Catholic sacrament of the week.

I'm not quite sure I completely understand the difference between "staff" and "line" but it would be good to quickly review the hierarchy.

Priest
Monsignor (with Pope Francis you have to be at least 60 years old. This is a term that signifies you have done some extraordinary work or deserve some recognition of some type. It is an honorary title, you are still a priest but with the title Monsignor)
Bishop (this is a brand new ordination and is considered the fullness of the priesthood. While you never stop being a priest your ordination to the episcopacy is different in degree and kind. At this level there are two distinctions: ordinary and auxiliary. An ordinary is the head bishop of a diocese and an auxiliary is the assistant bishop to an ordinary bishop of a diocese or an archdiocese. A diocese is smaller or of less historical importance than an archdiocese. An archdiocese also includes various suffrage sees, aka other dioceses that fall under the limited jurisdiction of an Archdiocese.)
Archbishop (this is simply the ordinary bishop of an Archdiocese)
Cardinal (an honorary title given to bishops. You could think of it as an elite monsignor for a bishop or archbishop. It is possible for laity to also receive the rank of cardinal. It is the highest honor one can receive other than being elected as Pope. Cardinals are considered princes of the Church.)

With this being said it sounds like bishops of the line might be auxiliary bishops or single bishops of a small diocese. Staff bishops would be Archbishops and Cardinals.

Quote: FrGamble

I'm not quite sure I completely understand the difference between "staff" and "line" but it would be good to quickly review the hierarchy.

With this being said it sounds like bishops of the line might be auxiliary bishops or single bishops of a small diocese. Staff bishops would be Archbishops and Cardinals.

You answered it above correctly in the body but not in the last sentence. I should have been more clear in how I asked. "Ordinary" would be what I am calling "line" and auxiliary would be "staff." Because I was brief before I will give some detail.

"Line" and "staff" are informal business and military terms for management structure. "Line" guys are the general managers who are responsible for some defined unit of P&L in business or soldiers in military. "Staff" guys help the line guy with one or more parts of the operation. For example, there may be a sales manager, a quality manager, and a HR manager as the staff managers to a line manager. This is both because the job is large and line managers need to be more administrators than specialists. So the guy who can sell sand in the desert but could care less about making sure the "right to cancel" form is attached (which could mean a fine) helps the line guy motivate the sales team. Meanwhile the guy who couldn't sell pardons in a prison but knows every rule and reg becomes the compliance manager. The are members of the "staff" of the "line" manager who has to keep this all in order and reports to someone higher with an even bigger staff.

"Staff" is considered an "easier" job with less stress, but if things go bad the staff will be the first place to be cut and the line manager must still get results without. "Staff" are generally disliked by lower-level line manages because they can forget the "real world" and do not have a direct P&L that determines their fate. Some have become good enough at one thing that if they are demoted to a lower level line job they can be a disaster. I know of one who very nearly became a guest of the State of New York for his actions.

For a historical example, see the movie "Patton" where Omar Bradley is put on Patton's staff early in the movie. Bradley later becomes Patton's boss. In business this is rare as a staff job can very often be a career dead-end.

Quote: FrGamble

Even if you were baptized as an infant you still received Confirmation and were even given a small part of a consecrated host as your first Holy Communion.

Think a minute:

A child's soul is given to a god that cannot even be depicted. Later the infant will be possessed by this god. Immediately afterward the infant will be fed a piece of human flesh.

Do you wonder the Romans had problems with this?

Quote: Nareed

Do you wonder the Romans had problems with this?

The Romans, hell, I have a problem with it.
It's voodoo, it's Santeria, it's superstitious
pagan nonsense.

There really is nothing new under the sun. These are some of the charges leveled against the early Christians in the year 100 AD. St. Justin Martyr was a great apologist who answered these objections. People considered Christians both cannibals and people who partook in orgies. These both came from a misunderstanding of the Mass.

The Mass was called an agape feast. This means a "love feast". It is still a good name because we celebrate the sacrificial and unconditional love of Jesus Christ at every Mass. He who has promised to be with us to the end of time is truly and really present, not just in His body and blood but in His soul and divinity. This means He is really and truly present. This presence is not exterior but interior. He becomes part of us, nourishing and transforming body and soul to be more like Him in our world.

Quote: FrGamble

This presence is not exterior but interior. He becomes part of us, nourishing and transforming body and soul to be more like Him in our world.

This is the reason 25,000 priests have left
the Church in the last 50 years. They bought
into the story and then realized it wasn't
true, so they left. Some people can only
suspend their disbelief for so long and reality
starts to creep back in. To buy the Christian
dogma, 'suspension of disbelief' is a major
part of it. For the congregation, they have
to do it infrequently. But a priest lives it all
day every day, his suspension of disbelief
has to be strong. Some just can't cut it.

Every single day as a priest my belief in God is strengthened.

Quote: FrGamble

Every single day as a priest my belief in God is strengthened.

And apparently every single day there are
priests whose belief is lessened. So much
for the power of gods presence in peoples
lives.

I know that the vast majority of those priests who leave active ministry do not do so because their faith is shaken or they lose their belief. I would say the number is zero of those priests who become atheists. The reality is that priests leave because in prayer they feel God is calling them to another vocation. They realize that they entered for the wrong reason or that they are called to get married. They don't leave because they have lost their faith in God, don't be silly.

Some leave because they lose faith, most
leave because they lose faith in the Church.