The Spirit of Governance

How We Were Ordained

The current text which all the bishops present say over the new colleague upon whom they have just imposed their hands is this: “Now pour forth upon this chosen one the power that is from you, the governing spirit, whom you gave to your beloved Son Jesus Christ and whom he gave to the holy Apostles, who established the Church in each place as your sanctuary, to the glory and unfailing praise of your name.” This is only slightly changed from the previous text, but the phrase “governing spirit” remains.

I am always amazed by this text. It is not about preaching or teaching or sanctifying in this core section of the prayer of consecration, but rather “the governing spirit.” What is this all about?

While the rest of the text calls upon this man to nourish the flock and to offer the gifts of the Church, the ordination prayer centers on this theme of governance.

How Our Predecessors Were Ordained

In the 1961 Pontifical, the consecration prayer over the new bishop-elect begins with the Gospel Book imposed over the neck and shoulders of the new colleague. The essential words are rather poetic: “Fulfill in your priest the perfection of your ministry: and sanctify him, clothed in the ornaments of perfect glory, with the dew of heavenly anointing.”

After the anointing with Holy Chrism, the prayer continues with the invocation of the penetrating Spirit into this man to help him preach and reconcile; it then has these words: “Grant him, O Lord, the Episcopal Chair, in order to guide [regendum] Your Church and the people assigned to him.”

This is not a very helpful prayer as it seems to be a collage of various images rather than an invocation of a specific charism, except for the very specific image of the cathedra, which again is tied to guidance or ruling.

Focus on Governance

This stronger emphasis on governance in the current ritual and its hint in the earlier prayer by reference to the cathedra is fascinating since Christus Dominus speaks of teaching as “among the principal duties of bishops” (§12; see §§13-14). After dealing with the sanctifying office (§15), CD then focuses on the pastoral role of being a good shepherd, with special care for the priests, and being attentive to the needs and apostolate of the faithful.

The Catechism (§1586) expands on the meaning of the ritual:

For the bishop, this is first of all a grace of strength (“the governing spirit”: Prayer of Episcopal Consecration in the Latin rite): the grace to guide and defend his Church with strength and prudence as a father and pastor, with gratuitous love for all and a preferential love for the poor, the sick, and the needy. This grace impels him to proclaim the Gospel to all, to be the model for his flock, to go before it on the way of sanctification by identifying himself in the Eucharist with Christ the priest and victim, not fearing to give his life for his sheep.

Clearly, this is the same governing spirit which was given to Jesus Christ and which he then handed on to the Apostles. The homily for our episcopal ordination ritual does list all three munera: preaching, sanctifying, and governing. As to the third of these duties, that homily speaks of gathering new members to the Body of Christ and leading all members on the pilgrimage to eternal life. In addition, the text notes: “In the Church entrusted to you, be a faithful steward, moderator, and guardian of the mysteries of Christ. As one chosen by the Father to govern his family, be mindful always of the Good Shepherd, who knows his sheep and is known by them, and who did not hesitate to lay down his life for them.” And this involves care for the clergy, the poor, the faithful, and even the universal Church, but especially for the flock over which “the Holy Spirit places you to govern the Church of God.”

The promises we made when we were ordained bishops include proclaiming the Gospel, guarding the deposit of faith, building and maintaining the unity of the Body of Christ, encouraging the clergy and people of God, seeking out the poor and straying, and praying ceaselessly.

There is also that aspect of governing which participates in the solicitude for all the churches, a care each bishop has for the entire Church in union with the Holy Father. Perhaps today we can mainly focus on the governance of the Church given to each of us. But even here we know that the local bishop, especially by his connection to the universal Church, is himself a source of the very universal communion which the local Church requires and experiences.

Thus, first of all, the bishop is the visible presence of Christ as head of the Church, “the living image of God the Father,” as the Catechism notes quoting Ignatius of Antioch (§1549). In addition, the bishop becomes the voice of Christ (§862, quoting Lumen Gentium §22). Thus, it is that each bishop manifests this sacramental presence by his words, example, and edifying exercise of authority (§894, quoting LG §27). Above all, this is most clearly seen in being a good shepherd (§896, quoting LG §27). All of these aspects reflect the role which the bishop has toward his people. We will see later how governance also includes the representation of his people, especially when we look at the letters of Ignatius of Antioch.

