Download the original attachment

THE CHRISTOLOGICAL DIMENSION OF THE ORDAINED PRIESTHOOD

  In dealing with the theme of this present discourse, I thought that the best point to start would be to choose what was reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council.

  Without doubt in Documents such as the Apostolic Constitution Pastores dabo vobis or the recent Directory for the Ministry and Life of Priests, one must remember– thanks be to God! – that great event, probably the most important of our time, which continues to be the life source from which the documents referred to above draw from.

  Therefore, the analytical index immediately flowed from the (well prepared) French edition of the Documents of Vatican II edited by Editions du Centurion¹. And I must confess that I was a bit surprised to find such a weighty column (in paragraph 8) under the theme “Priests and Christ”. I immediately thought that it could be necessary to put a bit of order (sapientis est ordinare) to such richness and, having had a good education, it immediately seemed to me that the best way to proceed was to use the four Aristotelian causes. It is a procedure that is a bit out of fashion (even though it may be used without being mentioned) but it seemed to me to be a method which is always valid.

  I must also forewarn that almost all of what I will say I can also apply very well to bishops; therefore the reference to “priest” can be generally understood as also applying to bishops, unless I indicate the contrary or it is obvious in itself. 

I. The material cause².

  Or, another way of putting it, who can be ordained a priest? Obviously, here we pause only at the conditions that seem to us to have a relationship to Christ.

  First, there is the need to be baptized. Just as for all the other sacraments. Now, what does baptism result in that enables one to receive the other sacraments? It produces baptismal character³, which, as such, is the mark of Christ and configuration to Christ the priest. In fact, we remember how St. Thomas defines character:

[...] deputetur quisque fidelis ad recipiendum vel tradendum aliis ea quae pertinent ad cultum Dei. Et ad hoc proprie deputetur character sacramentalis. Totus autem ritus christianae religionis derivatur a sacerdotio Christi. Et ideo manifestum est quod character sacramentalis specialiter est character Christi, cuius sacerdotio configurantur fideles secundum sacramentales characteres, qui nihil aliud sunt quam quaedam participationes sacerdotii Christi, ab ipso Christo derivatae (III, q. 63, a. 3, c.). 

  It may seem a bit redundant to recall this because, as I said, it is common to all Christians, but precisely, it can be useful to stress that the priest is not the only one who has a relationship to Christ under the aspect of worship: this character of Christ is common to all the faithful that enables the participation in liturgical worship, the sacraments of the Church and therefore being conformed to Christ. It is regularly expressed today within the categories of the common priesthood and the ministerial priesthood. It is important, in this context, to remember that the ministerial priesthood blossoms, if one can say, from the ground of the common priesthood and it is all at the service of the most perfect manifestation of it: worship in spirit and truth.

  Secondly, there is a point which, at one time, a mere mention would have sufficed, but which today requires some development: the fact that only males can receive the ordained priesthood. As affirmed by Paul VI⁴, cited by John Paul II in his Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 22, 1994):  

the real reason is that Christ, giving the Church its fundamental constitution, its theological anthropology, always followed by the Tradition of the Church, so established it.

  But if the fundamental motive is the will of Christ, guaranteed by the tradition of the Church, this does not forbid the search for motives of convenience which have enabled Christ to decide as such. And it is what the declaration of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Inter insigniores (October 15, 1976), strives to achieve. Now, one of the most evident motives - and here we find our argument - is that which arises from the very nature of ministerial priesthood. And here the declaration, in Chapter 5, entitled Ministeriale sacerdotium mysterio Christi luce contemplandum est, proceeds in a somewhat complex manner.

  First, recall the constant teaching of the Church according to which the priest, when acting as such (suo [...] munere fungentem), in persona propria non agere, sed Christum repraesentare, qui per eum agit: sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur, ut scripsit iam saeculo III S. Cyprianus [Ep. 63, 14].

