Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Not at all. I don't think you understood my analysis. It has nothing to do with predictability or foreknowledge.
The drunk is not operating as an agent of the bartender, carrying out the bartender's delegated responsibilities in his stead via authority and means conferred by the bartender upon the drunk.
The priest, on the other hand, is an ...[text shortened]... of the Bishop in his stead via the authority and means conferred by the Bishop upon the priest.
Consider another analogy.
Suppose I have a pet dog. I have to leave town, so I pick a guy off the street to petsit, and he doesn't feed the dog for a week. I have neglected my responsibility to ensure that the dog is fed. I hold myself culpable to the dog if the dog dies, and I hold the guy accountable to me. I can only delegate my caretaking duties, not my responsibility of ensuring the dog's well-being, as it is my pet.
Suppose I own a pet store. I sell a dog to a guy that comes in off the street. He doesn't feed the dog and the dog dies. After selling the dog, I no longer have a responsibility to care for the dog, and I do not hold myself culpable if the dog dies, and I do not hold the guy accountable to me.
The Bishop is, in a way, a caretaker of his members. He can delegate away to a priest his caretaking duties, but he can't delegate away to a priest his accountability and responsibilty for ensuring the well-being of his members.