…to congratulate Bishop Robert Baker of Charleston on being named the new bishop of Birmingham, Alabama.
Bishop Baker is a old friend of Michael’s, and he baptized Michael the Toddler in a memorable ceremony in a church in central Ohio that is probably still echoing from then 3 1/2 year old Joseph’s energy burst that seemed to come out of nowhere, but went straight into the annals of….something.
Bishop Baker has worked with Michael on two books – one lovely, hardbound book he wrote with Fr. Benedict Groeschel on Matthew 25 – When Did We See You, Lord (in
fact this was the book Fr. Groeschel was working on when he had his terrible accident in Orlando several years ago, which delayed its completion, but thanks to Fr. Groeschel’s strength in recovery, it did get finished. More details on that story, as well on the icons – written by the iconographer whose work we saw in the church in Conyers – at the Amazon link. )
More recently, Bishop Baker wrote The Questioner’s Prayer - a very nice book of meditations based on, well…questions.
I’m sure everyone in Birmingham – including EWTN – is very pleased to finally – after 2 1/2 years – to have a new bishop!
My husband, daughter and I have been praying for a holy, courageous, pro-life bishop who would support EWTN’s mission for some time. Wonderful
On the other hand, it’s a development for episcopal modernism: the shifting of a bishop from one see to the other. It would still be unfortunate if Baker were shifted to a major archdiocese like Atlanta or Washington. But that would have at least a sliver of tradition attached to it. It seems unthinkable there’s not a single viable candidate among the Birmingham clergy.
Bishop Baker is clearly a talented guy, but why does the curia and pope persist in so much hierarchical musical chairs. The patristic bishops would be scandalized by such a move.
Congrats to Bishop Baker. May I also add, Peter was first bishop of Antioch until he went to Rome, so moving is not too much of a change. I pray the good Bishop is what Birmingham has been needing!
And now we pray for another good and holy bishop for Charleston. I knew we wouldn’t have Bishop Baker forever, but he certainly has been a blessing here, and seemingly tireless.
I’m sure everyone in Birmingham – including EWTN – is very pleased to finally – after 2 1/2 years – to have a new bishop!
Yes, but what about us folks in the Diocese of Charleston! As Jim said, time to pray…
Seriously, though, I’m quite fond of Bp. Baker as well, so congrats to the folks in Birmingham!
Congratulation, Bishop Baker, from your friends in Florida!
This is great news. I think we will be seeing a Traditional Latin Mass on EWTN soon.
I too pray that my home Diocese has a new Bishop soon. I’ve met Bishop Baker on several occasions (I worked as a campus minister in his Diocese for a few years). He’s people-oriented, personable, and orthodox. I wish him well in the corner of the Vineyard that he’s being sent to.
On the question of moving bishops around, I tend to agree with Todd. The way it’s done these days does seem to be a more modern practice. And here’s some quotes from an article in the NC(Reporter) by John Allen,from back in 1999.
“Speaking in an uncharacteristically repentant tone, Ratzinger, the church’s top doctrinal officer, expressed regret for leaving his own diocese. He was quoted in the June issue of the Italian journal 30Giorni. Ratzinger said he believed bishops should ordinarily remain in one diocese for life.
He was seconding the argument made in April by Cardinal Bernardin Gantin, former head of the Congregation for Bishops.
Gantin had complained of the “amazing careerism” he experienced in making episcopal appointments. He said candidates often pressured him for higher offices, and he proposed that bishops should be transferred only in rare circumstances.
Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, agreed that the “natural place” of the bishop is as head of one diocese. In a March speech at a Roman university, Medina rejected careerism: “The episcopacy cannot be the coronation of a career.”
Ironically, all three men were first diocesan bishops before being transferred to Rome. Gantin led the Cotonu diocese in Benin in West Africa, Ratzinger the archdiocese of Munich-Freising in Germany, and Medina the dioceses of Rancagua and Valparaiso in Chile.
Ratzinger acknowledged the seeming inconsistency of his stance. “The view of the bishop-diocese relation as matrimony, implying fidelity, is still valid,” he said. “Sadly I myself have not remained faithful in this regard.” ”
Granted, the focus in these remarks is “careerism” — aspiring to “higher” or more “prominent” or “respectable” office. Baker’s transfer is unusual, it seems to be, from one perspective, “lateral.” No fancier hats or titles!
But still, the idea of the bishop’s relationship to his church as being akin to marriage, is hardly in keeping with the modern practice of episcopal appointments.
My first thought yesterday morning after hearing the news was a bit selfish, I admit: What a loss for us in SC, but what a gain for Birmingham and EWTN! Being a lover of EWTN (my daughter worked there), I have prayed for a vibrant, supportive new leader of their Diocese–they got him! I didn’t realize my prayer would be answered to our loss here in SC, but such is sometimes the irony of prayers answered (God does indeed sometimes answer prayers in unexpected, ironic ways!). Blessings on EWTN and their Diocese.
We’ve got two choices here – either we move bishops or we are administered almost entirely by Italians. We tried that one, too.
Bishop’s relationship to church as marriage, yes. But what about parish priests? Same issue… isn’t it? There’s a mobility issue with the modern world.
I agree with Todd and Gashwin, at least to an extent. I can understand moving a talented Bishop to a higher-profile archepiscopal or cardinalatial see; yes, it does have an air of “promotion” and “careerism,” but I think it is important to have the best Bishops in the largest and most important sees, if for no other reason than we need to have good men as electors of Popes and as potential Popes themselves. But what is the point of a lateral move? It does seem like needless “musical chairs,” as Tood says.