A. Christ conferred upon His Apostles a special and true priestly character.
A. Christ conferred upon His Apostles a special and true priestly character.
I. That there is in the Christian religion a true priesthood – a separate class of men to whom the public worship of God, and the care of religion in general, is especially confided – would be more than probable even though we had no evidence of its divine institution. For not only did the Synagogue – the figure of the Church of Christ – possess a true priesthood, but among all nations there existed a class of men to whom the things appertaining to religion, particularly the divine worship, and, chief of all, the offering of sacrifices, were especially entrusted.
II. Christ actually conferred a true priesthood on His Apostles. When at the Last Supper He commissioned them to change bread and wine into His own Body and Blood, and thus to offer the Sacrifice of the New Law, He thereby ordained them priests (Council of Trent, Sess. 22 c. 1; Sess. 23 c. 1). Together with the power of administering the Blessed Eucharist, He also gave them power to forgive sins, or to reconcile sinners to God. The Apostles were, therefore, constituted true priests, or mediators between God and man.
III. The twofold office of the priesthood of Christ is – to offer sacrifice and sanctify the faithful by the administration of the Eucharist, and to reconcile sinners to God by the administration of Penance. But this two-fold power supposes also the power to administer the other Sacraments, whose object is the reconciliation and the sanctification of souls.
Besides the power of inward sanctification, it was necessary that the essential direction of the faithful to their last end should be committed to a particular order of men – the priesthood, or the ecclesiastical hierarchy. This directing influence is exercised partly on the understanding by teaching, partly on the will by precept and legislation. The power of teaching and legislating, and thus directing the faithful to their last end, is called the power of jurisdiction (postestas jurisdictionis), as distinguished from the power of internally sanctifying the faithful, or that of Orders (potestas ordinis). These two powers, which make up the entire priestly dignity, may in some cases exist, and be exercised, separately; as, for instance, one who is duly appointed bishop, though he may have as yet received no Orders, can, notwithstanding, exercise episcopal jurisdiction. It was, however, the intention of Christ that both these should be united in one and the same priesthood, and ordinarily be exercised by the same persons.
B. The priesthood, according to the institution of Christ, was to be propagated by means of Holy Orders.
I. Christ intended that the priesthood should be continued in the Church to the end of time.
a. At the Last Supper the words: Do this for a commemoration of Me
(Luke 22: 19) were not addressed
to the Apostles only, but also to their successors in the priesthood, for here there was question of a permanent institution of the
New Law. Besides, the power received by the Apostles of forgiving sins was to be transmitted to their successors, since it formed
part of the charge given to them for all time; therefore the priestly order invested with this power was to be permanent.
b. It was always the belief of the Church that the existing priesthood was of divine institution, and that it was the continuation of the priesthood instituted by Christ.
Pope Pius XI consecrates a bishop.
St. Clement of Rome † 99 (Ep. I ad Cor. cc. 40, 43) treats this point extensively, and clearly sets forth that the priesthood has been instituted by Christ as a permanent order in His Church, as was the priesthood of the Old Law. St. Ignatius, Martyr † 108, repeatedly asserts that Christ lives in His Church through the bishops, priests, and deacons, without whom, he declares, the Church cannot exist (cf. ep. ad Magnes n. 6; ad Trall. n. 3). Similarly Tertullian † 160 (de praescript. c. 41), and Sts. Cyprian † 258 and Irenaeus † 202 in many places.
II. The priesthood was to be propagated by means of Holy Orders – that Sacrament whereby the priestly office, together with the grace to discharge it faithfully, is conferred.
a. That Christ instituted a sensible sign conferring priestly power and inward grace may be inferred from
the words of St. Paul to Timothy, whom he had ordained to the priesthood: I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God,
which is in thee by the imposition of my hands. For God had not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of
sobriety
(2 Tim. 1: 6-7). St. Timothy is exhorted to cooperate with grace by cultivating those priestly virtues conferred on
him by the imposition of the Apostle's hands; therefore in ordination he received not only the priestly office, but also the
special grace to lead a priestly life. But only God can attach inward grace to an outward ceremony. Therefore this rite or
ceremony must have been instituted by God.
b. Tradition bears witness to the sacramental character of Holy Orders, as we may learn both from the works of the Fathers and from the consensus of the Latin and Greek churches in naming Holy Orders as one of the seven Sacraments.
c. Finally, the Council of Trent (Sess. 23, can. 3) anathematizes whosoever denies that Holy Orders, or Sacred Ordination, are really and truly a Sacrament instituted by Christ.