  In the second place, we particularly consider the celebration of the Eucharist, in which the priest not only acts in virtue of the power given by Christ, sed in persona Christi, huius partes sustinens, ita ut ipsam eius imaginem gerat, cum verba consecrationis enuntiat⁵.

  This being said, the document goes on, it seems to me quite rapidly, to the affirmation that Christianum ergo sacerdotium est sacramentalis indolis. Perhaps a narrow reading of this is a bit strong, but whatever the words, the teaching that is to expose the declaration is very clear: it is without doubt that, in the exercise of his ministry, the priest represents Christ. Now it is fitting that he who represents someone or something might have a certain similarity to what is represented, in a way so that one can easily understand what it is. In any case, Christ’s way of instituting the sacraments always consists in the choice that the school calls natural signs, of signs that may have a certain natural relationship (in particular similarity) with that which is represented. As such it must be also for the priest who, in the exercise of his ministry⁶, represents Christ, indeed, in the celebration of the Mass, he acts in persona Christi. It is therefore consistent with the economy of salvation and in particular with the sacramental economy that the priest can be a natural sign of Christ, and thus resembles Christ.

  But at this point there is the need to ask what it is to resemble Christ. One could give an example. Christ was a carpenter, so all priests from the Pope down, must be carpenters, or Christ had a beard, so all priests must have beards, etc. The need then, first of all, is to state how the priest represents Christ and, therefore, must resemble Christ. As we have already highlighted, the priest represents Christ in the exercise of his own ministry, and that can also be said, when, at the name of Christ and, even, in persona Christi, he brings or works the salvation for which Christ came, suffered, died and rose.

  This being stated, it is evident then that the similarity of the priest with Christ must be verified in those things that have significance in the economy of salvation. And then the problem arises: is it of significance in the work of salvation that Christ is a man? It is to this question that the declaration responds, after having understood all the passages that I have believed it best to develop.

  The fundamental response is: the fact that the Word was of the male sex is in accord with the whole economy of salvation, “whose nucleus is the mystery of the Covenant”. In fact this covenant (which is salvation) is presented in the New Testament, in the Prophets, and overall in the image of the marriage between God (the bridegroom) and his people (the bride). This covenant is definitively realised with Jesus Christ who is the bridegroom whose wife is the Church. We note that it is Christ who presents himself as the groom. At that it can be added that Christ is the new Adam from the side of which is born the new Eve that is the Church. And Saint Paul does not hesitate to say that marriage is a great mystery because it represents the union of Christ and the Church (cf. Eph 5:31-32) ⁷.

  I think that it is not embarrassing to deepen, or to make explicit, this fundamental image of the spousal union. It is evident that, in the sexual union, it is the man who gives and the woman who receives⁸. Now, the same is verified in the union between Christ and the Church. It is Christ who gives grace and salvation, and it is the Church that receives these riches into its own heart to be fruitful.

  Therefore, the fact that Christ is male is not a coincidence, but has profound significance in the economy of salvation. And, as a consequence, it follows that who represents Christ ex officio, to be the same image, has to be male. We see then how the conformation of the priest to Christ begins in this humble bodily fact, humble but not insignificant: being male⁹.  

II. The efficient cause.

  From our point of view (the Christological dimension of the ordained priesthood), two observations can be made.

A. The priest receives his priesthood from Christ. Christ, in his humanity and through the ministry of the bishop, is the instrumental cause of the priesthood. The priesthood is a received gift (St. Paul reminds Timothy το χάρισμα του θεοΰ ο εστίν εν σοι δια της επιθέσεως των χειρών μου [2 Tim 1:6]), and is a gift which, of course, sanctifies who receives it, if they are duly disposed, but it is not directly oriented to the good of the who receives it, but to the good of the Church.