Anthony Brausch has a great comment about this focus on governance: “Many bishops would attest that it is the practical side of the exercise of the munus regendi that occupies the bulk of their time and accounts for most of their experienced difficulty and worries. The munus sanctificandi and the munus docendi, on the other hand, are the chief source of their joy and consolation.”[1]

I know that most of us would prefer those activities that give us joy and consolation and would rather shun those that seem to provide us with worries and difficulties. Nonetheless, this is the grace which has been given to us in order to fulfill a ministry that needs that grace so desperately.

Some Scriptural Texts

Perhaps we can find some solace in a few Scripture texts that can provide a kind of foundation for this spirit of governance. In one of the roughest of psalms (109), David invites all manner of retribution on his oppressor, including that “another may take his office” (109:8), a line taken up by the Acts of the Apostles as they seek to replace Judas (1:20). There is an ongoing sense that there is need for a continued apostolic leadership, in this case, that the team Jesus formed needs to be filled up. The subsequent naming of continuators of the mission may appear to be merely a practical consequence of the dying or disability of previous missionaries. However, this continuation is clearly the work of God and his Spirit which allows the missionary task to continue. We bishops are clearly filling not just a practical need in the Church, but a divine need. It is not always easy to see the divine activity in our work, when we are caught up what seems to us to be the merely practical.

Paul, in just one example, introduces a leadership model which appears to be a group activity as he writes to the Church in Philippi, resting on the imperial Via Egnatia: “Paul and Timothy, slaves of Christ Jesus, to all the holy ones in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the overseers and ministers” (Phil 1:1). This letter was most likely written a mere five years after Paul’s initial rather brief ministry there, and yet there are already those designated by the terms episkopoi and diakonoi. Granted, these nouns certainly do not have the import of today’s usage, but how quickly the Christian communities became organized is remarkable. Not only do the apostolic “slaves” of Jesus, as Paul calls himself and Timothy, appeal to individuals, but they seek to help form the Body of Christ, clearly a corporate reality. Yet, notice that episkopoi is plural. It may be that these guiding lights acted as a team rather than as a strict hierarchy, although that there may have been someone who facilitated communal actions cannot be ruled out.

It is in the Pastoral Letters, of course, where we find more occurrences of these terms. Here, there does not always appear to be a great distinction, especially between presbyteros and episkopos. Thus, in first Timothy, we find: “Presbyters who preside well deserve double honor, especially those who toil in preaching and teaching” (1 Tim 5:17). Titus is instructed to appoint presbyters “in every town” (Tit 1:5) with qualities similar to a bishop, at which point the text simply flows into the bishop with qualifications seemingly applying to both groups. The only significant difference is that the text uses ton episkopon in the singular (Tit 1:7).

But it is the role of this presbyter-overseer that is described in 1 Timothy 3, which can help us. It comes to us as an office to which one aspires, certainly not a common experience today. In fact, if you are like me, you probably had a lot of misgivings about becoming a bishop. I preferred my seminary work to the episcopal office. Nonetheless, we also see in the Letter to Timothy some expected characteristics: “he must manage his own household well . . . for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of the Church of God?” (1 Tim 3:4-5). Archbishop Anthony Fisher of Sydney, Australia, spoke to us bishops in San Diego in June of 2021. He noted: “Thus in the job description for a bishop offered in the pastoral epistles many of the ‘desired attributes’ bear immediately upon our themes of fraternity and communion: bishops must be familiar, open and trustworthy, not overbearing, excitable, or querulous.”

Letters of Ignatius of Antioch

It seems that managing oneself as well as one’s household and seeking to preserve communion are the keys to managing a local community. We will see this further developed as we look now at the letters of St. Ignatius.

St. Ignatius, the third bishop of Antioch, who was martyred in Rome around 110 AD under the Emperor Trajan, had written seven letters to various churches during his military escort to Rome, especially during a stay at Smyrna with Polycarp. In these letters, he writes about the importance of the hierarchy and especially about the role of the bishop. Though there may not have been the same settled position of the bishop in all the early communities, clearly Ignatius writes of an institution that was on the way to being established in the eastern part of the empire by his time.

It is not known why he was being taken to Rome and martyrdom. Allen Brent, in Ignatius of Antioch, suggests that there may have been some turmoil in Antioch around his assertion of episcopal leadership. While this was probably not the cause of his imprisonment, it may have been the context. At any rate, Brent also believes that his being taken to Rome served to unite the Christians of Antioch behind their now absent bishop. Brent adds:

Let us now see where this section has taken us. We began with our claim that Ignatius was, on his own admission, a man obsessed with his quest for church unity. His experience in his factionalized native Antioch had convinced him of his mission to introduce a church order founded upon a single bishop as the source of unity or concord (homonoia) between other authoritative bodies within the developing ecclesial constitution, namely the presbyterate and diaconate and also the laity of the community itself, which constituted with these the Christian ekklesia.[2]

Brent’s emphasis on the need for unity could well have been the overriding impetus for the development of the singular episcopos.