In 1947, Pope Pius XII, in the Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis, defined: ... for the substance and
validity of this Sacrament, the handing over of the instruments (traditio instrumentorum) is not required by the will of Our Lord
Jesus Christ Himself, even according to the mind of the Council of Florence. Nevertheless, if at any time the handing over of
instruments was an added requirement for validity because of the will and prescription of the Church, everyone is aware that what
the Church itself has established, it also has the power to change and abrogate. Therefore, after praying for heavenly light,
We, with Our Supreme Apostolic Authority and with certain knowledge, declare, and, as far as it is necessary, decree and make provision:
the matter of the Holy Orders of diaconate, priesthood, and episcopate, is the imposition of hands and that alone; and the form
(likewise the only form) is the words determining the application of this matter, which words signify in a univocal sense the
sacramental effects – the power of Order and the grace of the Holy Ghost – and which are understood and used by the Church in this sense.
Hence it is that We should declare and, to remove all controversies and preclude anxieties of conscience, We do declare with Our
Apostolic Authority and determine (even if there ever was any different legitimate prescription) that the handing over of the
instruments (traditio instrumentorum), at least in the future, is not necessary for the validity of the Holy Orders of diaconate,
priesthood, and episcopate.
It is only in a loose and general sense that in Scripture all Christians are said to be priests, just as
they are also said to be kings. They are priests, inasmuch as they are chosen and sanctified above others who are not Christians,
as true priests are chosen and sanctified above the simple faithful, and inasmuch as they are called to offer sacrifice in their hearts,
as priests do in truth and reality. In this sense St. Peter calls Christians a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation
(1 Pet. 2: 9).
C. The priesthood consists of different Orders, constituting the hierarchy of Orders; with which is closely connected the hierarchy of jurisdiction.
I. Besides the priesthood in the narrower sense (i.e., the Order of Priest), there exists in the Church also the higher Order of Bishop and the inferior Orders of ministers.
Some of the early Church Fathers, such as Pope St. Cornelius † 253 mention only seven Holy Orders: Porter, Lector, Exorcist, Acolyte – the Minor Orders; and Subdeacon, Deacon and Priest – the Major Orders. The Order of Priest was understood to include both the priesthood and the episcopacy – the bishop having the fullness of the priesthood.
a. In Holy Scripture we meet with different spiritual powers which suppose different Orders. The Apostles ordained deacons (Acts 6: 6). St. Paul and St. Barnabas ordained priests in all communities (Acts 14: 22). The seventy-two disciples, who prepared the way for the Apostles, represent an inferior grade of the priesthood.
b. From the earliest Christian ages a certain gradation of spiritual powers was acknowledged in the Church.
St. Clement (ep. I ad Cor. n. 40) says: To the high-priest (the bishop) certain functions are peculiar; the priest,
too, has his special duties, and the levites (deacons) also have theirs.
This distinction of rank is likewise to be found
among the most ancient of the Oriental sects.
c. The Council of Trent (Sess. 23, can. 6) defines the Catholic doctrine on this point in the following terms:
If anyone assert that there is by divine institution in the Catholic Church no hierarchy consisting of bishops, priests, and
ministers; let him be anathema.
Norway, 1885 – first Ordination of Catholic priests after Protestantism.
