In Book I, Chapter III,
Article II of the Sacrae Theologiae Summa
IB (On the Church of Christ), Fr. Joachim Salaverri writes,
Succession
is the continuation of one person after another in some office. A twofold
succession should be distinguished, one material and the other formal: a)
Material succession is a mere temporal continuation of one person after another
in some office. b). Formal succession is the full substitution of one person in
the rights and obligations of an office for someone else, or it is the
substitution of a subject without any change of right in a certain office.[1]
….
The
office of Apostles in general is the complex of all the powers, which for the
good of the Church were conferred on them by Christ. Their ordinary office is the complex of the powers of teaching,
sanctifying and governing, which are firmly connected to the institution itself
as a permanent office.[2]
…
We
are saying 1) that it is a matter of
divine right that the College of Bishops formally succeeds the College
of the Apostles; 2) that the individual Bishops govern monarchically the
individual Churches with a power that is complete in its own kind.[3]
…
For, the hierarchy, instituted in
the Apostles, by the will of Christ or by divine right is perennial.
Therefore they always existed who, by
divine right, fully succeeded the Apostles in their ordinary office.
But only the Bishops de facto always
fully succeeded the Apostles in their ordinary office. Therefore the
Bishops by divine right succeed the Apostles in their ordinary office.[4]
…
For,
Christ committed to the same Apostles
the ordinary office of teaching, sanctifying and ruling, and he did it
perpetually to the close of the age (Matt 28:20), universally for all
nations (Matt. 28:18; Mark 16:15), in all places to the end of the earth (Acts
1:8).[5]
The phrase “fully
succeeded” is equivalent to formal succession; meaning, a bishop who has
ordinary jurisdiction.
Fr. Salaverri continues
in Book III, Chapter III, Article II,
1176.
Apostolicity fundamentally is the perennial
identity in the Church of the mission, which Christ gave the Apostles when he
instituted the Church. Apostolicity is distinguished into at least three forms:
1).
Of origin, which is the essential identity, not only specific but also
individual of the constitution of the contemporary Church with that which took
its beginning with th eApostles and from the Apostles.
2).
Of doctrine, which the objective and individual identity of the doctrine fo the
contemporary Church with the deposit of doctrine received from the Apostles and
handed on.
3).
Of succession, which is the juridical
identity of the power of teaching, sanctifying and ruling of the contemporary
Church with the ordinary power of the Apostles handed on by a legitimate
succession.
…
1178.
The apostolicity of succession is distinguished in two ways: 1) material, is the mere continuation of
one person after another in the same office, without a necessary permanence of
the same law; 2) formal, is the
replacement of one person in the right sand obligation of another in some
office, without any change in the law.
Apostolicity
of formal succession is, therefore, that apostolicity of succession defined
previously under 3); this will be direct, if by an uninterrupted succession it
goes back to a certain apostle, the first pastor of the same Church; but it
will be indirect, if the first in the series of successors properly received
his jurisdiction from the pastor of another Church, who can legitimately confer
it.
…
1180.
The apostolicity of formal succession
is proved, in which others are included.
A.
What Christ instituted perpetually in the Church is its necessary property. But
Christ instituted perpetually the juridical identity of the power of the Church
of all ages with the ordinary power of the Apostles, to be handed on by a formal succession. Therefore the apostolicity of formal succession is a necessary
property of the Church.
The
consequence is clear, because the minor is the definition of the apostolicity
of succession. The major is certain, because it is the definition of a
necessary property.
The
minor is explained: 1) Christ the juridical identity of power, because he
conferred on the Apostles no other power except his own mission, and as one
destined to endure perpetually, as was already proved John 17:18; 20:21; Matt
28:18-20; John 14:16-26.
The
minor is explained: 2) The identical
power of the Apostles is to be handed on perpetually by formal succession,
because perpetuity is promised by Christ to the same Apostles: Matt.
28:20; John 14:16; but not to the same persons physically; therefore to the
same ones morally or juridically, that is without any change of law, or by formal succession.[6]
332.
Definition of terms. The Apostles are those Twelve disciples of Christ with
whom the Lord instituted the College.
The
office of Apostles in general is the complex of all the powers, which for the
good of the Church were conferred on them by Christ.
Their
ordinary office is the complex of the powers of teaching, sanctifying and
governing, which are firmly connected to the institution itself as a permanent
office.
An
extraordinary office is a complex of powers, which are committed to someone for
extraordinary events or circumstances.