  These obviously must be firmly remembered today. In fact, there are those in the Church who, reproposing an old Protestant view, deny this specific relationship of efficient causality between Christ and the priest and claim that each baptised person can, by virtue of their baptismal priesthood, perform priestly functions. Vatican II firmly stated that the common priesthood and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood essentia et non gradu tanto differunt (LG 10). But this has not prevented diverse theologians (or supposedly so), like P. Edward Schillebeeckx and Leonardo Boff, to support positions that negate this distinction. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, regardless of the measures taken regarding individual authors, published the letter Sacerdotium Ministeriale (6 August 1983) whose central claim is as follows:  

Although proposed in quite different and subtle ways, these opinions all come to the same conclusion: that the power to perform the sacrament of the Eucharist is not necessarily connected with sacramental ordination. It is clear that this conclusion absolutely cannot be reconciled with the transmitted faith, since, it not only disregards the power entrusted to priests, but also affects the whole apostolic structure of the Church and deforms the same sacramental economy of salvation (9 EV, 387).

Β. Secondly, to realise this good of the Church, to which the ministerial priesthood is ordered, Christ, through ordination, has the priest participate in the efficient causality itself, or better said, makes the priest an instrumental cause through whom he acts.

  This instrumental causality is infallible in the celebration of the sacraments of which the priest is the minister (as long as he has the required intention). This which I have just said, for us, rightly appears as dull, however, it merits that we pause for a moment. To say that the minister of the sacrament is, precisely, only a minister or, in other words, to negate any Donatism, is not without consequence for the life and the practice of the priest. One can say that it encourages humility, because all the efficacy of that which is done in the sacrament comes from elsewhere, firstly from the Passion of Christ and ultimately from God, but overall it must allow the priest to understand that the sacraments are not in any way his own, his property or even his own fruit . They are the sacraments of Christ over which the priest does not have even the slightest power; they are the sacraments of Christ, entrusted by Christ to the Church, which can only be the humble "distributor," but not "its own belonging" that it can adjust in its own way. We have here the motive underlying the call (which seems to me to be rarely heard) of the Second Vatican Council:  

[...] nemo omnino alius [not the Holy See and, within the limits of their competence, the bishops and the episcopal conferences], etiamsi sit sacerdos, quidquam proprio malte in Liturgia addat, demat, aut mutet (SC 22).

  In the other fields of priestly activity, one cannot speak of efficiency ex opere operato. Overall, it should be underlined that mission, preaching, teaching, and governance are like an extension of the work of Christ and by implementing these tasks, the priest is the instrument of Christ, the means by which the efficiency of words and the governance of Christ reaches every place and every age. Vatican II teaches:  

[...] sacerdotes [...] Deo in Ordinis receptione novo modo consecrati. Christi Aeterni Sacerdotis viva instrumenta efficiantur; ut mirabile opus Eius, quod superna efficacitate universum hominum convictum redintegravit, per tempora persequi valeant (Presbyterorum ordinis 12).

And John Paul II writes:  

Priests are called to prolong the presence of Christ, the one high priest [...]. Priestly life and activity continue the life and activity of Christ himself (Pastores dabo vobis 15.18).

  Only we note, as put forward by the passage of text quoted from Presbyterorum Ordinis, the expression viva instrumenta: priests are not passive instruments, but are called to collaborate, to varying degrees and in different ways according to the priestly work that is exercised, with Christ in the work of salvation which is accomplished through them (see also Pastores Dabo Vobis 25).  

IIΙ. Formal causality¹⁰.

  Obviously, this is an aspect that we should consider more. Also because it seems to be the hinge around which the Magisterium, from Vatican II on, builds its presentation of the Catholic priesthood.  

A. The teaching of the Magisterium.  

  I am limited, brevitatis gratia, to examine Vatican II and Pastores Dabo Vobis. In the following quotations, the emphases are my own.  

1. Vatican II

Presbyteri [...] vi sacramenti Ordinis, ad imaginem Christi, summi atque aeterni Sacerdotis (Hebr. 5: 1-10; 7: 24; 9: 11-28), ad Evangelium praedicandum fidelesque pascendos et ad divinum cultum celebrandum consecrantur, ut ven sacerdotes Novi Testamenti (LG 28). 

