (alcoholic) to drink.  In the end, the Mormons were out there on the dance floor having a great time.”  But did they drink, I asked.  “Well, let me tell you,” Father responded.  “I got to be friends with the bride’s uncle and his wife and they were knocking back gins and tonic all evening.  They said that gins and tonic are the Mormon beverage of choice because you can always claim that you are drinking club soda, and who’s to know.” 
This led another colleague of mine to tell of his experience at Wheaton College, an evangelical Christian College in the Chicago suburbs that has some very strict policies set forth in its ‘Community Covenant’ to which all students, members of the faculty, and employees must conform.  These policies are not unreasonable for a Christian institution and they limit the use of alcohol both on and off campus and proscribe use of illicit substances, non-marital sex (gay or straight), pornography, withcraft, plagiarism, obscene or vulgar language, as well as more difficult things to pin down such as pride or jealousy.  In 2004 Wheaton terminated the teaching position of Joshua Hochschild when Hochschild, a professor of Medieval Philosophy, converted to Roman Catholicism.  Wheaton President at the time, A. Dwayne Litfin, said that Roman Catholicism was incompatible with Wheaton’s dedication to Evangelical Principles on the sovereignty of Scriptural Revelation.  (Hochschild disagreed but moved on to teach at Mount Saint Mary’s University in Emmitsburg Maryland—a Catholic equivalent of Wheaton’s sectarian fortress.  By the way, while both Wheaton and Mount Saint Mary’s are somewhat closed-circuit institutions, unlike some other “bubble schools” they have respectable academic reputations and should not be short-sold on that account.)  Four years after Hochshild moved on, tenured professor Kent Gramm left Wheaton for Gettysburg College rather than disclose the reasons for his divorce to school officials.  All this is to demonstrate the strict standards that Wheaton sets for the members of its academic community.  But the reality of where people are at and what they do under the dark of night, according my colleague, is quite different.  To find out more, I called a friend of mine with whom I used to teach and who is a Wheaton alumnus, whose elder son also graduated from Wheaton and whose younger boy is currently a student there.  “I think there is less promiscuity on the campus there than there is at most schools, but it’s no “virgin territory.”  Whether you are gay or straight, there is plenty of opportunity to make connections.  As for the alcohol, I think it is well hidden, but as much, if not more, than at a place like Princeton.  Drugs—I don’t know.  From what I hear there are some—there are always some—but it is pretty much in the shadows and not talked about much.”
At the end of the day, it is all about the mystery of sin and grace. Where there is sin—and there will always be sin—there will also be grace and in ever greater measures.  We don’t sin so that grace will be prevail, but despite our moral principles, the reality of life is that there are—at the end of the day—no blacks and no whites.  As attributed to Cardinal Newman: “none of us are as good as we should be or as bad as we could be.” 
I am not writing about Baptists or Mormons or Wheaton College—or even Cardinal Newman—but about Archbishop Cordileone and his insistence that all faculty and staff at the four High Schools run by the Archdiocese of San Francisco both agree and, in their personal lives, conform to a policy statement that declares same-sex marriage, sex outside of (heterosexual) marriage, masturbation, pornography, artificial insemination, and other forms of “artificial reproductive technology” are “gravely evil.”  We need standards to be set.  I don’t have a problem with that.  It is up to the Church to set the standards for its members—and for those engaged in its mission even if they are not members.  I have no problem with that.  These are Catholic teachings and I have no problem with that. 
What I do have a problem with is when we expect people to live up to the standards.  Some of us will, some of the time.  All of us will, at one time or another, fall short of the standards.  That is the sin part of the equation.  But this isn’t Wheaton College; this is the Church of Jesus Christ.  When a person falls short of the standards, we accept the grace to get back up—and that can only be done with the help of a loving community—and brush ourselves off, and get back on track until we fall again.  That’s the grace part of the equation.  So when an Archbishop teaches the Church entrusted to his care: this is right, this is wrong, that is his job.  (He may, of course, get it wrong and that is another problem, but it is his job to teach the truth as he understands the truth.) But it is not his job to arm himself with a club to beat down the sinner who stumbles and falls. The policy statement set forth by Archbishop Cordileone is precisely that.  It gives him the grounds to fire anyone who fails to live up to, in his personal life, the ideals set forth by the Catholic Church, when a Bishop’s mandate is for the Shepherd to bring the sinner safely home.  But what about the person who falls over and over and over again?  The person who just doesn’t get it.  The person who just keeps sinning?  “And how often must I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Seven times?”  I think we all remember the answer to that question. 
A priest I know, a man of good heart but a congenital idiot when it comes to theology, gave a sermon some years ago about “The Good Shepherd.”  “A Shepherd,” he told his flock, “when confronted with a lamb that will not heed his directions, must sometimes break the leg of the lamb.  He then carries the lamb on his shoulder until the leg heals and this creates a bond of dependency that ties the sheep to its shepherd.  There are times,” this worthy priest said to his parishioners, “that I will have to break your leg to teach you to follow me as I lead you home to safe pastures.”  Whooo boy, where do we even start?  I don’t recall Jesus using that particular example in his teaching about Good Shepherds.  We don’t need Shepherds—mitered or otherwise—who go around breaking the legs of their sheep: even if for good purpose.  If only we could make people be good!!!  But we have the more difficult task of calling one another to the change of heart without breaking a leg or firing the lost sheep.