The bishop of Ephesus, Onesimus, actually visited with Ignatius, and about him the future martyr wrote the Ephesians that they should be united with their bishop and receive him as they would “the Master himself” (§§4-6). Ignatius saw the bishop’s role was to be one with his presbyterate, “joined to the bishop as cords to a lyre,” and thus not an overlord. I have always felt that my relationship with the presbyterate is the most important aspect of my governance activity.

Ignatius adds that the people themselves should participate in this music: “Therefore in your concord and in the symphony of your love Jesus Christ is sung. You must join this chorus, every one of you, so that being harmonious in concord and taking your note from God you may sing in unity with one voice through Jesus Christ to the Father” (§§1-2).

The youthful-looking Bishop Damas of Magnesia, who would seemingly have belied the title of “elder,” also visited Ignatius. To his church, Ignatius also urged unity and obedience to the bishop (§6).

A third bishop, Polybius of Tralles, arrived, and like the previous two bishops, Ignatius took joy in seeing their communities manifested in the very life of their bishops (§1). Somehow, the bishop actually embodies the entire community. In addition, Ignatius reminds the Trallians that Polybius represents the Father (§3). Allen Brent comments on this particular letter: “Ignatius, then, claims that the one bishop, as representing the Fatherhood of God from whose silence Christ proceeds, can alone provide unity to a Church splitting itself into factions as its unity breaks down.”[3] Brent especially notes the quality of discrete silence of Polybius, cited by Ignatius, as critical, often in the face of many loud and divisive voices. This notion that we bishops represent our diocese to God and the world and God himself to our diocese can seem intimidating, but perhaps the best quality here cited is that silence of Polybius.

From Smyrna, Ignatius then wrote to the Church in Rome, “the Church . . . of the Romans which holds the primacy” (Intro), making no mention of a bishop there. Ignatius’s primary aim is for that Church to support his pilgrimage to martyrdom.

At this point, Ignatius writes from Troas back to the Church in Philadelphia as he is preparing to cross into Greece. He recalls that while at their Church, he had urged obedience to their bishop, presbyters, and deacons “in a deep voice, the voice of God” (§7). While not mentioning the name of their bishop, he called for obedience for the sake of unity in their community (§8). Here, as in so many of these letters, Ignatius sees that the bishop effects unity by working closely with the presbyterate with whom he always celebrates the Eucharist (4).

Looking back, he also now writes to the Smyrnaeans, whom he seems to know far better than those of the other Churches, having spent so much time there with Polycarp. Either to counter or to prevent any divisions in the Church at Smyrna, he writes:

Let all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ did the Father, and the priests, as you would the Apostles. . . . Apart from the bishop, let no one perform any of the functions that pertain to the Church. Let that Eucharist be held valid which is offered by the bishop or by one to whom the bishop has committed this charge. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God (§8).

His last letter is to Polycarp himself. Ignatius again emphasizes something he has previously written: “Be preoccupied about unity, for nothing is better than this” (§1). His advice to his colleague may seem hard: “Stand firm like an anvil under the hammer. A great boxer will take a beating and yet win through. We ought to put up with anything especially for the sake of God, so that he will put up with us. Become more zealous even than you are. Understand the age in which we live” (§3).

Polycarp would later write a letter to the Philippians through whose city Ignatius traveled on his way to Rome.

Four Aspects of Governance

We have now come to the point of articulating several aspects of the spirit of governance which we received in our episcopal ordination: continuing the apostolic mission; embodying the Church we serve; seeking unity above all; being one with the priests, deacons, and laity. We will not delve into any practical applications here. Rather, let us briefly look at each of these general thrusts of the governing spirit we have received.

The Apostolic Mission

First of all, we have received an apostolic office, a stable charism. What is most interesting here is that this is not a charism which is directly given by the Spirit to an individual for the upbuilding of the Church. Rather, this is a charism given by the Spirit through the apostolic college. Granted, only three bishops may have ordained us. Nonetheless, it is the entire apostolic college of bishops which has handed this charism, this office, to us and, we in turn, with every new bishop after us, hand on the very same office and charism to each of them. Without this collegial action we would not receive the governing spirit. I remember when I was appointed to Lansing, Cardinal Maida told me that I was not the bishop of the capital or of the state, but that I was to work with my brother bishops, especially in the Michigan Catholic Conference.

