Many Orthodox and other Christians are hesitant about full communion with the Holy See not so much because they see some doctrinal issues as unsolvable, not because of unfortunate and reprehensible historical events, but precisely because of the way issues are dealt with by the Curia. It must also be said that this is a concern all over the world. Recent events in Switzerland, Austria, Germany and France, in Brazil, Africa and the U.S. are only one indication of how widespread this concern is. The concern has to do with the appointment of bishops, the approval of documents such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the grave decline in the numbers of priests and the consequent decline in the availability of Mass for the people, the cognate issue of the celibacy of the clergy, the role of episcopal conferences, the role of women and the issue of the ordination of women.

Two things are involved in these issues: the decision of the Holy See on a specific issue and the way in which these decisions are reached and implemented. For instance, are such decisions imposed without consultation with the episcopate and without appropriate dialogue? Are bishops appointed against an overwhelming objection of people and priests in a given diocese? Where the answer is affirmative there are serious difficulties for Christian unity.

...There are practical instances which are tantamount to making Bishops managers who only work under instructions rather than true witnesses of faith who teach -- in communion with the Pope -- in the name of Christ.

Collegiality requires discussion
...A collegiality which consists largely in embracing decisions which have been made by higher authority is a very attenuated collegiality...Bishops and episcopal conferences feel that such grave questions as contraception, the ordination of women, general absolution, and the celibacy of the clergy are closed to discussion.

...The international Synod of Bishops was envisioned as being a way for the bishops of the world with the Pope to deal with major issues touching the ChurchŠ Many bishops feel that issues which they would like to discuss responsibly cannot come up, such as those mentioned above as well as others such as divorce, remarriage and the reception of the sacraments. I am not here taking a personal position on any of these issues. My point is simply to underline that issues of major concern in the church are not really open to a free and collegial evaluation and discussion by bishops, whose office includes being judges in matters of faith. A free discussion is one in which loyalty to the Pope and the orthodoxy of faith of those who discuss these issues is not called into question.

Appointment of bishops
It is not uncommon for bishops of a province to discover that no candidate they proposed has been accepted for approval...Candidates whom bishops do not approve at all may be appointed...Honest, fraternal dialogue compels me to raise the question whether the time has not come to make some modifications in this procedure so that the local churches really have a significant and truly substantive role in the appointment of bishops...The participation of the local churches cannot properly be confined merely to the participation of bishops but must include a meaningful and responsible role for priests, lay persons and religious.

Until 1829, it was the policy of the Holy See to leave the appointment of bishops to the local church where possible. In 1829 there were 646 diocesan bishops in the Latin churchŠ Only 24 were directly appointed by Rome.

Time for Vatican III
...We need to recapture the importance of ecumenical councils...The Council of Constance in the 15th century decreed that there should be regularly scheduled councils every ten years. If that decree had been observed perhaps the history of the Reformation would have been different...I believe it would greatly benefit both the unity and effectiveness of the Church if a Council were held to mark the beginning of the new millennium.