Monday, October 8, 2012

Time For San Francisco Bishops To Kiss

Bishop Marc Andrus
Episcopal Bishop of
California
Well, San Fran Archbishop Cordileone pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of reckless driving (he had been arrested for DUI, a charge commonly reduced for first-time offenders) on October 1, three days before his installation in Saint Mary’s Cathedral, San Francisco.  Present outside the cathedral (where admittance was by invitation only) were the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a troupe of transvestites who favorite rig is nun-drag—dressing up in the pre-Vatican II style wimples and veils.  (Lots of super-orthodox Catholics would love to see those habits, just not on gay men.) The good “nuns” were protesting the new Archbishop’s public opposition to legalization of gay marriage, but even if he approved of same-sex marriage they would have been there anyway.  They never miss a Catholic party.  And who says there is a vocation shortage?  Somebody is just not recruiting the right folks.  Also outside the cathedral was a delegation of the neo-Catechumenal Way, a conservative movement within the Church, with banners thanking the new Archbishop for “teaching the truth about the family.”  The neo-Cats are an interesting group and we should do some entries on them so that you know more about them. 
One person who was not inside the Cathedral was Bishop Marc Andrus, the Episcopal Bishop of California.  Bishop Andrus had arrived late for the service and was not seated.  There are conflicting reports that the Bishop had been asked to wait until the liturgical procession had entered the cathedral and then would be taken to his seat among the VIP ecumenical and interfaith guests or whether he had been refused seating all together.  The first story sounds more credible but in any event he “left in a huff.”   To be honest I don’t know why he had bothered to come to the installation.  Catholic bishops never attend the consecration of installation of their Episcopalian colleagues—they send some junior-grade monsignor as their representative.  This would have been the perfect occasion for bishop Andrus to send Dr. Jane Shaw, the Dean of Grace Cathedral or one of the woman canons to represent him and score a point or two about the role of women in the Church.   

I am not as quick to discount Bishop Andrus’ account of being treated with less civility than due a bishop, even one of another denomination.  Bishop Andrus had written a somewhat barbed public letter “welcoming” Archbishop Cordileone to San Francisco.  While affirming areas of common interest, the Bishop admonished the Archbishop to remember his constituency and their special characteristics.  He also made it very clear that those Catholics who found Cordileone’s Catholicism a bit too narrow would find a friendly home in the Episcopal Church.  Here is part of his letter:

In working together with the Archdiocese of San Francisco, however, I will not change my course with regard to the full inclusion of all people in the full life of the church. I hope that public disagreements can be handled respectfully and that criticisms of public statements may be met with mutual respeect. Some Catholics may find themselves less at home with Salvatore Cordileone's installation and they may come to The Episcopal Church. We should welcome them as our sisters and brothers.
Even as we welcome those who may join us and look for ways to work with our Roman Catholic siblings in the faith, we will not be silenced in our proclamation of God's inclusion. Our ecumenical partnership should be founded in our following Christ and shared service. It is our Christian duty to take stands in public or from our pulpits when others - especially those of our own faith - are in error and trying to suppress the rights of others who, too, have been created in God's image.