[...] Presbyteri, unctione Spiritus Sancti, speciali charactere signantur et sic Christo sacerdoti configurantur, ita ut in persona Christi Capitis agere valeant (Presbyterorum ordinis 2). 

Eam [sc. vitae unitatem] vero exstruere valent Presbyteri exemplum in ministerio adimplendo sequentes Christi Domini, cuius cibus erat voluntatem facere ulius qui Eum misit ut opus suum perficeret. Sic Boni Pastoris partes agendo, in ipso caritatis pastoralis exercitio invenient vinculum perfectionis sacerdotalis ad unitatem eorum vitam et actionem redigens (Presbyterorum ordinis 14). 

"seminarians" per sacram ordinationem Christo Sacerdoti configurandi [...] (Optatam totius 8).

2. Pastores Dabo Vobis (25 March 1992)

In the Church and on behalf of the Church, priests are a sacramental representation of Jesus Christ - the head and shepherd - authoritatively proclaiming his word, repeating his acts of forgiveness and his offer of salvation - particularly in baptism, penance and the Eucharist, showing his loving concern to the point of a total gift of self for the flock, which they gather into unity and lead to the Father through Christ and in the Spirit. In a word, priests exist and act in order to proclaim the Gospel to the world and to build up the Church in the name and person of Christ the head and shepherd. [...] By the sacramental anointing of holy orders [sic¹¹], the Holy Spirit configures them in a new and special way to Jesus Christ the head and shepherd (15).  

By sacramental consecration the priest is configured to Jesus Christ as head and shepherd of the Church, and he is endowed with a "spiritual power" which is a share in the authority with which Jesus Christ guides the Church through his Spirit (21). 

The Holy Spirit poured out in the sacrament of holy orders [...]configures the priest to Christ, the head and shepherd of the Church, entrusting him with a prophetic, priestly and royal mission to be carried out in the name and person of Christ [...] (27 ).  

But the will of the Church finds its ultimate motivation in the link between celibacy and sacred ordination, which configures the priest to Jesus Christ the head and spouse of the Church. (29).  

Poverty for the priest, by virtue of his sacramental configuration to Christ, the head and shepherd, takes on specific "pastoral" connotations [...] (30).  

Through ordination [...] you have received the same Spirit of Christ, who makes you like him, so that you can act in his name and so that his very mind and heart might live in you (33).  

[...] to live in the seminary, [...] you become more like Christ the good shepherd in order better to serve the Church and the world as a priest (42).  

The priest, who is called to be a "living image" of Jesus Christ, head and shepherd of the Church [...] (43).  

etc., etc. (see, in particular, nn. 50, 61, 65, 70, 72).  

3. These quotes, which could be expanded further, do not leave any doubt: the Magisterium "defines" the priesthood as a conformation to Christ. It must be underlined that, extracting these expressions from their context as I have, I only mean to provide a demonstration and not to set forth the doctrine that develops or explains such a conception of the ordained priesthood. To tell the truth, this doctrine, under the aspect now considered, consists rather in statements that do not deepen the theme with coherence. What we search for now, therefore, to be a bit more precise, is to see what this “conformation” is.  

Β. In what sense (or in what ways) is the priest conformed to Christ?  

1. The synthesis of the Directory for the Ministry and Life of Priests  

  The Directory for the Ministry and Life of Priests, published 31 January 1994 by the Congregation for the Clergy, in a paragraph specifically entitled "Christological Dimension" has attempted to provide a somewhat organic synthesis of recent doctrine on this point¹². Although quite lengthy, it seems useful to quote in full (again the italics are ours; the footnotes, which are of great importance, because they indicate the documents which are referred to, are reproduced in footnotes, referring to the number they have in the original text):