A
delegated office is a complex of powers, which are committed to a person, from
among those contained in some ordinary office.
333.
Therefore, an ordinary office differs from an extraordinary one, because the
ordinary office is granted for all generally occurring situations, but the
extraordinary if for some unusual happenings and circumstances.
But
an ordinary office differs from a delegated one, because the ordinary is
annexed to an office, but the delegated is granted to a person.
Moreover,
an office can be proper or vicarious, according as it is exercised by the
subject in his own name and right, or in the name and right of another person,
to whom the office properly belongs.
334.
We understand to succeed “by divine right” in the sense in which it was
understood by Vatican Council I, that is, “according to the institution of
Christ our Lord himself” (D 3058). But this implies especially two things: 1)
objectively, that the office itself was instituted positively by God; 2)
subjectively, that the person occupying the office obtained it according to the
law established positively by God for its conferral. Hence this office was not
only in itself divinely instituted, but also it is conferred on the subject
divinely or according to the divine positive law. Accordingly, the one who
obtains the office possesses and exercises it with regard to men as something proper
to himself, not as taking the place or office of some other human person.
Succession
is the continuation of one person after another in some office. A twofold
succession should be distinguished, one material and the other formal: a)
Material succession is a mere temporal continuation of one person after another
in some office. b). Formal succession is the full substitution of one person in
the rights and obligations of an office for someone else, or it is the
substitution of a subject without any change of right in a certain office.
335.
The word Bishop, etymologically from ἐπισκοπή, is the same thing as overseer or
prefect. This word in profane literature, in the Greek translation of the O.T.
and in the inspired books of the N.T. signifies at least a firmly established
office, especially one concerning holy things.
A
Bishop in our thesis is understood as a man who in a particular Church has the
complete ordinary power of teaching, sanctifying and governing. Therefore, the
power of the Bishop is not merely delegated or extraordinary or vicarious
coming from some other human person, although it is the power of a Bishop
“placed under the due authority of the Roman Pontiff,” who not in his own name,
“but in the name of Christ feeds and governs his flock.”
Bishops,
who as individuals preside over particular Churches, exclude a collegial
Episcopate, and therefore they can be said to the Monarchs, although they may
have under them Bishops as auxiliaries or coadjutors.
336.
State of the question. We are saying 1) that it is a matter of divine right
that the College of Bishops formally succeeds the College of the Apostles; 2)
that the individual Bishops govern monarchically the individual Churches with a
power that is complete in its own kind; but we are also saying that this
monarchical nature of the Episcopate can be suitably explained only because of
its divine institution.
337.
Adversaries. 1) All those who either have worked against the obedience due to
Bishops and their freed, or have exalted the rights of the secular authority
over the legitimate power of the Church and of the Bishops, or at least have
held that priests are equal in authority with the Bishops. Adversaries of this
kind in the 4th century were Arius (D 2609), in the 14th
century Marsilius of Padua (D 1498 [34th ed.]), in the 15th
century Wycliff and Hus (D 1265); since the 16th century the
followers of Calvin and Presbyterian Protestants (D 2609), in the 17th
century E Richer and his disciples, who were joined by the followers of the
Synod of Pistoia in the 18th and 19th centuries (D
2609-2611).
….
347.
Part I: The Bishops by divine right succeed the Apostles in their ordinary
office.
Proof.
1) as a conclusion of the preceding thesis.
For,
the hierarchy, instituted in the Apostles, by the will of Christ or by divine
right is perennial. Therefore they always existed who, by divine right, fully
succeeded the Apostles in their ordinary office. But only the Bishops de facto
always fully succeeded the Apostles in their ordinary office. Therefore the
Bishops by divine right succeed the Apostles in their ordinary office.
The
antecedent and the first conclusion are certain from the preceding thesis, in
which we proved the perpetuity of the hierarchy from the institution for Christ
or by divine right.
The
minor states a fact, which is clearly apparent from the history of the Church.
But the same fact is proved from the arguments to be offered in proof of the
second part.
348.
Proof 2) from the words of Christ
For,
Christ committed to the same Apostles the ordinary office of teaching,
sanctifying and ruling, and he did it perpetually to the close of the age (Matt
28:20), universally for all nations (Matt. 28:18; Mark 16:15), in all places to
the end of the earth (Acts 1:8). But Christ could not hand over such a mission
to the Apostles alone personally, since they were going to die (John 21:9).