Well of course Bishop Andrus welcomes refugees from Cordileone’s Catholicism.  Without disaffected Catholics and the occasional social-climbing Methodist, there would be no Episcopal Church. Although a firm supporter in the ecumenical movement, I think a little tension on the local level between Catholics and Episcopalians is a good thing.  The Episcopal Church is not just “Catholic Lite” and the more clear the differences between us—superficial differences to be sure, there being “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all” (Ephesians 4:5-6)—but important differences none the less, the more faithful we each are.  I think we Catholics stand as a reminder to our Anglican and Protestant “siblings” of the Tradition handed down and they stand to us as a reminder of the radical freedom granted by the Gospel that transcends the Law.   Without our voice, there would  be only moral chaos; with only ours Christianity would revert to the religion of the Pharisees. So you two bishops, kiss and make up and get on with the work of the Gospel.      

 

 

Friday, September 14, 2012

Help! Sheep Without Shepherds!!!


Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas
City Missouri
Bishop Robert Finn, the Ordinary of the Diocese of Kansas City Missouri was convicted last week of failing to report suspected child sexual abuse to authorities.  Bishop Finn has indicated that despite his conviction he will not resign his see.  As he was not sentenced to prison but received a probationary sentence, he will not be impeded in any significant way from carrying out the responsibilities of his office, yet this is the first time that a Catholic Diocese in the United States has been led by a bishop convicted of such a crime.  (Note, the crime of not reporting the suspected abuse is a misdemeanor under the law, not a felony.)   Pressure by victim advocate groups is being put on the Vatican to remove Bishop Finn if he does not willingly resign but the Vatican does not respond well to such ground-roots pressure so it is unrealistic to expect he will be deprived of his Diocese.  In fact, the Vatican (I certainly need to refrain from using the term “Holy See” in this instance as the irony would be appalling) is all but certain to back up the bishop’s decision.  Hopefully they won’t promote him to a higher See.     
For those who think that this is just another case of the secular world harassing the Church, it should be noted that Bishop Finn himself had appointed former United States Attorney Todd P Graves to conduct an independent investigation of Diocesan policies and procedures regarding charges of sexual abuse perpetrated by clergy or Diocesan employees.  Graves was the national co-chairman of the U.S. Justice Department's Child Exploitation Working Group.  Graves’ final evaluation was “that Diocesan leaders (read: the bishop) failed to follow their own policies and procedures for responding to reports" of sexual abuse by clergy.”   In other words, not only did a Court find that the Bishop failed in his responsibilities, but the independent counsel the Bishop hired  to investigate the situation found the bishop at fault.  Bishop Finn needs our prayers as to the people of the Diocese of Kansas City in Missouri.  The victims of abuse need our prayers and the clergy whose sins and sickness has led to this debacle need our prayers.  But also the Old Boys Club in Rome needs our prayers that the Lord will open their eyes to comprehend the problem.  In other words, Cardinal Law still doesn’t get it.  Talk about Invincible moral Ignorance! Incidentally, when Archbishop-designate Salvatore Cordileone assumes the responsibilities of the Archdiocese of San Francisco on October 4th, he will be the second Ordinary to assume the diocese under a legal cloud as he was arrested recently on charges of drunk driving—another misdemeanor.  He is due to appear in court five days after his installation as Archbishop.  I only hope he has the aplomb not to wear his cappa magna to the courthouse.  
My complaint here is not against Bishop Finn or Archbishop-designate Cordileone.  I live in a glass house myself and am not anxious to throw stones.  I am sure that each is a good man within the parameters of basic moral structures; they (and those responsible for their advancement) are simply injudicious.  And injudiciousness at this level is not simply unadvisable, it is immoral.  What I am complaining about is that the American Church not only deserves but is in desperate need of better men for the ministry of Bishop.  The Church is being humiliated not by external enemies who ultimately are unable to wound the Church but by her own hierarchs who can do great damage to the faith.    I know that there are wiser and holier men for the ministry of Bishop than we are getting in many of our Sees—and at some Roman desks.   I have met priests who would make better bishops than Finn or Cordileone or the clique responsible for their advancement (The Burke-Law-Lori axis).  Please just give us the leadership we need. 