The ministers referred to are those mentioned by Pope St. Cornelius above. After the Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis, mentioned above, it is certain that the episcopacy, priesthood, and diaconate are sacramental Orders – i.e., by their reception the Sacrament of Holy Orders is truly received. They are, however, only one Sacrament; just as root, trunk, and branches are only one tree. The Church has never maintained that all the lower Orders have a sacramental character. The tonsure is not an Order, since by it no office or power is conferred; it is only an initiation into the clerical state founded on apostolic usage and tradition.
The law of celibacy is binding on all who are in higher, or Major Orders, and, as far as priests are
concerned, dates back to the apostolic times. The fathers in recommending celibacy justly appeal to the words of St. Peter:
Behold we have left all things.
(Mark 10: 28). If in the earliest times married men were admitted to the priesthood,
it was only because a sufficient number of unmarried men were not to be found who possessed the necessary qualifications. Moreover,
after receiving priestly Orders they were required to leave their wives. In the beginning the law of celibacy prevailed in the Greek
as well as in the Latin Church. But gradually the original discipline relaxed among the Greeks, until, as at present, only bishops
were required to observe perfect continence; while priests, if they were already married before receiving Holy Orders, were allowed
to retain their wives. But if once ordained priests, they were not allowed to marry.
The Church has weighty reasons for enforcing the celibacy of the clergy. The offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass demands the greatest purity in the priest, who is the representative of Christ; while His ministrations to the faithful are such that they can be properly discharged only by those whose hearts are free from earthly ties. It is not surprising, therefore, that since this law has fallen into abeyance among the Greeks, the offering of the Holy Sacrifice and the administration of the Sacrament of Penance have been greatly neglected. Only the priest who is disentangled from earthly cares and affections can dedicate himself wholly to the service of the faithful committed to his charge.
II. Bishops by divine institution occupy a higher rank than priests.
a. The words of St. Clement above quoted show that even as early as the first century bishops were considered to be of a higher order than priests. The Church always recognized the principle that the bishops were the successors of the Apostles, while the inferior grade of simple priests was prefigured by the seventy-two disciples, who were inferior to the Apostles.
b. The bishops have, moreover, the power peculiar to them of administering the Sacraments of Confirmation and
Holy Orders. According to the testimony of tradition, priests have not been the ministers of the Order of the priesthood;
while it is only by a special papal delegation that they can become the extraordinary ministers of Confirmation, or of the lower Orders
(i. e., Abbots of large monasteries have often been given the special delegation to ordain their subjects to the Minor Orders).
The declaration of the Council of Trent (Sess. 23, can. 7) is explicit on this point: If anyone shall say that bishops do not
have the power to confirm and ordain, or that the power which they possess, is common to them and to priests... let him be anathema.
III. With the hierarchy of Orders is intimately connected the hierarchy of jurisdiction.
Only priests and bishops who, besides Orders, have received a canonical mission, or jurisdiction, are lawful ministers of the Sacraments and preachers of the Word of God. Without this mission they cannot lawfully administer any Sacrament, although they have received the power to do so in Holy Orders; nor can they validly absolve in the Sacrament of Penance; for absolution, as we have seen in Issue 208, is essentially a judicial act, which of its very nature requires jurisdiction.
a. It is a dogma of Faith that bishops possess an ordinary power of government over their dioceses by virtue of Divine
right. In regard to the relation between the Papal and Episcopal powers the Vatican Council (First Dogmatic Constitution of the
Church of Christ, c. 3, 1870) declared: This power of the Pope in no way derogates from the ordinary and immediate power of
episcopal jurisdiction by which bishops, who have been set by the Holy Ghost to succeed and hold the place of the Apostles,
feed and govern each his own flock as true pastors; but rather, this authority is asserted, strengthened and vindicated by the
Supreme and Universal Pastor.
Pope St. Pius X consecrates bishops for France.
b. The Council of Trent (Sess. 23, can. 7) anathematizes whoever asserts that those who have neither been duly
ordained nor sent by ecclesiastical and canonical authority, but have come from elsewhere, are lawful ministers of the word of God and
of the Sacraments.