Therefore, he conferred it on the same Apostles morally and juridicallly, that
is, on their successors without any juridical change. But only Bishops under
the Roman Pontiff have always claimed for themselves and de facto have fully
exercised the ordinary office of the Apostles accepted from them by succession.
Therefore, from the words of Christ it is concluded that the Bishops are by
divine right successors of the Apostles in their ordinary office.
…
352.
c) Finally, they are show as established in authority received from God. For,
they received their power by the imposition of hands, to which was annexed the
granting of grace and the power to fulfill the pastoral office (2 Timothy
1:6-9, 13f; see 1 Timothy 4:14)
…
544.
One way of exercising the Magisterium is extraordinary and the other is
ordinary. The extraordinary way is that in which they exercise their Magisterium
when they are united together in a Council under the Roman Pontiff. But the
ordinary way is that in which the bishops, continuing in community with the
Roman Pontiff, exercise the Magisterium while dispersed throughout the world in
their own dioceses.
545.
A Council is an assembly of bishops legitimately brought together to deliberate
and make decisions about ecclesiastical affairs. It can be both Particular and
Universal. A Particular Council is one that represents only a part of the
College of Bishops. A Universal Council is one that includes that College of
all Bishops. A Particular Council is called Provincial or Plenary if it
consists of Bishops of one or of just some ecclesiastical provinces. It is
called National or Regional if all the Bishops of a nation or region are joined
together in it.
546.
A universal Council can be either General or Ecumenical A General Council is
one that includes the Bishops of all the particular Churches. A General Council
is said to be Ecumenical if it is accepted and confirmed by the Supreme Head of
the Church, the Roman Pontiff. For an Ecumenical Council it is required and
suffices that all the residential Bishops assemble together under the Roman
Pontiff, not physically but morally, so that deservedly they are brought to
represent the universal teaching Church.
Therefore
the ways of exercising ecumenical Magisterium, the ordinary form, or outside of
a Council and the extraordinary form, or in a Council, essentially agree in the
fact that both are acts of the universal Church teaching under the Roman
Pontiff; accidentally they differ in the fact that the extraordinary way
involves further the local assemblage of the Bishops.
547.
We are attributing infallibility to the Bishops, not to all, but to the
residential; not to individuals, but as constituting a College and taking the
place of the College of Apostles; not to those independent of the Head, but to
those obedient to the Roma Pontiff and agreeing with him; not to those teaching
in just any way, but to those agreeing formally among themselves and with their
Head; not to those exercising just any kind of authority, but to those binding
all the faithful to an assent that is completely firm and irrevocable. But the
way in which Bishops exercise their own infallibility can be either ordinary,
that is outside of a Council and dispersed throughout the world, or
extraordinary, that is united together in an Ecumenical council.
…
551.
The infallibility of the ordinary Magisterium, or outside of Councils, and of
the extraordinary Magisterium, or in Ecumenical Councils, implicitly was
defined in Vatican Council I (D 3011). This place, from the declaration made by
Bishop Martin in the name of the Committee on Faith in the same Council, must
be understood according to the Apostolic Letter “Tuas Libenter” of Pius IX (D
2879: “For even if it were a matter…””), however the question must remain
separate concerning the infallibility of the Supreme Pontiff, which in this
place the Fathers at the Vatican Council did not wish to touch either directly
or indirectly. (The infallibility of the Supreme Pontiff was to be treated and
de facto was treated in the following session, that is, session IV (D
3065-3075).
552.
Archbishop Simor, in the name of the Committee on Faith, explained the meaning
of this definition, when he said: “The paragraph Porro fide divina (D 3011) is directed against those who say that only
that must be believed which the Council defined, and not also that which the
dispersed Church teaching with unanimous consent preaches and teaches as
divinely revealed.” Bishop Martin, in the name of the same Committee on Faith,
determined further the meaning of the same definition, saying: “The reason why
the word universal is added, is this, namely, lest anyone should think that in
this place we are speaking about the infallible Magisterium of the Holy
Apostolic See. For, in no way was it the intention of the Committee to tough
either directly or indirectly on the question about the infallibility of the
Supreme Pontiff. Therefore, this word “universal” more or less signifies the
same thing that the Holy Father expressed in his Apostolic Letter, namely, the
Magisterium of the whole Church spread throughout the world.” And from the same
Letter of Pius IX the words as having been divinely revealed were borrowed and
so were included in the definition, “namely, lest opinion, which are handed on
in Catholic schools, even if they are certain, should be inserted into the
doctrine of the faith; for, if it is said that the Church teaches something as
having been divinely revealed, it is not possible that it is only an opinion of
the Schools.” Pius XII very much approves of this interpretation of the Vatican
definition. (Munificentissimus Deus,” by which the dogma of the assumption was
defined).