6. The Christological dimension, like the Trinitarian dimension, springs directly from the sacrament which ontologically configures the priest to Christ the Priest, Master, Sanctifier and Pastor of his People ¹³. 
The faithful who, maintaining their common priesthood, are chosen and become part of the ministerial priesthood are granted an indelible participation in the one and only priesthood of Christ. This is a participation in the public dimension of mediation and authority regarding the sanctification, teaching and guidance of all the People of God. On the one hand, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are necessarily ordered one for the other because each in its own way participates in the only priesthood of Christ and, on the other hand, they are essentially different ¹⁴. 
In this sense the identity of the priest is new with respect to that of all Christians who through Baptism participate as a whole in the only priesthood of Christ and are called to give witness to Christ throughout the earth ¹⁵. The specificity of the ministerial priesthood lies in the need that the faithful have of the mediation and dominion of Christ which is made visible by the work of the ministerial priesthood.  
In this unique identity with Christ, the priest must be conscious that his life is a mystery totally grafted onto the mystery of Christ and of the Church in a new and specific way and that this engages him totally in pastoral activity and rewards him¹⁶.  
7. Christ associates the Apostles to his own mission. "As the Father has sent me, I also send you" (Jn 20:21). In Holy Ordination itself, the missionary dimension is ontologically present. The priest was chosen, consecrated and sent to carry out effectively in our time this eternal mission of Christ; he becomes his authentic representative and messenger: "He that hears you, hears me; he that despises you, despises me; and he that despises me, despises him that sent me" (Lk 10:16. One can therefore say that the configuration to Christ, through sacramental consecration, defines the role of the priest in the heart of the People of God, making him participate in his own way in the sanctifying, magisterial and pastoral authority of Jesus Christ himself, Head and Pastor of the Church¹⁷ . 
Acting in persona Christi capitis, the priest becomes the minister of the essential salvific actions, transmits the truths necessary for salvation and cares for the People of God, leading them towards sanctity ¹⁸.

  Regarding this text, which is very dense, for that which we are concerned specifically, we note that:  
1) it distinguishes the participation of the faithful in the priesthood of Christ from the participation of the ordained priest in the same priesthood, also trying to find in what this difference consists (which is done in the most satisfactory way in the last paragraph).  
2) the priest's configuration to Christ, speaks in reality of two things, that both are located, as stated well in the text, at the ontological level, underlining that it is not only an outwardly imitate way of doing of Christ, but it is an interior transformation of the being of the priest himself.

  Overall, as I said, there are different conformations that the post-conciliar texts¹⁹ both affirm, but, in my opinion, are not distinguished enough, and so there is the risk of creating misunderstandings over which we might have the occasion to return to. For now we limit ourselves to briefly search to clarify things.  

2. The double conformation of the priest to Christ  

  The texts that we have quoted or to which we have made allusions to, refer to, while at times not obviously, two types of conformation of the priest to Christ: the first according to which the priest receives in Ordination a certain number of powers (the word is not fashionable, but it is inevitable) themselves of Christ the Head, the second according to which the priest receives (normally) in Ordination a specific assistance that largely allows him to put these powers into practice for the good of the Church. Those who are familiar with traditional theology will recognise the distinction between character and sacramental grace, between sacramentum et res e res tantum.

a. Priestly character

  It is proper to speak of this conformation to Christ the Priest through which the subject is made a participant of certain powers of Christ. Here, it must be said that the documents, following Vatican II, as we will see, tend to put the tria munera of the priesthood on the same level, while St. Thomas, faithful to his doctrine of character as the ability to worship and to the common doctrine of the Eucharist as culmen et fons, offers us, it seems to me (though underdeveloped), a formal order far more satisfying. According to him, the spiritual power in which the priestly character consists is firstly the power to consecrate the Eucharist²⁰, then it extends to the other sacraments²¹, in which the Eucharist is the end of the sacraments, and, finally, to the preparation of the people for the fruitful reception of the Eucharist, through the teaching of doctrine²², and a life conforming to his needs, through governance. We must however confess that what we expose so clearly and precisely is found, in the common Doctor, is more of the nature of suggestion than what is not a developed doctrine, but we will, I think, be able to turn this again.