Thus, this governing spirit is primarily about the Church continuing the collegial apostolic mission. This mission given by Christ and empowered by the Holy Spirit to be his witnesses is never to be seen by us as an isolated or lone-ranger type of activity. This also means that we are not merely associated in some generic way with the entire Church in her work of bringing salvation to the world. No, we are specifically to be associated with our brother bishops throughout the world and throughout the past and future as well.

The Catechism (§862), citing Lumen Gentium §20, notes: “Just as the office which the Lord confided to Peter alone, as first of the apostles, destined to be transmitted to his successors, is a permanent one, so also endures the office, which the apostles received, of shepherding the Church, a charge destined to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops.”

In this sense, the governing spirit we have received is entangling. If we have thrived on individualism and egoism, this will be a great change. To embrace this office and gift means a serious de-centering of ourselves. Even if ordination to the diaconate and priesthood required similar sentiments, now it is eminently more necessary. The apostolic college, resting completely on the Trinitarian life, demands our complete surrender.

Embodying the Church

Ignatius highlighted a second quality: that we embody our local Church. It is not just that we have a title and name and place; rather, we so take on this local Church that we are somehow synonymous with it. Now to avoid any dangers of schizophrenia, this does not mean that all the disparate and at times contradictory elements of our local Church must manifest themselves through us. However, should our Church be deeply divided, then there will be both a certain sadness that permeates us as well as an apostolic zeal to bring about healing. Both of these, perhaps, are embodied in us and are seen by others as well.

Clearly, this embodiment has a certain nuptial quality to it. We are wedded to our diocese and they to us such that the two do become one. Some questioned Gregory of Nazianzus being named to Constantinople because he was already the bishop of a rather small nondescript diocese, which, in fact, he may never really have occupied. Still, this sentiment of union with our local Church is very much akin to marriage—no doubt, like all marriages, something we have to grow into. This can be particularly difficult if we have trouble separating ourselves from our previous diocese or parish or ministry as we take on this new bride. I have made a point of rarely speaking about Detroit in Lansing.

Finally, embodiment directly points to the body. There is something about our carriage and physical behavior which is both in tune with our local Church and leading her as well. Each of us has to determine what this means in any practical sense and especially to determine whether we are out of congruence with our local Church. I am sure you can imagine many aspects that might apply here.

Seeking Unity

We now come to the third aspect of our governing spirit, that we seek unity above all. My favorite New Testament letters are those to Corinth. Paul continuously fought the factionalism he found there. I do not think he was very successful. After all, it was not much later that Clement of Rome wrote to the same Church about the same kinds of division. Yet, Paul gave it his all. The bishop must work at unity all the time. We do not throw up our hands. Since unity is the desire of Christ, we too must work at that with all our hearts and minds and souls.

There is not much point here in getting into any of the specifics of how this might be done. Yet, a caution is needed. This is because we will never achieve complete unity this side of the grave. We will always have that pastor or parish or organization which will perhaps pay lip service but will not effectively recognize our efforts toward unity as beneficent. Prudence and patience are incredibly important virtues for the bishop. And, speaking personally, there will always be those brother priests whom we have hurt either by our mistakes or by our justified actions that somehow never get healed, no matter how we may have apologized.

In addition, while there are canonical situations that call for actual compulsion, in most cases our efforts will be limited to persuasion, speaking truth in love. It is in seeking unity with our priests and deacons and consecrated persons and laity and not against them that we can be most effective. And, if all are clear that we only seek that unity for which Jesus prayed at the Last Supper, that unity which the Church promotes, that unity which is not our personal likes or dislikes, then God’s grace will surely guide us.

Being One With the Local Church

This leads us directly into the fourth quality of our governing spirit, which I wish to address: being one with our clergy, consecrated, and laity. I suppose when we are new to a diocese, the first thing we need to do is find common ground. Obviously, Jesus Christ and his Church provide that most solidly. However, there is also a matter here of personal connections. One of the first things asked of me by the public media when I came to Lansing was whether I favored Michigan or Michigan State since both were in the diocese. I responded that as long as they both beat Ohio State, I would be happy. This may seem a silly thing, but seeking and finding human connections can be difficult. I am not here speaking of making friends, though, of course, we must be friendly. Rather, these are connections which are broader than individual one-on-ones. Not only do we not arrive as an adversary, but we are quite intent on showing ourselves to be part of the cultural matrix of our diocese.