Monday, August 27, 2012

Mothers and Bishops Who Drink Too Much

Today is the feast of Saint Monica.  Monica has always been held up as the pious mother praying with copious tears for the conversion of her son, Augustine.  Read the Confessions, however, and you get a different picture.   Had Monica done her duty as a Christian mother and had her son baptized in infancy or early childhood, Augustine claims, he would not have strayed down all the wild and wicked ways of life (which, again, if you read the Confessions aren’t that wild and wicked, in fact are far from lurid, disappointing even).   But Monica and her non-Christian husband, Patricius (Patrick—you didn’t need to be Irish in the ancient world to have that name) had ambitious plans for their son, career plans that baptism would have impeded, and so he went unbaptized.  At that time, Christians were not allowed—by Church discipline—to study the great  non-Christian (I am avoiding the word “pagan”) authors—Cicero, Virgil, Livy, Terence —whose prose and poetry set the literary style.  Augustine studied hard and indeed excelled in rhetoric—equivalent to the study of law today—and had a successful career as an academic and then in the Imperial service, but to Monica’s horror he never did join the Church in those salad years.  His life, as I said, was not that dissolute—he lived in a long-term common-law marriage with a woman to whom he was faithful and with whom he had a son whom both he and Monica adored.  The son died in adolescence.  Augustine was prevented by law from marrying his companion as they were of sufficiently different social strata (she much lower) and the Empire had laws prohibiting such matches even as many State Governments in the 19th and first half of the 20th century prevented interracial marriages.  Monica, interfering in the most intimate details of her son’s life, indeed found her son a more suitable match and broke up the relationship with his son’s mother, forcing Augustine to send the woman away.  He said that losing this woman was like having his heart torn from his breast, but he did as Mother said.  What a wus!  He is one of my heroes, though, and I think the Confessions are one of the most beautiful books written.  And one of the most touching scenes in the book is the final conversation Augustine and his mother have in Ostia as they wait for the ship to return to their native North Africa.  Monica was never to make the journey, dying shortly after this conversation.    
Augustine also tells us in the Confessions that his mother had a drinking problem—indeed even as a child she seems to have had an alcohol addiction.  She would overcome it in her adult life a la George W Bush by totally refraining from alcohol.  
Speaking of Alcohol issues, yesterday I mentioned San Francisco Archbishop-Designate Salvatore Cordileone.  Cordileone is known for his vehement opposition to same-sex marriage as well as for his love for the bejeweled ornaments and long silk robes with which he has tricked himself out as Bishop of Oakland.  His Grace was arrested the other day for a DUI. We all make mistakes and we need to have compassion on one another for various moral failures such as getting drunk.  His being drunk shouldn’t be a problem for his assuming his new duties, but his lack of prudence and responsibility in getting behind the wheel of a car requires a reconsideration of whether he can handle the responsibilities of such a post as he is about to undertake.  Perhaps if he chooses to undergo evaluation and treatment (note, I say evaluation and treatment as evaluation can determine if there is a serious problem here or merely an indiscretion) in a facility such as the St. Luke Institute or the Southdown Institute he can learn important things about himself that will prepare him to be a good and wise pastor to the flock entrusted to him.  Such places have helped many priests and religious come to terms with themselves and find grace in the midst of the chaos of their lives.  This brings us back to Saint Augustine.   So many people think that Augustine is obsessed with sin but when you read the Confessions, really read them, you see that Augustine talks about sin because it was in the brokenness of his life that he found the mystery of Grace.  He is the Doctor Gratiae—the Doctor of Grace.  May Archbishop Cordileone find Grace in his life through exploring his failures and may he become the compassionate and wise bishop that was Augustine. 