  Whatever it may be, this conformation to Christ the Head given at Ordination is inadmissible, but has a limited field: it verifies when the priest works his own acts of the spiritual power so received (when he celebrates Mass, administers the sacraments, teaches ex officio, and governs his own flock).  

b. Priestly grace  

  These words of St. Thomas are sufficient to describe priestly grace: 

Ad divinam autem liberalitatem pertinet ut cui confertur potestas ad aliquid operandum, conferantur etiam ea sine quibus huiusmodi operatio convenienter exercen non potest. Administratio autem sacramentorum- ad quae ordinatur spiritualis potestas, convenienter non fît nisi aliquis ad hoc a divina gratia adiuvetur. Et ideo in hoc sacramento confertur gratia: sicut et in aliis sacramentis (4 CG 74). 

  It is then an increase of sanctifying grace specified to the fitting performance of priestly ministry.

 Regarding this grace, we must make two observations. First, as sanctifying grace with which he identifies, it conforms to Christ, in which is the participation in the same grace of Christ, but this conformation, even if it takes a particular colour in the priest, is fundamentally common to all the faithful. It remains, however, that this grace calls for the collaboration of man, in which it must seek to imitate Christ, because he is a priest, to imitate him more particularly in duties proper to the priesthood, as exhorted by the Second Vatican Council in n. 24 of the decree Presbyterorum ordinis cited above. Second, this conformation is unfortunately not admissible, the work of mortal sin of which nobody, not even priests, are protected.  

c. These clarifications should permit us to orient ourselves a bit better among the many things that are said of the priest alter Christus and on which I can not dwell here²³. We limit ourselves to point out that the priest is, in varying degrees²⁴, alter Christus in the discharge of his office, by virtue of priestly character, it can be no longer in the field of spiritual power, but in that of sanctity (of a sanctity which certainly will be coloured by his being a priest), by virtue of the sanctifying grace received at baptism and perfected with Ordination.  

IV. The final causality.

  This paragraph, strictly speaking, should remain empty because Christ is not of the order of the ultimate end, but a means to achieve the ultimate goal which is God ("who believes in me believes not in me but in him that I have sent ", etc.) Therefore, even though it is often said that the priestly ministry is to bring souls to Christ, we must not forget that Christ is an intermediary end, because those who have been assigned are called by him to God, it is that one considers each soul in particular, it is that one considers together the elect (traditio regni). Therefore, from the order of the end we are brought back to the order of formal causality.

  Christ has as his end the glorification of God, and the glorification of God is the salvation of men: "I glorified you on earth by accomplishing the work that I intended to do," Jesus says (Jn 17:4).

  So too, the priest has the same purpose: to glorify God through the salvation of men and this is to what his entire ministry tends. One cannot say precisely, as we mentioned earlier, that Christ is the end of priestly ministry. It should be added however that the ministry of the priest is not something parallel to that of Christ, but is the continuation of that of Christ and its implementation in different times and in different places, so that the priest always acts in Christ. The Second Vatican Council expressed this unity of purpose well and this relationship of subordination of the priest to Christ in achieving this end in this part of the decree Presbyterorum Ordinis with which we will be able to close these brief reflections on the Christological dimension of the ordained priesthood:

Finis igitur quem ministerio atque vita persequuntur Presbyteri est gloria Dei Patris in Christo procuranda. Quae gloria in eo est quod homines opus Dei in Christo perfectum conscie, libere atque grate accipiunt, illudque in tota vita sua manifestant. Presbyteri itaque, sive orationi et adorationi vacent, sive verbum praedicent, sive Eucharisticum Sacrificium offerant et cetera Sacramenta administrent, sive alia prò hominibus exerceant ministeria, conferunt cum ad gloriam Dei augendam tum ad homines in vita divina provehendos. Quae omnia, dum ex Paschate Christi manant in glorioso Eiusdem Domini adventu consummabuntur, cum Ipse tradiderit Regnum Deo et Patri (Presbyterorum Ordinis 2).

Daniel Ols, O.P