| Theology Annual <<MAIN>> | John J. Casey << INDEX >> |

<<PREV

 

vol.07
Theology Annual
”]1983”^p93-115
 

LUTHER AND CATHOLIC CHURCH ORDER

 

THE CATHOLIC ADJUSTMENT

The position of Martin Luther and his followers produced a positive and a negative effect on the Council of Trent's deliberations on Church order. In the positive vein, the Council firmly upheld a Church order which was grounded in control over the sacraments within the Catholic community of the baptized where the most important sacrament celebrated was the Eucharist and the key to the Eucharist was the sacrament of Holy Orders. In the negative vein the Council stepped away from the issue of the relationship between pope and bishops”Šthe power of the keys”Šand left that controversial issue raised by the reformers hanging. For three hundred years this issue matured in the context of European political and social change until it was finally settled at the First Vatican Council in 1870. At this Council it became Catholic doctrine that the pope is the infallible head of the Church and his primacy is that of universal episcopal jurisdiction. The principle invoked was that these perogatives of the papacy are implicitly contained in the very concept of primacy in the Church. Once this was settled, the basic questions raised by Martin Luther concerning Church order could be addressed.

The most important question was the universal priesthood of all the baptized and how this coincided with the special hierarchical priesthood. A second question following from this was the very nature of sacramental control within the Church”Šwhat its role and function was and how it differentiated Christians within the Catholic community of the baptized. And finally, given the fact that anyone can have control over the sacrament of Baptism the very base on which the whole structure of Church order stands, what would be an adequate theology for ensuring that the whole structure would be less vulnerable to internal collapse.

The Second Vatican Council took up the problem of the universal priesthood of the baptized and its relationship to the hierarchical priesthood within the Church. In speaking of these two priesthoods, LUMEN GENTIUM, the Council's dogmatic constitution on the Church, states the following:

"Although they differ essentially and not only in degree, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial hierarchical priesthood are none the less ordained one to another; each in its own way shares in the one priesthood of Christ. The ministerial priest by the sacred power that he has, forms and rules the priestly people; in the person of Christ he effects the Eucharistic sacrifice and offers it to God in the name of all the people. The faithful, indeed, by virtue of their royal priesthood, participate in the offering of the Eucharist. They exercise the priesthood too by the reception of the sacraments, prayer and thanksgiving, the witness of a holy life, abnegation and active charity." (No. 10)

What this statement of the Second Vatical Council has done is to make it proper now to speak of priesthood in the Church in two ways, the priesthood of the baptized and the priesthood of the ordained. These priesthoods are essentially different but complementary. The essential difference in a general way is seen in the exercise of these two priesthoods. One”Šthe ordained priesthood”Šis an active priesthood which can effect and offer the Eucharistic sacrifice whereas the other”Šthe priesthood of all the baptized”Šis more of a passive priesthood whereby one is disposed to receive the effects of the active priesthood and all that this signifies., The principle of the relationship between the two is still one of control over the sacraments, principally the Eucharist, but the control is mutual because basically one priesthood cannot do without the other. The ordained priest, since he offers in the name of the baptized priests, is dependent upon their existence and the baptized priests are dependent in turn upon the leadership of ordained priests for the exercise of their particular priestly charism. Thus there is an essential not just an accidental relationship of one to the other.

The Council also expressed the Scriptural basis of both priesthoods. The priesthood of the baptized is explicitly mentioned in Scripture while the ordained priesthood is not. However for the baptized priesthood no special role is mentioned in Apoc. 1:6 and no clear role in 1 Pet. 2:9-10. Nevertheless the right to the title is there. Whence comes the right for bishops and presbyters to call themselves priests over and above their baptized priesthood? The Council indicates that they have the right to the title because they act in the person of Christ in their Eucharistic ministry. And since Christ is THE PRIEST in Scripture”Šparticularly in the Epistle to the Hebrews”Šthe ministers who act in His name have the right to the title "priests" in a special way even though Scripture does not specifically call them such.

As for the very nature of sacramental control within the Church and how it differentiates, the Council enunciated a very clear and precise principle in its decree on the liturgy. The liturgy which is primarily the celebration of the sacraments and in particular the Eucharist, is seen as the action of Christ the priest and of His body which is the Church. Thus the liturgy is the exercise of the priestly office of Jesus Christ in which full public worship is performed by the mystical body of Jesus Christ”Šthat is, by the head and His members. The ordained priest, then, has power over the sacraments only as a vicar, a stand-in as it were for Jesus Himself. Thus sacramental control differentiates members in the Church primarily by designating those who represent Christ at the most solemn functions that He has given His Church to perform.

As for Baptism, nowhere is the primary action of Christ more clearly seen and the secondary role of His ministers more clearly indicated than in this Sacrament. "By His power He is present in the sacraments so that when anyone baptizes it is really Christ Himself who baptizes." The Church, then, is one body and whenever it acts it always acts together with its head. But in the world of external signs when the head has need anyone can stand in for Christ because in the reality of the sacrament itself it is Christ who acts. Men then are primarily His ministers, His servants, His stewards, as He sanctifies the priestly people.

It is interesting to note that the Church has accepted Luther's concerns as valid starting points but from these starting points has reached rather different conclusions. The baptized are indeed priests but priesthood in the Church is not to be understood through the priesthood of the faithful but rather all priesthood in the Church is to be understood through the priesthood of Christ. Power over the sacraments does indeed differentiate the members of the Christian community of the baptized and is grounded in the Scriptural concept of minister, servant and steward but this ministry, service and stewardship is given to Christ as He sanctifies the members of the Christian community. Finally, human control over the sacraments while necessary is most graphically illustrated by Baptism as simply a secondary role. Since Christ Himself plays the primary role, one need not fear that Church order based on control over the sacraments is in any danger of collapsing in upon itself.

There are those who say that everything contained in the theology of Vatican II concerning Church order had been part of the theological patrimony of the Church well before Martin Luther came on the scene. That may well be true but in no sense does this detract from the role of Luther in helping to shape current Catholic thought. The philosopher Plato discovered several centuries before Christ that when one is dealing with general ideas, dialogue helps them to become clear and precise. In Church order it is largely through wrestling with Luther's ideas that Catholic thinking has reached its present stage.

 

 
| Theology Annual <<MAIN>> | John J. Casey << INDEX >> |

<<PREV