Sunday, August 26, 2012

A Note on the Costume of Prelates


Archbishop-Designate Salvatore Cordileone
of San Francisco processing through the
streets of the Bay Area--seriously,  not
making this up!

You may have noticed that I don’t post the comments that come into my blog as it isn’t my intention to hold discussions but rather to present little known aspects of history or to make commentary on current situations in the light of the Church’s previous experience.  When I do get a question or a comment that merits some attention, I do try to respond indirectly.  In my last posting, I showed a picture of François de Salignac de la Mothe-Fénelon,  (1651-1715) Archbishop of Cambrai (1696-1715) and it included a picture of the Archbishop wearing a blue mozetta over his rochet.  I had an inquiry asking if Fénelon were a Sylvesterine Benedictine as, my correspondent (an obvious lover of arcane knowledge) reminded me, until Paul VI reformed the costume of prelates in 1969 prelates  who were Benedictines of this congregation wore blue.  But the answer is no—Archbishop Fénelon was not a religious but rather that the custom of bishops and archbishops wearing amaranth purple (actually a red tending towards the purple) is a fairly recent phenomenon.  Previously this reddish color was reserved for monsignori of the papal household.  The Gilbert Stuart portrait of John Carroll, the first Catholic Bishop for the United States, has Carroll in a green mozetta.  Only those bishops and archbishops who, in addition to their responsibilities in their own dioceses, were made honorary members of the papal household wore the amaranth purple habits.  Sometimes people ask why monsignors dress like bishops when in fact historically it was bishops who began dressing like monsignors.  This reminds me of the old joke that while we don’t know when Jesus instituted the priesthood—was it the Last Supper (Do This in Memory of Me) or Easter Night (Whose Sins you Forgive are Forgiven), we do know when he instituted Monsignors.  You can find it in Matthew 6:28.  “See the lilies of the field—they neither toil nor spin; yet not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed as one of these.”  In any event, in the middle of the nineteenth century it became all but universal that a man, on being made a bishop, was also automatically named an honorary prelate of the papal household and the green or blue episcopal habit disappeared in favor of the red.  The relic left behind, however, is that on his coat of arms a bishop’s (or Archbishop’s) hat is green, not red.  And the cord by which his pectoral cross is suspended is intertwined green and gold, not red and gold. 
Archbishop John Carroll, a man of
more restrained taste
Until the reforms of Paul VI, bishops (and Archbishops and Cardinals) of the monastic and mendicant orders wore choir vesture of the same design as secular prelates but of wool (not of silk) and in the traditional colors of their orders.  Thus most Benedictine prelates wore black; Franciscans grey; Dominicans  and Cistercians, white and black; Carmelites, brown and white and so on.  Prelates who were religious of the various societies and congregations (as distinguished from the “Orders”) such as Jesuits, Theatines, Oblates, etc. wore costumes of amaranth red (bishops and archbishops) or scarlet (cardinals) but of wool or broadcloth in deference to their vows of poverty rather than the silk of the secular clergy.  It made for a more colorful Church and was a bit more fun.  In 1969 however, Paul VI made drastic changes in the vesture of prelates.  He not only standardized the choir habit of all Western Rite prelates in color and design and fabric, but he abolished from papal ceremonies the cappa magna—the great cape with a train of nine yards that bishops could wear in their jurisdiction and Cardinals could wear wherever they wished.  He didn’t forbid prelates from wearing it in their own dioceses or Cardinals from wearing it outside the Diocese of Rome, but the vesture almost died out.  It has received a recent resurgence through the pomposity of such distinguished hierarchs as Raymond Burke, George Pell, Dario Castrillón-Hoyos and now Archbishop-designate Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco.  Of course in San Fran Archbishop Cordileone will fit right in wearing a long train of silk.  I’m sure he won’t be alone in his penchant for lots of silk.