Here the Council speaks of bishops as well as priests.
c. Besides, it is evident that if the Pope is the Supreme Pastor of the whole flock, no one can lawfully feed any part of it without his consent (at least tacit or presumed); and that a bishop who, contrary to the authority of the Pope as the Supreme Pastor, would usurp any part of the flock could only be regarded as an intruder, a thief, and a robber (John 10: 8).
There are three opinions concerning the source of episcopal jurisdiction:
The Papal Theory assumes that it comes to the bishop immediately from the Pope, as the Supreme Pastor. Pope Pius
XII appears to have favored this opinion in his Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis of 1943, in which he wrote: ... (bishops)
enjoy ordinary power of jurisdiction immediately imparted to them by the... Roman Pontiff.
Those who hold this view object that
the proponents of the second opinion (below), even while they acknowledge papal supremacy, often try to limit it in some way.
The Episcopal Theory assumes that each individual bishop receives his pastoral power immediately from God at his Consecration. In favor of this opinion the historical fact is urged that, in Christian antiquity and in the early Middle Ages, the choice of a bishop by clergy and people, or the nomination of a bishop by Christian princes was not always and everywhere ratified by the Pope (as is obvious in the life of St. Wilfrid). It is asserted that a tacit ratification and conferring of episcopal jurisdiction, such as is assumed by the proponents of the first opinion, is not demonstrable and is improbable.
These two opinions were warmly debated at the Council of Trent, but no conclusion was reached. At the Vatican Council in 1869, it was agreed not to debate this subject. In the 20th century, some theologians strove to advance a third opinion, which would be a reconciliation of the other two. This opinion points out that, with some of the Sacraments, there is an interior and an exterior aspect. For example, we have seen that, concerning the Sacrament of Penance, a priest internally receives the power to forgive sins in his Ordination; but externally he cannot validly use this power without jurisdiction. So, they say, there is an interior and exterior element to jurisdiction itself. The interior is received immediately from God in Episcopal Consecration, in view of the dogmatic teaching of the Vatican Council, given above. But since jurisdiction is exercised externally, it is not validly exercised unless it is lawful. So, when it is necessary and possible, the Pope may, as Supreme Pastor, demand that bishops must be ratified by him in order to lawfully and validly exercise jurisdiction. In earlier times this was neither necessary nor possible, so it was not demanded. It was enough that bishops be in communion with and submissive to the Supreme Pastor, and ready to accept his decisions should his intervention be necessary (as we have seen in the life of St. Wilfrid). Later on, however, it became both necessary and possible for the Popes to demand this ratification. Thus Pope Pius XII truly taught that, according to this later discipline, bishops receive their jurisdiction immediately from the Pope – in the external sense. But he did not teach that it had always been so, nor that it must always be so.
D. The character of the priesthood once received can never be effaced.
I. Tradition teaches that the Sacrament of Holy Orders, once duly administered, whether within or without the Catholic Church, cannot be repeated, just as Baptism and Confirmation cannot be repeated.
II. The cause why Holy Orders cannot be effaced is the indelible character it imprints upon the soul. This character being indelible, the powers resulting from it are likewise indestructible; and, consequently, the priest is a priest forever.
III. This truth, which is the constant teaching of tradition, was thus defined by the Council of Trent
(Sess. 23, can. 4): If anyone assert that he who was once a priest can again become a layman; let him be anathema.
Hence all those functions of a priest or bishop which depend only upon the power of Orders are in all cases valid. An apostate, suspended, or deposed priest, if he uses the matter and form prescribed, and has the intention of the Church, can validly consecrate the bread and wine at Mass. An apostate or excommunicated bishop, in like manner, can validly administer the Sacrament of Confirmation or of Holy Orders. But the case is different with regard to those functions which depend for their validity upon jurisdiction (as we have mentioned in Issue 208, concerning the Sacrament of Penance), since no priest or bishop who is not in communion with the Church can possess jurisdiction, unless the Church in some case make an exception – as it actually does in favor of the dying, whom all priests have power to absolve from all sins.
Alphabetical Index; Calendar List of Saints
Contact us: smr@salvemariaregina.info
Visit also: www.marienfried.com