553.
Theological note. Therefore the thesis is a matter of implicitly defined faith,
especially in Vatican Council I, with regard to both parts, that is, regarding
both the ordinary Magisterium and the extraordinary.
554.
Proof, 1) Both parts, that is, concerning both ordinary and extraordinary Magisterium,
treated together. Bishops are infallible when they teach as formal successors of
the infallible College of Apostles. But Bishops, teaching under the conditions
assigned by the theses is, teach as formal successors of the infallible College
of Apostles. Therefore the Bishops, successors of the Apostles, are infallible,
when in agreement with the Roman Pontiff they impose a doctrine to be held
definitively by the faithful.
555.
The major is clear: From the concept itself of formal succession, which is the
substitution of the subject without any change in the law; therefore, Bishops
teaching as formal successors of the infallible College, necessarily must teach
with the same right, that is, infallibly, b) From the cause of the
infallibility, for as successors of the Apostles, the Bishops enjoy the
assistance of infallibly in teaching, which Christ absolutely promised the
Apostles would continue perpetually, namely, in their successors (Matt 28:18;
John 14:16,26; 16:12-13). Therefore, Bishops teaching as formal successors of
the Apostles, with the highest grade of authority, exercise the Magisterium
under the assistance of infallibility, that is, infallibly.
556.
The minor. In the conditions which the thesis assigns, Bishops teach: a) as a
College, because in agreement under the Roman Pontiff, b) with the highest
grade of doctrinal authority, because they teach definitively, c) with an
obligation imposed under the danger of salvation, because they impose a
doctrine that must be held absolute, d) the whole flock of the faithful,
because all the residential Bishops are the ones who teach. Therefore, the
Bishops, teaching under the conditions which the thesis assigns, teach as a
college with the same supreme, peremptory, universal authority that was given to the Apostles by Christ,
that is, they teach as the formal successors of the infallible College of
Apostles.
…
560.
The conditions of the thesis are verified also outside of a Council in the
universal and ordinary Magisterium of the Bishops.
a)
It can be well established from the communication of the Bishops among
themselves, and especially with the Roman Pontiff, that all the Bishops teach
with one mind, so that their formal consensus is given.
b)
It is clear from their communion and their communion with the Supreme Pontiff
that the Bishops dispersed throughout the world teach under the Roman Pontiff,
and this is so from their profession of due subordination and obedience towards
him.
c)
That doctrine is taught definitively by the Bishops, and d) that they impose it
absolutely to be held can be easily proved from the formulas, whereby they both
commend the gravity of the doctrine and insist on the obligation to give a firm
and irrevocable assent.
d)
It is clear that the Bishops are direct to all the faithful, because they are
the agreeing Magisterium morally of all the Bishops of the Church.
Therefore
also in the ordinary Magisterium of the Bishops dispersed throught0ut the world
the conditions are verified, which our thesis requires.
…
574.
The theological foundation of the Ecumenical Council is the divine institution
of the College of Apostles. For, Christ instituted the College of Apostles as a
Body of Heads, that is, composed of St. Peter the Head and the Apostles as
members, in order to continue his work on earth in an effective way. The
Apostles exercised their office under Peter, either in the ordinary way dispersed
throughout the world, or united together in an extraordinary way, namely, in
the Council of Jerusalem: Acts 15:6-35.
575.
The nature of the right or of the power of an Ecumenical Council is formal
succession. For, the College of Bishops formally succeeds the College of
Apostles, which therefore is also the Body of the Heads, that is, being
composed of the Head, the Roman Pontiff, the successor of St. Peter, and the
member Bishops as successors fo the Apostles. Bishops exercise their office
under the Roman Pontiff, either in the ordinary way dispersed throughout the
world, or united together in an extraordinary way in an Ecumenical Council. By
divine law, therefore, there are two essential elements in the College and
consequently in a Council: The first is the Head, who is the successor of St.
Peter in the Primacy; the second is the Body, which is constituted by the
Bishops, successors of the Apostles, and they are this by right (de iure) physically all of them, but de
facto all morally.
No comments:
Post a Comment