La raíz sacerdotal de la colegialidad de los Obispos

Resumen

47

The article begins by rejecting a false opposition between the sacerdotal and the prophetic which certain authors have too much emphasized.

Before Vatican II theology commonly distinguished between the power of order and the power of jurisdiction, including within the latter the powers of teaching and governing. Only the first of the two main powers was considered to be sacramental, that is to say, transmitted by the sacrament of order. The other powers were regarded, in one way or another, as depending on canonical mission as their originating principle. Vatican II introduces a new terminology. It speaks of three powers, which are those of sanctifying, teaching and governing. Collegiality, according to the Council's explicit teaching, rests solely on the two last powers; the power of sanctifying belongs to all bishops but not to the college.

The object of the article is to show that the three powers, — 'tria munera', according to the vocabulary of Vatican II, — with which the bishops are invested, are properly sacerdotal, that is to say, have their origin in the sacrament of order and in the sacrament of order alone. Canonical mission merely makes possible their orderly and expeditious, use, and constitutes no more than a conditio sine qua non to safeguard harmonius ecclesiastical co-existence.

The argument takes its start from the common or baptismal priesthood. This priesthood confers upon the baptized person a true power, not only to intervene in Christian worship, but also to play a part in the spread of the gospel, and to assist in the introduction of the kingship of Christ into the web of human relationships in such a way as to cause the latter to develop according to his will. Baptism, which confers this 'triple power', does not introduce confusion or anarchy into the Church's life, because it confers the power in question within the Chrurch's communion and as a service to this communion, precisely as the latter has been instituted and shaped by Christ. Similarly, the connexion of the 'three powers' of the bishops with the sacrament of order as their sole and total cause not only does no harm to the communion of the Church, but promotes and ensures it, because the sacrament confers them precisely as 'powers' of communion, that is to say, as belonging within the special framework of communion willed by Christ, in which the bishop of Rome has functions that he alone can exercise. This raises the problem of bishops who do not live in full communion with the Catholic Church. The author here confines himself to indicating certain directions in which a solution may be found, since the particular treatment of this question falls outside the limits of his work.

The nucleus of the argument is concerned with the way in which Vatican II understands the ministry of the Apostles and its transmission in the Church. This ministry consists, according to the repeated declarations of the Council, in the simultaneous participation in the 'triple power' of Christ as priest, teacher and king, which makes of the apostolic band a true college with Refer at its head, a college which is perpetuated throught the centuries in the college of bishops with Peter's successor at its head. The transmission of the 'triplex munus' or the succession in the apostolic ministry and insertion in the college of bishops is brought about by episcopal consecration. It is therefore this consecration, — in which the plenitude of the sacrament of order is expressed, — that confers on the bishops their 'triplex munus'. From this, two important consequences follow. First, the sacerdotal office cannot be limited to exercising the sole power of sanctifying, but extends to those of teaching and governing. Secondly, the character imprinted by the sacrament of order at its episcopal level not only gives the power of consecrating the eucharist and administering the sacraments, but also sets apart for the proclamation of the gospel and the pastoral care of the flock. The unity of character which underlies the episcopal ministry, taken as a whole, gives cohesion to all its expressions and unifies them, overcoming the dispersion that too often occurs when the ministry in question is exclusively ranged under the rubric of the 'triplex munus'.

For the study of the sacerdotal nature of collegiality, the General Synods of 1969 and 1971 are of interest. The second, especially, is of great importance for its explicit teaching about the inclusion in his sacerdotal office of Christ's prophetic function and kingship. Once it is established that, in Christ, all the messianic powers are contained within the sacerdotal office, not only is an integrated notion of these powers obtained, but also and at the same time the unity that embraces them is defined as sacerdotal. Now, the ministry of Christ is the key to the understanding of that of the ministers. This ministry is a single thing and is primarily defined as sacerdotal. The insistence with which so many contemporary theologians have attempted to define ministry as primarily prophetic, relegating the sacerdotal to a lower level, is based upon false presuppositions.

The whole Christian community must also be defined as a sacerdotal people. This theme is not developed, though, in the present article.