Being one with our folks, of course, means we seek to be physically present to and with them. I began my ministry by doing formal parish visits. I must confess that I did not complete that process, and I do regret it. So many other things can get in the way and so many demands can arise that I gave up on the commitments which an extended weekend can make on my time. I encourage bishops to accomplish what I did not. There are other ways to participate as well. Confirmations have meant a great deal to me, and I really do enjoy them. Other religious celebrations such as dedications of altars, vows for religious, funerals of deacons and priests, and others are obvious occasions. To be physically present is so very important.

In addition, in today’s world we can be virtually present. When I became the bishop of Lansing, one of the first things I did was establish a brief Priests’ Newsletter every Friday afternoon with very short comments on the week just completed and perhaps some thoughts on upcoming events. This has remained a very successful connection with the clergy. In addition, we have been doing regular videos to put out on Twitter and Facebook and other media, and countless folks in the diocese have told me how much they appreciate this connection and “presence” to them.

In addition, there are meetings and more meetings and more meetings. While I do look forward to the day when I am a senior bishop and will no longer have to be at meetings, nonetheless, meetings are vital. They provide so many opportunities to hear from and dialogue with so many different people and constituencies. This is especially true of our curias. These fine men and women want to know us, be with us, and carry out our view of the mission of Jesus Christ. For introverts, these can be quite challenging. Still, engage in them. Spend a lot of time listening, in silence, as St. Ignatius of Antioch would say. This will encourage all to take part fully and will be a step in supporting them in their roles of co-responsibility for the Kingdom of God.

Conclusion

To top off these four qualities, or better, to make sure they are built on solid ground, pray, pray, and pray. If we are not spending an hour in prayer every day, most likely in the morning, our governing will not be of the spirit. But with prayer, the governing spirit we have all received will flourish for the good of our local Church and to the glory of God. This will help us fulfil what Gregory of Nazianzus, as cited by Archbishop Fisher noted: “administration must not sway the bishop’s primary role as ‘soul of the flock,’ physician of their hearts, devoted to their deification.”

Now, I know there are many other aspects of the Governing Spirit which we could address. For example, just how are we to “balance” justice and mercy, if even “balancing” is the correct term to use. This may, in fact, be a poor term. We are to exercise divine mercy, which is limitless, and divine justice, which is perfect. Cardinal Cantalamessa, in addressing the U.S. Bishops in January 2019 addressed this topic with us:

When it comes to questions of morality in the Gospels, the one constant in Jesus’s actions can be summed up in seven words: “No to sin, yes to the sinner.” No one is more severe than Jesus in condemning unjustly acquired wealth, and yet he invited himself to Zacchaeus’s house. And simply by going there just to meet him, he effected a change. Jesus condemned adultery, even that of the heart, but he forgave the adulteress and restored her hope. Jesus reaffirmed the indissolubility of marriage, yet he engaged in a conversation with the Samarian woman who had gone through five marriages. He went so far as to reveal something to her that he had not told anyone else in such an explicit way: “I am he [the Messiah], the one who is speaking to you” (John 4:26).

How we might continue the Lord’s behavior in our own ministry would probably merit another article altogether.

I might add here that the integration of our teaching and sanctifying roles with governance can be difficult. Louis Bouyer notes: “It is only as a consequence of this basic ministry of the Word and the sacraments that the apostolic ministry implies a governing power, that is, a power of applying the Word to the whole existence of the community.”[4] There is much to mine here.

There is also a theme of being careful not to exercise governance as the world defines it. Cardinal Cantalamessa, at the same gathering at Mundelein, noted:

This means that you cannot exercise the episcopal ministry if not “charismatically,” that is, with the power and anointing of the Spirit, and not according to the criteria by which the office of governing is exercised in the world. It would be a big mistake to let the world impose its agenda to the Church.

I suppose this does not mean that there is nothing we can learn from the world, but clearly ours is a spiritual gift.

In addition, there is an overriding theme we have not addressed. As Bernard of Clairvaux, in his Commentary on the Song of Songs (Sermon 18:3), notes, we are always to share the gifts we have been given. However, those in authority must always be aware that they not be “full of presumption to govern others while they know not how to govern themselves.” All of the implications above really are meant to manifest themselves in our own self-governance, a goal that must continuously seek God’s grace to accomplish.

I am sure you could come up with many other topics to pursue. In the end, it seems to me at least, we are very good with our sanctifying ministry and our teaching ministry. Perhaps, that is why in our episcopal ordination the “governing spirit” is the particular gift we have received and that we are to exercise.